The thing is that if they want to make games for the iPhone, okay. Using that as an excuse not to support the Wii is what I'm calling on.

Wait, who expected MH3 to take off in the West? Most predictions I saw in the month before release only projected between 500k-1 million in the West lifetime.

Second of all, there has already been a Lost Planet 1; people know what to expect and the sequel is more frontloaded. The argument can still stand without combining the PS3 and 360.

Third, how well did Monster Hunter do on the PS2 in the West? As far as I know, this is the most promo the series has ever really known on a home console before in these regions. The consensus is that consumers never heard of it, and it was previously associated with a different brand.

Despite the fact that it "only" managed 400k in 7 weeks, don't forget it already sold 1.05 million in Japan already...Besides, the game still has years left on the market. The ironic part about this thread, is that the Topic Creator, who is questioning the Nintendo hate, has people in the thread spewing exactly what he is wondering about. I still can't believe that people want to continue droning on and on about how this "SHOULD'VE BEEN A PS3/360" multiplat. It was originally supposed to be on the PS3, and Capcom changed it. A Monster Hunter game is coming to the 360 in Japan. What more could people possibly want?

I'm just curious...if it was on the PS3 and 360, how much would people expect it to sell?

Oh easy, Tatsunoko vs Capcom.  Every single Capcom fighter has mass market appeal and are typically very high quality titles.  If this was on any system other than the Wii, million sales wouldn't be a problem. 

But then, the idea of "mass market appeal" and "quality" are highly subjective in the world of video games.  Final Fantasy XIII has received reviews in the 50's (percent wise), and up to 100.  Especially in a conversation such as this where no one will actually admit to being wrong or mistaken because personal opinion will always skew the end result.  One can argue all they want that the Tatsunoko franchise has limited appeal, but not so in Japan, and for that matter, all any gamer would normally need to hear is "vs Capcom."  Yet it's sales are pathetic, despite extremely strong reveiws, and popularity of Capcom's fighters and "versus" series. 

Yeah, the Wii has 80 games that have sold a million.  Have you ever looked at that list?  It's like looking at the N64's "top titles," it's so dominated by Nintendo it's pathetic.  You go back to the NES and SNES era, the top titles and best sellers aren't totally dominated by Nintendo, rather, they're by other publishers--which is what you find on the Xbox360 and PS3--quality games made by someone other than the in-house first party dev teams.  The bulk of the rest of the Wii best-sellers are often among it's lowest-rated, casual/party/family shlock.  Hell, Carnival Games is a million seller, and that piece of crap is damn near unplayable.  I was embarrassed for everyone in the room when my Mom brought that to my place.  Even my kid hated it (for a 6-year-old, though, he's really starting to understand taste in games. He's pretty much learned that "if it's based on a movie or TV show, it's most likely crap.) 

No one will dismiss that the Wii has a lot of million sellers.  But selling a lot of copies doesn't equate quality games, or quality 3rd party support.  Nor does it indicate that customers know a damn thing about quality video games.  Again, Carnival Games anyone?  For instance, Mario Party 8, Link's Crossbow Training, Animal Crossing, Carnival Games, Just Dance, Wii Music, Sonic and the Secret Rings, Deca Sports, Game Party, Big Beach Sports, Cooking Mama, Pokemon Battle Revolution, and of all things, Jillian Michael's Fitness Ultimatum 2009 are million sellers (among other horrors).  Yeah, the Wii has shown a skill for moving crap better than the Xbox360 or PS3 could ever hope to accomplish--but then again, people actually buy the quality titles on those systems. 

Now, for the sake of argument, I'm going to list a few games I feel deserve better sales on the Wii:

--No More Heroes 2 (hasn't even sold half the numbers of it's lower-quality predecessor)
--Red Steel 2 (nevermind that it has no multiplayer, that's just a strawman argument. Metroid Prime games did better sans multiplayer because they focused on a quality game overall)
 --Bully (sales of almost half a million aren't bad, but there are far more Wii consoles than Xbox360's out there, it should've out-performed the Xbox360, and at least matched the PS2)
--Zaxk & Wiki
--House of the Dead: Overkill (sold barely half of what House of the Dead 2 & 3 managed, and it's untold amounts more fun)
--Dead Space: Extraction (highly rated; pathetic sales compared to Dead Space, which sold a million each on the PS3 and X360)
--Okami (to be fair on this one, the Wii version appears to have outperformed the PS2 release, but seriously, the sales are kinda sad for such a loved game)
--Muramasa performed worse than it's predecessor, Odin Sphere
--Deadly Creatures, Tenchu, and Cursed Mountain, with a caveat:  None of these was perfect, and they all fell short of expectations, but they didn't fail outright and each still has promise.  I'm certain had they been released for HD consoles, they would've met with greater success.  For instance, previous, lower-rated Tenchu games handily outsold Shadow Assassins on the Wii.  And there are fewer X360's in people's homes than Wii systems. 
--Fragile Dreams (despite less-than-stellar reviews, this would've sold really well on the PS3)
--Geometry Wars: Galaxies (an extremely popular XBLA download, but fully expanded with extra stuff, multiplayer, leaderboards, options, etc--well reviewed, quality title, embarrassing sales).
--Splinter Cell Double Agent--lower reviews aside, on any other system, these things are million sellers. I don't think this exactly deserves better sales (as per it's iffy quality), but as an example of a game that sells well everywhere else.
--A Boy and His Blob (strong reviews, no sales)
--Fatal Frame.... which, granted, seems to have actually been killed by Nintendo of all companies....
--Blast Works
--The Conduit (let's face it, it's a mediocre shooter, but a fully functional one--and had it been made for the Xbox360 or PS3, it would've just been another Haze or [X360/PS3] Turok, but it also would've sold as well as those two.  Turok, for instance, averaged the same review scores, but sold far better.  Haze scored even worse, and sold even better).
--Resident Evil: Darkside Chronicles (camera can be annoying, but the game is every bit as good as Umbrella Chronicles, and better in a lot of ways, but is selling far worse).

