The Starcraft 2 Wikipedia article is accurate and representative of everything Blizzard has revealed about the game so far. However, it seems to be a little bit short. There are several additional units that are not mentioned in the article and the ones that are present are lacking any detail.
In general, I think Wikipedia can be a great resource for finding accurate sources, but it alone, like any encyclopedia, probably shouldn't be used as a source for scholarly papers. The power of Wikipedia is it's availability to anyone with an internet connection. Stories can be updated immediately and it is a great source for up to date information. Additionally, the sources and citations that are listed on Wikipedia are often primary sources that could be used as a reference for a paper.
I was thinking about the idea that a group of amateurs is as fallible as a single amateur, and I think it is flawed. As a psychology major, I have learned about a phenomenon where groups seem to be much better at solving problems, not because of their combined power, but because the larger the group is, the more likely there will be a really smart person in it. This argument applies tenfold to Wikipedia and Youtube. The chances of having a really talented, knowledgeable person increases dramatically as the group increases in size.
Thursday, June 28, 2007
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
Glitching through the years
Home consoles have been around for decades, allowing people to explore digitally rendered worlds in their own living rooms. For as long as there have been consoles, however, there have been people who push the limits of games, finding holes in the code that produce odd, surprising and even humorous results. This process of intentionally seeking out programmer errors and exploiting them is known as glitching.
Mario, perhaps the most recognizable gaming icon of all time, consumed my days as a child. I would play often, and when I wasn't playing I was discussing strategy with my friends. Once, in the third grade, my friends and I were engaged in an esoteric conversation about the benefits of shooting fireballs at turtles, when a fifth grader approached us. He looked down and explained in his mighty voice that fireballs were for weaklings. Why use fireballs, he exclaimed, when you could walk through walls, become invincible, or even warp to the final level?
After a lengthy discussion and several jaw dropping revelations, the fifth grader agreed to come to my house where he would show my friends and me how to delicately circumvent the rules of the game and emerge victorious. Among the tricks he taught us was one where the player could gain 100 lives, enough to complete the game with ease, by jumping on a turtle at the right time and place. Another glitch involved walking through a wall to reach a hidden area where the player could warp to the final level. At the time I was surprised that a person could break the rules of seemingly intact games, and this newfound power thrust me into the world of glitching. I have actively pursued programmer errors ever since.
As I grew older, games became more advanced and glitching ascended to higher levels. No longer was I limited to walking through walls on a side-scrolling game like Mario, I could now explore 3D environments and exploit the physics and computer behavior of games to achieve amazing results. In the game Rush 2 my friend and I discovered that it was possible to escape from certain levels by gaining speed and hitting a well placed jump or ledge. While this glitch didn't benefit us in any way, it was fun to discover the limits of games.
I got my Xbox when I was in high school and was thrilled to be playing games like Halo, a first person shooter. My friends would come over to my house and we would spend hours competing against each other, sometimes playing one vs. one, or upping the stakes and engaging in a team battle. While this was fun, we were limited to one TV screen, one Xbox, and ourselves. However, Halo 2 came out several years later and was equipped with online capabilities. Now I could sit in my basement and battle with my friend across the internet as he sat in his basement.
As we began to play online we soon discovered that our proficiency at glitching gave us an advantage over other players. We could escape to building tops and wreak havoc on the opposing team, to their dismay, or carry extra weapons and unload clip after clip of ammo into enemy forces. By taking advantage of subtle errors in the code we were able to win almost every game. This didn't last long however, and the developer issued a "patch", or an update for the game that fixed many of the problems, as well as a warning that threatened to ban glitchers. Despite developer efforts, gamers are constantly discovering new glitches and developers are continually updating games to prevent them.
Ever since then I had refrained from glitching in online games for moral and selfish reasons (namely, that I didn't want to be banned), but in a recent game of Halo 2 I managed to take advantage of a glitch (for research only, of course) and reach a very high building with the sniper rifle, where I could kill opponents at my leisure. To me they looked like little dots far below, running in circles, but I could zoom in and have a wide open opportunity for a head shot. After several minutes of carnage and a score of 25 to 4, my opponents weren't very pleased and had this to say:
Opponent 1: "Oh my gosh, check out the glitch whore."
Opponent 2: "Yeah, that's so lame, anybody who needs to do that to win is just... lame."
Opponent 1: "Gosh!"
Opponent 3: (whiny child) "Gaaaawd. This sucks."
