Consumer Reports Gets Its Game On

Itninja writes "A few days ago Consumer Reports posted their first report on a specific video game: Wii Fit. From the article: 'Our testers ranged in age from 24 to 69 and included 10 women and five men. Users ran the gamut from regular exercisers to mostly sedentary folks.' Will this be a harbinger of things to come? Will CR be reviewing the next installment of Gran Turismo?"

Comments

n = 15

[Anonymous Coward]

That's a small sample size. How much of a gamut can you really run with only 15 people?

Re:n = 15

[Trigun]

Obviously a 1-15 person gamut. Anything else would require more gamut-runners.

Re:n = 15

[Kingrames]

When was the last time you saw 15 people testing a game to write a review, rather than just one?

Re:n = 15

[chitokutai]

The worst part is the selection of ages chosen by Consumer Reports. It's up in the air whether this is a good way to exercise, but what I'm more curious to find out is how well the Wii Fit is dealing with the weight of children under 15. Apparently the device is using BMI to judge how fit a person is, and already we are seeing complaints by parents that the Wii Fit is calling their children fat. It would have been great if CR had addressed this issue.

Re:n = 15

[Mikkeles]

Well, it does read: '...and included 10 women and five men.' My first question on seeing this was: What else did it include? Some rats as a control group? Maybe they mean 'consisted of'.

Re:n = 15

[Mike Buddha]

Considering the "gamut" for most reviews == 1, I'd say they're way ahead of the curve already.

Re:n = 15

[Intron]

Which issue? The idiocy of using BMI for anything or the overprotective parents?

Re:n = 15

[Lunix Nutcase]

Boohoo. It's about time someone started telling the little fatties the truth instead of feeding them the nonsense like "you're not fat, you're just big boned". I did find this quote in the linked story to be hilarious:

"She is solidly built but not fat. She was devastated to be called fat and we had to work hard to convince her she isn't. "Solidly built". LOL. Good euphemism there.

Re:n = 15

[mark72005]

or the issue that for the $400 you spend on a wii plus this game you could pay for a gym membership for at least a year and make a lot more difference in your condition

Re:n = 15

[haystor]

For $200, I'll provide you with a map so you too can find your way "outside" and view it in all its glory.

Re:n = 15

[Altus]

I prefer "Built for Comfort"

Re:n = 15

[Anonymous Coward]

The dailymail article says 4'9" and 6 stone (84 lbs), giving a bmi of 18.2 which is underweight. Typical inept 'journalism'.

Re:n = 15

[MarkGriz]

Or, to quote Garfield (the cat, not the president)

"I'm not overweight, I'm undertall"

Re:n = 15

[Sancho]

It's impossible to say without more information on this person's build, but the BMI really is outdated and using it as an indicator of health fails to consider many factors. You can logically deduce this just by looking at what the BMI is--it's weight divided by (height)^2.

Muscle is more dense than fat. Someone who is 6 feet tall with a lot of fat could have the same BMI as someone who is 6 feet tall, lean, and muscular. No one would accuse the latter of being out of shape--except for someone only using BMI as their measure.

Maybe the child you were referring to was actually fat. Maybe not. Childhood obesity is definitely increasing, but why assume the worst in a particular case without a lot of actual facts?

Re:n = 15

[mark72005]

d00d, the point is that the wii fit will magically get you in shape without you having to do anything strenuous

Re:n = 15

[drsquare]

No, the idiocy of reading the Daily Mail.

Re:n = 15

[HiVizDiver]

I agree 100% with your sentiment - people need to get their asses off the couch and exercise. However, a gym membership can bring a lot of unwanted baggage. They can be full of inconsiderate dickheads (wipe your sweat off the equipment, jackass), let alone the fact that a lot of people just starting out in a gym probably don't feel comfortable showing off their (lack of) prowess/fitness/ability/whatever to complete strangers. Add to that the often brutal membership requirements of most name-brand gyms, and its pretty off-putting to all but the most hardcore fitness buffs.

So two things come to mind when I think about this situation: a) the Wii might fit a nice gap in at least getting people off the couch and moving around. For some true couch potatoes, this might be enough and sufficient for at least a little while. b) Find a small local gym that isn't full of morons and doesn't charge brutal contract fees. They're all over, they want your business, and you're doing yourself and "the little guy" a favor.

Re:n = 15

[Dishevel]

You seem to be forgetting about all the hermaphrodites in the test.

Re:n = 15

[Null537]

Hell, that's 15 more people than usually test a finished project for most gaming sites.

Re:n = 15

[Orange Crush]

Boohoo. It's about time someone started telling the little fatties the truth instead of feeding them the nonsense like "you're not fat, you're just big boned". I did find this quote in the linked story to be hilarious

The problem is that it's basing this on BMI, a factor of weight and height which is horribly innacurate for determining anything about body composition. Fat, muscle, bone and retained water are all treated the same. So it's hardly a case of "telling the little fatties the truth" and more of damaging a young girl's already weak self-image who may be driven to starve herself or worse to obtain a better "grade" amongst her peers. This is supposed to be Wii Fit, not Wii Eating Disorder.

Re:n = 15

[edittard]

It's also 15 more than the slashdot proofreaders and dupe checkers.

Put together.

Re:n = 15

[tbannist]

Coincidentally, Wii Eating Disorders is slated for release in late September/early October just in time for the holiday binging season.

Re:n = 15

[sammy baby]

Obviously a 1-15 person gamut. Anything else would require more gamut-runners. I think having more than 15 people in a gamut is against indecency laws in most states.

Re:n = 15

[DriedClexler]

No, there is a valid point to be made there. Just for laughs, I found a BMI chart. I'm about 5'9'', 220 lb. According to the chart, my BMI is about 33, well into "obese" territory, which itself is a class above overweight!

Yet just last week I had my bodyfat checked at a gym with some electronic device you're supposed to grip. It put me at 24% bodyfat, right within the range it should be.

Re:n = 15

[The Phantom Buffalo]

Having a gym membership does jack shit for your condition. Going to a gym and exercising will make a difference. If they make a game entertaining enough for the little porker to get up and do something for a while each day or two, it would be infinitely more useful than an unused gym membership.

Re:n = 15

[Anonymous Coward]

And video games available that help you move your geeky self outside are available too: such as this or lately this.

Re:n = 15

[Lunix Nutcase]

So you're point is that the BMI chart pegged you correctly? You do know that 24% body fat puts you in the obese region, right? The recommended adult male body fat percentage is between 8-14%.

Re:n = 15

[Anonymous Coward]

I also did the calculation. This means that either the mother is lying, or her 'definition' of 4'9" and 6 stone is vastly different than reality, or the Wii balance board is using a different BMI scale than wikipedia uses. She neglected to mention what weight value the Wii fit used for her child.

Re:n = 15

[SunTzuWarmaster]

Um... from an economical perspective if you already have a wii for other reasons (like teh gamez!) it is a "sunk cost". At that point, you have to decide if the additional game money is worth it.

Besides, I have stairs outside of my apartment. I am permitted to traverse vertically to my heart's content without an induced fee. I am free to do pushups within most public areas. Additionally, I am permitted to walk, saunter, jog, run, sprint, dash, and speedwalk without so much as tipping my hat to other passers-by.

What makes a difference "in your condition" as you troll, is actually exercising. If you think that buying a game, or a gym membership, or new shoes, or brightly colored shorts, or a new tennis racket will help you, you are free to do so.

I do not comment on other's health choices/investments.

Also, it is cheaper than most home gym sets (if you have a wii already) and may well be more entertaining.

Re:n = 15

[Ana10g]

Or to quote / paraphrase Denis Leary:

"You're not big boned, Dinosaurs are big boned"

Re:n = 15

[stranger_to_himself]

BMI is a useful measure for the majority of the population, in fact it's about as good as a one-dimensional measure of obesity is ever going to be. Its simplicity means also it can actually be used and understood by people, which is important. Obviously if you are a professional footballer you know that your BMI is not very informative, and you probably wouldn't use your Wii to tell you about your fitness.

Re:n = 15

[DriedClexler]

Okay, "where it should be" might be exaggerating, but this one shows a chart where 20-25% is the acceptable range, meaning that the BMI's claim of "two levels above acceptable" is way off.

8-14% is "recommended" if you take "recommended" to mean "gee, it would be really nice if you pushed yourself this". Of course, I started going to the gym to lose fat, at 24% is where I'm starting from. (I actually thought it would be higher!) But according to the BMI reading, I should have difficulty walking around, and that's just not the case. (Then again, I don't look like a typical 220 lb male.)

Re:n = 15

[KillerBob]

Most of the people posting on this thread don't seem to have actually played the game.... I actually have it. Bought it on Wednesday of last week, and I've been playing it between 30-45 minutes a day. In the last week, I've also attended 10 hours of classes at Jiu Jitsu, and I biked to work on Friday, at 1h15 each way (about 27km each way). I also went swimming on Saturday, about 2km in lengths.

Not everybody who's buying this game is somebody who's overweight and never gets any exercise. Even those who *are* overweight and never get any exercise... I'd rather they play the games that come with Wii Fit than sitting on their ass playing Halo... the games that come with Wii Fit will actually have them getting up and possibly even working up a sweat. I know that I usually work up a sweat by the time I get to the step aerobics in my routine the sweat's usually streaming off (that's about 25 minutes in).

It's better than nothing. But as with any exercise routine, you'll get out of it what you put into it. If you're serious about losing weight then you'll need more than a video game. It's a good start, but it'll require some serious lifestyle changes for any weight loss to take.

There's a couple of major advantages to Wii Fit over going to the gym. You've touched on them yourself... you don't have to deal with asses at the gym, you don't have to deal with grimy sweaty equipment, you can do it in the privacy of your own home... and the personal trainer is actually pretty good. Well voiced, gives realtime encouragement based on your current position, which is limited by the fact that it can only detect your center of balance and not your actual position, but it is still fairly accurate for most situations.

Finally, I'd like to second the comment that using BMI as a measure of anything is approaching idiotic... It's good to keep track of your weight, and how it changes... and that's actually the idea behind Wii Fit: track your weight on a day to day basis so that you're more conscious of what you put into your mouth. There was an interview available on the Nintendo channel that explained this..... Anyway. BMI itself is a fairly useless measurement, because it doesn't keep track of anomalies. There is somebody at my dojo, for example, who weighs 260lbs. This person is 6' tall, giving him a BMI of over 35. Well into the "obese" category. There's just one thing wrong with this definition: This person wears a 32" waist, and has body fat of 13%. Tracking your BMI over time will give you an indication of how much weight you've lost, but it won't actually give anything approaching an indication of how much you still need to lose. :)

Re:n = 15

[stranger_to_himself]

I think you're confusing 'the range most people are in' and 'the range it should be'. Normal and healthy are not the same.

Re:n = 15

[BearRanger]

But then you would have to subject yourself to the stares and ridicule of people who are in better shape. I suspect, rightly or wrongly, that some people view the Wii Fit as a nonjudgemental personal trainer.

Of course you're right in the absolute sense. But loss of self esteem has a price too.

Re:n = 15

[clamatius]

Sounds dangerous. I hear there are bears "outside"!

Re:n = 15

[mark72005]

Outside is where you had to go to get video games before the internet. What is this, the 1980s?

Re:n = 15

[billcopc]

The problem with the great majority of "obesity" indicators is they don't take into account varying body types.

For me, most doctors/dietitians would consider my dead dry bones overweight, because I'm average height but extremely broad and solid. It's just how I'm built, big heavy bones. Even when I was so thin, I needed a tight belt to keep pants on, I was around 180lbs, but my comfort zone is around 230. Every dietitian on the planet would say I'm overweight, some have even recommended physician-assisted weight loss, which is patently ridiculous.

My way to gauge fitness is quite simple: do I feel good, and do I look healthy ? Numbers can't answer that... they approximate, but as soon as you fall outside the middle of the bell curve they fail. Anyone who adheres to indexes like BMI or total body fat, I accord them zero credibility whatsoever. They're just numbers created to serve a purpose, usually that purpose is to create demand for a product.

Re:n = 15

[somersault]

If she was doing lots of sports, chances are it was muscle. I'm 14.5 stone today, certainly not fat.. I used to be about 11.5 stone when I was at university, but since then I've gained general muscle from occasional periods of exercising :) Currently watching what I eat in an attempt to have a proper six-pack for once, but I'm actually putting on weight overall as I've been walking to work and doing situps etc :P

Re:n = 15

[fyrewulff]

400$? Try 950$+.

Gyms have gotten way too expensive. You're much better off just buying used equipment (I have a recumbent bike that cost 20$, and my mom got a treadmill over at her house that I use once in a while for 60$ that is powered).

Re:n = 15

[gfxguy]

Yeah... I'm about 5'11" and agree with that sentiment... I barely fit through normal doorways because my shoulders are so broad, I'm several inches broader at the shoulder than most people my height. When I sit in a typical movie theater or airplane seat, my arms go straight down to the rests on both sides. I can't tuck them in, it'd be impossible. I could lose fifty pounds and it's not going to change the width of my shoulders.

On topic, though, I think Wii-Fit is a great idea; I promised my wife I'd buy her one, and she's a fitness instructor at Gold's Gym (and couple of other local only places). The point is, if you're going to play, you can play something where you're NOT just sitting on your ass. We even stand when we play guitar hero, but Wii Sports is great, and I think this will be pretty cool, too. It's not great exercise, it's just some exercise when you'd otherwise just be sitting there playing a different game.

Re:n = 15

[carlzum]

As someone who exercises regularly, how would you rate playing Wii Fit vs cycling or swimming? Is it a just healthier way to spend 30 minutes in front of the TV, or could you substitute a game for a trip to the gym and get similar benefits? I can see it working well for stretching and balance, but I have my doubts about the cardiovascular benefit.

Re:n = 15

[KillerBob]

I work up a sweat when doing the advanced step aerobics or advanced hula hoop games... even some of the yoga exercises, when I do enough of them in succession. I haven't touched the strength exercises, and have no intention of touching them. It's a good addition, but no amount of play on Wii Fit will substitute the level of exercise I get elsewhere. I don't think my heart rate has gotten over 110 when working out on it, but I'm an anomaly in that respect: my resting heart rate is 56-62bpm and my BP is usually around 120/70... highest it's ever been measured was during a military fitness test, at 160/90 (I got out of the army on a medical... knee injury). That said, it's naive to expect that the average Wii owner will have the same level of physical health/strength, and when compared against a generally sedentary lifestyle I think it's very good. It does a good job of getting you active, and breaking that activity up into chunks that are easy for the average person to do, which is where going to the gym generally loses out.

Generally speaking, it's mid-light exercise... but it also adjusts the amount of "fit credits" it gives you.... you get minutes in the bank for every exercise you do, and some of the lighter games will give you 2 minutes in the bank for 5 minutes of play... on average, it takes about 45 minutes of activity to rack up 30 minutes worth of fit credits. Also, it gives a little light show when you hit 30 minutes of fit credits per day, encouraging you to be active at least half an hour a day. And new exercises are unlocked on basis of how many total fit credits you've accumulated since you started. I still haven't unlocked everything, and I've been doing about 35-40 per day, not counting my other exercise.

Honestly... I'd say it's better value than a gym membership. If for no other reason, then because it's the kind of activity that you can squeeze into your day quite easily. Break it up into 5-10 minute blocks, which you really can't do with a gym.

Re:n = 15

[Machtyn]

I don't know, the GTV show, X-Play, seems to have its set of writers/testers for a game. Granted, it still may be just one person per game, but it seems to me from having watched the show that there are a few writers per game to playtest it.

Re:n = 15

[billcopc]

Yep the wife and I love the Wii because it gets the blood flowing, plus there's something oddly exciting about three people flailing their arms like idiots to make their little bunny run faster :) Then the round ends and everyone struggles to catch their breath while laughing.... fun times

Re:n = 15

[Petrushka]

That's a small sample size. How much of a gamut can you really run with only 15 people?

Given that the full gamut involves only twelve notes (two non-overlapping hexachords plus the intervening "ti"), 15 people is in fact overkill.

Re:n = 15

[KDR_11k]

BMI is the easiest to measure by far though it is obviously limited. Giving the Wii a blood sample and attaching electrodes to your body just wouldn't sell. If you suspect that Wii Fit falsely accuses you you should ask a professional for a more accurate assessment. What else should Wii Fit do? Completely ignore everything? I read a review that suggested it pretty much ignores the BMI already and bases your score on your exercise results, not your BMI changes though it will complain if your BMI goes up.

