Moore rambling

Rambling is right.

Nintendo? Microsoft is not convinced by the controller's claims to innovation of the year. "If the controller is different and innovative; fine. But I would say that Xbox Live is the bigger innovation. It depends on your definition of innovative. If having a DVD style controller defines innovation; great. I would argue that talking millions of gamers and connecting them with friends and strangers around the world... I'd call that pretty innovative."
Click to expand...

Having one of your chief PR men be woefully uneducated in the manner of his competitors must be the hip thing to do these days.
 
I would argue that talking millions of gamers and connecting them with friends and strangers around the world... I'd call that pretty innovative."
Click to expand...

Is he in damage control or something? XBox Live is far from innovative. Very, very far.
 
[quote name='Scorch']Is he in damage control or something? XBox Live is far from innovative. Very, very far.[/QUOTE]
Oh come on, it's only a concept that's been around on PC for a decade. It's almost innovative. The Xbox 720 will provide a similar innovation called a "trackball."
 
[quote name='Scorch']Is he in damage control or something? XBox Live is far from innovative. Very, very far.[/QUOTE]

I'd consider it pretty innovative. It's made it easy for millions of people that wouldn't have normally played games online to play them with people around the world.

The Wii controller is innovative as well, but I can see how Moore would want to downplay that and talk about the strength of his companies console.

Heck, if the Wii controller is a success I'm sure we'll see a similar controller for the 360 much like Nintendo has seen that online gaming is a success and is offering downloadable content.

Both products are innovative. Otherwise, you wouldn't see Sony and Nintendo trying to match and surpass Live. It's great for consumers that these companies are building off of each others innovations.

Saying that Live isn't innovative is ridiculous. It has changed online gaming as we know it.
 
He seemed to know about Sony and I hate to say this but he said nothing about Nintendo.. Thats potentially a good sign for gamers isnt it?
 
[quote name='Snake2715']He seemed to know about Sony and I hate to say this but he said nothing about Nintendo.. Thats potentially a good sign for gamers isnt it?[/QUOTE]

Either that or he knows about as much as the rest of us do at this point. What exactly did you want him to say?
 
I'd have to say that Nintendo's online strategy has thus far been decidedly different than Live. The PS3 looks to be straight up copying Live. That however, is what they do, so its not terribly surprising.

Live seems to be about building that community, about having lots of robust features and inter-player connectivity. With Mario Kart and Tetris, you have absolutely no interaction with the other player whatsoever except that they are playing with you. Even in Metroid Prime you can only talk to friends. Thats not the Live philosophy. Nintendo's online strategy is about easy accessibility/simplicity.

Live is innovative as far as bringing an online experience previously only available on PCs, to home consoles. This is analogous to how Goldeneye and Halo are considered innovative because of a similar contribution in the field of First Person Shooters. Its less of an actual change and more of an massive expanding of the market.
 
I'll agree with shipwreck on this one - Xbox Live is pretty freaking amazing. I don't really like Microsoft (I never owned an Xbox) but the 360 has impressed me so far. As long as it doesn't break and the good games keep coming (where the hell is Street Fighter II?) in the long run they will have converted me into a fan - Xbox Live plays a major part in that.
 
Moore has no business insulting Sony because of how much their system is going to cost. It was freaking Microsoft who "innovated" by introducing segmented marketplaces with different hardware packages (that were also, arguably, way overpriced).
 
I agree with shipwreck as well, also isn't that what xbox people should be saying. Did you expect him to come out and say the Wii is great and he can't wait to get one? Didn't reggie do shit like this at e3 his first year.
 
[quote name='ryanbph'] Did you expect him to come out and say the Wii is great and he can't wait to get one? [/QUOTE]

No, but I don't expect him to be completely wrong.

There's a difference.
 
[quote name='javeryh']I'll agree with shipwreck on this one - Xbox Live is pretty freaking amazing.[/QUOTE]

There's a difference in "freaking amazing" and "innovative".
 
Ya gotta love Pete. He was great when he was hyping up the Dreamcast years ago, and he's great now.

Is Xbox live innovative? I dunno. They took someething that already existed, but made it easy to use, but now you have to pay for it. Apple didnt invent the mp3 player, but they made it easy to use, but charge you up the whazoo for it. Is that innovation?

I like this comment: "Xbox, the company's first play in this market, took a 25% to 30% market-share "depending on where you are in the world".

I guess Japan is out of this world, cos if it was in this world, that range would go from 1% to 30% market share.

