No, I think Nintendo let third parties burn in the corner of the hard truth ( harcore market is collapsing and the consumer is losing interest). They didnt support Wii at the beginning so they paid a heavy price in mounting losses and marketchare. Look at today EA, the worst struck one. And they still they do not learn

A brilliant use of an advanced rhetorical technique. Good show!

'You made the claim, you have the burden of proof.'.

jarrod did.

I agree.

People tend to forget past generations and how much shovelware the PS2 had. Not as much as the Wii seems to get, I admit, but still quite a bit.

No, he did not give proof. He gave assumptions. Computer specs are not up to opinion. How a game runs is not up to opinion (whether it's any good is a different matter). He didn't give any hard numbers, and that's the proof you need. You agreeing with that just shows you don't understand how absolute math is with computer programs.

Every console has shovelware. It's just that the market leader has the most shovelware out of all 3. The case with the Wii is taht there's so much shovelware that it overshadows the good games and it takes shelf space that according to me belongs to the good games. And why is that ? Because most of this shovelware sells like crazy, which is quite sad.

'No, he did not give proof. He gave assumptions. Computer specs are not up to opinion. How a game runs is not up to opinion (whether it's any good is a different matter). He didn't give any hard numbers, and that's the proof you need. You agreeing with that just shows you don't understand how absolute math is with computer programs.'.

jarrod made the claim.

I agree.

I still agree.

Without proof, the agreement can't change how the game actually runs on the system.

'Without proof, the agreement can't change how the game actually runs on the system.'.

I don't need proof to agree with someone. The matter is hypothetical anyway, unless you can prove otherwise.

"I don't need proof to agree with someone. The matter is hypothetical anyway, unless you can prove otherwise."

You didn't mention the hypothetical part until just now.