Thursday, April 23, 2009

Class 2: Exertion Games

Today you have learned about how physicality plays out when interacting with the Wii, and as you have seen, this is a heated debate! However, as all presenters have pointed out, there is room for improvement, so with your project is your chance to demonstrate how a perfect physical game could look like!

I feel like I did not answer the question on the project properly (sorry!), so I would like to clarify it here:

I would like to see you come up with a physical game. This means NOT a mouse/keyboard/gamepad game. (Simply because you have plenty of opportunities to do them in other classes).
You CAN do a physical (not exertion) games, but you might need to argue that it is physical (see for example a tabletop game). Considering the topic of the class, you should try to make it very physical and utilize exertion: this is your chance to try out something new and challenging, so you should take it!

I hope this is a bit more focused than my previous answer, and I apologize if I have not been clear enough earlier, but I hope it helps you to create something unique for this class.

Please post any comments on the class from 23 Apr 09 in the comments below. In particular comments and praise about the second presentation, as we ran out of time to give much feedback for Michele and Rhys, sorry!


  • Agree on an idea for your project, but be prepared to change it!
  • Enter your blog comment
  • Read the two papers under schedule for week after next
  • If you are presenting week after next, practice timing!
  • Watch for week after next: Time management

To the 2 teams who presented: could you please upload your slides and photographs to the blog please? And your comments could include advice for the upcoming teams on how to prepare for the presentation!

We still need a group to present paper 4!!!

And just in case you have missed the video that was shown during class or want to watch it again:


  1. Once again great class Mr.Floyd but then again it is more of a class effort so great job everyone. Anyway comments, comments,

    Right, so I would like to talk a little about Group 2's topic, about Wii's revolution being in the past. I guess I would say that none of the consoles are in the past IF a games designer has the skills to pull it off. Yes the Wiimote is an innovative idea but it does not rule out the fact that the Ps3 and Xbox360 controller being simillar to each other and also second generation consoles can give off an amazing experience as well.

    To be honest, God of War, (Im sure most of you have heard off) manage to immerse me in the gameplay without the gimmick of the Wiimote's swinging motions. The use of context sensitive button pressing and also having to twirl or shake the thumbstick violently is enough to give me an excitement and that is definitely an expert and imaginative idea of making a mundane controller much more exciting. Gratz to the pioneer of this idea. When you think about it, God of War's fast paced action is so breath-taking that when I am being grappled by an enemy, all I want to do is break my thumbstick just to stay alive and I do not really care whether it feels realistic or not.

    As for that small argument about GTAIV and car jacking, gain it depends on how the designer pulls it off. It would definitely take the fun out having to do such a tedious movement of unlocking a door when Im being chased by a horde of angry civilians. And if you do insist on having an unlocking minigame, fallout 3 on the 360 for instance pulled it of perfectly well using the thumbsticks alone. It certainly did not involve a lot of movement yet it feels good.

    I guess what Im saying is no system is bad, its a matter of opinion and no system is more innovative than the other. Its a matter of how the game designers incorporate a console's features. For instance certain RPG's on the NDS insist on using the stylus for movements and nothing else in the gameplay just for the sake of it which is so much easier to put that stylus away and use the control pad.

  2. Awesome lecture, but I just thought I’d add my opinion concerning the Wii immersion…

    I understand that the Wii controller can add an additional satisfaction of immersion, however such a tool is not very significant when analysing a games depth in full.

    Immersion is all about the depth of design. However immersion comes in a variety of forms.

    Certain games can achieve this in different ways. For example, Metroid Prime (Gamecube) is acclaimed as one of the most atmospheric and immersive games of all time. It accomplishes this by creating a believable world with vast amounts of 'lore' to draw the player into another universe that contains various races at conflict. The 'visor' point of view, the music, and style of design contributes to this. Not once through the entire game did I feel safe. Metroid Prime makes the player feel as if he/she is totally isolated. This is intended as you are a lone bounty hunter (Samus Aran) on a planet once inhabited by an ancient race.

    Saying so this type of immersion is one that can draw the player into a universe in which the player is keen to later read up on and discover more. In short, this immersion somehow convinces you that the Metroid universe does exist on its own, and not just spawned when you turn on your Gamecube. As for an emotional aspect, at times, this game will make you feel somewhat frightened and lonely.

    Back in the day, this game had me on the edge of my seat during its epic boss battles. Frantically spamming various weaponry buttons for (upto) 30 minutes to claim the win.

    The Wii controller adds physical immersion, but in essence it does not create a significant impact in the quality of gameplay.
    A good example of this is that Metroid Prime 3: Corruption released on the Wii, utilised all the capabilities of the Wii mote. However I can’t really say that at any point I felt any more immersed than I did playing its predecessor (Metroid Prime). Why? Because Metroid Prime was more masterfully developed.
    Swinging that Wiimote around while playing as the bounty hunter was cool nevertheless, but pretty lackluster. If this is somehow meant to make me feel excited or energetic it wasn't really achieved. I'd be better off hitting the gym or messing with the boxing bag. The game could of had the exact same impact on me had I been playing with a classic Gamecube controller.
    Maybe this is just me, as my interest in playing video games is fading.

    And with all this Wiimote 'immersion', I am yet to play a video game that has truly impacted me as a movie has. Needless to say, cinema has no interactivity amongst its audience. I know they are two different worlds, but they can be compared because they both use the same mediums to overall benefit the outcome of the product, and both can communicate emotions and impact the viewer. However Grand Theft Auto 4 featured amazing character development that is unseen in any video game to date, and featured a script that some believe is Oscar worthy, that might be taking it too far, but it was very very impressive and created a ‘strong’ attachment between you and its characters. In short I think immersion is all based on good production values. Personally, in my eyes flailing your arms around is just an additional excitement factor, but really a choice of preference. Which is absolutely fine.

    This is just my opinion and I am fully open to whatever others have to say. But if I come home to my xbox id rather kick back and use a standard controller.

  3. Yeah, the 2nd presentation was actually specifically what i was thinking on the lecture.

    Regarding the controller , i.e Waggle VS Buttons, i totally think a waggle is definitely identical to a button press, especially in the Wii issue, the Wii mote isn't all that specific as we discussed in class, and in the end you just get a few variety in actions you can input, like a controller is confined to the few buttons we have.

    When you break it down, games are *mostly* similar, you control an object in the virtual world. So whether you waggle or button press, it's all the same, the input being fed to the machine is still the same, it's just how you the player inputs it, and how the system reads your inputs.

    What's the big diff between button press and waggle?

    I believe, that although the Wii mote doesn't present you with all the freedom it seems to have, but players will somehow, in their subconscious establish a link between their actions with the Wii mote and the action on screen. Like how some players try to be a smart arse and put a personal movement while using the Wii mote, sure maybe that action would suck and not make sense, but the Wii mote might read it differently and tries to make sense of it. Then that particular player could say: "That's my patented Special move." although really it's just him doing something completely unnecessary or just using a glitch of the Wii mote.

    Another point is, sometimes i'm really pent up and wanna just play games to calm down, so let's take a hack and slash game, on a regular controller, we just press a button, monotonous, and boring, sometimes it feels like a chore. But with the Wii, we can swing really hard, and exaggerate our swing, release that anger. Though that input will still be the same as pressing a button, but there's more variation, we can swing hard/soft or have fun, but with a button press, we only press the button, do we feel different if we press real hard? Only the PS controllers have a pressure sensitive thing, but still it's quite same as another button press.

    @ immersion, I don't play the Wii extensively, but from what i heard, there are people who simply wave the Wii mote slightly, and the response of the system is still the same, and then that isn't all that immersive. Yes, true, but that is the player not letting himself getting immersed, the player is being too objective, he/she is saying: " Bah, a slight movement can execute that combo, why strain yourself.", true to the core, but the player is too focused on getting that action done, instead of playing the game. Playing the game with skill and surviving has it's own fun, but you cannot blame that you're not immersed in the game on the Wii mote, just cause you are more focused on getting points/surviving.

    With all that said, how do people decide which is more fun? : 1) Wii mote 2) Button mash 3) Actually going out and play that sport (if that's doable, not so in RPGs)
    It's up to the player to choose the level of interactivity, pressing buttons to have actions performed for you is definitely more relaxing, using the Wii mote gives you a small taste but is still simpler than real life.

    Lastly, regarding the first presentation, i think games themselves give you an emotion if you're immersed, no matter if it's Wii, button press, click and drag and so forth. Because the player goes through the actions of the character, he transits through the events, building his own interpretation of why the character does the following, and thus feeling more of the events happening. The Wii mote simply lets some people get more immersed, because they feel like they are that hero, that they can do those cool stuff with their hands(although this is false) instead of just pressing a button and letting the computer do the work.
    But personally, it is no different, the button mashing requires a different mind set and so on. So yes, the Wii mote does not inflict powerful emotions over you, it is the story, the game, it just ties you in the game, through your own actions, and the adrenaline that actually kinda blinds you so you don't think that much.

  4. For the point of not having to say "I think" or "It's my opinion that" at the start of each sentence, please note that it's ALL my opinion.

    Floyds lecture
    10/10 again. Floyd, you barely had to say much, and yet we learned a great deal. You act not as a teacher, but a mediator, utilising the greatest tool in the class room; the students. The ability for us to speak our mind and get reponses from multiple perspectives is something 1 person cannot teach. Your style is unique, innovative, and i thank you for the opportunity that you're giving us.

    Wii Mote - Increase of Emotion or Immertion?
    Immertion - Yes, Emotion - No.

    It immerses you in the fact that you're required to physically emulate real world actions. You can't tune out and play half brained like you can with button games because it requires you to be physically active (Obviously i'm only talking about the Wii games that require this). Even if you can sometimes get away with only lightly waggling the control, it's still more immersion than a button game.

    It doesnt give any extra emotion. The emotion is created by the processes in your brain as you play the game; the action and response. It's not related to the body movements required to give that action.

    Wii Mote - Revolutionising

    The wii mote gives the following options:

    The ability to play with regular button bashing
    The ability to use waggle movements as extra buttons
    The ability to have extra immersion devices. Example: aiming a gun or slashing a sword using the motion sensor
    The ability to change the form of the controller. Example:
    - Regular controller
    - Super Nintendo controller
    - Steering Wheel
    It's also more comfortable as you can seperate the left and right hand. Other console controllers you need to hold very close together.
    Theoretically it may sound pointless but it's one of my favorite features.

    Other console controllers give the following options:

    The ability to play with regular button bashing

    In other words, the Wii mote is very compatible and can account for a large range of players whereas all other console controllers only account for a very standardised group.

    Just to cut to the point of what "revolutionising" is, it's really just setting the new trend. Stepping out of the cosy square and actually pathing the way of the industry. The wiimote does that. I think it's definitly taking the next step and the gaming industry will follow it. Motion sensing is the way to go.

    Oh and if it isn't already bleeding obvious, i've got a wii.

  5. I forgot to say one most important bit, i need a 5-man team for the physical game idea.

    Willing to work like a dog, please send me a notice, Student no s3242135, email to my student email account, thanks.

  6. Scott Battye S3201290April 24, 2009 at 2:24 AM

    I would like to continue where I left off with the comment I made during the second presentation.

    My point I was trying to make was the fact that Microsoft, although having a very good system, could have had a great system if they spent more time and money developing instead of trying to rush the market by releasing first WAY ahead of the PS3 and Wii. Now by the time Xbox360 was well into the market and suffering the ill-fated RRoD, we already knew what the Wii was going to be about right, or at least, we knew the basics?

    So where are we at today? Xbox360 is still suffering from numerous problems (some of which have been caused attempting to fix RRoD), and Wii has dominated the market... What did Microsoft gain by releasing the 360 early, they ended up being skewered by many people for taking dodgy routes to get the 360 on the market ASAP.

    Thus, I come back to my point, the fact that, as was said, this COULD be the start of a new reveloution for gaming, but it comes down to how the next generation of this reveloution is developed.

    Btw, I own a 360 and I really have no reason to rebut when somebody puts shit on it (pardon my language) given the situation(s) its faced, I don't really have much of an argument.

  7. I really enjoyed yesterday's class. It was very engaging and I wished I had good points to say so I could be part of the discussion more!

    The presentations were really interesting and I liked it how everyone began to say things and argue throughout the presentation instead of having questions in the end.

    I read a statement in the article saying that body movement is connected with your emotional/mental state...can't remember. Anyways, I reckon emotion trigger like fear only starts when you encounter the, for e.g, monster and then you let your thumbs go to work, so it's like short period of emotions while with the Wii, you get the same shock but you have to constantly keep moving (your whole body) to overcome the monster, so your whole body is actively engaged which makes you feel more connected like you're the character therefore you are more likely be more emotionally involved. For e.g. once you kill the monster, it's like you won so you are thrilled and happy because you put so much effort into it and when your character dies, it's like you've died! But when using controllers, it's just your thumbs that's moving which don't send m u c h triggers to your brain where your emotions are ...identified!
    I guess what I'm trying to say is that the Wii allows you to move your whole body which makes you more involved and engaged like you are the character which most likely sends more stronger triggers to your brain like the feeling of being tired, nervous, anxious, all these are emotions and you feel more of them when you have to physically move to connect with the game.

    Hope that made sense in what I'm trying to say... (Y)

    By the way, me and Soph need to be with a team (of 5) so if you have room, let us know!!


  8. Hello, it's Nicholas Lim here.

    Concerning the Wiimote and the 2 group presentations:
    As mentioned by Raphael in an earlier post, I agree that "waggling" the Wii controller is identical in funtion to simple button presses on regular controllers, or even a keyboard. However, the Wiimote sure does give the player a better sense of involvement as they mimic moves like slashing a sword, playing tennis and bowling, while regular button presses are of course, merely button presses.

    So to be in context while relating to another's post (the following is an extract from Gan's comment)
    "The use of context sensitive button pressing and also having to twirl or shake the thumbstick violently is enough to give me an excitement and that is definitely an expert and imaginative idea of making a mundane controller much more exciting."

    Yes, I do agree that the Wiimote breathes new life into methods of player input, as the Wiimote DOES mean that the intensity of the player's input really has a direct output in the virtual world. Obviously, the Wiimote actions that are able to be performed by just about any player is appealing as well for those casual gamers who prefer not to just sit down and hammer a traditional controller. Indeed, the Wiimote adds physical immersion, as previously mentioned by David Biro in his post further up the top.

    However, the Wiimote and all other controllers with their quirks and gimmicks are nothing if it not for the actual games and their mechanics. If a game is imbalanced, bugged or not even FUN, no amount of waggling, intensity of button presses or fancy phyiscal moves on the Wii's input devices will compensate for an ill-designed, broken game.

    Gameplay (or game mechanics) will always take precedence over other factors, as a video game is only a good or acceptable if it plays and works properly. Afterall, games are addictive because of their good game design and gameplay mechanics, all dependant on the genre, obviously.

    This brings me to think about why I play the games I play. I play strategy games because I want to use my head to outthink and outmaneuver opponents with strategies. I play FPSes because I want to shoot something or someone online, or offline. I play role-playing games because I wish to play a role in a virtual world. It doesn't really matter on which platform they appear, if a game is fun, i will play it. This is the same reason why controllers do not really affect my decision on a games. As i own both a PC and Xbox 360, I love both platforms because they allow me to get to play the games I want to play, regardless of control scheme. For example, an FPS is still FPS on any other platform, either with a mouse or keyboard or the 360 controller's analog sticks and shoulder buttons. This is because the core gameplay of shooting is still the fundamental aspect of playing the game.

    At this point i would like to point out that despite the Xbox 360's flaws like the f^&*%$g Red Ring of Death and my console's noisy fans, I still play it, because of the fun and joy the Xbox 360's titles have to offer. The Halo series and both Gears of Wars games are fun, regardless of their presence on both platforms, for me it's one or the other. My experience for both platforms comes from playing copies owned by myself or my friends.)