Of course he's gonna play up the positives of the 360, and downplay the competition, thats his job. But I think he's stretching a bit when he calls the Japan launch a 'solid start'.
 
Like stated above I don't think Xbox live is innovative. A definiton of innovative is, being or producing something like nothing done or experienced or created before. I think Live is very easy to use and a great feature but it had already been done on PCs and Dreamcast. Of course not to the extremes of what Microsoft has done. They took something and made it user friendly and opened it up to a vast majority of people which is great but I dont think its innovative. And of course he is going to say crap about the competition that's his job.
 
[quote name='shipwreck']I'd consider it pretty innovative. It's made it easy for millions of people that wouldn't have normally played games online to play them with people around the world.[/QUOTE]

See? Microsoft had to go and ruin it.
 
This topic has "Fanboys come here and fanboy each other to death" written all over it. Just admit it, you're all jealous of moore's job and salary ;)
 
[quote name='shipwreck']Oh well, I don't think the Wii is innovative either then I guess.

Goes back to playing XaviX.[/QUOTE]

Check it out. Shipwreck is really Peter Moore.
 
The innovation in Xbox Live was creating a consistent, uniform experience between all games on the platform, including a single identity, ubiquitous voice chat, and cross-game messaging and invites. I'd say Bungie's matchmaking system for Halo 2 would be considered innovative too, and it has yet to be matched or surpassed.
 
[quote name='botticus']Oh come on, it's only a concept that's been around on PC for a decade. It's almost innovative. The Xbox 720 will provide a similar innovation called a "trackball."[/QUOTE]
Haha yeah.
 
[quote name='Strell']Check it out. Shipwreck is really Peter Moore.[/QUOTE]

Fanboy anger rising? (jk)

No but really you cant say xbox live is not innovative and say the Wii control is. Ditto the other way around. What will make the Wii control worth it will be SOFTWARE, which is also what make Xbox live great. Im a firm believer in Xbox live and I applaud their efforts(they won a Emmy!)

[quote name='botticus']Oh come on, it's only a concept that's been around on PC for a decade. It's almost innovative. The Xbox 720 will provide a similar innovation called a "trackball."[/QUOTE]

Xbox live works far better then 99.9% of PC games out there. Besides having you own server that all you buddies know about, how fun is it finding your friends? Do all PC games have native voice chat? Do Pc games keep track of what games your friends are playing and give a option to join them mid game? Xbox live is far superior to PC online gaming in many ways and I hope to see it expanded to to the PC universe with the upcoming Vista OS. I can go out and buy a control VERY similar to the Wii control for the PC, does that make the Wii control any less innovative?

Application of the product is the key element to success.
 
jeez, do people really care what these talking heads say? SHOW ME THE SHAQFUING GAMES.
 
[quote name='Michaellvortega']
No but really you cant say xbox live is not innovative and say the Wii control is. Ditto the other way around. What will make the Wii control worth it will be SOFTWARE, which is also what make Xbox live great.
[/quote]
Actually, I can say this. Live does not change the core gameplay/dynamic of the game, except that you can now play it with other people. Its a bonus.

Now changing the input system, that actually has a chance to change the gameplay on even a single player level. The input system changes the very game itself. Online components are only additions.

Changing the input system may have a chance to influence great software, but Live will NEVER create great software, it can only add to the experience.
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']Actually, I can say this. Live does not change the core gameplay/dynamic of the game, except that you can now play it with other people. Its a bonus.

Now changing the input system, that actually has a chance to change the gameplay on even a single player level. The input system changes the very game itself. Online components are only additions.

Changing the input system may have a chance to influence great software, but Live will NEVER create great software, it can only add to the experience.[/QUOTE]

Live/Online functionality can definitely create great software, checkout World of Warcaft/Halo 2/Battlefield etc. All games that are built for online play. The input system that Wii is centered around could be cosidered "only additions" so just as"The input system changes the very game itself" the online/live functionality changes the very game itself. Many people went out and bought Halo 2 JUST FOR LIVE, and the same goes for many titles. I mean you can go and flip everything you said and replace Live with input and get a logical reasonable statement. For example "Changing the input system may have a chance to influence great software, but Live will NEVER create great software, it can only add to the experience" can be said, Changing the connection(ie Live) system may have a chance to influence great software, but the input system will NEVER create great software, it can only add to the experience like superscope, the power glove, the power pad etc. Saying one is relevant or innovative and not the other is IMO wrong.


