Something I noticed about motion sensing that's like rumble.

"teh motion sensing teh immersive" huh? Let me know when the games start reflecting that on GS scores. Until then, I'll be enjoying the games that are more fun but actually have the scores to back it up.shsonline

"teh motion sensing teh immersive" huh? Let me know when the games start reflecting that on GS scores. Until then, I'll be enjoying the games that are more fun but actually have the scores to back it up.shsonline

"teh motion sensing teh immersive" huh? Let me know when the games start reflecting that on GS scores. Until then, I'll be enjoying the games that are more fun but actually have the scores to back it up.shsonline

[QUOTE="shsonline"]"teh motion sensing teh immersive" huh? Let me know when the games start reflecting that on GS scores. Until then, I'll be enjoying the games that are more fun but actually have the scores to back it up.goblaa

[QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"]"teh motion sensing teh immersive" huh? Let me know when the games start reflecting that on GS scores. Until then, I'll be enjoying the games that are more fun but actually have the scores to back it up.Nintendo_Ownes7

[QUOTE="Nintendo_Ownes7"][QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"]"teh motion sensing teh immersive" huh? Let me know when the games start reflecting that on GS scores. Until then, I'll be enjoying the games that are more fun but actually have the scores to back it up.shsonline

[QUOTE="shsonline"][QUOTE="Nintendo_Ownes7"][QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"]"teh motion sensing teh immersive" huh? Let me know when the games start reflecting that on GS scores. Until then, I'll be enjoying the games that are more fun but actually have the scores to back it up.goblaa

[QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"][QUOTE="Nintendo_Ownes7"][QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"]"teh motion sensing teh immersive" huh? Let me know when the games start reflecting that on GS scores. Until then, I'll be enjoying the games that are more fun but actually have the scores to back it up.shsonline

I don't think your analogy is applicable.

Motion sensing has a direct funtion upon input.

Rumble is a passive form of input that serves no function. 

[QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"][QUOTE="Nintendo_Ownes7"][QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"]"teh motion sensing teh immersive" huh? Let me know when the games start reflecting that on GS scores. Until then, I'll be enjoying the games that are more fun but actually have the scores to back it up.shsonline

[QUOTE="shsonline"][QUOTE="Nintendo_Ownes7"][QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"]"teh motion sensing teh immersive" huh? Let me know when the games start reflecting that on GS scores. Until then, I'll be enjoying the games that are more fun but actually have the scores to back it up.goblaa

Wii games are "fun" because they deliberately butcher and limit the function of gaming.  The Wii is incapable of facilitating current-gen quality games because Nintendo has deliberately sold out its loyal fan base.  The fanbase has become so deluded in their defense of the Wii that they have actually begun making arguements similar to: "Gaming should only cause p1 forms of fun; Graphics don't matter; we don't need new franchises."

[QUOTE="shsonline"][QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"][QUOTE="Nintendo_Ownes7"][QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"]"teh motion sensing teh immersive" huh? Let me know when the games start reflecting that on GS scores. Until then, I'll be enjoying the games that are more fun but actually have the scores to back it up.goblaa

[QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"][QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"][QUOTE="Nintendo_Ownes7"][QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"]"teh motion sensing teh immersive" huh? Let me know when the games start reflecting that on GS scores. Until then, I'll be enjoying the games that are more fun but actually have the scores to back it up.shsonline

[QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"][QUOTE="Nintendo_Ownes7"][QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"]"teh motion sensing teh immersive" huh? Let me know when the games start reflecting that on GS scores. Until then, I'll be enjoying the games that are more fun but actually have the scores to back it up.FoamingPanda

Wii games are "fun" because they deliberately butcher and limit the function of gaming. The Wii is incapable of facilitating current-gen quality games because Nintendo has deliberately sold out its loyal fan base. The fanbase has become so deluded in their defense of the Wii that they have actually begun making arguements similar to: "Gaming should only cause p1 forms of fun; Graphics don't matter; we don't need new franchises."

