Topic: Are We About to Move into the Next Generation of Consoles?

@BAMozzy: It seems most people's sticking point for this not being next gen is the fact the same games work on both systems and it doesn't matter if one system can run them significantly better. From a technical standpoint the move over to x86 architecture allows this and means any future consoles will likely upgrade along this (or x64) path which will lead to games being easier to optimise for a variety of configurations. Effectively this is the same as the scalability you get with PC games. So to ask the question again that everyone ignores, if, hypothetically, the Pro is still supported in the way the PS4 is now when the PS5 releases, does that make the PS5 not a next gen console?

I would say over hardware in the console that, even if we forego the idea that the Wii was classed as a new generation over the GameCube despite being only slightly more powerful, the upgrades in the Pro are as meaningful to the PS4 as the PS4 was to the PS3. As anyone who owns a gaming PC knows, the graphics card is the single most important upgrade and the one in the Pro is decent. The CPU is only just reaching its gaming capacity for the GPU so it is fine Sony only clocked it up, don't expect to see a bigger leap if the next gen releases in 3 years time.

@Dichotomy: The difference here is that its still just 1 game. Whilst the PS4 may offer an enhanced experience over the PS3 in a lot of similar games, you couldn't buy a PS3 version and put it in the PS4 and get the PS4 level of enhancements. The way the Pro works is virtually the same as the N64 with/without an Expansion Pack. You still bought just the one cartridge and if you owned an Expansion Pack enhancements, you would benefit from enhancements - if not the cartridge was still (generally) playable. The same will be true for the PS4 Pro - you won't need to buy a different or separate disc to play PS4 Pro enhanced games.

PS3 versions of games maybe essentially the same 'game' to the gamer - one just better looking but from a developers point of view, the coding can be very different. We just see a better looking game - even the mechanics may feel the same but the way the coding works may be different. Sony has gone to great lengths to ensure the PS4 Pro operates in exactly the same way as the PS4 - right down to ensuring that all the frequencies are the same.

With PC's changing a GPU or CPU often has minimal effect on existing games - other than maybe the ability to increase visual settings but often that's because of a multitude of drivers. In a static console, you don't need these drivers or support as the hardware is known by developers.

As far as generational leaps are concerned, in the past it was much clearer what each generation offered over the last. The ability to have increased pixel count or double the polygon count was far more significant than it is today. Number of colours available too made a big difference so it was far more obvious what each new generation console offered over the last.

Pong for example had a 'square' ball because of the limited pixel count. As we moved through the 80's, we had an increase in colours as well as pixels meaning games had a far more noticeable difference with each generation - characters became far more detailed although were essentially still 'flat' but because of the increased colour capabilities, you could use these to indicate shadows and highlights to simulate a more 3 dimensional look.

Polygons enable game designers to create 3D models but as with 'pixels', in the early days an increase in polygon count made a significant difference to the overall look and detail. I am sure you have seen this image.

It was clear what each generation offered over the last generation - look at how Mario evolved

Resolution itself doesn't always indicate a progression in terms of generation. The Original Xbox had games that ran at 720p but thats also the resolution of a few games on Xbox One too. The PS4 too can't run every game at a full 1080p despite being a LOT more powerful than the PS4. Its clear that visually games are significantly better looking though despite not having a significantly higher resolution. Both are HD Consoles.

So the PS4 Pro may offer an enhanced PS4 experience but its still a PS4. It has the same OS, the same controller, plays 'exactly' the same discs (not alternative PS4 Pro games), all peripheral support is the same. When PS5 launches, It may have some Backwards Compatibility with hardware and/or software but no doubt it will also have its own software too. Just like when the PS4 launched, games like CoD:Ghosts, Battlefield 4, Assassins Creed 4 etc were available on both systems BUT you had to buy PS4 versions to play on the PS4 - the PS3 versions wouldn't work. They may have had a similar enhanced visual presentation equivalent to what the PS4 Pro may offer from a purely gamers perspective but the coding was different and you couldn't just insert the PS3 disc in and get the PS4 'enhanced' version.

Right now I can't even imagine what the marketing points of a ps5/xb2 would be. 4K isn't mainstream yet and the pro/Scorpio cover it anyhow.

