Why The Console Generations Are Nonsense! - The Laird's Lowdown

[@autingo6583]

i'm a literary scholar and in the history of literature it is the same thing with the classification of literary movements. these taxonomies have to be understood as an epistemological tool to make sense of broader dynamics and developments. they do not reflect reality per se. this is the reason why you can always argue about them.

[@terran0797]

This is a subject I’m extremely passionate about and I love a great discussion of like minds on a subject that can just be discussed for the love of it and not argued because no one is actually correct here. That being said I really hope Kieren that you read all of this because if I could I’d chat with you for hours about games, consoles and just all the amazing things we could therein. I think we very much agree on many points in about to lay out. I think the console generations are a great way to show a mark in the change and departure of the past generations. I don’t believe it’s perfect at all though and I hear all your points about it. So for me there’s actually more to the generations than just gen 1-9. I believe we could say there’s a Gen 2.5, 4.5, and 8.5. Possibly even a 0 if we really want to get technical but I will start here. You spoke about and I’m going to of course paraphrase that you hate including the colecovision and 5200 in with the second gen and I fully agree. They are Gen 2.5. Technology was changing quickly here and those consoles are a step up from say the Atari 2600 or even Intellivision. They are their own. Some charts even acknowledge this as a lost generation both because of the start of the 3rd gen and because of the gaming crash. Gen 4.5 would include sega cd, 32x, turbo grafx cd and others. There could even be an argument for including the 3DO for this gen. People will have different opinions here. What I’m trying to show is when further into the generation you find addons or consoles that are either ahead of their time or don’t quite fit, it’s fitting to have a half generation in the middle. I do feel you need at least more than one company to facilitate this though especially when tech catches up. It’s not a rule as it’s not really a thing however I think it just makes the argument for a mid generation to have a better leg to stand on. What I mean by this is just because the Famicom got a disk system doesn’t make that gen 3.5, they were just finding ways around issues that later were fixed with cartridge limitations. Where as in gen 4.5 so many came out with cd add ons and other innovations to further the generation. Much like Gen 2.5 did. There could be arguments for even more mid generations however I think these stand out the most. The next is 8.5. We saw a ps4 pro, Xbox one x and a replacement to the WiiU here. Everyone upgraded during this generation and in this case it wasn’t because tech was changing so rapidly like the past two, it was a lack of tech in the first place because of the way the market was. They could have had consoles that powerful come out in 2013 but the consumer didn’t want to pay big ps3 prices lol. So they went cheap. An upgrade to be sure but not one that was all that impressive in my opinion. Now we get into the last few subjects that I only bring up because it’s a great debate and discussion. If middle gens could explain so much and make everything a little more complicated but very clear in the end, what do you think of this and examples of other consoles that may have been a part of other gens…technically? Dreamcast gen 5.5/3DO 4.5/Xbox 6.5/CDi 4.5/neo geo 4.5/sg-1000 2.5/gameboy 3/game boy color 4/game and watch 1/gameboy advance 5/Super Nintendo cd 4.5/jaguar 4.5/jaguar cd 5 and so many more I think could be argued. I think there’s definitely validity to the 2.5, 4.5 and 8.5 but anymore would definitely spark some controversy I think lol. Much like my thoughts about the Wii and WiiU. Both were so underpowered I have trouble not calling the Wii a 6.5 and the WiiU a 7 based on the hardware. For instance with my last thought, Gen 0. The brown box, was not a computer. It was a prototype console. The reason I’d like it included is because it was a forerunner and because there were so many consoles that didn’t make it past prototype that I’d love included in generations to see how it stacks up against competition. Many of which could have been mid gen consoles. Thanks so much for reading.

[@TheLairdsLair]

I can tell you I read every comment! The main reason I actually have my comments on approve here is so I can read each one before I let it through and don't miss any. I say this all the time, but my audience, or should I say community, is incredibly important to me and that's why you guys often drive my content (as this video proves). And I can't argue with a single thing you said and you way of doing things would certainly solve the CD-i issue, putting it with the likes of the Mega CD, Turbo Duo, CDTV etc. would make perfect sense. I didn't really think of anything past generation 6, because I mainly focus on retro, but great points there too.