I'm not sure if they programmed it to handle children well, after all their height changes a lot too. My guess would be that Wii Fit is intended for adults, not children.

Re:n = 15

[mgblst]

It put me at 24% bodyfat, right within the range it should be.

Yes, right within the range it should be, if you are a pregnant hippo. You know that means that you are a quarter fat. The rest is water, so you know, that is not good. You need some bones and organs.

Re:n = 15

[Zebedeu]

About your comments on BMI, I've read those kinds of oppinions a lot, but I always disagree with them, somwhat.

I agree that the BMI isn't the be-all end-all of fitness indexes, because as you say, it's not correct for anomalies, but those anomalies are exactly that: anomalies.
If I spent the last 10 years in a gym, I think I would know that I should probably ignore my BMI when it says I'm overweight, but for an average person with average muscle mass, the measurement is pretty accurate, or at least, accurate enough for estimating your "healthy zone".

I agree that it would have been better if people were using the % of body fat as an index instead, but as far as I understand it, measuring the body fat has it's own issues (if you drink too much/too little water, it goes crazy) and such a feature might have ruined the Wii Fit's price point (wouldn't know about that).

So, for a game aimed at the average person, the use of the BMI isn't such a bad idea, and the more sportive players will probably know to ignore it.

Re:n = 15

[eharvill]

Yet just last week I had my bodyfat checked at a gym with some electronic device you're supposed to grip. It put me at 24% bodyfat, right within the range it should be. Try taking this measurement at different times of the day. You'll notice quite the swing of numbers if you compare them between morning and evening. Make sure you take your weight/bodyfat% around the same time of day otherwise everything will be skewed.

Re:n = 15

[Eunuchswear]

Giving the Wii a blood sample and attaching electrodes to your body just wouldn't sell.

Bugger. We were just about to go to beta testers with our WiiWee urine sampler peripheral. I guess you think that wouldn't sell either?

Re:n = 15

[Chris Mattern]

Between a Wii game that you actually play and a gym you never go to, the Wii will be the one that makes a lot more idfference in your condition.

Re:n = 15

[madbox]

You're dead-on about using BMI as a comprehensive metric. A lot of people get caught up in using a metric as the last word in just how badly out of shape someone else is. When I was in the Air Force, about 12 years ago there was a huge push to come up with a better fitness standard. The old broken standard consisted of measuring the neck, chest, and waist/stomach area, then cross-referencing this with some chart.

    The problem with that was there were some guys (not many, this -is- the Air Force) that could bench-press a Buick and run a marathon, maybe at the same time. They always had to fight for waivers because their neck and chest measurements completely blew the chart figures and showed them as "fat".

    It never ceased to amaze and anger me how callous/indifferent the senior staff were about the reality versus the chart numbers: "You don't fit the chart, so you're fat, so you're on probation."

Re:n = 15

[DrYak]

Which issue? The idiocy of using BMI for anything or the overprotective parents? Agree with you on that.

Half of the reason people complain is that yes, indeed, BMI is a little bit more complicated in children (the "ideal" BMI range isn't a constant like in adult but a function of both age and developmental status) and the system could make blatant mistakes if not specially programmed to take that into account.

But the other reason is that the big "obese" message on the screen is reminding them that yes indeed an overwhelming fraction of the population of western children, including their very own "treasure", *is* overweighted or obese.
"The kid has only a bulky build" (actually found in the article), "The child only has heavy bones", "It's not that important she'll outgrow it" (although that one might be real under *some* circumstance - but ask a qualified paediatrician, not parents) are most often excuses that the parent try to imagine to avoid facing the sad truth.

There *are* massive problems with obesity and overweightness in children in developed countries. Denying it isn't the solution.
The problem is that this fact has to come with very good informations about prevention.
Starving to death to look like a barbie doll IS NOT the solution.
Exercices are part of it. (How many people go to their gym *in cars* instead of say, ride the bicycle once in a while ?)
Correct eating is also playing a huge part, but saddly the kids may confuse starving with a correct diet (avoid junk food, avoid processed food as much as possible, avoid eating outside meals - or limiting snacks to fruits and similar - learn to listen to their hunger/satiety instead of compulsory eating). Bad eating habit can explain why even kids that regularly do exercise are still overweight (at least they are not obese thanks to the sport).

Re:n = 15

[Anonymous Coward]

OK, that was fucking funny.

Wow...

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't wait to get my 'Wii' all fit and ready!

Wee Fit

[writerjosh]

I think it's obvious to anyone with common sense that this Wii Fit can hardly be considered a workout. On one hand, I commend Nintendo for at least attempting to get people off the couch, but it's only a half-a$$ed attempt. It's kind of like McDonald's offering salads to their menu so they can call themselves a "responsible" fast-food joint. Will Nintendo now say they are a "responsible" video game company? It's too little too late.

Besides, after the buzz wears down, anyone doing these "exercises" will quickly discover there are no results to be had, and the balancing board will end up in the closet with the rest of the rubber bands, abdominizors, and exercises dvds.

Perhaps a better alternative would be to attach electrodes to the player's butt and give them a shock every time they miss. That would keep couch potatoes on their toes. ;)

Re:Wee Fit

[MyLongNickName]

Yeah, because it is Nintendo's responsibility to keep me thin.

Keep clamoring for corporations to take responsibility for my behavior, and watch our individual rights continue to erode.

Re:Wee Fit

[Kingrames]

When McDonald's serves salad, I worry about what's in it.

But when Nintendo makes a workout game, I have no such hesitation. perhaps because I know it won't kill me. Perhaps because they have a nice track record. Perhaps because there are other video games known to give a nice workout.

Your pessimism really doesn't apply here.

Re:Wee Fit

[kericr]

When the mainstream press talks about the Wii fit in this light, I can't help but think about the revolution that was made by the same mainstream media when gamers started talking about their weight-loss and cardiovascular improvements after feeding their life-savings into their local arcade's Dance Dance Revolution machine. The difference in my eyes though, is that Wii Fit is not going to make you look like you're in the midst of an epileptic seisure, thus probably isn't as effective.

Re:Wee Fit

[cowscows]

I don't think Nintendo is trying to be a "responsible" game company, in the sense that I don't think they feel that they have to somehow atone for the fact that there are fat kids out there. I think they're more interested in making money, and one of the ways they've chosen to do that is by releasing new types of games that appeal to a wider market than video games traditionally had. Their strategy seems to be working quite well.

Sure, playing WiiFit isn't as strenuous as swimming laps, but if you're up and moving at all, you're getting more exercise than you would be sitting on a couch. I think the bigger problem with a lot of exercise routines has less to do with the fact that you don't get results and more to do with the fact that exercising is hard work and usually not particularly fun.

If someone finds WiiFit to be a good time, they'll probably keep playing it until it stops being fun. And in the meantime, they'll get a little bit more exercise than they used to. No harm done. I don't think you'll see any currently fit people giving up their habit of running three miles every morning and just playing WiiFit instead.

Re:Wee Fit

[elrous0]

Does anyone else have a mother with a attic completely FILLED with these exercise machines? It's like a graveyard of broken dreams that she keeps carrying around from house to house, always in need of a bigger attic.

Re:Wee Fit

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought the same thing. Have you actually used this yet? A co-worker of mine said that 15 minutes of certain exercises on the Fit actually winded him a little. And, no, he's not overweight. He's about 5'10", 160lbs, average-to-slim build.

Re:Wee Fit

[ergo98]

I think it's obvious to anyone with common sense that this Wii Fit can hardly be considered a workout.

Why do you feel the need to mention it, out of curiosity?

Wii Fit is a completely reasonable "workout" of balance and flexibility, and even for very moderate workouts for people who are otherwise sedentary (and there are a lot of those people, though they're probably sitting at their computer writing about how Wii Fit isn't a real workout because they see everything as a binary full-on-workout, or nothing).

Steps and other basic activities aren't going to replace the gym for someone who is actually into fitness, but it's better than nothing for people who have limited activity.

And one of the best elements of the Wii is the simplest element of all -- weigh-ins with time plotted tracking. It's simplistic, relying upon the lame BMI scale, not taking into account muscularity and other variables, however again for a normal everyday person seeing an accurate graph of their weight when they occasionally weigh into their Wii can be a very powerful input.

It's kind of like McDonald's

Analogies are like a dog with a tail growing out of its nose. Kind of like the planet Mars with annuity insurance.

Nintendo's whole angle with the Wii has been whole-body gameplay that is their "gimmick" instead of the traditional thumbs only. This is an obvious continuation of that. Like Wii Sports, the included game (Wii Fit) isn't the most incredible demonstration of the board, but it gets the units out there.

Besides, after the buzz wears down, anyone doing these "exercises" will quickly discover there are no results to be had, and the balancing board will end up in the closet with the rest of the rubber bands, abdominizors, and exercises dvds.

There are over a dozen balance-board-using games in development, and of course it launched with Wii Ski. It's another input controller (one with amazing potential...and it's bluetooth, and could be used with a compatible PC bluetooth stack), and Wii Fit is one use of it. I certainly don't think very many people are going to stick with their Wii Fit regiment ,just as they don't stick with any regiment, but if they at least weigh in on occasion before hopping into a game of Mario Balance, then that's better than nothing.

Re:Wee Fit

[AvitarX]

Wii fit is effective, and results do show (look at any of the extended reviews).

It is not anything that couldn't been done without it (probably even more effectively), but is does elevate heart rate, which means calories are being burnt vs sitting on your ass.

The Yoga part is actually quite awesome, and is something that is clearly enhanced by the balance board (some of the strength training greatly benefits too, but not as much).

If I feel muscle ache the next day, and it raises my heart rate while I do it, how is it not a workout?

Re:Wee Fit

[vux984]

I think it's obvious to anyone with common sense that this Wii Fit can hardly be considered a workout.

Is yoga a 'workout'? Is pilates a 'workout'? If you consider that to be a part of your workout routine, then the Fit is a part of that. And if it accomplishes the same thing as working along with a yoga/pilates video and is more fun, then that would be a win.

Nobody is saying that a Wii fit is a replacement for cardio, or weight training. But it may well be a perfectly legitimate to compliment yoga/ pilates/ and stretching exercises.

Besides, after the buzz wears down, anyone doing these "exercises" will quickly discover there are no results to be had, and the balancing board will end up in the closet with the rest of the rubber bands, abdominizors, and exercises dvds.

Unless its engaging and fun. Which a lot of people think it is, and who will play it regardless of whether they get 'results' or not.

And no matter how you spin it, its better for you than sitting on the couch.

So while Wii fit may not melt fat off, at least its not part of the problem.

Re:Wee Fit

[berashith]

strangely, after trying to give this a real effort and running through many of the exercises daily, I actually do feel a slight difference. Not just common sense, but real experience speaking here. Is it the same as riding a bike or playing soccer, no. It does meet a useful niche though. Forcing odd balance and repetitions does work you core , and lunges and such do work your large butt and thigh muscles. This leads to calorie burn. I have truly been hungry all week since I got this.

Not perfect, not a gym , but quite useful.

Re:Wee Fit

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

I think it's obvious to anyone with common sense that this Wii Fit can hardly be considered a workout.

I don't think that is obvious at all. Compared to aerobic step based exercise programs offered by many gyms or compared to DDR why would anyone assume this is less of a workout?

On one hand, I commend Nintendo for at least attempting to get people off the couch, but it's only a half-a$$ed attempt.

I'd say this is about as much of a workout as one could expect from any video game console. That is not to say it is the best activity for people looking to lose weight, but it is pretty decent compared to people looking at playing video games based off of any other input device.

Besides, after the buzz wears down, anyone doing these "exercises" will quickly discover there are no results to be had, and the balancing board will end up in the closet with the rest of the rubber bands, abdominizors, and exercises dvds.

I think you missed the point. This doesn't belong in the same category because it is not an exercise device, it is a game input device. Rather it will likely stay next to the TV along with or replacing many people's DDR pads. There certainly are plenty of people who still play DDR regularly.

Perhaps a better alternative would be to attach electrodes to the player's butt and give them a shock every time they miss.

There are already feedback devices for games that provide a mild shock, but I don't think they have gained any ground in the US. In nay case, I think you're mischaracterizing the Wii Fit. The primary purpose is to allow for developers to create fun games (skateboarding, dance dance, etc.). Any physical fitness benefits are secondary, although not necessarily insignificant. Some K-12 schools have DDR setups now and maybe they'll have Wii Fit setups in the next 5 years or so. bet kids prefer it to running laps around the gym all winter.

Re:Wee Fit

[HappySqurriel]

If you want to lose a decent ammount of weight all you need to do is put on 2.5 lbs of muscle (150 extra calories burned per day), eat 150 less calories than you need to maintain your current body weight (without considering excercise), and burn an additional 150 calories per day; this works out to a grand total of 450 calories more burned per day than you're currently taking in.

Wii Fit may not turn you into a body builder but its weight training program should be able to help you put on 2.5lbs of muscle, its aerobics program may not be nearly as good as jogging but it should be able to help you burn 150 calories per day, and if you cut down on sugar/cream in your coffee (or start drinking diet pop) you should easily be able to cut out 150 calories per day.

Basically, Wii Fit may not be much of a workout but it is all you (probably) really need.

Re:Wee Fit

[lpangelrob]

Since your post makes it painfully obvious that you haven't used Wii Fit at all, I'll post about my actual experience, and then people can comment.

After 30 minutes of actual activity on Wii Fit, I am sore. I am also pretty fat (32.xx BMI, and I'm not an athlete, so that's pretty accurate). The game charts your progress (based on BMI, and as a relative percentage) every day, which is quite useful.

The game places an emphasis (peculiar, at first, I have to admit) on balance. This is for a few reasons. The Balance Board is the game's only input, but it can tell where your center of balance is (and what your weight is) very well. The game doesn't come with any weights for additional resistance, so any resistance your muscles would work against is directly related to your body position.

Finally, the emphasis on balance seems to be firmly rooted in eastern culture. I mean, I can't really think of why it's so important to have *exactly* 50.0% of my weight on my left foot, and 50.0% of my weight on my right foot, and right now, that goal seems impossible.

Where the game succeeds best is, as is noted in the CR review, is in the balance games. Some people can exercise without the additional benefit of visual stimulation -- they enjoy varying degrees of pain or short-term uncomfortability for the hope of long-term progress. I am not one of them. So this is a big boon to me. And these exercises are not of the Wii Sports variety, either; whereas that game would just give you tennis elbow, in Wii Fit you're fighting yourself while trying to head soccer balls or being the human Super Monkey Ball. (Fighting yourself. How very eastern.)

Most importantly, the game makes sense to anyone who hasn't touched a controller. It's straightforward in the way Nintendo has made all of their games in the Wii generation, so that everyone can use it. This alone will be why Wii Fit should outsell Gran Turismo by at least a factor of 2-3 : 1.

I don't exercise nearly as often as I should. I also don't think this game will be the start of a sweeping change in our culture (where everyone walks swinging their arms as much as possible to improve their posture). But it's a big step forward in getting the interactive part of exercise to the home, without having to resort to video tapes or DVDs (no feedback in terms of balance), Bally's (image conscious?) or personal trainers (far more expensive than $90).

Re:Wee Fit

[nizo]

Yeah, but how many of those exercise machines can you play video games on?

Re:Wee Fit

[Artifakt]

I started using one. I run and lift weights, and no, it's not likely to give me either strength or cardiovascular benefits. But, I needed to work on my balance despite overall fitness, and it's been a fun way to fix that. You can be able to run 5 miles at a time, and still not be able to stand on one foot for more than a few seconds without wobbling. A little guiding the bubble down river or thwacking soccer balls with your head is good for shoring up weak spots.
      What else? Rainy Day fitness - it can do enough for even a seriously fit person to get a light workout, on those days when the weather is bad, or you're just getting over the flu, or you're really pressed for time. Probably not enough to keep you from slipping back if you have lots of bad training days, but enough to get you through an occasional one.

Re:Wee Fit

[jonnythan]

Offtopic, but those McDonald's salads are very good. A grilled chicken salad with balsamic vinegarette dressing isn't even 300 calories, but very filling and quite tasty.