I believe that mobile and console are orthogonal to each other, in that you don't want in-depth immersive experiences while on the go, so I don't see everything going the way of the switch.

I also don't see vr becoming the norm for most games, so the ps5/xb2 wouldn't be based on that.

So until 4K or 8k tvs have significant market penetration we may be stuck in this generation... unless someone can think of what qualitative difference would separate generations?

@BAMozzy: You still avoided my question, you should be a politician I'll try again though and then I'll put forward a few thoughts on what you said. So, one last time, it is 3 years in the future and the PS5 releases. Sony also announce the Pro will continue to play the same discs as the PS5, but the PS4 will no longer be supported. The Pro versions will be cut down like the PS4 versions will be compared to the Pro versions, but will otherwise offer the same basic gaming experience. Does this mean the PS5 is also not next gen? (For further reasoning on this move see my previous questions and also this is a hypothetical situation, I know this, but it is also at the crux of this PS4 vs Pro debate). OK, so if you reply to me, please answer that.

Polygon count can still make a big difference, your example focuses on one model, but if instead you think of 10 models (this is a basic example with numbers pulled out of my behind, but you should get the basic gist of it) then a 10X boost allows developers to create 10 models with 6000 triangles instead of having to choose between one model at 6000 looking realistic or 10 chunky models at 600. On top of that more triangles allow for more detailed worlds, extra effects and all sort of other graphical trickery to make the world seem more alive.

By using the fact that resolution doesn't mean generation you kind of are making the same point I am that you may or may not see this console as a new generation, but either way what does make a console generation? I mean the PS3 and PS4 both ran (some) games at 1080p, but no one argues that the PS4 isn't a new generation. A lot of people might point to the fidelity upgrade, but Sammy's article on this very site makes it sound like the Pro is as far ahead of the PS4 as the PS4 was over the PS3 (article here: https://www.pushsquare.com/news/2016/09/first_impressions_ps4_... ). Specifically the line

Remember when you replaced the sub-native resolutions of the PlayStation 3 for the full high-definition output of the PS4? Well, the PS4 Pro appears to offer a similar eye-rub all over again.

Otherwise it has always when a new system has been released.

As for the N64 expansion pack the main difference was you had to buy the N64, there was no new console. I liken that more to the extra memory module you could get for the Amiga - the only thing I remember that required it was Dungeon Master, but it added to your machine rather than superseding it. I also remember that Sega used to have some pretty expensive carts to make the games on them games run better with the hardware, I guess Nintendo's idea was just to get you to buy it once rather than charging more for every game that used it. But, as I said, you couldn't buy the expansion pack and get rid of your N64, with the Pro it replaces the PS4 in every way.

As I said though I expect this to be the new business model for Sony consoles, more regular hardware, but keeping support for the previous system. New controllers for consoles haven't really been relevant this generation, there is no real reason there couldn't have been an option to use the PS3 controller for most games if Sony allowed it, but that doesn't make sense to them from a profit perspective so we get a new controller with two mostly unused new features to justify it. It is possible they will now continue to allow the use of the current controller for future consoles, after all they've said they want to challenge the PC space and I'm still happily using my 360 controller on that platform. I am willing to make a friendly bet, no money or anything like that, just for fun: When Sony releases its next console (after the Pro) it will use the same basic architecture (x86 or x64) and the games will still be compatible with the Pro. I actually hope I'm wrong and this is just a blip in the console market brought on by the ill-advised release of weaker than expected consoles three years ago - I'd prefer to go back to 5-6 year cycles.

@Utena-mobile: The very fact you are not willing to say next gen or not based on what Sony do with the machine (a sort of Schrodinger's Playstation situation) says a lot. I get that you tie exclusive releases to the definition of what a generation of consoles is, but out of interest what is your answer to the first paragraph of this post?

@Mega-Gazz: PS3 was 1080p in theory, the PS4 also was 1080p in theory. So the power to pump out more detail is as much a reason for next gen as resolution increases. So the next set of consoles after the Scorpio and Pro will sell themselves on being able to put out more detail at 4K and 1080p. Since this is what the Pro is doing over the PS4 is why I'm relatively comfortable to think of the Pro as a next gen machine despite Sony's insistence it isn't.