    Nevertheless, I am of course aware of the differences of different methods of input and I like to think that things like the Wiimote is just another way of input for video games.

    Concerning the Wiimote's relation to emotion:

    While I do agree that the Wiimote adds to the level of immersion in a game, I do not believe that it generates much more emotion than any other controller. I believe that the game play and presentation are the main factors for creating emotion in a game, much like how a plot or sound effects affect movies.

    For example, as Greg stated and demonstrated in the first group lecture, things like sound play a major role in increasing the believability and invoking emotion. For me, when I played the first played Aliens vs. Predator 2, the highly effective background music really got my heart pounding. It was effective because the flow of the music itself was very dynamic and eerie. Now, because that was all the way back in 2002, i was only 12 years old, but I was rather confused as to whether it was the masses of Aliens (Xenomorphs) or the creepy musical score that was scaring me sh*tl3ss. So, I played without the sound. I found that the game wasn't nearly as terrifying as it was for me before. When I switched my speakers back on, I found myself scared once again. For me, that game and the experiences from it taught me that sound and visual design are important in invoking emotions. Emotions like fear, awe, joy, humour and many others can be invoked through clever visual design, music, and clever voice-overs.

    That's all that I have to say for now. If anything else pops up in my mind, I'll be sure to let you all know. Also, I would like to say that it was once again an engaging lecutre that gets the mind working again. Nice one, Floyd! And kudos to everyone for making their opinions heard.

    Nicholas Lim Chong Hock

  9. Ned "I like sports, but not as much as you know who" KirnerApril 24, 2009 at 4:28 PM

    Ned here.


    I find it interesting the way different people feel about games and game development, especially when it comes to the Wii.

    A bit of a hornet's nest was stirred up upon the mention of the financial, business end of game development (That was you Ahn Tu, right?). Being unable to resist a hornet's nest, (go masochism, go!) I think this is worth exploring.

    We've spoken of immersion and quality, but you'll notice that the top sellers in our industry are not always games which are... critically acclaimed.

    A quick look at the latest Nintendo console shows it is establishing a reputation for a few first party gems floating in copious amounts of 'shovelware', low quality games essentially 'shoveled' on to the market to make a profit.

    How does everyone feel about this issue?

    -Would you be happy developing endless sequels to "Bratz Rock Angels" for a hefty paycheck?

    -What makes a game good? If one million people buy "Ninjabread Man" and ten thousand buy Psychonaughts, who has produced a better product?

    -Is a massive profit to the industry from mediocre games ultimately harmful to us as designers, programmers and artists, or do you disagree?


    Don't remember who said it during the lecture, or if anyone said it at all, but isn't the most defining and important part of the whole gaming experience is the game itself? Social experience and meta-gaming would run a fairly close second, but for me the whole "console wars" debate seems a little juvenile.

    SO: The 360 is not a 'failure', as it has the broadest range of AAA quality titles and an incredible online service which leaves the competitors in the dust.

    The Wii is not "a load of crap" as the social experience of seeing your grandpa smash your little brother in a game of Wii Bowling and the possible broadening of the casual gamers taste is very valuable.

    Absolutist views have a tendency to alienate and reject. I think it would be a shame if I missed out on an awesome game developed by a passionate team just because I was prejudiced against the platform.

    Anyhow, best lecture/tute/lab/meeting-of-the-minds so far.

    -Ned Kirner

    PS. Floyd, I'd like to know how much of the Wii Ian had played, if you get the chance to ask him. Cheers :D

  10. Also Nicholas, it's criminal that AvP2 hasn't seen a decent sequel yet. Fingers crossed!

  11. Chris Tran - s3200763
    yesterday's presentations were pretty interesting. everyone put up a pretty good arguement agaisnt each other and the discussion was very productive and not off track. there was an interesting comment up on the white board which really got to me. fun = emotion wii is fun. i guess the controller wasn't all about how acurate it imitated real life movements. and yeah i agree that the controller is a good starting point for motion controlled video games but not good enough to to be realistic, however the wii remote is very fun.

  12. Scott Battye S3201290April 24, 2009 at 6:20 PM


    You're completely right, however, (and this is in no way me attempting to fuel an argument here) I have yet to see a title released on the PS3 that has ever made me personally dread the decision I made to buy a 360, simply because most of the titles on the PS3 that I would buy, are on the 360 anyway.

    I'm in no way a 360 extremeist; the first console I personally owned was an Xbox but that doesn't sterotype me and it certainly hasn't completely brainwashed me. I enjoy playing Wii games and the PS3 seems to be a excellent system (I've only ever played it twice though).

    They each have areas they excell in, and each have areas that need improving, console-specific fans of say, the 360, would pick holes in the PS3 while vigorously trying to defend the holes in the 360 and vica-versa. Which starts to become, as you point out, a bit juvenile and pointless.

    When I first saw and tried a Wii, it was constant laughs, Wii Sports for a first timer needing to adjust to this new style of gaming brought on a lot of shenannigans. For the numerous times I've played a Wii I have gotten used to it, it's an interesting concept and one I would like to see developed into a better system for gaming.

    I just hope whoever does try and advance this idea... does it right.

  13. @Ned,

    The only reason companies would invest millions of dollars on a game is if they see a potential market. Having said investing millions of dollars, they would definitely expect their game designers to have at least the ability to produce a first class game. No one in their right mind would blow away all that money for something like... Bratz. There is not a big market there.

    And like I already said in my point earlier, its a matter of how the game designers design a game that counts. And another reminder to die hard fans of Wii and 'party' games, once again I said it is a matter of preference. There are millions of gamers world wide and each have their own preference of games genre. For instance, I am never a fan of 'party' or kiddy games and no matter what kind of gimmick you put in it I will never play it. Its just a matter of which market a game company decides to cater for.

  14. An A+ lecture once again, go go Floyd. Everything involved, down to the none-too-subtly homoerotic "sports" slideshow made for an extremely engaging and (dare I say it) immersible class. I came out of not celebrating the conclusion of my second three-hour class of the day (okay maybe a little) but rather having been part of such a brilliant dynamic that Maths & Physics For Artists seems to now generate! Amazing.

    That aside, something I have to say first off that I'm sure has crossed other people's minds just as much as my own: the problem with having such an extensive discussion on the values of the Wii is that it is fundamentally pointless - in the end, everything just boils down to personal preference. It is painfully simple as that. We could argue until the most comatose of cows come home but the question of whether the Wiimote is conducive to drawing emotion from the player is absolutely and entirely dependent on the player - external factors both physical and mental hold more importance over the actual game system, one could say.

    That being said, the discussion didn't come with nil value. Indeed, it was extremely valuable, as I was before the session, as Ned would say, a console absolutist - the classic ~*counter-revolutionary*~, if I may. I was adamantly against the Wii, couldn't see the appeal in it, thought it ridiculous and felt ridiculous playing it. Tore my boyfriend to shreds for lamenting about the lack of stock everywhere in Melbourne. The word nunchuck made (and still makes) me cringe, for chrissakes (though I know it existed before the Wii, couldn't they have called it something less embarrassing? Jeez.) I think the attitudes of game companies during the release of the consoles may shoulder some of the blame for this, though this element of competition and belittlement of any other of the same is and has always been ubiquitous - like the eternal debate between Windows and Macs for instance.

    (Macs ftl by the way.)

    But yeah, being a party to that Wii debate actuated by Michele and Rhys - brilliant presentation, by the way - has changed my views on the matter, if not entirely then at least to the point where I can see it for its merits as well as its cons rather than solely the latter. It has introduced something new to the gaming world, and even if it wasn't a complete success (which, well, it was) it has definitely provided food for gaming industry thought. The line between virtual reality and THE REAL WORLD has always been a precarious line to for game developers to straddle, and I agree with Michele - the Wii has in some sense turned back the proverbial clock of the gaming world, almost reinventing it, as such. Lessen the realism at the risk of silliness, go too far with it and why are people even buying and playing it go outside kick a ball for the love of god.

    Can you tell I hate Second Life?

    Nicholas, you have raised some excellent points, and I must say that I agree with you on almost all points bar one - once again this is a matter of personal interest - but the platform of the game does affect the kind of game being played, at least for me. For instance, I couldn't fathom playing an RTS on a console: any sort of uber-micro would be near-impossible, or at least endlessly inferior to that able to be achieved on PC. The good old keyboard and mouse are pretty much essential, until the day someone comes around develops some revolutionary add-on for consoles that outdoes them. But as I said, personal preference as well as experience/a combination of external factors reign - I understand someone playing an RTS for the very first time, that happens to be on a console, would most likely find it more exciting than a seasoned Warcraft III veteran used to pwning no0bs on the PC. Along similar lines to my whiteboard comment addressed to Carla after her group's presentation - perhaps the novelty of games holds more significance over actual gameplay. Maybe your future gaming endeavours will never match up to the first time you played Super Mario Land 2: 6 Golden Coins on the original Game Boy. OK that was just me, but damn that game is awesome.

    Related lols: did anyone hear about that woman who died of water retention all in the name of winning a goddamn Wii? The competition was "Hold Your Wee for A Wii" - as self-explanatory as it gets. Can't you pro-Wii people see, clearly this console is detrimental to the public health and is taking lives of mothers everywhere. No but really, think about how dumb that was, do you as a reasonable and intelligent Gen Y individual really want to be part of the same market? No but actually I just thought that was interesting and worth mentioning and maybe slightly hilarious. Here is a link for anyone who feels the same.

    holy crap long comment is long I AM SORRY EVERYONE what is this shit I thought I didn't have anything to say ok bye

  15. Ok here’s my thoughts on the whole pandemonium of the last lecture…

    I’ve played both the wii and the gamecube version of Twilight Princess. And I must say that the wii Zelda was less enjoyable and harder to get interested in than the gamecube Zelda. Perhaps I’m just being nostalgic for Zelda games of old but Link is controlled with a joystick ok? That’s just how it goes. Motion only works with some games. If physicality isn’t used properly it ends up detracting from the experience.

    However, used for good, I think motion in games can make the player more emotionally invested in the outcome of their actions, and therefore more immersed in the game. You can’t spell emotion without motion! (I’m really sorry about that). If you press a button on a controller and fail in the game your not going to care that much. You don’t put anything of yourself into pressing a button. If you put your heart and soul into a massive swing of a baseball bat, and miss, you’re going to be more disappointed (Or happy that you succeeded). Like the exertion games video that you showed us Floyd, people who are more active will care more about how they fare in the game.

    But the wii-mote is only as fun as the amount of effort you put in. I thought what Raphael said was interesting about releasing anger while playing the wii. Surely there is a distinction here between receiving emotion from the game and putting emotion into it? The wii-mote allows you to express emotions better, even if the controls aren’t quite precise enough to distinguish a lot of different actions. I mean who hasn’t jerked their XBox/Nintendo/Playstation controller to the side, trying to coax the character on screen to jump higher or get out of danger quicker, despite there being no motion sensor in the controller? The wii just takes this a step further, by actually making those kinds of movements meaningful.

    Also, I think it’s hard to compare a game that you’ve really enjoyed on the Pc or other platform against a wii game or motion sensitive games in general. Because inevitably the games are different regardless of how you input the controls. Maybe we should imagine our favourite game with motion sensitive controls or virtual reality suits or something. Would it be better? Probably.

    Oh and has anyone heard of the 3D glasses games are starting to use? I know it’s not really a physical aspect of gaming, but its still interesting in terms of immersion. 3D GLASSES PEOPLE! We are surely living in the future.

    And is it just me or did the posts get a lot longer this week :P

  16. Ned,

    You asked how much Wii Ian Bogost plays: I will ask him that, but check out his excellent blog, I just did a search for Wii, and that should give you an idea that this man is a maniac (not to mention that he owns 12 consoles):

  17. @ Tim, i think about the 3d glasses, it's Sony taunting something bout using the PS3. Not fuel for the argument please, just info.

    @ Ned/Nicholas, I think there are two games being released regarding the AvP universe, 1 is colonial marines, and the other which is said to be... a Good sequel to AvP2, Heck, not a fan...

    Err, Rachel's comments are most disturbing... bout that woman's death..

  18. Tim,

    About the pressing controller and missing and not caring thing, I kind of disagree on that. I love and hate Ninja Gaiden. Its a frikinly annoying, uber hard but yet fun game and you wont believe how frustrating is it when you go through a series of pressing context sensitive buttons making good progress hacking at a boss only to miss the last one and essentially fail. I would honestly smash my controller were it not for my self control.

  19. Hello! Great class Floyd! I love the teaching style, you make learning fun, which is something my previous teachers never expressed when they taught us. We are very lucky to have you as a teacher.

    First I would like to say that I think the 2nd presentation was really great and interactive, the group looked like they really knew what they were talking about and I enjoyed it very much!

    This is my outtake on the article:
    I quote from the article “Wii‘s revolution is in the past“ :

    “the Wiimote is conceived as a tool to make gaming as accessible as possible to people of all ages and all abilities.”

    The Wii is designed for everyone, not just hardcore gamers like us. So when I think of it, the games produced for the Wii are games that will suit the non-gamers, casual gamers and maybe some hardcore gamers.

    The Wii is also the cheapest new, non handheld, console on the market. (Playstation 2 is not new) Which is very appealing to parents when their children are screaming: “we want to play video games!”

    Playstation 3 comes with a whole Blu-Ray DVD player, amazing graphics, sound, hardcore games aimed for the hardcore gamers and is a whole $400 more than the Wii (approx). Its also probably a little intimidating to those who know nothing of technology. “Blue what?“

    So others will go:

    Ok Wii: its cheaper, I can do exercise on it, my children can play games where there isn’t any graphic violence, I don’t have to learn much to use the control, its very interactive and the whole family can play!

    Playstation: its too expensive for me, the games don’t appeal to me, its probably to complicated to play, I’ll have to learn how to use a control, so I’ll go for the Wii.

    And that’s why its been the number one selling console since its release. It’s a console that anyone can play and the whole family can get into, and a parent will chose this console over the others for their children to play because the gaming content is nothing extreamly violent or graphic. Parents want to know that their children are playing games that wont affect them or expose their little minds to something grotesque. And the Wii is the perfect option.

    So the Wii isn’t aimed at the hardcore gamers, but its doing very, very well with everyone else.

    The gameplay is something that also adds to “making gaming accessible to all people of all ages and abilities”

    When you think of how to play tennis, you think:

    Grab racket, wait for ball, swing racket.

    You don’t think press X. And that’s another reason why the Wii is doing so well: it’s a natural experience, you know what to do, the immersion experience is easy with the Wii.

    The Wii is definitely doing what’s its aiming for, a game console that is aimed to EVERYONE.

    But I do agree with the author of the article, the Wii is making the same games with the added interactivity with the Wiimote, it does need more refining and improvement.

    But hey! People seem to like it nonetheless! They like it more than the Xbox and the Playstation, just look at the selling numbers, Wii is at the top.

    I’m not saying that the “Playstation and Xbox are lame or a total joke of a product” but, I am saying that the Wii is more of a “everyone can play” console, and there are less hardcore gamers than there is everyone else, only hardcore gamers will pay $700 for a console. (like I want to do sometime in the future)

    Anyway this comment is getting too long.
    Carlita :D

  20. Hmm, I forgot to do a conclusion:

    So the Wii is a console designed to target everyone, whether that person has played a game before or not, its meant to be a social console, the ads say it all, there is always more than one person playing, with the family sitting on the couch watching them play, taking turns and having fun.

    The Wii is doing what was intended, to be a console that is accessible to people of all ages and abilities.

    So ya, I double posted again, I will try to not make it a habit.

