Stop avoiding answering the real issues, please. You're flapping around aimlessly.
I brought out the launch lineups because you said:
"There wasn't evidence the 360 would be a good market. Developers just assumed it would be, put their games on it, and marketed them. It was a self-fulfilling thing, that they are refusing to see can happen with the Wii."
The launch lineups prove that developers started on equal footing towards 360 and Wii, exploring the respective markets with numerous games of various genres.
The question is always the same, and you are avoiding answering it: why should developers refuse to develop further games for the Wii if they had a satisfying response to their previous efforts? Why is Ubisoft still making Rabbids games, but Activision won't make MW2 its third COD on the Wii?
The logical answer, unless madness on their part is involved, is that they evaluated their parameters and decided if a followup was worth it or not. Sometimes it was, sometimes it wasn't.
Is that so hard to admit that the Wii might be too risky for some genres and projects? And that thousands of smart people working in many studios have probably more insight on the subject than our average forum lurker?
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
