Funny how Nintendo is following this same course once again 20 years later with the Wii. 

Arcades in the 80's were simple, 8-way joystick oriented time killers.  NES made a smash debut when it launched in the mid 80's since it brought the challenge and enjoyment of full size arcade machines right into a little family friendly box anyone could play.  Since then, Arcade popularity has declined dramatically, making it almost obselete in some places, and the home console gaming market has been booming ever since.  In order to stay alive, arcade systems had to move on to more ellaborate measures of interactivity to draw attention and keep gamers interested.

So here we are in the modern day.  Mircosoft and Sony are at eachother's throats in an all out graphical arms race with the PS3 and 360, while the software industry is growing ever so stale with numerous movie ports and rehashed ideas like we saw in the Atari days.  And right on cue is Nintendo's Wii that really disrupts the industry and invigorates console gaming once again by bringing the arcade home and uniting the family.

If that wasn't enough, Wii has thus far been a monumental success, with unsatiable customer demand and a crazy name that is distinct enough to have sprung up at least once in the average consumer's holiday babble.  It's generating enough word of mouth hype to attract the attention of literally everyone, with availibility issues leading Wii to outsell PS3 by nearly four to one margin.  There's no doubt that Wii will be the next hot item on everyone's wish list this year.  Nintendo has already gained so much momentum from DS, and we all know what an impact DS made by offering new ways to play games.

With Wii, Nintendo has everything they need to bring arcade gaming to the home a second time.  I wouldn't be surprised at if Nintendo finally pulls ahead in the console race this time around.

I hear people endlessly debating this concept over and over every day at System wars.  Sure Gameplay is superior to graphics, but that is not to say that graphics don't contribute to a better overal experience.  Combined with great gameplay, graphics are complimentary to a working formula, and most of the time it makes the game more fun.  That being said, it is still possible for gameplay to be affected in a negitive way when graphics are overemphasized.

Genres that rely heavily on visuals will naturally require more realistic graphics.  The thing is, there are only a handful of genres that focus on this category (namely Survival Horror and Stealth action).  Resident Evil 4 is a Survival Horror game initially released on a console that is (SURPRISE!!!) more powerful than Playstation 2.  Doesn't it make sense for a game of this calibur to be praised on the system that offers a more compelling visual experience?  But alas, RE4 is a gem that reaches a near perfect balance of both Graphics AND gameplay.

The PSP is a great example of what makes the whole graphics vs. gameplay bit so endearing.  Many of PSPs games have great visuals, but they lack the essential winning gameplay formula to keep players intrigued.  I find often that gamers complain about PSPs the lack of originality in its library.  Most of the games on the portable can be found in some form or another on a different platform such as the PS2, despite the fact that the gameplay therein might actually be good.  Even then, we can't forget what disasters can occur when graphics are the only thing on the agenda (The Con, Coded Arms).  Then of course there are simple games such as Lumines and Loco Roco, that may seem underwhelming visually, but they excell in offering a great time to the user.

What is the key here?  Subtlety in graphics.  Notice how these games are very humble in their presentation yet play very well and do a great job of satisfying their players.  While they may not AAA graphics, what keeps the gamer immersed is the engrossing gameplay in conjunction with minute touches that subconciously help the game flow better.  The blobby physics in Loco Roco really get the job done, since the majority of gameplay involves minipulating your character and your surroundings.  These are simple graphical touches that don't involve heavy polygons or extravegant textures, yet it looks great in motion. The same goes for Lumines with its great sense of musical timing and flashy flare that helps the gamers keep focused on the actual gameplay.

As for DS, there are several games that that may not have the best graphics in the world, but the subtlety in the graphics are what makes the games so much fun.  I think of the slingshot minigame in Mario DS or the rope toy in Nintendogs to name a few.  Both employ realistic physics that really feel satisfying to both the hands and the eyes, as well as underscoring simple yet addictive gameplay.   I also think of Castlevania DS and the great SMALL touches like realistic vehicle suspension or visible breath when standing outside in a snowy passageway.  These are great examples of how games don't require millions of polygons and gigantic amounts of storage space to make a game satisfying.