    Carlita :D

  21. Quote: Tim
    I’ve played both the wii and the gamecube version of Twilight Princess. And I must say that the wii Zelda was less enjoyable and harder to get interested in than the gamecube Zelda. Perhaps I’m just being nostalgic for Zelda games of old but Link is controlled with a joystick ok? That’s just how it goes. Motion only works with some games. If physicality isn’t used properly it ends up detracting from the experience.

    I agree. I played both versions as well, and I found the GCN version waaaaay more enjoyable. The Wii version got me irritated most of the time.. (Okami > TP Wii).

    Anywho, I really enjoyed both presentations! :)

  22. Quote: Gan

    No one in their right mind would blow away all that money for something like... Bratz. There is not a big market there.

    Actually, games like "Hannah Montana" and "Bratz" appeal to the young female gamers. So they're not as big as "Halo" or whatevs, but they still sell reasonably well!

    And speaking of "Bratz", I just watched the movie then, haha. It was good. >_>

  23. Heyhey everyone. How's it going? I hope nothing I say offends any fanboys/girls, and know that I do like the Wii, I just don’t think it’s as great as everyone keeps saying.

    @Ben Head. Unfortunately, I'm unable to believe the Wiimote is revolutionising. Yeah, it puts a whole lot of old technology together in a nice way, and presents itself nicely, but it isn't going to change the world or the future of gaming in any way other than making casual and simple games easier for non traditional gamers to play. It opens the market, but it's backfired on the developers in that now they have a different, and not as involved target audience.
    Also, saying other controllers only have 'button mashing' is a shows you haven't really played a lot of other consoles. Wipe Out from the PS network, for instance, gives the user the choice to steer with the buttons (button bashing) or with PS3's sixaxis motion sensitivity. Thus one can use the PS3's control just like a Wiimote by itself (although you're not given the choice of having an attachable steering wheel shaped bit of plastic.) Arguably because the steering wheel shaped bit of plastic must be bought separately of a controller you may as well go out and buy a properly designed more realistic steering wheel that actually has resistance and foot peddles.

    What people seem to be misinterpreting from Nintendo is that they're trying to make something realistic. They're NOT pursuing that true virtual reality that was mentioned in the second presentation. They're also not revolutionizing consoles or input peripherals. They're just making something to market to the non traditional gamer audience, and something that doesn't need to be an in-depth experience to be fun.

    I'd like to compare the Wii and the DS. After reading Gan's comment, I realised there's quite distinction between the innovation of these systems. The games on DS which use the touch screen aren't always about using it in the right context (to touch something or to write something), while most of Wii’s big sales come from games pretending to be something they're obviously not. It's been done throughout history; In Dance Dance Revolution you pretend to dance, in Guitar Freaks or Drum Mania you pretend to be a rock star, and in Time Crisis you pretend you're cool. People don’t buy these sorts of special peripheral games for it to be realistic, otherwise why wouldn’t they just buy a real guitar or drum kit, or learn to dance properly, or go out and join a local sport team. They play them because it’s a different, unique and (usually) a fun experience. So when people say the Wii is revolutionizing, I just think “How? It’s just another pretending device, but it’s force fed to the current Nintendo market”. Yes, the Wiimote gives you the choice of using it’s accelerometer features, but it doesn’t give you the choice to buy it separately, and thus doesn’t give the developers a choice about developing for it.

    Now I’m going to argue why I think Nintendo is sort of destroying the future market. The Wii has had an incredible amount of sales. They add up to almost the same as PS3 and 360 combined. This obviously, will have a large impact on developers. Because the target audience has no love of in-depth games like us, they can easily make a pretty penny on simple and (honestly) boring games. These games have little thought for story line or atmosphere. They simply want to get people to buy them. In opening the market up, Nintendo has either created a whole lot more jobs for programmers, designers and artist, or killed current market. The quality of games we (traditional gamers) might expect is no longer valid, and it’s quite possible that if things like Wiimotes continue to control the market, emotion will all but disappear from videogames. I hope everyone has the same goal when I say I want to make games that are actually captivating, beautiful and unique, not just a bunch of real games (tennis, hockey, basketball, bowling, etc.), redeveloped for the virtual world.

    Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying all Wii games are like this (SSBB, LoZ, Metroid for example are well made), nor am I saying the uncomplicated games themselves are bad. It’s great that they can allow old, young and other non-traditional gamers to immerse themselves into the virtual world we’re enjoyed for so long. I just hope we stay as the majority audience, so the quality of games doesn’t degrade. As said before, they're great for parties and allowing people to socialize. But it seems the Wii has proven that the general population prefers mindless simple games to intricate, atmospheric games.

    I’d just like to further my point about Nintendo’s greed by point out the new DSi. What's the $180 difference? Slightly bigger screen, somewhat better speakers, a gimmicky camera, and some software updates (accessible wifi connection, MP3 playing, camera software etc.) that PSP had when it was released.

    On a reverse note, I’ve got to admit I love a lot of DS and GBA games. Although some people have said realism in a game enhances the emotional attachment, I disagree. David Biro commented about Metroid Prime being a fantastic atmospheric game. So are Metroid Zero Mission and Metroid Fusion on GBA. Granted, the original SNES version didn’t do anything for me but the pixelated 2D sidescroller Fusion still had me shit scared when SA-X (the super powerful copy of Samus herself created by invinsible ) walk slowly around the ship while I hide breathlessly in a vent just above her. By contrast, the 3D handheld version of Metroid on DS was practically unplayable, let alone atmospheric.

    Oh before I forget, about casual and social party games as well as quick emersion in the Wii, note games like Singstar on PS2/3 are also easy to pick up and play, as well as Buzz. It’s not a new concept, it’s just that Nintendo decided to make an entire console about party/social/casual games. And apparently their best games which I mentioned before were only there to satisfy their old fanbase.

    I don’t hate the Wii. I just think it’s a bit fail.

    You may now flame =]
    PS – Watch the beginning of the Zero Punctuation review (by Yahtzee) of House of the Dead for a better, quicker, and more entertaining version of my point about Nintendo being sort of evil. Link:

  24. The presentations were great.
    But one thing i noticed is that no one brought up the fact that nintendo has been trying to make there consoles and games more interactive ever since they started. With R.O.B, the power glove, the NES zapper, Power pad, SNES mouse and even the old gameboy camera.

    No one complained about these things when they first came out... except for R.O.B.. The Wii just happens to be the first console that is using the interactivity as a selling point.
    The next Wii that comes out will be bigger and better. They took a risk with the first, lets just hope they listen to the people when it comes to the next.

    ALSO. i need a group of 5. So if youre interested add me on MSN
    or send me an email.

  25. Im not sure exactly how much of a profit industry giants would see in girl games. For one they have no purchasing power and rely on their parents so the only ideal time to create games for them would be on holidays such as Christmas. Aside from that, there are some good games for girls and boys out there such as Rune Factory, harvest moon, the sims which has a wider range of consumers and would probably be worth investing on. When we talk about critically acclaimed games such as Call of Duty, Halo etc, the reason they sell so well is probably due to the experience of the teams which are probably funded the millions of dollars we were talking about earlier. Just look at their concept arts, they even make sculptures of characters, some of these games even go to the lengths of visiting a military base to study weapons, learn the trades of military combat tactics etc. All these effort and money spent will guarantee a much higher quality game. Sure Bratz may sell reasonably well but by the amount of effort they put in it, I doubt they are being funded as much. So this is just to Ned's point about something like developers at the Bratz team (just an example) having a hefty paycheck etc and producing mediocre games. Stuff like that rarely happens.

  26. I think it's pretty rediculous the way everyone is trying to compare Wii to other consoles, it's like comparing apples and oranges, or more appropriately, console games and PC games, they are not 'designed' to be the same thing.

    i'm going to put the Wii up against the Wii (basically, yes, i am a fence sitter)

    Last friday i went to a mates place an we played House of the Dead Overkill on Wii, everyone who has played this will know its a terrible game but having to aim and fire the way you do an actual weapon (without those menacing physics, Newton's 3rd law to be specific) as well as flick the Wii-mote up in the air to reload makes the game heaps of fun and gives you a 'Teminator 2' style sense of ass-kicking (pretty much what Cherie said about Time Crisis) especially for any others out there who also like to emulate Arnie's classic shotgun reload techniqe.


    There are also Wii games such as Mario Galaxy which do not focus on the Wii-motes motion sensing capabilities but do employ them in the gameplay. For those who don't know, a flick of the Wii-mote causes mario to do a spin and the cursor allows you to pick up 'star bits' at a distance but thats pretty much it. Now any old school mario-ers from back in the days of the NES through to GCN will know that when mario gets intense, the button mashing can go off the scales, when this happens in Mario Galaxy shaking the Wii mote can make you feel a little more powerfull but often mario focusses on jumping, when you try a little too hard to jump you can flick the Wii-mote slightly causing mario to convert from a long jump to a mid air spin right over that pit of lava, not cool. Perfect example of how a button press would be more appropriate.


    Theres Mario Kart Wii which perfectly examlifies how the Wii-mote should be used. For any 'leaners' out there, im sure theres at least one, leaning side to side while playing mario kart actually does something now! While no mario kart will EVER stack up to it's N64 counterpart Mario Kart Wii is probably the most entertaining Wii game avaliable that appropriately uses the Wii-mote.
    Mario Kart Wii is the game i have probably lost the most hours to so far on Wii apart from possibly Smash Brothers which doesn't use the Wii-mote at all! The Smash Bothers series is pretty much the greatest title Nintendo has, the game is just brilliant and the best part is, they hardly changed it from the N64 release.

    Obviously my favourite Wii games are quite varied in thier use of the Wii-mote, so it should be clear why im a fence sitter. I think the Wii-mote has good features, but the only reason Nintendo developed the Wii is that they realised after GCN that thier lovable characters (Mario, Yoshi, DK, Fox, Link, etc. even Joana Dark) weren't going to be enough to pull them over the line anymore in terms of marketing so, for Nintendo, The Wii was not only a bold but practically necessary development.

    I have to Comment on what Cherie said about metroid fusion, that was one of the most enthralling games ive ever played, I loved the way the SA-X would hunt you down even if it only just saw you drop down from it's hding place as it left the screen. Also the Zero Punctuation link was fantastic, it completely verbalised my thoughts when i first played Overkill and threw in some extra prostitute refences.

    My FINAL point; see, its not that hard to articulate your opinion without the word immersion.

  27. Hai :D
    DJ Leigh here.
    I liked the presentations, was nice to get something that was organized and had some actually effort behind it, everyone had a good point to make with lots of nice picture and stuff help keep it entertaining.
    Just wanted to state my stance on the Wii mote’s ability to add emotional involvement to games, I don’t think it can at all. It does get you a bit more into it physically but your emotions are going to be just as withheld from begin effected by the game regardless of the controller you’re holding. The game has to breach through to you through thoughtful collaboration of a number of factors…
    …In my opinion these would be;
    -Sound / Music
    -Graphical imagery (nobody seemed to mention any of the emotion and psychology that is inherent with colour and other visual stimulus)
    -Graphical realism (although this is a somewhat minor point people would often be quick to say that the graphical realism of a game is completely irrelevant to emotional involvement, that it only adds to the immersion factor of the game but I would argue that in games being more like that which we are familiar with, seeing shadows and lighting ect. Behave as we expect gives the player a kind of subconscious relation to the game and makes us feel stronger feelings for the characters in them. (for example, you feel much stronger feelings when a photorealistic human is killed before you (such as in Crysis) than you do when you squish another goomba in Mario ect. )
    -Story and Design (arguably the most important factor in making you care and feel in a game)

    I would say that if anything, holding the Wii mote and swinging it around like a fool would only serve to emotionally remove a player from a game by causing them to feel a bit self-conscious and skeptical of the functionality of the gimmicky white gismo they are holding. The impression that the Wii console is even less emotional engaging than other consoles/methods of play is strengthened too by the fact that (as Ned was saying) the games that have been made for it are, for the most part, un-heartfelt crap that has been pumped out to give reason for people to have spent 500 dollars on a disappointing new toy to keep feeding Nintendo in search of their Wii actually being worth it.
    Also, the out of date graphical capabilities of the Wii limits it from having graphical realism, high detail 3d art or advanced shader programs ect. Making it a pretty unattractive platform for any developer to choose to launch their next masterpiece on.
    I do have a pretty bias view on what I see as a good game however, completely contrary to Ahn-tu’s statements I believe that a game is a work of art, a beautiful composure of the most extreme range of skills (from programming to storey writing to painting ect.) And hence I usually go for the pretty titles (I’m proud to say, I didn’t think Crysis sucked that bad).
    So basically I would call the Wii a massive technological disappointment. Nintendo have the power to sell things as a “revolution” and this is what we got? Old technology? I think everyone was expecting a much bigger leap towards a kind of virtual reality at some point and despite seemingly having the ability, no one will do it, instead Nintendo would release this overpriced cop-out of a gadget and then rip the graphical hardware out of the consoles to increase their profits. Hopefully whatever they do next will be better.
    I whipped something up in Photoshop just to sum up my feelings towards the Wii.

    About that ‘Break-out for Two’ game, I really like the idea of it. Its been very well made so far in my opinion. I would play it. I was thinking that the way the glass blocks break could give the overall game a lot more wow factor if you used some kind of procedural shattering technology like you can see in this little game.

    Oh, and regarding the waggle vs button press issue, I wanted to add that all the time you see people trying to nullify the novelty of a waggle by working out the quickest and most effortless motion they can make to tell the game to perform the associated action, since Nintendo didn’t bother to refine the technology of their Wii mote in the first place to forbid this, just as Greg was pointing out in his talk, they have essentially made every gesture you can do exactly the same as pressing a button (only more annoying).

  28. Is Wii revolutionary?
    In a word, No. It is not revolutionary in the sense that this is what people will be using from now on, nor is it revolutionary in the sense that it’s new technology. It’s old technology presented in a new way, more or less slappin some motion sensors in a case and labelling it the Wii. Instead of being revolutionary, it’s an alternative to the old generic controller button based consoles.

