Ferris Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 So what is it that we are going to refer to this upcoming Wii / PS3 / X360 generation as? The 256-Bit generation? I cant even say I know how many bits these new systems really are anymore, it almost seems irrelevant at this juncture. But five or ten years from now, when we look back at this era of games, as we look back at the SNES, Genesis and TG16 and refer to it as the 16-Bit era, how do you think we will remember this next generation as? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JagFan422 Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 hi-def Gen, well except for Nintendo. I think this generation could be summed up as the Insane generation, with all the crazy crap the big 3 are trying to do, especially Nintendo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+remowilliams Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Do the Math! - Generation 2! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8th lutz Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 (edited) Call it the hi dif gneration. I think the bit generations is near the end. I don't see a 512bit,1024 bit ,or 2048 bit generation happening. I don't think hd tv's are capable of doing 2048 bit. The 2048 bit generation would have to start around 2026 at least if every generation has 5 years for videogames like they do know. The only way this could change with bits is having a tv that is even more high tech then it is now. Nintendo is on the right path. The days of improving graphics is near the end. What can be improved on is the speed and find new ways to do games by control. It will be about the games,not the graphics after this coming up generation or the one after that. Edited May 18, 2006 by 8th lutz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liveinabin Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Well, aren't they going backwards now? The Xbox is a 32-bit system AFAIK. No idea what the newer systems are. I'd imagine the 360 is at most a 64 bit, the Wii is probably 128 bit and Sony are probably claiming infinity bits +1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPUWIZ Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 I'd imagine the 360 is at most a 64 bit, the Wii is probably 128 bit and Sony are probably claiming infinity bits +1. 360 = 128bit PS3 = 128bit Wii = 64bit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ze_ro Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Referring to systems or generations by some number of "bits" is rather vague and pointless... "HD Generation" or just "7th Generation" would be more appropriate. --Zero Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darklord1977 Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 Do the Math! - Generation 2! how about the over priced gen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtariJr Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 we've past ludicrous generation and gone straight to plaid!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 How about calling it by the dominant system(when we see it)? Or even just "third polygon generation"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtariJr Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 How about calling it by the dominant system(when we see it)? Or even just "third polygon generation"? or according to sony the "4th demension" generation... go kirby tilt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyper_Eye Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 we've past ludicrous generation and gone straight to plaid!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Andrew Davie Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 Call it the hi dif gneration. I think the bit generations is near the end. I don't see a 512bit,1024 bit ,or 2048 bit generation happening. I don't think hd tv's are capable of doing 2048 bit. The 2048 bit generation would have to start around 2026 at least if every generation has 5 years for videogames like they do know. The only way this could change with bits is having a tv that is even more high tech then it is now. Nintendo is on the right path. The days of improving graphics is near the end. What can be improved on is the speed and find new ways to do games by control. It will be about the games,not the graphics after this coming up generation or the one after that. "bits" are not the same as "pixels". You appear to be confusing resolution with CPU bit handling. The Atari 2600, for example, is an 8-bit machine. It can handle a resolution of 40 x n playfield pixels on the screen. So when we're talking about a HD tv capable of doing "2048 bit" -- that's meaningless. You could (in theory) have an 8-bit CPU driving a HD screen 2048 pixels wide, no problem. The HD TV resolution is independant of CPU processor bit-width. We're just at the beginning of the 64-bit CPU era. I expect this will last under a decade, and we'll see 128-bit CPUs come along in short order. After that, my guess is we'll start to see a change in architecture (eg: quantum computers) and I doubt we'll see 256-bit CPUs for some time. I'm sure there are significant cost disadvantages (pin count, bus bandwidth, etc) in developing higher-bit-width hardware. 8-bits is all anyone ever really needs, and 2048 bits is just insane. Cheers A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtariJr Posted May 20, 2006 Share Posted May 20, 2006 we've past ludicrous generation and gone straight to plaid!!! Thought you guys would like that. I personally think you cant say its HD generation as A. the wii isnt HD, and B. the population with a HD TV to take advatage simply is way too small , and will still be small in a couple years. How 'bout we just call it Sony's Doom Generation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHAGOHOD X99 Posted May 20, 2006 Share Posted May 20, 2006 Well if you really want to be technical nothing coming out is NEXT GEN because it's still interactive consoles utilizing controllers and not really doing much more than the previous generations. When we've arrived at something that's closer to a William Gibson (Neuromancer) SimStim VR Construct player or even a Star Trek Holo-Deck player, where one can literally be taken into an alterverse where one can feel, smell, hear, taste and actually in a sense BE THERE in the program Then and only then will anything be Next Generation. The whole Bits thing is dead, though HD Generation sounds about right even if it's not a completely true statement. We are none the less in the High-Definition age. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtariJr Posted May 20, 2006 Share Posted May 20, 2006 (edited) i think the Wii is the closest as the controller is a new way to at least play... yes, technically it isnt as impressive as 360 or PS3.. but it offers something really new to the table, which is what next gen really means right? I think with the exception of the Wii, i think the generation could be called the "Extention of the previous generation generation" Edited May 20, 2006 by AtariJr Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadow460 Posted May 20, 2006 Share Posted May 20, 2006 HD generation is what's over on wiki. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atari-Jess Posted May 21, 2006 Share Posted May 21, 2006 bits is dead. Its number of generations. we are entering the 7th Generation started with the Microsoft Xbox 360 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtariJr Posted May 21, 2006 Share Posted May 21, 2006 bits is dead. Its number of generations. we are entering the 7th Generation started with the Microsoft Xbox 360 maybe its the 8th generation... the Dreamcast pretty had its own generation there.. hmm.. actually ill settle for the 7.5th generation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smiley Posted May 22, 2006 Share Posted May 22, 2006 So what is it that we are going to refer to this upcoming Wii / PS3 / X360 generation as? The 256-Bit generation? I cant even say I know how many bits these new systems really are anymore, it almost seems irrelevant at this juncture. But five or ten years from now, when we look back at this era of games, as we look back at the SNES, Genesis and TG16 and refer to it as the 16-Bit era, how do you think we will remember this next generation as? even though I never considered the tg16 a actual 16-bit console, I still prefered most of its game over both the genesis and the snes, especially some of the rpgs and Bonk. bonk was the shiznick and they need to make more games for him. with this console race, I know that I'm not buying a ps3, because of problems with ps2, and will instead be buying a wii and a 360. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ze_ro Posted May 22, 2006 Share Posted May 22, 2006 "bits" are not the same as "pixels". You appear to be confusing resolution with CPU bit handling. The Atari 2600, for example, is an 8-bit machine. It can handle a resolution of 40 x n playfield pixels on the screen. So when we're talking about a HD tv capable of doing "2048 bit" -- that's meaningless. You could (in theory) have an 8-bit CPU driving a HD screen 2048 pixels wide, no problem. The HD TV resolution is independant of CPU processor bit-width. With most newer consoles, companies started quoting "bits" based on the power of the graphics processor. As the graphics processors ended up with larger data/address busses than the processor, marketing just chose to use the bigger number, because we all know that "bigger number = more better". And who are we to call them wrong? It's not like there's some standard saying "a 64-bit machine must have this and that". It's a meaningless indication of anything at all. At least now companies have given up on that kind of nonsense. Comparing things like clockspeed and data bus width on most consoles is like comparing apples to oranges, since they often used processors from completely different families, or in completely different arrangements (like this HD-Gen, with multiple cores and such). It's unfortunate that most of the consumers still haven't caught on to that. --Zero Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHAGOHOD X99 Posted May 22, 2006 Share Posted May 22, 2006 even though I never considered the tg16 a actual 16-bit console, I still prefered most of its game over both the genesis and the snes, especially some of the rpgs and Bonk. bonk was the shiznick and they need to make more games for him. Well that's good because for all purposes it was a Hyper 8-Bit console that got tagged as being a 16-Bit when it wasn't a true 16-Bit. No different than how the NEO:GEO "AES" [on the box no less] was called a 24-Bit system but in reality was just a "Hyper 16-Bit" system. Both were systems jacked up on Steroids for all purposes with a chaser of RedBull. "Hyper" was all it really was... and in the case of Neo:Geo anyhow, that Hyper kept on trucking along until 2003. I personally would've loved to have seen marketing around the PC-Engine Duo and/or TG-16 as "Hyper 8-Bit Power" or some creative shit, but I'm guessing it wouldn't have sounded as good to the masses even back then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB Posted May 23, 2006 Share Posted May 23, 2006 (edited) even though I never considered the tg16 a actual 16-bit console, I still prefered most of its game over both the genesis and the snes, especially some of the rpgs and Bonk. bonk was the shiznick and they need to make more games for him. Well that's good because for all purposes it was a Hyper 8-Bit console that got tagged as being a 16-Bit when it wasn't a true 16-Bit. I'd call it a Super NES, but the name's taken. No different than how the NEO:GEO "AES" [on the box no less]was called a 24-Bit system but in reality was just a "Hyper 16-Bit" system. Except that SNK was adding 16 for the 68k and 8 for the z80, while NEC was just taking 16 from the video processor. NEC actually had a more valid argument. Had everyone stuck to 16-bit graphics instead of 16-bit system we wouldn't be arguing the point today. Both were systems jacked up on Steroids for all purposes with a chaser of RedBull. "Hyper" was all it really was... and in the case of Neo:Geo anyhow, that Hyper kept on trucking along until 2003. Actually, the NeoGeo had GigaPower by 03. I personally would've loved to have seen marketing around the PC-Engine Duo and/or TG-16 as "Hyper 8-Bit Power" or some creative shit, but I'm guessing it wouldn't have sounded as good to the masses even back then. Well, NEC started the bittage argument, so they were setting the terms. "16-bit" was just easier to say than a bullet-point comparison to the NES. Edited May 23, 2006 by JB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdie3 Posted May 23, 2006 Share Posted May 23, 2006 How many bits does it take for a human to enjoy the video gaming experience? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtariJr Posted May 23, 2006 Share Posted May 23, 2006 How many bits does it take for a human to enjoy the video gaming experience? 0, gaming is irresistable from the beginning Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.