Regardless it sounds like someones trying to convince themselves and their audience that things are different then reality.

That would be very funny =P Have you checked my game list in VGChartz?

Thats not damgae control, thats just you ignoring the term "core" what is a core game? what is a casual one? Answer the question. Hell i didnt even give you a defintion.

I actually did buy quite a few 3rd party games for my Wii, more than i bought 1st party. Bit.Trip complete, GE007, Grand slam tennis, KOF Collection, Lost in Shadow, Rayman Origins, Bully SE, Sonic Colors and Unleashed, SW FU1, Muramasa, Red Steel 2, HOTD2&3 and OVerkill. Thats just off the top of my head, I bought them cause they were...good.(Unleashed, notwithstanding). 

"bad" third party games = "bad" sales. fair enough, there are games that i would consider bad that sold well and vice versa, but whatever. There were alot of games that sold real well, but you might not consider them core.  However how does that prove me wrong? If the system is getting bad support; whose at fault is irrelevant, wouldnt they go get a system with good support? Or do you believe most people are like some on this forum and will just stew about evil companies while others enjoy actual games? No, no they wont gamers will go where the games are at, regardless of what it says on the book, doesnt mean they gave up on WIi. If they wanna play RE, BIoshock, SF, Tekken, Skyrim, and so on. They cant do that on a WIi console. THat doesnt mean WIi is bad

Are you? no really, im curious. I knew it was gonna get the shovelware dump from day 1, but i never imagined it would be that bad. I knew it was going to lose out on alot of games as well, considering how far behind HW wise it was up against the other two. I admit, i had much higher hopes for it in the beginning, I was let down. BUt in constrast i had little hope for PS3 and it exceeded my expectations im still buying games for that stupid thing. Wii isnt bad, its just not for me or at least there was no way i could just have WIi and consider myself a satsified gamer.

Strange article in a lot of ways.

First of all, why is it comparing the Wii to the GameCube and N64? They aren't the Wii's competition. Besides, they were consoles that were largely unsuccessful when compared to their rivals. Trumpeting the Wii having better numbers is a bit silly.

And why does the writer not seem to understand that "core" and "hardcore" are not the same thing? Does he think that all hats are necessarily hardhats?

It's also odd to me that the writer seems to think that all "core" games were bought by people who previously owned consoles, when I think it's safe to say that, with a console as popular and family-friendly as the Wii, many of those core titles were for kids for whom the Wii was their first real video-game console experience. There can be little doubt that the Wii had far more new recruits than the GameCube or N64.

This is like a peek at someone's rationalizations and justifications. I can't take this seriously.

stop making so much sense

haters can't stand nintendo sucess, so when wii became the best selling 7th generation console they had to come up with excuses and lies as always.

bach on gamecube/N64 days the excuse was nintendo was for kiddies, then wii came and they needed something else for a lie.

A core game is a core game. It doesn't matter if it's a third, second, or first party game. Super Mario Bros. The Legend of Zelda, and Smash Bros. are core gaming franchises. All of these series saw an increase in sales compared to the previous generation. This means that there were more core gamers who bought the Wii then Gamecube. The belief by many is that Nintendo abandoned the core gamer and was only successful because all of the new casual players who bought it only to play games like Wii sports. If this were true, then games like Smash Bros. Brawl would have sold less then Melee, which of course isn't the case.

3rd party companies are to blame for their own poor sales. Most of them offered half-baked games with mediocre gameplay, Nintendo's own core games were far suprerior to them. 3rd parties created a reputation of releases watered down low effort, or just bad games. Dead Space Extraction, Red steel, and the on rails Resident Evil games are good examples. It's not Nintendo's fault that 3rd parties put in a low effort for core games on the Wii. Therefore 3rd parties aren't even revelent to this discussion. Remember this article is about core gamers abandoning the Wii and Nintendo.

Besides, that's like saying, the N64 and Gamecube are both casual systems since both had poor 3rd party support and poor 3rd party sales.

