Playstation 3 - Always on...

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The basic idea has? Where? I've been playing video games since pong and I don't recall seeing such controllers on any of the atari , Nintendo (powerglove wasn't close), Sega, sony, or microsoft systems I've played. We can get even more obscure, the TG16 didn't have it, nor did colecovision or Intellivision. Maybe you're talking about the gamepad that microsoft made for PC's a few years ago that had a tilt axis in it, even though that's not even close to the same thing.

So yes, you are talking out of your ass, because you have zero experience on the subject. I'm not surprised you think it's a stupid idea. You established long ago that you don't find very many things to be fun, why would this be any different?

---

The idea of a motion control is not original. No, I haven't seen anything just like the control... But the same sort of idea. How is the Power Glove not close? It was along time ago when I had it, but didn't you move the glove to punch like in a boxing game? Isn't that what this control does?

If your playing an action game and you have a sword, wouldn't you wing in the air like if you really had a sword? If so, what's the big difference?

---

I suspect the difference between those and the Wii controller is on the order of the difference between the graphics on the original Gameboy and those on the Gamecube - night and day in terms of sophistication. The graphics issue is a separate one that makes the Wii a bad buy for you.

[drzachary]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The basic idea has? Where? I've been playing video games since pong and I don't recall seeing such controllers on any of the atari , Nintendo (powerglove wasn't close), Sega, sony, or microsoft systems I've played. We can get even more obscure, the TG16 didn't have it, nor did colecovision or Intellivision. Maybe you're talking about the gamepad that microsoft made for PC's a few years ago that had a tilt axis in it, even though that's not even close to the same thing.

So yes, you are talking out of your ass, because you have zero experience on the subject. I'm not surprised you think it's a stupid idea. You established long ago that you don't find very many things to be fun, why would this be any different?

---

The idea of a motion control is not original. No, I haven't seen anything just like the control... But the same sort of idea. How is the Power Glove not close? It was along time ago when I had it, but didn't you move the glove to punch like in a boxing game? Isn't that what this control does?

If your playing an action game and you have a sword, wouldn't you wing in the air like if you really had a sword? If so, what's the big difference?

I don't really give a shyt about the control as long as it fits my hands well. I could careless about this type of thing. A motion control isn't going to make me forget that it's a video game.

It looks like alot more trouble than it's worth. Moreover, the games don't look all that impressive and look way too cartoonish. That really bugs me. If you like it, good for you.

You call me closeminded, but the simple fact that you can't accept that this doesn't interest me suggest that your pretty close minded.

---

Essentially, the Wii controller is similar to the Power Glove, but, like AHF said, it's night and day with regards to how well they work. The Power Glove was terribly inaccurate and used ultrasonic sensors; the Wiimote is very accurate and uses thermal/light sensors (AFAIK.)

Cartoonish is a bonus for me, a detriment for you. That's why this whole argument is so pointless. Whereas sports games on the Xbox 360 and PS3 will have near photo realism, Nintendo titles will continue to have amazing art direction.

That said, the most visually impressive games I've ever seen were Viewtiful Joe and Windwaker.

[Plainview1981]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The basic idea has? Where? I've been playing video games since pong and I don't recall seeing such controllers on any of the atari , Nintendo (powerglove wasn't close), Sega, sony, or microsoft systems I've played. We can get even more obscure, the TG16 didn't have it, nor did colecovision or Intellivision. Maybe you're talking about the gamepad that microsoft made for PC's a few years ago that had a tilt axis in it, even though that's not even close to the same thing.

So yes, you are talking out of your ass, because you have zero experience on the subject. I'm not surprised you think it's a stupid idea. You established long ago that you don't find very many things to be fun, why would this be any different?

---

The idea of a motion control is not original. No, I haven't seen anything just like the control... But the same sort of idea. How is the Power Glove not close? It was along time ago when I had it, but didn't you move the glove to punch like in a boxing game? Isn't that what this control does?

If your playing an action game and you have a sword, wouldn't you wing in the air like if you really had a sword? If so, what's the big difference?

