Topic: How to Manage Your Forums

[Urkel]

I like to keep making comparisons between the DS and Wii, but not so much because they follow the same business model, but because they continue to be perceived so differently.

I often see on Nintendo fansites bitter former fans that are angry about the Wii being "mainstream", or "casual", or "not for serious gamers". Yet, it confounds me that many of them have praise for the DS and squeal with glee each time some JRPG or whatever is considered to be hardcore is announced for the system.

These same people are pissed at Nintendo for going with weak hardware on the Wii and can't even stomach the idea of playing an epic game on something with twice the power of the Gamecube, but apparantly they're willing to put up with N64 era quality graphics playing some SquareEnix game. And they'll often praise the graphics of said SE games that would only look cutting edge a decade ago.

I. Don't. Get. It.

1)  If they don't care about playing the most technologically advanced games out there, don't care about playing online, and want something to play with the kids and wife, I tell them to get a Wii.

2)  If they're into first-person shooters and RPGs with cutting-edge graphics, and want to play against other people online, I tell them to get a 360.

See, the DS most closely resembles the first category, yet you'd be hard pressed to find a "serious" (can we start using the term "upstream" now?) gamer that doesn't consider it a worthwhile system for themselves.

I can understand someone not being satisfied with the current 3rd party lineup of games, but the idea that the Wii cannot function as a "serious" game console at any point is what I just don't get.

[Deguello]

Well that's easy Urkel.  The "bitterness" is a defense mechanism against realizing that the HD Surround Sound Plasma palace they have built may not exactly be what's driving the industry and that their money is not very well spent, as those very same downstream people will be able to buy all that they own for nickels on the dollar later.  Owning the HD consoles requires HD investment on your part.  This is not so with the DS/PSP, as they are their own unique investments, and easily blamed.

That and there is the myth that, since Nintendo always won the handheld sector, the status quo would be kept.  the market would never turn away from the 360 crowd and there will never be hardcore games on the Wii simply because Wii Sports exists.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Things are going to significantly improve on the Wii front in the next 6 months.  It's similar to how the DS took this long, relatively, to receive a new flux of super-software.

Things are doing fine on the Wii right now.  Heck, just last night I played this horrible fighting game online with kiddie Nintendo characters.  GeneralTraag, Kenology, wassup.

[Crimm]

To the topic at hand.  Ubisoft's forums came back up yesterday.  The "events" folder, which had been ground zero for the uproar, is now gone.

[GoldenPhoenix]

To the topic at hand.  Ubisoft's forums came back up yesterday.  The "events" folder, which had been ground zero for the uproar, is now gone.

Perhaps they lost the mold for it?

[NWR_Lindy]

OK, here's my massive roundup response post...

To believe that any sizable chunk of the Wii owners also own 360's is pretty naive."

I never said anything about the size of that group.  All I said was that it exists.  I think that the notion that everybody that owns a Wii is 100% pleased with the Wii game library is naive.  So there!  :-)

The 360 will end up with like the N64.  Fist-pumping hard-rawking UNF GO AMERICA console (as the N64 was the darling of the western publishers), but the loser in the end, except this time with less ground-breaking games.

I don't know what the 360 being primarily popular in America has to do with anything, but I can assure you the 360 will not end up like the N64.  For example, third-parties won't abandon it, people will continue to buy it well into the future, and it will continue to get high-quality exclusive games.  You can't say any of those things about the N64.  When it died, it died quickly.

No More Heroes, Scarface, Godfather, RE4, Manhunt 2, RE: UC, Strong Bad, Alone in the Dark,  House of the Dead,  Conduit, Medal of Honor, Mad World, all confirmed for KIDZ!

Yeah, all of those games are M-Rated, but I'd also assign them another letter....the letter B.  As in, B-grade titles.  The only top-shelf title on that list (sorry, No More Heroes) is Resident Evil 4, and that's a port of an already-existing game.  You don't see anything approaching the quality of, say, Metroid Prime 3 on that list.  Mad World, maybe.

