But on the whole, yeah, it works without issue, but that's too be expected. Wow isn't revolutionary, just evolutionary -- they streamlined a lot of the UI issues, but its still got a ways to go, before I'd consider it "great."
The fundamental insight into Blizzard a lot of people miss is just this, Blizzard doesn't start revolutions.
Blizzard is the master of taking a genre and making it excellent. WarCraft, StarCraft and Diablo all had significant predecessors, but each took the concept and expanded them. The results were incredibly easy for a wide audience to enjoy, while having enough depth to appease the nigh-insatiable desires of the more intense gamers.
WoW is simply another example of this. It really is nothing that anyone hasn't done before, except they've done it remarkably well. It's easy to learn, understand and play on a casual level, while having rewards for those who dedicate themselves to it.
It didn't revolutionize MMORPGs, but it bring them into the limelight.
Actually, the only thing weird about those controllers was how they looked.
The N64 controller introduced a fair number of concepts we still see in controllers today. The Analog Stick and the Trigger being the principle ones. Certainly they were both elements of generations of joysticks that came before, but not since the Atari days had anyone bothered to consider them useful. Nintendo saw that with the advent of 3D games the analog stick would be imperative, and did something about it.
Most importantly, you need to remember that Yamauchi was dictator at Nintendo at the time. It was his vision that guided the aestetics of the N64 and the Gamecube. The Gamecube and Gameboy advance were purple because he wanted them to be so.
My experience with both controllers was positive. They were comfortable and effective at their tasks. I will grant you that the N64 controller's analog stick was easily worn down if you played demanding games such as Mario Party (the original one wreaked havoc upon it) and that the positioning of the Gamecube controller's analog sticks was slightly less orthogonal than the Xbox's. However, to call him 'batshit' is ludicrous.
We owe Miyamoto, and everyone like him, our industry. If 'batshit' is what it takes to make good games, then we should all be 'batshit'.
I am fully willing to accept the possible reality that there are Wii owners who are not satisfied, are bored, or who think the controller isn't all it is cracked up to be.
However, I am not willing to accept these possibilities when the only indication of them is an anonymous poster without sources saying it is so without even an anecdote of his own.
If there is an issue with the Wii on the scale many ACs claim, surely it should be simple enough for them to bring sources from message boards, actual news articles, and blogs supporting their views. As it stands, I have yet to see one do so.
If you have an anecdote of your own, post with your name attached. The possibility exists you will be moderated down. However, if what you speak is truth, surely the message is more important than a karma ranking on a website?
Well, you could always look at the following link as well. Searching the News section for Japan can give you a good look at both software and hardware sales numbers from the far east.
In March we should be getting official numbers for three new systems from both sides of the Pacific. It shouldn't be too difficult at that point to look up the old GameCube numbers and make a fair comparison.
If you have any sources to validate your points, it might be good to put them on the table that we might have a reasonable discussion.
That took guts, and for that you deserve some recognition.
It's completely ridiculous to assume that everyone in this world is going to enjoy the Wii. It should come as no surprise that people are going to have reactions outside of "Wow!".
However, it is only very rarely that anyone voices a dissenting viewpoint here concerning the Wii that does not hide themselves as an AC. Rarer still is the AC post that seems to have any connection to reality.
I will add that I myself haven't played my Wii much lately, but this is true of all my consoles. My computer and my DS have been stealing my attention away from the television.
Isn't the point of any video game pretending to be something we aren't? Whether it's a soldier, a racer, a hedgehog, a fat plumber, a surgeon, a guitar master, or a field marshal; all video games place us in positions we do not normally have access to. That's the appeal of video games.
Like any other media each genre (and any particular sub-category or instance thereof) will appeal to some gamers more than others. You can note that you do not agree with his taste in video games, but insinuating that his standards are somehow flawed because he chooses X over Y is disingenuous.
In the end, every character we live vicariously through in video games is "half-assed", as we are not actually living that dream.
If you think about it, it really isn't all that surprising.
At any console launch, at least to date, there has never been what could be considered a truly fleshed out, solely of good quality set of launch titles. Each console has had its focal points and weaknesses that were only compensated for later, whether it was sports and FPSs, RPGs and sandboxes, or Platformers and war games. One or two genres have always tended to get clustered around, leaving most of the rest sidelined or represented by lackluster titles.