Opponent 1: "Every time I re-spawn I just die. Dude, you suck, I hope you die today. Go fuck yourself!"
After that last sentence the opposing team left the game within seconds, taking a loss and giving my team a win. Based upon my research, and having had been in their shoes countless times before, I am more aware of what a problem glitching can be in multiplayer games.
However, glitching is not an intrinsic evil. Like any new knowledge it can be used for whatever purpose it's discoverer intends. With that, I leave you with an example of fun and harmless glitching. This appears to be a secret that the developers implanted into the single player mode of Halo 2 on purpose, and it requires glitching. On the level "Metropolis" there is a hidden weapon with vast power located far above the regular level on a building that is not accessible unless glitching is implemented. In this case the player has obtained the overshield, making him resistant to damage. He then sets the warthog on a bridge, hanging the front wheels over the edge. By standing on the corner of the warthog and firing a rocket launcher at the ground the player is blasted up into the air, far higher than is allowed by the game physics under normal circumstances.
Mario, perhaps the most recognizable gaming icon of all time, consumed my days as a child. I would play often, and when I wasn't playing I was discussing strategy with my friends. Once, in the third grade, my friends and I were engaged in an esoteric conversation about the benefits of shooting fireballs at turtles, when a fifth grader approached us. He looked down and explained in his mighty voice that fireballs were for weaklings. Why use fireballs, he exclaimed, when you could walk through walls, become invincible, or even warp to the final level?After a lengthy discussion and several jaw dropping revelations, the fifth grader agreed to come to my house where he would show my friends and me how to delicately circumvent the rules of the game and emerge victorious. Among the tricks he taught us was one where the player could gain 100 lives, enough to complete the game with ease, by jumping on a turtle at the right time and place. Another glitch involved walking through a wall to reach a hidden area where the player could warp to the final level. At the time I was surprised that a person could break the rules of seemingly intact games, and this newfound power thrust me into the world of glitching. I have actively pursued programmer errors ever since.
As I grew older, games became more advanced and glitching ascended to higher levels. No longer was I limited to walking through walls on a side-scrolling game like Mario, I could now explore 3D environments and exploit the physics and computer behavior of games to achieve amazing results. In the game Rush 2 my friend and I discovered that it was possible to escape from certain levels by gaining speed and hitting a well placed jump or ledge. While this glitch didn't benefit us in any way, it was fun to discover the limits of games.
I got my Xbox when I was in high school and was thrilled to be playing games like Halo, a first person shooter. My friends would come over to my house and we would spend hours competing against each other, sometimes playing one vs. one, or upping the stakes and engaging in a team battle. While this was fun, we were limited to one TV screen, one Xbox, and ourselves. However, Halo 2 came out several years later and was equipped with online capabilities. Now I could sit in my basement and battle with my friend across the internet as he sat in his basement.
As we began to play online we soon discovered that our proficiency at glitching gave us an advantage over other players. We could escape to building tops and wreak havoc on the opposing team, to their dismay, or carry extra weapons and unload clip after clip of ammo into enemy forces. By taking advantage of subtle errors in the code we were able to win almost every game. This didn't last long however, and the developer issued a "patch", or an update for the game that fixed many of the problems, as well as a warning that threatened to ban glitchers. Despite developer efforts, gamers are constantly discovering new glitches and developers are continually updating games to prevent them.
Ever since then I had refrained from glitching in online games for moral and selfish reasons (namely, that I didn't want to be banned), but in a recent game of Halo 2 I managed to take advantage of a glitch (for research only, of course) and reach a very high building with the sniper rifle, where I could kill opponents at my leisure. To me they looked like little dots far below, running in circles, but I could zoom in and have a wide open opportunity for a head shot. After several minutes of carnage and a score of 25 to 4, my opponents weren't very pleased and had this to say:
Opponent 1: "Oh my gosh, check out the glitch whore."
Opponent 2: "Yeah, that's so lame, anybody who needs to do that to win is just... lame."
Opponent 1: "Gosh!"
Opponent 3: (whiny child) "Gaaaawd. This sucks."
Opponent 1: "Every time I re-spawn I just die. Dude, you suck, I hope you die today. Go fuck yourself!"
After that last sentence the opposing team left the game within seconds, taking a loss and giving my team a win. Based upon my research, and having had been in their shoes countless times before, I am more aware of what a problem glitching can be in multiplayer games.