However, when developers ignore these trends and opt for overly simplistic graphics with no integrity, the gameplay suffers and the player feels let down. Sure gameplay is a must, but gamers thinking that it is ONLY gameplay that matters are fooling themselves.  Lucky for them, there are a few games like Phoenix Wright and Brain Age that are above the rule, but other than that there must be some balance between graphics and gameplay to make a succesful formula.  Truthfully, I think PSP would be doing a whole lot better right now if they focused less on the bulk of the graphics and more on the small touches that help compliment the gameplay.  I wouldn't mind if there were games on the platform with N64 visuals, as long as they occasionally wet my whistle when it matters most

Convincing phsyics are a perfect fit when done in moderation, but when developers begin to tip the scales in favor of either mostly "Graphics" or mostly "Gameplay", gamers lose in the end.  People need to stop and realize that graphics and gameplay go hand in hand, and you can't really have a fun game without one or the other.  When all you have are screens to go by, there's not much sense in arguing over whether it plays good or not. And next time your system is criticized for not being up to par with either category, you better hope you got a good excuse as to why a system can't offer both.

I've been carrying my DS around a lot more lately. Namely, the DS lite, as well as two or three extra games since everything can easily fit into my pocket with no hassles at all, and I don't feel like such a clunky dork with the old DS that was only barely portable.

But as I stop by some friend's houses within the last few days, the subject of video games is always somehow brought up. The situation turns into the perfect opportunity to show people the lite (pun intended). Anyways, the first guy I show it to is a skater friend I've known since high school. I wouldn't consider him a "gamer" according to his hobbies, and he only systems he's ever owned was a NES and PSone years ago, and a PS2 he currently owns (that he mostly watches movies on). I happen to have Tony Hawk's American Sk8land in my DS, and during a commercial break of the show he was watching, I booted up the DS lite and had the game running in less than 10 seconds. He becomes curious because he recognizes a song playing in the background and asks what game I was playing.

"Tony Hawk" I replied.

"Woah, really?" he asked, and I let him recieve the DS to try it out himself. Immediately, he was able to play the game like he did back in the old days of Tony Hawk, and soon the discussion turns to what the DS is capable of doing. I tell him it's not as powerful as the PSP (which he once told me he aspired to own), but I assured him it was still capable of decent 3D, and that due to the non-demanding CPU and cart media, the system has great battery life and no loading times. As impressed he was at the few moments of skating he played, he was even more surprised at what he could do with the bottom screen and mic. I showed him how you could record your own voice for bails and design your own boards and graffitti with the touch screen.

"I could never figure out how to do this kind of stuff with a controller. It really killed my muse, ya know?" He tells me. He soon forgets about the show he was watching and completely devotes his attention to making his artist insignia on the board bottom. After about 5 minutes, he insists he make a graffitti design too. I don't object, though I hadn't anticipated him being so excited about playing the game. He was also refreshed that the game was something completely new (as the Tony Hawk for PSP is a port of a game he could play on PS2). Before long, his gaming session is finally halted by a cell phone call, and he tells me he was going down to the coffee shop to meet some other friends. Exchanging farewells, I get my shoes on and head for the door.

"Hey man, could I borrow that Gameboy?"

"Sorry", I told him with a smile that reeked of 'get your own', and I left.

Another instance of casuals appreciating DS lite, I bring Brain Age over to a fireworks party a few days ago to play in my free time. Eventually, people start wanting to compete with Math Problems and soon enough everyone is whoring my DS lite, taking turns playing with the Stroop tests and number games. Within about a half an hour, everyone in the house of various age groups had gotten to play when they wanted to, and some had even expressed interest in buying a DS when told of its relatively inexpensive price point and line of great budget titles. Amazingly, out of about two dozen guests, everyone seemed thoroughly satisfied with their portable gaming experience, and those who were schooled gamers couldn't get enough of New Super Mario Bros.

Then there's my Dad, a 55 year old Air-force retiree who now does factory work. The last video game he ever played was Wetrix for Nintendo 64, and that was years ago. Alors, My little brother let him play his phat DS with True Swing Golf, since my dad is a big sports buff. Right away, he knows exactly how to play, and he finds himself enjoying a nice game of interactive virtual golf. I figure he'd like Brain Age as well, and sure anough, he becomes hooked on the minigames and Sudoku puzzles. Although my Pop is budget oriented and unskilled in modern electronic purchases, my little bro plans to give him his old DS with True Swing Golf when upgrading to DS lite.

So in the end, DS truly does appeal to everybody, without aiming at any specific teenage demograph like Sony does. Practically everybody I know could find a game they liked on the Nintendo DS, and my best friend (an English major in college) plans on getting a DS lite as well a copy of Phoenix Wright whenever that rereleases. Its starting to become strange, for I feel as if I'm becoming a DS representative, even though the system is pretty much selling itself. Is it any wonder that DS is on top of the electronic world? Esspecially since DS opens new doors and allows non gamers to enjoy interactive entertainment? With the way things are going now, I can see the Wii becoming just as big of a success as the DS. Nintendo knows what they're doing in this market, and I just have to laugh at all those haters out there who said the DS would flop.