Re:Wee Fit

[Anonymous Coward]

and one of the ways they've chosen to do that is by releasing new types of games that appeal to a wider market than video games traditionally had. Their strategy seems to be working quite well.

My completely non technical in-laws in their early 60's just bought a Wii for themselves. The last time either of them bought or played anything that resembled a video game was Pong about 30 years ago. They wanted a Wii because "it looks like fun".

Re:Wee Fit

[Altus]

I found the boxing in Wii sports to be a light impact cardio work out. Im usually a touch winded after a couple of fights. I wouldnt call it a work out but its a lot more interactive than Mike Tysons Punch Out.

Re:Wee Fit

[Sancho]

Calories aren't the only thing that matter. The chicken on that salad has lots of sodium (depending upon which salad you're talking about, the salad+chicken can have up to 960mg.) The salad dressing has another 700mg or so. That's per serving--I don't know how many servings you get per order.

I can't figure out which salad you're talking about, anyway. Every non-ceasar salad with chicken has at least 260 calories per serving, plus another 40 from the dressing (again, always assuming 1 serving of each). Maybe you didn't include the dressing when you were reading on the salad's nutritional information?

Citation:
http://www.mcdonalds.com/app_controller.nutrition.index1.html

The salads may taste good, but that doesn't mean that they're good for you.

Re:Wee Fit

[Rydia]

Balance is also important in a "real" exercise routine to ensure muscles are worked evenly. A good example is weight machines- if your balance is very bad, you will not be able to use the machine properly, and you may end up injuring yourself.

Re:Wee Fit

[fprintf]

Great suggestions until you got to the part about the diet pop. Have you seen how many fatties order up huge meals and then have a diet coke to go with it? I have heard, though perhaps it is non-peer reviewed urban legend, that diet soda does more to retain weight than the high fructose corn syrup stuff.

Re:Wee Fit

[ilsie]

I would venture to say that you have not used a Wii Fit yet if you're saying it's not a workout. I train and run marathons, and yesterday I decided to try out my Wii Fit in lieu of a cross training workout. The strength and yoga portions are not easy, for sure, and definitely gave me a really good core workout.

Re:Wee Fit

[Jason Levine]

Have you actually used WiiFit? I have been using it every chance I get and let me tell you, some of those activities make you feel the burn. I didn't think much of Yoga, but I've got to say that some of those poses really work out your muscles. (Note to those attempting Tree Pose: Wear "slipper socks" or some other gripping sock/shoe or your foot will slide down your leg leading to loss of balance.) I've found that the best (of my currently unlocked activities) is the Hula Hoops. Swinging around to spin those hoops and then leaning over to catch other hoops really seems like a great workout.

Of course, WiiFit can only be one part of a plan to get in shape. If you work out with WiiFit for 30 minutes a day, but then follow that up with a banana split each time, you're not going to lose any weight. However, if you work out with WiiFit and eat healthier, the added exercise WiiFit gives you should help with weight loss.

Plus, the weight/BMI charting alone should help. I've found that the closer I pay attention to my weight, the less likely I am to gain weight. Probably because I'll be more likely to reconsider that sweet treat if my weight is on my mind.

Re:Wee Fit

[berashith]

exactly. The rainy day / pressed for time bit is what is helping me, although the real issue is that finding time to do much exercise with a one year old around is difficult. This is quiet and I can stick around the house, and stay in better shape than if I just stare at tv (or slashdot).

Re:Wee Fit

[chris462]

Analogies are like a dog with a tail growing out of its nose. Kind of like the planet Mars with annuity insurance.

That's probably why he used a simile.

Re:Wee Fit

[Tom]

Keep clamoring for corporations to take responsibility for my behavior, and watch our individual rights continue to erode. And which right, exactly, is Nintendo endangering with Wii Fit?

(and what fool modded that up?)

Re:Wee Fit

[ergo98]

You should look-up what an analogy is. It isn't as simple as "if they use like it's a simile".

An analogy is comparable to metaphor and simile in that it shows how two different things are similar, but itâ(TM)s a bit more complex. Rather than a figure of speech, an analogy is more of a logical argument. The presenter of an analogy will often demonstrate how two things are alike by pointing out shared characteristics, with the goal of showing that if two things are similar in some ways, they are similar in other ways as well.

Re:Wee Fit

[X0563511]

It's better than a burger and fries, with a soda.

Re:Wee Fit

[Tom]

Sure, playing WiiFit isn't as strenuous as swimming laps, That isn't entirely true, you know?

I own a Wii Fit. I'm also a martial artist. I bought the thing mostly so me and my girlfriend can work out together a little on the weekends.

Turns out, there are some exercises in there - in the advanced section that you have to unlock - that are quite a good workout even for me. Remember that in many cases, it isn't how much weight you lift or how fast you do something, but the number of repetitions. Also, all that yoga stuff and balance training is quite a good addition to my usual training.

There are also parts that I don't like that much (like having to start with the baby stuff, no matter what) but all in all it definitely is good exercise - as long as you don't consider it a total replacement of all other activities, but it does a good job of reminding you about that.

Re:Wee Fit

[Chris Burke]

Besides, after the buzz wears down, anyone doing these "exercises" will quickly discover there are no results to be had, and the balancing board will end up in the closet with the rest of the rubber bands, abdominizors, and exercises dvds.

The abdominizors and work out balls et al don't end up in the closet because they're ineffective in the sense that you mean. Used regularly, pretty much any of those As-Seen-On-TV exercise doohikies would improve fitness of your average couch potato. Sure the benefit/effort ratios are wildly exaggerated, but there are surely results to be had.

The reason they end up in the closet is because they were bought by/given to a person who doesn't have the motivation and discipline to exercise regularly just for the sake of exercising, and the device doesn't magically give them that motivation.

The problem is exercise is boring. If WiiFit makes it fun enough that someone will do it, then it will succeed where the Abdominator failed.

Re:Wee Fit

[Tom]

Besides, after the buzz wears down, anyone doing these "exercises" will quickly discover there are no results to be had, Do you have any idea what you're talking at all?

As a hobby game designer, one of the first things I noticed about Wii Fit is the carefully crafted positive feedback loop. These guys hired someone who knows about motivation and listened to his input. There are literally dozens of different ways to nudge you to continue, do one more exercise, come back tomorrow, and so on. The unlockables, the minutes you accumulate, the records, the positive remarks of the virtual trainers, the reminders by the animated board, the graphs, the goal you set yourself, the comparison with other people using Wii Fit in your home, and many more.

Re:Wee Fit

[Sancho]

It's better than eating a bullet, too. That doesn't make it good for you.

Re:Wee Fit

[WarPresident]

Sadly, he's not even right on the numbers. A pound of muscle takes about 35 calories to maintain (that's only 87.5 calories/day for 2.5 lbs of muscle). Building that muscle takes a lot more calories, so resistance training IS important.

The diet stuff leaves you hungry, leads to more snacking. Supposedly, when you eat food (with real live calories) your body thinks it's been in starvation mode (thank you 0 calorie soda!) and stores as many calories as it can as fat. HFCS does other nasty things to you, not to mention all the trans-fatty acids in the American diet.

Wanna lose weight? Eat less, exercise more. Do resistance training and stop sucking down the soda, diet or otherwise.

Re:Wee Fit

[jonnythan]

The Premium Caesar Salad with grilled chicken is 220 calories.

Add 40 calories for the dressing and you're looking at 260 calories for the whole thing.

Re:Wee Fit

[db32]

You are clearly unfamiliar with anything the Wii Fit does. No, it isn't some professional sports star training regiment, nor is it meant to be. The Wii Fit has things broken into a number of categories, Yoga, Strength Training, Aerobics, and Balance Games.

Now, I'm no fan of yoga nor am I knowledgable enough on the subject to critique it.

The strength training exercises are the standard group of exercises that you would normally do, pushups/side planks, various leg lifts, jackknives, all the Wii Fit does is watch your center of balance and in some cases count what you are doing. It also does almost all of these excercises at an excruciatingly slow pace, which if you know anything about most strength training exercises is the correct way to do it. 30 very slow and controlled pushups will put a burn in your muscles far beyond 100 rocket fast pushups.

The aerobics piece is basically the same. The game does very little more than give you something to play along with while exercising. How much workout you get is entirely dependent on the effort you put into it, not what the game is doing. As you spend more time on the thing it unlocks more exercises and more options. The hulahoop thing on TV eventaully can go into longer time frames and it measures your balance and movement control while you are doing it.

The balance games are pretty amazing themselves. They force you to shift your center of balance around and are far more difficult than they look. I had major reconstructive surgery on my ankle and I thought it was getting quite a bit better until I played with this for a while. I realized that all I was doing was shifting more of my weight onto the opposite leg rather than really rehabilitating. These balance games are forcing me to rebalance my weight and build the muscles required for better stability.

Finally it lets you do little body tests every day for weight and body control and tracks that information. The game isn't meant to make you fit. The game is meant to give you motivation to get fit yourself, let you set goals and track them. The little beast is very effective at giving you a solid measure of progress.

I don't think this has anything to do with Nintendo trying to be a "responsible" gaming company. They did it because there was a demand for it and those devices are flying off shelves. I think it is obvious to anyone who has actually played with one of these that you probably haven't seen anything other than some commercials. Also, your S=$ isn't that clever. They are profiting off of a real demand, not some enforced monopoly status like MS. And the S=$ isn't even that clever there.

Re:Wee Fit

[Sancho]

I said non-caesar, as I didn't expect it to be one of those (one rarely pairs a caesar salad with vinaigrette dressing, though I suppose it does happen.)

Re:Wee Fit

[hkmarks]

I'm speaking mainly from a personal experience perspective with a bit of biology knowledge, but here goes.

Diet soda has 1-2 calories (Aspartame & acesulfame potassium or sucralose). A bottle or large cup of non-diet soda has about 300 calories (sucrose/glucose-fructose or HFCS). All else being equal, if you're drinking sugary soda all the time, you're going to be worse off than if you drink diet soda. It's simple in-and-out calorie counting.

On the other hand, drinking diet soda is like playing tricks on your body. It messes up your insulin production. You drink it, your body says, "Sweet! That means sugar, so make insulin!" Then it doesn't get the calorie hit it's expecting, so it makes more insulin. Eventually it builds up an insulin resistance, and it's a slippery slope to diabetes.

However, if you're consuming diet soda with food, you're getting calories (albeit less than with sugar soda), so you don't get the insulin resistance. (I think, IANAD.)

If you're still eating a 1700 Calorie meal, that won't do you much good and you'll still get fat. But at least it's not a 2000 Calorie meal. A lot of people are tricked into thinking "diet" means a lot more than it does. You're shaving calories off from your drinks but you need to watch the rest of your intake, too. I know a few people who are desperate to lose weight, but never do, because while they're trying every other trick in the book, they just refuse to cut down on their portion sizes.

Switching from sugar-based to diet sodas helped me lose about 20 lbs (from 160 to 140), especially with the first 10 lbs. It only helped, though. I had to resume exercising and watch what I was eating, too.

Re:Wee Fit

[SuiteSisterMary]

Strap on some wrist weights and get even more out of it.

Re:Wee Fit

[SuiteSisterMary]

More sodium just means drink more water.

Re:Wee Fit

[klausboop]

The diet stuff leaves you hungry, leads to more snacking. Supposedly, when you eat food (with real live calories) your body thinks it's been in starvation mode (thank you 0 calorie soda!) and stores as many calories as it can as fat. I have also read rumors about the diet soda actually contributing to weight gain via messing with your metabolism's mind (so to speak), but can the above be correct? Because doesn't water also have 0 calories? Or is the issue that the sweetness of the diet soda is triggering something (not triggered by 0 calorie water) that is then unsatisfied with 0 calories?

Re:Wee Fit

[berashith]

yup. I like the competitiveness that can be found in the scores and rankings. Also, the trainers start at easy enough repetitions and work up to more as you get better, which works great for someone who is out of shape. This encourages more strenuous workouts as time goes on, and I am actually afraid of how hard it will make me work as the reps get closer to failure.

Re:Wee Fit

[chubs730]

The fool(s) who read it correctly.

Re:Wee Fit

[cparker15]

The sweetness in the artificial sweetener causes your body to release more insulin than it needs, making your blood sugar lower, making you feel hungrier.

A quick Google search pulls up some decent results: http://www.google.com/search?q=artificial+sweetener+insulin

Re:Wee Fit

[Anonymous Coward]

I totally agree with the parent. I own Wii Fit and i'm at the 'Overweight' category too (just 200 pounds). I'm doing my 30 minute training every day and I already saw the result: more energy, little weight loss.

The WiiFit is not to be an athlete for sure. But it improve my general fitness and posture every day. As for anyone who's complaining about Yoga, get a WiiFit and try the Tree pose. You will see that it's not easy than it seems.

Re:Wee Fit

[zippthorne]

Do you mean "eating a bullet" as in, the bullet enters the body in the traditional manner for food, or that the bullet enters the body in the traditional manner for bullets. The effects on your health are significantly different in each case.

I suspect that in the former case, it would be somewhat filling, and have negligible deleterious effect unless you made a habit of it.

Re:Wee Fit

[r_jensen11]

Offtopic, but those McDonald's salads are very good. A grilled chicken salad with balsamic vinegarette dressing isn't even 300 calories, but very filling and quite tasty. I still find it ironic that the man who started McD's salad ended up dieing from a heart attack....

Re:Wee Fit

[stranger_to_himself]

Are you suggesting that sports and fitness equipment manufacturers are fascist tools of the state?

Re:Wee Fit

[Sancho]

"Eating a bullet" is a phrase used to mean that a person was shot in the head with the gun barrel having been placed in the mouth before firing. It's almost always a euphemism for suicide.

Re:Wee Fit

[Anonymous Coward]

Analogies are like a dog with a tail growing out of its nose. Something scientists would want to study and everyone else would think "it's so ugly it's cute and I just have to one" ?

Re:Wee Fit

[zippthorne]

correlation != causality.

In the case of diet soda, I's suggest that there is a significant amount of selection bias.

I also submit that the problem is satisfaction. McDonalds et al. just aren't very satisfying meals, so you end up eating more just to feel satisfied. (note: I don't mean the same thing as filling, although in filling-ness per calorie, they don't do so well either)

I think it's very much the same with RPGs. WoW isn't all that satisfying, really, once you've played through the first ten hours. To feel satisfied, you have to play longer and longer sessions, until you find yourself in the position where you're contemplating a five-hour raid and thinking it seems short.

You can go to a steakhouse and get the 96'er and chow down. But you can get a much tastier 7'er for the same price. It's satisfying enough that you'll eat the veggies, too, without resentment, and find yourself quite full without consuming four days worth of Calories in one sitting.

Re:Wee Fit

[HappySqurriel]

The number 60 calories/pound of muscle per day came from a news story I had seen earlier this year ...

Upon googling it seems that there is no solid answer and people are claiming anywhere from 6 calories per day to 90 calories per day; it isn't quite as simple as the 35 calories you listed either being that most (seemingly trustworthy) sites claimed between 35 and 50 calories per pound of muscle per day.

Re:Wee Fit

[WarPresident]

It is the aspartame in diet soda that induces an insulin response. Insulin is used to store fat. Drink diet soda and you're training your body to store fat (just like eating too much). Google on aspartame insulin response.

Re:Wee Fit

[AnomaliesAndrew]

I wonder if it comes with a nutritional guide, because it's fairly well accepted that fitness is not all about exercise.

"I played a round of Wii Yoga between each of my six Big Mac's, but it doesn't seem to be working...?"

Oh... it's working alright.

Re:Wee Fit

[Fozzyuw]

Since your post makes it painfully obvious that you haven't used Wii Fit at all,

Indeed. I go to the gym 3-5 times a week (depending on my work schedule) for a mix of cardio and weight training. I have the Wii fit and after a few exercises, my heart rate is up and I'm sweating. Some of the strength training exercises were actually hard to do because of the focus on balance, something I lack when I lift free weights, better balance.

A lot of the strength training exercises are quite good and directly out of fitness magazines (Something else I'm familiar with as I've been reading Men's Health on/off for years) such as: Push-Ups, Lunges, and sit-ups (I've not even unlocked the advanced stuff yet).