[QUOTE="shsonline"][QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"][QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"][QUOTE="Nintendo_Ownes7"][QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"]"teh motion sensing teh immersive" huh? Let me know when the games start reflecting that on GS scores. Until then, I'll be enjoying the games that are more fun but actually have the scores to back it up.goblaa

I just got Killzone for the PS2 today and played the first level tonight. Man... I felt a urge to pick up one of my Wiimote's and point it at the screen.foxhound_fox

many can say the samething for graphicspoopinloop32

[QUOTE="FoamingPanda"]

[QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"][QUOTE="Nintendo_Ownes7"][QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"]"teh motion sensing teh immersive" huh? Let me know when the games start reflecting that on GS scores. Until then, I'll be enjoying the games that are more fun but actually have the scores to back it up.goblaa

Wii games are "fun" because they deliberately butcher and limit the function of gaming. The Wii is incapable of facilitating current-gen quality games because Nintendo has deliberately sold out its loyal fan base. The fanbase has become so deluded in their defense of the Wii that they have actually begun making arguements similar to: "Gaming should only cause p1 forms of fun; Graphics don't matter; we don't need new franchises."

I'm saying that you over-inflate the value of a console and judge it by completely contradictory and ridiculous means.  The games you cite as enjoyable could function more efficently on any other console currently on the market.  A console should not depend on exclusive hardware and input forms to generate sales -- a console should simply process data, and developers should simply produce their games on any console.  I'd love it if 360/PS3 games could use a Wiimote or PC/Keyboard (I've always hated analog sticks) and see no reason why all consoles could not simply facilitate any form of USB 2.0 input. 

You cite the "fun" of these games, which is in itself an inflated and lower grade of pleasure, because they apply to your immediate guttural senses for pleasure (which is perfectly fine and enjoyable).  But by doing this, and dragging in half the casual market with you, most people outside of the hobby of gaming come to see video games for exactly what they appear on the screen at your Wii party -- petty little toys that are incapable of even facilitating higher and more complex forms of entertainment that one might see in the movies or read in a book. 

You're wrong for placing more value on a simple form of pleasure when we discuss the success and direction of a console.  Simple forms of fun can occur on almost any machine, regardless of hardware power.  Only machines that provide truely innovative forms of CPU/GPU technology progress the capability of video games as a medium of artistic expression.

[QUOTE="poopinloop32"]many can say the samething for graphicsfoxhound_fox

[QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="FoamingPanda"]

[QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"][QUOTE="Nintendo_Ownes7"][QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"]"teh motion sensing teh immersive" huh? Let me know when the games start reflecting that on GS scores. Until then, I'll be enjoying the games that are more fun but actually have the scores to back it up.FoamingPanda

Wii games are "fun" because they deliberately butcher and limit the function of gaming. The Wii is incapable of facilitating current-gen quality games because Nintendo has deliberately sold out its loyal fan base. The fanbase has become so deluded in their defense of the Wii that they have actually begun making arguements similar to: "Gaming should only cause p1 forms of fun; Graphics don't matter; we don't need new franchises."

I'm saying that you over-inflate the value of a console and judge it by completely contradictory and ridiculous means. The games you cite as enjoyable could function more efficently on any other console currently on the market. A console should not depend on exclusive hardware and input forms to generate sales -- a console should simply process data, and developers should simply produce their games on any console. I'd love it if 360/PS3 games could use a Wiimote or PC/Keyboard (I've always hated analog sticks) and see no reason why all consoles could not simply facilitate any form of USB 2.0 input.

You cite the "fun" of these games, which is in itself an inflated and lower grade of pleasure, because they apply to your immediate guttural senses for pleasure (which is perfectly fine and enjoyable). But by doing this, and dragging in half the casual market with you, most people outside of the hobby of gaming come to see video games for exactly what they appear on the screen at your Wii party -- petty little toys that are incapable of even facilitating higher and more complex forms of entertainment that one might see in the movies or read in a book.

You're wrong for placing more value on a simple form of pleasure when we discuss the success and direction of a console. Simple forms of fun can occur on almost any machine, regardless of hardware power. Only machines that provide truely innovative forms of CPU/GPU technology progress the capability of video games as a medium of artistic expression.