@Dichotomy: As that is a very hypothetical situation and also very unlikely to happen, its impossible to answer. The reason the PS3 on launch had 'backwards compatibility' was because Sony built the PS2 into the PS3 - hence the cost. However what separated the PS3 from the PS2 and the PS4 from the PS3 was next generational hardware and that's what will separate the PS5 from the PS4 too. Next generational hardware generally has more power and why Games can have significant improvement over last gen which often manifests itself in better visuals.

In the early days, doubling the power, the resolution, the amount of colours etc had much more of a dramatic effect on gaming than say increasing resolution from 1080p to 4k. Audio is virtually at the limit of advancement too - From the days of simple beeps, to synthesised speech to full surround HQ sound we have today. Next generation is unlikely to see as much of a jump as say the SNES to N64 in terms of visual, audio or even controller function. Most of these are likely to seem relatively minor (if at all). Seeing a game at 4k HDR isn't necessary going to seem 'that' much more improved over 1080p with HDR - a bit sharper, slightly more detail of course. How that runs on the hardware though could be different, the operating system could be different even if the dashboard shares a common theme.

When we look at the PS3 to PS4, the dashboard isn't that different. The PS3 runs games similar to the PS4 with a bit of a visual downgrade but it has a sixteenth of the RAM and a very different structure too. The CPU is very different as well. One of the reasons the PS4 Pro keeps with the Jaguar chip is, as Mark Cerny explains "Moving to a different CPU - even if it's possible to avoid impact to console cost and form factor - runs the very high risk of many existing titles not working properly. The origin of these problems is that code running on the new CPU runs code at very different timing from the old one, and that can expose bugs in the game that were never encountered before."

In the PC space, this may not be such an issue because of a plethora of drivers

I have no doubt that the PS5, when it arrives, will have next gen hardware - including the next generation of CPU. From our perspective though, games are likely to feel similar but with a better visual presentation but could run and or use very different coding to achieve similar results.

The N64 was built to be expandable - the PS4 was not. That's why it was relatively simple and cheap to add the expansion pack and why the Pro is a new console but essentially its the same principal. It still operates in exactly the same way, uses the same coding etc as the PS4. Like games that didn't have Expansion Pack support, the N64 games didn't access the Expansion pack. On the Pro, games won't utilise the other half of the GPU but all the other hardware is the same.

I really can't see PS5 games working on the Pro. Its possible that Sony may relent and let publishers release a PS4 Pro only version but I doubt that 'Pro' version would run on the PS5.

Sony of course probably could have held out another year or 2 without releasing an enhanced version but could also have lost some of its user base to PC's and maybe even Scorpio. In the 3years since the PS4 launched, 4k HDR TV's and VR have become reality. Trying to compete with cheap GPU's and PC's that can connect to TV's with full controller support - giving higher game performance both visually and frame rates would not be easy. Whether Sony feel the need to make another iterative hardware within the first few years of the PS5 generation or not will depend on the technological advances and the relative power demands of those. If the PS5 maintains a 4k HDR resolution with little/no compromise to the overall visual quality and frame rates and can play VR comfortably too - even if Sony bring out a higher spec PSVR2, then it really wouldn't make sense. The Pro essentially is a halfway step between old generation HDTV type technology and the future - a transitional console but still locked to the 4th generation.

@BAMozzy: It isn't impossible to answer, you just are choosing not to. The fact it is hypothetical renders whether this is what will happen or not moot and should not be factored in to the answer. It is, in fact, very simple to answer. You either say, yes the PS5 in this situation would be next gen, or no the PS5 in this situation wouldn't be next gen. There is nothing hard about the question, but if it helps you in some way we can call the company making this move Notrealco and it just happens they mirrored exactly what Sony did up to this point. Personally, because I am suggesting the Pro could be classed as a next gen system, I would obviously also class this hypothetical PS5 system as a next gen one. See, not impossible at all, I managed it and am listening to a book at the same time.