Don't even get me started on the Yoga. hehe that kicked my butt. Flexibility and stability are also great ways to tone and strengthen your muscles. It's not just how big the dumbbell is in your hand. Most people can probably drop a good percentage of their lifting weight and focus on form, balance, and speed (slower speeds, most people go far to fast and I'm guilty as charged) and get a far better work out.

Re:Wee Fit

[AnomaliesAndrew]

"Remember that in many cases, it isn't how much weight you lift or how fast you do something, but the number of repetitions."

...so that's why my beer drinking arm is disproportionately large...

Re:Wee Fit

[AnomaliesAndrew]

"I have truly been hungry all week since I got this."

You should go eat one of those McDonalds salads ;-)

(it's been mentioned enough times above...)

Re:Wee Fit

[KillerBob]

Well... I *have* been asked what kind of dressing I wanted with my salad after ordering a caesar salad at McD's....

Me: *raises eyebrow* Caesar?
Girl behind the counter: That's a kind of dressing?
Me: *waits patiently while girl checks*
Girl: oh. Wow. I didn't know that! *slaps forehead*
Me: *dies inside*

Re:Wee Fit

[mauriceh]

Precisely.
Most people do not maintain their exercise regimen because it is boring, and they lack motivation.
The pother problem is it is just so darned inconvenient.
Anything to make it more interesting and attractive is great!

Re:Wee Fit

[TavisJohn]

I do not think that the WiiFit is trying to replace a gym. But for some people this looks like a good workout machine.

I have various health problems. And I have noticed that sense I have gotten my Wii almost a year ago, that I have been playing the Wii Sports on a regular basis. (2-3 times a week for at least 30 minutes) And I have noticed that it has helped with my health a lot.

So I am planning on getting a WiiFit so I can add to my exercise routine. If I do it once or twice a week that should help even more.

Re:Wee Fit

[Ohio Calvinist]

I was told by my doctor that balence is important (for me in my circumstance) because I have a bad back. Poor posture causes the vertabrae to not sit square where they are supposed to and causes discomfort (which in turn causes me to avoid working out the muscles that would help the problem). So, I think for the average person, if they are going to use this extensively (as a "workout"), having the proper balence on the board will help avoid discomfort and injury, and probably helps calibrate the unit (e.g. the system looking at variance versus your balance while sitting still would impact how it handles "movement.")

I don't know if this is true for everyone, or significant in everyone's case, but being more consciencious of my posture has really helped take the edge off that helps me exercise more often, so I think having a sedentary person first address this due to the potential injury factors, and the reality that a game that isn't going to wind them on the first day is a good design decision.

Re:Wee Fit

[drinkypoo]

Okay, now your increased water intake is depleting your body of other vitamins and minerals, and you should especially increase your intake of Calcium, Zinc, Magnesium, and the other metals. If only the body were so simple. I don't think anyone's asserting that a few extra mg of sodium are going to kill you today, but for most people that kind of food is a habit, and engaging in it every day is simply not good for you. No matter how much water you drink.

Re:Wee Fit

[mblase]

Nobody is saying that a Wii fit is a replacement for cardio, or weight training. But it may well be a perfectly legitimate to compliment yoga/ pilates/ and stretching exercises.

I'm looking forward to the inevitable development and marketing of the Wii Treadmill.

So while Wii fit may not melt fat off, at least its not part of the problem.

Amen to that. The Wii has done more than any other game since DDR to get people to exercise in their homes.

Re:Wee Fit

[drinkypoo]

as long as you don't consider it a total replacement of all other activities, but it does a good job of reminding you about that.

A lot of people don't engage in any other activities already. I have a friend whose mom is like 62 or something, and her body has just broken down because she stopped doing anything, just sat on the couch and watched TV or read books or ordered shit from catalogs while balancing the ice cream container on her gut. If she would get up and walk around the building a couple times, it would be an improvement. Depending entirely on Wii Fit would be a DRAMATIC upgrade.

Re:Wee Fit

[drinkypoo]

Finally, the emphasis on balance seems to be firmly rooted in eastern culture. I mean, I can't really think of why it's so important to have *exactly* 50.0% of my weight on my left foot, and 50.0% of my weight on my right foot

Think spine. If this isn't natural to you when you're standing on a flat, level surface, then there's something wrong (or you're copping a pose. cut that shit out if you're not black, yo.)

Good balance is useful every day. All I want to know: When is Wii Tai Chi coming out?

Re:Wee Fit

[initialE]

I worry about their apple slices. They don't oxidize, what on earth do they put in them to prevent them from oxidizing?

Re:Wee Fit

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes...beer drinking...

Re:Wee Fit

[Anonymous Coward]

I found the boxing in Wii sports to be a light impact cardio work out.

I wouldn't call it a work out

Wouldn't you? I have evidence to the contrary!

Re:Wee Fit

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody is saying that a Wii fit is a replacement for cardio, or weight training.

I'm saying it.

Cardio is easy - just get your heart rate up. The only draw back with the Wii Fit is the pauses between exercises, but you can always keep moving while selecting the next one.

Wii Fit is _great_ for weight training. You do it along with a trainer who is demonstrating perfect form. The feedback from the balance board helps you achieve perfect form as well. Adding weights is as simple as picking them up.

Re:Wee Fit

[mgblst]

I think this game is a good idea.

However, one of my mates gf's has hurt her back by playing it for 30-45 minutes a day, for about two weeks.

Re:Wee Fit

[Anonymous Coward]

I am not the parent poster, but I had the impression that he/she was not talking about Nintendo in particular, but was referring to this fashion of *expecting* corporations to be good "corporate citizens", instead of *legally*demanding* that.

That whole "vote with your wallet" BS, instead of trying to vote for politicians that will actually represent the interests of the people.

Re:Wee Fit

[ggvaidya]

I suspect that in the former case, it would be somewhat filling, and have negligible deleterious effect unless you made a habit of it. But can you literally shit bullets? Will that be a problem?

A remember a book in which bullets are smuggled into a village by force-feeding them to a goat, then sewing the goat's anus shut. Wait, is that too far off topic?

Re:Wee Fit

[Anonymous Coward]

The game places an emphasis (peculiar, at first, I have to admit) on balance. Quite a few 'serious' gym exercises like many with execise balls and the squat in weightlifting create a need for balance, the notion being you get all the exercise of the basic movement, plus you have to exert effort to keep balanced.

For example, if you do a press up with your feet on a large ball, you not only do the work of the press up, but also you have to control and shift your weight to keep yourself balanced, resulting in more muscles being exercised and greater overall exertion.

Re:Wee Fit

[Von Helmet]

I bought the thing mostly so me and my girlfriend can work out together a little on the weekends.

Saving yourself for marriage, eh?

Re:Wee Fit

[SuiteSisterMary]

Oh definately; I was giving a simplistic retort to a simplistic statement.

On the other hand, I know people who have put their kids in the hospital by taking 'low sodium cooking' too far.

Oh, and I'd not say 'that kind of food is a habit,' I'd say 'that kind of food is standard fare.' American eating habits both fascinate and fighten me.

Re:Wee Fit

[jonnythan]

There's nothing special about the Caesar salad versus any of their others. It's just lettuce, cabbage, spinach, tomato, and a little parmesan. In fact it's the most basic salad they have.

They have an Asian salad with oranges and almonds, a Southwest salad with lime and tortilla strips, a Bacon Ranch salad with bacon bits, and I think one or two others.

Re:Wee Fit

[Anonymous Coward]

I own a Wii Fit. I'm also a martial artist. I bought the thing mostly so me and my girlfriend can work out together a little on the weekends. You're doing it wrong.

Re:Wee Fit

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, that was not ironic, but karma. Ironic was when Jim Fixx (the famous runner) died of a heart attack in his mid-40's while he was running.

Re:Wee Fit

[I(rispee_I(reme]

I don't know what McDonald's uses, but lemon juice keeps apple slices from oxidizing.

Re:Wee Fit

[alexburke]

Ascorbic acid, otherwise known as vitamin C, also works great to prevent apple slices from browning. It's probably a dilute solution of ascorbic acid sprayed onto them before packaging; there's an ancillary benefit of being even better for you as a result.

Really?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is there really anyone that groups Wii Fit in with Gran Turismo? One is a video game, the other is a gadget for attempting to change life styles. Just the fact that it is only playable on the Wii is irrelevant. CR is not reviewing video games, and they didn't review this game for graphics or how fun it is. They reviewed for its purpose: did people lose weight?

Re:Really?

[InsaneProcessor]

Wii is a consumer product. Gran Turismo is not. The hard core gamer is a small, tiny, largely insignificant number of the consumer market. Sort of like grouping Porsche owners as a significant portion of the car buying market.

I welcome CR

[jsnipy]

I think it would be good to have more unbiased reviews. But I only think they did this because the wii fit is touching on the arena of exercise equipment.

Re:I welcome CR

[urcreepyneighbor]

CR is unbiased - or, at least, as close as humanly possible.

Re:I welcome CR

[ThinkTwicePostOnce]

I'm sure it's the fitness tie-in too.

The day Consumer Reports starts reviewing games like Gran Tourismo or Grand Theft Auto for "how much fun" they are to play is the day they start reviewing brands of cigarettes for which ones "taste the best" to smoke.

Re:I welcome CR

[Frosty Piss]

But I only think they did this because the wii fit is touching on the arena of exercise equipment.

Entirely correct, I think. I don't think CR is testing the Wii as a game platform, rather as excursive equipment, which is consistent with the types of things they test...

No, I really don't think CR is the right forum to test games, except maybe to discover if they start fires...

Re:I welcome CR

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm. I think you're on to something.

Re:I welcome CR

[KDR_11k]

I think he meant to say he welcomes our new CR overlords as exactly that source of unbiased reviews.

Re:I welcome CR

[urcreepyneighbor]

You're probably right. I must have misread the comment.

It'll never happen, tho. The hardware industry, as a whole, is 99% marketing and lies.

Consumer Gamespot Reports

[Recovering Hater]

Will CR be reviewing the next installment of Gran Turismo?

NO.

Re:Consumer Gamespot Reports

[drinkypoo]

While you're probably right, I think it's only a matter of time before they review essentially all video games released in the US in some format. Video gaming has become a major American pastime, and they have a name people trust.

Re:Consumer Gamespot Reports

[KDR_11k]

Do they review movies?

Wii fit can be good...

[hyperz69]

I agree with this report. In short it explains that Wii fit is good if you need motivation to get off the couch. It is not for those who pull themselves outside or goto the gym and get physical already. It's target group though is over 50% of Americans... and a heavily growing European segment.

Re:Wii fit can be good...

[Anonymous Coward]

I am not heavily growing, you insensitive clod!

Re:Wii fit can be good...

[cduffy]

It is not for those who pull themselves outside or goto the gym and get physical already.

Do you own one, or are you speculating?

As a Wii Fit owner who pulls himself outside on a moderately regular basis and spends an hour at the gym every morning, I think you're simply wrong. The Fit provides a different kind of exercise than the gym does (largely focused on control and balance -- but also acts as a guide for more conventional exercises like crunches, pushups and the like), and it graphs my progress over time -- which is useful no matter where the exercise is coming from.

Wii Fit Parody

[TypoNAM]

Reminds me of this Wii Fit parody.

:)

Again

[MikeyG79]

Maybe this is a way for CR to get companies to stop selling stuff in the US again.

Wii Fit IS NOT LIKE Gran Turismo...

[BobMcD]

...and this isn't an accident. Nintendo's Blue Ocean (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Ocean) named 'Wii' is decisively different, as evidenced by the fact that Consumer Reports is covering Wii Fit.

This isn't your typical game

[brokeninside]

From fad diets to late night infomercial exercise devices, Consumers Union has a long history of testing out exactly this sort of thing.

That would be aweomse

[jollyreaper]

I've grown thoroughly disgusted with the usual pattern of game reviews.

Previews: Holy shit, glowing reviews, the game is better than blowjobs and bacon sammiches combined!

Reviews: Walking the fine line between placating advertisers and telling the truth. Reviewers who bite the hand that feed them soon go hungry. So even the most disappointingly middling hash job gets a gentleman's C.

If we get the money out of the review process and really see some honesty... well, I don't know if we'll get better games but I do know it will honk off more suits and that's almost as enjoyable.

Re:That would be aweomse

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

Reviews: Walking the fine line between placating advertisers and telling the truth. Reviewers who bite the hand that feed them soon go hungry. So even the most disappointingly middling hash job gets a gentleman's C.

Then you should applaud Consumer Reports entering the gaming review market. They don't have any advertising and don't have anyone to please but subscribers. They even refuse to take donated equipment for reviews because of cherry picking and anonymously buy their gear through regular retail channels.

If we get the money out of the review process and really see some honesty...

There is one ad on the page with the article. It is for a subscription to Consumer Reports. If you really want the money out of the process, go subscribe. I think it is well worth it for their great, independent assessments of cars, electronics, computer hardware, etc. Without a subscription, for example, I'd never have known Dell has brought their laptop line from near the bottom of the heap to near the top (just under the premium vendors) within just the last year.

If you want people to review things impartially with your interests in mind, pay them already. Otherwise, feel free to put up with reviews that are closer to PR releases

Re:That would be aweomse

[jollyreaper]

Then you should applaud Consumer Reports entering the gaming review market. They don't have any advertising and don't have anyone to please but subscribers. They even refuse to take donated equipment for reviews because of cherry picking and anonymously buy their gear through regular retail channels. Didn't you read my subject line? I already said this news is aweomse. This is a sign of fervent albeit misspelled support.

Re:That would be aweomse

[Anonymous Coward]

You know, we have this thing today called the internet, where anyone can write up their opinions about anything. You talk as if we are stuck in the days of gaming magazines, where the corporate controlled reviews were ALL YOU HAD.

Re:That would be aweomse

[AK Marc]

I think it is well worth it for their great, independent assessments of cars, electronics, computer hardware, etc.

And they violate their written rules on testing vehicles if they think it will make a good cover photo. Every "flipping" vehicle in CR history was tipped on purpose in direct violation of their testing guidelines. They even invented a new test for the sole purpose of flipping the Sidekick. There were many attempts to flip the Troopper, long after testing was over, and when they finally got it to tip enough for a photo, they cheered (literally, in the video you can here it, like that's "unbased") and slapped the photo on the cover to sell magazines. Oh, and I don't remember so well, as that was what, 10 years ago (about 20 for the Suzuki), but the following article was on cereal where they rated chrunchiness on a 1-5 scale. There was no mention of testing methods, definitions, or anything else. It was like a couple guys got together in their basement and decided to make a magazine that reviews things. I wouldn't mind, but they pretend to be impartial and scientific.

If you want people to review things impartially with your interests in mind, pay them already.

But I'm a car enthusiast (among other things). They don't have my interests in mind. They have flawed surveys to a self-selected group of a self-selected group that gives crap data (which can be proven by the vast difference in reliability when there are models that are sold by two companies, like Mitsubishi Eclipse and Eagle Talon were). They have reviewers that are more interested in flipping cars and counting cupholders than telling me about driving it. They tell me whether I should or shouldn't like the texture of a cereal. I feel like a little child being lectured to, not an inteligent person reading impartial reviews for my benefit. For that, I refuse to give them money. When they aren't self-advertising with flipped vehicles and manage to properly administer a survey or lecture at me, I'll be happy to renew.

have you ever used a balancing board?

[deft]

I used one to come back from physical therapy after a fighting injury (i do mixed martial arts).

It is a HELL of a workout of your leg muscles, and VERY effective. The workout I get fromt hat is comprable to doing wall sits which are a staple of my boxing class every night.... and your quads get a tremendous burn.

Unless the wii balancing board is somehow deficient, you'd sure as hell get a nice workout.

after i went through therapy with a balancing board, i bought one for home traning the next month.

Re:have you ever used a balancing board?

[deft]

dear lord, i just saw it.... thats no balance board... thats a fricken scale.

balance board in real traning is awesome... i apoligize for not researching the wii "board" before posting.

Re:have you ever used a balancing board?

[Anonymous Coward]

MMA fighters are yellow-bellied sissy men!

Love and kisses,
Anonymous Coward

^^^
See? *That's* an anonymous coward.

Re:have you ever used a balancing board?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, they have a balance board accessory for Wii Fit. So, you were sorta right. At least, if you just kept quiet, we would have all thought so. =)

No, CR will not review Gran Turismo.