[@terran0797]

@@TheLairdsLairyou make some of the best most thought out and comprehensive content

[@matthewhainer189]

I think your point concerning the second generation is valid. It is too much to group the Atari 5200 and the Colecovision with the likes of Fairchild and the RCA Studio 2. I don't think your point concerning 4/5 generation works as well though. You yourself said during your 2 generation argument that a consoles hardware/ability mattered more than release date; that same requirement should be equally applied for 4/5 generation. Busineßes aren't going to nearly release their products to like up with a generational category that bind it by in the future. That the Jaguar, 3DO, CD 32, and CDI failed so quickly doesn't change the fact that they were not radically different from the Saturn, PlayStation, or N64. I'd point out that the Jaguar had multiple CPU chips in the same vein as the Saturn. I don't think a two year difference from a consoles discontinuation to the release of the N64 is a strong enough argument to create a roughly two year long mini generation sandwiched between 4/5 generation. It makes more sense to just think of it as the first half of the 5th generation failed, while the second half was successful.

[@Psy500]

It is weird the 2600 is in the same generation as what was suppose to be its replacement the 5200, also weird the SMS is in the same generations as the SMS was the SG-1000 replacement. Though the 3DO was very transitional, the Playstation and Saturn carried 3DO ports early on that mostly just provided a frame rate boost and then you have the PC-FX came after the 3DO and the PC-FX has no 3D capabilities next to the 3DO having some. Also before Sega got wind of the Playstation the Saturn was aiming to more in line of the 3DO capabilities but better.

[@TheLairdsLair]

The PC-FX was basically delayed by over 2 years, it's the same gen as the Jaguar and 3DO really, I'm surprised it came out at all in all honesty.

[@gstcomputing65]

I agree completely. I hate how "generations" are considered fact. It is nothing more than an opinion, and a bad one at that.

[@KoopaMedia64]

I've felt this way for a very long time, great to see the console generation reform getting more attention. Only small thing I'd disagree with you on is disregarding the pong consoles. Cartridges shouldn't be a deciding factor in a console, if it plays video games on a TV, then it's part of the console generations. (Except for modern TV plug n plays as they're too sporadically released and hardly any feature original games)

[@heavysystemsinc.]

@2:07 "I don't know who came up with them.." It's an old magazine term that just stuck. They'd announce 'the next generation of consoles' and the public went, 'I guess this is a generation'. They apparently are based on what's available at each 'big adoption period'. I.e. what kind of machine is the most popular of the time before advertisements of 'the next generation' come around and what kind of specs does it have. I think it's funny how early on it was going by bits despite making no sense with what was out there (and what came before...we had 24 bit computers, 50 bit computers, etc...bit processing was inconsequential really as there was no standard before manufacturing processes got ironed out) and then when 3D happened, suddenly bits went out the window. Funny that. Now we have 'THE EMOTION ENGINE', 'DIRECT X', 'BUMP MAPPING' etc. Just keep in mind that marketing itself muddies up any academic discussion of this hobby. You see the same thing in any other toy-adjacent industry. I think it's a follow on effect of our culture in general, where 'having fun' as an adult is supposed to imply partaking in fundamentally different activities, despite the end goal being the same: chilling out and having some fun.

[@benonemusic]

I agree with your arguments. I think the Pong units and its clones should be called the 0th generation of consoles, with the 2600 the 1st, and 5200 and Colecovision in a subsequent generation.

[@dgvintage]

I always had the same issue as you, regarding the 2nd & 3rd generations. I pretty much just consider the later 2nd gen consoles + the Sega SG-1000 as Generation 2.5. Could almost be considered a "commercially failed 3rd generation", though the presence of the Colecovision does muddy that somewhat. I think I'd leave 5th generation as-is though. Just because those early consoles were underpowered and failed, doesn't really warrant them being a separate generation, they still fit the "32-bit" criteria. A similar scenario exists in 2nd gen - compare the Fairchild Channel F to the Intellivision, the Channel F is essentially a glorified pong console with ROM carts vs the much more powerful Intellivision, yet both are still 2nd gen.

[@TheLairdsLair]

Yeah, that's a fair point, however I will push back on it a little. Because the Channel F and Intellivision were basically working in the same way - doing single screen score based 2D games. But of you compare the games on the FM Towns Marty and the Amiga CD32 to the ones on the PlayStation and Nintendo 64 they are completely different in almost every regard.

