What I do know is the videogame industry has this resentment or envy of the movie industry, and there is a push to try to create a movie-like experience in games.  This is a major reason for production costs going up regarding games, combine with the industry whining about how used games are harming them, and Kotick going off how he can repackage cut scenes as a movie for people to watch.  The industry is operating on razor thin profits, because it keeps driving production costs up.  How many games do you think will be profitable if the average budget is $100 million to make a game?  What I do know is BOARDGAMES are a lot less money to develop, and generally have greater replayability than the wannabe movie.

Please go and argue how the videogame industry is in fine shape from a profitability standpoint.  I would like to hear your argument regarding this.  I said profitability, not REVENUES.

The PS3 is just one of these 6-in-one board games.

And then you take tthe 360 with Kinect, and the way they talk about the system with Kinect, on how having NO controller is SO accessible, and people get real joy from it, it looks like the 360 is trying to be 2 Wiis duct-taped together.  Nothing like Microsoft playing the Borg and assimilating the sales pitch Nintendo did for the Wii, oh about 5 years ago?

From me, I get upset when boardgames are used as a derogatory term by some in the videogame industry to take shots at form of play that aren't "movie-like" enough, or lack in supposed storytelling.  For me, it is an issue, because people have the Monopoly connotation as to that is what boardgames are about, when the wealth of play in a boardgame goes fairly wide.  There is a level of contempt shown to boardgames by some who are hardcore videogamers, that is not good in my opinion.  I personally also watch people who struggle to make ends meet try to put out boardgames, and not nearly get the same level of respect, let alone money from working on boardgame stuff.  Here is an example of the trials of getting a boardgame done:

http://michaelmindes.com/kickstarting-eminent-domain

All I can say here is check this game out.  If it looks interesting, support them.  And I would also say that, if you think boardgames are just like Monopoly, visit Boardgame Geek, and see what is out there, as far as a variety of games you can play.  And one thing boardgames do have over videogames, is in a number of them, you little toys you can actually play with.  Yes, fun bits, and more social interaction in person.  You get to spend real time face to face with someone.

While that is true, depending on the game (some stuff is REAL light), it is ironic the videogame industry sticks board game stuff in the "Casual" category.  Well, I do play off that a bit with the CADERS project that sticks casual and retro together.

Damn right! I mean, as you said there are some very simple board games but writing them all off as "casual" is madness and ignorance at it's finest! Instead of laughing at them the industry really sould learn from them. Several game genres has their roots in board games after all.

Speaking of board games ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrBauG5FhZA&feature=player_embedded

:)

That is the second attempt to do the computer game as a boardgame actually.  The first one was done by Eagle Games and got VERY mixed reviews.  It had issues and didn't work right.  However, you do see some of those elements in that attempt to Civilization: Revolution.  On another note, there IS another boardgame called "Civilization" which was a boardgame first.  It is a classic.  Usually will take a full day to play though.

I am taking "casual" to now mean "we don't need a large dev team to get it out", this the development is more casual than this like a movie development cycles.  Also, CADERS sticks boardgames under the C for "Casuals" in the name (Casuals And Devotees of Everything Retro Society.  Yes it is manglish, but done so it can sound like arcade).

I remember playing a few times  Civilization made by Avalon Hill (?) with friends in the mid-80's.