[igotmybfg]

I find it telling that not only did CR review the game, but that the composition of their sample group had a giant gaping hole in it - the young male. Not only that, it includes twice as many women as men. This really shows you that Nintendo has executed their strategy - ignore the ritalin kids in favor of focusing on everybody else - brilliantly. They realized what Sony, and to an extent Microsoft, didn't - that games aren't fun because they run on the latest hardware and look photorealistic, rather, they're fun for the same reason anything else is - you can play with your friends and family. Yes, I know Microsoft has Xbox Live. Running around killing people isn't really a game you'd play with grandma though - but Wii Tennis is (I have and she loved it). So no, I don't think CR will review Gran Turismo... but I'd bet money that they'll review the next big family hit on the Wii.

Re:No, CR will not review Gran Turismo.

[elrous0]

Running around killing people isn't really a game you'd play with grandma though

What if your grandma is a sociopath?

Re:No, CR will not review Gran Turismo.

[Jogar the Barbarian]

I play City of Heroes with my 63-year-old mom (who is a grandmother twice over). She's logged over 550 hours of playtime with one toon.

That said, I don't *think* she's a sociapath...

Re:No, CR will not review Gran Turismo.

[BaronHethorSamedi]

This really shows you that Nintendo has executed their strategy - ignore the ritalin kids in favor of focusing on everybody else - brilliantly. They realized what Sony, and to an extent Microsoft, didn't - that games aren't fun because they run on the latest hardware and look photorealistic, rather, they're fun for the same reason anything else is - you can play with your friends and family. Yes, I know Microsoft has Xbox Live. Running around killing people isn't really a game you'd play with grandma though - but Wii Tennis is (I have and she loved it). So your criterion for fun is something you can enjoy with grandma? I like Rummikub as much as the next young adult male (read: not very much, though I do love and respect my grandmother), but I think your reasoning is a bit limited.

I admit to being a bit tired of the sanctimoniously fannish "it's-the-gameplay-not-the-graphics" mantras that invariably get tossed around whenever the Wii comes up in discussion. It's a marvelously innovative little machine, but certainly doesn't hold any secret key to human enjoyment entirely overlooked by its competitors. I hate golf--playing Wii golf did nothing to change my opinion; the virtual activity was every bit as tedious as the real thing. I have people (including family) that I very much enjoy spending time with, but who prefer "running around killing people" to the upgraded version of Pong that is Wii tennis. And really, would people enjoy Wii tennis/bowling/[insert simulated other activity of choice] as much if they did use Pong-era graphics? The visuals aren't an entirely negligible component of the experience.

Re:No, CR will not review Gran Turismo.

[igotmybfg]

Indeed, some very good points here.

So your criterion for fun is something you can enjoy with grandma?

It is one of many criteria.

It's a marvelously innovative little machine, but certainly doesn't hold any secret key to human enjoyment entirely overlooked by its competitors.

Agreed; I do see some innovation on the Xbox and PS3 in this area. And as you correctly point out, the key to the Wii's success is anything but secret.

I hate golf--playing Wii golf did nothing to change my opinion; the virtual activity was every bit as tedious as the real thing.

Agreed. You hate real golf and the simulated version. I love to fish, but I hate fishing simulations. And I don't have any data on this, but I would bet that the vast majority of those who love, for example, Grand Theft Auto, would probably not want to shoot/run over/blow up someone in real life. So it is difficult for me to come up with any kind of general relationship between how much people enjoy activity X in real life vs. in a simulation, no matter which box the simulation runs on.

I have people (including family) that I very much enjoy spending time with, but who prefer "running around killing people" to the upgraded version of Pong that is Wii tennis.

Agreed. Opinions are definitely subjective, so YMMV.

And really, would people enjoy Wii tennis/bowling/[insert simulated other activity of choice] as much if they did use Pong-era graphics? The visuals aren't an entirely negligible component of the experience.

Another good point - visuals are definitely part of the equation. I didn't intend to say that visuals don't matter, and if that's how it came across then it is my fault for communicating poorly. My point is merely that I think photorealistic graphics aren't the X-factor, the end-all-be-all, of fun in games; that Nintendo realized this early on and designed the Wii with this idea in mind; and that Nintendo's sales numbers show that there a great many people out there who agree.

All this is fun and good, but there are occasions when I do find myself agreeing with you - sometimes mowing down zombies with a minigun is just the kind of fun I'm looking for.

Re:No, CR will not review Gran Turismo.

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you're missing the more likely cause of the sample bias: Consumer Reports' target audience.

Re:No, CR will not review Gran Turismo.

[igotmybfg]

Another good point. I didn't communicate this as clearly before, so I'll emphasize here: I understand that the target audience is biased. What I find significant is the way in which it is biased, since Consumer Reports almost certainly handpicked every person in the sample group. CR believes that the Wii has transcended, if you will, the traditional "video game" market per se - that is, video games targeted at the 14 - 29 year-old male demographic - and so it makes sense to them, and to me, that they should be interested in the experiences of people who are Nintendo's target market: not the ritalin kid, but everyone else.

Ughh...

[stewbacca]

Consumer Reports is not a good source for video game reviews because they take the subjectivity out of their reviews. Video-gaming is very subjective and it will be impossible for CR to capture the nuances and evaluate them with any effect. This goes for ANYTHING that people have passion for. While CR does good, unbiased reports on the boring everyday items such as blenders and vacuum cleaners, their car reviews are awful and hold no water except with people who like to drive cars that have no soul...same goes for any video game review they'll attempt.

Re:Ughh...

[Anonymous Coward]

their car reviews are awful and hold no water except with people who like to drive cars that have no soul Is that sorta like how the news is full of repeated drivel so that most of the people who watch it like it?

Or is it sorta how half the population is below average and advertisers cater to them?

Re:Ughh...

[SydShamino]

I can get the feel for the "soul" for a car by looking at it, sitting in it, and driving it. I get the unbiased review of experts and a fair polling of quality and risk from Consumer Reports.

Buying a car without the first might seem silly to you, but buying a car without the second seems downright dangerous to me.

Re:Ughh...

[lpangelrob]

While CR does good, unbiased reports on the boring everyday items such as blenders and vacuum cleaners, their car reviews are awful and hold no water except with people who like to drive cars that have no soul...

Disclaimer: I use CR for most things. That said, I've seen people use crappy stuff. Maybe a blender has no soul (believe me, I don't derive enjoyment from driving my Civic, but that's because I use it primarily as a tool to get from point A to point B) but I *do* feel good when it "just works". As opposed to other blenders I've owned that don't blend, or blend very crappily.

The reason that Wii Fit is being reviewed is because it is passing itself off as a piece of exercise equipment, not (primarily) because it's a video game. CR happens to review exercise equipment.

Re:Ughh...

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey! Have you seen the movie Christine? I prefer my car without a soul, thank you! More seriously, since I'm not someone into "cool" things, to me a car has no more "soul" than a vacuum cleaner, so I don't know what you are talking about.

As for video game reviews, since about every review I read now are amateur journalism at best, I think CR would be a lot better for that too.

Re:Ughh...

[stewbacca]

I agree with your post entirely. My problem with CR is that, after their very thorough and fair unbiased review, they make a lame attempt at subjectivity in the narrative portion. It shows they know nothing about those things that make a car great to those people who love cars. How else would you explain the lackluster reviews of cars such as the BMW 3-series, that seem to win award after award in nearly every automotive journal on the shelves? My answer is that CR values cup holders over handling, because you can count cup holders by looking, but you actually have to have an engineering background to setup/test/observe skid-pad numbers. Plus, most consumers just don't care. They'll go buy a Toyota Corolla/Honda Civic and drive them until they explode at about 500,000 miles anyway.

Buying a car without reviewing the repair history of that model IS crazy though, and I would never be able to talk myself into a car with a poor repair history, no matter HOW passionate I may be.

Re:Ughh...

[stewbacca]

to me a car has no more "soul" than a vacuum cleaner, so I don't know what you are talking about. You don't get cars, fair enough. At least you don't go around trying to give impartial reviews on a very subjective manner. I'm not sure if you are trying to bait me into some sort of argument by inferring that I have some crazy minority view about cars, but last I checked (in the countries I've lived...US, UK and Germany) people are crazy about cars. Some people want to get from point A to point B. Might I direct them to Consumer Reports for their next purchase...

Re:Ughh...

[randyest]

What good to me is someone else's subjective opinion?

Re:Ughh...

[randyest]

How else would you explain the lackluster reviews of cars such as the BMW 3-series, that seem to win award after award in nearly every automotive journal on the shelves?

What lackluster reviews? BMW 3-series gets top marks in every category (membership required) and the new wagon gets a good score but loses points for controls, cup-holder design, a small interior, and the need for premium fuel. I'm not sure why you're so personally offended by such an honest review, but maybe it would help you to know most CR readers don't focus much on the final "score" but rather look at the pros/cons and consider which are important to them.

Your post really comes across as a pompous attempt to be a "car guy" but real "car guys" (1) don't get their panties in a twist over a CR review and (2) don't drive BMW's.

Re:Ughh...

[Anonymous Coward]

How else would you explain the lackluster reviews of cars such as the BMW 3-series, that seem to win award after award in nearly every automotive journal on the shelves?

Nearly every automotive journal accepts advertising from BMW, so I would expect award after award for their (overhyped?) car.

Only a small percentage of computers read automotive magazines. For the rest of us, Consumer Reports provides fairly objective reviews which is what I'm really looking for.

Re:Ughh...

[DragonWriter]

While CR does good, unbiased reports on the boring everyday items such as blenders and vacuum cleaners, their car reviews are awful and hold no water except with people who like to drive cars that have no soul...

I dunno, I find them a good source of concrete relative comparisons rather than gushing hyperbole like most advertising-driven reviews from other sources. Even for cars. Yes, there are lots of subjective factors that go into car buying (or blender buying, for that matter), but subjective reviews by third parties (even if they were directed by a desire to maximize advertising revenue rather than honesty) aren't a good guide to those factors most of the time, anyway (the self-awareness to know what objective factors influence your subjective response to something allows objective reviews to sometimes be a good guide to that, and beyond that you've just got to try it yourself.)

Re:Ughh...

[juuri]

The BMW MSeries would like to respectfully disagree.

(disclaimer: I drive an audi)

Re:Ughh...

[stewbacca]

"Real car guys don't drive BMWs". Are you serious? Do you even have the slightest idea what you are talking about, or are you far too superior to us carbon-burning heathens? I bet you drive a Prius.

I'll admit, I was not up to snuff on the current reviews of the BMW lineups, but in the past, CR has been laughably bad when it comes to reviewing things about cars that matter to people who are passionate about cars. My analogy would be Reader's Digest reviewing computer gear.

BMW has been given an unfair reliability stigma by past CR reviews, only because parts in the US cost disproportionately more than they do in Europe. That's because we Americans actually consider crap like Malibus and Tauruses as acceptable for our hard earned dollars, when the rest of the world says, WTF?...the most advanced country in the world makes THOSE cars? All we've got is the.....Corvette (dubious, even that).

Disclaimer: I drive a 2008 Mazdaspeed 3, because I couldn't justify the extra $20k for the BMW I wanted. I also drive a Ford Contour SVT. I "think" I'm fairly accurately described as a "car guy".

Re:Ughh...

[Bloodoflethe]

Only a small percentage of computers read automotive magazines. Damned uppity computers making posts. What has the world come to?

Re:Ughh...

[stewbacca]

LIke the other guy said, a healthy dose of objective CR reviews, mixed with a nice subjective read of Car and Driver AND a test drive is the best. Unfortunately, I know far too many people who just look up the top car on the CR list and go buy it. Good for them. I hope they enjoy their boring car. A car is a huge investment btw, so might as well be something you enjoy. You'll spend tons of time in it stuck in traffic or just hitting the highways, so you might as well spend money on something you can live with on a subjective level, versus the little bubble-meters that CR gives you.

Re:Ughh...

[randyest]

I know exactly what I'm talking about. Prius? Heh, I drive a Porsche 911gt3. My wife drives a 350ZX. So, as I was saying, real car guys don't drive BMWs. Even my wife knows better, so you can extend that to car gals as well :)

I'm pretty sure CR understands that "reliability" has nothing to do with the cost of parts. I'd certainly take their review over yours, Mr. "car guy" with a Ford (which you mock!) and a Japanese econobox.

Re:Ughh...

[stewbacca]

Oh, the other thing I wanted to respond to....ALL car magazines take ad money from ALL manufacturers, yet not everyone can win the top awards. Therefore, the tinfoil hat theory of Automotive-Journals-are-Inherently-Biased holds no water with me.

As a fan, I can tell you the overt biases that the major pubs carry. The entire culture of a pub is established by the editors' articles. Car and Driver favors the purist/enthusiast elements of cars, without regard for non-car-guy features, such as child booster seats and cupholder efficiency. Road and Track is for old farts who like to putz around in cushy Buicks. Motortrend is the most overtly biased ad-based pub, with their consistent support of Detroit "big iron", even in the face of empirical evidence that US Automakers aren't quite as good as MT thinks they might be. Automobile tends to stress the industrial-design and engineering whiz-bang features, the sort of OSX crowd of auto mags.

Re:Ughh...

[stewbacca]

You mean my Japanese econobox that equals, or betters your 350ZX in nearly every performance measurement, that equals the fit-and-finish, and has a better Consumer Reports repair history, and seats five adults? ;-) Horses for courses, or some silly cliche.

I find it blasphemous that a Porsche driver would ever poo-poo a BMW. Having lived in Zuffenhausen Germany, I just can't fathom it. Maybe you can poo-poo Audi or Volkswagen, but come on, BMW??? Lame.

The Ford Contour SVT is possibly the best US Ford product made (from an enthusiast point-of-view) with its heritage stemming first from Ford UK. Contours suck. SVTs don't. Car guys know that...well, car guys that don't drive $106,000 Porsche's that is. By the way, my 1999 Contour SVT (105,000 miles) is for sale in Austin, TX if anyone is interested. Asking $3500.

Nice Porsche you have, btw. Too bad you diminish those of us who can't afford super-cars as not being car-guys as well. Diminishing a Mazdaspeed3 to a Japanese econobox demonstrates you are neither up on the literature, nor a true car-guy. For the record, the BMW1 that I wanted runs circles around your 350zx (as already established in your Z barely keeping up with my econobox). Back to you, sire...

Re:Ughh...

[stewbacca]

oh yeah, and CR DOES take the cost of parts into account when rating reliability. If a Ford Escort has a brake failure three times in 5 years, and each event costs the owner $25, then that trumps the one failure/$350 repair event for a BMW (which is completely unfair to BMW, considering there is lost time from work, car-in-the-shop, general pain-in-the-ass of dealing with garages to take into account, that may or may not have objective monetary value associated with them. In that vein, pretty much any BMW dealer gives you a free loaner car, whereas you 'might' be able to 'borrow' one from a Toyota dealership, with a "small fee"). Methinks you don't readeth the entire CR philosophy and are just looking at the little black and red bubbles.

Re:Ughh...

[randyest]

You mean my Japanese econobox that equals, or betters your 350ZX in nearly every performance measurement

It's my wife's, but now you're just being ridiculous. I'll leave you to your fantasy. Sorry to disrupt your reality distortion field.

Re:Ughh...

[stewbacca]

Now you are just showing how much of a car-guy you aren't. Start with the simple things, like 0-60 (Z: 5.2, MS3: 5.4). As much as I dislike objective measurements, the reality remains that the Z is not as much of a sports car as it wishes it were and the MS3 is much more of one than most people think. Track times support my claim as well. Granted, the Z is slightly better in pure performance, as to be expected from a sports car and its price tag, but a couple tenths here and there are nothing to write home about, nor does that fully denounce my MS3 as being non-car-guy territory. Point me to a car-guy that can think of a better recommendation for a sporty car under $23,000 than an MS3 and I'll buy your dismissive attitude.

Re:Ughh...

[randyest]

Are you starting to understand that the "subjective reviews" you complained that CR doesn't give aren't quite as useful or desirable as you thought they would be, especially when they don't agree with your subjective opinions?

