Current Events > Which console generation had the actual biggest leap in hardware?

(+) Yeah! (+)

nt...

Besides 2D to 3D the ps2/GCN was a pretty noticeable leap.

---

Easily PS1/N64 to Dreamcast/PS2/GCN/Xbox

id say dreamcast

---

ThirstForBLOOD posted...

Easily PS1/N64 to Dreamcast/PS2/GCN/Xbox

This

---

Ps2 to ps3
---

Atari to NES.

---

GoldenSchmoldin posted...

nt...

16 bit to 32bit... you go from 2d to 3D, from home systems running at 3.58 MHz or 7.6 MHz to monsters running at 28 MHz with dual cores and co-processors or even 93 MHz processors with 63 MHz co processors

---

ThirstForBLOOD posted...

Easily PS1/N64 to Dreamcast/PS2/GCN/Xbox

if you think about it the jump from Mario world or sonic the hedgehog to Mario 64 or crash bandicoot was far bigger than Mario 64 to Mario sunshine or sonic adventure

---

16-bit to N64 and PS1 era, the shift from 2D to 3D.

---

PS4/XB1/Wii U to PS5/XSX/Switch

SPE posted...

if you think about it the jump from Mario world or sonic the hedgehog to Mario 64 or crash bandicoot was far bigger than Mario 64 to Mario sunshine or sonic adventure

Ate you talking aesthetically, or are you talking hardware limits?

SPE posted...

if you think about it the jump from Mario world or sonic the hedgehog to Mario 64 or crash bandicoot was far bigger than Mario 64 to Mario sunshine or sonic adventure

That's more devs figuring out how to manipulate whatever resources the hardware gave them. Comparing actual hardware power is kinda difficult.

---

I initially wanted to say from 5th to 6th (N64/PS1 to GCN/PS2/Xbox).

But after putting some thought into it, while it was well before my time, I think you could make a serious case for the jump from 1st to 2nd generation. The 1st generation was largely made up of pong games and pong spin-off games... essentially hit-ball-with-paddle games. With the 2nd generation (Atari 2600 & Colecovision, among others), you had games that did not resemble pong at all, and in the case of the Colecovision, you even had home versions for arcade games like Donkey Kong and Zaxxon. Those were huge leaps, IMO.

1ST GENERATION


2ND GENERATION


---

It defends on how we define it. Do we define from the weakest in the older generation to the strongest in the new generation? Or the first in the older to the first in the newer? Strongest of the older to the weakest of the newer? Do we compare Nintendo consoles against Sony and Microsoft or do we recognize that Nintendo doesn't keep up with the others?

For instance, is it fair to compare the Wii, the weakest of Generation 7, to the Xbox One X, the strongest of Generation 8? Or should that comparison be base Xbox 360 against base Xbox One?
Is it fair to say the Gen8->Gen9 leap is Xbox One X->Xbox Series S? Or is it base Xbox One to Xbox Series S?
If we compare first releases, then this is obviously weighted towards more recent Generations, because technological growth is exponential, even if it's not clearly visible.
But if we're not actually talking about technological prowess, as so many here seem to think it's about looks, then yeah. 2D->3D.

---

Caroniver posted...

It defends on how we define it. Do we define from the weakest in the older generation to the strongest in the new generation? Or the first in the older to the first in the newer? Strongest of the older to the weakest of the newer? Do we compare Nintendo consoles against Sony and Microsoft or do we recognize that Nintendo doesn't keep up with the others?

For instance, is it fair to compare the Wii, the weakest of Generation 7, to the Xbox One X, the strongest of Generation 8? Or should that comparison be base Xbox 360 against base Xbox One?
Is it fair to say the Gen8->Gen9 leap is Xbox One X->Xbox Series S? Or is it base Xbox One to Xbox Series S?
If we compare first releases, then this is obviously weighted towards more recent Generations, because technological growth is exponential, even if it's not clearly visible.
But if we're not actually talking about technological prowess, as so many here seem to think it's about looks, then yeah. 2D->3D.

I'd say the most fair is to say strongest of old vs strongest of new. What's your take on that?

The Popo posted...

I initially wanted to say from 5th to 6th (N64/PS1 to GCN/PS2/Xbox).

But after putting some thought into it, while it was well before my time, I think you could make a serious case for the jump from 1st to 2nd generation. The 1st generation was largely made up of pong games and pong spin-off games... essentially hit-ball-with-paddle games. With the 2nd generation (Atari 2600 & Colecovision, among others), you had games that did not resemble pong at all, and in the case of the Colecovision, you even had home versions for arcade games like Donkey Kong and Zaxxon. Those were huge leaps, IMO.

1ST GENERATION


2ND GENERATION

This makes a good case. 1st gen video games were total shit. Gaming didn't start to become close to recognizable as we know them today until the 2nd gen

Definitely the jump to 3d

EnvoyOfTheLight posted...

That's more devs figuring out how to manipulate whatever resources the hardware gave them. Comparing actual hardware power is kinda difficult.

Id also argue that a game like Mario 64 takes far for technology and involves a lot more calculations that a 2d side scroller

---