You haven’t understood. OP is saying that something being ahead of its time isn’t a function of how much time has passed since. It will always remain ahead of its time. As stated, it is an intrinsic, rather than an extrinsic, property.
Something can be ahead of its time, but that doesn’t mean it is unsurpassable.
I wasn’t saying it was unsurpassable. I was saying that “its time” was a fixed point in history, and if it was ahead of its time (aka. 1983), it will always be ahead of its time (1983).
The Famicom is definitely not ahead of the Switch, or even the N64. I’m sure someone could argue it was ahead of the SNES in some ways. Or anything else. But as a whole, it’s been surpassed a long time ago.
Something being ahead of its time is ahead compared to its contemporaries. 100 years later its contemporaries are still the same because being contemporary of something means “being of the same period”, therefore no matter how much time passes, it will still be ahead of its time.
deleted by creator
You haven’t understood. OP is saying that something being ahead of its time isn’t a function of how much time has passed since. It will always remain ahead of its time. As stated, it is an intrinsic, rather than an extrinsic, property.
See: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrinsic_and_extrinsic_properties
I wasn’t saying it was unsurpassable. I was saying that “its time” was a fixed point in history, and if it was ahead of its time (aka. 1983), it will always be ahead of its time (1983).
The Famicom is definitely not ahead of the Switch, or even the N64. I’m sure someone could argue it was ahead of the SNES in some ways. Or anything else. But as a whole, it’s been surpassed a long time ago.
Something being ahead of its time is ahead compared to its contemporaries. 100 years later its contemporaries are still the same because being contemporary of something means “being of the same period”, therefore no matter how much time passes, it will still be ahead of its time.