Now, no doubt any of these are debatable.  This is obviously just my opinion, needless to say, but these are games I'm pretty confident would've sold much better had they not been on the Wii or which simply deserved much better sales than they got or where other releases in the series do better anywhere else but on a Nintendo system, regardless of the relative quality. 

The vs Capcom games never got huge sales. So that's not a proper answer.

1) Stop right there. Marvel vs Capcom 2 only managed 240k on the PS2 and 150k on the Dreamcast. This gen, Tekken 6 hit around 800k on the 360, and 1.8m on the PS3. However, this is after Tekken 5 managed 3.66 on the PS2. The series' sales were almost cut in half.

Then you say Tatsunoko vs Capcom has pathetic sales? According to who? Last time I checked, Capcom deemed it a success, and recently its sales have been going up.Seeing as to how one TvC was released in Japan and made 100k already, it is no surprise the rerelease no less than a year later of almost the exact same thing didn't do so hot.

As for the rest of your post, I have never seen so much useless input inserted into one post. I assumed that within your wall of info, that there would be at least a modicum of actual insight. However, it is truly not, and I know you have got to be laughing while you were typing it. There is no way you can honestly believe what you typed.

Not every game needs a million to succeed PAw.

When it comes to a games quality it is does it serve its purpose. Is it fun to play? well to be  honest that is about it for me. Guess why some of thoose cheaply made and sometimes rushed games sale? They are fun for a lot of people to play.

"Mario Party 8, Link's Crossbow Training, Animal Crossing, Carnival Games, Just Dance, Wii Music, Sonic and the Secret Rings, Deca Sports, Game Party, Big Beach Sports, Cooking Mama, Pokemon Battle Revolution, and of all things, Jillian Michael's Fitness" 

Guess what every single one of these games have in common? A large amount of people find them fun to play. I myself own a few of those.

Alright, last time I'll comment on the MH3 deal (sorry if it's somewhat off topic):

I brought the game up as an example of what not to do if a third party wants their Wii game to be truly successful - essentially putting a PS2 game with better graphics on the Wii. If they made room for worthy changes, like motion combat, improved interface, maybe 2p online co-op (see MKWii), the game could have really taken off. Instead, we see sales as they are - good, but nothing special.

Nobody said the game should've been a PS3/360 multiplat, either. I was saying the sales would definitely have been higher in the west if it were, because again, it's essentially a last-gen game with improved graphics and online (hello, perfect HD game formula). I think it's silly to believe the Wii could compete with a smaller userbase (61m vs ~68m), and with a game that was built with the HD consoles' values in mind, instead of what the Wii stands for. Hell, the game comes packaged with what's essentially a Playstation controller...

Finally (to LTNK), I already stated I didn't think MH3 should have been on the HD consoles, due to development costs, incentives (Nintendo's MH3 promotion), and most notably, Japan. Still, the game illustrates why it seems 3rd party games don't sell as well on the Wii (big budget or not), as they do on the HD consoles - it's because 3rd parties don't utilize the Wii's strengths.

Oh, I wasn't addressing you cord. The things you said previously were legitimate, I agreed with ya.

I kind of lost track of what this thread was actually supposed to be about. I mena, nominally, it's about hate toward Nintendo, and I think that we've seen that engendered in several ways:

1. Rejection of the appeal of Nintnedo's different value focus.
2. Rejection of the very idea of people having different value metrics (i.e. saying Wii Sports sucks and people who like it are "just casuals", to generally disparaging "casuals" as a whole)
3. Increased and nonsensical focus on the performance of games that do not hold to the values of the userbase, and then treating these games' performanc as the fault of the usrbase instead of the fault of a developer that couldn't appeal to that userbase
4. Talking shit about Nintendo game in general ("Nintendo gave up on its fans" "Nintendo only makes games for casuals now" "Nintendo is kiddy" "Nintendo is ruining all of their old franchises")

This has gone on for some pages and outside of some users gracefully strutting their stuff (which is to say displaying how level-headed they are in how they look at the market and alternative value sets for different players) it's come down to the same endless squawkery that this breed of topic always does.

So we might as well just remember:

...And move on.

I still call on that assumption, especially based on your earlier comment that limited local multiplayer hurts Wii games but somehow not HD games. Last I checked, the best sales for multiplayer games on the HD systems STILL included local. So it would have been a factor on the HD systems as well.