Golden Era from my understanding is usually when said industry is at the cusp or top of it's game. Top being subjective to the person defining it. Usually 'Top' is defined by either popularity or quality or both. I don't know much about the golden era of animation but when considering the golden era of hollywood, the 40's and 50's were 30 something to 40 something years after hollywood was established, I would hardly call that era around the beginning.

Secondly, the golden era of hollywood was golden because it's popularity was immense and at it's peak, and the same was true of the quality. Although the quality less so, because I believe the best movies now aren't better than the ones then, but they are closer than in the god awful 80's and most of the 70's. It's just that nowadays there are so many bad generic movies made the good movies get completely drowned out. But there very well is a good flow of quality movies nowadays.

Golden Era from my understanding is usually when said industry is at the cusp or top of it's game. Top being subjective to the person defining it. Usually 'Top' is defined by either popularity or quality or both. I don't know much about the golden era of animation but when considering the golden era of hollywood, the 40's and 50's were 30 something to 40 something years after hollywood was established, I would hardly call that era around the beginning.

Secondly, the golden era of hollywood was golden because it's popularity was immense and at it's peak, and the same was true of the quality. Although the quality less so, because I believe the best movies now aren't better than the ones then, but they are closer than in the god awful 80's and most of the 70's. It's just that nowadays there are so many bad generic movies made the good movies get completely drowned out. But there very well is a good flow of quality movies nowadays.

I don't agree with the ideology of attaching names to a sector of games that are pidgeonholded into being either A or B. "Hardcore" and "casual" are two empty terms. They mean whatever someone wants them to mean to serve their current argument/discussion. You attaching them to the Wii's library in a way to draw a line down the middle is exactly what I don't agree with. The two words don't matter. You could have said apples and oranges and I still would have gotten the message. I just don't agree with sectioning games like that in the first place.

Well, I think you make very good points. To elaborate, I used the terms because of a lack of words really. Meaning, I don't know what words to use to appropriately convey what I mean. For example I could have used more specific terms like generic and art but that would automatically deem my view of the Wii's library generic by the conventional definition and every game that falls under 'art' art and that's simply not what I mean.

When I say generic, I mean highly accesible games, games that don't concentrate or put great emphasis on battle systems, or implementing a cover system, or adding destructible environments to increase the realism or very deep storylines to increase the level of immersion the player can possibly achieve. The Wii's bread and butter games aren't games with much substance, they aren't deep, they are designed to be picked up and played and instantly you're just in the thick of the game. This isn't neccesarily a bad thing. Alot of these games are very fun. The other day I played punch out in gamestop for about 30 mins and had a blast. But the people that these games are designed for don't have the experience or knowledge of battle systems and such to even look for their presence. I am your traditional gamer, and although i can definitely enjoy these types of games, you can see why a gamer like me would eventually tire of the game. Additionally, you can understand how I would  need games that introduce new aspects of gameplay or evolve old one's. A gamer like myself views gaming as an art moreso than entertainment. Whereas the casual gamer views it vice versa.

The most important part of what Mr. Buffalo said is that the label of golden, either meaning era or age cannot be applied as it's happening. It's something that is judged long after it's over and can be reflected upon. So whether this generation can be a golden era or not is irrelevent. We are not in the right mindset to judge this era yet because we are in it. This question is the equivalent of asking us what modern day games will be remembered most nostalgically or what modern day games will be cult classics. These are impossible questions to ask. When the time is right, they'll be answerable questions but they can't be determined as they are happening.

Well, I think you make very good points. To elaborate, I used the terms because of a lack of words really. Meaning, I don't know what words to use to appropriately convey what I mean. For example I could have used more specific terms like generic and art but that would automatically deem my view of the Wii's library generic by the conventional definition and every game that falls under 'art' art and that's simply not what I mean.

When I say generic, I mean highly accesible games, games that don't concentrate or put great emphasis on battle systems, or implementing a cover system, or adding destructible environments to increase the realism or very deep storylines to increase the level of immersion the player can possibly achieve. The Wii's bread and butter games aren't games with much substance, they aren't deep, they are designed to be picked up and played and instantly you're just in the thick of the game. This isn't neccesarily a bad thing. Alot of these games are very fun. The other day I played punch out in gamestop for about 30 mins and had a blast. But the people that these games are designed for don't have the experience or knowledge of battle systems and such to even look for their presence. I am your traditional gamer, and although i can definitely enjoy these types of games, you can see why a gamer like me would eventually tire of the game. Additionally, you can understand how I would  need games that introduce new aspects of gameplay or evolve old one's. A gamer like myself views gaming as an art moreso than entertainment. Whereas the casual gamer views it vice versa.

aren't you describing the Wii right now? please tell me that you have a Wii.