Vampire film fans are a very small elitist minority of film fans that the rest of the film world doesn't care about at all, so yeah, this is a good comparison with hardcore gamers and their whining about Wii Sports.

If you ask film fans what their favorite films of all time are, you're not gonna get any vampire films.

That's a terrible similitude and in your heart you know it. Vampire films are a subset of all films. But casual, accessible games are a subset of all games. It's the "whiny hardcore gamers" that are really the film fans and know what they're talking about. And it's people that only play Wii Sports that have limited themselves to a little handful of plots.

There's nothing wrong with many gamers dissing Wii Sports. Its main quality - accessibility - has no value for them, and they find little else in it.

Why are you so anxious to flatten everything to the simplest common denominator?

Dammit, I can't deny it when you tell me I know it in my heart.  I was just tossing around bad analogies for fun.  I thought that became the point of this thread after a while.

Indulge me, I was trying to concede a way out of a terrible rethorical place you had created for yourself.

Everybody knows Twilight is a passing craze that isn't revolutionizing vampire films.  However, I think Wii Sports is no passing craze and is actually revolutionizing video games.

It is changing the landscape for non-gamers. It did squat for gamers. They can care about the economy of the industry or in an abstract way about other people having fun, but it didn't add much to their gaming life.

I think that's a good thing and some people here think that's a bad thing.  I have no idea why it could be a bad thing.  Market expansion is not market replacement.

Say that to the Nintendo core gamers that are feeling neglected. There's quite a number of them.

I really don't know why this game gets so much hate.

From a seasoned gamer's point of view it might have little going for it. Much richer games have been dissed thoroughly. Why should this game be special for such an audience?

I think I should just start a "Why do you hate Wii Sports?" thread to gather all the anti-Wii Sports arguments in one place.  I really still don't get it.

Most common answer you'd get? "Because it's a bad game"

Second most common answer? "Because if this is the direction the industry takes I fear there will be less space for the games I like"

It's that simple, really.

I'm not saying sales determine quality, but I hope you're not saying that accessibility automatically leads to a lack of quality.  Was Pac-Man a bad game because it didn't use any buttons?  I think Wii Sports Tennis and Pac-Man both have brilliant design just because neither game uses buttons at all, and you only have to control the motion, and I think it's a great challenge to make a buttonless game so damn enjoyable.

If complexity was better in every case, the whole world would have given up Chess and Poker for Steel Battalion,and we'd all be playing games with these instead of touchscreens, microphones, keyboards, and analog sticks:

Luckily there is room for complex games and accessible games to co-exist!  Can a man not equally enjoy StarCraft, Portal, Wii Sports, and Tetris?  There really isn't a giant divide (or any divide at all) between "hardcore" and "casual."  Why is accessibilty a bad thing we're supposed to look down upon anyway?  Super Mario Bros. was so easy to play that anybody could play it, and for a game from 1985, it was really "dumbed down" compared to the complex pen-and-paper RPGs, ASCII-based Roguelike games, and flight simulators that came before it.  But history hasn't decide that SMB was trash and 70's-80's RPGs and flight simulators were more important.

Quality is completely subjective.  You can't even argue that Beethoveen is objectively better than Britney Spears or the Jonas Brothers.  You can argue that Beethoveen's music is more complex, but that might not even be true anymore, with the amount of complex production that goes into Britney's beats compared to the simple "one note at a time" ditty "Ode to Joy."  And either way, complexity never automatically equals quality.

If you want to argue that MGS4 is better than Wii Sports because Wii Sports doesn't have a story, voice adcting, or cutscenes, I can just as easily argue that Britney Spears has better music videos than Beethoveen and the Jonas Brothers have better guitar solos than Beethoveen.  Those arguments are equally stupid.  It's like saying a cheeseburger is better than a milkshake because milkshakes don't have cheese.  Those are the arguments of crazy people.

I'm not even saying Wii Sports is THE greatest game ever.  But I think it's safe to argue that it's one of the most historically important games of all time, in the same way we can definitely argue that Beethoveen is one of the most historically important composers of all time.

I just don't like everybody ganging up on Wii Sports fans.  It makes you look like elitist old guard gamers who are afraid of the new generation.  You're too young to get this bitter and ornery people!

I hope you actually believe this and agree with Metacritic's top 20 games of all time, in that order, and believe it is a list of games magically ordered by objective quality from top to bottom.