(To Fanboys) Moore is just trying to sell his system, don't take anything he says against nintendo personal against you. It's his job to be a ass and sell product.
 
"I won't call it online gaming any more," says Moore, almost convincing me that the idea just came into his head. "It makes it seem like a hardcore pastime. I'm going to start calling it connected gaming from right now. Online gaming still has this feeling of MMOs and RPGs. It was linked to the PC and I think that is off-putting for a lot of people and quite frankly seems kinds geeky."
Click to expand...
Good job Mr. Moore, you just insulted a vast majority of your early adopters. :applause:
 
[quote name='XxFuRy2Xx']Good job Mr. Moore, you just insulted a vast majority of your early adopters. :applause:[/QUOTE]

Some of nintendos big hanchos have said much worse, MUCH MUCH WORSE,and Ken over at sony well that nigger is just crazy.
 
THE GAME CANT EXIST WITHOUT THE CONTROLLER. PERIOD

try to flip it around. Tell me a game can exist without the controller. Try it.

Now that thats out of the way. The game has to be built around the controller FIRST. World of Warcraft is built around the keyboard and mouse. Halo and Battlefield 2 are built around the xbox controller/keyboard and mouse.

You can certainly design it with a heavy focus on online multiplayer, just as you could design any part of the game differently within the confines of the system. But conversely, you could design it with heavy co-op or you could design the single player experience to have a certain theme, like a survival horror theme. Those kinds of design decisions still have to be made with the controller in mind.

I can play Battlefield 2 and Halo OFFLINE. Its not bad. The core mechanics/gameplay that you will find in the online arena are present there. Then, from that point, you can EXTEND it online. The game may be even made with the intent that everyone go online with it. That doesnt change that it was designed around the controller.

Innovations in the input are a completely different level of innovation than anything else.

How do we know this? The genres of games themselves are somewhat tied to the controller. Analog controls brought 3d platforming. Dual analogs revitalized first person shooters. The Revolution controller will revitalize genres and/or create new ones. Havoc Physics wont create new genres of games. AI and poly count wont create new genres of games. Live, will not create new genres of games, unless you count MMO maybe. This is what I'm talking about.

oy, but we're clearly just splitting hairs here.
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']THE GAME CANT EXIST WITHOUT THE CONTROLLER. PERIOD

try to flip it around. Tell me a game can exist without the controller. Try it.

Now that thats out of the way. The game has to be built around the controller FIRST. World of Warcraft is built around the keyboard and mouse. Halo and Battlefield 2 are built around the xbox controller/keyboard and mouse.

You can certainly design it with a heavy focus on online multiplayer, just as you could design any part of the game differently within the confines of the system. But conversely, you could design it with heavy co-op or you could design the single player experience to have a certain theme, like a survival horror theme. Those kinds of design decisions still have to be made with the controller in mind.

I can play Battlefield 2 and Halo OFFLINE. Its not bad. The core mechanics/gameplay that you will find in the online arena are present there. Then, from that point, you can EXTEND it online. The game may be even made with the intent that everyone go online with it. That doesnt change that it was designed around the controller.

Innovations in the input are a completely different level of innovation than anything else.

How do we know this? The genres of games themselves are somewhat tied to the controller. Analog controls brought 3d platforming. Dual analogs revitalized first person shooters. The Revolution controller will revitalize genres and/or create new ones. Havoc Physics wont create new genres of games. AI and poly count wont create new genres of games. Live, will not create new genres of games, unless you count MMO maybe. This is what I'm talking about.

oy, but we're clearly just splitting hairs here.[/QUOTE]

"but Live will NEVER create great software" then you say "Live, will not create new genres of games, unless you count MMO maybe." FlIp FlOp fLiP fLop..... which is it?

Of course the Games cant be played with out a control,other wise we are watching movies. Games don't HAVE to be built around the controler at all, check out all the DS games that don't TRUELY support the touch pad but are more of a GBA project that was pushed to DS,Check out the PSP and how the ports of PS&PS2 games are forced to work with a 1 nub dual shock conrtol schme. But the argument was is Live/Wii conrtols a innovation?
I could say that Live is not a Inovation because Online play has been done for years, and then I could say the Wii controls have been done before by my Gyration Cordless Mouse
(http://www.circuitcity.com/ssm/Gyra...27621/catOid/-13017/rpem/ccd/productDetail.do ) I can play games with it by moving the mouse in the air VERY similar to the Wii controls so now both products are NOT "a new invention or way of doing something"

in·no·va·tion
Definition:

1. origination: the act or process of inventing or introducing something new

2. new idea or method: a new invention or way of doing something
 
Live is like having a 16 lane highway built when only 4 lane highways exist.

