Sonys motion controller named

[TM™]

Games were toys back in the early days, but see how they've evolved into something a lot more bigger than just toys. These games now are full of realism, better interactivity, and so much more.

It'd be a bit dumb to call them toys, but I know where you're coming from. Like Ivan said, I just can't see why they should be called toys, when so many of it has done greatly in the gaming world. Some of it's technology is now being used in other things as well (e.g. game engines being used in movies). Technology is rapidly changing, and so is the ideology of it, it changes games, and many other things now. You can't just call it toys.

But that's just my 2 cent.

Also, the motion controller does look like a big rip-off from the Wii controls, but then again, I doubt they were being creative in it's design. Nonetheless, lets see what can be done with this sort of thing.

[Kitsune Inferno]

That may be true, but recall that I never called videogames "just" toys, as though the words "toys" and "art" were mutually exclusive. They're obviously not. A masterfully designed action figure can truly be a work of art, but that doesn't change the fact it's still a toy. It was meant to be played with, that is unless you're a douchebag who's so ashamed of his hobby that you constantly insist it's a "collectible". I'm not a pretentious snob who believes anything that's popular and coherent isn't art. I'm just stating a fact. Videogames were meant to be played with, therefore they are toys. That's how they started out and that's what they should still strive to be. A plaything for my enjoyment. That doesn't mean they aren't brilliant masterpieces. But don't forget what games are and don't forget their purpose.

That's why I frickin' hate the Move. It has just dawned on me that this is nothing more than a corporate exercise to placate the Wii's detractors, mainly the idiots who think the Wii is nothing more than two Gamecubes duct taped together. All it's offering to the table is HD. HD contributes ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to gaming. It's just to please the more "diehard" fans who have forgotten what gaming is supposed to be about. The dumbass graphics whores who'll masturbate over bloom effects and other technical bullshit like that. The same motherfuckers who'll eat this shit up after spending the last four years making fun of the Wii. I'm adamant that this thing will fail hard. It just won't have the spirit and creativity Nintendo presents all the time. It's nothing more than a shameless ripoff. Same thing with Natal.

[Ivan]

Motion Control isn't a Wii exclusive or anything, everyone has the right to use it. Honestly, what's so creative about Nintendo's use of motion control? Wii Fit? Wii sports? Yeah, lovely. You don't know what Sony will do with it and you sure as hell can't be sure of Natal, it seems way more elaborated than Sony or Wii's use of Motion control from what I've seen. It's not about what tools you use, it's about what comes out of them, if I start seeing stuff like Wii Sports and all on the PS3 then sure, it's a complete rip off but as it stands right now, I'm not sure anyone can be so certain about it. The PS3 and the 360 bring more to the table than just HD( which does have its fair share of importance). It brings digital distribution, a better online gaming structure and generally more options for developers, all these improvements end up contributing to every aspect of the development of a game. Are there shortcomings? Yeah, there are. Mainly the cost of developing games which usually shuts out the more niche developers. I guess that will just keep happening, it's a damn shame though.

[TM™]

That may be true, but recall that I never called videogames "just" toys, as though the words "toys" and "art" were mutually exclusive. They're obviously not. A masterfully designed action figure can truly be a work of art, but that doesn't change the fact it's still a toy. It was meant to be played with, that is unless you're a douchebag who's so ashamed of his hobby that you constantly insist it's a "collectible". I'm not a pretentious snob who believes anything that's popular and coherent isn't art. I'm just stating a fact. Videogames were meant to be played with, therefore they are toys. That's how they started out and that's what they should still strive to be. A plaything for my enjoyment. That doesn't mean they aren't brilliant masterpieces. But don't forget what games are and don't forget their purpose.

That's why I frickin' hate the Move. It has just dawned on me that this is nothing more than a corporate exercise to placate the Wii's detractors, mainly the idiots who think the Wii is nothing more than two Gamecubes duct taped together. All it's offering to the table is HD. HD contributes ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to gaming. It's just to please the more "diehard" fans who have forgotten what gaming is supposed to be about. The dumbass graphics whores who'll masturbate over bloom effects and other technical bullshit like that. The same motherfuckers who'll eat this shit up after spending the last four years making fun of the Wii. I'm adamant that this thing will fail hard. It just won't have the spirit and creativity Nintendo presents all the time. It's nothing more than a shameless ripoff. Same thing with Natal.

I can't argue with what you said, but games have to change, I guess. Sony's move may have surprised us, but I guess with the way gaming is now, they've benefited from it and made something like this, which yeah, is a shameless rip-off.

Also, those whores who like HD are those who prefer nicer visuals, to those that are fairly outdated. Graphics are an important factor in games now, and what you can do with it is a magnificent result (If you're interested in game developing). I myself like graphics, and looking back at time, you can tell that it's been a successful ride for a lot of game developers making very good looking games. After all, graphics are part of the package, making it shit just puts people down, unfortunately. Some game developers are dependant on graphic games, not gameplay games. I think once someone sees the mistake that developer created, they will try to focus more on the fun side of stuff, the gameplay.

The market can be big competition, that's why these companies are making stuff like this, so they can stand out more and sell, that's the point in Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo.

[Spaz The Great]

I don't plan to start any "Are games art?" or whatever shitty argument like that but I truly do not see games as toys anymore, the way they can trigger emotions, the way they can have incredibly well thought out and engaging mechanics, I just can't see it as a toy.

Toys have always triggered emotions. I've always loved toys that were well thought out and had engaging mechanics. If my toys didn't follow these basic rules, why would I ever play with them?

The definition of toy is a play-thing, or something that brings about joy to someone. Cars to toys to some people((very rich people, mind you)).

[Ivan]

Yeah, you have a point. I guess it might come down to your definition of "toy", when I hear someone call games in general that, I imediatly assume it's some sort of insult but in many aspects, it does make sense.