I'm a fairly old school gamer.  I was just a kid when the Atari system was in its prime and its decline but over the years, I've seen a lot.  From my point of view, gaming was, for the most part, a TV, a console, a controller.  It was good.  Well, since the very beginning, the cutting edge industry of gaming has been the testing ground for new technology.  Well, with a few exceptions, most of the new innovations that come to gaming have been gimmicky, at best.

There was the Power Glove.  A device that let gamers interact with the game buy punching in mid-air and moving individual fingers (it was "So bad!").  There were various "Light Guns".  From the Konami Justifier to the Nintendo Zapper to the Sega Menacer.  They let you shoot objects on screen while using a facsimile of a gun.  There were lesser known items like the U-Force (you held your hand in front of two sensors, allowing you to control a game without actually holding a controller), the Turbo Touch 360 (replaced the d-pad with a touch screen), the Sega Activator (full body movement controls).  Other devices that recieved limited support but added to immersion were the Power Pad, Dance Dance Revolution dance mats, Guitar Hero/Rock Band instruments, and the Tony Hawk RIDE board.  I could go on and on and on and on about the various cameras, microphones, e-readers, etc. that came out over the years.  But look where we are, today.  One could argue that, for all of the advances in technology, we are basically where we were when gaming first started--a TV.  A console. A controller. 

And that's what bothers me about the state of gaming, today.  The integration of online (which isn't a new thing but really caught on, during the last gen and this gen) and motion controls (loved by some, and hated by others) are about the only features that seem to have made a permanent impact on gaming.  Well, since the Wii became a massive success based on the promise of a new experience, it seems like nobody wants to launch a console without a "Gimmick".  But look at the Wii.  I own/enjoyed the system but how many gamers and customers bought the console, grew tired of the gimmick, and then asked, "Now what?"  Was the Wii the right way to go?  Yeah, Sony and Microsoft went after their market with the Move and Kinect (respectively) but was it time?  Which leads me to the whole point of this rant:  Technology for the sake of technology.

Are things like the Dreamcast VMU, Kinect, Move, the Wii Remote, the 3DS's 3D screen, the Wii U's controller, the SIXAXIS motion control, the PS Vita's touch pad, etc.. just there to hook us?  Do the gaming companies actually know what the hell they're doing when they push these things on us or are they just pushing the technology out of the door in the hopes that someone will figure out what to do with it?  Are we just gunea pigs for new technology?  Forgive me, but sometimes, I have a hard time figuring out exactly what all of this new stuff brings to the table when it comes to improving my gaming experience.

Discuss.

Seems like the same discussion is taking place here: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=130005&page=2

I'm just going to port the OP over there and join in with those guys.  Mods can lock this thread.

I don't think you're wrong. To me, it certainly smacks of throwing shit at a wall to see what sticks most of the time. I do think, for example, that Nintendo knew what they were doing with the Wii and that's why it launched with something that perfectly demonstrated the new tech and went on to become the killer app in Wii Sports. But most of the time these clowns seem to launch shit just for the sake of launching it, and if they have a master plan, they disguise it very well.

The industry has always been enamoured with technology for the sake of technology, that's one of the traps developers can fall into (the other trap being when developers get the idea that they're "artists"). Art can contribute, technology can contribute moreso, but at the end of the day it's about what we play, which is why online and motion controls have had more impact than other technical advancements, since both really open up new gameplay possibilities. It's when technology tries to be different, but isn't different in a way that really enhances gameplay experience, that we get into tech masturbation

That's also why there is cause for a ludological argument in gaming (though i don't entirely embrace that perspective, there is some truth to it); that if developers have less tech to work with, they'll have to get more creative, which is why experiences from older consoles tend to have more staying power than experiences from newer consoles in general, though of course there are exceptions to that.

Nintendo is different because they have closer cooperation between their hardware and main software development people (though Sony and Microsoft have cooperation in that respect as well, less so than Nintendo), which is also why Nintendo games seem to shine much more than third party games on the same platform, because the hardware was in many cases literally designed with those games in mind, so most of the features you find usually have some immediate, software necessary purpose, and you can really tell when they don't (like the DS' microphone, yeesh)

I remember when microsoft released kinect and people were asking what sort of games we could expect from them in the future and the answer they gave was pretty much "We dont know, we'll just let developers do something with it, it's gotta be good" and thats really showing, none of the stuff they showed off at E3 really evolved from the launch titles, because the technologies there just to look cool not to add to the game. Its not just kinect though, the ps move trailer really doesn't have anything to offer that the wii didn't and thats because sony developed it with the idea they'd tap into nintendo's market, not that they'd actually change the playstation experience. The 3D on the 3DS also proves this point aswell.

That's kinda the basis of this entire thread.  I tried out the "Kinect Fun Labs" thingy, yesterday.  It showed a lot of potential but when it was over, I was left feeling a little empty.  It's like they're a little clueless.  I imagine this is how I'm going to feel when I get a 3DS and try those AR games.  Anyway, lets continue this is the other thread: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=130005&page=2