I don't really give a shyt about the control as long as it fits my hands well. I could careless about this type of thing. A motion control isn't going to make me forget that it's a video game.

It looks like alot more trouble than it's worth. Moreover, the games don't look all that impressive and look way too cartoonish. That really bugs me. If you like it, good for you.

You call me closeminded, but the simple fact that you can't accept that this doesn't interest me suggest that your pretty close minded.

---

Essentially, the Wii controller is similar to the Power Glove, but, like AHF said, it's night and day with regards to how well they work. The Power Glove was terribly inaccurate and used ultrasonic sensors; the Wiimote is very accurate and uses thermal/light sensors (AFAIK.)

Cartoonish is a bonus for me, a detriment for you. That's why this whole argument is so pointless. Whereas sports games on the Xbox 360 and PS3 will have near photo realism, Nintendo titles will continue to have amazing art direction.

That said, the most visually impressive games I've ever seen were Viewtiful Joe and Windwaker.

---

I just don't like the style. My old systems have bad graphics by today's standards, but it seems that the Wii has went too far in the cartoonish direction. I don't know, maybe it's only a few games.... But the games I've seen, I've found the style alittle annoying.

I'm sure it's a more versatile device, but the whole idea just isn't original IMO.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The basic idea has? Where? I've been playing video games since pong and I don't recall seeing such controllers on any of the atari , Nintendo (powerglove wasn't close), Sega, sony, or microsoft systems I've played. We can get even more obscure, the TG16 didn't have it, nor did colecovision or Intellivision. Maybe you're talking about the gamepad that microsoft made for PC's a few years ago that had a tilt axis in it, even though that's not even close to the same thing.

So yes, you are talking out of your ass, because you have zero experience on the subject. I'm not surprised you think it's a stupid idea. You established long ago that you don't find very many things to be fun, why would this be any different?

---

The idea of a motion control is not original. No, I haven't seen anything just like the control... But the same sort of idea. How is the Power Glove not close? It was along time ago when I had it, but didn't you move the glove to punch like in a boxing game? Isn't that what this control does?

If your playing an action game and you have a sword, wouldn't you wing in the air like if you really had a sword? If so, what's the big difference?

I don't really give a shyt about the control as long as it fits my hands well. I could careless about this type of thing. A motion control isn't going to make me forget that it's a video game.

It looks like alot more trouble than it's worth. Moreover, the games don't look all that impressive and look way too cartoonish. That really bugs me. If you like it, good for you.

You call me closeminded, but the simple fact that you can't accept that this doesn't interest me suggest that your pretty close minded.

---

Essentially, the Wii controller is similar to the Power Glove, but, like AHF said, it's night and day with regards to how well they work. The Power Glove was terribly inaccurate and used ultrasonic sensors; the Wiimote is very accurate and uses thermal/light sensors (AFAIK.)

Cartoonish is a bonus for me, a detriment for you. That's why this whole argument is so pointless. Whereas sports games on the Xbox 360 and PS3 will have near photo realism, Nintendo titles will continue to have amazing art direction.

That said, the most visually impressive games I've ever seen were Viewtiful Joe and Windwaker.

---

I just don't like the style. My old systems have bad graphics by today's standards, but it seems that the Wii has went too far in the cartoonish direction. I don't know, maybe it's only a few games.... But the games I've seen, I've found the style alittle annoying.

I'm sure it's a more versatile device, but the whole idea just isn't original IMO.

---

Better graphics and faster processers aren't original but they still make for better games!

[Plainview1981]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The basic idea has? Where? I've been playing video games since pong and I don't recall seeing such controllers on any of the atari , Nintendo (powerglove wasn't close), Sega, sony, or microsoft systems I've played. We can get even more obscure, the TG16 didn't have it, nor did colecovision or Intellivision. Maybe you're talking about the gamepad that microsoft made for PC's a few years ago that had a tilt axis in it, even though that's not even close to the same thing.

So yes, you are talking out of your ass, because you have zero experience on the subject. I'm not surprised you think it's a stupid idea. You established long ago that you don't find very many things to be fun, why would this be any different?