This is true of the current generation as well. The Xbox 360, the PS3 and the Wii all suffer from this malady. Each in its own fashion of course.
For the 360 and the PS3, the developers have tried and true control systems and standards they can adhere to in order to be certain their games do not fail. As such, we see very familiar genres, and mostly ones that will appeal to the hardcore crowd. Those are the people who will be buying the early systems, so why make games aimed at a different demographic?
For the Wii, the developers are understandably cautious. If their control schemes such royally, the game will flop. The safest bet is therefore to make a game with many control schemes. If one or two fail, it doesn't ruin the entire game. Hence, lots of mini-game collections. These serve to showcase much of what the remote can do.
The result in both cases is an overly focused launch that is entertaining, but is little more than an appetizer. It wasn't until the second wave of games that the Xbox 360 really began to show its worth (Dead Rising, Gears of War). This will be true for the Wii and PS3.
PS3 has the top selling game in Japan now - Japan will be a fierce battle between Sony and Nintendo. Nintendo really needs to work on their release schedule. Wii owners are getting restless as the novelty of games like Wii Sports is wearing off.
Virtua Fighter just about to hit the shelves.
The hidden contradiction here is that the top selling game in Japan this past week was Virtua Fighter, it's not just about to hit the shelves.
More importantly, it only sold ~3000 more copies than Wii Sports. Wii Sports has been on the market for 11 weeks now, and on its release week sold slighly most than three times as many copies as Virtua Fighter did. If the novelty of Wii Sports is dying, we can only assume that the novelty of the first four incarnations of Virtua Fighter is as well.
I will grant you the point that Nintendo does need to work hard to keep their release schedule flowing smoothly, but this is true of any system with or without a special controller.
I have to ask, is there really a such thing as "rock solid" engineering in the consumer electronics world?
There used to be a video on the internet where some boys tired of their Gamecube and decided to destroy it. They dragged it behind a truck, while someone else followed and filmed. The purple bugger took a good beating.
Afterwards they brought it home and put Smash Bros in. The thing still worked. They later took a baseball bat to it, and it "almost" started up.
I'm not sure if that qualifies as rock solid or not, but certainly durable.
The beginning of the problem was in the transition from 2D to 3D. Some franchises weathered this well, Sonic did not.
Certainly, Sonic Adventure was a good game, but very quickly it and its successors revealed that SEGA had forgotten what made the 2D games so great.
All the previous Sonic games were great because 90% of the time you were running like crazy, screaming across the screen and trying to keep up with everything that was being thrown at you. Often, you wouldn't and a shower of rings would signal your collision with any number of bad things.
However, it only took all of 2 seconds to collect as many rings as possible and be about your business. Then you could resume your crazy dash across the level. The 3D games were far more punishing in this regard. Colliding with something could completely mess up you up for the rest of the level. Ever present were pits that completely wiped you out, something that was rather rare in the 2D games. It was much more frustrating to attempt to be a blue blaze.
Another thing that was lost were the multiple paths and hidden treasures. Quite simply, every 3D level seemed rather linear, with only minor branching that generally joined up with the main path again rather quickly. There was a lot of replay value and fun to be had just exploring the massive levels in the 2D games, while this simply wasn't the case in the 3D ones.
Aside from bosses, the enemies in the 3D games almost seemed like afterthoughts. They were very rarely as colorful and varied as the 2D game's animal based foes.
Overall, the essence of Sonic was lost. What the platformer equivalent of a clickfest turned into another ill-fated attempt at taking a franchise based in 2D and making it 3D.
The way things are looking currently, developers are having no problem porting or developing games for the Wii. This may be due to the lack of HD assets they need to create and tweak, or simply the ease of development as the hardware isn't radically different from their previous offering.
Concerning your controller argument, it seems less about precision and more directed at the lack of games that use the remote as anything but a replacement for hitting buttons. The best thing to do would be to rent/buy Warioware and put the remote through its paces, and see how precision affects the mini-games there.