As for the PS5 being next gen hardware, I would guess it will actually be a slightly modified CPU of a power no greater than a mid-range one you can pick up today. The GPU will follow the same pattern of roughly a mid-range one released a year or two earlier. It is very unlikely at this point consoles will move away from using AMD, Intel or NVidia to source their hardware, the costs involved with producing such technology are prohibitive just for the sake of a console and it makes sense to stick with the market leaders who can offer more bang for your buck. Consoles also need to be affordable, so the best performance you can hope for is of PC tech which is a few years old. This is fine and works well, not many people want to be cutting edge (I certainly don't) as the costs get exponentially higher as you try to obtain a bit more power. The days of completely unique chip sets for consoles are over, complexity in creating games is already high enough without having to throw in multiple unique chip sets you have to also code for (the Wii U suffered, in part, for this and many 3rd party titles on the PS3 also struggled because of this).

Given the above paragraph it makes sense for Sony to have their console act like PCs, the hardware is compatible both backwards and forwards and Sony are saying they want to compete with the PC space (this has always been a big bonus for PC, well at least since we got Voodoo cards) so it would certainly help Sony pursue that goal. It gives them a large install base from the launch of a new console and softens the blow of the removal of the PS4 from support since they got their 6 year cycle. Those same people would be the ones Sony would hope quickly upgrade to their new machine too. On paper it almost sounds win/win, in reality it isn't quite, but that is a different topic and one I don't wish to get into.

The point is that cost will always be a factor so expecting for a console released in three years to be far more powerful than one released next month is just not going to happen unless we see a price significantly above £350/$400. It will be roughly the same difference in power as the Pro is to the PS4. On that basis alone it would be hard to justify one being next gen, but the other not being next gen regardless of 'forward' compatibility.

@Dichotomy: Hmmmm... (-_ - ) that's a tough one. lol.
I still think that we can't really tell at this point what Sony is going to do. Btw, sorry if this gets long. But I don't consider PC to go through "console" gens, except when the architecture changes. So like x64 is one gen. and x86 is another. But since games can sometimes be played across both it tends to make that example pretty murky.

Consoles are a bit different. We keep assuming that Sony and MS are treating future compatibility as policy, but they technically haven't said anything about that. it could be that PS5 won't be compatible with PS4. I consider a gen is a new gen when the majority of games being created are in a format or have specific requirements that prevent it from being played on the older, previous console (I don't think graphics are a good measure of next gen). So, Gameboy Color can play Gameboy and GBC games, but GB can't play GBC games. They are in two different gens. Gameboy Advance can play GBC and GB games, but GBC and GB can't play GBA games.
Wii U can play Wii games, but Wii can't play Wii U games. They're different gens. You can't play PS4 games in a PS3, or PS3 in a PS2, or PS2 in a PS1. Those are four different gens.

So following that, if the Pro, eventually starts putting out games that the Vanilla can't play (or it struggles so much that it might as well not be able to play) and the majority of PS4 games are being made mostly for the Pro, then yeah, the Pro is the next gen. I super tiny increase of a gen, but still a gen. But that hasn't happened yet, and Sony is so far saying that all games can be played on Vanilla and Pro. But this is just my opinion. (T-T )

@BAMozzy:
Wow, that was the first time I've seen that polygon picture. That makes a lot of sense. But I don't think Mario is a good example like the polygon figure because Nintendo found a good artstyle with him, figured out how to do it fairly early on, and starting with the GCN stuck to that look regardless how good the graphics got. If you could find the same sort of graph, but with "some nameless soldier" from like Call of Duty or Battlefield or whatever guys play today, then it would work better because they're going for realism.

I wouldn't say it's a new generation. Although technically Nintendo is starting a new generation, I feel the console will be behind both the original Xbox and PS4 consoles. So for me personally, that's not really a new generation console.

As for PS4 Pro and Xbox One Scorpio, they're really just a stopgap as many others have pointed out. Although I do believe every console will be backwards compatible from here on out, but I just don't think that it's a leap large enough to consider it a new generation, and other than power upgrades the consoles will be nearly identical to their original versions.

@Kamehameha: Generational consoles are far more complex than they used to be. At one time we knew the 'generation' we were in and can still name them to a degree - 8bit, 16bit, 32bit etc.

