Fortunately Galaxy 2 and the new Zelda aren't overpriced mission packs, therefore they'll have little in common with ODST's (lack of) hardware boosting ability.

Why are you talking like Zelda Wii is just another Zelda? At the very least, it's the first motion plus Zelda, where you will control your items as you would imagine them (sword, bow, boomerang etc.). The last Zelda only had modest gestures to swing your sword and the like. It was a Gamecube game on Wii. This is a Wii game.

At best it could be a bridge title that goes back to the series roots and finds a new audience, while still pleasing the core audience. Bridge titles are Nintendo's biggest sellers, Mario Kart Wii and NSMB are bridge titles. I'm skeptical that they'll manage to make this into a bridge title, there have been more unsuccessful attempts (like Zelda: Spirit Tracks) than successful ones, but my point here is that you're way off the mark by acting like Zelda Wii is "just another Zelda".

PS. Being a bridge title doesn't mean it'll actually sell the numbers MK Wii and NSMB Wii did, but it would sell far more than the typical Zelda.

Yeah, from what we know, the new Zelda is going to be a bit of a series reset.  More like A Link to the Past, Ocarina of Time or Phantom Hourglass than The Minish Cap, Twilight Princess or Spirit Tracks.  Not really business as usual, and it should definitely have more draw factor than most by-the-numbers sequels.

But the people who care about Mario or Zelda already have a wii. The people who do, like myself, but don't have a wii, realise that no matter what the title, the wii is incapable of providing a good gaming expereince in comparison to the rest of the market due to the serious hardware limitations it has.

I'd say sales this year will be about like last year (i.e. great).

If I had a nickel.

Slightly fixed. Also, I distinctly recall the exact same argument by a lot of people before NSMBWii came out. This , in conjunction with the argument that everybody who wanted a Wii already got one.

Please drop the crap. Mario Galaxy 2 may be a direct sequel and won't drive momentum like a killer app (though sequels can drive momentum as has been shown over and over again), but Zelda Wii is not anything like a direct sequel. Zelda Wii is a motion plus game so it's going to be something completely new in that respect. It also has the possibility of being a bridge title.

Expecting it to sell only to people who bought Twilight Princess is bullshit whichever way you slice it.

I'm not the minority though - many, many gamers consider the wii to be poor at producing hardcore titles, which is backed by the wii devs and the sales of the more hardcore games as the wii cannot provide advanced graphics, advanced physics and advanced ai - key elements to hardcore titles.

NSMBWii was always going to sell because of a)Japan b)Nostalgia. SMG2 and Zelda already have had titles on the wii, so the nostalgia factor can't/won't kick in.

You don't seem able to grasp that the new Zelda didn't have a predecessor on Wii though.  It's like equating Galaxy 1 to NSMB or Prime 3 to Other M.  This isn't just some sequel, it's a series shift.  It's a situation more like NSMBWii than Galaxy 2 in fact.

As for "poor at hardcore" Wii opinions, well that's pretty much a self-fulfilling prophecy on the platform, and has been the opinion of most naysaying developers and analysts since before the Wii even hit the shelves.  Thankfully the actual market seems to disagree (Galaxy, Twilight Princess, Super Paper Mario, Smash Brawl, Mario Kart, NMH, RE4, MH3, Samurai Warriors 3, TatsuCap, HOTD, etc, etc).