Nintendo is FAR from Dead, and some of you fanboys out there need to lay off the wishful thinking and realize this.  Have a nice day.

....At least that's what all the haters say.  I've been all over this gaming site, and it never ceases to amaze me how many ignorant "gamers" oppose Nintendo's radical change to gameplay interface.  Often, the fanboys site numerous failed peripherals that never took off or were laughed out of the business altogether.  Such examples would include various fishing rods, light guns or motion sensing devices, most notably the infamous Nintendo Powerglove.

Despite popular belief, the reason those all failed is because they were all unused third party accessories with no potential.  The Revolution controller is standard, and developers will find ways of effectively programming games for the interface.  It's only a matter of time before people realize how truly ground breaking and beneficial this method of control is for the gaming business.

The problem here is that new-age gamers are still too stuck inside the we-don't-need-change mind of thinking that ultimately prohibits industry growth and makes them think they know what is good for virtual entertainment.  Frankly, modern control as we know it now is far from perfect.  It's laughable that people can be satisfied with prehistoric duel analog control for console FPSs, and mere button presses for sports games.

Haven't we all seen the future joys of Virtual Reality on television and in movies?  I'd find it hard to believe if no one here has ever pondered how cool it would be to be able to manipulate our interactive gaming environments so seamlessly and realistically like they do in all the neat sci-fi flicks of old.  The fact is, Revolution is the first step towards realizing that future, and I'll be damned if brainwashed Sony and Microsoft fanboys are ignorant enough to rebel against such a welcome change to gaming control because they think "we don't need it".

We are never going to get anywhere in gaming if we are merely building off of old concepts with newer visuals and slightly improved AI.  How fun can the 12th Grand Theft Auto sequel be if the only improvements we see are more vehicles to steal, more drugs to traffic, more hookers to kill, and more radio stations to listen to?  Eventually, the formula will get old, no matter which way you look at it.  The only way to see progression besides horsepower is through a new industry control standard.  And Revolution is doing just that.

So before you haters out there criticize Nintendo for "not being able to change the way we play games", look at their portfolio of past innovations they used to standardize the control scheme you are so confident in today.  I'm sure there were naysayers in the past, but nevertheless, the "Nintendo change" improved playing games for the better.  Why can't they do it again?

I love video games and I love art.  What two things could be better than THAT?  A Bob Ross painting game for Revolution of course!  Now that it's pfficially confirmed, it's the best of both worlds!  I'm sure he would have loved it.  R.I.P. Bob.

No.  In fact, it's not even close

That's because handhelds and consoles are two completely different platforms with varying factors that unschooled gamers would never even consider. Sony is jumping too far ahead in technology when handhelds are only ready for it's "32 bit era". People seem to forget that as fancy and graphically impressive as the PSP may be, it comes at a steep price.

Sony figured it be better to bite off more than they could chew and decided to give PSP graphical capabilities around that of a Dreamcast using miniturized discs as their format. Unfortunately, a taxing CPU and spinning disc media makes for high development costs and low battery life. Any seasoned portable gaming vet knows that this isn't a good thing, esspecially in a handheld. If that wasn't enough, consumers are milked to high heaven with video and music functionality, not to mention the high cost of Memory sticks to allot them these features.  One could say that these features are merely optional, but in reality, who is going to have a PSP and not want to show it off?

Of course, Sony fanboys will buy into these multimedia gimmicks and shiny graphics at a time when the industry isn't ready for this type of heavy lifting, and such unproven tactics are sure to weaken the industry in the long run. I find it pathetic when fanboys bash Nintendo for choosing to "underpower" their handheld in favor of adding more intuitive means for playing portable games. Nintendo has been in control of the handheld market since the birth of the Gameboy, and it isn't likely to change. Sony believes they can follow the same route the made with consoles, and the fact is, it doesn't work. Like I've said before, handhelds aren't ready for Sony's type of heavy risk taking, and the continued failure of UMDs and large amounts of uninspired console ports are proof of this. 

Sony fanboys think that graphics are everything, when they clearly are not. When gamers are forced to pay $50 for a portable game that offers gameplay almost identical to what they can find at home on their PS2, industry growth is stunted. Nintendo's strategy is more thought out than one might think, and will allow developers to make games at a more reasonable and more stable pace. DS is still a capable system with good graphics, it's just that Sony and their hype train misleads many a fanboy into thinking that good Graphics = Good game.