[@whoeverest_the_whateverest]

My first arguements about the same thing would've been not how different the first and last consoles of second gen are and how big the technological leap between them, but rather how nonexistent any technological leap is between last second gen consoles and first third gen ones - like, both colecovision and sg-1000 are basically just consolised msx, with very little changes. Or, compare visually the best looking games on atari 5200/colecovision and the very first games on nes - this is practically same level if technology - and all later noticeably better looking nes games are using a lot of mappers, so comparing a5200 games with, say, kirby's dreamland or smth like this wouldn't be fare actually

[@whoeverest_the_whateverest]

That's what i noticed myself long ago Also add to this that magnavox odyssey should be it"s own zeroth gen, cause both the tech is even more primitive, fundamentally, from first gen, and the release dates are far away too and even, as i've read somewhere, odyssey-1 even died out roughly before the release of first other 1st gen consoles - so it's fully separated from them both in technology and on timeline

[@TheLairdsLair]

I think putting the original Odyssey with Pong consoles is fair, because that's essentially what it is.

[@whoeverest_the_whateverest]

Also there's turbografx that's kinda makes it hard to fully, with a noticeable gap, separate the third and forth gens

[@TheLairdsLair]

See, I don't agree on that, for me the PC Engine/TG16 is undoubtedly a forth gen 16-bit console, especially given its better than the Mega Drive/Genesis in some regards and its a huge step up from the NES.

[@tibalose975]

Even though these "generations" serve as a categorization for easier comprehention and study of game consoles, it's all subjective in retrospective, each person links certain parameters to the timeframes the systems represent. Personally, parameters like the peak of popularity, the graphical goals and marketing and comparison with contemporary consoles, are the ones I would use. That way, I find the PC Engine as a fourth gen. console, even though it was concived as competition for the NES. Or the Nintendo Switch as part of the ninth gen. Thanks for your videos, as always. Glad to see you.

[@Trenchbroom]

I agree, and when the Internet was new and I used to look up video game history back then I always thought in my mind that the 70s 8-bit machines (and the Intellivision) were 2nd generation with Colecovision through to the Master System being the third. You can blame the "historian" Stephen Kent for these generations. I think he was the first to write about video game generations in his books back in the 90s.

[@TheLairdsLair]

Good point with regards to Stephen Kent, that is probably where they came from.

[@Jon867]

Personally I've always seen 3d acceleration as the hallmark of the fifth generation, so classifying the Amiga CD32 in the same bracket as the PlayStation and Saturn always seems a bit odd. The Jaguar is another example of a transitional machine. Yes the graphics chip was apparently quite powerful and under-exploited, but with that 68000 legacy processor in there, and a lot of developers programming to it rather than the custom chips, Jaguar games often have a 16-bit look and feel.

[@TheLairdsLair]

Good points, I agree!

[@Vormund]

You are definitely correct that the Atari 5200 should not be lumped in with the 2600 (and Colecovision) I’d say the Video Game Crash is why they got pushed into that gen and everything that released after was considered 3rd Gen (NES, 7800, MS)

[@TheLairdsLair]

Yeah, that's as good explanation as any.

[@portnaluinge]

I'm glad you covered this, cos it's bugged me ever since I first encountered the idea of console generations, likely 10 or 15 years ago. It's an idea that makes sense in the X-Box/PS era, but trying to apply it retrospectively just doesn't work - there are too many crossover devices that span generations (PC-Engine, Jaguar) and putting things like the 2600 and its intended replacement the 5200 in the same generation drives me nuts. I hadn't even considered the stupidity of placing the 32X and Saturn together either. However, it's a ship that I'm afraid has likely sailed, and I can't see anyone revising them at this late stage.

[@randomrc601]

Lairds Lair is Awesome

[@randomrc601]

thx Mr Lairds My top 5 channel

[@randomrc601]

Retro is your No 1

[@colinmcdonald2499]

Why not do a video series more like your amazing facts/exclusives videos, for your way of defining the generations? Where do you put Intellevision? Start of Generation 3 with Collecovision? Would you also put the Bally Astrocade with Collecovision and Intellevision? And what about the Sega SG-1000? It seems SG-1000 should be in with Collecovision as they. with a pretty early release date or end of Generation 2

[@TheLairdsLair]

Intellivision is a 70s console, as it the Astrocade, as I said in the video these would be generation 2 with the Atari 2600, Odyssey 2 and Fairchild Channel F. SG-1000 would definitely go with ColecoVision, it's basically the same hardware, although the fact it was released on the same day as the Famicom confuses that somewhat.