Personally, the only argument of the lot that seems to be more than speculation is the "killer" one I brought up, which only affects games of an uncreated genre. What happened with the PS2 is something to be considered, but there are too many differences between the two systems for an argument by induction to work. Speculation is fun, but it needs to honor the fact that the position the PS2 was in is vastly different the position the Wii is in.
Personally I find the balance to be fine, when fighting an evenly geared opponent.
There are fights that are harder, but when I fight an opponent whose equipment matches mine, I only lose when I make mistakes or my foe is simply better than I am. There's the occaisional super lucky crit streak win, but those are abberations.
And honestly, the whole Shaman/Rogue supremecy thing died ages ago. Watching bluetracker, there isn't a single class that hasn't had numerous nerf threads in the past months.
Now, if LotRO is off the bat better balanced than WoW is now after 2 years of tweaking, then I'll think your point is good.
I feel as though this article is being used to say, "In ten years, hardcore gamers will be a thing of the past." That's quite absurd. Certainly they may no longer have the majority on purchasing power, but games will most certainly still be made for them.
Hardcore gamers bring something to the table casuals will likely never be able to, dedication. So long as they are playing game X, they will tell everyone they know all about game X, how game X is the bee's knees and they're so 1337. This may annoy a fair number of casual gamers, but it spreads the name of the game by word of mouth rather well.
Talk to a casual gamer, and the most you'll get is, "Yeah, I play games" unless you really press them to go into further details.
That's not to say that all hardcore gamers are utterly loyal to their games, or that casuals don't ever talk about games. Rather, it is saying that of the two groups, hardcore gamers are far more likely to spread the word.
I read a number of the articles, but despite claims that this isn't a WoW clone set in Middle Earth as opposed to Azeroth I couldn't find much substance to prove it.
The blogger's argument simply seemed to consist of noting how everything in LotRO was new, while players of WoW would already be tiring of the Burning Crusade and seeking something new. Exactly what makes LotR different from WoW outside of the setting, the slightly different races and the classes?
The screenshots certainly didn't help. The user interface looked as though it was lifted straight out of WoW in almost every regard. I looked at some EQ screenshots just to be sure WoW hadn't done the same thing. Aside from possibly preferring Middle Earth to Azeroth, I'm having difficulty finding a good reason for someone to pick LotRO over WoW.
Firstly, how was the PS2 the runt of its generation? Are you referring to its somewhat lesser graphical capabilities? You do realize that anything that wasn't a system exclusive on the other systems eventually made its way onto the PS2, even AAA titles such as Resident Evil 4, not to mention a lot of titles were developed specifically for the PS2 and never ported to the others.
Secondly, what's the point in claiming the Wii might not have the power to cope with it when you follow it up with mention of the PS2 port?
Lastly, most gamers I've seen who are concerned about lightsaber dueling on the Wii are not concerned as much with the accuracy as they are with the issues of resistance. Specifically, there is none. If your lightsaber collides with another, you're still swinging even though the on screen character is now locked saber against saber.
It's entirely possible to make arguments against the Wii, which seems to be your MO. However, if you're going to do so there are far better arguments than those you're using.
I'm sure you can still push decent graphics out of it, but Lucas is a graphics snob, and he will want the best. Regardless this game is real heavy on the use of physics, which requires a top-notch processor, which the Wii does not have.
And so, they're publishing it on the PS2...
As far as I can tell, the real reason why they're hesistant to release this on the Wii is because of all the expectations gamers have of a "1337 l1gh754b3r g4m3". Everyone wants to see the Wii remote used for some sweet lightsaber action, but the nature of it is such that it will require it's own unique control scheme. Given the anticipation, they're much better off making a dedicated game.
The idea that it's a graphic's issue is hilarious when the DS, the PS2 and the PSP, all significantly weaker systems in horsepower, are getting ports.
Excluding the game being actually fun and awesome, my only concern is how Spore deals with filtering of content.
The fact of the matter is, when this game is released someone is going to make one or more rather obscene creatures. Whether it's a perfect model of a Playboy bunny, or a disturbingly humorous creature based off of our naughty bits, there needs to be a way for someone to say 'I don't want that in my game'.
While there will be people who will welcome these things into their ecosystems, there will also be people who will not. For them, the entire experience will be ruined if their creature they have lovingly crafted can not be played without encountering a race of Fidel Castros.
