So, the system is not innovative because every single game will not be?

Good point, sir. Darwin's got nothin' on you.

And you're absolutely right! There is no "warrenting" for the DS, what a dumb idea Nintendo had there!

Games are where the innovation counts. You can have a fancy new controller but be doing the exact same thing; Does that classify it as being an 'innovative' experience?

You might be able to make a 2 sceen portable system but it's nothing new if you're using the bottom screen just to view a map.

As far as I'm concerned, systems barely have anything to do with 'innovation'. It's what the games do. Warioware Twisted was an innovative game and it didn't need 2 screens or a motion sensor remote to make it something special.

Double Post:
I don't even think you got that statement I said earlier.

It did kind of need a motion sensor though. If you wanted to make a point, maybe you should've mentioned innovative games that make use of the available controls, such as Katamari Damacy or Pikmin. =D

Anyway, not every title on a console has to be innovative in order for a console to be. I do agree that in the end individual titles are innovative (or not), but some consoles are more suited to innovative titles than others. The DS and the Wii both possess elements that encourage innovative gameplay designs. This is not really subject to discussion.

No, I pretty much made my point. Was the Motion Sensor originally built in the GBA, No. It was part of the game itself.

A system is only stepping stones to innovative games. It matters how many of those stones the developers try to use.

Double Post:
This conversation has given me the urge to play Warioware. I'll go do that now. :p

That's the thing with the Wii controller. It also has the wing and nunchucku attachments so that games that are ported to the Wii and arn't mapped for their exclusive controller can still be played using the Wing. Therefore madden doesn't have to be specifically designed to run on the Wii over normal porting methods.

On the other hand though should you be forced to have ten-thousand attachments just to play this game or that game? For a system that's been named and focused on simplicity, this things has more twists and turns then the last game of Labyrinth I played.

As far as things such as how the system works and what not we'll just have to wait till E3 to get more on the details. But it was a good idea to release their ridiculous name now instead of having the entire audience laughing through the confference at E3. I shall now go and find where I'm going to put my Wii.

Why are you being so black or white about this? Who said anything about both hardware and software not being able to work together to offer innovation? Yea Wii alone, without any creative games, won't revolutionize a thing. However, the console itself does half the work towards reaching such steps. The controler itself will probebly inspire game developers to create new and innovative games that they probebly wouldn't have thought of on their own.

Also, yea, not EVERY SINGLE TITLE EVARRR will use the controler. So what? If the game's damn good, and fun, why not enjoy it when there'll be plenty of other titles that do use the core controler's unique abilities? Same goes for the DS of course. Stop being such a downer.

I dunno, I class not having to hit the pause button every two minutes in a Castlevania game to look at the map as innovation of the best kind. Lazy awesome innovation.

Does anyone even try to interpret information differently? I find it amazing that most people here are basically repeating each other.

Technophile. This all started because I said too many games overuse the 'innovative' saying. I don't know why you all are making it more complicated then that. It was plain and simple. =/

No, you said Wii and the DS shouldn't be called innovative. There is a difference and the people who responded to you are exactly right, and I don't you seem to be taking any of it in.

Also I think you should read the dictionary meaning for "innovation"

in·no·va·tion
noun.

1. The act of introducing something new.
2. Something newly introduced.

Does this not perfectly describe what both the DS and Wii are doing. Do you see other handhelds with a touchscreen? No. It's an innovation in handheld gaming. Do you see other home consoles with motion sensing controllers? No. It's gaming innovation, it's innovative.

What started this was that I said the 'innovation' selling point is overused in a lot of games. Again, I don't see how something as simple as that got turned into an arguement. I simply said, they overuse the term 'innovative' on some games that barely do anything unique.

Also, Somehow, saying that comment meant that I was mad because every game isn't completely about touching a screen?

I was well aware of what innovation meant when I made the comment. Like I said a while back. Innovation is in the games (at least that's the only category where I care for innovation).

If it makes you feel better then I'll say, Yes they both are innovative systems (to your standards).

But for me, I'm not going to be calling a game innovative just because now I can see a map on another screen.

(I wonder if people think I'm a Nintendo hater now?)

Actually I've been playing touch games on my palm long before the DS, and the powerglove that I have is the same thing that Nintendo is trying to reintroduce. So are either innovative? Not really, they're just better marketed. As far as the Revolutionary part it depends on how games use their features. And if the features of the Wii is used as well as the features as the DS, then the Wii might be selling one of thoes "i"s for some extra cash to keep their heads above water.

P.S.
Soniclover: All I have to say is diddo.

What games have been called innovative, when all they have is a map on the bottom screen. None I can recall.

Also, to your standards, do you really not consider the DS or Wii innovative?

Comparing the DS to a palmheld computer is hardly logical, you're not going to call a palm a gaming console are you? Of course the DS wasn't the first to have touch screen gaming, it just brought the touch screen concept into mainstream gaming.

