The real question is, will it blend?

(See: http://www.willitblend.com/)

I think that Wii Music came out maybe too early. There are better forms of MIDI on the horizon that sound a lot better and more like instruments than they do in Wii Music. Also, what's even more scary with Wii Music, and why most people give it a bad rap is that it quite literally requires the person to be creative with their music playing. It's super easy to play instruments badly, and this very much holds true in Wii Music. However, when you can actually be creative, follow the rhythms and patterns of the song you're playing, then you can get something great out of it. Compare that to Rock Band where you don't have to be creative usually as you play what they tell you to play. What's great is that you not only feel more like you are in that band (AC/DC or whatever), but you can add your own little flavor with things like the small Drum Breaks. Personally, I'm not a fan of Wii Music. I hate being the person to say this, but when I play video games, I want to feel like I'm freaking awesome. Whether it's saving the galaxy, or being a rockstar. I don't want the game to make me realize how musically challenged I am. Thus, if I'm going to go through all of that trouble, I may as well pick up a real instrument and spend my time working on that. Yes, it's not as easy as button pressing, but you'll get the same effect out of it. I think that feeling of "I want to go get an instrument!" is what Wii Music is also trying to invoke, to get people interested in music. Thus, if the goal is to get people at least interested, then Wii Music has already succeeded.

It's also quite useful for making me horribly sick. :-P Good riddance to it I say!

Make that three. Though, perhaps it's caused by the beer instead of the cheese?

I have no words. Easily one of the best comments in a while! And due to your complaints, Verizon has decided that next month they will only take your appendix. I mean, it's useless, right?

As a games developer, when I read that I'm curious about a few things.

- What do the engagement charts look like for other genres (RPG's, RTS, MMO, Barbie Horse Adventure, etc)?

- Does the art and animations affect the results? I mean, is it the action of throwing a grenade that players get attached to? Is it the animation and the way your player throws it? Do you get similar responses when you throw a known human grenade versus a fictional type (such as Halo's plasma grenades)?

- What do engagement charts look like in multiplayer? I would assume they would be higher many times as you realize you are playing against human players. But then I gotta ask if the players still stay engaged even when the other players are wiping the floor with them?

- This is perhaps the most important piece of research they can find... Are players finally sick of WW2 shooters? (joke sort of) Anyways, as I said, I'm really interested and want to know more details! I know Valve has said they are interested in this tech, especially since players when giving feedback are fairly ignorant to their own thoughts and feelings. It's wierd to say, but if you can explain why something is fun, then that's great. Many people can't. I'm sure if playtesters asked why they have more engagement throwing a grenade than a warthog, I'm not sure anyone would be able to answer since they may not even realize it.

That's a dangerous question you're asking! It's almost a challenge to them to find a way to top that and screw it up. I mean, they may just say that the "toasters" got their start when the UFOs stole them in Batteries Not Included!

For anyone who is at least a fan of video game music, I highly suggest attending a Video Games Live concert. I'm going to one in January and it should be awesome. I'm not the biggest fan of video game music, but mostly I'm going for the experience that the VGL guys create with the videos in the background and such.

Don't bring any logic into this!

*Bill Gates rubs hands together*

"Excellent... Just excellent... Rise my army, rise up and do my bidding!"

I wonder if the worse economy will affect that decision at all.

If Comcast had the option of upgrading their servers for X amount of dollars (which perhaps could have been an unplanned upgrade due to the possible stress of their network brought on fairly suddenly) or rather limit all UDP traffic to reduce stress for a hell of a lot less, what do you think they will do (and remember this is Comcast, the master of throttling)?