    Does the Wii have an upper hand at immersing a player into the game?
    Greater immersion physically, yes. Greater emotional immersion, no. To be a truly immersive, mentally stimulating game that makes people forget who they really are and that they have to eat, a game has to have the core ingredients such as an engaging plot, characters and setting.
    See, I don't know about any of you, but there have been many times when I've been playing a game - using a PlayStation controller and i've been fully immersed in the gameplay. When something's jumped out at me i've literally jumped and had an 'OH SHIT!' reflex. My heart pounds faster, i start getting all jumpy and crack under the pressure.... This wasn’t because i felt any more like i was there because i was waving a remote through the air, but because of the great story telling of the game, the sound effects, the aesthetics the game had that kept it visually stimulating for me. The game had me sucked right in and i knew that was the feeling of becoming completely immersed within the realms of a game. In my extremely brief use of a Wii (which i must point out that for the most part i am speculating with all the crap that i’m saying) i have yet to feel that complete and utter sense of immersion.
    Also i must bring up that creating emotion, it's not done through just one thing - it's the combination of everything complimenting and feeding off the other element to enhance that one. If you were to play a high intentensity FPS with the sound on mute, you wouldn't get the same experience as if you had your surround sound system cranked up to 11. The game stimulates multiple senses, sight, sound, possibly attempted stimulus of feeling through a vibrating controller.
    Creating emotion through video games can be paralleled to when creating emotion through art (not that our video games aren’t artworks, but in a more stereotypical gallery, paint on canvas type art). The medium or console does not necessarily determine how successfully an artwork or game can make someone feel a sense of emotion, it’s the content within the artwork or game. The medium is merely the vehicle and means to convey this and make it accessible to various audiences – some people like sculptures better, in the same sense that some may like to play Wii more and others PlayStation or Xbox. The different platforms are so that video game companies can target a larger demographic and have their game more broadly used.
    The Wii is one of these different consoles that appeals to a different audience, and is by no way anything new in this sense. Singstar, Guitar Hero, gun controllers, Dance Dance Revolution, EyeToy, GameCube microphone, and more are all just different ways of playing video games because gamers need some sort of diversity in their playing. They also can serve a different purpose in the sense that someone at home who's just in a vegeing mood is probably more likely to pick up a controller such as that of the PlayStation or XBox so he/she can jsut sit there and play with minimal effort. Whereas if you're at a party and people are hyped up, have been drinking and they're more likely to want to make themselves look silly, Singstar, Guitar Hero and Wii would be great. Singstar and Guitar Hero can also be based on a regular swapping turn based thing for a group, changing after every song. And in this sense is great for immersing an entire group in the game - fast paced switching rather than waiting for someone who's playing a single player game and also just watching the people who are playing the game is entertaining for everyone who's not.
    I don’t believe that Wii expected the ‘revolution’ to occur over night and as Greg stated in his group talk, the Wii has a great idea but it has a very long way to go and lots needs to be developed before it’s going to be considered a serious revolutionary product. So instead at this stage, the Wii is more like an extention to normal button pressing games rather than the complete alternative. This can be demonstrated through games like Mario Party 8 and Mario Kart Wii. These games have taken the original way to playing the game using a normal controller like the GameCube or N64 and extended the playing experience with the capabilities of the Wiimote. Mario Kart gives the user the OPTION to replace this 'old' way of playing with the experience of using the Wiimote as a steering wheel and tilting it to turn a corner. And in Mario Party, the old way of playing with buttons is still used in some mini games and then there are some mini games where you must use the Wiimote in the way of swinging, waggling it in the air, etc.
    Nintendo has created these games where you don't HAVE to just use the Wiimote in the way of moving it around in mid air but also gives you the option to play using the 'old' way with the purpose of helping to intorduce the Wii and its new features to gamers. Mario Kart and Mario Party are hugely sold and played games and with their reputation and evolution from the N64 to the GameCube and now the Wii, they have quite a large fanbase. Nintendo would have been expecting and hoping that these games get players from the old consoles to fall in love with using the Wii and make the transition.
    This brings me to why i think that Nintendo has created this product in the first place – well one of the reasons. Nintendo has introduced this console as a solution to the problem that the common media has been bitching about for years: childhood obesity and the like. Nintendo has released this as an alternative to normal sit down button pressing consoles. ...yes you can play a Wii in that way with some of their games but the option is there to win over naive parents trying to prevent obesity in their child. My mum is the coordinator of an Out Of School Hours Care at a primary school and is considering upgrading the GameCube they currently have to a Wii. She realises that the kids can use it and sit and play Mario Kart like they have been or in the attempt to get the kids active, they can play Wii Sports.

    Quoted from Rachel – “But as I said, personal preference as well as experience/a combination of external factors reign - I understand someone playing an RTS for the very first time, that happens to be on a console, would most likely find it more exciting than a seasoned Warcraft III veteran used to pwning no0bs on the PC.”
    I agree with this and would like to add some ramblings... The amount of enjoyment (which is a positive emotion) that the player gets out of a game can be said to be relative to how much fun you've had doing the same differently. In other words, picture this: you're at a cafe and have a fuckin fantastic iced chocolate. Now, the next day you're somewhere different and order an iced chocolate. But this one's nowhere near as good... You're going to be disappointed (well I would be anyway). Whereas if you had had the second iced chocolate without having that prior knowledge and experience of the previous, you would probably be none the wiser and enjoy your iced chocolate - probably to a lesser extent, but you wouldn't have that other one to compare it to so how would you know that you're missing out?

    @Tim Goschnick, All i'm gonna say is, I agree :) and great comments there, you expressed things that i would have liked to have said but hadn't considered as of yet.
    And great work on the lame joke! I enjoy a good one as they seem to be the only sort of joke i can come up with most of the time lol.

    And in response to Carla's post, i've heard those Blue-Rays are quite dangerous, Steve Erwin knows what i'm talking about ...i apologise if that was distasteful, no offense intended...
    ...maybe if a blue ringed octopus and a stingray got together that's what their kids would be like... Anyway...

    Sorry for the long post :S I’m surprised i crapped on for that long
    Thanks for reading :)

  29. Aha Dylan, loved the iced chocolate analogy.

    Every time I think some piece of programmed prose has spoiled all other games for me, some other piece of genius comes and enfolds me with it's gentle, digital embrace.

    Bioshock, Okami, Audiosurf, Left 4 Dead, N+, Mario Galaxy, Disgaea, Little Big Planet, The World Ends with You... so much goodness.

    @My Bratz Reference

    Ok ok, I know that developers working on a Bratz game wouldn't get superior pay. It was a hypothetical situation. A silly one, I'll grant you that.


    Good point on the whole "People gaming to feel like a [insert wish-fulfillment role here]" A lot of really awesome games are really awesome because they make you feel like a general, or a spy, or a rockstar. I think, apart from it's accessibility, that may be one reason Wii Sports works so well.

    -Ned Kirner

    (PS. Thanks for following that up for me Floyd, will check the blog!)

  30. This comment has been removed by the author.

  31. This comment has been removed by the author.

  32. Nintendo, in my opinion, is a huge company that is interested more in R&D than anything else.

    Nintendo likes to put forward new (or seemingly new, for some of you) and "innovative" ideas and see how the community of gamers (be it casual, or hardcore. see bottom of comment for more info on types of gamers) respond to it. It's sort of like fiddling around with elements in chemistry and observing the physical/chemical changes and reactions.

    By doing this, Nintendo provides the potential of a "revolution", not necessary the revolution itself. So... this is all merely some sort of experimentation?, and... WE'RE THE HAMSTERS?!! w00t! \o/

    I'm going to link this topic to Marcel Duchamp's urinal which I had mentioned in the first class blog. Basically during the early 1900s, when art was still considered "paintings" and "sculptures" and anything physically crafted, a guy by the name Marcel comes up and takes a urinal (a "readymade" in this case) to an art exhibition where it had been announced that all submitted work would be accepted. The exhibition owners were furious about the urinal, I can imagine them saying, "Oh-la-la Marcel!! Vat's zis urinal doing here, zis is an "art" gellary, not a batroom! Vat are you sinking??" (yeah, sorry, if only they had expressions like OMGWTFBBQ! back then, would have be sooo much cooler :D). The fountain was lost (probably thrown away), but what people learned from this experience was that art was more than crafted objects. The idea of art as intellectual interpretation was put forward.

    I see Nintendo as another Marcel. Is the world ready for something new, or is everyone too busy with what they have in their hands at the moment that we're all just ignoring or pushing away new ideas (ie. new ways of thinking/new ways of playing)? Unfortunately, there are so many noobs out there that steer away from Wii simply by thinking "this is for kids", but that's a discussion topic of its own.

    Anyway, I shall conclude my comment with three interesting links:

    1. Did you know Nintendo only makes $6 on each Wii console it sells? (see:

    2. Here's an article on the different types of gamers: And here's the Wii MotionPlus I mentioned during the first presentation: and (these two link may be useful for the group who will be doing homebrew on wii :) )

    That's all from me.


    P.S. sorry about previous posts >.<

  33. omg, the third link keeps getting stuck to the end of the second, I had to delete my post two times, and it's still not fixed!! grrr >_<;

  34. @Chad How can Nintendo be the video game industry's Duchamp if the technology already existed? Not only that, but as you said, people scorned Duchamp and questioned his as artistic merit. Nintendo is not only already one of the biggest players of the video game market, but the Wii has been accepted by everyone (without question) as a next gen video game console.
    This is my opinion, but if they are researching and experimenting on us, it's only with the goal to see how much money they can get from us.

    I just read that link about Wii's $6 profit on each console. At first I thought your point was to suggest they made little profit from their consoles, but then I read this "In stark contrast to Sony and Microsoft, Nintendo also reaps the added benefit of making a profit on each Wii sold."

    @everyone The word Revolution generally means "A sudden or momentous change in a situation". What's happening in the games industry isn't happening particularly fast. I think it would be better described as evolving. It's survival of the fittest in games; The technology Nintendo is using has become more refined over years of trial and error. We're not going to see a dramatic change in the industry next year, or even five years from now, but in ten or twenty years who knows what it might have become?

    I finish with a link to this unprofessional article about Nintendo. I like the picture. The words are good too:

  35. Sigh to sum everything up, personal preference and ability of the game designers to successfully utilize a console's features etc etc.

    By the way the gears of war photoshop guy, :O great stuff, it really spoke to me.

  36. @Leigh: Agreed with Gan, that macro moved me to tears of joy.

  37. Also @Cherie: you are completely brilliant, I agree with every single one of your points. Yahtzee is overrated to the (n+1)th deg though. Regardless: e-marriage?

  38. Nice Lecture and it was very interesting to hear both sides of what people thought about a particular topic.

    In my opinion the Nintendo company is always taking the first big step in improving the gaming industry. I've always been a huge fan of the Nintendo because through the years it has always delivered fun games.

    I don't just get involved in a game based on the graphics and sound alone, though i agree they do contribute to a great game. What's more important to me is the way it gets me involved and into the game making me want to play it over and over again which in my mind becomes a great game.

    With the Nintendo Wii I agree with the group presentation when they said that the Wii mote is "only a key opening the door"
    I also think through time it will be the future of gaming "the revolution"

    That is all

  39. The first point I’d like to discuss from the last lecture was introduced by the boys in the 2nd presentation. They were referring to the article written by Ian Bogost , titled, “Persuasive Games: Wii’s Revolution is in the Past” . Bogost posed the question, “Would carjacking have the same impact if it required several physical gestures to open the door...” Personally, I am of the opinion that Bogost misses the point of difference provided by the Wii Console.

    The Wii is great for interactive social games and sports games because the Wii-mote encourages a player to mimic “realistic” actions when playing these games. Through the mimic of real actions, a person’s imagination is easily boosted so that a player can connect closer to the “real” game or action. Games styles and genre’s are as varied as the people that play them and in the same way that some prefer a PC system, others a classic console, and others still a Nintendo DS or Wii, not all games suit all types of systems and really, do they have to? I believe that a single game does not have to suit all systems. Variety is the spice of life after all and different strokes for different folks.

    Most Humans are trained from an early age to label, box and define everything. We do not seem to realize how we limit ourselves and our perceptions of the world by doing this. Our perception of the world is related to how we define the world. Many spiritual philosophies have been saying this for centuries.

    So, some games, like Grand Theft Auto and First Person Shooters aren’t suited to the Wii Console, so what. That’s what PC’s, Xbox 360’s and PS3’s are for. Point of difference is important when marketing a product, otherwise, why bother switching or trying it? This is basic commonsense in business and marketing strategy.

    Secondly, I would like to congratulate the first team on a wonderful presentation with a strong argument. The article “A Console to Make You Wiip” has based it’s whole argument on what I believe is a faulty definition of the term, emotional, based on American psychologist, William James. In my opinion, he is confusing emotional with interactive. Today we live in a world where media, tv, advertising, entertainment and sport make us desensitized in many ways. Unfortunately, in my opinion, many people out there no longer connect action with feeling or emotion because of this socialized desensitization. That means that to act in today’s age, one does not necessarily need to feel. Take a look at the “Bowling for Columbine” scenario or any other similar act such as War and the dehumanization of the enemy or other (refer to Sam Keen “Faces of the Enemy”).

    My Apple Dictionary provides the following definition for emotional:

    emotional |iˈmō sh ənəl|
    of or relating to a person's emotions : children with emotional difficulties.
    • arousing or characterized by intense feeling : an emotional speech.
    • (of a person) having feelings that are easily excited and openly displayed : he was a strongly emotional young man.
    based on emotion rather than reason : sound reason, not an emotional knee-jerk response, is the best recipe for making decisions.

    Whereas movement is defined as:

    movement |ˈmoōvmənt|
    1 an act of changing physical location or position or of having this changed : a slight movement of the upper body | the principle of the free movement of goods between member states.
    • an arrival or departure of an aircraft.
    • (also bowel movement) an act of defecation.
    • ( movements) the activities and whereabouts of someone, esp. during a particular period of time : your movements and telephone conversations are recorded.
    • the general activity or bustle of people or things in a particular place : the scene was almost devoid of movement.
    • the quality of suggesting motion in a work of art : the painting was a busy landscape, full of detail and movement.
    • the progressive development of a poem or story : the novel shows minimal concern for narrative movement.
    • a change or development in something : movements in the underlying financial markets.
    2 [often with adj. ] a group of people working together to advance their shared political, social, or artistic ideas : the labor movement.
    • [usu. in sing. ] a campaign undertaken by such a group : a movement to declare war on poverty.
    • a change in policy or general attitudes seen as positive : the movement toward greater sexual equality.
    3 Music a principal division of a longer musical work, self-sufficient in terms of key, tempo, and structure : the slow movement of his violin concerto.
    4 the moving parts of a mechanism, esp. a clock or watch.
    ORIGIN late Middle English : via Old French from medieval Latin movimentum, from Latin movere ‘to move.’

    and action is:

    action |ˈak sh ən|
    1 the fact or process of doing something, typically to achieve an aim : demanding tougher action against terrorism | if there is a breach of regulations, we will take action.
    • the way in which something such as a chemical has an effect or influence : the seeds require the catalytic action of water to release hotness.
    • armed conflict : servicemen listed as missing in action during the war.
    • a military engagement : a rearguard action.
    • the events represented in a story or play : the action is set in the country.
    • informal exciting or notable activity : the nonstop action of mountain biking | people in the media want to be where the action is.
    • informal betting.
    • [as exclam. ] used by a movie director as a command to begin : lights, camera, action!
    2 a thing done; an act : she frequently questioned his actions | I would not be responsible for my actions if I saw him.
    • a legal process; a lawsuit : an action for damages.
    • a gesture or movement : his actions emphasized his words.
    3 [usu. with adj. ] a manner or style of doing something, typically the way in which a mechanism works or a person moves : a high paddle action in canoeing | the weapon has speed and smooth action.
    the mechanism that makes a machine or instrument work : a piano with an escapement action.

    Have you ever been so tired that your body has gone into a form of “remote-control” to get yourself home or to finish working? This is action, but where may I ask is the emotion? In a nut-shell, I believe that the first presenting group’s arguments won the day. Yes, Wii is more interactive physically and possibly even socially but it is not necessarily more emotive than other games or consoles. Many factors contribute to a person feeling emotions. Sound, art design, story and mood, just to name a few of these factors.

    Thirdly, EXERGAMES! Fun, fun fun!!! Games are traditionally the playing arena for nerdy and geeky types who do not as a rule play sports or “jog” regularly. Providing a fun outlet to keep these people fit is wonderful and it also makes games more inclusive to traditionally sports orientated, “jock” types. It’s win-win all round really, the biggest thing lacking is SUNSHINE & FRESH AIR. (I'm just practicing being an old person who is just going to die anyway??!!??!)

    I'm studying Games for the love, not money and many of us are.

    Cheers for listening all.

  40. Before i start i would like to say that i agree largely with Tim's and leigh's arguements, but i'll try not to repeat anything.

