your opinion in mine it paved the way for the wii and move

o.O.Q arguing in another Nintendo thread.

This forum is getting boring. Same old thing every day with the sam posters. Nothing new, nothing exciting.

Maybe I should try making a tROLl thread.

Edit: Move innovative? LOL.

Kinect is debatable, but the Move isn't exactly succesful. It's also a much closer "copy" of the Wiimote than the Wiimote was of any previously released controller. The functionality of the Move is almost exactly equal to the Wiimote, it doesn't offer much new to the table. Kinect is taking off more so than the Move it seems, but it still is only a peripheral and there are hardly any games devopled for it at the moment. Both haven't really changed the market, at least not yet. The Wii did. Therefore, the Wii is more innovative than both Kinect and Move, and Kinect is probably more innovative than Move.

Any questions?

"Your last desperate attempt to cover up that you were wrong. Here are your own words:

i originaly said that the strategy taken by HD consoles was better in my opinion because it provided versatility and allows for more features... i only branched into saying that the wii wasn't original because the claim was made that it was "new""

"the strategy microsoft and sony used this gen from the standpoint of options provided was better than nintendos because they offered more versatility... in that for example microsoft and sony were able to offer add ons to suuport motion gaming but the wii will never be powerful enough to accomplish many of the features provided by the HD twins..."

i don't follow... isn't that what i said?

in regards to the wii stick sorry le stick my only point was that a console motion wand had existed long before the wii i don't really get where you're taking this now

"The functionality of the Move is almost exactly equal to the Wiimote, it doesn't offer much new to the table"

i can't say that i agree with that the move incorporates a video camera which allows for more game types to attempted like ar games heres an example

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TztCY2iz450

"Kinect is taking off more so than the Move it seems, but it still is only a peripheral and there are hardly any games devopled for it at the moment."

a good portion of the upcoming games for 360 are kinect games

"Both haven't really changed the market, at least not yet. The Wii did. Therefore, the Wii is more innovative than both Kinect and Move"

i definitely agree that the wii is more successful but does that mean its more innovative?

which posts? be specific 

Yes, the Move does feature the Eye Toy camera, hence I said "almost". 99% of the games out there don't utilize that camera in an innovative way, if at all. And those couple of 360 games are hardly relevant in the grand scheme of things, although, like I said, it seems to be quite a lot more succesful than Move.

And on your last question: yes, it is so by the very definition of the word "innovative".

"the argument itself was off topic for this thread "what would you do if nintendo bit the dust"

i originaly said that the strategy taken by HD consoles was better in my opinion because it provided versatility and allows for more features... i only branched into saying that the wii wasn't original because the claim was made that it was "new""

how did i disagree with any of that?

And that argument came in response to a post criticizing Nintendo of wanting to make the most money with the least amount of effort, which in itself is off topic, if you want to start classifiying arguments as off or on topic.

And while the Wiimote is not the original motion controller, the Wii is definitely something new. Nintendo wanted to expand the gaming audience and created hardware that appealed to people through interface rather than visuals. They completely defied the traditional console development cycle, and they reaped big rewards for the risk they took.

As for the versatility, there really isn't a lot the PS3 or 360 can do that the Wii can't, if only Nintendo would allow it. Nintendo's restrictions are what kept the versatility of the Wii back, not the hardware.

i'm confused 

"By implying that you said something different" i did? how? this was the post i originally made

"the strategy microsoft and sony used this gen from the standpoint of options provided was better than nintendos because they offered more versatility... in that for example microsoft and sony were able to offer add ons to suuport motion gaming but the wii will never be powerful enough to accomplish many of thefeatures provided by the HD twins..."

this was the post i made in reply to rainbird 

"i originaly said that the strategy taken by HD consoles was better in my opinion because it provided versatility and allows for more features... i only branched into saying that the wii wasn't original because the claim was made that it was "new""

i don't see how it can be said that i implied saying something different

"now that you've confirmed your statement,you have basically admitted to being wrong "

you mean the statment i never denied above? by the way how is the statement wrong? would you disagree that the HD consoles are more versatile and powerful than the wii?