I think a better way to say that is that the DS was the first handheld touch-screen device designed almost SOLELY for games.

Games on the palm computers are generally shitty, and the devices themselves have far better versatility than the DS.

The DS isn't the first to have touch-screen games, no.

But it is the first one to have GOOD touch-screen games.

Nova: If you actually took the time to read the second sentence you would have seen that all I was trying to say was that they were not the first to come up with the concept. They just executed it better.

I know that your last question was not geared to me, but I do wish to answer it from my opinion if that is alright. I myself do find both the DS and Wii themselves innovative, but very few games on the DS have been innovative. Metroid was unfortunatly poorly executed, and most games hardly even use the touch screen if at all. The only games that I can think of at the moment that uses the touch screen well are warrio ware touched, trauma centre, and a release title that I can't recall the name of. But seeing that the Wii is a console and not a handheld, perhaps Nintendo will have some standards for developers to meet so that they don't end up being games that just use the buttons and not any of the system's other .

But, what would be special about Trauma Center without the touchscreen? Or Kirby's Canvas Curse? It's not just that they wouldn't be innovative they wouldn't even exist. You're putting too many eggs in one basket.

Because you are saying things that are so incredibly retarded that you are derailing the entire conversation. We can't even focus on all the good stuff coming out lately because you are, uh, a moron.

I can't believe I even have to sit here and try to convince you just how dumb you sound.

Who says everything has to be 100% innovative? Innovation is great, sure, but it doesn't have to incorporate itself into every orifice of every game ever created.

For example, I was masturbating earlier today. Now, I masturbate on a fairly regular basis, and not much generally changes between those instances. Today, I was just sitting in a chair as per usual and jackin' it. I was watching a video I'd never seen before, but my technique and style in terms of the actual masturbation remained essentially the same.
And yet, I managed to achieve my pleasure capacity, thereby splooging as messily as ever. It was a pleasurable, worthwhile experience, even if it offered nothing new in terms of execution.

See?

By the way, here's a much better video of that supposed Wii Tony Hawk game:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wp0J-...%2F4%2F29%2D66

Well, you can actually see this one. Much better. Thanks!

Well if that is what the Wii is capable of (considering we add some background and other stuff to that black scene) then I would be really suprised. It looks great.

I doubt it though

actually, i'd bet that any of the current consoles could do that- rendering a good-looking human isn't hard when hardly anything else is being rendered at all. i mean look at it! you've got a curb, and a couple of trash cans around. not exactly difficult for the graphics processor.

The lighting on that character is good, but god damn that background is shitty. Looks like Dreamcast.

Did I say that no DS games offer anything new? You're making arguements out of nothing. You keep adding these assumptions to what I say and then make it into another arguement and keep branching this whole conversation out.

Do I have to repeat myself again? I simply said that some DS games overuse the 'innovation' selling point. I think it's really an overused term. Somehow, by just saying that, you made up a whole war about it.

Also, apparently, most people here think the same, since nobody else tried to think "hey, maybe that's not what soniclover meant and BlueMikey interpreted it wrong?". They'd rather read your response and just side with you instead.


You do understand that you started this whole mess because you took my "the innovation term is overused on some games" statement out of context.

I love how you said nobody can focus on the good stuff because of this conversation. Interesting. If you really wanted this to be focused on 'the good stuff' then why would you keep draging this out and keep making arguements about nothing?

I think it's hillarious when people say things like this. So, you have to sit here and argue, huh? Again, if you really wanted to change the subject, then you'd just skip over this now wouldn't you? Why would you drag out a conversation that you supposedly don't want to be in?

Okay, so is this over now? I'm tired of fighting a battle of assumptions but I'm sure somebody will be happy enough to try to drag this battle of nothingness out even longer. =/

That's an insult to the Dreamcast, it was capable of far better than that. For comparison, I think those Shen Mue tech demos looked pretty impressive. In fact, even those looked better than the Tony Hawk test.

The lighting on the character does look good though, but why is the background shadow so static? It doesn't even move or align itself to where the light source is coming from, which is pretty strange considering how the character shadowing looks. Granted, it looks like a really early test, but you'd think the basic lighting and rendering system would be the first thing that they'd finish. But it does look really early, and there isn't even any evidence that it's even from an official game.

Didn't the Tiger Game.com have a touch screen?

Yes, that´s what I actually ment - one single character model shouldn´t be a problem to render - but if you add more background objects with detailed textures and models and maybe other characters to it I think it could get critical (if we assume that the specs that IGN posted are real).

Not that I care that much about graphics, I just say that I would be surprised if wii games could have graphics like that.

No, BlueMikey didn't do a thing wrong. You're the one who keeps dragging this bullshit out just because you can't clearly state that "innovation" is a buzzword; which it is. If the result of said buzzword is a great game then who the fuck cares? Now get back to the regular topic of Wii, Revolution, N5, or whatever the fuck you want to call it or I will ban your ass from this thread.