Guys, give it a rest already, everyone on this forum knows mazty is incredibly anti-Wii. Stop trying to convince him, no matter what you say, he will not see things he doesn't want to see.

Wow you clearly have never played Resistance 2, Killzone 2 or many PC FPS if you think it has been done all before. Thanks for helping to back my claim that many wii owners are not real gamers.

I said "Gears of War made the cover-system shooter work", not that it invented it, so why did you say that?

No, film-like games have not been done on PC in the way Uncharted was done. Stop talking about games you have clearly never played.
PC media hubs did exist before console hubs BUT they were massive/needed a PC hooked to the TV which is far more awkward than using a console which both have wireless pads.

Bluray allows larger games and HD films, so yeah, that's doing something for entertainment and helping to progress gaming as multiple DVD's is not beneficial for devs and has already limited games (e.g. Rage).

Why seperate consoles and PC? Both play games and both have genres which are across all platforms. For what arbitrary reason are you seperating PCs from consoles?

You clearly have **** all idea about gaming as you claim all the games out on the 360 and PS3 have been done before which is blatant trash talk. It's clear you have very little knowledge of what the consoles offer and what games specifically offer in comparison to other games.

Why do I need to show you evidence about wii's collecting dust? My point was that if Nintendo made a new console which was simply a wii with better hardware it would not sell as no serious gamer would play on a wii, as it offers no benchmark games. It's like showing you a photo of the blue sky then you asking for proof.

You claim that wii games are intuitive, and therefore for hardcore gamers so please, which games are so intuative they are seen as benchmarks for their genre?

PS. It's nothing shy of hilarious I've been asking the same question for many pages and you've yet to actually give a straight reply.

Saying the wii isn't for hardcore gamers isn't anti-wii -.-

Oh please, as if I'm referring to anything like that. Everyone here knows you are, and it's blatantly obvious from your post history too. No sense in even trying to deny it.

Still avoiding those liks are we? Your goalpost moving is hilarious please continue makes good weekend humor.

So where are the links or are we going to pull more numbers out of your gamer wannabe ass?

Exactly what does going down the rabbit hole of improving graphics gain you in the marketplace? Nintendo showed NOT pursuing this path has been beneficial for them. So, one has to ask what do they gain by doing this. And DON'T think as a videogame fanboy either when trying to answer this.

What links??

What goalposts? You are just saying this allowing you to avoid your point.

Fact is you have yet to show why a hardcore gamer would have a wii on the basis of it's games, which is my whole point of my point that a simple hardware improvement would not help nintendo.

in case you forgot:

dont avoid proving your claims and show us some links to support them.

Show proof of 180ms lag. Allready failed at this and only proving that you talk out of your ass.

Show me proof that hardcore gamers are not buying the wii, there are lots of proof otherwise just on this site and users here and by me posting.

Show proof that most wii´s are collecting dust

You are not getting of that easy we have provided you with answers and examples and just because you dont agree doesnt mean that they are not valid.

So show some proof instead of whinning like a butthurt little kid.

When you have done this we can continue the discussion.

Are you for real?

All you have shown is that the wii remote can be used as a steering wheel or lightgun which have been around since the PS1.
Your claims that HD consoles have done nothing for game genres is a lie, ignoring games such as Heavy Rain, Gears of War, Killzone 2, Resistance 2 and so on.

Something to show that hardcore gamers are not interested in the wii is that it would seem to have not a single, or maybe one or two (?) benchmark games for any game genre. Why would a hardcore gamer buy a console which offers games of a lower quality than other gaming platforms?

You are not a hardcore gamer - you clearly haven't touched the likes of Gears of War, Killzone 2, Uncharted etc. You simply enjoy casual games, something the wii excels at, but casual games are not for the hardcore by definition.

The fact you ignore many of the features of modern games to aid your claim the wii is for the hardcore shows how hollow your argument is.

By the way, you have yet to provide any evidence for the wii latency, so it's a completely stupid point to bring up - let it go.
Why do I need evidence wii's are collecting dust? That's digressing from my point the wii is for casual gamers (ergo people not interested in a  wii 2 due to a lack of interest in hardware), something which is backed up by the fact the wii has no benchmark or revolutionary games, which cannot be said for the PS3, PC or 360.

So going to tell me what games make the wii revolutionary or just pretending you've already answered it, which you haven't, unless you can tell me how a light gun and a steering wheel are revolutionary considering the length of time they've been around.

The wii is great for parties and casual gamers, but I would say that it has no benchmark games for any genre, meaning it's game offerings are of a lower quality than the other consoles, and it's hardware also limits game quality. That doesn't mean it's a bad console, but people like to argue it's the bezt gamez c0nsol3 evar and then argue this point relentlessly with idiotic statements such as the HD consoles offer no revolutionary games.