Lord Shplane
Also, pointing your gun is-

1: Subjective. Myself and a lot of people I know greatly prefer the joystick controls.

2: Not exclusive to the Wii. Games have been doing this for years. There've been nintendo zappers and light guns and super scopes for a long time now.

So, what, because the individual components existed before that nulls their potential effectiveness today? The difference today is that the ability to point at the screen is a standard function for the Wii remote, as opposed to Zappers and the like which were independant products that not everyone is going to own, so it would be silly to program games with them in mind.

Look, I don't want to come off as too much of a crazy Nintendo fanboy. My response to the Okami announcement clearly shows that I recognize there's always a potential for serious damage being done to the game by sloppy integration of the Wii remote. The thing is, though, that I don't take that as a given. It'd be immature for me to say that everything about the Wii is awesome and every game should make you thrust the remote itself forward to push buttons, but it's also immature to think that anything other than 4-10 buttons and an analog stick or two are the only ways that any video game will be good ever.

Inkmonkey
Look, I don't want to come off as too much of a crazy Nintendo fanboy. My response to the Okami announcement clearly shows that I recognize there's always a potential for serious damage being done to the game by sloppy integration of the Wii remote. The thing is, though, that I don't take that as a given. It'd be immature for me to say that everything about the Wii is awesome and every game should make you thrust the remote itself forward to push buttons, but it's also immature to think that anything other than 4-10 buttons and an analog stick or two are the only ways that any video game will be good ever.

Yes the Wiimote can work with some games. It can't, however, work with all games. Game developers will, however, try to force it on games that it won't.

I do admit that there CAN be good games using the Wiimote. However, most games probably won't be. And my point with the guns is simply that I'm a bit tired of people being like "OMG WII AM INNOVATIVE!!!" It's not really. It's just better advertised than previous technology that did the same thing.

If anything, the Wii is the LEAST innovative of the three systems. It barely, if at all, improves anything about the games. It just adds a subjective "Hey, I like this game more with motion detection" thing, which not everyone will like. I know a lot of people who HATE the Wii for the very things other people say are it's advantages.

Other systems, however, are capable of ACTUALLY IMPROVING the games in a way that you can't write off as entirely subjective. The PS3 is capable of better graphics and sound quality, more things can happen at once, the games can have more content due to increased disk space, more things can happen at once, and... a few other things I can't remember. My memory really sucks.

It's possible that I'm wrong. It's possible that you're wrong. It's possible that we're both wrong. It's even possible that we're both right. No one knows or is right about everything.

Lord Shplane
If anything, the Wii is the LEAST innovative of the three systems. It barely, if at all, improves anything about the games. It just adds a subjective "Hey, I like this game more with motion detection" thing, which not everyone will like. I know a lot of people who HATE the Wii for the very things other people say are it's advantages.

Other systems, however, are capable of ACTUALLY IMPROVING the games in a way that you can't write off as entirely subjective. The PS3 is capable of better graphics and sound quality, more things can happen at once, the games can have more content due to increased disk space, more things can happen at once, and... a few other things I can't remember. My memory really sucks.

It's not the least innovative. It maybe the most unorthodox, which has the potential for innovation, but is not a measure of innovation itself.

Innovation is defined as:
1. something new or different introduced: numerous innovations in the high-school curriculum.
2. the act of innovating; introduction of new things or methods.


I don't see graphics and sound quality as being "innovation". A wii game can have as much content as a PS3 game, assuming you don't mind if it doesn't look as nice. The simple fact is that the PS3 and 360 are not innovations; they are simply superior versions of the previous consoles. In that same vein, the Wii is not innovation, because all of its individual components already exist. Granted there's a lot more than can be said for the Wii-mote than the Power Glove, but still... Anyway, my point is that, if you want to get really technicaly about it, then none of the video game systems are inherently innovative; just one of them looks more like it is. The important thing about the Wii is not that it's mere existence is going to change games forever, but the fact that unlike the other systems, it has the potential to.

I'm going to refer back to the Nintendo DS. For the first couple years, 3 out of 4 games that utilized the touch screen used it as a stupid gimmick, and in fact there are many excellent games for the system that don't utilize any of its unique features. The important part, though, is that the option exists, and in the hands of a telented programmer it can produce gameplay experiences that aren't simply unique (because as we all know, any system can create a game that is simply unique), but that is impossible to experience on another system. Case in Point: Rayman: Raving Rabbids. A uniqure, frenetic party game for the Wii, whose distinct flavor and atmosphere practically fizzes away on consoles other than the Wii. Granted the mini-game schtick has been played to death already, but there are very few games on other systems that cannot be replicated on the Wii (granted, the graphics will tend to be worse, but that's a completely different argument).