New interface is like flying cars.

Which is more innovative?

I'm sure Moore would be absolutely thrilled with 16 lane highways. "We feel it adds more lanes." Thank you for the brilliant insight.

//having fun at this point
 
Why are people fighting what Moore said by solely attacking his claim that Xbox Live isn't innovative, as opposed to discussing why the Wii is innovative?

I remember doing that stuff in grade school.
 
[quote name='Brak']Why are people fighting what Moore said by solely attacking his claim that Xbox Live isn't innovative, as opposed to discussing why the Wii is innovative?

I remember doing that stuff in grade school.[/QUOTE]

No one is fighting, we are having a round table discussion about games. Much respect to everyone's opinion if thats how you read the posts.
 
Man. I go to sleep, wake up and all you're talking about is his innovation claim.
I hand it to him that some things about the Xbox Live is innovative, but I'm shocked nobody has called him out on blaming airplanes and how they now use ships to send Xbox 360's now. Airplanes weren't to blame for shortages.
 
[quote name='thorbahn3']Man. I go to sleep, wake up and all you're talking about is his innovation claim.
I hand it to him that some things about the Xbox Live is innovative, but I'm shocked nobody has called him out on blaming airplanes and how they now use ships to send Xbox 360's now. Airplanes weren't to blame for shortages.[/QUOTE]
He didn't blame air freight. Air freight is not the ideal way you want to ship large quantities of any product, thats just the way it is, ships are far more economical. However, ships take a very long time to go from China to the continental US. They had to use air freight, at great expense, to move product straight from the assembly line because they didn't make them fast enough. Had they used ships initially, no 360's would have arrived in time for launch, none.

He's just saying that they're finally at a point where their manufacturing and supply is consistent enough that they can use ships, which means lower costs and a steady supply.

They could have easily blamed Infineon, since they played a large part in the manufacturing problems by supplying faulty memory chips.
 
I'll also just go right ahead and say no, Live isn't innovative and yes, the Wii controller is.

Why? Live is on its second incarnation. For "innovative," your feature should actually be new, as opposed to something you did 5 years ago. So yes, Live WAS innovative. Past tense. Or does Sony get to talk about how putting games on disks is really innovative, and look! Nintendo controllers have one of those really innovative D-pads they invented.

As for Peter Moore's comments ... well, we should be used to this sort of sillyness by now. Between Moore, Itagaki, and Cliffy B, it seems like MS has the majority of the douchebags on lock these days.
 
[quote name='dafoomie']He didn't blame air freight. Air freight is not the ideal way you want to ship large quantities of any product, thats just the way it is, ships are far more economical. However, ships take a very long time to go from China to the continental US. They had to use air freight, at great expense, to move product straight from the assembly line because they didn't make them fast enough. Had they used ships initially, no 360's would have arrived in time for launch, none.

He's just saying that they're finally at a point where their manufacturing and supply is consistent enough that they can use ships, which means lower costs and a steady supply.

They could have easily blamed Infineon, since they played a large part in the manufacturing problems by supplying faulty memory chips.[/QUOTE]

Alright. The way he worded it made me think so though, especially since I didn't know about the whole backstory.
 
[quote name='trq']I'll also just go right ahead and say no, Live isn't innovative and yes, the Wii controller is.

Why? Live is on its second incarnation. For "innovative," your feature should actually be new, as opposed to something you did 5 years ago. So yes, Live WAS innovative. Past tense. Or does Sony get to talk about how putting games on disks is really innovative, and look! Nintendo controllers have one of those really innovative D-pads they invented.

As for Peter Moore's comments ... well, we should be used to this sort of sillyness by now. Between Moore, Itagaki, and Cliffy B, it seems like MS has the majority of the douchebags on lock these days.[/QUOTE]

You forgot to tell us why the Wii control is innovative.
 
[quote name='Michaellvortega']You forgot to tell us why the Wii control is innovative.[/QUOTE]

I thought that one fell under the header of "obvious."

EDIT: I should really just answer this, instead of being a smartass.

Here's my point: I'm NOT saying Live isn't innovative because, as others have said, it's been done to varying degrees of success, on the PC and the Dreamcast. I'm saying Live isn't innovative because at this point, Live on the 360 is a slight refinement over Live on the Xbox. Microsoft THEMSELVES already did this, just a couple years ago, and that was that.

