[youtube]59PGHiGQ37U[/youtube]
| The Glade 4.0 https://gladerebooted.net/ |
|
| Babysitting Mama or Ummm Wow, WTF . . . https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=4595 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Rodahn [ Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Babysitting Mama or Ummm Wow, WTF . . . |
[youtube]59PGHiGQ37U[/youtube] |
|
| Author: | Roophus Gunthar [ Sat Nov 06, 2010 9:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The Wii isn't as gimmicky and ridiculous as many of us, such as myself, make it out to be. It's just certain titles that scream kiddie/gimmicky. However, it's titles like this that really don't help make a case for the system. I can't believe there's even a market for this stuff. |
|
| Author: | Rodahn [ Sat Nov 06, 2010 10:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Heh, I saw this thing in person today, on a shelf, at the GameStop I go to while picking up the new GoW PSP game. Creepy. Felt like some baby was starting down at me while I was at the counter. |
|
| Author: | Rorinthas [ Sat Nov 06, 2010 11:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Don't see how it's much different than those egg babies the early childhood development students carry around. Yeah it's not for me, but continues to show the capabilities of the system and the creativity of the company. Two things you need to remember about nintendo. 1. It's a Japanese company and has all the weirdness contained there in. 2. Nintendo doesn't cater to hard core gamers, it gives birth to them. |
|
| Author: | Corolinth [ Sun Nov 07, 2010 10:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I don't really think that game is all that weird. Someone combined a baby doll with a video game. That's no stranger than combining a steering wheel with a racing game, or a joystick with a flight simulator. Millions of little girls all across the world play with dolls that resemble human babies, and pretend to take care of them. Why shouldn't that be a video game? Video games are a normal part of everyday life, now. That, ultimately, is what beat Jack Thompson and Hilary Clinton five years ago. Normal things that normal people do for entertainment are going to find their way into video games. This is a good thing. It means video games are being accepted by society as a normal pastime. |
|
| Author: | Stathol [ Sun Nov 07, 2010 4:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Corolinth wrote: *words* Yeah, I'm going to echo this. If anything, this is about the most normative application of modern electronic entertainment to traditional child play that I can think of. Archeologically, dolls are one of (if not) the oldest forms of children's toys, and are common to virtually all cultures, and to both genders. Sorry guys -- as much as you may hate to hear it, anthropologically speaking, G.I. Joe and Transforms qualify as dolls. Complain about the reinforcement of modern gender roles if you must, but there's certainly nothing "weird" about this game. |
|
| Author: | Roophus Gunthar [ Sun Nov 07, 2010 7:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The difference is that "dolls" don't require coordination or much cognitive thinking. A game like this is far too complex for a 2-3 year old to actually enjoy. So, if it's not for 2-3 year olds, who exactly is the market for this? |
|
| Author: | Kaffis Mark V [ Sun Nov 07, 2010 7:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Um.. 2-3 year olds? Dolls were, anthropologically speaking, training tools to develop child caring skills in young children so that, as they grew older, they could help Momma take care of their baby siblings (and, even later, be more prepared for parenthood themselves). Nothing's saying that the games have to be coordinationally challenging; gross inputs like "is the controller-doll lying on its back?" are probably fine for most game functions in a game that I could imagine for this type of thing. You're caring for a baby, not aiming it at targets. |
|
| Author: | Mookhow [ Sun Nov 07, 2010 8:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Kaffis Mark V wrote: You're caring for a baby, not aiming it at targets. *cancels preorder* |
|
| Author: | Kaffis Mark V [ Sun Nov 07, 2010 8:28 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Aww, come on, Moo -- there's a game where you help your doll play his baby keyboard! |
|
| Author: | Stathol [ Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Mookhow wrote: Kaffis Mark V wrote: You're caring for a baby, not aiming it at targets. *cancels preorder* I laughed entirely too hard at this. |
|
| Author: | Echo [ Mon Nov 08, 2010 4:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Babysitting Mama or Ummm Wow, WTF . . . |
If it's anything like Cooking Mama (my girlfriend has made me play it with her...) then this will be the most hardcore, sadistic game ever made. |
|
| Author: | Micheal [ Mon Nov 08, 2010 4:55 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Mook, maybe you could raise your baby to become a magical girl? Then again, does that ever turn out well for the parents? |
|
| Author: | Corolinth [ Mon Nov 08, 2010 2:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Roophus Gunthar wrote: The difference is that "dolls" don't require coordination or much cognitive thinking. A game like this is far too complex for a 2-3 year old to actually enjoy. So, if it's not for 2-3 year olds, who exactly is the market for this? It's not aimed at 2-3 year olds, it's aimed at 4-8 year-olds. I can personally verify that 4 year-old girls have the necessary motor skills to play Wii games. They're not going to **** you up at Halo, but they can certainly play far more complex video games than, "Rock this baby doll back and forth."
|
|
| Author: | TheRiov [ Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The difference between playing with dolls and the new toys however: non-interactive dolls are a vehicle for children to express their own needs. They imagine what the child needs and then fulfill it. Often times the child will create needs for the doll based on their own. These new dolls take the cathartic aspect out of it. While I'm sure they're good at providing training for future child care, they take away some of the imagination and projecting that I suspect children need to do. |
|
| Author: | Raltar [ Mon Nov 08, 2010 4:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Stathol wrote: Mookhow wrote: Kaffis Mark V wrote: You're caring for a baby, not aiming it at targets. *cancels preorder* I laughed entirely too hard at this. So did I. I really needed that. |
|
| Author: | Mookhow [ Tue Nov 09, 2010 4:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Babysitting Mama or Ummm Wow, WTF . . . |
Spoiler: |
|
| Author: | Rodahn [ Tue Nov 09, 2010 5:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Babysitting Mama or Ummm Wow, WTF . . . |
Mookhow wrote: Spoiler: Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! They've initiated Phase 1! |
|
| Author: | Corolinth [ Tue Nov 09, 2010 6:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
TheRiov wrote: The difference between playing with dolls and the new toys however: 1) The controller is a doll. A five year old is likely to spend just as much time playing with the doll by itself as she is actually playing the game. Moreso if Mommy or Daddy likes to hog the TV to play Xbox. This is a perfectly viable product even for a family that doesn't own a Wii. It's pure **** genius.non-interactive dolls are a vehicle for children to express their own needs. They imagine what the child needs and then fulfill it. Often times the child will create needs for the doll based on their own. These new dolls take the cathartic aspect out of it. While I'm sure they're good at providing training for future child care, they take away some of the imagination and projecting that I suspect children need to do. 2) You grossly underestimate the imagination of a five year-old. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|