Now let's name good mature 360 games. There aren't a hole lot to speak of.

What top-quality 360 games aren't M-rated?  I can't think of any besides Burnout Paradise, Virtua Fighter 5, Guitar Hero, and Rock Band.  Hell, practically everything in my 360 library is M-Rated.  Halo 3, Mass Effect, Ninja Gaiden II, GTA IV, BioShock, Orange Box, Gears of War, Call of Duty 4, Elder Scrolls: Oblivion, Rainbow Six Vegas 1 and 2, Assassin's Creed, Devil May Cry 4...how's that for a list?

All we need is one "mature" new IP that is a hit and you will start to see a balance.

I'll believe that when I see it.  It hasn't happened yet, and unless Nintendo surprises us with something killer (and entirely out of character, I might add), I don't think it will.  I don't believe Nintendo feels it's their job to provide mature games.  I think they look at that as the job of third parties, because they see themselves as the Disney-style company that provides games that everybody can enjoy.  Unfortunately, it looks like many third-parties have abandoned making mature games for Wii because they feel it's too risky, meaning we're right back where we were with the GameCube.  However, it'll be even worse this time around because the Wii's huge userbase guarantees that casual games are profitable.  So now we'll see a flood of casual games because they're low-risk, easy to develop, and profitable.  Yay.

Also I'm not so sure I'd count Xbox 360 or PS3 as "RPG systems" because I can only think of one RPG that was any good and that is Eternal Sonata, the rest are comparable in quality to Opoona. I think the only really good RPG for 360 was Mass Effect and even that isn't a true RPG.

I'm with you on this one.  Why are RPGs so weak this generation?  I don't understand it.  I think it's a strange combination of the 360 not being popular in Japan, the Wii not being perceived as an appropriate platform for RPGs, and RPGs taking ages to develop on PS3.  Final Fantasy XIII seems like it's been in development for five years already, and it still won't be out until 2009.  Ironically, the Nintendo DS is hands-down the best system for RPGs this generation.

I can understand someone not being satisfied with the current 3rd party lineup of games, but the idea that the Wii cannot function as a "serious" game console at any point is what I just don't get.

It doesn't have a large list of M-Rated games like the ones I listed above.  Therefore it's not that it cannot function as a console for those game types, it's that it does not because those games don't exist for it.  A console is only as "serious"/"hardcore"/"M-Rated" as the games that are made for it.

See, the DS most closely resembles the first category, yet you'd be hard pressed to find a "serious" (can we start using the term "upstream" now?) gamer that doesn't consider it a worthwhile system for themselves.

This is all due to game library (see my above point).  The DS has a large, varied library of HIGH QUALITY unique games (Elite Beat Agents, Meteos, Kirby Canvas Curse, Bangai-O Spirits, Planet Puzzle League, Nintendogs, Ninja Gaiden: Dragon Sword, Professor Layton, Contra 4, etc.) so hardcore gamers love it.  The Wii is seriously lacking in this department.

[NWR_insanolord]

Your entire long argument is invalidated by your calling No More Heroes a B-grade game.

[NWR_Neal]

Eh, I love No More Heroes but it really is a B-grade game. I could hear a handful of arguments for it not being a B-grade game and agree to disagree but I don't think Lindemann's argument loses weight because of it.

I actually think his argument is very strong. While I know I'm not the majority (at least I don't think I am), I have a Wii and a 360 and the 360 is generally for those "mature" games like Bioshock and Assassin's Creed while the Wii is where I get all my fun multiplayer games like Brawl, Mario Kart, Wii Sports, Warioware and such. I can speak from my own experience that most gamers that I know crave the combination of Wii/360 or Wii/PS3.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

"Why are RPGs so weak this generation?  I don't understand it."

Cuz they're not worth making for those "serious"/"hardcore"/"M-Rated"/"HD" machines.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Halo 3, Mass Effect, Ninja Gaiden II, GTA IV, BioShock, Orange Box, Gears of War, Call of Duty 4, Elder Scrolls: Oblivion, Rainbow Six Vegas 1 and 2, Assassin's Creed, Devil May Cry 4...how's that for a list?

