Originally Posted by >Omen<
(Post 4935554)
LOL, I was not being sarcastic all, but rather agreeing with your point. I know text chat is not exactly conducive to always conveying what you mean without confusion, but you're really being overly defensive there guy.
There was nothing I said in my prior posts or that post for you to jump to that conclusion. In fact if you'd read what I've been saying you probably would have realized I was speaking literally, not sarcastically.
@bud,
I'm going to try to wrap up this debate with one response, because if nothing else, I really tire of your taking my words out of context (often after repeating what I actually said more than once) and struggling to read and respond to your marathon, unstructured sentences. You really should revisit basic English class. :rolleyes:
You don't see it as accurate because you continually fail to see and/or example what I am saying regarding this tech's potential effect on PC games. Where did I ever say there would be no more controllers for PC games, or even that motion sensing would take over? Get it through your head, I am talking specifically about games losing their challenge and complexity due to being designed for the average person being able to play them via tech like this, specifically PC ports. Is it THAT hard for you to understand that one simple point without twisting my words around?
This is not a debate over mouse vs gamepad or even PC vs console really. It's about control inputs vs motion recognition and more specifically how this tech totally abandons one to favor the simplicity of the other as well as the resulting tradeoffs. No wonder you start throwing labels around when debating bud. You're too busy venting old arguments which don't pertain to the subject that still have you uptight.
A LOT of places? Apparently you didn't even bother reading the many negative responses in that Xbox 360 Forum thread I linked to. All you heard was what you wanted to hear, as always. You don't see the obvious because you're too busy saying "Gee whiz, that's cool, can I have one"? It doesn't take a genius to see that with MS' money grubbing attitude about gaming, they are cashing in on how Nintendo approached gaming, and the huge profits it netted them. Spend some time on a Wii, then come back and tell me you like the future of this tech because you clearly don't see the huge negative potential here for avid gamers that actually like a real challenge.
OMG, the constant correcting of your inattentive reading. Bud, wake the heck up and READ what I'm saying for a change. I said more than once, I was talking about how it could easily change the content of gameplay in PC ports, NOT that motion sensing would take over PC gaming. Are you seriously that stricken with ADHD? Sure the other could happen eventually, but I'll tackle one possibility at a time, rather than jumping to the drastic conclusions you're implying I'm referring to, despite my words making it clear what I meant.
(Facepalm) Why does a game have to be complex? Are you serious? You sound like a 5 yr old that doesn't want his Wii taken away. Did I not give several valid reasons why taking away certain nuances would dumb games down too much for avid players? Do you seriously want to play a fighter where the master has geriatric speed, or a racer where gas and brake are on or off, no in between? The problem would be even worse with shooters, God forbid they use the tech in that genre. Video games aren't just something to make mass money on for mere casual entertainment anyone can enjoy, they've always been about serious challenge too. They need to be made to serve a wide spectrum of skill levels, and these type games only serve the lower skill end of that spectrum. Like I said, if you don't understand that, spend some time playing Wii games, and you'll see what you're in for. And if by chance you still don't understand, then you probably don't have a lot of gaming skill.
I noticed in your saying "out of this, i can only see good things", you didn't so much as give ONE example. I offered one in the Fusion controller, and I also mentioned why. Because it merely uses motion sensing for aim, look and shield/melee, vs using motion sensing entirely and by doing so, dumbing down that complexity you see fit to do without. I guess that pretty much tells why you don't give any examples, you actually see it as holistically good, with no negatives. I'll give another positive I've seen with motion sensing, TrackIR, it's really opened up the driving and surveying ability and realism in many games. Again though, that is merely using motion sensing for look, not using it entirely, which obviously from those MS demo clips has serious tradeoffs.
