Topic: current gen or next gen

Technically speaking, the Wii U is the first console of the current generation, and the NextBox and PS4 will be joining it, so none of these consoles are "Next gen"

It's by definition the same generation as PS4 and Xbox Infinity, even though it's inferior in terms of power. Just like Wii was to PS3 and 360.

I agree. I'm not worried about what a console has in terms of hardware (especially when compared). Like you, banacheck, I'm excited for future possibilities and opportunities in every feasible way regardless of company.

We know the PS4 and nextXbox (well virtually know about the nextXbox) are much more powerful than Wii U. We pretty much know it's power is more current gen than next gen. If you are thinking about developing a game like I said, the Wii U will be with PS360 much more than PS4 and nextXbox.

Also, when you talk about how powerful the Wii U is, you often seem to ignore that your speculating big time.

Those of you who wouldn't call Wii U next gen, do you also say Wii is not the same generation as PS360?

Generation is a measure of time, not power or anything else.

That Wii U is not as powerful as the other upcoming systems in non-controversial.

If Sony didn't produce most of the games I wanted to play, I would care less. Any extra juice is just bonus.

I'm going to disagree slightly even at the risk of having people misquote me again.

What you have said here is pretty much entirely true with one exception. I don't think developers are thinking about console generations in terms of power. They think in terms of who will buy their game. If a platform has an audience for their content and a decent instal base then they'll find a way to develop for it. If power of the platform was the only consideration there would have been a LOT more PC exclusives in the last few years. Instead the focus has been on 360/PS3 because they have the audience and the market share despite the lack of power.

What the Wii U gets in terms of third party support will depend on what happens once the PS4/720 launch. If they sell like crazy leaving the Wii U behind then it's likely the Wii U will get worse than it is now. If the 360/PS3 drag on for a while longer then the Wii U is in a nice spot because it's got first party content. If Nintendo do a 3DS with killer first party content at the end of the year and the PS4/720 end up being more expensive than expected don't be shocked if the major third parties stop talking about graphical performance.

Publishers make the call on who is going to buy what.

Publishers. Not Developers.

It's a food chain.

They do collaberate though, and a developer might ask different publishers until they find a one that is on board for what they want do. Not all developers have a a set publisher they work for.

There's influence, sure.

I've long held the suspicion that there is a resentment within the Dev community about Nintendo, and their uncanny ability to whip out a Best Game Ever every once in a while to keep people in check. So many years reading interviews just do that.

But at the business end of the stick, money talks, and publishers have no such qualms.

"Who cares what you, the creators, want to make? Make this because we know we can sell it."

Arguably, this is where Nintendo themselves have failed to have focus.

Obviously, I'm talking about the mid-table to top end. The money making proportion of the industry. Indies etc can do what they want and are a law unto themselves, amen.

Care to evaluate what the NOS and turbo are in the consoles?

Sometimes it's Devs sometimes it's Publishers sometimes it's both. They're still generally more interested in keeping their jobs than they are using cutting edge visuals. Unless that's their sell they're always going to aim for the largest market over the best hardware.

LOL, i like that analogy.

As a PC gamer, I'm seeing a ton of stuff lately that actually doesn't try to impress with visuals at all. Games like Terraria, Don't Starve, and Monaco don't exactly push cutting edge boundaries when it comes to their graphics, yet they are all fantastic games and have been widely acclaimed by critics and fans alike. I think that this generation will see a continuation in that vein: many games like Killzone WILL continue to bring graphics more and more in line with photorealism, but I believe MORE games will harken back to stylized/creative visuals instead, in many cases displaying graphics that won't even utilize every bit of power these new consoles can produce. This will do much to even the playing field between all competitors. Again, I do realize that power goes toward more than graphics, but to be blatantly honest graphics are what sells most consoles to the mass market consumer.