If history is any indication, you'll see that gamers favor simplicity and addictive gameplay over graphics 90% of the time. Just look at Lumines. Taking a cue from the legendary Tetris, It's without a doubt PSPs biggest title, and not a polygon in sight. On the other hand, you've got graphic heavy games like "The Con", relying visuals alone to hide the bland gameplay and long loading times.

To make a long story short:  DS may not have the best graphics, but it is still stomping the PSP.  Personally, I think PSP would've fared much better if Sony had waited a year or two until manufacturing costs came down and the technology was much more affordable to the mainstream consumer.  It's not like any other competitors would offer such advanced hardware so early on. 

The fact is, Sony chose to make this device at a time when it wasn't really neccessary.  Sure, a lot of PSP's thunder is from its graphical prowess, but I believe waiting a little bit wouldn't have hurt at all, and the impact wouldn't be any less.  It's likely that battery life would be higher, and it would probly even have a hard drive.  Oh well.  What's done is done, and Sony is suffering because of it.  Maybe they'll learn from their mistakes in the future. 

...If they have one. 

It always seems to come in threes.  Nintendo 64 was Nintendo's 3rd console, so naturally they had a big name to live up to.  I would say they delivered, but ultimately, their fate came at the hands of a weaker, easier to develop for console.  Now, Sony is ready to release the third generation of the mighty Playstation console, and I feel they may have bit off more than they can chew. 

People seem to forget that even though Nintendo was on top of the world, all the power and money they poured into the Nintendo 64 couldn't save it from defeat from Sony's more capable, down-to-earth console.  If last gen is any indication, I think it's safe to say that people won't devote their allegiance a system because of namesake alone.  Playstation offered gamers and developers what Nintendo had a bit more trouble achieving:  A steady stream of good games at a more affordable price than the competition.  Not to mention that ease of development meant more quality games and third party developers.

Fast forward to modern day, and you'll notice Sony is putting themselves into the same situation Nintendo was in a decade ago.  The Playstation brandname has become synonymous with console gaming.  Unfortunately, high costs of Cell production and overly complicated game engineering are likely to decay the market lead by Sony into a flashy, expensive, all-or-nothing derelict where gamers are the ones who suffer.  The industry can't afford another monumental failure due to such heavy risk taking like it did in the 1980s. 

Luckily for us, Microsoft and Nintendo still have cards to play next gen.  Odds are, if Sony does go under, it'll be up to Xbox 360 or Revolution to pick up the pieces.  Nintendo certainly didn't die after the Nintendo 64, but they did learn a hard lesson about how to program a console and keep development costs low.  We've all seen the damage pride can cause to gaming giants who don't know what they're doing. 

They say that those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it.  I think Sony needs to go back to school...

I've seen it time and time again. Gamers complaining when a specific game doesn't use voice overs. I don't know about you, but voice overs aren't always neccessary for a game to be fun. There are the few exceptions in games like MGS or Resident Evil where it is there to put emphasis on realism and to further the experience of that particular game, but for the most part, many games can be enjoyed without it. I can't stand having a story TOLD to me. I prefer being able to experience it myself and at my own pace, where the game becomes more of an inventive, interactive novel as opposed to an constant-attention, edge-of-your-seat wannabe movie.

Back in the 8-16 bit days, games weren't expected to have actual recorded dialog and narration. As a child, playing games like the original Dragon Warrior, Shadowgate, Ninja Gaiden 1 and 2, Zelda, and Goonies 2 all helped me develop reading skills as well as offer me a good time in the process. But nowadays, kids don't have to sit through the "bothersome chore" of reading text. They will never get to experience the same challenge and learning curve many of us had to overcome to understand games and how they worked.  In a way, voiceless gaming helped us to use our brains at an earlier age.

My little brother for example, doesn't like to play games that have a lot of reading. He prefers to stick to the likes of games like Viewtiful Joe, Metal Gear solid, or Sports games with commentary. To him, text is nothing more than a bunch of mumbo jumbo that prohibits him from actually playing the game. To be perfectly honest, I've seen many, many other modern children like that, who'll skip through all the dialog and instructions as fast as they can push the confirm button. As a result, these kids find themselves lost or frustrated in said game, and will move on to something more "player friendly". Of course, since many great games require reading (All Zeldas, Pre-PS2 Final Fantasy, Metroid Prime, Morrowind). These gamers will never get to fully experience these games and will move on to the more flashy stuff generally made for casuals. Personally, I'd take my RPGs and other text dialog games without VO any day, as it ultimately leads to a more imaginative and personalized world, where I am free to think of the character's voices as I imagine them, combined with the game designers' open ended and creative inflection (for example, Barret's dialog in FFVII).