The Nintendo is no doubt a next generation console for Nintendo but in terms of specs, is looking like it will be on a par with the 'generation 8' consoles of Sony (PS4) and Microsoft (XB1). In terms of computational power, its rumoured specs are anything from 1 to 1.5tflops and looking at delivering 900p to 1080p gaming. Its a step up from its predecessor and time will tell if it is as successful as the WiiU or can compete with Nintendo's Wii in sales. I do think they would be better marketing it as a handheld that can be a console rather than a console that can be a handheld. I doubt that 'Skyrim' for example could compete with the PS4 or PS4 Pro version on a 'head to head' in console format but as a handheld its unrivalled. If you own a PS4, Pro or the upcoming Scorpio, would you buy a 900-1080p version of a game (not necessarily Skyrim and baring in mind the processing power could be less than an XB1) to play on your big screen TV primarily or buy for the other console(s) that offers a higher PQ ans/or frame rate? I can see the appeal of buying the Switch as a primarily mobile device but if you were to use it more as a console, I struggle to see the third party games appealing more on Switch. As a 2nd console, I can see its attraction too. The Xbox is quite similar to PS4 and a PC may well negate the appeal of its exclusive content but the Switch is certainly more unique.

I am still not convinced that the Scorpio is just a mid-term upgrade like the Pro. I know what MS are saying now about it but they also want to keep selling XB1 consoles. I am sure they will release first party games on both systems - unless of course they are developing a VR game - but I can't see the XB1 having the capability to continue running games in 3yrs from now - not unless we see a major downgrade in visuals. A number of games struggle to reach 900/60. I know First party games (like GoW4, Forza Horizon 3) run at 1080p and whilst these games do look stunning, the games have a more 'simplistic' element to them - that doesn't mean they aren't fun to play though. When you look at Uncharted 4, there is so many little details - things like sandbags reacting to bullets and leaking sand for example as well as much wider level design. Its possible too that first party developers are much better at utilising the ESRAM in a similar way that Sony's developers were better at utilising the PS3's architecture and 3rd party developed games are built for a more generic set-up as not all devices have ESRAM - mind you it could explain why textures etc take a bit longer to load in on PS4 despite the PS4's faster RAM.

Anyway that's getting a bit off topic. I see the Scorpio as a cross between the Pro (able to play existing and future XB1 games at a higher standard) and a 'new' generation too - offering 'new' games and experiences not available to current XB1 users. MS are moving away from generational consoles and this looks to be the first step. Like a PC, if you own a certain spec, that may allow you to play the majority of games upto 1080p comfortably but maybe can't play VR games unless you upgrade components. If you do, you van then play VR but the extra power allows you to play games at a higher level but upgrading doesn't mean your existing library is now obsolete. If you don't upgrade, in the near future some games won't run well at all - your PC won't meet the minimum specs and I see something similar with the XB1/Scorpio path. I can see a time when games may well have 'minimum required' or similar. I have no doubt that MS will bring out a follow up to the Scorpio too and that will follow a similar path - still play games from the XB360 era (like the XB1) but the XB1 won't run the latest games anymore but Scorpio will although the follow up will run them better. I have no doubt that the Scorpio will run more games at a native 4k than the Pro can but I also think we will see a lot of upscaling and checkerboard rendering, particularly in 3rd party software to deliver a 4k image. 6tflops is not enough now so in a year+ time, I can't see it being enough. Obviously at over 4x the power of XB1, it should be enough for 1st party games that hit 1080p so a follow up can offer an upgrade.

I see Sony continuing on its own path and offering a traditional console generational upgrade. Whether they offer a backwards compatibility or not, time will tell but the way Sony have handled the Pro, I would think not. It seems that they believe their games (first and third party) require a specific set-up (right down to clock speed) to work and anything more than this would require developers to rework/patch the games to account for extra speed or computational power. Maybe they will offer PS4 games on PSNow or just remaster them. Mark Cerny was quite clear that he believes in generational consoles and starting new with each new era. I fully expect that when the PS5 launches, you will need to buy a PS5 version - not just put in a PS4 disc and get PS5 standards - like we saw when the PS4 launched - you had to buy PS4 versions of Ghosts or Battlefield 4. I think MS will be different from now on in that if you have the game and upgrade your console, that game will run at the enhanced level (if there is an enhanced level of course - its not going to increase the resolution, textures etc beyond what was built in - its not going to make a game built at 1080p suddenly run at native 4k) meaning that games will just have Xbox on the box - like PC's just have PC on the box.