OK let's see.

Bioshock=Multiplatform
Orange Box=Multi Platform
Gears of War=Multiplatform
Call of Duty 4=Multiplatform
Mass Effect=Multiplatform
Elder Scrolls=Multiplatform
Ninja Gaiden II= Not A grade
Rainbow Six=Multiplatform (Also far from A grade)
Assassins Creed=Multiplatform (Also not A grade)
Devil May Cry 4=Not A grade

So you managed to bring out all multiplatform M rated games except for two all of which have better versions on the PC. In fact these multi platform titles are the only real true AAA. You know what I can do? Show how pathetic the Xbox 360 lineup of Mature rated games are compared to my collection of PC games since we appear to be using that as a measurement. By that measurement then everyone should buy a PC if they want real game experiences. Also I'm not sure what standard you are using for calling something B-Grade, many of those Wii games I listed (Like No More Heroes) have similar overall ratings to games like Ninja Gaiden II (I think one is better to be honest) or Devil May Cry.

Also Lindy, I respect you but to equate M-Rated with a serious game is childish at best. Take Metroid Prime 1 for example, it isn't a M-Rated game but has pushed the genre in ways that we still haven't seen and it is far from "kid friendly". In fact I would argue the industry is starting to rely too heavily on shock value in regards to gore or other controversial themes, that it could benefit from focusing more on innovating gameplay. It seems like most mature games now days are basically ripping from a previous game and trying to spruce up the visuals along with gore. Take Gears of War which is far from unique, especially since it borrows quite heavily from RE4. Even Call of Duty 4 is basically the same at its core with a shallow single player campaign and a good but pretty standard multiplayer game in its design. Halo 3 is basically the same way. These shooters start to really mesh together into a blob of "Which one is prettier".

Probably the only really stellar mature rated game that I played last year was Bioshock and I wouldn't call it groundbreaking at all.  When I look at my 360 library it saddens me how basically everything is so similar except for a few games like Eternal Sonata, Mass Effect (which I rebought on PC), GTA4, and Beautiful Katamari. My Wii Library is very diverse, probably the most diverse (and yes satisfying) library I've EVER had for a console. I have a great FPA (MP3), a great trivia game (Smarty Pants), great arcade racers (Mario Kart and Excite Truck), two great adventure games (Zelda: TP and Okami), two solid lightgun shooters (RE: UC and House of the Dead collection), amazing puzzle game (Boom Blox), one amazing platformer (Mario Galaxy), an amazing survival horror game (RE4), the best beat em in years (No More Heroes), two solid free roam games (Godfather and Scarface), stellar fighting game (SSB:B the highest rated fighter out of them all) tremendous sports games (PES 2008 perhaps the biggest jump in sports game innovation in some time). This does not even include upcoming games which look to be really pushing the envelope in things like sports (Madden 2009 actually looks like it could be a really unique experience along with tiger woods), and the potentially great Fatal Frame 4 all coming in the near future. Also we have a strong platform for space shooters and one game within that genre is also one of the most flexible user creation tools ever, and that is Blast Works.

Does the Wii have a long ways to go? Sure it does, but already it is showing signs of having one of the most diverse and yes UNIQUE lineup of games out of all the systems. Also as others have stated, there will be a critical mass point where these mini game collections will start to be poor investments, it happens EVERY generation where one genre is flooded and it finally slows WAY down. Remember the DS, it took about 2 years to get the gimmick, mini game collections to become less and less common. I would think any "serious" gamer would appreciate that if they are truly a serious gamer instead of a fan of one or two particular genres only and only if they have mature rated games in them.