    Ok about immersion, emotion and the wii.
    To be immersed within a game for me usually requires the right atmosphere. By this i mean the whole composition of media elements that engage as many of the players senses as possible. So it could be argued that immersion, meaning to be involved or absorbed deeply within whatever the individual is putting themselves into,(btw could be antything from thought to water) is the result of convincing a person's senses (to view, hear, feel, smell and taste) that they are experiencing more than what is going on in the lounge. Therefore it can be conceded that if a game can convince more of the player's senses the more immersed s/he will be. Generally the quality of the audio or visuals will help draw in and create an appealing game, but are not the essential qualities. The real selling point for an immersive game is to implement these qualities with engaging gameplay that follows an interesting and exciting storyline. Think back to the times of the first playstation when games graphics were, lets face it - terrible, and we knew it when compared to some games for computers around the same time. Never-the-less there were games that involved the player so much more than had been tried on previous consoles or even the computer. I remember watching dad play, so completely immersed that not only was he unable to hear anyone around him, he had lost control of his body and reactions. Many, many times my brother and i had a good laugh at him jumping out of his seat, leaning from side(attempting to look around the next corner) flailing around as if he was dodging bullets and falling off of the chair. The best bit was when he didn't even get back up - maybe rising to his knees, with an unbreakable look in his eyes forever glued to the tv. That kind of immersion comes from captivating the player in a story or with gameplay that drives and motivates the player to play. Of course this like most things is subjective as different people are captivated by different things.
    However emotion is mental, and to create emotional bonds or ties to characters, worlds or stories predominantly requires interest within them. This is because emotions and feelings toward these things need time to grow, and interest will ensure that the player continues to follow the game and its characters. - A player will never instantly love a world or a character at a level where they really care about what happenes to them. Not until they become more familiar with their characteristics, personality, attitude and life as we recognise simmilarities, differences, the positives and negatives between 'us' and 'them,' will the player begin to 'care.' A good emotional game helps a player to determine what they think about the characters, the world or the story and make a judgement on how they feel about them. Throughout a game the player will learn more about the characters and be able to see things from their perspectives, allowing the player to connect to them and actually see them as another person. Conversely there are the emotions created around the game that are not aimed towards any particular character, world or story, rather the idea of the game or the competition/ challenge it creates. Games such as these pull emotions from players as they invest time and effort to succeed, often becoming far more entertaining when played socially, much like a party game. This adds pressure and live competition that both captivate and engage the players. In fact, the more physical the game the more powerful emotions like passion or anger emerge from both players and spectators. This is most evident in sports (as was demonstrated in the lecture) because they (the players) are putting far more into winning than any other type of game. A sport/game like football used to be played by individuals who worked other jobs and got together to play on top of that, as it was seen as more of a game. Now it is a 'proffessional sport' that sees players training all year round full time, which is now actully making it less of a game. Just a question - Are modern sports still games? What about when played proffessionally??

    Ok the Wii. Im tired now so in short - The Wii does not help create emotion within games nor does it immerse players within them. That is completely up to the games and their designers. However some games particularly social games and sporting games still do help to generate emotion in players, because as with real sports it takes effort to play. Although like i mentioned above this root of emotion does not stem from the game rather what the player gives the overall notion of the activity and how they feel playing it.
    errrr, kinda forgotten what else i was going to say, so errrrr yea
    Coolio :P

  41. Great comment Pranee :) Thank you for the kind words.

    @Cherie: New ideas, new ways of thinking. Not nessesarily new technology. Good points there :)

  42. Hi, its Nicholas again.

    Concerning Rachel's comment (on my comment) of the effects of a platform on the kind of game being played.

    Yes, consoles in this case a infinitely inferior to the capability of keyboards to perfrom uber-micro on liek 3 fronts at once at least in RTS games. While the advantages and disadvantages are very obvious in this sense, I would like to point out (if I haven't already) that I feel that if gameplay and mechanics are good, the game is good regardless of platform. However, the method of input varies greatly and does affect the user's performance, but this isn't so much a gameplay design issue as it is a control scheme issue.

    (Asking everyone & anyone), are there any RTS games on the Wii? I'm sure there are some interesting possibilites there as the motion controls may mimic the mouse tracking on PCs.

    Also, to Ned: Yes, it's criminal that AvP2 had no sequel, but as mentioned by Rapahel, there are games in the same universe in the works and I can't wait to let loose with a new Pulse Rifle. Or a Smartgun. Or a nasty retextured AP bullet handgun. That'd be awesome.

    * At this point I would like to apologise for showing my love for AvP2, if it IS to the discomfort of anyone reading this blog. I will, in future, avoid such actions.

    Nicholas Lim Chong Hock

  43. hello children
    lovely presentation chads group. there's not a whole lot i can say considering i've never played wii and dont play any other games besides musical nots on my phone and harvest moon on sony 1 O_o yep i'm gross. i really dont have the brain capacity to go into deep discussion and write out a novel but i thought you put across a great argument and made alot of great points and i agreed with alot of the things you all said. and unfortunately due to personal reasons i couldnt stick around for the second presentation my bad. sa sorry.
    any one need a group of 5 holla! 0438434189 Amanda Joy Bailey (:(:

  44. Centrifugal SpawnApril 28, 2009 at 5:42 PM

    Hellooo, Adrienne Giuliano 3236467 here 0___^ Now I'm going to try not to repeat anything anyone else has said but given how thoroughly the topic of last lecture has been covered that's going to be pretty impossible.

    Firstly I'd like to begin by applauding the two groups who presented. I was extremely impressed with the thoroughness and detail that the first group went into when exploring the concept of the Wii as an immersive console and the depth they went to. Not only did they discuss the Wii capabilities/incapabilities (depending on your point of opinion)on immersing a player in the game, but also the key factors of games which did or did not allow this to be possible or were entirely unaffected by the control system of the console, such as the importance of the storyline, the purpose and focus of the gameplay, and the use of audio and visuals. Well done! As for the second group I was also impressed with the depth they went to in discussing their topic.

    Now as for my opinion. I personally am anti-Wii, although I do strongly believe - similarly to Chad - that the concept behind the control system is not only a refreshingly different concept to what most gamers are used to, but a concept that could initially be developed into something that makes the game experience far more realistic and/or enjoyable in te future. Unfortunately Nintendo's ability to convert this idea into the real thing falls way too short of anything remotely brilliant due to a number of details. 1: as Greg mentioned in the presentation, the movements required for the Wii controller to translate it as say swinging a tennis racquet may be as simple as a basic wrist movement - while getting completely into the game and performing a complete swing may result in a miss. And as Carla noted regardless of how you swing the Wiimote in Zelda, Link will still perform the same sword slash. If performing even the most half-hearted twitches will stimulate your little character to perform the same action as any amount of enthusiasm, you might as well be button pressing.

    I agree with the point someone made however that the Wii is suitable more for non-gamers as they want something which they can pick up and play instinctively without having to learn buttons. However, while it is evident that nintendo are more interested in incorporating all age-groups, it does mean at the same time that the Wii becomes a console that traditional gamers may find difficult to adjust to. You don't go home to play the Wii on your own, you play teh Wii with other people. I believe that if it were such a brilliant concept to incorporate the use of motion by the Wiimotes, then Nintendo would not have needed to make a normal controller for the Wii for those unimpressed with the "waggle". In fact, I have found that rather than immerse you easier, the Wii can detract from games. For example, I was a major fan of the original mario kart and have followed its progress to the N64, then the DS (which does not suck as much as people say and even has better vehicle handling than the N64 version). But then I played it on the Wii, and despite attempting the wheel and the normal Wiimote, I found both times it was near impossible to control my kart and overall I walked away completely unimpressed. The only upside was ramming my kart into the people next to me and forcing them into my turmoil. ^.^ And before I am accused of basing my opinions on one experience, I have played several other Wii games, all of which left me unsatisfied and willing to prove that a Wiimote *can* embed itself in a double brick wall.

    Overall however I am willing to accept that the Wiimote does have some amount of immersive ability, but it is initially only a controller like the Xbox and the Playstation's controllers, and it is the game that generally determines the playability and enjoyment the player will get out of it. Oh and that little clip at the end about exertion games? That was quite cool, wouldn't mind playing that only I suck at soccer and throwing, but it did give me a clearer concept on exertion games (aka sports -.-). Although here's a concept: even if the Wii or any other console could refine the motion system so that movements were clearer and truer to life, and perhaps even create some type of vest that gives you the feel that you are being hit by a sword/gunfire etc to amplify gameplay etc etc, how could you make your character walk? (this is asuming all future games of this type become completely motion orientated) Would you need some sort of all-way treadmill that you can walk and strafe on?

    Anyway I'll conclude with saying another awesome lesson, Floyd! For the first time I was actually challenged to consider why I really don't like the Wii. And considering all the other consoles have cool or half-decent names (Xbox, Playstation, Dreamcast), what the hell is a 'Wii'? It sounds like something you do in the bathroom! O.o

    And I think I'll go now, I've got curry to eat tonight ^.^ Mmmmm goodness...

  45. Rhiannon BaragwanathApril 29, 2009 at 1:35 PM

    The class was very interesting! Unfortunately I don't have a huge input that no one has already said. For me, the Wii isn't all it's cracked up to be - it's very cute. I think Wii immersion is subjective. If you want it to be all consuming then it certainly can be but otherwise it's a bit of a chore actually. I think the nature of a game to a degree is to vege out and relax... and the Wii takes that away a little. Whether this is good or not, I can't decide. It defeats the purpose of a lazy video game, and if playing a lazy video game is what you want, then the Wii isn't really it. But its in some ways a good step. It has a large degree of immersion - it's physically interactive of course, but as someone said earlier on this topic, the interactivity isn't really much 'better' than something like a play station. It's just read differently. As in, shaking the remote or swinging it doesnt send any different information through it than pressing a button would, but it's a more satisfying and involving movement. As I said, I didn't really add anything to the discussion but that's all I have to say on the topic!

  46. This comment has been removed by the author.

  47. Ciao a tutti!

    I was part of the group who presented first and I must say that I was impressed with the feedback that we received. The questions asked were a mix of general and speciffic ones. I felt as though the questions not only allowed for the audience, that is our fellow peers, to ask us about aspects of our presentation, but it also allowed for us as individuals to demonstrate our understanding of the topic.

    Here are some pictures of our group and presentation.

    For the second group that presented, they did a fantastic job considering it was just the two of them. Their idea to divide the class into two sections - that is one for the wii and one opposing the wii was a good idea; however in the end I don't think that the intended purpose was met as people were forgetting which side they were on and answering on what they personally believed. BUT that is not to say it interfered with their presentation; it still provided a good means of discussing their topic and getting their point across. Well done guys ^_^

    Although I presented, I will post this, for those who are still in limbo with the term of immersion. I found this on a site that continues to explain the term immersion in reference to the wii:

    "Immersion is a state of being so focused on a specific problem or experience that there are no distractions. Blocking out distractions makes it possible to stimulate the senses to tap imagination, provide new experiences, and increase a person's knowledge or awareness. Immersion can be achieved in part by the illusion of reality, whether that reality is familiar or some new, plausible but unfamiliar place (inside a protein molecule, flying over Mars) and in part by merely engaging the senses, delighting the imagination and holding the user's attention much as theater does...The Wii Zapper provides perfect immersion for core players, putting them right in the game and into the action. Immediately accessible and absolutely intuitive, the Wii Zapper is part of the progression started by the Wii Remote, one that continues in 2008 with the Wii Wheel(TM) and Wii Balance Board(TM).”Our new Wii Zapper interface opens up a huge range of experiences for players and developers,” says George Harrison, Nintendo of America’s senior vice president of marketing and corporate communications. “Just as the Wii Remote put Link’s sword in your hands, now you physically pick up Link’s crossbow, take aim and shoot targets as though you were right in Hyrule. It’s another example of how Nintendo continues to change the way people interact with games.”

    This was sourced from:
    For those who wish to check it out, it is NOT entirely based on the wii, there is simply a few references, as for the rest of the site, it refers to immersion in other contexts.

    I do not feel that the wii will improve much ,if any, in the coming years. If they were serious about the feedback, in terms of the ability to pick up motion from any and every angle,they would not be putting out add-ons like the wii motion plus, they would instead, be working on a new wiimote that would do all that. In my opinion addons are, for the most part, gimmicks by companies to gain profit off of the consumer. Does the tennis racket add-on really improve feedback in a game and make the wiimote work like a tennis racket? Sure, it may have the feel and look of a tennis racket and it may "enhance" the experience but it is not going to improve the response received by the console to simulate a better hit by the player. For most of the add-ons this also applies with the exception of a few such as the guitar in guitar hero and the steering wheel; which without the add-on the game usability is affected. So to conclude, and basically reinstate what I mentioned in the presentation, the wiimote really only "enhances" the gaming experience.

    Thanks for another fantastic lecture Floyd :)


  48. Ok, not sure if I posted in the right place so better doing it here as well...

    I am not convinced that the physical play behind the Wii, enhances any kind emotional investment in game play, in contrast to any non physical game. I think the Wii (or any other physical simulation game) has not been fully developed to the absolute potential of the concept. While it has been proven that over a long period of time, the Wii produces physical weakness simular to that attained from actual sports. If the Wii can increase the physical and mental alertness and strength of individuals; in however disabled or fragile states, or enhance surgical abilities or advance research into medicine, then I would say it has met the standard.

    It’s comparatively new to start to question gaming in modern human civilization. Gaming itself, even being so new and guiltless it has occupied an audience that continues to grow beyond comprehension. I believe that Michel (I’m not sure exactly how to spell your name sorry! I know it’s not pronounced Michael so there is my shot) scraped the surface on why games attract us. What is the draw to the outwardly strange device that makes us want to play it?

    I can only really relate this to the experience I have learnt with my own personal life in the growing hobby. Scientific quotes are relatively few and mostly based on assumption that one can only narrate what their familiarity is in relevance to the lecture on Thursday night.

    Scientifically games produce little difference than anti-stress devices. Actively categorising those into other actions such as smoking, sports, getting high on drugs and other various activities that make them feel better than they already are. Gaming is essentially this and it’s easier to see why people who game are just as susceptible to addiction as they are to any of the listed previously.

    Even with sports, the Wii Sports range all coincides with this. Most people would agree that sky diving, base jumping or bungee are all classified as ‘high thrilled’, those would also agree that in order to compete as a professional in competitions with high thrilled sports, adrenaline plays a huge part in an addiction to the sport, that these thrill seekers have their various thrill seeking activities.

    Gaming is not so different. Everyone has their own reason for why they want to play games with a wide range of motivations, and it goes without saying that not everyone who plays games, plays for the same reason (as profusely evident in the class debates). Almost every game has a genre and that genre is designed around a certain audience.

    But even with simular audiences will play other genres for their own reasons. It provides evidence that genre’s are becoming dated. Games have now become platforms for all kinds of minds with all kinds of thinking processes. Instead of players who just want to play ‘that kind’ of game, it’s more where the stimulation and the mind meet. And you can look at the more popularised games and see the games that do well are till played at large today, are the games that the player’s themselves have customized and the type of game irrelevant.
    The personal influence drives gamers true interest in a game, and what thought processes they experience. A person can not distinguish their true nature, and though they may think that they like this game, as the game evolves, the person is likely to chance their preferences at an unconscious level, a personality magnet, able to chance our most inner preferences without us thinking about it.

    An example is that if a person, who has played a flight simulator enough, is most likely able to fly a real plane. I know personally of applications used in the defence for that train the reflexes and timing of their soldier’s with gaming.

    This is something the Wii would fulfil if it would reach its full potential. According to psychological evidence, games (not just those with physical game play) have a very real influence on our daily lives. I’d guaranty that none of us in the class are stranger to the power of games altering your thoughts, however for the better or not. The gaming addiction has far greater implications that gaming has on society and the world. Personally I find after playing games I’m a little sharper, perhaps a little more strategic in day to day events because of my interaction with games. It’s evident that games have an immense potential that the Wii is still far from discovery.

    Courtney Daly

  49. The debates that we have in class are so good, I love it. There are definitely some strong voices in the class, it's really interesting to listen to the arguments and rebuttals.