To make a long story short, nary will you ever find a text-heavy game in a casual's library. I hate to say it, but once gamers start to get accustomed to the comfort zone of Voice overs, the less they will respect titles that do have text. Gamers are frequently becoming accustomed to the ways of the convenient casual life, and it's starting at an early age (they want to draw in the kiddies while they can't read). Sure, Recorded dialog and is a big step forward in the industry, and can certainly help a game out, but it should only be used if it is completely neccessary. Sadly, Game developers are relying more and more on Voice overs, and will eventually abandon text altogether. A dark day it will be when people start penalizing classics like Zelda or Fire Emblem for "making you have to read" (I'm talking to you Tommy Tallirico).

You know, now that I think of it, it's kind of funny that some people will call Nintendo "kiddy", yet it is Nintendo who usually gets the slack for not using voice over in most of their games. Last time I checked, it was young children who have the most displeasure when it comes to reading. Perhaps it's the ADD-prone Nintendo hating fanboys who are the kiddies...

P.S.: If you are too lazy to read all this, you're probably a casual gamer. ;)

It's true.

I hate to say it, but I don't think there will ever be a time in modern or future gaming that can match the era of awesome unforgettable titles like FFVII, Zelda OoT, Metal Gear Solid, Mario 64, CastleVania: SOTN, Perfect Dark, Tony Hawk Pro Skater (The good ones), and many other fantastic and unbeatable titles I may be forgetting. This was the era when I was in complete gaming bliss, doodling pictures of my pixelated heroes on my homework, losing sleep to play the latest big Squaresoft RPG, and commiting myself to find out about all the latest news and games as soon as it hit the press.

The modern market however, once you get past the shiny bells and whistles of new GTA games, Slasher Beat-em-ups, Button Mashing fighters, needless cash-crop EA sports games, and an innumerable amount of WWII and Futuristic First Person Shooters, somewhere along the lines, gaming just gets a bit stale. Thank God for the few truly quirky and innovative titles that actually stirred up gaming a bit. Games like Mr. Mosquito, WarioWare, Super Smash Brothers Melee, Katamary Damacy, Pikmin, Gitaroo Man, Metroid Prime, Super Monkey Ball, and Various Eyetoy titles. Don't get me wrong, there are a few gems this generation has handed out to the gaming public, but it is nothing to the calibur of last gen's legendary line-up.

I guess the problem here is that, once everythings been done before, how long is it until that particlar title or franchise becomes old and unprofitable? I agree Nintendo may be taking it too far with their Mario games but in the long run, people still buy it and enjoy it. Unfortunately, other popular titles like Metal Gear Solid, Tekken, Tony Hawk, Final Fantasy, Megaman, and many many others can and possbly will suffer the same cold fate of rusted gameplay, or just the exhaustion of seeing the same old familiar faces for too long. It's something we've seen many times before in cases like Syphon Filter, Bust A Move, Tomb Raider, Army Men, and Recently, Spyro the Dragon. In an ever changing market, it's getting increasingly difficult to make something new and unique, and to make it last long to boot. It's as if the Earth is running low on fossil fuels, and good games are the oil.

I guess we can all blame the prior generations in all their excellence for claiming dibs on all the good and original ideas, but lets just hope there is more gaming goodness to come. I don't think gaming can continue this way much longer...

PlayStation 2: You need to realize that your fragile face is surprisingly outdated yet funny at the same time, and your inards are most likely put together with tape and Elmer's glue. You may have been on top of the world not too long ago, but you keep making yourself look bad every business choice you make. You keep thinking that just because you're you, no trouble can come to your way. Too bad screwing over your young fans has been your downfall (pun Intended). A smooth criminal indeed...

Xbox: What can I say? Bill Gates is the only person in the world I could think of to fill this posistion. Hey, let's face it: He's got all the money in the world, yet not many friends. All's he has to do is practically give his assets away and he'll win you over in a heartbeat. I mean, he'll practically give you $500 if you bother to smell his farts. Well, his gaseous emition may not smell any different from anyone elses, but there is no one else on this planet that you would be obliged to do that for. Esspecially when there is so much gain! Most bang for your buck here, folks.

Gamecube: The underdog that no one appreciates. Deep down he has a lot of tricks up his sleeve, that no one seems to know about or care for. He'd save your ass in a hurry, but most people are too proud to give him any credit. He may be a kind of a loser at first, but once you get to know him, He'd be your best friend forever.