xyz

@oolzie Why would split screen or fighers be impacted in anyway? It will work exactly like the Wii: multiple controller setups depending on who wants what, with the pad being limited to one person. I had no problem playing smash brothers with one guy w/ wiimote/nunchuck, one w/ classic, and one w/ gamecube controller. Each to his own.

@A Sandwich
It is a disappointment because people's minds were swirling with ideas of what you could do w/ multiple pads.

But when that washes away, you're left with an HD wii, with a cool new peripheral for single player and unique new multiplayer experiences, and (supposedly) improved online. If the possibility of using multi-pads never came up, I'm pretty sure people would be more impressed. I mean, how many revolutions can you have?

And anyone complaining about having to use wii-motes or not being able to play multiplayer never used a classic controller. I look at this pad as merely a peripheral that is better than the balance board. And for what its worth, I never had problems with fun multiplayer experiences with people taking turns with the balance board.

Harp about the differences between MGS4 and MGS3 or even MGS1 all you want, but in the end, beyond cosmetics, only people who play games all the time and pay hyper detail to them could tell the differences in their cores. Catering almost exclusively to a niche market of people who are "hardcore" doesn't work for a mass medium. Nintendo saw this and tried to expand it. Not to soccer moms and grannies - but to EVERYONE. If games are on par with movies and tv and other mass mediums, then they need to be embraced by the majority of the population. You can't do this by catering exclusively to a niche.

This means that shock of shock, there will be software put out that a)sucks and/or b) does not appeal to you. JUST LIKE THERE HAS BEEN SINCE THE DAWN OF VIDEO GAMES. It is called licensed games. See E.T. the game or countless other examples. Games catered to casual gamers have always existed, and will always exist. Their numbers are expanding, so their representation in the market place is expanding. This is no indication that "core" games are vanishing. Major record labels put out jazz records that no one but jazz enthusiasts will care about at the same time as 'mass market' pop music. Movie studios do the same thing, releasing "indy" movies with limited appeal next to mass market turds. Video game publishers will do the exact same thing. And you will eventually come to realize that just like other mediums, the ratio between good releases and crap releases is often just as much good "mass market/casual" stuff (mario galaxy, boom blocks, rock band) as there is niche/core stuff. There are plenty of shitty "core" games. Go look at metacritic. Therefore, there will be plenty of shitty "casual" games. It is a fact of life. 80% of everything is crap, or mediocre. 20% is good to great. This applies across any medium, any genre, any niche, whatever.

Typically, casual games have had a higher chance of sucking because developers/publishers figured they wouldn't know the difference. With more and more casual gamers and games available, hopefully this will change and we'll get an increase in casual quality. And now I'll end my rambling.

John,

Here is the problem with your argument.

1)your first argument is better graphics and improved physics. This is exactly the type of thing the original poster was talking about by improving specs every year. Every single generation has improved graphics and physics. It is not revolutionary, it is basic evolution. You could say the same exact comment about every single generation.

2) many of the things you list are last gen imports. Hard drive storage (xbox), network play(dreamcast), voice chat(xbox/ps2), DLC(xbox), media player functionality(started as early as the sega cd), web browsing (dreamcast), linux(ps2)... all of these things were implemented in the last generation of consoles (or earlier). Now they have become standard features. In many cases they have improved. Again, this is evolution.

In addition, many of these things are also implemented on the wii! Voice chat, DLC, network play, web browsing - all of this exists on the wii. Whether or not it is implemented as well as the other consoles or not, it is moving forward with this generational leap along with the others.

3) one of your arguments is that it is superior because of being a media center. The majority of gamers at the beginning of this gen would consistently bash this approach (sometimes in terms of 'appealing to casuals') because they cared about games, not playing movies. Nintendo has always maintained that they want to focus on games. Sony and Microsoft are both conglomerates with media divisions. Nintendo is a game company. It makes sense for the other companies to expand into media centers because it fits their corporate business models. Nintendo only cares about games. They made this clear when they chose to use mini-dvds in the gamecube. I think the rise of the digital household is turning this tide against them, but I don't fault them for not being media-centric.

4) So summing up, I fail to see the evidence that Nintendo is "moving backwards". Did they not improve their overall hardware from last year? "Doubling" the power of the gamecube, standard wifi, etc seems like a step forward. They hedged their bets and didn't move as far forward as the other consoles. They couldn't afford to be in an IT race, and they thought that increasing to where they were was "good enough". The "good enough" claim was wide spread when the Wii was revealed. I honestly believe it. I'm part of the Wii's demographic. An old school hardcore gamer who doesn't have much time for games. I could not justify the price of a 360 or ps3 but probably could for a wii. The graphics capabilities are better than anything I've played before (stopped buying consoles after the last gen) and make the games look and feel "good enough" with the added bonus of bringing a NEW slant to games. Not an evolution of the same old thing, but something new. Notice that as arcades die, they moved to the same idea of coming up with new ways to interact with the games.

Be honest. The differences between Deus Ex and Bioshock are 99% cosmetic. I've already played Deus Ex. I can load it up and play it again if I want to. I, and many people like me, needed some reason to continue to care about games.

amazon or best buy

Irony 101

Did everyone piss their pants so much when the power pad came out? This is nothing new. It didn't ruin the NES, it won't ruin the Wii.

For everyone complaining on how casual and lame the Wii is, what does the Wii have or not have that makes it so much lamer than say the NES? This is a legitimate question and not rhetorical.

Red herring, red herring, blah blah blah,straw man, false dichotomy, blah blah blah.

Anything else?

Consoles are appealing over PC's because of their simplicity, plug and play. Waiting for a REQUIRED 20-min install is a big change in that.

Xbox1 had a built in HDD, yet how many of those games required an install? None to my knowledge.

If it was an option to speed up load times, great! If you have to wait 20+ minutes to play the game for the first time, not so great.

I have neither a 360 nor a PS3 and I don't really care about either. But your post was one of the worst bullshit arguments I have seen here in some time and you were due for being called out over it. You don't address the issue, you just make excuses, bluster, and make unrelated criticisms.

Anyone who actually read this, original poster included, would have seen that this is a pilot program. Whether or not this could be used on your own DS in the final program is unknown.

That said, this is a really cool idea. I know Disney has been working for quite a while on making the theme parks more interactive for the ADD generation and it looks like they've made some real progress.

The coolest feature to me is showing you how long the wait is at each ride and what the return times are for fast passes being issued. It'll also show you any closed rides.

90% of everything is crap. 90% of western games are crap, 90% of japanese games are crap. 90% of all games are crap.

To argue back and forth by pitting the 10% of one side against the 90% of the other side is completely retarded. There are just as many bad (and good) western games as there are japanese. Some people will prefer one over the other, some will appreciate both. Some will be retarded and make huge categorical claims based on their own opinions formed from limited experiences.

There are plenty of stupid arguments on the 'stiq, but this one nearly takes the cake.