However, glitching is not an intrinsic evil. Like any new knowledge it can be used for whatever purpose it's discoverer intends. With that, I leave you with an example of fun and harmless glitching. This appears to be a secret that the developers implanted into the single player mode of Halo 2 on purpose, and it requires glitching. On the level "Metropolis" there is a hidden weapon with vast power located far above the regular level on a building that is not accessible unless glitching is implemented. In this case the player has obtained the overshield, making him resistant to damage. He then sets the warthog on a bridge, hanging the front wheels over the edge. By standing on the corner of the warthog and firing a rocket launcher at the ground the player is blasted up into the air, far higher than is allowed by the game physics under normal circumstances.
Sunday, June 24, 2007
Glitching through the ages (not final)
Home consoles have been around for decades, allowing people to explore digitally rendered worlds in their own living rooms. For as long as there have been consoles, however, there have been people who push the limits of games, finding holes in the code that produce odd, surprising and even humorous results. This process of intentionally seeking out programmer errors and exploiting them is known as glitching.
Pac-Man on the Atari was a controversial game that displeased many fans because of it's rushed production and poor quality. However, that didn't stop people from finding a glitch that allowed a player to beat the game easily, locking the ghosts in the portal permanently.
Later, when the Atari had lost out to the next generation of 8-bit consoles, like the Nintendo, games offered a new world of glitching. Super Mario, perhaps the most popular game icon of all time, had several glitches in it's first sidescrolling rendition, Super Mario Bros. The ones shown in this video are representative of the types of glitches that were common for many Nintendo games, including walking through walls and defying death.
The Playstation, released in America in 1995, was the first console able to create complex 3d environments and as a result glitching ascended to ever more complex levels. The Playstation 2 improved upon the graphics of the PS and glitching became more entertaining as fairly realistic environments were demonstrated to be nothing but computer code.
As video games became playable over the internet and it was possible to compete with anyone, glitching took on a new role. Glitches allowed people to gain an advantage over their opponents in matched games. By finding a shortcut through a wall in a racing game, escaping to an unreachable section of a map in a shooter game, or taking advantage of physics glitches to attain invincibility, players were able to defeat their opponents unfairly.
In a recent game of Halo 2 I managed to take advantage of a glitch (for research only, of course) and reach a very high building with the sniper rifle, where I could kill opponents at my leisure. To me they looked like little dots far below, running in circles, but I could zoom in and have a wide open opportunity for a head shot. After several minutes of carnage and a score of 25 to 4, my opponents weren't very pleased and had this to say:
Opponent 1: "Oh my gosh, check out the glitch whore."
Opponent 2: "Yeah, that's so lame, anybody who needs to do that to win is just... lame."
Opponent 1: "Gosh"
Opponent 3: (whiny child) "Gaaaawd. This sucks"
Opponent 1: "Every time I re-spawn I just die. Dude, you suck, I hope you die today. Go fuck yourself"
After that last sentence the opposing team left the game within seconds, taking a loss and giving my team a win.
Based upon my research, and having had been in their shoes countless times before, I am aware of what a problem glitching can be in multiplayer games. As a result of the widespread use of glitches to gain an advantage, game developers have resorted to updating games with patches that fix problematic glitches. These "patch" up the faulty code, preventing people from gaining an unfair advantage over their opponents, and are required to play online against real people.
However, glitching is not an intrinsic evil. Like any new knowledge it can be used for whatever purpose it's discoverer intends. With that, I leave you with an example of fun and harmless glitching. This appears to be a secret that the developers implanted into the single player mode of Halo 2 on purpose, and it requires glitching. On the level "Metropolis" there is a hidden weapon with vast power located far above the regular level on a building that is not accessible unless glitching is implemented. In this case the player has obtained the "overshield", making him resistant to damage, after which he utilizes the warthog and a rocket launcher to blast himself into the air.
Remember. Please glitch responsibly.
Pac-Man on the Atari was a controversial game that displeased many fans because of it's rushed production and poor quality. However, that didn't stop people from finding a glitch that allowed a player to beat the game easily, locking the ghosts in the portal permanently.
Later, when the Atari had lost out to the next generation of 8-bit consoles, like the Nintendo, games offered a new world of glitching. Super Mario, perhaps the most popular game icon of all time, had several glitches in it's first sidescrolling rendition, Super Mario Bros. The ones shown in this video are representative of the types of glitches that were common for many Nintendo games, including walking through walls and defying death.