[@colinmcdonald2499]

@TheLairdsLair Perhaps the age of the console is only part of the "generation". Having gotten a VCS in Dec 1981, as i got s bit older and played an Intellevision or two in probably 3rd or 4th grade the Hardware and certain games for it seemed to be much closer to Collecovision and certainly 5200 than it was to my lowly 2600. A solid argument for the Intellevision ( or Bally Astrocade) for being a different generation than the 2600/VCS was chronologically they were developed AFTER the VCS was launced and clearly they were seriously upgunned in the hardware department in an attempt to outgun the VCS and did so successfully ( your Bally Astrocade Amazing facts video ... Is what I am basing my argument on). I would say... You could make Intellevision and Astrocade gen 3 and perhaps slide all the othet gens back by one...

[@chrisbampton5225]

I would classify half of the 2nd generation as part of the 3rd generation of consoles, with the NES starting the 4th generation. The 5th generation would include the SNES and Sega Mega Drive. The Sega 32X and Atari Jaguar would represent a “5.5 generation The 6th generation would consist of the PlayStation 1, Sega Saturn, and Nintendo 64. The 7th generation would then include the Dreamcast, PlayStation 2, GameCube, and Xbox. For the 8th generation, I would place the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, and Wii. The 9th generation would feature the Xbox One, PlayStation 4, and Nintendo Switch, with the Xbox One X and PlayStation 4 Pro serving as a “9.5 generation” due to their mid-gen upgrades. Finally, the 10th generation would include the Xbox Series X and PlayStation 5.

[@smallmj2886]

How about the SG-1000? Should that go into your extra generation with the Colecovision?

[@TheLairdsLair]

SG-1000 would definitely go with ColecoVision in my mind, it's basically the same hardware, although the fact it was released on the same day as the Famicom confuses that somewhat, but I don't think release dates are as important as the hardware itself.

[@MegaManNeo]

Interesting view on things. I always think of the weirdness which are generations with consoles whenever I just look at both the WiiU and Switch which each rival(ed) the PS4 and XBOX One, and now that the PS4 still somehow received games one could argue it rivals the PS5 as well.

[@faenethlorhalien]

Honestly, I never heard the concept of console "generations" until, literally, 2012 and the release of the PS4.

[@lasskinn474]

yeah it came to use in like a decade use and in retro circles as well MOSTLY among the snobs who'd make vids pretending to be professors because they bought a lot of stuff.

[@whoeverest_the_whateverest]

I learnt at one point, and it was hard to realise myself, that Sonic'06 being sometimes named 'SNG' in one of non-english speaking fandoms of sonic, is cause it's 'sonic next-gen' - dunno when exactly it was applied, and actually it's long out of use probably, but this indirect evidence is suppose tells that at least the 'next gen' marketing and via this prolly the console generations classification was already in use at launch of sony's and microsoft's next fen consoles in middle 2000s

[@paulward2076]

That was a very interesting video. I think you could work on this and expand it into a documentary or lecture, to do the rounds at conventions or events. I think you had some good points, all except the N64. I honestly dont think a system has to be around at exactly the same time as all the systems designated under the same generation to be categorised the same. Its more about its technological similarities or lack of, its development and sale during that era, in my opinion. We had similar debates to the one youre proposing about historical and prehistoricsl eras when i studied archaeology. Its very difficult to move the boundaries to where one era ended and another begins without grey areas and anomalies. Wherever you move the boundaries for an era or classification, there will always be some room for debate for something different. I think you could work on this more and develop a new categorisation that fits better than the current one, mind you.

[@TheLairdsLair]

You kinda proved my point about gen 5 though and how it should be split, because you are arguing its about technological similarities and its very clear that the earliest consoles in that gen in the Amiga CD32 and FM Towns Marty are radically different to the N64 and PlayStation - they have more in common with the Mega Drive and PC Engine!

[@paulward2076]

@TheLairdsLair well, the point i was making is that consoles should be designated along those lines but not purely on wether one was discontinued in that generation before another was released. I think i pretty much agreed with your proposal apart from that point.

[@kurtwinter4422]

When you look at how many consoles across generations use the same CPU family - they look less like generations. Coprocessors made the Amiga run ahead of machines produced a decade later with an inferior CPU.

[@alexxbaudwhyn7572]

1:30 I assume my Comment rant about Wikipedias console gens couple weeks ago 😊

[@TheLairdsLair]

Probably! I couldn't remember who left the post or on what video, sorry!

[@pauledwards2817]

As for second gen. Think it is more about which generation of people set the agenda. Most of the people in to gaming were never even born, it’s pre-history gen 1 and 2, the NES is the first console of so many who are the most active.

[@TheLairdsLair]

Perhaps, but doesn't make it right.

[@ugencz8364]

I think that console generations are more like a spectrum, and the 5th gen is a nice example of that.

