What is a hardcore gamer?

[baka]

Kwaad said: Second. If you think a headshot is a physics simulation. I want some of what your on. Becuase there have been headshots since HalfLife... possibly earlier, but I cant name any. Halflife came out in about 96 or 97.

This was pulled from your own arguments, and what you're describing isn't the fruit of some advanced physics simulation either. A physics simulation buys you something like this: your character runs forward quickly, and then stops dead - does your character lean forward while stopping? Is this behavior scripted, hidden in a bracing motion, or does it look realistic? In a driving game, does your car take into account the speed, friction of the tires, speed of the air, and the Ackerman settings of the wheels? Does it seem to slide around in an unrealistic "arcade" fashion, allowing you to recover in the least likely of circumstances? There is a physics model in every 3D game, good or bad. You're debating how many physics calculations are done, where it's implemented, and how accurate they are.

the Wii does NOT have enough power to do that. How do I know? My PC dont. And my PC is ALOT faster than a Wii. (Crap, my processor uses more power than the Wii... And my processor is one of the most energy efficent processors there is)

It has sufficient power to do a reasonable amount of physics calculations. Wii Tennis and Wii Bowling are two simple examples where physics are obvious while you're playing.

The pointer is not accurate for 2 reasons. 1. The way it works. It works of 2 IR dots, useing a webcam style sensor. It finds the 2 dots, identifys the distance from the 2 dots, and then guesses where you are pointing on the screen. Due to the fact the sensor is such a low resolution. I would say it has less than a 300x300 grid to point at. Wich is basically fine for a SDTV. Or a small TV. The problem with that method is, it has a delay, it uses alot of power, and the sensor tends to jitter the pointer.

The resolution for the camera is fine for the resolution of the Wii, which is really what matters. As for the jitter, your hand introduces a large amount of that. There is a small delay intended to reduce said jitter, and is successful with the exception of a few poorly implemented games from what I understand. Luckily, I do not own any of these games: I wouldn't touch a COD game on any platform.

2. If you are in a bright room, and have a glossy TV frameing, or glass around your TV, the sensor picks up more than 2 IR dots, and goes apeshit. (forget a wii if you have a window behind your TV. Speaking of apeshit, I had my sensor detecting 12 IR transmitters... And some from the window were brighter than the ones on the TV. That's why it's not on my 40inch TV)

The latter is true to be sure. If I had a window behind my televison though, I'd put up drapes. I wouldn't want the glare associated with bright light from outside when I was watching the television. I haven't yet had a problem with it however. I also do not have a television with a glossy frame; I won't buy one either, if you're correct and it messes up the infrared camera.

The accelerometer blows. Not digging on this but it just blows. It sucks on the PS3 as well. Luckily it is not USED on the PS3 much.

I disagree with you on this in particular. It works great when games are written properly. Wii Sports was a good first effort, and Wario Ware in particular really shines in its use of the accelerometers. I've heard Madden does a good job with it too, but I wouldn't touch Madden on any platform either.

EDIT: The GB is capable of allowing headshots.

Sure, on a 2 dimensional bitmap a headshot is simple. Even a Z80 is sufficient for that.