    The gaming industry has undergone such a massive shift from hardcore to casual in the last few years, it seems that alot of the negative Wii comments seem to be coming from people who appear, to me at least, to be more towards the hardcore end of gaming, whether that be they're really into FPS or RPG's, they're people with a taste for something that isn't what the Wii has to offer.
    The thing that I think its always good to keep in mind is that the Wii is not marketed towards the hardcore anymore, we are no-longer the intended customer, they can care less what we think these days, there's another crowd of people over there that are happy to pay them money to look like a lunatic. You only have to go as far as last years E3 to find that nintendo is more about smiles and 'fun' than emotional substance anymore. While this seems like a bad thing to the hardcore, to the casual gamer, this is really all they want. Something they can pick up and play for an hour and come back to whenever, or play with friends for fun. But for us, as hardcore gamers, we want realism/hyper-realism, we want to feel like a part of the action rather than a player, the feedback that would be required for that is a bit un-realistic, in terms of home gaming, unless there are some massive leaps in nano-technology or something, its hard to see now, with the limits of the technology we have what's possible in terms of making a game more realistic in terms of physical feedback in the future, to be honest I don't see the hardcore gaming market moving in that direction for a few years, perhaps after a few more generations of consoles we will see Microsoft or sony start to experiment with more forced feedback from controllers of accessories. Then again, if you take a look through the past failures of video game accessories, its pretty surprising that the wii has done so well, this is probably attributed to the current generation of technology at our disposal, I think I'm just starting to babble on here so I'll conclude.
    You can't fault Nintendo for taking the gaming industry in a new direction, they're out-selling the xbox and playstation, they made a console that essentially prints money for them. Just because its not what we, the hardcore, want in a console anymore doesn't mean that its bad. That's just how I feel about it anyways, sorry if I got a bit too far off topic.
    Ben Taylor (s3168518)

  50. The article "How the Nintendo Wii Will Get You Emotionally Invested in Video Games" asserts that the physical movement encouraged by the Wii will elicit a greater emotional attachment response than the standard input devices. The article seems to suggest that this is due to the activation of physiological responses which then produce an emotional response. However, the response can also operate the other way around - the emotion causes the physiological response. As Greg mentioned in the lecture, factors such as sound, atmosphere, gameplay, narrative, and graphics can be utilized to produce a strong emotional response.

    Did anyone else play System Shock 2? It's a bit old now (I think it was published in 1999 or something) but I remember being really emotionally immersed in that game. The sound was a big part of it - I remember being scared to walk around corners. Being frightened produces a physiological response - rapid heatbeart, dialated pupils etc., which in turn reinforce the "fear" emotion. So the Wii and more traditional input devices achieve the same physiological result; they just start the cycle at a different point.

    The Wiimote in its current form is not particularly revolutionary. As has been said, this technology has been in existence for some time now. In its current form, it acts as an accessible alternative to the more traditional input devices. It allows for easier (but not more extensive) game immersion, making it the ideal choice for the casual gamer.

    But does the Wiimote have potential? Most definitely. The technology need not even be developed by Nintendo themselves - in fact, I believe this to be unlikely. Nintendo is ultimately a corporation - their primary goal is to make money, not to revolutionize the way we play games (although I'm sure they would say differently).

    The following videos show some interesting potential applications for the technology, made by Johnny Chung Lee from Carnegie Mellon University:

    It is easy to see that with some further development, the Wiimote could become a really powerful tool for game immersion - could you imagine playing an FPS utilising head tracking like that?

    Lisa Dyball (s3229443)

  51. Oh gosh...I think it's quite clear that everyone has jumped on the write-a-novel bandwagon. I think we need to set a word limit for this thing : s. Seriously, I can skip a few comments but Floyd is going to spend entire nights reading about the Wii until he's left shaking in the corner.

    I think Adrienne said it well, it's very hard to say anything new and worthwhile when everyone is so darn opinionated : P.

    Well, I've read through most of the comments and it seems they almost all refer to the Wii as either not worth talking about as a revolution, or an evolution that brings immersion somewhat closer to the player. But, as I mentioned in the lecture, I have to disagree. I think the Wii appeals for an entirely different reason than immersion.

    I think Greg’s example of S.T.A.L.K.E.R. really demonstrates that. I mean, the Wii is fantastic but what the Wii does is make the game play both accessible and incredibly fun. It’s the same type of emotional involvement you receive from playing sports. You get all riled up and elated but it’s got nothing to do with deep immersion. Like I said, I’d prefer to call it involvement. What makes Stalker so fantastic is its attack on the imagination. Through avid use of the beautiful graphics, a fantastic soundtrack and I well built environment it makes us believe we’re in Chernobyl; it makes us want to believe we’re in Chernobyl. It’s all a matter of creating an entirely different world for the player to exist in. Why? Because every player plays those types of deeply immersive games for one reason, escapism. We want to get away from reality and enter a world that’s exciting and cool and full of explosions.

    In that way, however, the Wii’s motion-sensitive remote detracts from the immersion. I believe that Michele referred to this during the second presentation. What the remote is doing, effectively, is pulling you back out into reality, making you aware of your own actions and thus your existence in dull, boring world we know so well. I see a great deal of comments refer to PC games being some highly immersive games and I agree wholeheartedly. A PC can pull you in so much better than a console. I believe this is because you’re typically closer to the screen, you don’t have to move often, and the little movement you make to play the game is not enough to pull you out of fantasy (particularly after it becomes second nature).

    However, this by no means an ‘against’ argument for the Wii’s utter brilliance. What Nintendo has done is effectively implement a sense of involvement and casual fun in their games that is winning the hearts of both a hardcore gamer’s market, and a market that holds just everyone else. It’s just like different flavours of ice cream; some people like vanilla, some people like chocolate. They’re both ice cream but it depends on what you like. And there’s always going to be those people who find it so hard to believe that someone doesn’t like exactly what they like and find it necessary to yell out “You like chocolate? YOU ‘TARD! VANILLA FTW! It has such better graphics” or something like that : P. Some people enjoy playing the Wii with its emotional involvement and bundles of happy funtime, while others love the immersion of a good PC game. But I’m being general again. Though the motion-sensitive controls detract from the immersion of a game, they do not make it impossible. Some of the best games on the Wii, such as Zelda: Twilight Princess, are fantastic because they combine both that fun remote-swinging and a deep immersion.

    Nevertheless, I think truly deep immersion is most easily achieved through a less physically interactive format and a more mentally interactive and imaginative format.

    ...and it seems I’ve written a tonne as well. Sorry Floyd, I’ll stop now : P.

    Courtesy of Jacob.

    (P.S. I don’t know if it’s sad or totally awesome that iced treats have been used twice as examples this week)

  52. Very difficult to contribute to the blog with 1 hand (I'm sure most of you noticed my gimpy-ness last week) but luckily I got most of my discussion/questions out during the actual lecture.

    Thankyou to both groups for giving me PLENTY of food for thought and thanks to Floyd for making the lecture entertaining enough that I didn't care about missing dinner! Anyway my doctor says not to type so that's all from me this week.


  53. Hello all, awesome lecture last week! Everyone contributed and the discussion was fruitful. Both groups presented perfectly, but I have to say group 2’s discussion really blew my mind away.

    Now, the Wiimote as a revolution …hmm. I don’t know. I’m not a fan of the Wii.

    The Wiimote is an interesting tool for gaming; unfortunately, it hasn’t quite reached its peak. When I play games, I don’t like being aware of my movements. I just want to get into it and mash away. Playstation 3’s Sixaxis Wireless Controller, utilizes a similar sensitivity mechanism as the Wiimote – but without being intrusive and annoying. You’re still rewarded with a fancy movement on screen, you still get that action/reaction, but you’re not waving your arm around…

    (Here’s an example of SIXAXIS. In this vid, the controller is used to guide arrows:

    Overall, it’s clear that the Wii (Wiimote) is a favourite, but for how long? The graphics aren’t that crash hot and the games seem a little repetitive. But I like the details and pretty quick-time events of PS3 games, so the Wiimote is a little poo-ish to me.

    Once again, awesome presentations last week!

    Sama Rind (3239506)

  54. Ok, so regarding the Wii’s ability to improve immersion… It doubtlessly adds a dimension to the playing experience, even if that happens to be spastically waving your arms around. Don’t get me wrong, there is certainly potential. It’s just that neither Nintendo nor the Third Party devs have made any genuine attempts to utilise the Wii-motes full potential to create an immersive playing experience… Maybe the big guns are waiting for motion plus, or the next iteration of the Wii/everything else. (All of which will doubtlessly include motion control) Hmm, this is sounding like a re-telling of group ones presentation so far. >.>

    Umm, I guess I would say that the Wii is an important step for gaming…but it’s a bit unnecessary. Or maybe it’s more of a failed attempt… I believe I read in an interview that Nintendo president Satoru Iwata said that he wished the 3rd party devs would put more effort into their Wii games. I would say Nintendo has so far been setting a pretty poor example. Sure, the games are good as always, but even the motion controls in Zelda: TP didn’t amount to anything more than a lazy flick of the wrist here and there. But then like somebody pointed out it was probably a Gamecube port. ANYWAY.

    Let me give an example of what I consider to be real immersion. This is going to be spoiler filled so RUN AWAY.


    Half Life 2: episode 2 was another stellar entry in valves masterpiece. (WHERE IS NUMBER 3 VALVE? GETTING IMPATIENT.) In the game you play as Gordon Freeman. He’s a scientist with a PHD in ass kicking…I am so sorry. Anyway, you play from 1st person perspective, and there are no cut scenes in the game whatsoever. The story is told entirely through gameplay. Valve has commented several times about this technique, saying they feel it is an essential evolution for storytelling in games. The other important element to the story is that Gordon Freeman has practically no personality. He never speaks. His personality is defined by his actions in the game. Sure, everybody in the game seems to love him, but you’re basically free to attach whatever personality YOU want on him. This creates an attachment to the character that transcends conventional character development.

    Near the end of episode 2, things finally start to look up for Gordon and his friends in the battle against the combine. Just as you think you can finally relax, you, your friend Alyx and her father are ambushed by these alien things with the power to control space. You ran into them before, and they seem to delight in human suffering. They basically freeze you in place against a wall, and begin their slow ritual for killing people. They choose Alyx’s father first. She begins to scream and cry while her dad reassures her that it will be all right, even though it won’t. It was at this moment that I realised that I was more immersed in a game than I had ever been before. By giving me complete freedom throughout the entire game, and then suddenly taking away my ability to move at such a crucial moment was just shocking.


    Anyway, the point is that good immersion comes from creating an experience. This can be done through storytelling, a game mechanic or even a control mechanism. Motion control is the first step in the right direction. It’s not necessarily gonna revolutionise anything but it’s at least got everybody talking about innovation/immersion. (even if it is mostly about why it’s failing lolol)

    Thanks for your time, and yes, I realise that wasn't particularly coherent. Oh and cheers for last lecture Floyd.

    John Gregg.

  55. Hello, this is Lawrence Wong (3175889)

    First of all before I start touching my ideas about last class, I would like to say that the 2 presentations by the Magnificent 7 and another group (couldn’t recall the name) are impressive.
    *From my point of view for this topic, the first group point some interested points as for example, I certainly agree with Gregg that wii mote is still not enough but it eventually will get better with coming major updates such as to make it more realistic than it is now.
    *As in the other case that will wii able to affect players emotion? My answer is yes. There are some still some games that able to affect a player or peoples` emotion by playing wii such as the environment graphics, sounds and etc. For a example, a wii game called (Trauma Centre), you play as a surgery doctor/surgeon to operate or to help the patients from various kind of illness/emergency. This game is play with the nunchuk and as if you are really into to operate someone. The point I want to state here is that some people will just don’t have the guts (for some reason such as they really freaked by the body organs, the blood spill and etc).
    *Also, if I am asked to prefer a better story line for wii with funky or it couldn’t compete against games by PC and PS3 games then I would rather choose to play wii. Imo, people should have know that pc got various type of graphics card that increase a performance for graphics of the game and PS3 are more likely graphic based game. But as for wii, you could do odd movement with nunchuck depends on the game your playing which it will make someone thrill.
    *Lastly, about the wii and the wiimote, I would like to say it is already a real high – technology gaming system and joystick for me at least, as I play on few console such as 360,ps1-3, N64, etc. I can see that Nintendo will be improving more and like what I mentioned above, maybe there are some new accessories for coming version of wii such as 3d specs and etc.

    Lawrence Wong

  56. This comment has been removed by the author.

  57. The first group made the point that the physical interaction isn’t what drives the game and gets the player engrossed – they believed the storyline, music, characters etc. is what makes the player emotionally engaged in the game. And I agree. Take Mass Effect for example. I absolutely loved it and found myself ‘emotionally immersed’ and yet the aspect that absorbed me the most wasn’t the combat, the part that involved the most interaction, but the dialogue. In the cut scenes of the game the player is able to select a line of dialogue from alternatives and sit back and watch the consequences – it’s like a movie where you get to choose what happens. And some of these physical-interaction-free choices did cause emotion – like the part where the player has to decide which of their beloved, loyal team members must die.

    The first article talks about emotions belonging to the body and that therefore the Wii, being more physical, would create more emotion in the player. They used the example of “a person encountering a bear in the woods”. But, if done the right way, I believe that just >watching< footage of a bear encounter could evoke very similar feelings of emotion without any physical interaction involved at all. This brings me to the point of movies. Movies have always been used to engage the viewer emotionally. One can get emotional when watching a movie and that requires a lot less physical interaction than a console game. Plus, the viewer doesn’t get to choose anything! It’s all set out before them. (The only thing they do have control over is whether they actually watch the movie or not).

    But, all of this is not to say that the Wii >doesn’t< hook you in and get you absorbed. (Yes, I am a fence sitter.) My point is, I don’t think the Wii necessarily makes you >more< immersed in the game than a PC or console game – it’s just a >different< way.

    The first article states “although [The Wii] can’t compete with the visual realism of Sony and Microsoft, it ends up feeling more realistic”. But I disagree. I don’t believe it feels >more< realistic – it is just realistic in a >different< way. Other consoles create realism in their storylines, characters, graphics and sounds whereas Wii creates realism through the physical interaction.

    The Wii’s visuals have purposely been downgraded in sacrifice for the ability of physical interaction. And yes, as the first group pointed out, the other consoles aim for hyper realistic graphics, characters, sounds and storylines. But this level of realism doesn’t necessarily mean that the player will become engrossed and emotionally attached to the game. I’m sure a lot of us have laughed at a crudely drawn comic before. I particularly liked Pranee’s point about games like bowling or even Tetris - that they don’t necessarily have a storyline or great graphics and sound in order for them to be engrossing or emotional – just the simple act of trying to get a high score can immerse the player.

    I thought Anh-Tu also made a good point in the discussion- that we, as gamers, are a different audience than those that use the Wii. The article suggests that the simplified graphics may increase a game’s approachability and I think that this has caused an interest for the people who play the console as a social tool and therefore have little interest in the graphics or visual realism. The game is also more approachable for this audience as gestures come more naturally to the player than pressing buttons. As the first article states “the wireless controller makes game play more intuitive – you no longer have to remember arcane sequences of buttons”. And I’ve noticed this too - chuck my Dad, a non-gamer, an Xbox controller and he is lost – I’m sure he would benefit with the Wii-mote as it mimics real life gestures he would be familiar with. But on the other hand there is my little gaming cousin, Billy, who comes round to play Need For Speed with me on the Xbox - with a regular Xbox controller. He becomes so completely absorbed in the game that he twists and turns his whole body when turning corners – surely he’s just as engaged in the game as if he had a Wii-mote to turn like a real steering wheel?

    The second article and the second group that presented talked about the abstraction of pressing a button by using the example of a carjack in GTA where “a physical and criminal act is compressed into a single button press”. Being too realistic and having to do each individual movement of this sequence would be tedious and would distract from the moral dilemma and consequences caused by the action. The article suggests that “the abstraction of a digital button press is a powerful tool for representing complex situations”. But, as people pointed out in the lecture, even the Wii’s gestures are abstract - Link’s sword only moves in the three ways regardless of the player’s movements.

