Confused gamer: Why is one of these situations better than the other?

[mike_intellivision]

Some points.

Folks, people play Animal Crossing like crack. It may not invovle blood and gore, but there are many hardcore players for it.

Also, since when did Call of Duty become casual? Is SW: Clone Wars casual? (Everyone wanted a light sabre game. When it is shown, no one mentions it).

Nintendo is playing a different game now. First of all, they are the market leader with increasing share, so they don't have to generate hype years out and decided not to play that game. Second, they are trying to leave some air in the room for third parties. They don't want a GC situation again (where there was virtually no third party support).

The Big N showed six Wii games -- five out by the holidays, one in Spring 2009. It also hinted at other things in development. I would guess at this point next year we will be talking about the new Zelda that is coming out for Christmas 2009 -- and beating FF XIII to market in NA and EU. (SE is unsure how it is going to do the X360 version and has said that will delay the western release. Sounds like date slippage to me).

There are just a lot of people who (a) don't like the Wii because it is not the latest technolgoy, (b) don't like the Wii because it has (workable) motion controls, don't like the Wii because it is differently positioned than the other two consoles, (d) don't like the Wii because they don't like Nintendo, (e) don't like the Wii because it has some games that are more casual, (f) don't like the Wii because it has iconic franchises, or (g) don't like the Wii for all of the above. Many of the E3 attendees fit into (g), so why should Nintendo do much for them 8*>. (And if you don't beleive me, read some of the gaming press.).

Mike from Morgantown