Video games are toys. They always have been. I payed money for a toy, I enjoy it. I don't give a rats ass what the hardware is and besides you, Ive never met anyone else who does either.

Also, your part about how any wii game would be more efficiant on other consoles, ture. But DDR is more efficient on a controller than a dance pad. But who would ever play DDR on a standard controller?

At least you explicitly admit to limiting the function of games to little more than a simple toy.  This is quite a shame, considering how much potential games hold as respectible medium.  Saying, "video games are a toy," makes about as much sense as saying, "films and books are toys."  All of the forms of media listed above are simply facilitate IDEAS, except gaming.  Gaming becomes intrinsically tied to certain consoles and is limited in its functionality? Why?  Because companies like Nintendo want to keep games where it is.  It would be a nightmare for developers who seek a massive, quick, and simple profit to inform the general public of the awesome potential of games (simple games, like the ones played at your wii party, are much easier and cheaper to produce).

If Nintendo manages to push into the market through the "games as little toys" assumption, complex games will become increasingly scarce because consumer demand will naturally only precieve and demand "fun" games.  Consumers will not likely realize the potential of gaming as an artistic medium.  And for gamers who value higher forms of pleasure will slowly see video games stagnate in quantity.  

Many gamers do care about hardware performance and the future of gaming.

Did you not understand the part about standardizing all console input as a USB 2.0 device?  A developer could program a game and package self-running firmware that could let you use your cable-box remote for a controller if they wished to.  Input needs to be put into the hands of developers, and consumer demand needs to select which forms of input are preferrable.  I'm sick of gaming companies forcing me to play a game with "X" controller.

Wii makes games feel more novel with the sacrifice of precision. It might make a game feel more "fun" to some people, but it'll make it feel less playable to others. Here at GS, even with many of the Wii's best reviewed games, the complaint is always "The controls feel clumsy and innacurate." Wii's controller is not bringing more control to games, it's removing it and replacing it with novelty. And when the novelty wears off, you might find yourself with a less-than-stellar way to control games.Timstuff

At least you explicitly admit to limiting the function of games to little more than a simple toy.  This is quite a shame, considering how much potential games hold as respectible medium.  Saying, "video games are a toy," makes about as much sense as saying, "films and books are toys."  All of the forms of media listed above are simply facilitate IDEAS, except gaming.  Gaming becomes intrinsically tied to certain consoles and is limited in its functionality? Why?  Because companies like Nintendo want to keep games where it is.  It would be a nightmare for developers who seek a massive, quick, and simple profit to inform the general public of the awesome potential of games (simple games, like the ones played at your wii party, are much easier and cheaper to produce).

If Nintendo manages to push into the market through the "games as little toys" assumption, complex games will become increasingly scarce because consumer demand will naturally only precieve and demand "fun" games.  Consumers will not likely realize the potential of gaming as an artistic medium.  And for gamers who value higher forms of pleasure will slowly see video games stagnate in quantity.  

FoamingPanda

Or... MS and Sony are the ones keeping gaming where it is by focusing only on hardcore gamers and continuing to alientate the rest of the world. Movies and books can be enjoyed by virtually anyone. Games - at least those on traditional consoles - can only be enjoyed by people already familiar with how videogames work. This is something that has always differentiated videogames from other forms of media. Nintendo seems to be the only company trying to break down this wall.

Are Wii games simple? Some are, some aren't. I fail to see how this is any problem of yours, however, if you simply stick to your Xbox 360 or PS3. You'll find nothing but traditional games there, and if that's what makes you happy, then there you go. Those are the consoles for you. The Wii will bring people into gaming who will eventually crave more complex games. So that market will never shrink. It's just that, before the Wii, it seems like everyone forgot that non-gamers need an "introduction" or "tutorial" to gaming, so to speak, since everything had become so complicated.

So I think that the Wii opens up gaming to the masses, which - after all - is important to any media being accepted by said masses. If someone has never played a videogame, they may consider them only for kids or a waste of time and consequently never respect the medium. However, if they enjoyed Wii Sports or the like, then they will be able to appreciate videogames as something that anyone can enjoy - like *gasp* movies or books!