Also, I'm still waiting for someone to post a link to a credible news article that states the Wii U is factually INCAPABLE of running a "next-gen" engine like Frostbite or Unreal. So far I've only seen devs state the engines will not natively be supported, not due to power constraints, but due to fiscal common sense. I believe I asked the OP to provide a link, but I haven't seen anything from him/her on that front since. Thanks!

@rallydefault gamespot.com/news/dice–explans–why–frostbite–skipped–wii u–6408017
(sorry for any errors,hard to type on 3ds)

@demonta4

Thank you for the link! But if you read closely, they actually never even tried to run Frostbite 3 on the Wii U. They decided not to because they were disappointed with results from Frostbite 2. What that could really mean is anybody's guess, ranging from lack of power to lack of interest in Nintendo's console.

The reason why Frostbite 3 will not show up on Wii U, is because like you said, they didn't like how 2 performed, so they didn't try any further.
Trying to run Frostbite 2 and assuming 3, would be like running Windows XP on a Windows 8 computer. The OS or game engines themselves don't have access to the new Wii U hardware.
My guess is that if a Frostbite 4 engine comes out, it will be able to access features of the Wii U that previous builds of the engine cannot. Really though, it looks like the core abilty of Frostbite 3 could still be relevant for all new consoles. We could possibly see Frostbite 3 on other new consoles if they decide to just upgrade the engine by programming more features and accessibility, but they may just build a new engine from scratch. Who knows...

@willobee
Nos in the case of Wii U, would be the way Nintendo has used the GPU. Turbo in Xbox isn't necessarily maybe the right analogy. PS4 could really be a V6 with NOS, Turbo, better oil, better gasoline, etc. little enhancers like that.
Nintendo could obviously use the better gasoline and oil to get slight improvements just the same.
I just feel like Xbox Infinity and Wii U have a better build quality. Sony tends to throw a bunch of unnecessary things in their consoles that don't always matter. Other OS and PS2 BC being dumped are immediate let downs I can think of. They didn't know how to manage those features, so they just dumped them.

EDIT: So a different analogy could be:
Wii U = V6 w/ NOS and add better oil and gasoline later
PS4 = V6 w/ NOS + Turbo + better oil and gasoline FROM THE START
Xbox∞ = V8 w/ only better gasoline and oil

A solid build of a V8 will ALWAYS be better than a V6 with tons of enhancers.

Obviously this analogy has different possible variants, but my main point was to say that the consoles might not as far apart in performance as most think. People think PS4 and Xbox∞ could be the kill all machines. Really, the industry in general wouldn't exist in it's current state w/o Nintendo at all, so people praying for doom upon the console is like putting out an oil fire with water.

My love of cars means your analogies just confuse me more than help, but I can vaguely understand what you mean

You obviously don't understand the meaning of generation, nor do you understand the meaning of definition (apparently). I don't care if developers are saying it's previous generation when according to the basic definition of the WORD GENERATION this is FALSE. Harkening back to a previous point of mine, if I said that the word banana meant a nuclear submarine, does that make it suddenly true? Your arguments are invalid because they GO AGAINST THE BASIC DEFINITION OF THE WORD. I take no issue in whatever you're saying about power - argue that the Wii U is weaker in power until the sun goes down, but you cannot simply ignore the definition of a word and use it blatantly.

And I've got the best source ever - the dictionary. The following is taken straight from freedictionary.com's definition of generation in regards to technology:
"A class of objects derived from a preceding class"
Gee whiz, then if the Wii was a member of the "preceding class", and the Wii U came after it, doesn't that mean... OH, MY, LOGIC DICTATES THAT THE WII U IS A PART OF THE "NEXT" GENERATION.

I frankly could not care less about how much power the PS4 has, simply because it's irrelevant to the argument. The fact of the matter is, you can spout as much technical jargon as you desire, but the rules of language and basic logic trump all.

The end. I win. Please submit your written apology in the mail. I'll be expecting it shortly.
Regards,
somebody who understands basic definitions.