It shouldn't be too difficult to have an option where you right-click a race and select them for replacement.
My brother recently responded to a post on their forums which claimed that solo-play would be impossible because hardcore gamers would form guilds and control everything, ruthlessly hunting down people on their lands who did not bow to their whims.
Apparently Darkfall takes place in a space about the size of Germany. Even if Darkfall had 8 million players and half of those 4 million were dedicated policemen for The Noble Guild of 1337 h4x0|2z, you still wouldn't be able to secure even half of the gamespace against bandits, barbarians, and lone wolves.
That's a solution, but it's not an optimal one for the following reasons.
1. Money: While losing 60 hours of work is difficult to put a price on, buying more memory cards when I already have 2 near-full 255 slotters on my Gamecube alone starts to go beyond "dirt cheap".
2. Backups: I'd have to start a fairly regular backup regimen for this to be effective.
3. Principle: The solution doesn't address the problem that to unlock the features of a game takes more than a full day's worth of time. This simply shouldn't be the case for multiplayer-centric games.
It's certainly a thought, but sadly it won't bring my deceased save file back, nor does it provide the unlocked features I lost.
Oh I used the motor, but all the actual boating around just bored me greatly. Not sure why really, maybe it brought back too many memories of Windwaker.
It's cheap and possible to build a computer with muscle that performs evenly with an Xbox 360, including output to an HDTV. I made one almost two years ago that is on par with a 360 for approximately the same cost. It's probably cheaper now, or you could take the same hit on the wallet for more power.
I didn't even think about outputting to an HD TV, but my computer is fully capable. It has the output for both conventional and component, all I need are the cables. If I was the kind of person who downloaded movies, I'd easily be able to watch them in my living room. Getting a wireless keyboard and mouse to work isn't a brainteaser at all.
But yes, PC gaming is a different experience. It lends itself to single player or LAN play far more than consoles. It's hard to cram four guys around one monitor and a keyboard. On the other hand a TV, couch and 4 controllers are well suited for the task.
Slashdot Mirror
The fundamental insight into Blizzard a lot of people miss is just this, Blizzard doesn't start revolutions.
Blizzard is the master of taking a genre and making it excellent. WarCraft, StarCraft and Diablo all had significant predecessors, but each took the concept and expanded them. The results were incredibly easy for a wide audience to enjoy, while having enough depth to appease the nigh-insatiable desires of the more intense gamers.
WoW is simply another example of this. It really is nothing that anyone hasn't done before, except they've done it remarkably well. It's easy to learn, understand and play on a casual level, while having rewards for those who dedicate themselves to it.
It didn't revolutionize MMORPGs, but it bring them into the limelight.
Actually, the only thing weird about those controllers was how they looked.
The N64 controller introduced a fair number of concepts we still see in controllers today. The Analog Stick and the Trigger being the principle ones. Certainly they were both elements of generations of joysticks that came before, but not since the Atari days had anyone bothered to consider them useful. Nintendo saw that with the advent of 3D games the analog stick would be imperative, and did something about it.
Most importantly, you need to remember that Yamauchi was dictator at Nintendo at the time. It was his vision that guided the aestetics of the N64 and the Gamecube. The Gamecube and Gameboy advance were purple because he wanted them to be so.
My experience with both controllers was positive. They were comfortable and effective at their tasks. I will grant you that the N64 controller's analog stick was easily worn down if you played demanding games such as Mario Party (the original one wreaked havoc upon it) and that the positioning of the Gamecube controller's analog sticks was slightly less orthogonal than the Xbox's. However, to call him 'batshit' is ludicrous.
We owe Miyamoto, and everyone like him, our industry. If 'batshit' is what it takes to make good games, then we should all be 'batshit'.
I am fully willing to accept the possible reality that there are Wii owners who are not satisfied, are bored, or who think the controller isn't all it is cracked up to be.
However, I am not willing to accept these possibilities when the only indication of them is an anonymous poster without sources saying it is so without even an anecdote of his own.
If there is an issue with the Wii on the scale many ACs claim, surely it should be simple enough for them to bring sources from message boards, actual news articles, and blogs supporting their views. As it stands, I have yet to see one do so.