I don't think console generations are over, but I do think the days of everyone sharing in the same generation is at its end. It's basically evolved to where each manufacturer has its own generational schedule.

Personally, I'm still going to refer to it as 9th gen though.

9th Generation Hardware

• PS4 Pro
• Switch
• Scorpio

Admittedly, it's really only the 9th generation for Nintendo once Switch releases, but things have changed. PS4 Pro and Scorpio are timed right around the 9th gen Switch (6 months before, 6 months after) and are considerably more powerful, so it stands to reason that we could (and probably should) refer to it as the 9th gen.

Maybe it's technically not for Sony/MS, but whatever. The whole reason we categorize into generations is to easily separate the waves of advancement. And we're getting one huge wave of advancement all centered around Switch, which is technically 9th gen. So why not just slap the label on it and be done with it. It'll sure make things easier when referring to this wave of hardware. At least we'll have a name to call it besides "the 9th gen for Nintendo but not 9th gen for Sony and MS who instead released mid-generation upgrades"

@JaxonH: The issue with your reasoning is that the Wii and WiiU were generationally a step behind in terms of computational advancement and released at different times to the rivals The WiiU for example has more in common with the 7th Generation PS3/XB360 and its looking like the Switch will be more an XB1/PS4 gen (although still underpowered comparatively). If anything, the Switch should be '8th' gen - which then fits in with the PS4/PS4 Pro - which are both the same generational hardware.
I don't think the Scorpio will be entirely still rooted in the 8th gen as it will offer more than just a boost to XB1 games - VR support and games are just the start and I really do think that it will have its own non-VR games at some point too. You don't build a very powerful console, with over 4x the power and limit it to the much inferior hardware that's already 4years old. It will be interesting to see what CPU they use and its speed. You could argue that's what Sony have done with the Pro (limiting it to the older hardware) but its really only doubled the GPU (bolted two together essentially) and given a slight (30%) boost to the CPU and RAM bandwidth - its still using the same CPU and amount of RAM.
When the PS1 launched, it had more in common with the contemporary consoles so could be easily compared with the N64 for example and linked to that generation. When the PS2 and original Xbox launched we could easily compare with the Gamecube and Dreamcast and therefore link them with that generation. The PS3 and XB360 were generationally a big jump up from their predecessors where as the Wii was a lot less of a jump up and the WiiU basically jumped up to the level of the PS3/XB360.
I think its difficult now to class consoles by a single generation. Nintendo have been around a long time so can be classified by 8th/9th generation consoles but I tend to look at Sony as now on its 4th generation hardware - The Pro is still a 4th generation Sony console with more power. MS are on their 3rd generation but MS are trying to do away with 'generational' steps and looking to move into the same format we see in PC's - what generation are PC's on? By that I mean that they will look to release a new console every 3-4years that will play all existing Xbox games - going right back at least until the XB360 era - those that are on Backwards Compatibility on XB1. Like the XB1, the future consoles will play these games across all generations, chat across all generations etc meaning that you could play CoD:BO for example with friends on Scorpio, XB1 and XB360's and party chat with everyone too. PC gamers can play Black Ops with people that have a PC just powerful enough to play this all the way up to PC's with the most powerful GPU, massive RAM and the fastest CPU.
I know it could get confusing to speak of multiple different generations when we consider each console manufacturer. Its true that the Switch is looking like it could be a generational jump for Nintendo but in terms of what it can offer, it can't match up to the XB1. Of course it has other features, like portability, but I doubt it could run games to the same standards (if at all in some cases) as the 3yr old consoles. Undocked, the Switch is unlikely to match the WiiU but it only needs to deliver 720p visuals on a 6.2" screen and at that size, can scale back a lot of the visuals because you wouldn't see them. Using 32bit instruction, the same as the PS4 and XB1, we are looking at around 393Gflops (docked) which makes it less than a third of the power of a XB1. Using 16bit (or half floats), they could double this up to 786Gflops (0.8tflops) - The Tegra X1 is upto 1tflop (16bit) if running at max capacity. The Switch also has half the RAM and a slower CPU with less cores. If the Pro used 16bit for example, it would be an 8.4Tflop console to put some perspective on it. For a handheld, its more powerful than the Vita - quite a bit more - even undocked but for a console its not going to provide a generational leap experience for those of us who own PS4's or XB1's. If you refer to these as 8th gen, then its hard to call the switch a 9th generation when it can't offer the same level as these - at least in my mind. In essence, Nintendo are joining the PS4/XB1 generation but compromising on power to make it portable.