[@celynjones4958]

Maybe half gen steps would help like processors. e.g. 32X & CD32 gen4.5 / 3DO & Saturn gen5. Or Collecovision gen2.5 etc.

[@michaelmalak]

I asked ChatGPT about N64 vs Jaguar because I only had personally played the Jaguar. It concurred with you that the N64 was a "generational leap" beyond the Jaguar.

[@guser7137]

ChatGPT told you that because humans (and the marketers) described it that way. It didn't draw that conclusion based on its own formed opinion.

[@bruhbruhbruh645]

Stopping kids from saying first.

[@davepage2466]

bruh!

[@RationalistRebel]

TBH I think the main thing that keeps the 5200 out of the 3rd generation is fanboy elitism clinging to the idea of Sega and Nintendo being "first". The only real point that holds it back is the clunky complected controller, a design throwback from the 2nd gen.

[@TheLairdsLair]

Perhaps, but as I said I wouldn't put it in the same generation as the NES and SMS anyway, I'd have a new generation in between 2 and 3.

[@RationalistRebel]

@@TheLairdsLair What keeps any of those non "2nd gen" systems out of the 3rd gen?

[@Fellipe2k5]

Regarding the second generation, they grouped video games that were an advance in concept compared to the first generation, but are not on the same level as the Famicom. PS4 Pro is technically better than PS4 but belongs to the same generation, for example

[@TheLairdsLair]

Bit of an offensive comment there, especially as I am autistic myself. It's not about dates, it's about the actual hardware.

[@Fellipe2k5]

@ Sorry, I didn't know. I used this expression because it is a common expression on the internet that means you don't need to be so thorough. But I apologize again, I will update the comment.

[@MaxAbramson3]

4-bit, 8-bit, 16-bit, 32-bit, etc, based on the addressing calculation of the largest CPU on the board. No one knows (nor cares) about generations. And frankly, all of the 64-bit machines are kind of looking the same. (looking at you, SONY)

[@3vi1J]

I suspected I could guess what your problem with the second generation would be, as I have always had the same problem with the definitions found online today. I can say with certainty, that those of us who started in the early second generation DEFINITELY considered the ColecoVision and all other consoles released in 82 to be the beginning of the next generation. And, the 5200 even had an adapter to make it backwards compatible - as it was supposed to be the next generation for previous 2600 owners. It's just complete bullshit to lump all of these systems in with the ones designed and released in the 70's,.

[@guser7137]

The generations are basically just marketing speak from the producers of the console. When there is a product coming to the market, it is pretty standard to describe the replacement as the 'next generation'. It is only commentators and reviewers that group these generations across brands, often incorrectly. Generations make sense in the context of a continuing product line. But really... who even cares? You buy a console for the exclusives on that platform - though the platform owners have sold themselves out for quick dime on licensing.

[@OM19_MO79]

It’s funny but your annotations were once the way it was classified, there was a 3rd generation from the CV to the crash, and the Jaguar was usually with the rest of the 16-bit. I disagree with you because the generations are not defined, although it is an important factor, by the time period or the technology. You could say it’s subjective, but is mostly defined by things such as trends, looks, a technology thing such as the “bits” or medium. About the second generation, you’re right, the Colecovision shouldn’t be there, it should be on the third. Why, because it was this the one that brought more closely the concept of Arcade at home, which is one of the defining factors of the third. Even though it was discontinued, it was the first to have some of the kind of games that would mark the third. The 5200 on the other hand, not so much. The 5200 was pretty much a slightly better looking 2600, the same kind of games with little to zero innovation. Yes, you can argue that it makes no sense since we consider the XEGS a third generation and the 5200 is almost the same. The difference in this case is both their period and their games, but mostly their games.

[@OM19_MO79]

In the case of the fourth and fifth generations, it’s more about the games than the period and the technology used and the classification might never please all. The Amiga CD32, for an instance, doesn’t show a before and after, despite the media and the “32-bit” technology; most of it’s games are typical fourth generation (16-bit) games, so this system, despite being released at the same time as 3DO and Jaguar, cannot enter the fifth generation, and the same goes with the FM Towns Marty. The 3DO and the Jaguar, despite not being able to compete with the N64 and struggling with 3D as those with which the PS would dominate the rest of the decade, the games of both consoles did depart from the SFC and the Mega Drive. In the case of the N64, although it does have a technology that was far superior (most of) from the others, it was still in the same vain of games that defined the generation, but it couldn’t quite get even close to what the following generation, which started with the Dreamcast, would be known for. The fifth generation was defined, not for the media, not for 3D, but for the way of making games, which had more depth, more length, more immersion. And this was possible with FMV, 2D, still images and 3D, a departure from the quick, short, pick up and play arcade-like experiences everything before the Jaguar and the 3DO did most of the times.