(We got the Z for $26k new, so it's not exactly expensive, and it will run circles around a speed3 in terms of speed, acceleration, and handling, which I've driven at a zoom-zoom event. But I guess if you're on a strict and low budget, you could do worse.)

Re:Ughh...

[stewbacca]

(We got the Z for $26k new, so it's not exactly expensive, and it will run circles around a speed3 in terms of speed, acceleration, and handling, which I've driven at a zoom-zoom event. But I guess if you're on a strict and low budget, you could do worse.) I sense a bit of understanding on your behalf (finally). I guess we'll have to disagree about running circles, since 2-tenths of a second are miniscule measurements and hardly qualify as a stomping. As for low budget, I am not. I just couldn't JUSTIFY the expense of more desirous cars, such as the G37, BMW1, BMW3 and Porsche Boxster, the other serious contenders for my cash (still probably going to buy a 1-series though and give the MS3 to my wife).

Are you starting to understand that the "subjective reviews" you complained that CR doesn't give aren't quite as useful or desirable as you thought they would be No, I'm not. Quite the opposite actually. I'm not sure what I said that would make you think otherwise. I suppose you are saying that CR's subjective reviews don't jive with my subjective reviews, so therefore I reject CR, which isn't true. What I AM saying is that CRs subjective reviews are so far removed from the desires of car enthusiasts and from what the major auto-journals are saying, that they are practically useless and CRs value is limited to red/black bubbles for vehicle reliability and the occasional blurb about how many cupholders and infant seats a vehicle has, or how round the door frame is (to avoid injury while entering the car...WTF? Who buys a car based on THAT?).

Now I'll take another stab. My Mazda runs circles around your GT3. To prove it, we'll have to exchange cars for the weekend ;-)

Re:Ughh...

[randyest]

There's more to a sports car than 0-60 in a straight line. And while the difference is slightly larger than you indicate (it's 0.7s according to R&T, which makes the mazda ~14% slower) check the quarter mile, top speed, and -- most importantly to me -- skid pad numbers and you'll see even bigger differences. But enough about that. My point was that initially complained that CR gave objective reviews and you'd prefer subjective ones aimed at "car guys" like you. I was trying to show you that subjective reviews are only useful if you happen to agree with them. Since there are usually as many subjective opinions as there are people, CR sticks to the objective.

For the subjective stuff you need to test drive any way. CR just gives reliability, repair cost, and other objective facts to help narrow down the cars you need to test.

Re:Ughh...

[stewbacca]

I don't know where we lost the communication but:

CR just gives reliability, repair cost, and other objective facts to help narrow down the cars you need to test. I'm not, nor have I disputed this. Where I have a problem with CR is AFTER all their data mining and objective reporting, they always slather a healthy dose of "don't buy this car because the cupholders suck" in the subjective bits attached to the data (i.e. the article).

I couldn't agree more with the test drive portion. I totally disagree with this though:

subjective reviews are only useful if you happen to agree with them. I can totally disagree with a subjective review but still find merit in the review. I do it all the time with Rottentomatoes.com and three of the car-pubs. I actually find MORE merit in a review I don't agree with than those that I do. Who wants to hear what they already think, anyway? Oh yeah, most people on slashdot. Guess I'm weird.

I also love the fact that our conversation is so far off-topic now, yet no /. geek has called us out.

You used R/T numbers. They are consistently the slowest since 1990 (when I became a "car-guy"). They are the James May (of Top Gear UK fame) of drivers. Yes, I know there is WAY more to a car than numbers, and obviously I'm just teasing you about the MS3 and the Z. After all, I am a car guy, and I do realize that, numbers aside, the Z is a real sports car and mine is a practical-yet-fast hatchback that hauls my drums, my wife and my 2 kids :-) Here's some more track numbers though (from the SAME source, Car and Driver in this case, since many people like to pick the slowest times from one source for the car they dislike and the fastest times from yet another source):

Skid Pad: .88 for the Z, .87 for the MS3
0-60: 5.4 for the Z, 5.6 for the MS3
1/4 mile: 14.1 (101mph) for the Z, 14.4 (99) for the MS3
70-0 : 164ft. for the Z, 166 for the MS3
Top Speed: 156 for the Z, 155 for the MS3

All in good fun, but with a slight hint of seriousness--those are some amazing numbers on the MS3's part, especially when directly compared with the Z (never would have thought it myself, even as a self-proclaimed car guy). It actually would appear that the Mazda team set the Z in their sights, as opposed to the more common comparo of the Subaru WRX.

Lastly, the Z has a way better exhaust note, and real car guys know that is very important!

peace, stu

CR will review Gran Turismo if ...

[damn_registrars]

... it uses the Wii fit controller?

That could really lend to a sense of realism previously lacking in racing games. Or maybe just a new sense of vertigo...

Wii Sports Experiment

[WiglyWorm]

If you're going to say that Wii Fit is not a work out I'd point you at the Wii Sports Experiment. For six weeks this guy played Wii Sports agressively and lost 9 pounds. Is that a lot? No. But it did take him from a BMI of "overweight" to "normal". I can't imagine something that gets your whole body in to the workout while providing you with motivation (BMI and weight tracking) could be anything but more effective. Even if only slightly.

Re:Wii Sports Experiment

[wbav]

More appropriately, the Great WiiFit Experiment seems to correlate with WiiFit building proper habits when exercising. I mean removing 10.8 lbs in 7 weeks is quite impressive.

Re:Wii Sports Experiment

[m.ducharme]

9 pounds in 6 weeks is A LOT...most non-quack diet and exercise regimens instruct you to expect between 1 and 3 pounds a month weight loss as being health.

Re:Wii Sports Experiment

[X0563511]

9 pounds in 6 weeks is very good! Project that to a year and you get 72 pounds - that is a LOT of weight. And in general, a gentle loss is much healthier and likely to be kept than a sharp loss.

Re:Wii Sports Experiment

[chromatic]

Are you sure? Reducing your intake by 250 calories a day and burning an extra 250 calories per day from exercise will take off a pound a week. That's reasonable.

Re:Wii Sports Experiment

[Yold]

9 pounds isn't really that much. I've lost 2 pounds of water in a couple hours of working out. You have your units mixed up, recalling my nutrition class from last semester, 1-2 pounds a WEEK is healthy for most people (women included). If the above-mentioned dude cycled and swam for the amount of time he was playing Wii sports, and ate a balanced diet, i'd imagine he'd lose over ten. Think about "The Biggest Loser" TV program, and how much weight those people lose in a week.

Although the Wii burns calories, it would be a good supplement, not a substitute, to a training routine.

Re:Wii Sports Experiment

[falcon5768]

try 1-3 pounds a week, not a month. 9 pounds in a month is perfect.

Re:Wii Sports Experiment

[SunTzuWarmaster]

http://www.caloriesperhour.com/

So... to burn an extra 250 calories per day at my weight of 170 pounds, I have to run... Let's see... over 2 miles per day.

To burn 9 pounds in 6 weeks must, logically, be the equivalent of running more than 2 miles/day. Do you not call that significant exercise?

(reducing intake by 250 calories is easy, however)

Re:Wii Sports Experiment

[Cederic]

I can lose 9 pound by the end of the week.

Losing around 16 pound in two weeks is easy.

As always, keeping it off is the difficult bit..

Re:Wii Sports Experiment

[Anonymous Coward]

just so you know, running is a terrible way to burn calories. You can run a marathon (literally, no joke - put it in the calculator or google it if you don't believe me) and burn the equivalent of a plate of pasta.

Re:Wii Sports Experiment

[drinkypoo]

I lost 10 pounds a month for 13 months on the atkins diet while eating 3000-4000 calories a day. I fucking stuffed myself. Only mentioning that because of all the idiots who think that ketosis has something to do with caloric intake.

Of course, you might think that's a quack diet, but I guess that's understandable considering how much time and effort the establishment has spent convincing you of that. Of course, that's only because they want to sell you processed foods that make you fat and diabetic so that they can sell you drugs to treat your conditions...

I doubt you'd be able to detect a quack diet if it waddled like a duck.

Re:Wii Sports Experiment

[MojoStan]

I can lose 9 pound by the end of the week.

Losing around 16 pound in two weeks is easy.

I think the original comment should have clarified that water and glycogen shouldn't count in weight loss measurements. I don't think a two-week 16-lb weight loss is possible without significant water and glycogen loss. Remember that 1 gram of glycogen binds 4 grams of water. If you deplete your glycogen stores (common in low-carb diets), you'll start pissing more to get rid of excess ketone bodies.

Re:Wii Sports Experiment

[chromatic]

A pound a week is definitely doable, and running two miles a day isn't a huge amount of exercise, if you're in reasonable shape. (If you're between 5'10" and 6'1", then 170 pounds is probably reasonable shape.)

Re:Wii Sports Experiment

[hanako]

Of course you lost tons of weight on it. You can lose tons of weight on most diet plans, they wouldn't sell otherwise. And selling stuff is exactly what the diet people want.

The question is, DID IT STAY OFF? And for how long?

Most diet plans will take the weight off you. By the end of five years, the weight will be back, even if you're still on the diet. That way, they can sell you another diet.

Capitalism, the nasty little beast that eats itself!

MOD UP

[Anonymous Coward]

I bought the Wii Fit pack largely because I wanted to play We Ski, and there's a cool snowboarding game coming out shortly. Things like that give it longevity. I wouldn't have bought it just for the Fit thing.

Re:Can't wait for the "Unsatisfactory" rating

[hey!]

Wow, you actually feel oppressed by Consumer Reports.

I will say that sometimes they do miss some important points when they deal with specialized products. I remember once seeing a review of bicyles that included a braking distance rating -- just like for cars. Well, all the bikes in the price range they were testing probably used the same or very similar Japanese component sets on rims of the same alloy. Any remaining difference in stopping distance would be determined by (in order): adjustment, rider technique, net weight, rotational mass (wheel weight). So there's not much to be gained for a serious rider looking at braking distance.

Also, there is the matter of comfort. The two most comfortable seats I've ever had were unpadded. One was a classic leather seat, the other was a plain, hard plastic shell. I never found that adding padding made the seat more comfortable, in fact quite the contrary. I found padding cut off the circulation after an hour or so in the saddle.

But that particular observation is not valid for somebody who takes his bike out for an hour or two a dozen or so times a year. If you ride on the order of a hundred miles or more per week, what you find comfortable is different.

Likewise, tire differences might make a difference in braking for a weekend rider, who is more likely to brake without adjusting his weight distribution, and thus is more likely to skid.

What I'm getting at is that if you aren't the kind of person who as a more specialized source of consumer information, the CR reports are probably fairly useful.

Consumer Reports Sucks

[Bryansix]

Yes they are not biased. Yes, they don't get paid off (from what we can tell). They do still sell advertising space so that's a conflict of interest. The reason CR sucks though it that their reach is too far to produce any real usable information and reviews. Any company that tries to review washing machines to Digital Cameras; Cars to the Wii Fit, will have trouble getting people knowledgeable enough in the subject area to write the article. I noticed this several times in their car reviews and their digital camera reviews. Too often they just speak from inexperience in that field.

Re:Consumer Reports Sucks

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

They do still sell advertising space so that's a conflict of interest.

They do? Where? There are no ads accompanying the article and I don't see them on any of the reviews I've looked at.

The reason CR sucks though it that their reach is too far to produce any real usable information and reviews.

I've found their reviews very useful and their expertise in affordable testing procedures carries from products to product. They provide fairly useful reviews from a normal person's perspective, with some product lines being reviewed by experts as well.

You say Consumer Reports sucks.. well maybe so, unless you compare them to every other company out there. They're pretty much the most reliable source of unbiased, professionally written reviews out there. Even for unprofessional reviews you have to deal with astroturf (more and more common) and with people trying to justify their purchase, by excusing problems or by villainizing the company because of a bad experience. Consumer Reports is better than anyone else I've seen. Who, exactly, is more trustworthy and useful in your opinion and why do you think that?

Re:Consumer Reports Sucks

[Bryansix]

Well take my example of Digital Cameras. http://www.dpreview.com/ is much more informed and not biased at all and very professional.

The point is no one place reviews all these things because to do so is madness. Still individual publications out write CR in every field they cover. This is because they specialize which is a good thing.

Re:Consumer Reports Sucks

[vapspwi]

I don't read CR a lot, but I'll occasionally thumb through it when I'm shopping for something. The impression that I get is that you don't get very deep, technical information in their reviews - they seem to focus on price, build quality, and feature set. That's probably a better approach for washing machines than for digital cameras. They provide good general information for novices, and following their advice won't steer you wrong, but they probably aren't all that useful for power users.

JRjr

Re:Consumer Reports Sucks

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

Well take my example of Digital Cameras. http://www.dpreview.com/ [dpreview.com] is much more informed and not biased at all and very professional.

How do you know it is not biased? They're being paid by the companies they are reviewing. So how do you know they don't nix the most critical reviews? Do they take donated cameras? Are those cameras the same as normal people buy, or cherry picked by the companies donating them?

The point is no one place reviews all these things because to do so is madness.

There are several things useful for review sites. Expertise is one, and maybe one where CR is not top of their game. Another is credibility, where CR is at the top of their game. With other sites, you just don't know for the most part if they are honest or will remain that way. A third is testing methodology. Do they know how to acquire and test batches of goods for reliability?

Still individual publications out write CR in every field they cover. This is because they specialize which is a good thing.

Most individual publications are horribly biased either by intention or because of the realities of the industry. The only practical way around that is to move away from advertising as in income stream and move to subscriptions. Very few people want to pay a subscription for just reviews on one type of product, because it is inconvenient even if it is not too costly.

If they run ads or even take donated gear, I don't trust them. This opinion has proved to be the correct one again and again as magazine after magazine has been exposed as changing content to suit the people paying them, and that isn't the reader. For sites where consumers post reviews, the situation is just as bad. Reviews can be removed at the behest of advertisers. Reviews can be paid astroturfing. Reviews can be biased by consumers trying to justify their purchase or angry because they had a bad experience that may not be reflective of the general case. Seriously, paid subscriptions are the only model that does not have a huge probability of intentional or unintentional misinformation.

Re:Consumer Reports Sucks

[randyest]

dpreviews is good, but they do take ads and donated cameras from manufacturers. But back on topic: You claimed that CR sells ad space, but you've yet to back that up or acknowledge you're wrong. Why is that?

Re:Consumer Reports Sucks

[EMeta]

But I don't know how biased or unbiased dpreview may be. And I certainly don't want to track down all possible biases or conflicts of interests for each different specialized product review site I look at. Sure, do I go elsewhere for some things? Of course. But to have one trusted catch-almost-all place to look is a wonderful, wonderful thing.

Re:Consumer Reports Sucks

[UttBuggly]

Hmm...I would agree that Sound and Vision, for instance, does a much more thorough job of dissecting a new LCD TV or A/V receiver than Consumer Reports. But I would also observe that the issue with the test of Yahama's newest receiver ALWAYS has one or more ads for the same unit. And people have complained that their reviews are sometimes TOO technical for the average consumer.

I have to disagree that CR sucks. Quite the opposite, IMHO. I've read CR for a long time and have made many buying decisions based on their reviews.

I drive a 2007 Toyota RAV4. When I went shopping, I was looking for a small, good mileage, SUV. I looked at the top 10 rated vehicles in CR, narrowed it to the Honda CR-V and the RAV4, drove both for a weekend, and picked the Toyota. And since I got good fair market data on my trade, got an idea of what dealers were selling RAV4s for, and followed their buyers advice...go into the dealership near the end of the month, for instance, I got a great deal.

My whole house is "CR" equipped, I guess. New microwave? Bought a GE that was rated high in CR and it's the best unit I've owned. Washer, dryer, stove, gas cooktop, and vent hood were all CR recommended. I can't recall EVER buying something I first read about in CR and having been disappointed later. Now, I do consult many sources on major things...like the RAV4...so, I don't live and die by CR, but I have a lot more trust in their data than any other source.

Re:Consumer Reports Sucks

[Jherek Carnelian]

Any company that tries to review washing machines to Digital Cameras; Cars to the Wii Fit, will have trouble getting people knowledgeable enough in the subject area to write the article. I noticed this several times in their car reviews and their digital camera reviews. Too often they just speak from inexperience in that field. You don't understand the purpose of CR.

They exist to keep regular joes from getting ripped off.

