You seem to be contradicting yourself there. Obviously Nintendo has already started down the path of non-gaming features and mass storage. Look at what Nintendo is doing with the DSi, adding many non-gaming gadgets, I can see them doing the same to the wii. It also only makes sense that the next gen from Nintendo will try to remedy all the negatives of this current gen, unless they come out with something new and as innovative as the Wiimote they will probably up their graphics and multimedia support for next-gen. Otherwise why would it be next gen with no improvements?

I don't think I mentioned aiming anywhere, also I don't see where movement with such amazing precision would be needed outside of platformer games, or games with such elements. I guess racing games too, but you can get very cheap wheel/pedal addons for the PC which are far superiior than the normal kbd input and any analog stick input. I also don't know what Thief you've been playing, but the PC was much less annoing to control and manage than the PS2 version by a mile.

Sorry to disappoint you, but if the PC needed motion controls for its games then there will be motion controls, it's completely possibile to add motion controls to a PC if the need arises. As I stated above you just won't be able to bring the party-game environment to the PC platform, and Nintendo isn't the only one doing things like that.

Nintendo isn't but they way Microsoft and Sony are heading with adding more and more crap to their systems with every generation sure are. The more they add the less ease-of-use there is and the more problems the consoles start sharing with the PCs. Consoles need to back off on the useless and complicated stuff and just focus on their strengths, which is the ease-of-use and no hassle of just drop and start playing a minute later.

Firstly, console success doesn't depend on any advances in technology.It's all about the games and how fun they are.

Ignoring that, I don't believe we will hit a limit in computer technology scaling - Moore's Law will hold for the forseeable future, and beyond that new forms of processing like spintronics, quantum computing, photon-based chips and so forth will allow features on subatomic scale.

I think a more pressing limit is how well programs and games in particular can scale to take advantage of these extra transistors - multicore isn't going too well even on 4 cores at present. What will it be like at 100+ like Intel, AMD and Nvidia seem to be aiming for with Larrabee and GPGPU?

This was published today at engadget.com

Researchers say new state of matter could extend Moore's Law

by Donald Melanson, posted Oct 22nd 2008 at 1:28PM

There's certainly been no shortage of folks trying to pin down an end date for Moore's Law, but there's also thankfully plenty of researchers doing their best to keep it going, and a team of physicists from McGill University in Montreal now say they've made a discovery that could keep the law alive even further into the future. Their big breakthrough is a new state of matter known as a quasi-three-dimensional electron crystal, which they discovered in a semiconductor material by using a device cooled at temperatures "roughly 100 times colder than intergalactic space," and then exposing the material to the "most powerful continuous magnetic fields generated on Earth." Unlike two-dimensional electron crystals, which lead researcher Dr. Guillaume Gervais equates to a ham sandwich, the quasi-three-dimensional electron crystals are in an "in-between state" between 2D and 3D, which could potentially allow for transistors to improve further as they run up against the physical limits imposed by the laws of physics.

Dude, again you're bringing stuff up that is yet to be confirmed with the DSi. So far all they have is that it can take pictures, and maybe view them? Sorry, but I DON'T see that going too far in depth. It does make sense for them to address storage and boost their specs a bit, but again, this does not a PC make, as it's pretty obvious that all of those features are going to be focused on primarily on the gaming aspect.

the problem you're running into is "NEED =/= WANT" Just because a keyboard is sufficient for a game doesn't mean that analog control won't make it more comfortable to use. As for Thief, I played the PC version, I just used a PS2 controller and mapped all the controls to that. It works quite well, provided you aren't utterly dependent on items and weapons being assigned to hotkeys.

And the PC doesn't need motion controls because no game that needs motion controls will be designed for the PC because there are no motion controls on the PC. Oh wait, there are, just that no one really noticed, which is pretty much the whole point. You think someone can come out with motion controls for the PC? Go ahead, tell me then. Which company is going to put them out? Microsoft? Dell? HP? Toshiba? What game are they going to use to push those controls? How are they going to market games for the PC that require motion controls when most people still have mouse + keyboard, and how are they going to market the motion controls for the PC when there aren't any games that need them?
This is the conundrum that all PC companies face. None of them are lare enough to make a signifigant innovative difference in the market within which they exist. Only console companies can do this, because they are the ones who decide their market.

And yes, I've made numerous posts that M$ and Sony are shooting themselves in the foot the way they're headed. Certain elements of PCs are going to be incorporated simply as part of the technology advancing, but I think Nintendo has still maintained a firm grip on those elements that seperate itself from PC gaming, and it's more than just party games.

wow you guys are crazy..... and nice read scottie thanks

in any case, I do think that PS360 type of consoles is going to conflict with PC gaming, and it already has.. (Fallout 3, Far Cry 2 developped for all 3 at once), which probably is going to lead to the living room PC that tech companies have talked about for years.... and I don't think either MS or Sony would complain about that.

The Wii type console (as from the little I read GA is trying to talk about without being understood), still has a bright future. It's a game platform and not a multimedia platform, and that enables it to be much more bold in it's choices as it doesn't have the constraints of the other multimedia requierments....

my guess would be that in the future, we are going to end up with 3 ways to play.... Handheld, Console and "gaming"-multimedia Hubs that offer a catalogue including all PC games...

As much as I dislike Microsoft, they do have the power to change PC gaming rapidly. DirectX 10 and Games for Windows are two recent examples. They're really going to push touchscreens next, with Windows 7, and that is certainly a "new control method" that could be used in PC games. I don't see motion controls on the PC as a huge obstacle if they wanted to do it.

However, I agree that consoles will always be focused on games more than the PC and that is why they will continue to exist. Nintendo, the most successful console company today, are never going to put their games on the PC.

wait, what's this? Our arguments whittled down to a fundamental point over which we agree? On the internet?

And they say miracles don't happen anymore :P

seriously though, I see your point on the touch screen issue, but the question I still have is if that is going to be able to be implemented enough that it becomes a standard that PC developers can specifically design a game around and not just have it as an option. I don't see this as being likely, but I'm not going to try to say impossible.

But yeah, Nintendo is really the only console this generation that has managed to define itself as being significantly different from a PC in terms of it's focus on gaming, different controls, low price and wide variety of exclusive games. Even if Nintendo gets more computer-like farther down the road, it will suffer when it does and in reaction pull back away from the things that make it computery on any following iterations.

The PC vs console argument is funny since consoles are becoming more & more specialized PC's as time goes by. Consoles even have their own operating system now.

Totally missing the point.

I have a Gamecube. I have a Gamecube game. Knowing just these 2 facts, can you tell wether or not my game will work? I can say with 99.999% certainty that I will be able to put that game in, and it will play.

Now, same scenario; I have a PC, I have a PC game. Knowing just these 2 facts, can you tell wether or not my game will work?

Fact is, without asking both what the game is, as well as what type of specs the computer has, which will include, ram, harddrive space, proccessor speed, graphics card and OS, you will not know for certain if a game can play at all or correctly(with or without a patch) on that PC. That's why PC games have a "minimum specs" category. Even then, just because it's playable doesn't mean it looks GOOD while it's playable.
Wow, I saw my friend playing this awesome game. It's only $40 for that and it looks great. I'll go buy it and put it on my PC, it says I meet the minimum specs. Why does it look like crap on my computer? Oh right, just because I CAN play it on my computer doesn't mean it'll look like what I was willing to pay $40 for.

Say what you will about how cheap and easy it is to build a high grade PC or how cheap it is to upgrade, the average consumer doesn't want to be bothered.

Consoles will ALWAYS be here.