By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Mazty on 30 May 2012
Edit Thread
archbrix said:
Mazty said:

1.  We agreed that motion controls are good for bowling and golf games. 
They are a niche market.

2.  You can't say "The wii sold well because it's controls are good". All we can say is "The wii sold well". There are too many factors to determine such as advertising and simply the reason why people bought the wii. My point has not failed. You merely have simplified an incredibly complex process. 

3.  Because motion controls have not done become dominant on the PS3 or Xbox, and have not done well at all on the PC, we can determine from this that current controllers, whether they are a pad or a mouse, are good enough for gaming with motion controls not being competitive enough in terms of pricing and/or what they bring to gaming. 

4.  What do I have to learn? That the best thing to do is to simplify incredibly complex processes? Sorry, I have had a decent education and don't work in the fast-food industry so I know that's the wrong thing to do. Being 36 and unable to see the complexity within the process of buying an item is just alarming. 

1.  We agree that motion controls are good for bowling and golf games.  Check.  They are a niche market, which we also agree with.  Check.  Are you seriously going to make these established statements again?

2.  I wholeheartedly agree that the Wii's sales are attributed to many factors, but saying that the controls had nothing at all to do with its sales is where your point fails.  If you don't think the Wii's controls are good or bring anything new to gaming, that's your opinion, but don't state that as fact.

3.  The point you're not seeing is that motion doesn't have to become dominant to be relevant or beneficial to gaming.

4.  Your profound insecurity shows quite clearly here.  It's not a matter of simplifying a complex process.  It's about reading comprehension, something that doesn't appear to be one of your strong points, which was demonstrated by continually bringing up the "PCs and motion controls" subject when it had already been addressed several times.  However, the fact that you refrain from bringing it up again in your last post suggests that you finally realized this, so perhaps your "decent" education is paying off.

Can you prove that the wii sold because people felt the controls were good? Are the customers all gaming connoisseurs who spent hours testing the controls and came to the conlusion that they are fantastic? I'm not saying I dislike the controls and that is related to sales, don't make more strawmen, I'm saying that we cannot speculate as to why the wii sold so well and if the sales reflects anything definitive about the controls. 

If motion controls were beneficial/better then exisiting input methods then surely they would be dominant? That's what logic would suggest...You on the other hand...

You're American. It's okay. I know you are not taught how to debate in school but simply given multiple choice questions so I'm having to teach an old dog new tricks. Look at the above paragraph. To summarise, I said "surely motion controls would be dominant if they were the best input method?" and you simply said "no". You didn't give a logical retort, but just rejected the notion without saying why. Ironic you speak of comprehension when that is your idea of how to debate. 

The PC control issue was you not understanding my point. You for some reason seemed to think that a mouse is viable when playing a game slumped in a sofa. A mouse is far more precise then a controller for most games making it a better input. The reason it is not adopted on the consoles is because it is not practical. Motion controls however are pratical for the consoles and the PC, something you failed to address. As motion controls are practical for the largest sources of gaming (consoles and the PC) surely they would be adopted by all 4? Yet that is not the case.