They do not exist to give expert advise to nit-picking, niche hobbyists. If you want that sort of expert advise, go to one of the many magazines dedicated to whatever niche you have a fetish for.

Meanwhile the people who just want to buy a washing machine/refrigerator/car/bed/television/dvd-player/vacuum/etc that does a decent job and won't break down a month after the warranty expires can go to CR.

Re:Consumer Reports Sucks

[BSDetector]

Well - this is just so typical of the drivel found here on Slashdot. I have been a subscriber to CR for 37 years! That's longer than some of you have been around. And I have never - NEVER - NEVER EVER - seen an ad for any non-CR product or service in any of their publications - print or online - in any and all of those 37 years. Check the facts kid and come back when you have grown up!

Re:Consumer Reports Sucks

[Chris Burke]

Well take my example of Digital Cameras. http://www.dpreview.com/ is much more informed and not biased at all and very professional.

Wow. You accuse CR of having a conflict of interest because they sell advertising -- which is completely false -- and then your chosen example of an unbiased reviewer is one that has no less than four large ads on the front page, including direct ads by companies whose products are being reviewed.

If you find their reviews useful to you, and more so than CR's reviews of the same products, more power to you. But Consumer Report's reputation for non-bias is extremely well established and well deserved. They are funded entirely by subscriptions, and not only do they not sell ads or take freebies from companies, they go out of their way to purchase off-the-shelf products incognito at retail to avoid cherry picking of samples.

Specialized knowledge is great and all, no doubt about it, but nobody beats CR in terms of avoiding conflicts of interest. That's what they bring to the table, and it's a great asset.

Re:Consumer Reports Sucks

[drinkypoo]

Meanwhile the people who just want to buy a washing machine/refrigerator/car/bed/television/dvd-player/vacuum/etc that does a decent job and won't break down a month after the warranty expires

Jesus H. Christ dipped in tempura batter on a stick, you had me at washing machine/refrigerator/car/bed! It's also a television/dvd-player/vacuum!? Which issue was that in?

Re:Consumer Reports Sucks

[Bryansix]

You've obviously never been to dpreview. They give technical reviews with very little opinion at all. The site if for people who know what makes the difference. They give objective image and resolution tests to you to judge for yourself. Nothing is more scientific then that.

Re:Consumer Reports Sucks

[Bryansix]

Not if they send you off in the wrong direction because they have no idea what they are talking about.

Re:Consumer Reports Sucks

[Anonymous Coward]

Its clear you don't understand how bias can manifest, it does not have to be in what is said, it can just as easily be in what is not said.

Here's a couple of common examples:

1) Cherry-picked units -- the manufacturer sends out review units that they have tested to make sure they are at the high-end of the quality bell-curve maybe even hand-tweaking them to get the best possible calibration before shipment, or in some cases come from a 'first run' that uses higher quality components than later production runs.

2) Dropping bad reviews -- the manufacturer pays the review site/magazine to simply not publish any reviews of their products that show poor performance. For example, they only review one model out of a line-up of 3 new models because the other two models tested out substantially poorer.

Re:Consumer Reports Sucks

[Jherek Carnelian]

Well - this is just so typical of the drivel found here on Slashdot. And are not all the responses refuting his claims also typical of the drivel found here on slashdot?

Re:Consumer Reports Sucks

[Bryansix]

Like I said. You must have never been to dpreview because the review all the cameras.

Anyone actually TRY this?

[OiBoy]

I see a lot of people complaining that it's not a REAL workout, or it's just a gimmick. Knowing that the Wii Fit is sold out almost everywhere, how many of you have actually tried it?
I own a Wii Fit. I've been using it for 5 days now. Not a workout, my ass! Maybe if you only do the balance games, or maybe if you only consider a workout to be doing weightlifting. I've been doing the cardio games (Hula Hoop, Stepping, Running), and I end each session out of breath and sweating. No, a single 2 minute stepping series on the starter level doesn't wear me out. 30 minutes of rotating between the 3 exercises in the more advanced mode (which you only get after having done them for 30 minutes...I think. Regardless, they are an unlockable you wouldn't see the first time you tried) will have your heart rate up just as effectively as the same amount of time on your average exercise bike or elliptical trainer.
Would I lose any more weight if I drove 30 minutes to the nearest gym, paid the equivelent of a used car payment in membership fees every month, and used machines covered in somebody else's sweat? I doubt it. More importantly, I wouldn't bother, so I wouldn'get get ANY exercise. Walking into my living room and turning on the TV seems to have a much lower barrier to entry, so I can't easily make excuses for why I can't work out today.

Re:Anyone actually TRY this?

[427_ci_505]

I end each session out of breath and sweating.

But you're a slashdot reader.

Re:Anyone actually TRY this?

[trdrstv]

I see a lot of people complaining that it's not a REAL workout, or it's just a gimmick. Knowing that the Wii Fit is sold out almost everywhere, how many of you have actually tried it?

In general that's a criticism of something many people throw blindly at the Wii or Guitar Hero, or Rock Band simply because they don't understand it. They're quick to criticize and say "Why don't you just play [real] tennis, play a [real] guitar, or shoot a [real] Nazi?" and they miss the entire point.

In general however, I can understand if people think Wii Fit isn't a workout. Some people may either beyond the point where the exercises are on the easy side of what they are used to, or they are of the apathetic side that doesn't put much into it and walks away too soon. This being slashdot, my money's on the latter.

You will get out of it, what you put into it and if someone steps on the board and does 10 minutes or less of exercise then they won't feel anything.

So far my largest complaints aren't of the board or the game, it's the inability to chain exercises or set up a schedule. I'd like to set up routines that go seamlessly from one to the next like a routine to give me "30 minutes - Ab exercises" or "30 minutes - Cardio".

Re:Anyone actually TRY this?

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree totally. Besides, I haven't found a gym with a "No Shirt, No Shorts, No Problem" philosophy. Cuts down on the laundry.

Re:Anyone actually TRY this?

[na1led]

I agree. I purchased the Wii Fit, and I did get a good workout after just 20 min. The thing I like the most, is the fact that it monitors your progress and weight each time you use it. You can actually see yourself losing weight. This motivates people to continue using it. My family loves using the Wii, and the Wii fit. My daughter loves doing the races with me. Nintendo has geared towards family entertainment and physical activity, its a great combination, and thats what makes the Wii so popular. Sony and Microsoft are trying to follow suit with Nintendo's popularity, but I doubt they will succeed. Nintendo has discovered a nitch, and I think we will see more interesting gadgets for the Wii in the years to come.

Re:Anyone actually TRY this?

[tooslickvan]

Knowing that the Wii Fit is sold out almost everywhere, how many of you have actually tried it?

I think Yogi Berra said it best when he said "Nobody goes there anymore; it's too crowded."

Re:Anyone actually TRY this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry for posting AC - long time reader but can't be bothered signing up for an account.

Just wanted to add my 2 cents: I've had WiiFit for 2 weeks (since it came out here in Australia) and have already lost 4 kg (~8 lb). It's a great motivator actually.

Re:Anyone actually TRY this?

[Achoi77]

I see a lot of people complaining that it's not a REAL workout, or it's just a gimmick. Knowing that the Wii Fit is sold out almost everywhere, how many of you have actually tried it?

It's just the same old same old group.

You know, the group that complains about the time spent on guitar hero should be better spent on a real guitar.

Or the group that complains about how DDR does not compare to real dancing. You know, comicbook-guy-style criticism.

Most people don't really care, and they especially are not as passionate about voicing their opinions about non-relevant issues.

It's a freakin game. If I had fun playing it - hey that's cool. If I lost weight playing it - hey an added benefit, that's cool too. Is it going to replace gym equipment? Uh.. not really. Is owning the game going to label me in a negative light? I don't see how that's any different from any other geek issues, say, like playing WoW, or magic the gathering, or LARPing..

.. or Guitar Hero

.. or DDR

.. or paintball

.. or coding

Does it have the potential to make sports and outdoor activities obsolete?..

Who the hell thinks like that? And who the hell thinks other people think like that?

I don't get it. I don't know where the animosity comes from. Or people so afraid that other fellow geek peers will *gasp* lose weight or something?

Re:Anyone actually TRY this?

[RealGrouchy]

Here's my exercise routine:

1. Bike to a gym 30 minutes away.

2. After learning of their membership fees, tell them to go fuck themselves and exit the gym.

3. Bike back another 30 minutes.

Presto! A 1-hour workout for free!

You could also add the following:

4. Buy an ice cream cone with the money saved from not paying for the gym membership.

5. ???

6. Profit!

- RG>

Re:Anyone actually TRY this?

[brkello]

Just because people are taking the Wii fit to one extreme doesn't excuse you from taking it to the other. Yeah, it is exercise and this is good. But to say that it is going to give you the same workout a gym can tells me you don't go to gyms. That, and $30 a month is hardly a used car payment.

In other words, it's fine to defend your game. But you are just as guilty as the people who say it isn't a real workout by exaggerating your bias against gyms.

Re:Anyone actually TRY this?

[kionel]

Agreed completely.

A while back, my family had a membership to a great gym. Went 2 - 3 times per week for three years. Great place. Family-friendly, good classes, and accepting of people who, while in shape, didn't look like super-models.

Then the gym changed ownership. The staff became faux-tan Body Nazis. Both the classes and clientèle changed. It was no longer a family gym; it was a meat-market for hot young urban professionals.

We canceled our membership.

To make up for it, we took up hiking, biking, cross-country skiing, and yes, even golf. We're healthy, and we're active.

So, we do "go outside", and we've done the gym thing.

We picked up Wii Fit last week. We freaking love it. Yes, it has flaws:

It doesn't let you chain exercises (dumb design.
Its BMI calculation is goofy.
Is habit of having you watch cues on the screen during certain push-ups and Yoga exercises is baffling.


Regardless, it gets our heart rates up in our own living room, tracks our progress, and adds yet more variety to our daily exercise regime. That ain't bad for a hardware accessory and software title. Ain't bad at all.

Warning: Obligatory Nerd Musing:

That being said, I would love for an MMO to take advantage of the Wii Fit board and WiiMote and Nunchuck.

Imagine having to actually walk all of the way from, say, Stormwind to Lakeshire in World of Warcraft. Better still, imagine having to actually run away from mobs ganging up on you. Add in combat options with the WiiMote / nunchuck combo, and I'd both be happier and even slimmer for my hobby.

For now, though, I'll just keep working on avoiding those damned panda heads in the soccer head-butt mini-game. :)

My Quick Wii Fit Review

[Anonymous Coward]

I have had the opportunity to play with the Wii Fit for a few days now. I like it. The style is very much like Brain Age and other training games on the Nintendo platforms. Some of the Aerobics and Balance games are fun to play with other people. It isn't setup to be competitive, but if you rotate profiles it works fine. Unfortunately many of the games don't have enormous amounts of replay-ability. It isn't long before you master each one and need to move up in difficulty. After you've perfected each one they are kind of repetitive and it doesn't take many days to get very good. As for the workout aspect, some of the exercises can get you to break a sweat, but most of them won't. The running in place exercises definitely can if you really put yourself into it. Rhythm boxing is also pretty good. I didn't do much of the yoga and strength training exercises, but it looks like they would be effective if you actually followed along with them.

The use of BMI without any warnings about the flaws of BMI is a little disappointing, but generally it is accurate enough for average people. Still, it is good to be aware of what BMI is, and they don't do anything to help you understand that.

Overall, I like it. I'd give it a 7 out of 10. You can really use it to work on your fitness. It probably won't guide you to being a top tier athlete, but just to stay in a reasonable shape I have little doubt it could work. Like most things at first it will be great, and then you will likely grow tired of it. You have to keep using it to get results, and there is no magic there. Like anything else you only get out of it what you put in. It nicely tracks your weight and BMI over time and provides graphs so you can see your progress over time. At first the games are lots of fun, but after the novelty has worn off (like with Wii Sports) the fitness stuff will remain for those willing to take it seriously.

I'm looking forward to future games using the Wii balance board. There is a lot of potential there for some incredible gameplay.

Re:My Quick Wii Fit Review

[wbav]

..snip..

The use of BMI without any warnings about the flaws of BMI is a little disappointing, but generally it is accurate enough for average people. Still, it is good to be aware of what BMI is, and they don't do anything to help you understand that. ..snip..
Didn't read the manual did ya? It specifically lists cases where BMI won't be accurate. (Children and athletes.) But I do agree that it is strange to put warnings in the manual (which over 50% of people don't read) for a game which is targeted at over 50% of the population.

As a side note, I found the scale to be wildly inaccurate. Apparently I could loose or gain over a pound by stepping off and back on again.

Re:My Quick Wii Fit Review

[Trolan]

As a side note, I found the scale to be wildly inaccurate. Apparently I could loose or gain over a pound by stepping off and back on again. Some of that's posture. If you're not pefectly centered on the pressure sensor, it probably won't quite read you right. The digital in my bathroom does the same thing. I'll usually do best of three to figure it out.

Re:My Quick Wii Fit Review

[Anonymous Coward]

They actually claim it is more accurate than moth bathroom scales. I would guess +/- 2 pounds is probably within a normal bathroom scales range of accuracy. After eating a meal I know I weighed 1.8 pounds more. It seems like a lot. I guess I should have weighed my food and drink first. Otherwise I've found it to be fairly accurate. I'll accept a couple of pounds floating. If it was much more it would start to matter.

Re:My Quick Wii Fit Review

[brkello]

I don't know why everyone is objecting to BMI so much. It is fine for the majority of people...and for the small percentage of the population it isn't correct for, they already know the limitations of BMI. Pretty much everyone I know understand BMI and its caveats. It is like everyone on Slashdot is trying to sound smart by parroting off common knowledge. For the people who are going to get a tough work out from Wii Fit, it is going to be fairly accurate.

Re:My Quick Wii Fit Review

[Lost Engineer]

They're probably wrong. I personally had it claim I gained six pounds in a few days. This was bogus of course, confirmed by a decent quality floor scale.

It doesn't actually surprise me that much. Nintendo really skimped on the motion sensors in the Wii-motes, choosing the cheapest possible at the noticeable expense of accuracy. Those things are designed to detect when your laptop is being dropped, not drive a Mario Kart. I imagine they did a similar thing with the balance board.

Short answer: no

[Guppy06]

"Will CR be reviewing the next installment of Gran Turismo?"

CR picking up on Wii Fit is less an indication of CR getting involved in game reviews and more an indication of the success of Nintendo at reaching out to non-gamers. By the blurb alone it's easy to see that they tested it not as a video game but as a physical fitness device.

So no, Consumer Reports will not be reviewing the next installment of Gran Tursimo, any more than they review the next movie or album.

Optional Balanace board ?

[trdrstv]

Ok, I'm watching the video and apparently the woman doing the voice over wasn't one of the 15 people using Wii Fit as she called the balance board "optional". Sorry, but running in place is only so exciting, and it's the only game (that I have unlocked anyway) that doesn't require the board.

Re:Optional Balanace board ?

[vapspwi]

I assumed that she meant that the balance board was an optional Wii accessory (that is, not something that comes with the Wii system), not that it was optional for Wii Fit.

JRjr

Re:Optional Balanace board ?

[trdrstv]

I assumed that she meant that the balance board was an optional Wii accessory (that is, not something that comes with the Wii system), not that it was optional for Wii Fit.

Considering you can't buy the board separately, wouldn't that be like saying "WiiFit" itself is optional?

Re:Optional Balanace board ?

[vapspwi]

You kind of have to take the whole thing with a grain of salt - she says the review is about the "Wii Fit game console" and then talks about how it has an "optional balance board" and a "hand control" [a Wiimote]. So the whole description is kind of a mess.

JRjr

Re:Optional Balanace board ?

[wbav]

Well there are a few extra exercises which don't need the board, but you need the board to unlock them.

Re:Optional Balanace board ?

[TooMuchToDo]

Totally offtopic, but I wish they wouldn't use BMI (it's a horribly incorrect indicator), and would've included small conductive patches on the top of the balance board to detect your body fat content (most $40 scales can do this). I preordered Wii Fit and my wife and I love it.

Re:Optional Balanace board ?

[trdrstv]

Totally offtopic, but I wish they wouldn't use BMI

I've been using a combination of Weight and "Fitness Age" as my indicators. If my weight AND age goes up, it's a bad trend. If I go up a few pounds and my fitness age is equal or lower, as I see it as gaining more muscle mass. That kinda thing.