Personally, though, I feel a little embarassed talking up the Wii so much. But I feel like there has to be some contrast to your blind hatred for the device, so I'm allowing myself a bit of blind optimism. I don't want people to get the impression that I think the other systems are bad or inferior, simply that they do not allow certain possibilities that the Wii encourages.

Inkmonkey
It's not the least innovative. It maybe the most unorthodox, which has the potential for innovation, but is not a measure of innovation itself.

Innovation is defined as:
1. something new or different introduced: numerous innovations in the high-school curriculum.
2. the act of innovating; introduction of new things or methods.

Ok, I have a confession.. I kind of drifted away from innovation there for a second. I meant to clarify that it wasn't quite what I was talking about anymore... but I, like anyone else, make mistakes.

Someone
Anyway, my point is that, if you want to get really technicaly about it, then none of the video game systems are inherently innovative; just one of them looks more like it is.

I agree with you. They're not really too much. The Wii, however, does the least to improve video games as a whole. All of its advantages are subjective, instead of being things that everyone (or almost everyone) can appreciate as being good, even if they're not too concerned about it. You can't hate the PS3 for having better graphics.

Someone
The important thing about the Wii is not that it's mere existence is going to change games forever, but the fact that unlike the other systems, it has the potential to.

Other game systems do have the ability to change games forever. Maybe not as much as the Wii, but they do have it.

And anyway, like I've said before, any change that the Wii makes won't be a complete improvement. It will simply be the industry catering to a different group of people. This is not a good thing. While the new people that the Wii is bringing in generally weren't big on games. They had other things to do, and other things to make them happy. I, however, derive almost all my happiness from games. If the industry changes, I will have nothing.

Someone
I'm going to refer back to the Nintendo DS. For the first couple years, 3 out of 4 games that utilized the touch screen used it as a stupid gimmick, and in fact there are many excellent games for the system that don't utilize any of its unique features. The important part, though, is that the option exists, and in the hands of a telented programmer it can produce gameplay experiences that aren't simply unique (because as we all know, any system can create a game that is simply unique), but that is impossible to experience on another system.

This, about the DS, is true. The DS is the only system out currently that is truly innovative. I don't particularly like it's innovation, but it is new and different. No other system can produce what it does.

However, it would not be difficult at all (perhaps not wise either, but not difficult) to simply add a program to the PS3 allowing it to play Wii games. Then it would just be a matter of putting a different plug on the sensor bar.

Someone
Case in Point: Rayman: Raving Rabbids. A uniqure, frenetic party game for the Wii, whose distinct flavor and atmosphere practically fizzes away on consoles other than the Wii. Granted the mini-game schtick has been played to death already, but there are very few games on other systems that cannot be replicated on the Wii (granted, the graphics will tend to be worse, but that's a completely different argument).

While there aren't very many games that can't be put on the Wii (at reduced quality) right now, other systems are capable of making games that the Wii can't even hope to run.(Especially the PS3, which is capable of making games the 360 can't handle either)

Someone
Personally, though, I feel a little embarassed talking up the Wii so much. But I feel like there has to be some contrast to your blind hatred for the device, so I'm allowing myself a bit of blind optimism.

Yes, I hate the Wii. But do I blindly hate the Wii? No. I hate the Wii from experience. Almost every game I've played on it was horrible (Twilight Princess was an exception, but like I've said before I would probably have preferred the Gamecube version), and I have no reason to expect that to change in the near future. Also, in order to blindly hate the Wii, I would have to think that it can't be good at all. It would have to be impossible for me to change my mind. However, if someone were to hand me a game for the Wii and say "Here, play this, it's awesome" and it is in fact awesome, I would say "Hey, maybe I'm wrong about this".

Someone
I don't want people to get the impression that I think the other systems are bad or inferior, simply that they do not allow certain possibilities that the Wii encourages.

The Wii can do some things the other systems can't. However, it's not anything that a minor hardware/software change couldn't allow the other systems to do. The Wii would have to be rebuilt entirely to have the same capabilities of the other systems.