[NWR_Neal]

Regardless of whether or not they're on PC, 360 or PS3 (Honestly, I prefer consoles), the fact of the matter is that, out of that list of games, none of those games are on Wii. Yes, Mature rated games do not equal serious games as games like Metroid Prime, Brawl and, to bring this conversation back home, hopefully Spyborgs have shown, but games like Bioshock, the Orange Box and even your far from A-grade games are not really rivaled on Wii.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

You know Wii is doing awesome when GP is very positive about it, and other people pick at "Wii VS. the Rest of the World" issues.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Regardless of whether or not they're on PC, 360 or PS3 (Honestly, I prefer consoles), the fact of the matter is that, out of that list of games, none of those games are on Wii. Yes, Mature rated games do not equal serious games as games like Metroid Prime, Brawl and, to bring this conversation back home, hopefully Spyborgs have shown, but games like Bioshock, the Orange Box and even your far from A-grade games are not really rivaled on Wii.

And guess what? Many of the games I listed are not on Xbox 360 or PS3 as well. EVERY generation has different exclusives. Yeah the Wii may not have Ninja Gaiden II or Assassin's Creed but it instead has games like Super Mario Galaxy, No More Heroes and Metroid Prime II (Also it is quite debatable that NMH isn't better than NGII which is basically NG1 rehashed and more limited in scope). I will give you the Wii doesn't have a great selection of FPS, but that could easily change down the line. We've seen steps in the right direction and it is quite commonly held that the Wii would be BETTER when it comes to controls for a FPS. So we'll see. You also have to realize both Orange Box and Bioshock took over two years into the 360's life cycle to come out as well.

It is quite odd that people are now harping against diversity between systems instead of embracing them. Every generation up to PS2 has had genres they were strongest at, one wasn't "more serious" than the other, just different. That line started to get blurred (In my opinion TOO MUCH) but with the Wii we are startng to see that diversity again. PS3/360 will get great games and experiences Wii won't and Wii will get great games and experiences that neither of those two will get. It is making gaming exciting again by shaking up the old and opening up potential for the new. Any "serious" gamer should be thrilled about that.

I do agree with Lindy in that the Wii needs improvement in more traditional games, but that appears to be coming as time goes on. We have to realize with new technology and new ways of interacting with games you need a year or two to get the hang of it and what you can do with it along with understanding your market. PS3/Xbox 360 had an advantage in that they are both extensions of previous generations with the same basic ways of interaction but with better "guts". To abandon the Wii as a mini game, family system so early in this new technologies life cycle seems silly to me especially when we are already seeing signs of this possibly leveling out with each game announcement (Barring Ubisoft of course). EA especially has been taking hold of this and by all accounts the new Madden game is quite innovative and will provide a serious, yet unique experience you cannot find on the other two consoles.

[NWR_Neal]

Well said...errr...written.

But, by your logic with Bioshock and the Orange Box, we should be getting comparable games this fall but then again, the 360 sure as hell isn't the Wii. That can be taken as a good thing or a bad thing.

[Deguello]

I never said anything about the size of that group.  All I said was that it exists.  I think that the notion that everybody that owns a Wii is 100% pleased with the Wii game library is naive.  So there!

I never said that at all, but you did imply that somehow Wii and 360 are complementary in some sort and that somehow means they serve different masters or something.  I however, never even made an inkling of the notion that 100% of Wii owners were 100% satisfied with Wii.

I don't know what the 360 being primarily popular in America has to do with anything, but I can assure you the 360 will not end up like the N64.  For example, third-parties won't abandon it, people will continue to buy it well into the future, and it will continue to get high-quality exclusive games.  You can't say any of those things about the N64.  When it died, it died quickly.

We'll see, but one of the reasons the N64 got "abandoned" was because it simply became more profitable to make games on the PS1.  Games of ANY type.  Do you even know what the PS1 launched with?  It was a disgraceful lineup of the worst games CD developers could offer, seriously, and the game that launched it into the stratosphere didn't even come until 3 years after it launched, in the first year of combat against the "Serious" console, N64, which had just launched GoldenEye.  Things could just as easily fall apart for MS, no matter how much support they are willing to outright purchase.

