http://kotaku.com/5096820/columnist-ninty-gets-some-blame-for-crappy-wii-titles-too

"So Reggie Fils-Aime popped off to Forbes this past week, saying developers should shoulder the blame for the shovelware rep richly earned by the Wii games lineup. Many third-party publishers don't get the Wii audience, Reggie said, and finger-pointed at publishers' reluctance to bring games that have done well on other consoles over to the Wii.

"I will be able to say our licensees 'get it' when their very best content is on our platform," he says. "And with very few exceptions today, that's not the case."

I know what you're thinkin'. Yep, don't worry, someone's already got this covered. He writes for the Dallas Morning News.

"I think most game creators got into the industry in the hopes of writing the next Doom or Halo or Command & Conquer," writes Victor Godinez, "and not the next Hannah Montana video game adaptation. So the best game makers gravitate to the consoles that seem to specialize in the kinds of games they like."

Godinez continues:

Nintendo bears some responsibility here, as well.

 

The Wii is the least powerful of the three current consoles, and you simply cannot easily duplicate a high-end Xbox 360 or PS3 game on the Wii.

Dead Rising on the Xbox 360, for example, was fun and amazing in part because there were often hundreds of zombies on the screen at one time, each shambling toward your brain.

The Wii version under development, though, is limited to a dozen or so monsters on the screen simultaneously, and the downgrade makes the game seem kind of pointless.

But Nintendo chose to go down this path of less-powerful, lost-cost hardware, and one side effect of that decision is that some games simply cannot be ported over.

So as much as developers do need to step up their efforts, Nintendo hasn't done them any favors.

The Wiire (saw this one when I was reading up on Jennifer Aniston) points out that Capcom's Seth Killian said the Dead Rising build Godinez references was really "just a tech demo," and not close to the final game. But the larger point made here is a valid one. To demand that your underpowered console get the best of a developer's effort, otherwise they don't "get it," when they're selling tons of their best stuff on the PS3 and 360 already, that's just arrogant. It also ignores the tremendous incentive for others to develop lightweight titles, an incentive very much furthered by Nintendo's continuous touting of the casual market's growth."

So no one wanted to make games for snes or playstation 2. This graphics reason is crap or all past generations would have been boring. My best gen was N64/PS 1 and they had polygon box characters in some games.

The money/port reason seems valid however, just say it is for the money. I doubt anyone that was developing for Final Fantasy 7 didn't feel like they were doing useless crap just like the people developing Final Fantasy 13 don't. Uber real looking graphics can't be the main drive for developers, story and gameplay needs to be.

I like Victor Godinez now. He makes a very good point.

It's not all their fault, Nintendo!

There is only one upside to this. The Wii will get more third party exclusives than any other console, and in the next couple of years, I expect there to be some really good ones. We already know about Deadly Creatures, Madworld and the Conduit, but I'm sure there will be a lot more high-end Wii exclusives in the near future.

That's starting to become an outdated excuse that you can't simply make a good game on a platform with less power. It makes me wonder how they ever did it on the PS2, GC, and Xbox. They could do it, and power is not the issue, because visuals don't make a game AAA.

The second part of his answer, is the real reason. They have no incentive to right now and won't until those PS360PC games start doing badly. Otherwise Wii along with DS, PSP, and PS2 are there to pay for those games and they are doing quite well at it. And every now and then you'll have a dev who has issues tapping into that market start putting all their efforts on the Wii, such as Sega and Marvelous(on smaller size Namco), but aside from that they are doing just fine on those platforms.

Ya see I don't mind if people answer this with a kind of answer like that, but at least tell the truth. The idea that good games aren't coming to Wii being a power issue simply isn't true. It's an incentive issue and even more so a laziness issue. But the incentive leads to the laziness. That incentive is there is none because they don't need the Wii as a viable platform and it takes more to develop another edition for a platform they haven't deemed viable yet.

Wow, this jackass doesn't get it either. I don't want games ported up from the PS2, but at the same time (what this guy doesn't get), I don't want games ported down from the PS360. I want original games tailored to the Wii's advantages and disadvantages. When that happens, those games do really well.

people who say graphics aren't a valid reason - I don't even think the ps1 games to ps2 games are as big as a graphical difference of wii compared to ps360

FF13 does have a GREAT story and game play too, square enix ALWAYS made huge FF titles, even their underperforming games sale 5 million due that.

power have to do alot with it too, the difference between PS1 and n64 wasn't so big, even so FF9 could easily be mistaken for a n64 title and even being longer!.

in the six era porting was not big of a trouble mhz and overall power wasn't so different.

making RE4 run on a ps2 wasn't a challengue  it had a few things cuts, but making RE5 running on the wii would require to remade the game using an old engine.

but the difference between wii vs HD consoles it's huge yeah many people will say it's not only graphics but many HD are masterpieces and fun to play too :).

Your theory is based on infactual analysis. The PS2, GC and XBOX era didnt have any one console that was heads and shoulders more powerful then the others. The XBOX was only marginally more powerful then the other two.

This generation the PS3 and XBOX360 are literally in a different league of power than the Wii. If that means anything I dont really care, its based all on games, and judging games is objective.

I have only thing to say and its not pretty STFU YOU IGNORANT  JOURNALIST. WHO THE HELL DO YOU THINK YOU ARE? YOUR NOT A PROGRAMMER OR AN EXPERT IN ENGINEERING SOFTWARE AROUND THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THE WII.

YOU ARE NOT ONE OF THE MILLIONS OF PEOPLE THAT DO NOT HAVE AN HD TV OR WANT ONE SPECIFICALLY FOR THE ONE AND ONLY REASON OF PLAYING A PS360 SHOOTER.

YOU ARE NOT RELEVANT AND YOUR PROGRAMMING BUDDIES, WHO PREFER HD PROGRAMMING PURELY FOR SELF_MASTURBATORY PURPOSES, ARE THE ACTUAL PROBLEM WITH THE INDUSTRY.

WAKE THE HELL UP AND REALISE PEOPLE BOUGHT CONSOLES WHEN THEY WERE LESS POWERFULL THAN COMPUTERS. NOW YOUR GONNA HAVE TO SUCK THE BIG ONE AND DESIGN GAMES FOR A LESS POWERFUL CONSOLE.

(catches breath)

Someone should fire his ass. He's the reason Wii games get lower averages