Wii just got a whole lot more wrong
Posted: 2011.02.25 (11:17)
Welcome to the Metanet Software community.
https://forum.droni.es/
Zephyr wrote:Oh youbisofthard...
This post is retarded. Of course the gaming industry combines geekiness and sexiness successfully. Jill Valentine or Lara Croft? Alyx Vance or Sarah Kerrigan? Chun-Li, Misty, Midna, Carmen fucking Sandiego? You've either failed at communicating or failed at rational thought here.Universezero wrote:However, it's shit like this that's ruining the gaming industry. There are times for sexy and times for geekdom. Combining them is like try to eat breakfast cereal out of * ***** *****.
I think it would be communicating then.hairscapades wrote:This post is retarded. Of course the gaming industry combines geekiness and sexiness successfully. Jill Valentine or Lara Croft? Alyx Vance or Sarah Kerrigan? Chun-Li, Misty, Midna, Carmen fucking Sandiego? You've either failed at communicating or failed at rational thought here.Universezero wrote:However, it's shit like this that's ruining the gaming industry. There are times for sexy and times for geekdom. Combining them is like try to eat breakfast cereal out of * ***** *****.
First of all, a single game cannot "ruin the gaming industry". What does that even mean? What would that even look like?im_bad_at_n wrote:While gaming does have sexiness like Laura Croft and many other ways dealing with curves, I do not think gaming is supposed to actually get the action going with real humans in the room playing the game with you. Or multiple humans. If this spoiler is a real game in development, then not only has Wii shown a face that doesn't belong to its consumers but it would ruin the gaming industry.
When I hear "ruin the gaming industry," I see a certain type of gamer, who starts to love games at a certain time in their life. For my dad, he liked games when they were still something new, in particular Stargate, Mr. Do, and Pengo. He played those games a lot, but probably no more than we play our games today (though then, they cost $.25 per play). I do believe still that one game can ruin the gaming industry, but it is a matter of perspective, depending on the type of gamer. For my dad, that game would be Street Fighter, I've heard him say that many times. This type of game symbolizes a shift in the new types of games that come out, and since Street Fighter was a very popular game, the companies made more similar games to rake in the dough (also by increasing costs per play as well). SO.. all of my dad's favorite games became more outdated, and no new games of that style were in production. So, for my dad, Street Fighter did ruin the gaming industry, as no more of his types of games were in production.hairscapades wrote:First of all, a single game cannot "ruin the gaming industry". What does that even mean? What would that even look like?
Secondly, this game isn't going to, in the vast majority of instances, devolve into group sex. People are going to be drunk and tired of playing Just Dance and Mario Party and their going to pop this in for a few laughs and a chance to slap that one chick's ass. If you think that this game is going "get the action going" (I assume you mean sex) then you've obviously never had the action get... going.
Lastly, we've already discussed that the Wii doesn't deal exclusively in children's games. Read the other posts in this thread.
You and your dad are the only things ruining the gaming industry.im_bad_at_n wrote:When I hear "ruin the gaming industry," I see a certain type of gamer, who starts to love games at a certain time in their life. For my dad, he liked games when they were still something new, in particular Stargate, Mr. Do, and Pengo. He played those games a lot, but probably no more than we play our games today (though then, they cost $.25 per play). I do believe still that one game can ruin the gaming industry, but it is a matter of perspective, depending on the type of gamer. For my dad, that game would be Street Fighter, I've heard him say that many times. This type of game symbolizes a shift in the new types of games that come out, and since Street Fighter was a very popular game, the companies made more similar games to rake in the dough (also by increasing costs per play as well). SO.. all of my dad's favorite games became more outdated, and no new games of that style were in production. So, for my dad, Street Fighter did ruin the gaming industry, as no more of his types of games were in production.hairscapades wrote:First of all, a single game cannot "ruin the gaming industry". What does that even mean? What would that even look like?
Secondly, this game isn't going to, in the vast majority of instances, devolve into group sex. People are going to be drunk and tired of playing Just Dance and Mario Party and their going to pop this in for a few laughs and a chance to slap that one chick's ass. If you think that this game is going "get the action going" (I assume you mean sex) then you've obviously never had the action get... going.
Lastly, we've already discussed that the Wii doesn't deal exclusively in children's games. Read the other posts in this thread.
You're right, I never had the action going for me, so maybe it was premature to say that this game will invoke group sex. Or even normal one-on-one. Whatever, I'll be honest and just say this is out of my league. What I was going for, which also might be premature, is that this game is similar to Street Fighter for my dad... that it could change the gaming industry, and if it does it'll ruin it for some. I doubt my Dad knew when he first saw SF and no other copycats were released that he would not like any new games that come out, and here would probably be the same situation, it will be impossible to tell until after the change has passed what it will do.
And while I still believe that this game might be better accepted by xbox or playstation, I guess it doesn't matter much more if it is a Wii game..
That's stupid. Just because one game came out and a ton of other companies rushed to cash in on the concept does not mean that every other game in the world will be a clone of that game. Innovation will constantly pump fresh content into the gaming industry, regardless of what the cool thing is at the moment.im_bad_at_n wrote:So, for my dad, Street Fighter did ruin the gaming industry, as no more of his types of games were in production.
I don't pay between 40-70 dollars for Spin the Bottle. As I said, it's studios making sub-par casual games like this that are overshadowing the -real- game makers and generally degrading the experience for all, especially the less casual gamers.T̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư wrote:Spin the Bottle and Strip Poker are fine examples of games with a real-world sexual component. Why couldn't a video game do something similar, particularly one that's motion controlled?
Then... don't pay $40-$70 for Spin the Digital Bottle?Universezero wrote:I don't pay between 40-70 dollars for Spin the Bottle. As I said, it's studios making sub-par casual games like this that are overshadowing the -real- game makers and generally degrading the experience for all, especially the less casual gamers.T̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư wrote:Spin the Bottle and Strip Poker are fine examples of games with a real-world sexual component. Why couldn't a video game do something similar, particularly one that's motion controlled?
The best games are indeed worth more than their price.l'oeuvre wrote:The best games are free.