Lastly, Nintendo Fans are core gamers. You can't discredit us simply because we enjoy Nintendo games. This is what Rol meant by Damage control, and bending and redifing terms. You're trying to disprove this article and argument by claiming Nintendo games aren't core games therefore all the the increase in sales is because of New Nintendo fans and not core gamers. When in reality Nintendo fans and core gamers are one in the same.

1. The Author clearly states the following: "This idea that Wii lost core gamers while focusing too much on casuals is pretty widespread…but it’s also totally false! The fact of the matter is that Wii had a stronger core gamer audience than any other Nintendo console in history – and I’ve got the data to prove it."

The author's goal was to prove that Wii had the strongest core audience in Nintendo's console history. What would be the point in comparing them to Sony or Microsoft? The article is disproving the lie that the "core" audience ignored the Wii, when in fact the Wii had the largest "core" audience in Nintendo's console history.

2. The author defines "core" as the type of game

"To be fair to all platforms under consideration, I’m taking the broadest possible definition of “core games.” That means anything that’s part of a major “traditional” Nintendo franchise will make the list"

But the Hardcore Gamer will deny this, too. New Super Mario Bros. isn’t a core game; it’s a casual game. And while there’s an extent to which I can agree – there’s a clear distinction between Super Mario Bros. and the other so-called “core” games in terms of appeal – we must never forget that using this broader appeal to discard Super Mario Bros. as a part of Nintendo’s core lineup is sheer propagandizing. People would have laughed in your face if you told them that Super Mario Bros. is not a game for gamers back in the ’80s. Though I can agree that the newer games aren’t as special for their time as the older games, that’s no reason to claim them as exceptions.

 and refers to "hardcore" for the nay saying gamers.

3. The author cleary stated the following: "

There’s no evidence to suggest that Wii “lost core gamers,” as many seem to believe. That’s a patent lie, invented by the Hardcore Gamer to solicit Nintendo to create fewer games for other audiences – which the Industry refuses to recognize as “core” (even though they are more critical to Nintendo’s success!) – and more games to satisfy the Hardcore (even though they are the pioneers on the path to Nintendo’s decline).

The fact of the matter is that the data demonstrates that, if anything, Wii actually created core gamers. Not only that, it demonstrates that the Wii Revolution, which began with Wii Sports, was not merely the beginning of a new era of “casuals” but the “expansion of the gaming population,” just as Nintendo intended it to be."

Can you not read or comprehend what the writer wrote in the article? The author never claims that "only "core" games were bought by people who previously owned consoles", He blatantly claims the opposite. The fact that Nintendo increased it's core fanbase is evident in the sales figures. It doesn't matter whether the increase in the core base was more from young kids new to gaming or old veteren gamers. The fact remains that the Wii was a more successful "core" gaming system then the N64 or Gamecube.

If a system sells more its going to...wait for it, sell more games, thats just common sense. I never said that Ninty abandoned the core i dont agree with those who said, if anyone read what i wrote i even said they made the same types of games they always made and added, the WIisports and such and those games generally speaking sold way more than even Ninty's core games. 

Again this isnt about who is to blame since i never even brought that up all i said the article was flawed since it ignored those games which make up most of the library and no if you are trying to prove that core gamers didnt abandon the Wii you have to actually account for the ENTIRE library, the fact that they dont address 3rd party games in a discussion about a console, shows that something aint adding up. Ninty fans are not going to abandon the console. Again its not about whose fault is what. WHy do people keep going there?

Would you consider those people who bought the WIi solely for WiiSPorts, FIt and the like as core gamers? WOuld you consider them Ninty fans? ARe you really going to sit there and say the WIi wasnt popular because it atrracted non traditional gamers? Even though numbers show thats the kind of games that sold the best, this is why looking at 3rd party is important because they made a lot of those WIiType games and they sold well. Its like people want to ignore that segment for some reason. And as you say the core games 3rd party did make were watered down so dont you think that some people would have gotten a system that that wasnt the case? Not saying they stopped playing Wii altogeter.