Is the lacking 3rd party support a myth?

[mowe]

astrosmash said:

 

My thoughts on the validity of using review scores to compare consoles had nothing to do with my statement.

 

When the wii first came out and was selling like crazy, one of the most common attacks against it was the it had "no third party support". More recently, this critism has been less prevelent  than the critisism that the review scores of its games are low. (though obviously I still see the former enough to have felt this thread was needed)

 

All I was saying was that your signature was a perfect example of how most people now critisize the wii via review scores.

 

 

 

I hope you realize that those critics are right. The Wii doesn't have many good games and the best way the prove it is showing the review scores. In fact, some would use "no third party support" and "no good third party support" interchangeably, myself included.

If a person says that the Wii does not have third party game support, is he really wrong? Obviously what he means is that there are no good games, and you can't really point to the many mini-game collections to prove him wrong. The point I'm trying to make is that critics of the Wii have basically been saying the same thing for a while, that there are far fewer good third party games on the Wii, and they have been completely right.

I know that you and many others seem to think that the whole world is against the Wii. That the critics are always coming up with new ways to bash the system. That before it was "no third party games" and now when the games did come they changed it to "no good third party games", citing review scores. Believe me, only a few select idiots are "out to get" the Wii. It's not hating if you're truly just stating facts (and review scores are great example of facts).