I'm with you on this one.  Why are RPGs so weak this generation?  I don't understand it.  I think it's a strange combination of the 360 not being popular in Japan, the Wii not being perceived as an appropriate platform for RPGs, and RPGs taking ages to develop on PS3.  Final Fantasy XIII seems like it's been in development for five years already, and it still won't be out until 2009.  Ironically, the Nintendo DS is hands-down the best system for RPGs this generation.

RPGs are weak this gen because of the sudden misconception that they require powerful hardware to run.  The only time in history where RPGs sprouted up on a debatably superior console was the SNES.  Any other time, NES (versus Amiga and gaming computers, which had the popular Ultima series) PS1 (vs. N64 and Saturn) PS2 (v.s Xbox and GC), Gameboy (vs. Game Gear) GBA (vs. ... ... NGage?), DS (vs. PSP).  Also they also come to the market leader, regardless of the market perceptions.  One of the things that humorous to watch is Square Enix run around like a chicken with their head cut off trying to fund that albatross-around-their-neck of a game FFXIII.  One game is taking up half their resources and you know it's not going to end very well.  IF it were on the Wii, they could make a very high budget, yet reasonably so, FFXIII along with SEVERAL other games on the same platform.  Another idea that has bored into the skulls of third parties this gen is the apparent reasoning that they should release less games.  Third parties that flooded the PS1 and PS2 with copious amounts fo software have scaled back and put all their eggs into one title's basket.  If you take away ports on the Wii, Capcom's output has been laughable this gen.  Moreso Square Enix (Whose Current generation release count is something like 3) and Konami.

Another thing that plagues the industry is the "wait and see" approach.  Mainly because it is an approach that is only applied to Nintendo.  There is a famous quote by somebody about Socialism and CEO's, how they get all the benefits of Socialism (when their companies fail, they make golden parachutes and somehow land at other companies) while the workers at the bottom have to deal with the free market (they are ejected into the free market workplace to fend for themselves.)  This is a similar case with Nintendo.  most of the big support for PS3 and Xbox 360 was announced before those two systems even launched, yet Nintendo gets "wait and see."  And as a result of this "waiting and seeing" Nintendo dominates their own platform by making relevant, high quality games that sell well, downmarket or upmarket,   Third parties react by thinking it's all casual games which they think are shoe-string budget, Z-grade games.  This is not Nintendo's fault, seriously.  They didn't "encourage" these games, mainly because Wii Sports isn't an afterthought project, nor is Wii Fit.  Notice how the DS was for minigames and casuals and girls in 2005 and then suddenly the RPG machine a year later, due to a company (ironically Square Enix) who, INSTEAD OF SIMPLY SEEING THE MARKET FOR WHAT IT APPEARED TO BE, actually decided to release a plethora of RPGs and such on the platform.  Ironic because they were scrambling even then to fund the very game that's taking a million years to develop on a third place platform.

I mean seriously Silks, when you responded to the idea of the DS being "serious" you listed a lot of games that don't even fit the genres you typed for the 360, and none of them are M-rated anythings, and most came out after the DS's initial two years, during which the DS was judged just as you are judging the Wii now.

It is implausible to think that the current and continuing market leader will lose ground in third party support.  Trust me, stockholders and investors will be yelling at their companies soon, wondering why they haven't made an earnest and serious effort to extract funds, revenue, and profit from the largest userbase, currently, and one that's been outpacing THE PS2, for God's sake.  And they won't be placated with demographics and generalizations, because if they don't respond, Nintendo will end up getting all the money this generation.

[ShyGuy]

Great post Deg

[NWR_insanolord]

I'm proud that my half-joking one sentence post helped inspire GP to make some truly great posts.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Well said...errr...written.

But, by your logic with Bioshock and the Orange Box, we should be getting comparable games this fall but then again, the 360 sure as hell isn't the Wii. That can be taken as a good thing or a bad thing.