The Playstation, released in America in 1995, was the first console able to create complex 3d environments and as a result glitching ascended to ever more complex levels. The Playstation 2 improved upon the graphics of the PS and glitching became more entertaining as fairly realistic environments were demonstrated to be nothing but computer code.
As video games became playable over the internet and it was possible to compete with anyone, glitching took on a new role. Glitches allowed people to gain an advantage over their opponents in matched games. By finding a shortcut through a wall in a racing game, escaping to an unreachable section of a map in a shooter game, or taking advantage of physics glitches to attain invincibility, players were able to defeat their opponents unfairly.
In a recent game of Halo 2 I managed to take advantage of a glitch (for research only, of course) and reach a very high building with the sniper rifle, where I could kill opponents at my leisure. To me they looked like little dots far below, running in circles, but I could zoom in and have a wide open opportunity for a head shot. After several minutes of carnage and a score of 25 to 4, my opponents weren't very pleased and had this to say:
Opponent 1: "Oh my gosh, check out the glitch whore."
Opponent 2: "Yeah, that's so lame, anybody who needs to do that to win is just... lame."
Opponent 1: "Gosh"
Opponent 3: (whiny child) "Gaaaawd. This sucks"
Opponent 1: "Every time I re-spawn I just die. Dude, you suck, I hope you die today. Go fuck yourself"
After that last sentence the opposing team left the game within seconds, taking a loss and giving my team a win.
Based upon my research, and having had been in their shoes countless times before, I am aware of what a problem glitching can be in multiplayer games. As a result of the widespread use of glitches to gain an advantage, game developers have resorted to updating games with patches that fix problematic glitches. These "patch" up the faulty code, preventing people from gaining an unfair advantage over their opponents, and are required to play online against real people.
However, glitching is not an intrinsic evil. Like any new knowledge it can be used for whatever purpose it's discoverer intends. With that, I leave you with an example of fun and harmless glitching. This appears to be a secret that the developers implanted into the single player mode of Halo 2 on purpose, and it requires glitching. On the level "Metropolis" there is a hidden weapon with vast power located far above the regular level on a building that is not accessible unless glitching is implemented. In this case the player has obtained the "overshield", making him resistant to damage, after which he utilizes the warthog and a rocket launcher to blast himself into the air.
Remember. Please glitch responsibly.
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Home consoles have been around for decades, allowing people to explore digitally rendered worlds in their own living rooms. For as long as there have been consoles, however, there have been people who push the limits of games, finding holes in the code that produce odd, surprising and even humorous results. This process of intentionally seeking out these programmer errors and exploiting them is known as glitching.
Pac-Man on the Atari was a controversial game that displeased many fans because of it's rushed production and poor quality. However, that didn't stop people from finding a glitch that allowed a player to beat the game easily, locking the ghosts in the portal permanently.
Later, when the Atari had lost out to the new generation of 8-bit consoles, like the Nintendo, new games offered a new world of glitching. Super Mario, perhaps the most popular game icon of all time, had several glitches in it's first sidescrolling rendition. The ones shown in this video are representative of the types of glitches that were common for many Nintendo games, including walking through walls and defying death.
The Playstation, released in America in 1995, was the first console able to create complex 3d environments and as a result glitching ascended to ever more complex levels. The Playstation 2 improved upon the graphics of the PS and glitching became more entertaining as fairly realistic environments were demonstrated to be nothing but computer code.
As video games became playable over the internet and it was possible to compete with anyone, glitching took on a new role. Glitches allowed people to gain an advantage over their opponents in matched games. By finding a shortcut through a wall in a racing game, escaping to an unreachable section of a map in a shooter game, or taking advantage of physics glitches to attain invincibility, players are able to defeat their opponents unfairly. As a result, game developers have resorted to updating games with patches that fix problematic glitches.
Pac-Man on the Atari was a controversial game that displeased many fans because of it's rushed production and poor quality. However, that didn't stop people from finding a glitch that allowed a player to beat the game easily, locking the ghosts in the portal permanently.
Later, when the Atari had lost out to the new generation of 8-bit consoles, like the Nintendo, new games offered a new world of glitching. Super Mario, perhaps the most popular game icon of all time, had several glitches in it's first sidescrolling rendition. The ones shown in this video are representative of the types of glitches that were common for many Nintendo games, including walking through walls and defying death.
