Well, for once Pachter isn't making asinine predictions, he seems to be stating negative sales data for the Wii over the last year.

Which, of course, is the way the last few Nintendo consoles have gone.  System launches successfully, system gets decent 3rd party support and attention, Nintendo fans refuse to buy games or support 3rd party efforts, 3rd party companies abandon sinking ship.

The casual audience that bought the Wii as a barely-used fad doesn't help things.  For as high as the sales are for the Wii, individual game sales should be much higher to match.

For once, Pachter is correct: the Wii is suffering from poor software sales, software companies appear to be reluctant to release titles for the Wii, either there isn't enough quality software on the Wii or there is and the userbase just doesn't care enough to buy it--thus lower software sales, and developers/publishers are moving away from the huge Wii install base, which he thinks is premature.

How is any of that wrong, anti-Nintendo, or advocating publisher panic and console abandonment?

Reading comprehension.

seriously, knock it the hell off.

i am sick and tired of this "elitism" crap. i am a nintendo fan. i freely admit that. i've also done my damnedest to support good third-party efforts on the wii, and i'm not the only one (don't believe me? check my games collection). i wonder just who you think you are to be making such unfair generalizations?

The title of this thread is terribly misleading. I thought it's just Pachter's typcial Nintendo bashing , but this time he has a point. He's not saying Wii developers should "abandon" the Wii.

"other publishers have prematurely abandoned the very large Wii audience"

How can you abandon a ship you never hopped onto??

I'm not elitist, I'm just a regular gamer (for that matter, I'm pretty awful at most games for some reason).  There really is no reason anything I'm saying should be seen as offensive or elitist.  Nintendo isn't perfect and they certainly never bat 1000. 

What I stated, though, is really how the last three Nintendo console cycles have run:  The system launches successfully, starts off with a lot of promise and 3rd party support, and then it trickles off very clearly about three years into the cycle.  That's a fact, man.  Sure, the N64 started somewhat slowly (with only 3 launch titles in the US), and there was strong support from 3rd party companies, like Acclaim and Midway.  Towards the end, it was almost nothing.  The GameCube started off far better (third party support-wise, but with lower sales than the N64), but was still pretty dry towards the end, whereas the PA2 and Xbox maintained a strong release line-up. 

My "generalization" isn't just fantasy that comes from no where.  Third party titles sell worse on Nintendo systems, and this is a fact that just hasn't changed in three generations.  They sold better, comparitively on the SNES, but that was the last time.  Blaming developers and publishers and is just stupid, and foolishly ignorant.  It's not their fault, it's the audience.  And the audience on Nintendo systems during the N64 and GC generations was overwhelmingly Nintendo fans, and this time, Nintendo fans and the new Blue Ocean crowd.  During the first two-three years of the GameCube, it received almost all the same games as the Xbox and PS2--it was GameCube owners who consistantly maintained lower sales of those things.  That's not my fault, that's not your fault--that's just Nintendo fans--in general--buying Nintendo games over 3rd party titles.  And let's be real, Blue Ocean gamers don't know what the hell to buy.  I know plenty of those people.  Trust me, my Mom has a Wii--and it doesn't matter how many times I... well, she did listen to me tell her about Muramasa... (but that's only one game).

Who knows?  Maybe this time, things would've been different if the Wii was technically on-par with the X360 and PS3, and the control scheme would've pushed 3rd party titles to greater success on the Wii.  Had it been on the same level, technically, it certainly would've gotten a lot more of the cross-platform titles the Sony and Microsoft got, but by now, we'd have countless streamlined FPS titles, rather than Metroid Prime 3, The Conduit; and hoping four years in hoping that Goldeneye would finally get it right. 

I understand that there are Nintendo fans also buy third party games, but looking at sales, we're obviously in the minority.  Just the way it is.  That's the way it's been for three generations.  And feel free to look over my collection if you like, Nintendo systems easily dominate it.  I'm still surprised how much stuff I have for the Wii (and one of these days, I will get back to NMH2, but I've been too into S&P lately). 

Hey, seriously, I've been called a fanboy a bajillion times.  ... come to think of it, I've been called that for Nintendo, Microsoft, and Sony, as well as a hater of Microsoft and Sony. 