Well I will say we probably won't be getting  comparable genres in quality. But with Mad World looking promising, that is at least one game that shows alot of promise. Like with the DS the Wii has been "handicapped" in that it presented a new way to control games. It appears that finally developers are getting the hang of it and are willing to take more risks but still there has been significant delay, once again, like the DS. So let me modify my statement by saying there will be a bit more lag behind these AAA titles than there was with Xbox 360. It is one thing to throw the traditional wheel on a video game and see where it takes you then to have to figure out how to put a redesigned wheel on and after that you still have to take it for a test spin to make sure it won't fall off.

Also well thought out post Deg. You are spot on about the DS gamer population and how it supposedly skewed for AT LEAST the first year. It is interesting though that even at this early stage I think Wii shows much more progress in regards to diversity of genres (Not to mention quality). Will the Wii ever be overly populated with Mature rated titles? No I don't think so, but that does not mean there won't be a good to great amount of quality games for those looking for more traditional "serious" experiences. A "serious" gamer in my opinion is someone who wants to experience a wide  array of different genres and games, and to truly achieve that you should own two of the three systems. Though if you can only own one, well you will find some great experiences on Wii if you truly appreciate diversity in gaming, even if it may be lacking in a couple of genres. What we need to do is not abandon Wii but continually try to slap 3rd parties in the head to get their act together, that One Million+ who bought Red Steel (poor people) didn't die off but has more than likely gotten larger.

[KDR_11k]

Talking about M games for the DS is kinda difficult as a 2d game has to be pretty much Mortal Kombat to get an M rating. Some people here said CoD4 for the DS has a T rating yet noone would really argue the game doesn't fit in with M rated games.

BTW, seems like the general oppinion of Red Steel has gone way down since the release? I recall people loving it when it was new.

[Deguello]

They loved what it represented.  Yes it was mediocre at best.  But it was good fun and SOLD the concept of FPS on the console.  However, Apparently the game's success despite its mediocrity apparently means little to UBIsoft, who has decided to ignore this at least 1 million strong Shooter audience on Wii and paint all users with the same demographic, which is ... really stupid considering this doesn't work too well with the market leaders on any generation.  you know, like how all the Ps2 owners only bought it for Madden or the DVD Player.  Same idea, except professionals in control of assets and decision-making positions are making these statements instead of greasy forum fanboys.

Makes you wonder about the state of the industry's business side, eh?

[Nick DiMola]

Makes you wonder about the state of the industry's business side, eh?

This is precisely what I was thinking. How is it possible for any sound business person to dismiss bringing games to the Wii? Who cares what the perceived demographic is? Time and time again games come out targeting the "serious" demographic and succeed. It isn't magic, it is just proof that the demographic for that game is there.

This whole serious/hardcore/XTREME gamer talk just annoys the crap out of me. The words are thrown around and mean LITERALLY NOTHING. Every single person has their own perception of what the words mean and what demographic the words represent. What the hell am I if I play all games on every system? A "casual gamer" who plays every single minigame collection that releases on the Wii may as well be the same type of "serious gamer" who catches every single first person shooter that lands on the 360. They don't care about quality, they are just genres whores, they are the exact same type of gamer with different game type interests.

I honestly think the industry has gotten to a point where the people running the companies are the annoying fanboys in forums and they feel like they are defending the integrity of gaming by continuing to develop for the 360 and PS3 exclusively. What they don't realize is that they are stifling gaming and not advancing anything in a significant way anymore.

[KDR_11k]

I draw the line at information BTW, a regular gamer will get information on a game, often from gaming publications (i.e. read reviews), a casual gamer will buy stuff because he saw it in an ad, in a mainstream media report or because the box looks interesting (maybe including licensed titles).

Also I think when people talk about mature games they really mean mainstream games and they define that by looking at hollywood movies, especially the live-action kind. Do NMH or Mad World look like average Hollywood movies? Now compare the popular offerings of the XBox 360.

[NWR_Lindy]

My God, I wish I NEVER would have uttered the phrase "serious gamer" because it TOTALLY derailed this thread.  You will never, ever, EVER, hear me utter that accursed phrase again.

