Maybe, maybe not. It depends on what you mean by a "revoloution". Xbox revoloutionized online gaming for me, So Wii's controller will probably revoloutionize controls for me.
In order for a true gaming revolution to occur, you'll need more than just a new controller. I mean, sure the Wiimote has changed the way you play the game, but fundamentally the games have not changed much -- you could just as well use a standard controller to control the actions on screen. What will bring about a true revolution would be a fundamental change to the games themselves. What that could be, I don't know. But as long as the Wiimote is only used for the standard FPS, platformer, racer, fighter, sports, etc. etc., it's not revolutionary. It's just innovative.r11011b
When was the last time we had a TRUE gaming Revolution?
[QUOTE="r11011b"]In order for a true gaming revolution to occur, you'll need more than just a new controller. I mean, sure the Wiimote has changed the way you play the game, but fundamentally the games have not changed much -- you could just as well use a standard controller to control the actions on screen. What will bring about a true revolution would be a fundamental change to the games themselves. What that could be, I don't know. But as long as the Wiimote is only used for the standard FPS, platformer, racer, fighter, sports, etc. etc., it's not revolutionary. It's just innovative.XenoNinja
When was the last time we had a TRUE gaming Revolution?
Is that a rhetorical question? Because the last gaming revoloution was NES, I guess.
[QUOTE="r11011b"]In order for a true gaming revolution to occur, you'll need more than just a new controller. I mean, sure the Wiimote has changed the way you play the game, but fundamentally the games have not changed much -- you could just as well use a standard controller to control the actions on screen. What will bring about a true revolution would be a fundamental change to the games themselves. What that could be, I don't know. But as long as the Wiimote is only used for the standard FPS, platformer, racer, fighter, sports, etc. etc., it's not revolutionary. It's just innovative.her0_54
When was the last time we had a TRUE gaming Revolution?
Is that a rhetorical question? Because the last gaming revoloution was NES, I guess.
Perhaps. More realistically, we'll see more console companies adopt the marketing stategy of Wii (offer cheap inferior consoles that reduce gameplay to its simplisest form in hope of capturing a wider audience). Check me profile on why such an event would be terrible for normal gamers.
[QUOTE="r11011b"]In order for a true gaming revolution to occur, you'll need more than just a new controller. I mean, sure the Wiimote has changed the way you play the game, but fundamentally the games have not changed much -- you could just as well use a standard controller to control the actions on screen. What will bring about a true revolution would be a fundamental change to the games themselves. What that could be, I don't know. But as long as the Wiimote is only used for the standard FPS, platformer, racer, fighter, sports, etc. etc., it's not revolutionary. It's just innovative.XenoNinja
When was the last time we had a TRUE gaming Revolution?
Fair question, and if I were to follow my own definition of a supposed "gaming revolution", it'd have to be when video games were first created...taking things like sports and racing etc. and converting them into a different form (from physical reality into video).
I wouldn't necessarily call what the NES did a revolution. I'd call it a revival. Let's face it -- Atari was a nice first attempt at a home console, but the games were of relatively low quality, and very simplistic. Nintendo came in and rescued the market from death, providing higher quality and value, as well as a deeper gameplay experience that, among other things, included storytelling. The games themselves were leaps and bounds beyond anything that existed on the Atari, and so they "revolutionized" the industry, so to speak. But again, I'd still call that innovation because the fundamentals didn't change much.
I guess whether or not the Wii will revolutionize gaming really does depend on your definition of "revolutionize."
[QUOTE="r11011b"]In order for a true gaming revolution to occur, you'll need more than just a new controller. I mean, sure the Wiimote has changed the way you play the game, but fundamentally the games have not changed much -- you could just as well use a standard controller to control the actions on screen. What will bring about a true revolution would be a fundamental change to the games themselves. What that could be, I don't know. But as long as the Wiimote is only used for the standard FPS, platformer, racer, fighter, sports, etc. etc., it's not revolutionary. It's just innovative.r11011b
When was the last time we had a TRUE gaming Revolution?
Fair question, and if I were to follow my own definition of a supposed "gaming revolution", it'd have to be when video games were first created...taking things like sports and racing etc. and converting them into a different form (from physical reality into video).
I wouldn't necessarily call what the NES did a revolution. I'd call it a revival. Let's face it -- Atari was a nice first attempt at a home console, but the games were of relatively low quality, and very simplistic. Nintendo came in and rescued the market from death, providing higher quality and value, as well as a deeper gameplay experience that, among other things, included storytelling. The games themselves were leaps and bounds beyond anything that existed on the Atari, and so they "revolutionized" the industry, so to speak. But again, I'd still call that innovation because the fundamentals didn't change much.
I guess whether or not the Wii will revolutionize gaming really does depend on your definition of "revolutionize."
the way the wii has revolutionised gaming is simple. they gave devs away out. The cost of gaming has been spiraling out of control. a 40 people team is now considered garage development, thats realy bad.  You cant release a game with out heavy backing and it was going to kill the industry no one would be able to create a new genre or new style of game because the costs makes selling the idea almost imposible
I am not sure but frankly Im sick of hearing this. The game industry was never dying to begin with in fact with over 100 million PS2s sold worldwide id say we were in good enough shape. I like the wii and all but i havent seen one game utilize the controller enough to even consider it one of the greatest consoles but only time will tell. Like I said we didnt need a revolution. Besides I think the better hardware allowed for that, so with PS3 and 360 we get better AI and pyshics and graphics for a bonus.
[QUOTE="r11011b"]In order for a true gaming revolution to occur, you'll need more than just a new controller. I mean, sure the Wiimote has changed the way you play the game, but fundamentally the games have not changed much -- you could just as well use a standard controller to control the actions on screen. What will bring about a true revolution would be a fundamental change to the games themselves. What that could be, I don't know. But as long as the Wiimote is only used for the standard FPS, platformer, racer, fighter, sports, etc. etc., it's not revolutionary. It's just innovative.XenoNinja
When was the last time we had a TRUE gaming Revolution?
Fair question, and if I were to follow my own definition of a supposed "gaming revolution", it'd have to be when video games were first created...taking things like sports and racing etc. and converting them into a different form (from physical reality into video).
I wouldn't necessarily call what the NES did a revolution. I'd call it a revival. Let's face it -- Atari was a nice first attempt at a home console, but the games were of relatively low quality, and very simplistic. Nintendo came in and rescued the market from death, providing higher quality and value, as well as a deeper gameplay experience that, among other things, included storytelling. The games themselves were leaps and bounds beyond anything that existed on the Atari, and so they "revolutionized" the industry, so to speak. But again, I'd still call that innovation because the fundamentals didn't change much.
I guess whether or not the Wii will revolutionize gaming really does depend on your definition of "revolutionize."
I agree, Great post:)
i think the last and real revolution was with PSone , and thats in a level of increasing the market and the audience of gaming , maybe wii can do something similar , but not for me i am happy with my 360 and my PC , and all the testing i did with my friend`s wii ( yes that sound awful ) didn`t make a "believer" ...
[QUOTE="ps3-nikita"]Funny how the same sheep who say we need a gaming revolution. Then go to vc and dl the old games with the old gameplay, they were tired and bored with. BTW here in the uk, gaming was fine and nes didnt create any revolution. Sincliar ZX Spectrum says Hi What does the need for a gaming revolution have to do with the quality of past titles? :| The gaming industry crashed in '82, but that dosen't mean that games like Pong and Pac-Man weren't great games.
Log in to comment