I think the analysis of why 3rd party games don't sell well on Nintendo would (and should) make a good conversation--but not when it boils down to retardness like just assuming game developers are morons, and not when it doesn't allow for varying opinions.  The only two sides I tend to see are "developers are idiots" and "Nintendo owners don't buy third party games"--and the second argument is flamed cruelly by Nintendo fans, thus killing any kind of conversation.  I looked over a profile recently that had only Nintendo systems and a PS2 with almost no games.  That person's opinion on Nintendo is most likely blind and should be taken with a grain of salt--and this is the kind of person usually flaming me and treating me like an elitist. 

(Treat response as a generalization, this isn't geared straight at you.)

I'm not elitist, I'm just a regular gamer (for that matter, I'm pretty awful at most games for some reason).  There really is no reason anything I'm saying should be seen as offensive or elitist.  Nintendo isn't perfect and they certainly never bat 1000. 

What I stated, though, is really how the last three Nintendo console cycles have run:  The system launches successfully, starts off with a lot of promise and 3rd party support, and then it trickles off very clearly about three years into the cycle.  That's a fact, man.  Sure, the N64 started somewhat slowly (with only 3 launch titles in the US), and there was strong support from 3rd party companies, like Acclaim and Midway.  Towards the end, it was almost nothing.  The GameCube started off far better (third party support-wise, but with lower sales than the N64), but was still pretty dry towards the end, whereas the PA2 and Xbox maintained a strong release line-up. 

My "generalization" isn't just fantasy that comes from no where.  Third party titles sell worse on Nintendo systems, and this is a fact that just hasn't changed in three generations.  They sold better, comparitively on the SNES, but that was the last time.  Blaming developers and publishers and is just stupid, and foolishly ignorant.  It's not their fault, it's the audience.  And the audience on Nintendo systems during the N64 and GC generations was overwhelmingly Nintendo fans, and this time, Nintendo fans and the new Blue Ocean crowd.  During the first two-three years of the GameCube, it received almost all the same games as the Xbox and PS2--it was GameCube owners who consistantly maintained lower sales of those things.  That's not my fault, that's not your fault--that's just Nintendo fans--in general--buying Nintendo games over 3rd party titles.  And let's be real, Blue Ocean gamers don't know what the hell to buy.  I know plenty of those people.  Trust me, my Mom has a Wii--and it doesn't matter how many times I... well, she did listen to me tell her about Muramasa... (but that's only one game).

Who knows?  Maybe this time, things would've been different if the Wii was technically on-par with the X360 and PS3, and the control scheme would've pushed 3rd party titles to greater success on the Wii.  Had it been on the same level, technically, it certainly would've gotten a lot more of the cross-platform titles the Sony and Microsoft got, but by now, we'd have countless streamlined FPS titles, rather than Metroid Prime 3, The Conduit; and hoping four years in hoping that Goldeneye would finally get it right. 

I understand that there are Nintendo fans also buy third party games, but looking at sales, we're obviously in the minority.  Just the way it is.  That's the way it's been for three generations.  And feel free to look over my collection if you like, Nintendo systems easily dominate it.  I'm still surprised how much stuff I have for the Wii (and one of these days, I will get back to NMH2, but I've been too into S&P lately). 

Hey, seriously, I've been called a fanboy a bajillion times.  ... come to think of it, I've been called that for Nintendo, Microsoft, and Sony, as well as a hater of Microsoft and Sony. 

I think the analysis of why 3rd party games don't sell well on Nintendo would (and should) make a good conversation--but not when it boils down to retardness like just assuming game developers are morons, and not when it doesn't allow for varying opinions.  The only two sides I tend to see are "developers are idiots" and "Nintendo owners don't buy third party games"--and the second argument is flamed cruelly by Nintendo fans, thus killing any kind of conversation.  I looked over a profile recently that had only Nintendo systems and a PS2 with almost no games.  That person's opinion on Nintendo is most likely blind and should be taken with a grain of salt--and this is the kind of person usually flaming me and treating me like an elitist. 

(Treat response as a generalization, this isn't geared straight at you.)