Since almost nothing has been written ground-up for Natal, it's important to remember that most of the demonstrated usages have been shoe-horning Natal's control scheme into games that were designed to be played with controllers.

This is analogous to the early days of the Wii, where many games simply replaced a button push with a waggle. And, like with the Wii, I predict that the first batch of games to come out will exploit the novelty of non-traditional control without focusing on designing programs that fit. Established companies are terrified of being upstaged by anything perceived as "disruptive." Professionally speaking, some of the people designing Wii games simply don't have the creativity or ability to adapt to full leverage the platform. They just can't ignore such a huge installed base.

"As a core gamer I think the idea of motion controls are ludicrous, and no controller at all is even worse."

As a core gamer, I think this attitude hinders progress. Some games, though admittedly not many yet, are better controlled by motion, the difficulty is both capturing the input precisely as well as managing expectations of "core" gamers. Analog stick skills do not translate perfectly to motion control, just like mouse & keyboard FPS skills didn't translate 1:1 to consoles back when Halo first came out.

 Reply

There was an AmazonFail, but that guy had nothing to do with it. It was all internal.

 Reply

Really!

 Reply

There's over 6,000,000,000 people in the world.

The world birth rate is around 20 births per 1000 people per year, which gives us 120,000,000 births a year, or 328,767 births per day, 13,699 births an hour, 228 births a minute.

A very generous estimate would say that there are 227 suckers born every minute.

 Reply

The suckers are from all sides of the political spectrum, too. Social Security is a pyramid scheme, for example.

-Kle.

 Reply

Individual Liberty via Limited Regulations? Check

Reliance on Free Markets aka Blind Faith in the Invisible Hand not ass raping society? Check.

 Reply

it's a cycle, it will happen again, and who is president when it happens certainly won't make much difference. it never really has.

 Reply

(I am postulating that this reason is that economists have boring sex.)

 Reply

I think the real problem with economics is that it's opinions touted as fact. There are still economists out there that claim "trickle down theory" works because of the economic boom in the '90s many years later. Nevermind the rich got that way by saving money...

 Reply

1. to prove a theory works an economist must simply set up a reasonable set of assumptions under which the theroy holds. the end result is that most predicitons are made by arguments that beg the question. this is further compounded by the fact that we do not know enough about the real economy to even accuratly discribe what questions are being begged. without full knowledge of intimite details for every party involved, often times without the party in question even realizing it had any baring on the decision, most predictive models are rough estimates at best.

2. the underlying assumption for every economic model in existance is that people will always take the information they have available and act rationally with it. this assumption is rather flawed in rather obvious ways. the problem is there's no a lot anyone can do about it. once the restriction is lifted there's no way to build predictive models for anything.

 Reply

I know it's kind of crazy to say "predict how people will be irrational," but I wonder if we didn't look closely at it for long enough, would we discover that mostly people be have irrationally in the same three or four different ways?

 Reply

this brings up another inherent problem. predictive models are inevitably data driven because they must be aggregated over large sample sizes, to large for a single human being to draw any direct analysis from. if human understanding is required to evaluate human behavior then we are at am impasse because we lack the programming language to fully describe the data points involved in quantifying human behavior. arguably statistics and computer science were created because human thought processes and behaviors so often conflicted with actual logic that a set of rules and theorems needed to be outlined that defined what 'logical' behavior even was.

 Reply