But I understand your beef with hardware power stagnation. I wish the Wii were more powerful, too. All I'm saying is that there are many ways of looking at the issue.

Or... MS and Sony are the ones keeping gaming where it is by focusing only on hardcore gamers and continuing to alientate the rest of the world. Movies and books can be enjoyed by virtually anyone. Games - at least those on traditional consoles - can only be enjoyed by people already familiar with how videogames work. This is something that has always differentiated videogames from other forms of media. Nintendo seems to be the only company trying to break down this wall.

It is far more probable that the negative connotations assosiated with gaming evolved out of a time where negative connotations assossiated with gaming were literally true-- games were physically not capable of being anything more than 32/64 bit toys that only a child, or person with quite low entertainment standards, would devote their time and interest to.  Now games have the full winds of the digital age blowing at their backs and are capable of accomplishing incredible things.  Negative connotations can be changed by turning the connotation itself a positive connotation (games are toys, but they're prefectly fine because they are toys) or by destroying the connotation all together (games can be anything and should be judged on a game-to-game basis).  I don't see how MS and Sony focus exclusively on hardcore gamers -- unless you define "focusing on hardcore gamers" by the reluctance to cater solely to the current negative connotations assosiated with gaming and sell their products exlusively through those means. 

Are Wii games simple? Some are, some aren't. I fail to see how this is any problem of yours, however, if you simply stick to your Xbox 360 or PS3. You'll find nothing but traditional games there, and if that's what makes you happy, then there you go.

Please review the law of porportional decline in gaming complexity (see my profile).  This is problem because simple games reinforce the negative conntations previously discuss, and if they come to make up the bulk of consumer demand, will stagnate the growth and progress of higher forms of gaming (which drive most technological innovation within this industry -- see gaming and pleasure in my blog).

Those are the consoles for you. The Wii will bring people into gaming who will eventually crave more complex games. So that market will never shrink.

Again, review the law.  Even if casuals come to embrace complex forms of gaming, which they will not under the Wii marketing model, the Wii is physically not capable of facilitating true next-gen games.

So I think that the Wii opens up gaming to the masses, which - after all - is important to any media being accepted by said masses. If someone has never played a videogame, they may consider them only for kids or a waste of time and consequently never respect the medium. However, if they enjoyed Wii Sports or the like, then they will be able to appreciate videogames as something that anyone can enjoy - like *gasp* movies or books!

They will appreciate games under the negative connotations discussed above.  See my blog post, mentioned above, to determine why it is incredibly economically inprobable for gamers to come to embrace gaming through such a process.

Where did N say the wii's is more fun than the 360?
goblaa

At E3. Reggie: "Wii will give you more fun for less money", implying that the Wii will be more fun than the more expensive competition. Nobody would question that analog controllers are better than the old digital controllers because of how much better they work for 3D gaming. But when it comes to the Wii remote/Nunchuck system, it's not ideal for many games as we've seen from reviews and some people's reactions. I find the standard controllers to be more comfortable with most games because I can relax my hands, wrist, and the controller in any way and any direction I want without having to worry about pointing to the right position on the screen. Wii Sports and Rayman clearly benefit from the Wii control system but I don't find them to be really satisfying gaming experiences. It seems to me that the new control system is better for overly simple games which to me is kind of a step backwards.

Or... MS and Sony are the ones keeping gaming where it is by focusing only on hardcore gamers and continuing to alientate the rest of the world. Movies and books can be enjoyed by virtually anyone. Games - at least those on traditional consoles - can only be enjoyed by people already familiar with how videogames work. This is something that has always differentiated videogames from other forms of media. Nintendo seems to be the only company trying to break down this wall.FoamingPanda

It is far more probable that the negative connotations assosiated with gaming evolved out of a time where negative connotations assossiated with gaming were literally true-- games were physically not capable of being anything more than 32/64 bit toys that only a child, or person with quite low entertainment standards, would devote their time and interest to.  Now games have the full winds of the digital age blowing at their backs and are capable of accomplishing incredible things.  Negative connotations can be changed by turning the connotation itself a positive connotation (games are toys, but they're prefectly fine because they are toys) or by destroying the connotation all together (games can be anything and should be judged on a game-to-game basis).  I don't see how MS and Sony focus exclusively on hardcore gamers -- unless you define "focusing on hardcore gamers" by the reluctance to cater solely to the current negative connotations assosiated with gaming and sell their products exlusively through those means. 