    This brought up the point that the Wii still isn’t quite real enough– but would we really want it to be more real? If it’s too realistic it can easily be either boring or too hard. Imagine playing a FPS where your shooting skills were exactly as they were in real life. Plus, why eliminate the imagination factor? Part of it is >pretending< - taking on a role that you can’t in real life.

    The first article wrote that “sometimes [in my case, all the time,] we just want our video games to be pleasant distractions without the melodrama that comes from having our bodies involved.” I think that no matter what happens, I there will still be fans of the ol’ sit down and this just highlights that the Wii is just an >alternative<. I think their slogan “changing the way we play” should really be “providing an alternate way to play”.

    To be honest, I don’t quite understand a lot about the Wii. Why play Wii sports when you can go outside and play real sports?
    I think I feel the same way about the Wii as David O’Doherty does. He said (in his sarcastic tone and Irish accent) “Ohh! This is so real! It’s exactly like chopping up a real carrot! It’s exactly like what I was doing 23 minutes ago when I was chopping up carrots for dinner! Wow!”
    I am a big fan of sitting down and twiddling thumbs and have never felt the need to stand up and get physical just to get more immersed in the game.

    - Kalonica Quigley
    [ewww, it's so long]

  58. This comment has been removed by the author.

  59. Hi all,
    First, I just want to say that "Great presentation" to both groups!!

    With this lecture and tutorial (week8), Wii is a cool gaming console, a home video game for every one. Wii is increasing the consumption in world gaming market. If I said i never play Wii , someone could laugh me , right?!! It's true. I has just known about Wii recently ( at beginning of this course).

    Wii is a interactive tech-equipment which is expensive in my country. To me, Wii is a new and interesting game console. With the controller , you could play game by moving you body naturally, reacting situations that you play in the game and enjoying sound and graphic scenes.As result, Wii brings to you emotions make you like it, enjoy it and just want to play it. That's about all great things of Wii.

    However, as Courtney mentioned in class, Wii also have social problems . By using controller and ,players could damage themselves and other people when they react to situations in game....I think, those social problems can solve now.I saw a a new advertising of Wii, player play game with a new equipment ( a small mat on the floor) without controller ... Sound is great... I want to experience it !!!=)

    @ Pranee. I like your comments.It's great. Before that, I also thought "Does Wii bring real emotion to player?" Through your comment i could realize that not only me think that Wii can bring to you emotion but it's not really....

    I agree that Wii is a physical game ( a exertion game )creates emotion to players and makes player moving their body or exercise ...blah blah...but It's lacking of real environment. We could say we play Wii that mean we play a physical game , we can fee and enjoy it. But some how, It's not. It's just a game , you look into screen a front of you and pay it. You dont look to the real, actual Subject or object that you playing with. You just hold the controller and play it at "home". How can you get a real emotion as other physical game outside?!!

    For example, You want to play tennis with your friend. You play both Wii and real game in tennis area. With Wii you just hold controller,look into screen and play , your friend is similar. How can you know and guess that what your friend react to your hits from you ? How strong are you want to hit the ball? blah blah blah..... and if you play in different weathers , how can you feel the real environment and feel it (e.g.ranning, windy...)?
    It is just my little idea about Wii. Althouht, I said Wii can not really bring to us real emotions, I still love it, want to get it and play it because it's just a game!!!

    Life is short!!!Enjoy it


  60. Nikki heree, first off, congrats on another great lecture and not just to Floyd, but to the 2 groups as well.

    Lets see, does the wii increase emotion or immersion, emotion no, immersion yes, but only in contrast to regular game playing (button pushing) because the wii provides players with game play very similar to the action being portrayed (eg. bowling, baseball or slicing up some zombies with a chainsaw), so of course when compared to playing baseball on xbox where the player pushes buttons to bat, being able to physically swing on a wii is going to immerse the player more.
    As for the wii increasing emotion, no, in comparison to other consoles it does not. I think it was Pranee who brought up the point of getting really excited and such when you get a strike or something playing wii, but can't you get that from playing a great game on any console? eg tekken, beating a bastard of a character you get just as excited. or is that just me?
    Personally, i think emotion is based on a game not the console, certain parts can really gear you up or make you sympathetic but that's not just due to the gameplay, it's a combination of the soundtrack, the attachment to a character, etc.

    The wii mote revolutionizing?
    I don't know if i'd go as far as to call it revolutionizing, yes it does involve a lot more movement than other consoles, but it's not the first to incorporate movement, which people seem to recognize as it's key feature. I personally think the joystick on arcade games to be revolutionizing, when it came out it was something different to just pushing buttons, since then console controllers have gradually moved forward leading us to where we are today. These days PS3 controllers have motion sensors in them, so its not like the wii mote is the first controller to incorporate movement, they just evolved the idea.

    Random rant; DDR was around before the wii and involved just as much movement. These days n00bs rage about the wii fit and such being so amazing and how they've lost so much weight with it. I have women of all ages come through my work with their just bought wii fit boxes, treating it like the holy grail of weight loss. DDR was around ages before the wii, and people have lost weight from that too. Anyone seen that kid on youtube who was obese and lost a ton of weight from playing DDR? Merely searching weight loss and DDR brings up a couple of stories from people who've lost substantial amounts of weight with DDR but even then half the searches pop up about the damn wii fit. I'm sick of hearing about the damn thing and it being such a brilliant idea and how it's getting people off the couch. IT IS NOT THE FIRST INTERACTIVE GAME. Next person who say's that to me i may have to kick in the shins.
    End of rant.
    Nikki out.

  61. Mariah;

    You're a one handed gimp? ;)

  62. It was again an interesting lecture, with lots of talking and discussion and all the things in that kettle of fish. Obviously the bribe of chocolate has paid huge dividends looking at the mass of text above me - Good luck reading it all.

    My opinion on the Wii remote and all controllers in general:
    The controller does not make the game.
    The controller is just the tool with which we communicate our wishes to the console or computer so that they can perform the correct action inside the virtual world.

    I think that the controllers job is not to be an obvious immersive tool but to not exist as much as possible. Controllers get in the way and whatever controller button layout or motion device makes it seem the most invisible and the communication between the player and the game the most natural and quick the better that layout or motion device is.

    An example of this is quite obvious in the Wii remote - As people noted with Zelda 'Twilight Pricess' the physical slash and hack is quickly replaced by the waggle to streamline the communication between player and wii. Actaully swinging was a novelty that once wore out just got in the way of game-play and immersion.

    As Mark Morrison from Blue Tongue said when he came in for a guest lecture on tuesday - 'If we had just put in a jump button we would have got 85 [out of 100] instead of 81.'
    People will do whatever is simplest to get their directions across.

    I think i may have said the same thing several times - but we all know that if you have to look at the controller something is wrong, this goes the same with thinking about it. After playing COD 4 for weeks then switching back Halo 3 you are not immersed at all for the first 5 minutes until you stop throwing grenades when you want to scope and scoping when you want to melee.

    Daniel Kidney

  63. wooo hey guys rory here sorry the comments a bit late but anyway, great lecture last week and i totally agreed with what the groups were saying and i especially liked something gregg said and that was that when he played wii tennis he goes in hardcore and swings the wiimote just like a tennis raquet and gets the same outcome as the guy who sits down and shakes his wrist a raquet swinger and i always loose to the guy making the smallest least fun movements.....damn!....maybe to test the wii motes true power we should play and compare a game thats been released on wii as well as other consoles and see wether the wiimote does much at all.....or maybe the game has to be made for wii and only wii to get the full experience, iv played heaps of wiii games where the conrtol system was just point the wii remote and push a button, also about that last point about the wii fit ....maybe people like it so much because they can exercise and not have to leave there house or the comfort of the tv....thats a bit lazy yeah.....why not run for free with friends than pay for wii fit? but i dont no much about it maybe its multiplayer and maybe the wii fits just a passing novelty anyway not sure where that was going lol so toodle-oo\

  64. Heyooo!!

    Floyd if i had to expand on your project i would also track the player so you could have a game where the aim was trying to tag or hit your opponent on the screen with say a ball or object! I think the game you have created is a very good example of a physical game and a great idea.

    josh platt s3239197

    I really enjoy the presentations, they were very engaging and very interactive raising many questions from the audience which by both groups answered very well and clearly!!

    I'm not personally a huge fan of the wii but in terms of an awesome platform for interactive games its great and is a good step towards revolutionizing the industry by adding an extra lvl of interaction plus its new and shinny. I totally agree with both of the arguments posted by the two groups and hope the wii is the next step in getting the user more immersed and interacting with the game.

  65. once again great lecture.
    My thoughts on the wii. Well i actually bought a wii about a year ago when i played Metroid Prime 3 corruption. i had played the previous versions (including the super nintendo, GBA ect) i think the wii did an awesome job with the wii version as it was somthing different. The was a lot of emphasis on the wiimote being created to immerse players. yet i think that was only part of the idea of the wiimote. i like to think nintendo took a step back and said "hey the majority of consoles these days are all based on one controller and most of the game play is done by the press of a button, why not make somthing DIFFERENT from the normal. (NOTE:i dont know much about the xbox 360 guys but i know they had some kind of gesture or movement happening with their controllers, so im not saying this IS the case, merely my opinion). Also i heard that the wii was developed partially to make people more active when gaming. i think if thats the case they failed pretty badly. although i must say after playing 20 rounds of wii boxing you can defiantly feel it in your arms the next morning hahaha. overall i thought the wii was pretty good, but i havent been as immerse with the wii as i have with a game such as doom3


  66. I thought the arguments brought forward in the first presentation where slightly biased. For a "casual" gamer the Wii maybe more immersible than say the PS3, because they are performing actions that resemble real life movements. For that particular gamer, story, sound and quality of the graphics may not be of importence (eg Wii Sports)
    As for the second group, i thought your presentation theory might have seemed like a good idea in theory, but did not reach it's full potential in execution.

  67. Samantha To s3197261

    It was an good idea put out a debate =D
    When i think i about it, i think i was sitting on the wrong side maybe? Wii is not the best thing that was created. there were others i would have to say the eyetoy for ps2 that really had no buttons but i that quickly go old i the same thing with the Wii. Also i a lot people say the is more affordable yes it maybe be when you buy the thing, but what about the games? the games aren't cheap the cheapest is maybe 50? while other games for the ps2 ps3 goes down to 20. maybe no one thinks of the long runs?
    personal i rather go outside and play sports its more fun then hiding inside all day long. Maybe I'm giving the Wii too much bad feed bad? Nintendo great, but i think in the end i like a remote with real buttons.

  68. s3237022leanneleeApril 30, 2009 at 2:54 PM

    sweet last weeks presentation was well prepared, it covered all the topics and their points had both rebuttal and support to back them up but they had their clear points which they steered towards the end and didnt stray from the topic which made it much more easier to understand and keep engaged. Their use of class involvement was a great, opinions and discussions as such stir the viewpoints of the topic. Overall they understood the topic well and presented it in a manner that executed what was required. For the second group there preparation was quite good given the number of people they had and generated good viewpoints and ideas.

    p.s wii is awesome

  69. Cheung Yi Kai S3232755
    hi. i remember one of your team metion that we got strong emotion is more because of the sound, graphics and storyline. Also Leigh suggest the colours and effects on screen. I strongly agree with that! But i wanna say i got the emotion when i need to swing my remote with a lot of energy, adjust your remote angles and got clump while u shaking your remote. Games like Rayman, star war Unleashed, Metroid Prime Corruption and no more hero are good example. The hand movenment also make me feel Awesome when i do a prefect combo in Star War Unleashed or i shake my remote like a child again. And i believe wii remote create a strong emotion because it is like we doing body language while our presentation.... well that is just want i think :) Even a game like cooking mama can be so much fun when u can pretending the gameplay.

  70. Andrew Demetriou s3237544April 30, 2009 at 4:15 PM

    hey guys whats up.
    i don't think i can churn out an essay like heaps of other dudes/dudettes but i'll give it a red hot go.

    My opinion on the matter is one of a fence-sitter. I am unable to formulate a particular opinion on the matter because i don't use the wiimote on a regular basis... frankly i think i've only ever used it about twice.
    The reason for this is, when i game, i am relaxing and taking a break from all the physical activity i have been doing or will continue to do throughout the day.
    When i play the wii at a mate's place i generally bring a gamecube controller with me, because i cannot be bothered mustering the strength to wave and "waggle" the wiimote. i would rather just sit around and press buttons to whoop my friends at super smash bros.

    However, while i am not a personal fan of the wiimote and it's recycled technology, i admit that it is revolutionising social and casual gaming. As someone who plays games a fair bit, i haven't taken well to the wii, but many others have. My younger cousins and their parents are fans of the wii, and use it as a family.
    I find this actually pretty cool, and i respect that they are able to do that.

    Although, that said, i don't find the wiimote to be revolutionary in the technological sense.

    This isn't really the point, though, is it?

    I guess the point i'm trying to make is that it really depends ont he person in terms of immersion and emotional attachement to a game. It is up to the individual to decide whether they are immersed or not.

    For example, if they made a game on the movie Twilight, i would not play it. However, if i were to play it, and it was fantastic and able to immerse every Twilight lover on the planet, it would not immerse me because my view is completely arrogant and closed off to the idea of Twilight being more than garbage.

    This is a personal opinion, and such opinions completely warp the concept of emotional attachment to game characters and immersion in the plotline.

    I agree with [insert name here, i'm sorry i forgot who said it], who said that immersion depends not only on the storyline but also visual effects and sound. I think that everything collaborates towards the whole idea of immersion, but is not nessecary.

    For example, Final Fantasy VII has some of the worst 3d graphics... ever.
    The characters have triangular prisms and such for arms and legs. It's horrid.

    AND YET it's one of the most highly acclaimed plotlines for a JRPG, and RPG's in general. Everyone knows the Final Fantasy series and this game is one of the reasons.
    Square Enix proceeded to bring out FFVIII, which in my opinion is a better game (because the graphisc are ACE in comparison to VII, and the storylines pretty damn good) but alas not everyone agrees with me, and they are right in their disagreement. They were more immersed by VII and i can't argue with their opinion... unless i want to be a complete arse... which is often the case xD.

    So anyway thanks for reading.. whoever you are, i tried my best to make a sweet response like all the other peeps on the blog.

    See you all in the lecture *creepy stalker face*


  71. Ok, so it seems it didn't save my comment I made earlier, which is a shame.

    I'll add it again later :S

  72. @Dooshie re: Twilight: WORD.

  73. Very sorry for the late comment, this if for the class held on the 23/04/09.

    I just want to thank everyone for the awesome comments and the class participation when we held our presentation. It was fantastic and lots of fun. The rest of the class commenting really helps make it easier for us to talk to the rest of you so thanks for expressing your points and issues. I’m looking forward to the next group’s presentation.

    As for the content of the discussion, I think the topic of what makes a ‘good’ game is an exceptionally long one and in the end it might still be very opinion based. Everyone will have something to say about what made a game ‘good’ for them and what they think makes a ‘good’ game over all, and you can bet ill be making comments too ;)

    I don’t want to go into this too much because I will be writing pages, but I think a game is based on 4 aspects, 3 of which we are studying right now. The graphics (Artists), Story line (Designers) and game play (Programmers). The 4th aspect I believe is Sound, I’m not sure where in our program this fits but for now I feel it belongs with the artists. If any one of these foundations is solid, and by solid I mean made in the best way possible, then I believe that game could run on that alone, however the game will not be exceptional and will not stand out from the rest, in my opinion, when all 4 are done correctly and they help support one another that’s when you have a ‘good’ game.

    The reason I used S.T.A.L.K.E.R as an example is because for me its one of the closest things to perfection, not perfect, but almost. This is my opinion of a few games in relation to THEIR foundations.

