how often do you see developers lashing out at the console maker? hopefully he wouldn't be backtracking tomorrow. this is quite refreshing. have we entered an age where AI is that important yet? game AI has been essentially neglected forever--don't blame it on the lack of computing power, but rather this is not what people pay for. a secondary reason is probably the lack of understanding of AI by game designers. if so, programmers won't be asked to carry out the AI codes. also, the whole field of AI is still si still basically brute force and little else. even a factor of 10 or 20 doesn't help you that much, because you can just sacrifice some details to get results that in no way the gamer is gonna notice. so i don't know what specific things he had in mind about computing power, but i'm guessing maybe it's about games like spore that devotes a lot of computing power in explicitly simulating the creature's entire environment, and this simulation of the environment is crucial to the gaming experience. spore seems exactly like that kind of game--and now a factor of 10 or 20 will matter pretty much exactly 10 or 20 times.

This is really ignorant. Wii is definitely lower in terms of raw power to the 360/ps3. However, is artistic style only defined by visuals? To have good AI do you really need a super computer? I would argue that the artistry of a game should encompass not only the visual display of the game, but the also the interaction with the game as well. That, to me, seems a very important part of a GAME. It is not a movie or a painting or music where all the user does is sit there and enjoy. A game is an full experience that must include the physical interaction. The Wii has by far a much larger advantage on this point and if I need to go into detail on why it has the advantage then please do not respond to my post as you should hand in your gamer card now and leave this forum forever. Another important part is the AI. However, I know for a fact that you do not need a super computer to have intelligent AI. If you look at my profile I mention that I am a software engineer. In my last year of school I took an AI class as an elective. Possibly one of the most interesting coding classes I took. During this class the final project was to create some sort of program that would have varying levels of AI, showing the basic differences on techniques. I created a tank battle scenario based on robo wars. I created 4 different AI's implementing 4 different techniques. The most advanced was a tank that basically designed itself through a technique that is best described as evolution. The program "learned" how to make a smarter tank through hundreds of battles until it eventually came to a tank that could not be defeated by anything else including all my classmates and teachers. It is highly responsive and completely unpredictable, unlike really any villian/boss in any game I have played. My point is that the actual resources used to do this were on a p3 box with 256mb of memory. AI is not the resource hog, the visuals and total qty of items/foes needing to be depicted are the problem. The Wii has every capability of showcasing a highly artistic game. Just as the PS2 (ff13) or GC (re4) had. The real problem is finding a designer with enough intelligence to sit down and actually create a well defined, resource friendly game. Nintendo has proven countless times that they can do that. Will Wright can definitely do it. If Spore does come to the wii, I bet it will be more equivalent to the PC version than a few of you think. From the videos I have seen, there is no reason to believe otherwise.

You just contradicted yourself. You're saying some people may find Wii fun (i guess it's obvious, as it sold more than 5 mil right now) and yet you wrote that "Nintendo needs to take this advice". Face it. The Wii is not for you, as Killzone or Halo are not for me. We're different.