Are Wii games simple? Some are, some aren't. I fail to see how this is any problem of yours, however, if you simply stick to your Xbox 360 or PS3. You'll find nothing but traditional games there, and if that's what makes you happy, then there you go.

Please review the law of porportional decline in gaming complexity (see my profile).  This is problem because simple games reinforce the negative conntations previously discuss, and if they come to make up the bulk of consumer demand, will stagnate the growth and progress of higher forms of gaming (which drive most technological innovation within this industry -- see gaming and pleasure in my blog).

Those are the consoles for you. The Wii will bring people into gaming who will eventually crave more complex games. So that market will never shrink.

Again, review the law.  Even if casuals come to embrace complex forms of gaming, which they will not under the Wii marketing model, the Wii is physically not capable of facilitating true next-gen games.

So I think that the Wii opens up gaming to the masses, which - after all - is important to any media being accepted by said masses. If someone has never played a videogame, they may consider them only for kids or a waste of time and consequently never respect the medium. However, if they enjoyed Wii Sports or the like, then they will be able to appreciate videogames as something that anyone can enjoy - like *gasp* movies or books!

They will appreciate games under the negative connotations discussed above.  See my blog post, mentioned above, to determine why it is incredibly economically inprobable for gamers to come to embrace gaming through such a process.

Unfortunately, laws must be proven. You have a hypothesis that has no way of being proven within the next few years. So stop acting like you've seen the future. I completely disagree with your predictions, and yes, that's all they are - your predictions.

My honest opinion is that the Wii will not have such a grand influence on the future of gaming. It's really quite flattering that you think Nintendo's little box will change the face of gaming so drastically. I doubt it will have such an impact. I also doubt games will ever be universally appreciated as an art form like movies and novels. They are games, and will always be games. No matter how complex the plot, no matter how developed the characters, no matter how realistic the world - games are games are games. You can recommend a movie to anyone. You can recommend a novel to anyone. You cannot recommend a videogame to anyone, and you never will be able to. Even with the most powerful hardware in the world, games will always be restricted to gamers. And that, more than anything else, is what will always separate videogames from movies and novels.

But, having said that, I also don't think it matters. Games should be different. If you want a movie or a novel... watch a movie or read a novel.

You miss it when it's gone. I've been playing the Wii a lot and going back to my PS2 feels weird sometimes because I'm using analog sticks instead of tiliting or pointing. It just feels less immersive, like not having rumble.

Example: In Rayman, many of the games require you to move by tilting, but in the hog races, you turn with the analog stick. Yet, I find my self leaning from side to side as I make turns anyway.

I guess I'm spoiled now and can't imagine a game being as immersive as it could be without both motion and rumble....now Nintendo just needs HD.
goblaa

I do feel this way about Twilight Princess having played both the Wii and Gamecube versions.  On Wii, it feels much more immersive while using the slingshot, bow and arrow. 

However, I don't really feel weird going back to PS2 afterwards...

On the contrary, playing the NES and then going back to Atari 2600 felt like an utter joke...

Maybe if I played Wii more often I'd feel differently...

[QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"][QUOTE="Nintendo_Ownes7"][QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"]"teh motion sensing teh immersive" huh? Let me know when the games start reflecting that on GS scores. Until then, I'll be enjoying the games that are more fun but actually have the scores to back it up.shsonline

[QUOTE="Nintendo_Ownes7"][QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="shsonline"]"teh motion sensing teh immersive" huh? Let me know when the games start reflecting that on GS scores. Until then, I'll be enjoying the games that are more fun but actually have the scores to back it up.shsonline