So why does the Wii get the pass? Yes, people have done motion control before. But not with this (alleged) degree of accuracy, and not with a pack in, and we all know what a difference that alone makes. They also haven't done it lately, excepting an Eye Toy "game" or two.

Time is a crucial factor with innovation. What we're talking about here is calling a 2006 Ford innovative because it's a car, vs. calling the Wright bros first plane NOT innovative ... because other things have had wings. Like birds. And stuff.

Does Nintendo get to claim how their innovative controller is again next gen? No. By then, it will have been innovative. It won't STILL BE innovative. Same thing here with Live.
 
[quote name='dafoomie']He didn't blame air freight. Air freight is not the ideal way you want to ship large quantities of any product, thats just the way it is, ships are far more economical. However, ships take a very long time to go from China to the continental US. They had to use air freight, at great expense, to move product straight from the assembly line because they didn't make them fast enough. Had they used ships initially, no 360's would have arrived in time for launch, none.

He's just saying that they're finally at a point where their manufacturing and supply is consistent enough that they can use ships, which means lower costs and a steady supply.

They could have easily blamed Infineon, since they played a large part in the manufacturing problems by supplying faulty memory chips.[/QUOTE]

Alright. The way he worded it made me think so though, especially since I didn't know about the whole backstory.
 
[quote name='trq']I thought that one fell under the header of "obvious."[/QUOTE]

It's not a new concept , there are free standing controls you can use in the air that you can go and buy now. Heck there is a one handed PS control that looks like the Wii control as well. So what makes the Wii control innovative?
 
[quote name='trq']I thought that one fell under the header of "obvious."[/quote]
No, it falls under the header of 'wait until the damn product is on the shelves and the numbers are in'
 
[quote name='thorbahn3']Alright. The way he worded it made me think so though, especially since I didn't know about the whole backstory.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, the article wasn't worded terribly well, just thought I'd try and explain what he meant.
 
[quote name='trq']I thought that one fell under the header of "obvious."

EDIT: I should really just answer this, instead of being a smartass.

Here's my point: I'm NOT saying Live isn't innovative because, as others have said, it's been done to varying degrees of success, on the PC and the Dreamcast. I'm saying Live isn't innovative because at this point, Live on the 360 is a slight refinement over Live on the Xbox. Microsoft THEMSELVES already did this, just a couple years ago, and that was that.

So why does the Wii get the pass? Yes, people have done motion control before. But not with this (alleged) degree of accuracy, and not with a pack in, and we all know what a difference that alone makes. They also haven't done it lately, excepting an Eye Toy "game" or two.

Time is a crucial factor with innovation. What we're talking about here is calling a 2006 Ford innovative because it's a car, vs. calling the Wright bros first plane NOT innovative ... because other things have had wings. Like birds. And stuff.

Does Nintendo get to claim how their innovative controller is again next gen? No. By then, it will have been innovative. It won't STILL BE innovative. Same thing here with Live.[/QUOTE]

Excellent I appreciate you coming back and explaining you opinion. Good points.
 
[quote name='CappyCobra']No, it falls under the header of 'wait until the damn product is on the shelves and the numbers are in'[/QUOTE]

Because something is only innovative if it sells well.
 
[quote name='trq']I thought that one fell under the header of "obvious."

EDIT: I should really just answer this, instead of being a smartass.

Here's my point: I'm NOT saying Live isn't innovative because, as others have said, it's been done to varying degrees of success, on the PC and the Dreamcast. I'm saying Live isn't innovative because at this point, Live on the 360 is a slight refinement over Live on the Xbox. Microsoft THEMSELVES already did this, just a couple years ago, and that was that.

So why does the Wii get the pass? Yes, people have done motion control before. But not with this (alleged) degree of accuracy, and not with a pack in, and we all know what a difference that alone makes. They also haven't done it lately, excepting an Eye Toy "game" or two.

Time is a crucial factor with innovation. What we're talking about here is calling a 2006 Ford innovative because it's a car, vs. calling the Wright bros first plane NOT innovative ... because other things have had wings. Like birds. And stuff.

Does Nintendo get to claim how their innovative controller is again next gen? No. By then, it will have been innovative. It won't STILL BE innovative. Same thing here with Live.[/quote]

Nice post. :applause:
 
I think the real innovation that the Wii provides is that somewhere, someday there is going to be somebody that bets that he can beat his friend at Super Smash Bros. while the controller is stuck in his ass cheeks.

Place your bets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top