If you have an anecdote of your own, post with your name attached. The possibility exists you will be moderated down. However, if what you speak is truth, surely the message is more important than a karma ranking on a website?
Well, you could always look at the following link as well. Searching the News section for Japan can give you a good look at both software and hardware sales numbers from the far east.
http://www.gamesarefun.com/news.php?newsid=7480
In March we should be getting official numbers for three new systems from both sides of the Pacific. It shouldn't be too difficult at that point to look up the old GameCube numbers and make a fair comparison.
If you have any sources to validate your points, it might be good to put them on the table that we might have a reasonable discussion.
*Hearty Applause*
That took guts, and for that you deserve some recognition.
It's completely ridiculous to assume that everyone in this world is going to enjoy the Wii. It should come as no surprise that people are going to have reactions outside of "Wow!".
However, it is only very rarely that anyone voices a dissenting viewpoint here concerning the Wii that does not hide themselves as an AC. Rarer still is the AC post that seems to have any connection to reality.
I will add that I myself haven't played my Wii much lately, but this is true of all my consoles. My computer and my DS have been stealing my attention away from the television.
Isn't the point of any video game pretending to be something we aren't? Whether it's a soldier, a racer, a hedgehog, a fat plumber, a surgeon, a guitar master, or a field marshal; all video games place us in positions we do not normally have access to. That's the appeal of video games.
Like any other media each genre (and any particular sub-category or instance thereof) will appeal to some gamers more than others. You can note that you do not agree with his taste in video games, but insinuating that his standards are somehow flawed because he chooses X over Y is disingenuous.
In the end, every character we live vicariously through in video games is "half-assed", as we are not actually living that dream.
It kills the joke, but I feel I must explain the above post that it might be moderated appropriately.
The star character of Ninja Gaiden is Ryuu Hayabusa. Hence, the joke.
If you think about it, it really isn't all that surprising.
At any console launch, at least to date, there has never been what could be considered a truly fleshed out, solely of good quality set of launch titles. Each console has had its focal points and weaknesses that were only compensated for later, whether it was sports and FPSs, RPGs and sandboxes, or Platformers and war games. One or two genres have always tended to get clustered around, leaving most of the rest sidelined or represented by lackluster titles.
This is true of the current generation as well. The Xbox 360, the PS3 and the Wii all suffer from this malady. Each in its own fashion of course.
For the 360 and the PS3, the developers have tried and true control systems and standards they can adhere to in order to be certain their games do not fail. As such, we see very familiar genres, and mostly ones that will appeal to the hardcore crowd. Those are the people who will be buying the early systems, so why make games aimed at a different demographic?
For the Wii, the developers are understandably cautious. If their control schemes such royally, the game will flop. The safest bet is therefore to make a game with many control schemes. If one or two fail, it doesn't ruin the entire game. Hence, lots of mini-game collections. These serve to showcase much of what the remote can do.
The result in both cases is an overly focused launch that is entertaining, but is little more than an appetizer. It wasn't until the second wave of games that the Xbox 360 really began to show its worth (Dead Rising, Gears of War). This will be true for the Wii and PS3.
The hidden contradiction here is that the top selling game in Japan this past week was Virtua Fighter, it's not just about to hit the shelves.
More importantly, it only sold ~3000 more copies than Wii Sports. Wii Sports has been on the market for 11 weeks now, and on its release week sold slighly most than three times as many copies as Virtua Fighter did. If the novelty of Wii Sports is dying, we can only assume that the novelty of the first four incarnations of Virtua Fighter is as well.
I will grant you the point that Nintendo does need to work hard to keep their release schedule flowing smoothly, but this is true of any system with or without a special controller.
There used to be a video on the internet where some boys tired of their Gamecube and decided to destroy it. They dragged it behind a truck, while someone else followed and filmed. The purple bugger took a good beating.
Afterwards they brought it home and put Smash Bros in. The thing still worked. They later took a baseball bat to it, and it "almost" started up.
I'm not sure if that qualifies as rock solid or not, but certainly durable.
The beginning of the problem was in the transition from 2D to 3D. Some franchises weathered this well, Sonic did not.