As for RPGs, the problem is that companies like SquareEnix suddenly decided that RPGs=CGI Movies.  This lead to making their big RPGs exclusively for consoles that can emulate CGI movies.  I love the fact that Dragon Quest 9 is coming out on DS, that's just awesome.

I realize that the DS' library improved greatly later on, but the Wii seems to be going in the opposite direction.  With the DS there weren't too many games in 2004/2005, period, and then you had the Great Flood of Christmas 2005.  We'll see what happens at E3, but I'm not expecting much to be honest with you.  I figure they'll announce a new Zelda game and probably Animal Crossing, but I doubt I'll be really surprised at anything.

And think about this: regardless of the size of a console's userbase, a publisher isn't going to bring a game to it if it doesn't think it will sell to the console's audience.  Note the key word there is "think"; I'm talking perception, not reality, but in this case I think perception is shaping reality.

[Mario]

And it's all thanks to you

[animecyberrat]

Like with the DS the Wii has been "handicapped" in that it presented a new way to control games.

the problem is that with DS youhad the traditional controlls built in, with Wii you don't, yes you can use GC controllers, something not a lot  of people have lieing around and are getting harder to find and only work for certain games. Or you could use the classic controller, which is an extra $20.00 to play using a "traditional" controller, which also only works for a handful of games (Not counting the VC)


With Wii you either adapt or you don't fit in. With DS if using the touch screen just didn't work for your game, you had a D-Pad and basically the GBA controller to fall back on.

They loved what it represented.  Yes it was mediocre at best.

I bought it on Day 1, and right off the bat I started finding things I did not like about it. When I invited my friends over to play (all massive PS fanboys and major graphics whores) they all enjoyed the sword play, but that was it, the FPS controls made everyone dizzy because they couldn't get the hang of it right away. The learning curve was not very fair for someone used to Halo controls.

Although I did enjoy the game, it got boring right away and I ended up trading it in for MP3.

Time and time again

And that is exactly it, time. Right now the Wii is in it's second year, and things are starting to turn around. A lot of the big budget PS3 and 360 games that came out last year and this year were STARTED before the Wii came out, and some games were started even before then that haven't even come out yet. It takes longer to make those big budget PS3/360 games so smart companies will want to release them on schedule if they can so they make back what they invested. By the time Wii came out and disrupted the market, for many games it was toolate to bring them over without doing a sloppy job. So instead they rush a bunch of PS2 ports over, but guess what, that is common for EVERY system ever made. Not something new. 


The wait and see approach made sense in 2006 cuz GC was not a very successful console, therefore most companies assumed Wii would follow it's sales patterns. I honestly maintain that once 2009 rolls around things will be different, if it took DS that long why shouldn't it take Wii, after all GBA *was* the market leader and DS *did* have a leg to stand on. Wii was a big gamble that is paying off for those who saw into the future and placed the right bets, everyone else is playing catch up, just like they should.

a casual gamer will buy stuff because he saw it in an ad, in a mainstream media report or because the box looks interesting

I think labeling one by that standard is pompous and arrogant. You amke it sound like anyone who doesn't read up about a game for months ahead of time isn't a real gamer that is bullshit my friend. Some games come out that you may have missed and all you have to go on is the box art or what the dopes at GS will tell you. I bought a **** load of fantastic games last gen that magazines/website either didn't cover at all, only gave a single paragraph to or gave low reviews. I based a lot of sales then on what I could get, since GC wasn't popular at all in my area it became even harder to find games for it so that complicate things.

Note the key word there is "think"; I'm talking perception, not reality, but in this case I think perception is shaping reality.

Exactly what happened with Xbox. Cube and Box has close to identical sales and Cube had superior 1st party offering, but public perception was that Xbox was superior and had better games, no buddy was talking "serious" or "hard core" then it was just better graphics, better online, etc. It wasn't true but people thought it was and therefore wrote the GC off as nothing. Even major retailers showed this, they knew that event hough Xbox had the better brand name at the time, the GC games were still selling so they kept them in stock and put them close to the GBA/DS games which they knew would get sales anyways.