Key Weakness of the Wii - Graphic Capabilites?

[bdbdbd]

@Sky Render: I know. I actually was born to a family who ran it's own business. I just didn't want to go too deep into it since it's a bitch to type with a mobile.

@horriblebastard: The thing that makes you, atleast seem, a fanboy, is your attitude not to understand reasoning.
Yes you can, but as i just said, you're not really listening to any reasoning that people tells you. People are telling you proven facts.
If 3rd parties keep making more games that are more flashier and more expensive for the HD consoles, what do you think will happen to them?

I know what the topic is, and just as i've been saying in my posts, it's graphics capabilies isn't its weakness. If i recall, it was you who derailed from it and what people here are doing, is showing why you're wrong. If you are talking about your opinion, you shouldn't argue with facts.

Yes we are seeing examples of that quality. Such as SMG, TP, MKWii, Brawl are perfect examples.

In one of my first posts in this topic (if not the first) i already said that some third parties don't like the Wii, since they need to focus to the games quality. Latest example being Carmack, who complains about this very subject.
And if you haven't noticed, every time some console leads the market, the publishers jump to that ship, ie the "mass market", as by your words.
The reason for 3rd parties put out shovelware, is them needing to put something out fast, since they were expecting Wii to die out quickly, and when that didn't happen, they had to put somekind of support out there.
I'm not expecting anything "super innovative", but considering people say Boom Blox being innovative and EA:s "all play" has the call your shots, which seems innovative, i think the "innovation period" have started. If they turn out to be good, i think innovation doesn't need to be any better.
What's wrong with Carnival Games? And what made you a Nintendo fan?

Using Geometry Wars as an example was to show the difference between a good game and game with good graphics. And another point concerning the graphics is (what people are saying), that after they reach the "good enough", the level of graphics is irrelevant. So the SMG example you asked from Sky Render wasn't the thing he's saying here. It's the same as asking "were all the last gens games shit, since they didn't reach this gens graphical level".

Wiis successor will be HD capable, if Iwata is to believe. And i don't think nobody would be here complaining if Wii would put out HD, but the thing is, then we propably would see different kind of sales for the Wii. As we are going by Nintendos business strategy, SD definately is a part of it. It's just that i rather take SMG or MKWii in SD than GTA or Halo in HD. As this topic is about the question is Wiis graphic capabilities its key weakness. And it's not, since it's one of the key elements, that Nintendos business strategy is build on.

As for they points you listed, i agree with number one, number two is two-sided, since they can also make the game worse, by focusing too much into it, which is a real-life problem in the industry. Devs are putting "more everything" that is measured with any technical term into the game and make improvements with that, instead of finishing the gameplay, and that's because adding graphics and effects doesn't require skill, it only requires pushing the hardware.
Look, the thing that the 3rd parties complain is about Nintendo not fighting with the same rules, Nintendo fights with making games that have quality gameplay, instead of making graphics better, and the making gameplay better, is all about skill, something that most can't compete because the lack of skill.