LOL, did I not USE the Wii as an example of what MS is now planning? It doesn't matter so much who copies who, or where the idea came from as whether or not the tech influences gaming enough to change it's direction, IMO for the worse. The Wii is the largest selling platform now due to the mere feature of the Wiimote and it's motion sensing. That means gaming can head just about any direction as long as you throw a big enough control gimmick at the public. All over avid gamers have sworn off the Wii for it's lack of hardcore titles and easy gameplay, yet you seem to be oblivious to this. Worse yet, the Wii is now getting exclusives like Indiana Jones and the Staff of Kings and Dead Space Extraction, genres they aren't even good at making, and titles that SHOULD have come out on PC.
Another facepalm, once again you managed to entirely miss my point. And the ironic thing is, I doubt there have been more fatalities with stunt kites than there have with crazy and/or obsessed gamers. I'd reiterate the point I was actually TRYING to make, but I already have a few times. :rolleyes:
I explained the way stunt kiting changed in detail, and it's no joke. People actually started making ultralight kites that they would just throw up in the air and tug on them to keep them aloft, vs flying them in the wind outdoors. They even have competitions like that, very gay. Stunt kiting was born in places like Hawaii, where strong, steady coastal winds offer plenty of pull on the kite. It was a sad day when I went to the local annual kite festival and saw how the sport changed, so I quickly lost interest.
Like I said, there's reason for concern, and your own words convey that by admitting many DON'T like where gaming is going. I also never buy games via pre order or full price, quite the opposite. There was simply no reason for you to assume I would not very frugally spend my money via caution given what I've been saying. I also read between the lines concerning reviews. You have to know when it's more truth than BS, and also pay attention to the customer reviews some, esp regarding bugs and lack of patch support.
Yet another facepalm. Obviously you missed the part where I said WHY the Fusion is not selling well, because it's made 3rd party and games have to be written for it. Do you not understand how much control both MS and Sony have over what games are written for their platforms and esp, what devices can be used with them? The Fusion has superior tech. Ultrasonic motion tracking is much more precise than mere RF. I also feel it;'s superior in that it can both simplify and speed up look, aim and shile/melee moves, WITHOUT losing subtle control nuances elsewhere.
How quickly you fall in love with the underlying tech talk the manufacturers use (much like you do with game engines) without noticing how it translates on the surface. You are pretty much conveying only one half of what Robbie Bach, pres of MS' E&D said in his video clip on that site. Sure there's sophisticated underlying tech, but the end goal is making things simple for the average person, just like he said. IMO, TOO simple. It's bad enough when games are made simple for the average gamer, but when you make games simple for the average random person, you get dumb on top of dumb. Hey, maybe they should make a Dumb and Dumber game, with Robbie Bach and Steve Balmer playing the lead roles. LOL
Do you really need be told what a hardcore game is? To give an example, when Ubisoft made that statement, it was during production of Far Cry 2. Many assumed from what they were saying it meant no more pure realistic shooters like the Rainbow series, and possibly no more shooters at all, unless heavily tainted with RPG and/or very arcade-like gameplay. You give very few examples of action games on the Wii, it's really not a platform for sophisticated shooter games. The ones they've tried have been buggy as hell. Just due to the type of people the Wii appeals to, it's title selection will likely be dominated by family games. That's always been Nintendo's bread and butter, I doubt they'll want to stray from that cash cow too far. Nintendo's Wii is being used as a role model marketing philosophy, much like many corproations are following Wal-Mart's corporate mentality. It's all about da money!!!
LOL, kinda scratching my head over that summary paragraph bud. You started out raving all over this tech like it's a must have. Now you say you're not wishing for motion sensing and probably won't buy it before you even know what it will end up costing. Fun and innovative on the surface may be appealing to the average person naive about gaming, but to avid gamers, those demo clips really do show how much of the subtle nuance and challenge is lost. I'm not clear on whether that bit about hardcore was pure sarcasm on your part though. It comes down to whether you want a conversation piece that anyone can enjoy, or something you'll come back to for the challenge it offers. Natal looks so far to lack the latter. I'm sure if they really wanted to they COULD offer for instance everything from very slow to very fast sparring speeds on the fighter game they showed, but then the bulk of their audience would probably start feeling too intimidated by it and they're not likely to want to lose all that milk from their cows.
|