Re:Optional Balanace board ?

[TooMuchToDo]

Good to know. Thanks for the info!

Re:Optional Balanace board ?

[brkello]

What comes with Wii Fit is a scale. They have an optional balance board that you can purchase separately (this is what I gathered from other comments)

Re:Optional Balanace board ?

[alexburke]

Negative. The "balance board" *is* a scale; there's a solid-state pressure sensor in each corner which records weight at each corner; this is how it detects shifts in balance front-back and left-right. Add up all four corners and you have the subject's weight.

Disclaimer: I own Wii Fit and have already disassembled the Balance Board to see what made it tick. Yes, it still works.

Re:Can't wait for the "Unsatisfactory" rating

[R2.0]

"Wow, you actually feel oppressed by Consumer Reports."

Huh? How did you get that?

I was a CU subscriber for many years, and most of their product reviews - mainly for consumer products - are very useful. But after a while, I got the strong impression that they had an agenda beyond providing unbiased information. It is clear that their editorial staff believes that the government and corporations have no purpose other than to fuck people over. OK, fine. But the Suzuki fiasco showed that the editorial bias had gotten well into the review process itself. Although CU was found not liable for their "review" of the Samurai, the evidence presented permanently damaged their credibility, putting them in the same league as 60 Minutes and Dateline.

Nothing to do with games, but possible claims

[penguin_dance]

I doubt CR is entering the gaming market, but only to test claims expressed or inferred that WiiFit is a viable exercise program.

Most game reviews are like book reviews, they're pretty subjective and it depends on the what you like, but there is a need for an unbiased look at a video game that's claiming to be a fitness product.

I disagree that you need a huge sample to test it out, just a diverse one. I suspect that while just about anything to get the couch potato off their butt would help, it's not going to be a subsitute for a regular workout or sending the kids out to play ball for a change.

aargh

[Tom]

Will CR be reviewing the next installment of Gran Turismo?" No, they won't. You still don't get it, do you? While MS and Sony fought over who gets the bigger piece of cake of the gamer's market, Nintendo choose to make the cake larger. Quite a few of the titles you can get for the Wii are solidly on the borderline of what counts as a "game". Wii Fit is one of them. A few of the mini-games are just that, but the overall package just doesn't belong to the same category as Gran Turismo or Counterstrike or Halo.

McDonald's salad

[ionymous]

Getting sick/injured from a McDonald's salad could be the best thing that ever happens to you.

I'm sure they've already incorporated the cost of lawsuit settlements into the cost.

Come on! It's the American way!

Um. Doubt it.

[sammy baby]

Quoth the original poster:

Itninja writes: "A few days ago Consumer Reports posted their first report on a specific video game: Wii Fit... Will this be a harbinger of things to come? Will CR be reviewing the next installment of Gran Turismo?" Great question. Let's go to the TFA.

Now let's see... aha! First sentence!

After an intensive few days of bending, jumping, and precarious balancing by Consumer Reports staff, under the watchful eye of expert testers from our Health franchise, we have our first test reports on Nintendo's Wii Fit, the wireless "balance board" that hit the market in North America earlier this week. Unless Sony starts making claims about the health benefits of Gran Turismo, I think it's safe to say no.

Wonder what they will give...

[i_want_you_to_throw_]

Duke Nukem Forever?

Comment near end is right on

[WeirdJohn]

Near the end of the video the comment is made that if you aren't an athlete the Wii Fit will probably work for you. That is pretty much in line with what I've seen. We got one 2 weeks ago, and it does give you a workout if you aren't fit.

My wife and eldest son are both very obese, and the machine can get them both sweating with jelly-legs. I'm not overweight, but don't get to exercise much any more. I find I can get my cardio right up on it. Is it a complete substitute for a gym with personal trainer? No. But it's much cheaper than gym membership for my entire family (7 people) and gets my kids (especially the video game addicted teens) moving more than they were before.

What I'm hoping to see is that it will be a tool that will improve their fitness enough that they get back on their bikes. So far I believe it will.

Re:Comment near end is right on

[mgblst]

To be fair, diet is probably the biggest issue you have. You can't get obese unless you are regularly eating bad food.

Hey, but at least you are doing something.

Re:Comment near end is right on

[WeirdJohn]

Both of them seem to have some kind of weird metabolism where food goes straight to storage - the other kids and myself can eat massive amounts of crap and gain a little weight, whereas those two can gain weight eating salads.

Fitness games in general

[jockeys]

are a good thing in my mind. [disclaimer]I haven't managed to get my hands on a copy of this game yet, all the stores near me are sold out.[/disclaimer]

But when DDR got big, I've got to say I saw it as a positive thing. Will it replace treadmills and such? Of course not. But, to someone with my attention span, a treadmill is VERY boring. A video game is fun and exciting, so I am much more likely to use it.

Case it point: in my living room right now, I have a nice metal dance pad and a nice elliptical machine. They both cost about the same. Guess which one gets used more? Exactly. So even if the dance pad doesn't give a better workout, it gives a better workout anyway because I will actually use the damn thing rather than avoid it like the plague.

Just my 2c

Re:Fitness games in general

[HikingStick]

Know anyone with a hardware background? I can see a big market for a game that utilizes a treadmill and a Wii-mote. You can speed up and slow down your pace using the treadmill and you use the Wii-mote to turn, shoot, or interact in some other way with the environment (push other runners out of the way?).

I could even see a Flintstones [copyright/trademark owned by someone] game, wherein you are using foot-power to race your own Flintstone-mobile.

Re:Fitness games in general

[jockeys]

Flinstones, eh? hell, I'd play it.

I'd shell out big bucks to be able to run around on a treadmill to control my player in a game like doom or quake.

I don't care

[hassanchop]

Consumer Reports is great for Washing Machines, TV's, Cars, etc. I.E high dollar items that you can't easily sample or return if you don't like them.

This is nothing like that, and serves no real purpose. If I want to test it, I'll borrow a friends/rent it/buy it with the intention of returning it if I don't like it.

Something I've wondered about CR

[Anonymous Coward]

As I was watching TV the other day, I wondered....does CR do any sort of reviews on the various "male enhancement" pills they advertise during primetime? Heh, is there any sort of 3rd party examination of things like that?

Re:Something I've wondered about CR

[mark72005]

The "smilin' bob" people got sued recently because apparently all their claims were a bunch of poppycock. No pun intended.

Re:Something I've wondered about CR

[bronzemug]

Why? Do you have ... um ... a size problem?

Mod parent up

[Ripit]

I ran out of mod points.

And he's right, fools modded the OP up.

Better idea

[Haoie]

It'd be better to review the often bundled Wii Sports first, if they haven't already. Just to get the feel of Wii exercise based games.

Re:Can't wait for the "Unsatisfactory" rating

[zippthorne]

If you have a tube tv, there is nothing that little plastic box is going to do to inches thick tempered glass. That stuff is holding back 15 pounds per square inch *already* and you think twenty flings of a flimsy plastic pointing device is going to do *anything* to it at all?

BSing Numbers

[hanako]

9 pounds in 6 weeks is very good! Project that to a year and you get 72 pounds

... unfortunately, this sort of bad science is absolutely rampant in the weight loss industry. "It worked to lose ten pounds, so if I repeat it ten times I can lose a hundred!" That's generally not true. The body isn't that simple a machine. Metabolism adapts, and weight gets progressively harder, not easier, to lose. But quacks trying to sell you stuff will use such 'logical' estimates to 'prove' that their product will change your world.

But yes, a slow weight loss is generally kept off a lot longer than a crash one. And anything that keeps people active and HAPPY (instead of miserable exercise making people hate doing it so that they quit as soon as possible) is good.

Balls out boys

[Anonymous Coward]

It's Wii strokin' time!

Re:Can't wait for the "Unsatisfactory" rating

[Chris Burke]

Maybe they're playing Wii Sports Bowling with the 16lb Bowling Ball attachment?

Wii Fit Is a Step in the Right Direction

[jonnyboy3us]

So far, I've really enjoyed playing Wii Fit for the past week. The game does focus heavily on balancing your body. While I don't really go for the yoga exercises, I do love the Skiing, Snowboarding and Running Exercises. While it may seem boring to be running on an island, the game really steps it up by having the other Mii's you've created run with you which makes the running entertaining. I recommend you hold the Wii Remote in your hand for it to be more accurate since when I put it in my pants, it tends ruin your pace.

I'm usually always worn out after 30 minutes of these exercises. The strength exercises are really good if you do them right. Just like Wii Sports, once the family plays this game, they'll love it. My younger boy who has difficulties with his gross motor skills loves the balance games. For $90, you can beat this type of therapy.

It's fun having your friend get registered as being 'obese' when he's really got a lot of muscle mass. You guys will get a kick out of watching your wife do the hula hoop...

Well worth the money in our family. My wife also loves it which is rare for any game.

And Finally, once we get some decent skiing and snowboarding games that use the balance board, it's going to be a blast.

Just my two cents...

Re:Wii Fit Is a Step in the Right Direction

[gujo-odori]

since when I put it in my pants, it tends ruin your pace

I don't think I want to know what kind of game you have that requires you to put the wiimote in your pants. Heck, this one is bad enough :p

And just why should a wiimote in your pants ruin my pace, anyway? I don't even know you...

My friend's brief review.

[antdude]

My friend did a short review about it. :)

How would they do GTA IV?

[jmoriarty]

'Our testers for Grand Theft Auto IV ranged in age from 15 to 75 and included 10 women and five men. Users ran the gamut from upstanding citizens to flat out bitches and thugs. Half had never dropped a cap in anyone's ass before, and a full third had never jacked someone's ride.'

If they started doing video game reviews like their normal reviews, I might just subscribe...

Enjoyable games, poor weighing human-factors

[snStarter]

We have a Wii Fit and have found it enjoyable although the weight check-in is frankly broken and counter-productive for many folks. It's preachy and it's use of BMI indicates the designer doesn't really know how to talk to a weightloss-oriented group.

But . . . I really enjoy the games. It's competitive just within one's own abilities. The step aerobic games are addictive, always trying to get a better score. The balance games are fun.

Is it a great workout? Well, it's not the same as hopping on my bike and riding for a couple of hours. But I do that anyway. It trains different muscles. You use TONS of muscles doing small-motion balance corrections and can build strength that way.

I can't wait for the games to come when innovative designers use the Wii Fit pad as a controller. Then it'll be even more of a break-through product that it already is.

Being active is a good thing and this game and controller make it fun. I'm all for it. I give it six out of ten.

Re:Enjoyable games, poor weighing human-factors

[alexburke]

We have a Wii Fit and have found it enjoyable although the weight check-in is frankly broken and counter-productive for many folks. It's preachy and it's use of BMI indicates the designer doesn't really know how to talk to a weightloss-oriented group. Actually, no -- it shows the game's Japanese roots. There's a reason Wii Fit never shows your weight unless you click the Weight button from the BMI display at the end of your Body Test: If others are around you and you don't want them to know your weight, they won't unless you explicitly choose to have it displayed.

Keep in mind this comes out of the same country where various sound generators for bathroom stalls are commonly installed to cover "embarassing noises".

Did anyone else notice

[DarKnyht]

That the reviewers did not follow the game's instructions and wore shoes on the balance board. I have difficulty listening to a review done by someone who cannot be bothered to follow the maker's instructions.

Re:Did anyone else notice

[alexburke]

According to CR, this was done deliberately because they had 15 unrelated people sharing two Balance Boards and there were hygiene concerns.

They're complimentary products

[cduffy]

The Wii Fit keeps metrics on fitness over time (extremely useful from a motivational standpoint), and provides yoga exercises and such that one's not likely to get at a gym. The gym provides more strenuous exercises; they compliment each other.

Gym in the morning, Wii Fit in the evening; the Fit charts the progress I'm making, helps me set goals and lets me know how close I am to meeting them.

Is this even a video game?

[Anonymous Coward]

I mean, in the traditional sense of the term and the market, I don't think the Wii fits. It's doing something else entirely - the 'hardcore' gamers don't give a toss about it, and everybody else does.

It's ok

[Lost Engineer]

I am not that guy, but I will say that Wii Fit, compared to running, cycling, or swimming really doesn't cause you to work up as much of a sweat (well unless you're swimming but you get the idea) However I also keep hearing from the experts that in many respects walking is as good as running. Viewed that way, Wii Fit aerobics is as good as a good walk.

Overall the game is better when you consider the balance and core strength exercises. That's really where its goodness is. Even for fitness buffs, the machine can measure balance and posture in a way that even your average trainer might not pick up on. Again, it's not a replacement for a guru but it might be a decent substitute.

Wii Fit Injuries - a cautionary tale

[monktus]

I think Wii Fit looks pretty cool, and if I had some spare cash I'd maybe get one for my housemate's Wii, however I do have a cautionary tale.

One of my friends bought Wii Fit recently and was doing some jogging on it (I know - jogging on a big plastic board? Some of the other stuff looks cool but I'm dubious about the jogging!) however it was quite late at night and his flatmate asked him to keep the noise down a bit. He therefore took his trainers off and kept going in his socks for a while. The next morning he woke up with his ankles in agony and had to go to hospital. The doctor asked what he'd been doing but my friend was too embarrased to tell him the truth, so he said that he'd been running with hiking boots on. The doctor of course told him he was an idiot (or something along those lines), but didn't think that my friend's story quite added up. Eventually he got the truth and, again, told him he was a silly boy and not to run again without appropriate footwear again.

It will be a while before my friend does so (either virtually or realityally) however - the doctor gave him a 3 month ban on running while his ankles heal.

Of course, this is a "User too stupid" error as opposed to any fault on Nintendo's part, however I thought it was an interesting story. Virtual joggers, you have been warned!

Re:Wii Fit Injuries - a cautionary tale

[alexburke]

Wii Fit explicitly tells you not to jog on the Balance Board. A graphic is displayed before every jogging session showing a big red X through the Balance Board with the text "Balance Board not used". You put a Wii Remote in your pocket (or hold it) to detect your pace while jogging in place on the floor.

If your friend hurt himself by jogging in place, shoes or not, I would posit that there was something wrong with him in the first place. Perhaps he was jogging only on the balls of his feet or his tiptoes to keep the sound down? That would put great strain on the feet and ankles.

I regularly jog in place in sock feet for Wii Fit and have no issues other than getting sweaty.

Do keep in mind that Nintendo put Wii Fit together with input and guidance from a fitness association -- their name is in the game credits (accessible from the settings screen, same place you go to install the Wii Fit Channel or do a Balance Board check, IIRC).

BMI's usefullness

[DrYak]

BMI itself is a fairly useless measurement, because it doesn't keep track of anomalies. There is somebody at my dojo, for example, who weighs 260lbs. This person is 6' tall, giving him a BMI of over 35. Well into the "obese" category. There's just one thing wrong with this definition: This person wears a 32" waist, and has body fat of 13%. Ok. And how many of the average Wii players do you think have a monster muscular mass which completely screws up the interpretation of BMI ?

My opinion is not much. Given population stats in the developed country, I can freely bet the average console game player has a very high likelihood of being overweight. Thus being in a category where BMI might help as an idicator.

BMI is just a score used in Medicine. Like any other score, it just an indication, that has to be processed by the brain that interprets it (the doctor in a medical context. Or the player reading the screen, in our current example). Yes there are example of exception.
The same way, the Glasgow coma score would pretty much be useless for mute persons (they fall down to 1 in the verbal category).
But both score do the trick in majority of situations and that's why they are used.

Medicine and biology aren't exact sciences. It just really hard to find Gold Tests that will work for all situation (and usually the real 100% exact test are something really invasive like an autopsy).

On the other hand I'm rather surprised that the machine doesn't also offer an option to input the waist. That wouldn't be that much complicated and would help a lot in interpreting the results. (Lots of modern decision procedure take that into account in addition to BMI).

For calculating the body fat ratio, I understand (the cheapest and simpliest method to integrate into a balance would be impedance analysis and that would have been a nightmare for certifications and rising costs). But the absence of waist measurement, I fail to understand.

Well, not exactly

[DrYak]

More sodium just means drink more water. In the long term, an excessive intake of sodium raises the blood pressure. And hypertension has a fucking load of complication associated with it.