The Playstation, released in America in 1995, was the first console able to create complex 3d environments and as a result glitching ascended to ever more complex levels. The Playstation 2 improved upon the graphics of the PS and glitching became more entertaining as fairly realistic environments were demonstrated to be nothing but computer code.
As video games became playable over the internet and it was possible to compete with anyone, glitching took on a new role. Glitches allowed people to gain an advantage over their opponents in matched games. By finding a shortcut through a wall in a racing game, escaping to an unreachable section of a map in a shooter game, or taking advantage of physics glitches to attain invincibility, players are able to defeat their opponents unfairly. As a result, game developers have resorted to updating games with patches that fix problematic glitches.
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Traditional source: Next in Child Prodigies -- the Gamer
By Michelle Slatalla, New York Times
"On one hand, studies show there’s no doubt that exposure to violent games contributes to aggression in young children... But on the other hand, other factors — like warm relations with parents, good grades and plenty of friends — can eliminate the risk."
"Me: “Sweetie, get back on that console. You need to spend another 45 minutes mastering your Half-Life 2 gravity gun moves.”
Academic Journal Source: The effect of video game violence on physiological desensitization to real-life violence
By Carnagey, Anderson, Bushman, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
"Participants who previously played a violent video game had lower heart rate and galvanic skin response while viewing filmed real violence, demonstrating a physiological desensitization to violence."
Online Source: Graphic Violence
Wikipedia
"Critics such as Dave Grossman argue that violence in games hardens children to unethical acts, calling first-person shooter games "murder simulators"
Non-Traditional Source: Video Game Violence
By ashes4eyes, Youtube
"video Game violence and the supposed affect violent video games have on teenagers today. Ya know.... The crap about where if a normal teen plays Mortal Kombat he grows extremely aggressive...psssht....yeah."
By Michelle Slatalla, New York Times
"On one hand, studies show there’s no doubt that exposure to violent games contributes to aggression in young children... But on the other hand, other factors — like warm relations with parents, good grades and plenty of friends — can eliminate the risk."
"Me: “Sweetie, get back on that console. You need to spend another 45 minutes mastering your Half-Life 2 gravity gun moves.”
Her: “Please, Mommy, can’t I take a break and do my math homework for awhile?”
Me: “We’ve been over this before. How do you expect to get into a good college if you don’t reach Level 27?"Academic Journal Source: The effect of video game violence on physiological desensitization to real-life violence
By Carnagey, Anderson, Bushman, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
"Participants who previously played a violent video game had lower heart rate and galvanic skin response while viewing filmed real violence, demonstrating a physiological desensitization to violence."
Online Source: Graphic Violence
Wikipedia
"Critics such as Dave Grossman argue that violence in games hardens children to unethical acts, calling first-person shooter games "murder simulators"
Non-Traditional Source: Video Game Violence
By ashes4eyes, Youtube
"video Game violence and the supposed affect violent video games have on teenagers today. Ya know.... The crap about where if a normal teen plays Mortal Kombat he grows extremely aggressive...psssht....yeah."
Sunday, June 10, 2007
Game I Life
A blog I read often is Game Life, which is one of Wired magazine's many blogs. It's focus is on video games, and includes information about new releases, online flash games, business, recalls, anything game-related that is interesting. I'd guess that the people who read that blog include serious gamers, probably between the ages of 20 and 40, game developers, and maybe even business people who own stock in game companies. Most of the posts are about gaming news, such as what games are coming out and when, as well as game reviews. The only reason I think developers and business people might also read the blog is because there are also posts about which games are selling the most and which companies are doing the best.
Wednesday, June 6, 2007
Conversation: Wired Blog-- GameLife (Re-Write)
Original Post:
(The opening post initiated the conversation by reporting on an incident and then including personal opinion. Bill Gates, and Microsoft in general, are known for either buying-out the competition or copying it, and when Bill Gates said that he would like to have a technology that could simulate the swing of a bat, Chris Kohler (the author) points out that there is already such a technology, the Wii, and it happens to be made by Nintendo, a competitor of Microsoft. I personally think that the Wii has met with success because it dared to depart from the traditional archetype of consoles and has reached out to a wider audience. It is currently beating the Xbox 360 and the PS3 because it is cheaper and appealing to people outside of the traditional gamer demographic.)Bill Gates: One Day, Video Games Will Let You Swing a Tennis Racket
From Bill Gates' and Steve Jobs' joint presentation at the D5 conference, some ruminations from the Microsoft big cheese about the future of motion-sensing video games:
He went on to explain that he's talking about video recognition -- a camera that watches you swing an actual tennis racket, then translates that imagery into game data. Then again, what's the difference, really, besides the fact that one of those technologies already works and the other one doesn't?Gates: Software is doing vision and so, you know, imagine a game machine where you’re just going to pick up the bat and swing it or the tennis racket and swing it.