---

The idea of a motion control is not original. No, I haven't seen anything just like the control... But the same sort of idea. How is the Power Glove not close? It was along time ago when I had it, but didn't you move the glove to punch like in a boxing game? Isn't that what this control does?

If your playing an action game and you have a sword, wouldn't you wing in the air like if you really had a sword? If so, what's the big difference?

I don't really give a shyt about the control as long as it fits my hands well. I could careless about this type of thing. A motion control isn't going to make me forget that it's a video game.

It looks like alot more trouble than it's worth. Moreover, the games don't look all that impressive and look way too cartoonish. That really bugs me. If you like it, good for you.

You call me closeminded, but the simple fact that you can't accept that this doesn't interest me suggest that your pretty close minded.

---

Essentially, the Wii controller is similar to the Power Glove, but, like AHF said, it's night and day with regards to how well they work. The Power Glove was terribly inaccurate and used ultrasonic sensors; the Wiimote is very accurate and uses thermal/light sensors (AFAIK.)

Cartoonish is a bonus for me, a detriment for you. That's why this whole argument is so pointless. Whereas sports games on the Xbox 360 and PS3 will have near photo realism, Nintendo titles will continue to have amazing art direction.

That said, the most visually impressive games I've ever seen were Viewtiful Joe and Windwaker.

---

I just don't like the style. My old systems have bad graphics by today's standards, but it seems that the Wii has went too far in the cartoonish direction. I don't know, maybe it's only a few games.... But the games I've seen, I've found the style alittle annoying.

I'm sure it's a more versatile device, but the whole idea just isn't original IMO.

---

Better graphics and faster processers aren't original but they still make for better games!

---

I don't hear many people talking about Xbox 360 as it's really original... Or I'd hope not.

[drzachary]

Quote:

---

Better graphics and faster processers aren't original but they still make for better games!

---

Hmm, I disagree totally with this. Think about Tetris.. it's about as rudimentary as graphics can get, and it's still incredibly fun. I think graphic quality exists on a separate axis from gameplay quality.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Better graphics and faster processers aren't original but they still make for better games!

---

Hmm, I disagree totally with this. Think about Tetris.. it's about as rudimentary as graphics can get, and it's still incredibly fun. I think graphic quality exists on a separate axis from gameplay quality.

---

All things equal - better graphics and faster processors make for better games.

Which is better - Tetris with rudimentary graphics or Tetris with much better graphics? Tetris with better graphics, obviously. There is no question that the gameplay is the foundation for everything but when you have a certain level of gameplay quality in a product then giving that product better graphics just enhances it. You mentioned the Windwalker as a neat graphical experience - think of whether the game would have been better or worse with the original gameboy level graphics. Obviously, even if the game was unchanged in every respect except graphics it was a much better game on the Gamecube and that is because of the better graphics.

It is just like movie making. You can't sacrifice story-telling just to show some fancy special effects, but if the same quality of story is there then the higher quality specifial effects make for a better movie. (IMO, you can see Episodes 1-3 as examples of technology being placed on bad story telling and showing that you can't make a classic by CGIing crappy scripts and acting. To the counter, the Lord of the Rings movies are a perfect example of the added bonus that better special effects can give a good story. Imagine the same story and same acting performances being given in 1983. Big difference in movie quality, IMO.)

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Better graphics and faster processers aren't original but they still make for better games!

---

I don't hear many people talking about Xbox 360 as it's really original... Or I'd hope not.

---

I guess my point is, who cares if the Wii controller is original or not if it translates into much more fun games?

[Plainview1981]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Better graphics and faster processers aren't original but they still make for better games!

---

I don't hear many people talking about Xbox 360 as it's really original... Or I'd hope not.

---

I guess my point is, who cares if the Wii controller is original or not if it translates into much more fun games?

---

I'm just saying people shouldn't hype it as something that it's not.

[Nicholasp27]

it's original and innovative in that the entire console is built around a motion-sensing controller

of course people have made and used motion sensing devices in the past...but it's the application this time that is different and the integration of the devices into the console and the system