Certainly, Sonic Adventure was a good game, but very quickly it and its successors revealed that SEGA had forgotten what made the 2D games so great.
All the previous Sonic games were great because 90% of the time you were running like crazy, screaming across the screen and trying to keep up with everything that was being thrown at you. Often, you wouldn't and a shower of rings would signal your collision with any number of bad things.
However, it only took all of 2 seconds to collect as many rings as possible and be about your business. Then you could resume your crazy dash across the level. The 3D games were far more punishing in this regard. Colliding with something could completely mess up you up for the rest of the level. Ever present were pits that completely wiped you out, something that was rather rare in the 2D games. It was much more frustrating to attempt to be a blue blaze.
Another thing that was lost were the multiple paths and hidden treasures. Quite simply, every 3D level seemed rather linear, with only minor branching that generally joined up with the main path again rather quickly. There was a lot of replay value and fun to be had just exploring the massive levels in the 2D games, while this simply wasn't the case in the 3D ones.
Aside from bosses, the enemies in the 3D games almost seemed like afterthoughts. They were very rarely as colorful and varied as the 2D game's animal based foes.
Overall, the essence of Sonic was lost. What the platformer equivalent of a clickfest turned into another ill-fated attempt at taking a franchise based in 2D and making it 3D.
The way things are looking currently, developers are having no problem porting or developing games for the Wii. This may be due to the lack of HD assets they need to create and tweak, or simply the ease of development as the hardware isn't radically different from their previous offering.
Concerning your controller argument, it seems less about precision and more directed at the lack of games that use the remote as anything but a replacement for hitting buttons. The best thing to do would be to rent/buy Warioware and put the remote through its paces, and see how precision affects the mini-games there.
Personally, the only argument of the lot that seems to be more than speculation is the "killer" one I brought up, which only affects games of an uncreated genre. What happened with the PS2 is something to be considered, but there are too many differences between the two systems for an argument by induction to work. Speculation is fun, but it needs to honor the fact that the position the PS2 was in is vastly different the position the Wii is in.
Personally I find the balance to be fine, when fighting an evenly geared opponent.
There are fights that are harder, but when I fight an opponent whose equipment matches mine, I only lose when I make mistakes or my foe is simply better than I am. There's the occaisional super lucky crit streak win, but those are abberations.
And honestly, the whole Shaman/Rogue supremecy thing died ages ago. Watching bluetracker, there isn't a single class that hasn't had numerous nerf threads in the past months.
Now, if LotRO is off the bat better balanced than WoW is now after 2 years of tweaking, then I'll think your point is good.
I feel as though this article is being used to say, "In ten years, hardcore gamers will be a thing of the past." That's quite absurd. Certainly they may no longer have the majority on purchasing power, but games will most certainly still be made for them.
Hardcore gamers bring something to the table casuals will likely never be able to, dedication. So long as they are playing game X, they will tell everyone they know all about game X, how game X is the bee's knees and they're so 1337. This may annoy a fair number of casual gamers, but it spreads the name of the game by word of mouth rather well.
Talk to a casual gamer, and the most you'll get is, "Yeah, I play games" unless you really press them to go into further details.
That's not to say that all hardcore gamers are utterly loyal to their games, or that casuals don't ever talk about games. Rather, it is saying that of the two groups, hardcore gamers are far more likely to spread the word.
I read a number of the articles, but despite claims that this isn't a WoW clone set in Middle Earth as opposed to Azeroth I couldn't find much substance to prove it.
The blogger's argument simply seemed to consist of noting how everything in LotRO was new, while players of WoW would already be tiring of the Burning Crusade and seeking something new. Exactly what makes LotR different from WoW outside of the setting, the slightly different races and the classes?
The screenshots certainly didn't help. The user interface looked as though it was lifted straight out of WoW in almost every regard. I looked at some EQ screenshots just to be sure WoW hadn't done the same thing. Aside from possibly preferring Middle Earth to Azeroth, I'm having difficulty finding a good reason for someone to pick LotRO over WoW.
Is there something I'm missing?
Am I the only one who finds the idea that Vader attempts to kill Palpatine before Return of the Jedi ludicrous and out of character?
Well... not that anything else that happened in 1-3 was in character...