[the moderators say he's describing the Wii]
Gates: No, that’s not it. You can’t pick up your tennis racket. And swing it.
Comments: (6)
Obviously, Bill's really talking about the EyeToy from Sony, rather than the Wii.
(This post is defending Microsoft in response to the attacks that were made on it in previous posts. By suggesting that Microsoft's "video recognition" would be more accurate and responsive than the Wii currently is, the author is validating Bill Gates' comments. I suppose it would be possible, in a couple decades, to have amazingly accurate video recognition, but currently, and for the forseeable future, the Wii is the best movement recognition out there.)ummm... not really, because if microsoft's video recognition really does work, it will be able to simulate somewhat exact movements. when the wiimote only detects movements, and can't translate the movements into the game.
Please hurry up with this new tennis software. I can't run anymore because of arthritis. I love the game and wish I could play again. I can't wait!
RCR: If anything, I'd say that the Wiimote is far more precise than camera technology is likely to be. The Wiimote has every little bit of data -- the force applied to the controller via the X, Y, and Z axes over time, and can also read absolute position. Of course it can translate these movements into the game, it's just a matter of a game designer doing it.
I eagerly await the day when a camera can do the exact same thing just by eyeballing someone's off-the-shelf tennis racket...
Ms. Jean: Buy a Wii!
I hope tennis rackets and baseball bats are equipped with *very* strong wrist straps in the future.
Monday, June 4, 2007
Conversation: Wired Blog-- GameLife
Original Post:
(The opening post initiated the conversation by reporting on an incident and then including personal opinion. Bill Gates, and Microsoft in general, are known for either buying-out the competition or copying it, and when Bill Gates said that he would like to have a technology that could simulate the swing of a bat, Chris Kohler (the author) points out that there is already such a technology, the Wii, and it happens to be made by Nintendo, a competitor of Microsoft.)Bill Gates: One Day, Video Games Will Let You Swing a Tennis Racket
He went on to explain that he's talking about video recognition -- a camera that watches you swing an actual tennis racket, then translates that imagery into game data. Then again, what's the difference, really, besides the fact that one of those technologies already works and the other one doesn't?Gates: Software is doing vision and so, you know, imagine a game machine where you’re just going to pick up the bat and swing it or the tennis racket and swing it.
[the moderators say he's describing the Wii]
Gates: No, that’s not it. You can’t pick up your tennis racket. And swing it.
Comments: (6)
I like how Microsoft have gone from slyly copying other's ideas, such as Firefox's tabbed browsing, and passing them off as their own without much fanfare, to actively trying to steal another's ideas with just the simplest of embellishments in a public forum and then openlly deny it. It you chopped the handle off a racket and replaced with with the Wiimote you have exactly the experience Gates is talking about.
Obviously, Bill's really talking about the EyeToy from Sony, rather than the Wii.
(This post is defending Microsoft in response to the attacks that were made on it in previous posts. By suggesting that Microsoft's "video recognition" would be more accurate and responsive than the Wii currently is, the author is validating Bill Gates' comments.)ummm... not really, because if microsoft's video recognition really does work, it will be able to simulate somewhat exact movements. when the wiimote only detects movements, and can't translate the movements into the game.
Please hurry up with this new tennis software. I can't run anymore because of arthritis. I love the game and wish I could play again. I can't wait!
RCR: If anything, I'd say that the Wiimote is far more precise than camera technology is likely to be. The Wiimote has every little bit of data -- the force applied to the controller via the X, Y, and Z axes over time, and can also read absolute position. Of course it can translate these movements into the game, it's just a matter of a game designer doing it.
I eagerly await the day when a camera can do the exact same thing just by eyeballing someone's off-the-shelf tennis racket...
Ms. Jean: Buy a Wii!
I hope tennis rackets and baseball bats are equipped with *very* strong wrist straps in the future.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
(This comment agrees with the original post and adds additional reasoning. I agree with this, and believe that Gates is trying to steal the thunder of Nintendo.)