    Graphics are based on the time in which they came out, not based on graphics today and the story line.

    S.T.A.L.K.E.R – Graphics 81%
    - Sound 98%
    - Story Line 85%
    - Programming 71%

    Silent Hill 2 – Graphics 91%
    - Sound 98%
    - Story Line 93%
    - Programming 90%

    Crysis – Graphics 98%
    - Sound 76%
    - Story Line 68%
    - Programming 90%

    Far Cry 2 – Graphics 86%
    - Sound 75%
    - Story Line 47%
    - Programming 69%
    Half Life 2 – Graphics 98%
    - Sound 76%
    - Story Line 78%
    - Programming 87%

    Portal – Graphics 81%
    - Sound 99%
    - Story Line 94%
    - Programming 90%

    Abe's Odyssey– Graphics 82%
    - Sound 93%
    - Story Line 95%
    - Programming 77%

    Halo – Graphics 98%
    - Sound 99%
    - Story Line 97%
    - Programming 95%

    This is just my opinion of these games; some people might agree some might not.
    In the end I think it is a brilliant discussion to be had and I think if people understand this better and can see how each one of those 4 elements works off one another then we would have some fantastic games surpassing any of our expectations.

    Oh yea and the Wii remote needs work, its crap.

  74. I just remembered something that came up in Michele and Rhys presentation, I wanted to comment but we ran out of time.

    Somewhere along the line it was said that, a lot of people rate a game based on how ‘good’ its Graphics are and then it was said ‘well what happens when the graphics are as good as then can be’, such as real life basically. This is where I got the impression that this is why the Wii remote is such a cool thing, its different, its new.

    And this is where I wanted to say ‘Hey, that’s a load of crap’

    When moving pictures 1st came out they were in black and white and looked rather bad, the quality was very poor and there was no sound but as time progressed, sound came along, then colour, then TV in our own homes and not HD. In my opinion, until you can smell, taste and touch what you see on the TV that’s as real as its going to get, and it has been like that for a very long time now. CG in movies is almost at a point where you can’t really tell the difference any more. However people still watch them. I haven’t heard any1 say TV is boring because it looks just like reality now.

    And this is what I’m trying to say about games. Let’s say games get to a point where it’s just as realistic looking as reality, basically you can’t even tell the difference. People (me) are still going to play games and are still going to rate them on the graphics, the elements we look for in graphics might change a bit but it will still be part of the rating system. I don’t think there is any game or movie out that is rated purely on graphics, in the end it comes down to how those graphics are presented to us.

    Sin City for example is almost entirely made using CG however the colour scheme of the movie and the look is anything but realistic. The Lord of the Rings blends CG and real life beautifully but it’s the storyline and way it is presented which that keeps us interested.

    Graphics will keep get better and better and I think it will always be an aspect of what keeps us interested.

    In the end there will always be one thing that keeps interested and that’s the pure need for entertainment and escapism.

  75. To Pranee:

    Abstraction provides a different access to ideas than does mimicry. As millennia of poetry have demonstrated, the defamiliarization of ideas is among the greatest purposes of art. Through estrangement, concepts familiar or unfamiliar become new. This, I believe, is part of what makes GTA work. It defamiliarizes carjacking. Such power ought not to be underestimated, ought not to be subordinated to the physical mimesis offered by the Wii remote.

  76. This comment has been removed by the author.

  77. Hi there,

    I hope I can write something out here, let's get it started...

    OKIE!!!!As many people said , graphics and sound effects seems to be the most of game playing. "Graphics will keep get better and better and I think it will always be an aspect of what keeps us interested." Gregg said. For example FF7 (I think everyone know that),when it was released, for me it had already got a very good graphics. But, comparing with nowadays game graphics, it sucks .(That's why so many gamers require to renew the FF7 graphics) What I want to say is, even the graphics sucks, but if the storyline is good, it will be a good game. But, if the graphic is good but without good storyline, i think most of the people will choose the previous one.

    Furthermore , first I wan to say is, I hate Wii (you also can say that I hate sports). And it's the most stupid machine( is it?sorry if any Wii fans here)ever, although is a new evolution in game controller, but IT'S NOT EVEN A SPORT OR A GAME PLATFORM. If I want to play a sport , I rather go outdoor to play the REAL sport. And if I want to play a game, I really want to relax and sit down on my sofa and holding a game controller and play without so many movement.

    PS: And I think the best platform to play game is on PC, what genre of game can fit to it and also easier for players to make themselves into the game (for me).


    PekLoke Tay (s3214125)

  78. Oh I would like to say thanks to everyone for making presenting so much fun too!

    Your comments and attention was very much appreciated, and it made me feel comfortable up there.

    Thanks all for the great feedback and happy presenting.

    I'm excited to hear other groups presentations!

    Carlita :)

  79. My group presented last week and we truly thought that class would not want to participate in our presentation. Our pessimisms were unfounded as the class cheerfully and passionately embraced each and every question we posed, although occasional it got a bit heated and unnecessarily particular the enthusiasm displayed by the students was truly remarkable. I enjoyed presenting and definitely look forward to presenting again, maybe next time with more sleep and/or some form of sustenance.

    On topic/ argument, I believe, as stated last week, that the Wii is not an immersive device/ tool and no interface can be logically branded a tool of immersion. Of course it can immerse you, but only in collaboration with appropriate software. An interface can assist an abstraction or create a means to which the content is abstracted but on its own it cannot create anything within the confines of a medium that truly “immerses”.


  80. So I've found the time to write out my comment again and hopefully it stays here this time.

    I found this lecture interesting, and it was good to see some presentations on physical games and whether or not they emotionally engage us, and if they are in the past.

    I found the presentation hard to concentrate on with all the continual interruptions from the class. Maybe this is because of a LARGE portion of our marks are awarded from in class contribution. Maybe if we all shout and scream loud enough with some insightful and witty remarks, we can get not only good grades, but some chocolate too!

    But now on to the subject matter. I believe the wii's controls are a way of emotionally engaging us for the following reasons. The wii allows us to engage in a more physical way with the game, performing life like actions. Whether these are 100% accurate or not are besides the point that it feels like we are performing the actions, rather than just pushing left or right on the control pad, and pressing a button to perform, say a golf swing. Where as on the wii, performing a golf swing is as intuitive as the action is very similar to performing the real life counterpart.

    The emotional attachment comes from the association with the real life action. The sensation of performing the physical activity is uplifting and engaging, allowing for an easier path to having fun. Having fun is results in the emotional response of being happy. So I think the wii controls allow for an easier way for people to have fun.

    For the second presentation, I believe the argument presented did get a little distracted, but brought up some good points about the how immersing the wii controller really is or isn't. In some instances, the controller is used by basically waggling it. I agree that sometimes this could just distract from the gameplay, especially when the user is aware of this. A good example is the waggle in super mario galaxy to spin. Maybe it would be easier just to press a button. Why have a waggle?

    But where this controller excels is in games such as wii sports, where it simulates a physical action. It does not distract, but hence allows a more natural interaction with the game rather than pressing a button. This can be taken too far, as was demonstrated with Michele and Rhys' comment on performing a series of actions to hijack a car in GTA. I think there i a balance in all games and their inputs to keep the game flowing and entertaining. I mean, why does not wii sports make you perform actions such as reaching into a golf bag to change clubs, etc. The motions are streamlined to make the game interesting and flowing.

    My migraine hurts me. Bye for now

  81. Ben Goodvach-DraffinMay 6, 2009 at 4:51 PM

    Immersion and Games

    Immersion - concentrating on one course of instruction, subject, or project to the exclusion of all others for several days or weeks; state of being deeply engaged or involved; absorption.

    I think the only thing i'll get from swinging the Wii remote around for several days is RSI (repetative strain injury). I mean yes it can be fun to pretend your hitting a ball with an arm motion instead of pressing a button. But really, i think every game i've seen on the Wii can be played with motion from just the elbow down. So unless you're really really into it, or old (as every promo photo i've seen of the Wii has been the elderly generation playing it). You're going to sit there and waggle your elbow just like everyone else.

    Plenty of games will keep people amused for many days without the need to use physical movement. There have been cases of people dying from malnutrition whilst playing MMO's (Massive Multiplayer Online). So until theres a similar case where someone carks it from too much Wiing (get it), I really can't argue that immersion is increased overly much.

    The example used for the GTA car theft scene. Of actually using the wii remote to flick the door hatch, open it, get in etc etc. This probably could be simulated with the remote, but it wouldn't be fun. And this is about games and ludology (fun), so yes...companies have bound a single button press to the action of car jacking. The game is fast paced and running around in your lounge room trying to unlock imaginary cars, looking like you were mentally challanged is not going to be enjoyful for anyone.

    However! A game such as Thief (I, II and III) or Splinter Cell, where a character has to pick locks, and has the time to do it. Instead of rotating their controller's joystick until it starts to jiggle, could potentially use the Wii remote. But i can't say the mechanic would gain more of a sense of immersion, it would be fun though.

    In terms of sound/vision and how they immerse us. It's all part of it of course, and they all add to the experience (i guess just how the wii remote does...kind of). But a game won't be immersing unless you have fun playing it. And yes sound can make it scary or happy or sad. And amazing graphics will allow you to stare at pretty water effects while the AI destroys your naval fleet (enter Empire: Total War). Hell, you could be in a virtual reality akin to what we see in Sci-Fi flicks. But if your game crashes constantly, there are clipping bugs, it has a bad story (for a storybased game), its too easy, its too hard, it's online and is full of hackers due to poor hack protection or has a bad lobby/team/chat system. You're not going to play it; you will boot it up, mess around for a couple of hours, give it a chance. And maybe it has pretty water,immersing sound and you get to swing your Wii remote as if your life depended on it, amazing...then you realise all in all the game is absolute shit and it gets put in the garage with the rest of your duds.

    Moral of the story. Wii could immerse you...maybe if you're really old, or really young. But when it comes down to it. If the games good in the first place, you'll be immersed. If it's not, you'll see just how many pieces the disc breaks into as you throw at it your wall (Along with the Wii remote).

  82. Hi Ian,
    Believe it or not, when it comes to art (including film) & literature, I agree with you that abstraction can be powerful, much more so than mimicry. I encourage all to think differently and not aspire to "following the herd". In that way, new innovations can arise.
    It is not the abstraction of concepts and thoughts that I have a problem with in today's world but rather the destructive implications of desensitizing humans from their emotions and feelings when related to their physical actions. These implications concern me. I believe the line between imagination and real action is not as black and white as many believe and this is supported by successful tests & training of some olympic athletes who are encouraged to visualize how they will act/ perform & thereby win... and do...
    I was attempting to raise the point that emotion is not necessarily connected to action by using desensitization as an example and thereby an argument based on that assumption is problematic as a result.
    Unlike Floyd (kudos to you!) who encourages free, individual & critical thought, many educational institutions do not encourage this. They churn out people not trained to question anything or to think critically or creatively (until they reach post-grad...but by then, how does a person know how???). I believe Western Society is structured to encourage "psuedo-individualism". It makes us better consumers, better office workers, etc... "Don't think, just buy. Be an in individual/ wear what everyone else is what I like or you're outcasted". It takes real strength to be a real individual in this day and age.

    But alas, I digress!

    Oh, dear, I realised that due to my tangents & rambling in my previous blog (& this one), you may have misunderstood me. When I said "you were missing the point of difference" provided by a Wii, I meant to relate it back to branding and marketing, which I did a bit further on. To re-itterate and summarise my point, Wii is good for social games and interactive games which makes it a different MARKETed alternative to Playstation & XBox consoles. Games like GTA would be rather stupid played on a Wii and they don't need to be as the systems they work on suffice (a holographic room is a different story however). Is that a bit clearer??? I hope so. Sorry for my rambling.

    In conclusion, be strong in your beliefs and you will not disconnect from them, thereby, desensitization is not a problem. Even if you participate in "fantastical" actions you would never morally do in real life as a form of fun escapism. Often it's about gaining the learning experience & perspective and it is better to do these things in a game than in the real world.
    Also, I grew up watching slash-em-up horrors, I love them!!! GTA is on my top 10 favourite games, alongside Resident Evil and Tombraider. I love playing FPS. I have strong moral beliefs however and know the difference between a game, a movie and reality. Unfortunately, many people do not understand this difference.
    Be strong young Jedis and may the force be with you

  83. To Ian Bogost

    I agree with you Ian about the abstraction of a button but am saying, "Wii ain't so bad", it meets a need in the market. THIS is WHAT I MEANT BY stating that YOU WERE MISSING THE POINT OF DIFFERENCE... a marketing term if you've ever had to write a business plan.
    I didn't say you were "missing the point". I agree with many of your points.

  84. Hi Ian... re: your comment,

    Oh, dear, I realised that due to my tangents & rambling in my previous blog (& this one), you may have misunderstood me. When I said "you were missing the point of difference" provided by a Wii, I meant to relate it back to branding and marketing, which I did a bit further on. To re-itterate and summarise my point, Wii is good for social games and interactive games which makes it a different MARKETed alternative to Playstation & XBox consoles. Games like GTA would be rather stupid played on a Wii and they don't need to be as the systems they work on suffice (a holographic room is a different story however). Is that a bit clearer??? I hope so. Sorry for my rambling.

    Believe it or not, when it comes to art (including film) & literature, I agree with you that abstraction can be powerful, much more so than mimicry. I encourage all to think differently and not aspire to "following the herd". In that way, new innovations can arise.


    I agree with you Ian about the abstraction of a button but am saying, "Wii ain't so bad", it meets a need in the market. THIS is WHAT I MEANT BY stating that YOU WERE MISSING THE POINT OF DIFFERENCE... a marketing term if you've ever had to write a business plan.
    I didn't say you were "missing the point". I agree with many of your points.

  85. the soccer game with the smashing of the glasses was a great demonstration for exersion gaming. exersion gaming i think will open new doors but will not take all gaming methods of play

  86. George SelemidisJune 7, 2009 at 1:14 AM

    I think all gaming consoles are great because they do what they are designed to do, which is bring fun to the user. Comparing the consoles is like comapring basketball and soccer, or a merry go round and ferris wheel. Diffrent people will be drawn to different types of entertainement. The Wii's defining feature is definently the fact that it allows for phisically exerting gameplay, however it does not necessarily make the console more appealing. Some people play games to escape from reality, physical exertion is a reminder of reality. That is why the wii is not appealing to everyone.

  87. The presentations were great. Both groups presented perfectly.

    It seems that many people are trying to compare Wii to other consoles and talking about which motion-controller sounds best. PS3, Xbox,or Wii.

    Here are my thoughts:
    There's no doubt that both 360 and PS3 have vastly superior graphics and online features. But, in last year, Nintendo’s Wii outsold the Xbox 360 by more than 2-to-1 and outpaced the PlayStation 3 by almost 3-to-1. I think there is one big difference—motion controls. Wiimote convinced many players that this system was easier to figure out, more immersive, and built for them. Although wii can't compete with the visual realism of Sony and Microsoft, it makes people feel much more realistic.

    When it comes to Wii’s Revolution, it's different from other companies, Nintendo Simplified graphics to increase a game’s approachability. It's really quite astonishing that no other company has managed to get a more fleshed-out motion enabled sports game on the system as of yet. It is innovative and well thought out of Nintendo.

    Also, I'm a big fun of Nintendo, because it provides players with many fun games and more precise in gaming development. At last year’s E3, Nintendo announced it would improve the Wii’s sensitivity. Wii Motion Plus is a small extension that clicks into the base of each Wiimote. I think that developers may want that higher level of precision with the Wii-Plus remotes. So players can whole twisting of the club in golf or tennis game, etc. Anyway, Wii really enhances our gaming experience.

    Jiajing Zhang(s3213125)