[@FatNorthernBigot]

Those early consoles each improved almost exponentially and they're nothing like the tweaked skinning-a-fart incremental upgrades of today's consoles.

[@simmat6419]

No I think the gens are a good way to keep track of time in VG history. The weirdest anomily for me is the Atari 5200 & the 7800. Are they both Gen 3? is 7800 technically Gen 4? Would that make the Jag a Gen 5 console?

[@TheLairdsLair]

5200 is considered 2 and 7800 is 3. You have kind of proved my point over why they are wrong here with your confusion - clearly not a good way to keep track!

[@randomrc601]

UK.. im Aussie

[@randomrc601]

just a question... whats the the woman voice sayin at start

[@randomrc601]

and what game

[@TheLairdsLair]

"Welcome STUN Runner!" taken from the Atari Lynx port of the famous arcade game.

[@brendanroberts1310]

A controversial take. People do like the idea of console generations as it enables comparisons which generate discussion amongst fans of the hobby.

[@randomrc601]

1982 Kangaroo... you must be older than me ?

[@TheLairdsLair]

I am close to 50 . . . . . .

[@randomrc601]

@@TheLairdsLair 45 mate

[@randomrc601]

@@TheLairdsLair older than me 👌

[@antonvaltaz]

It’s also nonsense having the Switch as part of the 8th generation when it’s spent the majority of its life competing against (and trouncing) the PS5 and Xbox Series, and was a replacement for Nintendo’s actual 8th generation console, the Wii U.

[@BBfanfun]

false & pointless. it's life cycles , not rigid dates ... 2nd Gen : it's all leading to optimized 8-bit processors. the designs (and re-designs) are for viability & streamlining of production (and therefore - programming) before the Reagan era (1980) - quality (consummer AND military specs) chips were scarce. Research into better processors & memory boosted the market forward. BTW , the ColecoVision was develloped around the same time as the IntelliVision, Coleco struggled to find stable suppliers to start manufacturing. the FamiCon brought a new approach to programming/marketing & the NES had a clear field after the Crash (only Atari survived). that was NEW. as for the other contention, it reflects the turmoil of that period. the transition was roughly 1995 - when affordable computers (Laptops) & systems (Windows) took off. i don't understand this revisionism

[@TheLairdsLair]

I don't understand your post, it's very confusing. Firstly the Coleco was not in development at the same time as the Intellivision as they bought the design for it via Bondwell Hong Kong, who owned Spectravideo, who worked on the MSX standard with Microsoft and ASCII Corp. This is why it's so similar to the MSX. Development of the MSX standard didn't start until 1981, two years after the Intellivision was released. There was no shortage of chips at all, most these came from Texas Instruments who had been using them in their own devices for years as well as selling them to other people. I assume you mean the Famicom and that's a simplistic Americanised way of looking at it. I don't really find a single one of your points valid in all honesty and most just confuse me.

[@Fellipe2k5]

Grouping by generation is so simple that I don't understand why people have problems with this concept. We don't need to be thorough with dates. 3DO is from the PSX generation, Dreamcast is from the PS2 generation and Switch is from the PS5 generation, even though they were released a few years early

[@MegaManNeo]

Other than you using "autistic" somewhat like an insult here, isn't it just as much to think the PS5 and Switch are from the same generation? If we take the Switch especially into account, it gets wild anyway as the WiiU was so shortlived that both systems rivaled the PS4 and XBOX One whereas the PS4 is still lived for long in stores and even rivaled XBOX Series.

[@TheLairdsLair]

Yeah, I nearly didn't approve it because of that as I am autistic myself.

[@Fellipe2k5]

@@MegaManNeo It's a common expression on the internet, like saying: "So gay". But I've already changed the comment so as not to offend anyone. Regarding generations, it is a grouping. If you want to be so detailed then there is no grouping. Every grain of sand is different so it is impossible to summarize

[@Fellipe2k5]

@@TheLairdsLair I've already changed the comment, there's no need to be offended because it wasn't directed at you personally.

[@guser7137]

@@Fellipe2k5 You should have left it in. It is not your responsibility to manage how others take offense. Regardless of the initial intentions, policing speech is never the answer.

[@ko55579]

We should have crossgen consoles classifications Dreamcast&Nintendo Switch as examples