Firstly, how was the PS2 the runt of its generation? Are you referring to its somewhat lesser graphical capabilities? You do realize that anything that wasn't a system exclusive on the other systems eventually made its way onto the PS2, even AAA titles such as Resident Evil 4, not to mention a lot of titles were developed specifically for the PS2 and never ported to the others.
Secondly, what's the point in claiming the Wii might not have the power to cope with it when you follow it up with mention of the PS2 port?
Lastly, most gamers I've seen who are concerned about lightsaber dueling on the Wii are not concerned as much with the accuracy as they are with the issues of resistance. Specifically, there is none. If your lightsaber collides with another, you're still swinging even though the on screen character is now locked saber against saber.
It's entirely possible to make arguments against the Wii, which seems to be your MO. However, if you're going to do so there are far better arguments than those you're using.
And so, they're publishing it on the PS2...
As far as I can tell, the real reason why they're hesistant to release this on the Wii is because of all the expectations gamers have of a "1337 l1gh754b3r g4m3". Everyone wants to see the Wii remote used for some sweet lightsaber action, but the nature of it is such that it will require it's own unique control scheme. Given the anticipation, they're much better off making a dedicated game.
The idea that it's a graphic's issue is hilarious when the DS, the PS2 and the PSP, all significantly weaker systems in horsepower, are getting ports.
Excluding the game being actually fun and awesome, my only concern is how Spore deals with filtering of content.
The fact of the matter is, when this game is released someone is going to make one or more rather obscene creatures. Whether it's a perfect model of a Playboy bunny, or a disturbingly humorous creature based off of our naughty bits, there needs to be a way for someone to say 'I don't want that in my game'.
While there will be people who will welcome these things into their ecosystems, there will also be people who will not. For them, the entire experience will be ruined if their creature they have lovingly crafted can not be played without encountering a race of Fidel Castros.
It shouldn't be too difficult to have an option where you right-click a race and select them for replacement.
Darkfall is definately very interesting.
My brother recently responded to a post on their forums which claimed that solo-play would be impossible because hardcore gamers would form guilds and control everything, ruthlessly hunting down people on their lands who did not bow to their whims.
Apparently Darkfall takes place in a space about the size of Germany. Even if Darkfall had 8 million players and half of those 4 million were dedicated policemen for The Noble Guild of 1337 h4x0|2z, you still wouldn't be able to secure even half of the gamespace against bandits, barbarians, and lone wolves.
It'll be interesting to see that one develop.
That's a solution, but it's not an optimal one for the following reasons.
1. Money: While losing 60 hours of work is difficult to put a price on, buying more memory cards when I already have 2 near-full 255 slotters on my Gamecube alone starts to go beyond "dirt cheap".
2. Backups: I'd have to start a fairly regular backup regimen for this to be effective.
3. Principle: The solution doesn't address the problem that to unlock the features of a game takes more than a full day's worth of time. This simply shouldn't be the case for multiplayer-centric games.
It's certainly a thought, but sadly it won't bring my deceased save file back, nor does it provide the unlocked features I lost.
Sadly, I was not going to give you a million dollars, and as you have predicted wrongly I can not in good conscience give you such a sum.
Oh I used the motor, but all the actual boating around just bored me greatly. Not sure why really, maybe it brought back too many memories of Windwaker.
It's cheap and possible to build a computer with muscle that performs evenly with an Xbox 360, including output to an HDTV. I made one almost two years ago that is on par with a 360 for approximately the same cost. It's probably cheaper now, or you could take the same hit on the wallet for more power.
I didn't even think about outputting to an HD TV, but my computer is fully capable. It has the output for both conventional and component, all I need are the cables. If I was the kind of person who downloaded movies, I'd easily be able to watch them in my living room. Getting a wireless keyboard and mouse to work isn't a brainteaser at all.
But yes, PC gaming is a different experience. It lends itself to single player or LAN play far more than consoles. It's hard to cram four guys around one monitor and a keyboard. On the other hand a TV, couch and 4 controllers are well suited for the task.
There is insight here.
The question for the Wii is, "Is it hype or is it substance?"
It's the same question that was posed to the DS, and the answer was the latter. That is, however, no guarantee the same is true for the Wii.