the issue is that people think we have clear GENERATIONS when in fact all we actually get are just replacements or successors to the current ones

the Wii U is being succeeded by the Switch nothing more

i think it's time to drop the generation label and just accept that tech gets replaced when it becomes too outdated and with the PS4 Pro and XBOX ONE-s being released i think that the term Generations is now outdated anyway

@FullbringIchigo: The XB1s has more in common with the PS4 slim than the PS4 Pro. It maybe have an upgraded Bluray player but as far as gaming is concerned, its only slightly more powerful than the XB1 but not as powerful as a PS4 so its more like the Slim. You could argue the Pro is a new generation because of its impact on gaming although like I said its CPU and RAM are virtually the same as the base but with just a slight increase in performance. Of course the Pro though isn't a 'replacement' to the PS4 and its locked to the 4th generation Playstation.
Generational leaps are more than just an increase in 'power' but often the architecture inside is 'new' generation too. Mark Cerny believes generational leaps are more about the CPU architecture than anything else. Its one of the reasons that Sony stuck with the Jaguar CPU in the PS4 Pro and pushed that to its limit.
The Switch is obviously using very different architecture to the WiiU and is clearly Nintendo's next generational hardware. The PS4 Pro is not Sony's 'next' generation console though and is in essence no different from the N64 with an Expansion pack - more power to improve the current generation games.
The Scorpio though seems to be a mix of a 'next' gen and mid-term upgrade. It may not start by offering too many unique games - depends on how many VR games are available but I do expect that it will have games that won't be on XB1. Similar to PC's in that if you don't upgrade your hardware, it will eventually struggle with the latest releases but if you do upgrade, you can still play the older releases and some of those at 'enhanced' levels.
I think it makes more sense to consider the consoles by their manufacturer. Sony are on their 4th Generation, MS their third for example. Its increasingly difficult to refer to all as one specific generation. In a sense I do agree that the term 'generation' with regards to consoles generally is now outdated but could be applied individually by manufacturer. If you consider the Switch as 9th Generation but then can't play some 8th generation games due to lack of 'power', it does seem odd to me. In 'undocked' mode, it appears to lack the power of its predecessor in raw power terms. 'Next' generation hardware can still apply as well. PS5 for example would be the 'next' generation Playstation and Sony's 5th. Nintendo's Switch would still be Nintendo's 'next' generation even if it can't match up to Sony or MS's hardware releases either side of its arrival.

Its difficult to not call successions in computing 'generations' as that's what we have called them for ages. It even has dedicated pages in computing encyclopedias so you cant really argue with popular naming conventions unless you have an alternative.

Also I'm noticing commenters getting caught in the details of right now! Some generations had components / extras / remodels brought out for an older model after a new generation had already started, who's to say the wii u wasn't a part of last gen? I'm tempted to say it is. If the PS4 pro and scrubs / x1 and Scorpio and switch have a good run over the next 5 years the wii u will be seen as a bridging console at best and last gen at worst.

I personally think the tech companies dont have a 100% grasp of what the next big thing will be so they are all throwing money and products at us in case one sticks and they dont want to be left behind. This is obviously bad for consumers as we don't know what to buy either leading to a lack of confidence and seemingly strange business decisions and rushed products to market.

@BAMozzy: i never said they were, i'm saying that the concept of "generations" with consoles has changed to the point i don't think the term is relevant anymore

The Switch will probably be next gen in Nintendo Land. The Pro is just a turbocharged Ps4 that should have more focus on silky smooth 60fps 1080p before talking about 4k. Then there is the Scorpio that may be next gen for Microsoft or just a much more powerfull Xbone with some new features.

The idea that the Scorpio would be a more powerfull Xbone interests me more than any current Sony console. Backward play, external hdd, the possibilities with a windows 10 os, more apps, a good browser, and pc like use of games like mods and settings options like dof, blur, bloom, ca, ect to deal with all of the unwanted graphic effects common in this gen games. All of that would make the Scorpio a good option to hooking a pc to my living room big screen.