obviously you dont know what i meant, im saying that with the casual audience of nintendo i dont think that the wii could bring 3rd parties the sales they want. considered wii software sales are saturated with a giant holiday season and a failry sleeping q1 and q2, it means that most wii gamers do most of their shopping in the holiday season while on ps3/360 it is distributed evenly, where we see q1, and q2 having lots of software sales. im talking about the buying trends of wii only owners.

when i talked about chaning their way i was saying that if nintendo want serious 3rd party support as much as ps3/360 they have to change their current ways, which is appealing to hardcore gamers, which will never happen.

I think that labeling all of Nintendo's audience as casual is a bit simplistic at best. 

Also, I think you may forgetting that the reason the Xbox 360 and PS3 got so many releases outside of the holiday season this year is because everyone delayed to avoid Modern Warfare 2. In general, there are more sales of video games (and just about anything) during the holidays than at other times of the year, so specifically pointing out Nintendo for this is a bit presumptuous. 

But you are right that Nintendo is not going to change its ways. It is news when the company has a quarter where it loses money -- its competitors have had multiple years without profits.  Why should it change?

I just once would like to see how well a multiplatform hard-edged game would do on the Wii compared to other platforms if all were released at the same time with equivalent feature sets. Most of the "test" games that third-parties have released have been overly simple or rail shooters.

Mike from Morgantown

RE4 was one of the first test, and the Wii passed with flying colors. Then Okami was declared to be a test right out of the blue. I think Capcom, or at least the people at the top if not the team making the port, didn't want the Wii to pass, so they moved the goalpost to a game they knew wouldn't be a hit, and refused to market it just to be sure. This has been the tactic with "test" game since.

Also, developers shouldn't start supporting the next system until the learn what the Wii is trying to teach them (and even the makers of MH Tri discussed they learned) or they will fall into the same traps they did with the HD systems. Their games will still cost too much money, take too long, and sell for one week before trailing off.

It will if Nintendo doesn't stay soooo far away from the competitors raw power. That is there downfall this gen. They had the marketshare and it would have continued to grow had Wii been comparible to PS360 and gotten some early solid ports.

But, since 3rd parties have about the same marketshare on PS360 as they do Wii and they simply prefer to push the technology, then Wii loses out on great IPs. So, Nintendo needs to not only push the innovation, but atleast come within striking distance in terms of performance (like PS2 to xbox) to do even better than Wii and finally break 50% marketshare or higher.

i agree with the first part, but the second part  "i thought Fuck No" i owned about 10 gamecube games they all aint remembered... the support back then are even worse then the wii's support i can manage to find more support on the wii then the gamecube despise of its 400 game shovelware flood

Edit: oh and one other thing..... STOP TALKING ABOUT THE DAMN WII HD!!!!!!! lol

The next generation won't have a RROD-box or something that costs $900 to make.  ok, so the next nintendo console is not going to be as successful.   That's one strike against it having strong third party relations.

Nintendo doesn't even have them now, b/c nintendo's whole sctick is making games like Sonic/mario/metroid/zelda/etc games that you can readily identify as being from nintendo.  Nintendo wants to protect its brand image, so they will probably just have strong 1st party to the exclusion of everything else just like this generation.

The side effect of not having a $900 console to manufacture will be that all three systems will (potentially) be much closer in processing power; and while the cost of systems like the "PS4" or "XBox 720" might be more competitive with the "Wii 2" it is also very likely that the "Wii 2" will be more competitive in terms of processing power and features. In general, without further knowledge of what is being produced, you could assume that each of the advantages would (more or less) balance each other out.

Now, the one thing you haven’t considered in your (mindless) rant is how the different release dates of the consoles impacted how the market appeared to third party publishers. The year head start for the XBox 360 and the combined sales of the HD consoles after the Wii launched allowed third party publishers to ignore the Wii because it never represented the majority of the market. If you retained the same sales rate of the consoles and had the Wii release a year before the HD consoles it would be unlikely that third party publishers could ignore the Wii to the same extent; and if you start considering how a shift in third party publishers’ support would impact sales of consoles, by releasing ahead of their competition a system as popular as the Wii would probably be caught in a feedback loop which lead to it dominating the market.

Well I have a Gamecube as well and being aware of the library I know it had many of same 3rd party games found on the PS2 and Xbox. Maybe you consider all of it shovelware, but it had quite a few titles that considered high quality at the time.

Anyhow, my point is the Gamecube shared many multiplat games. As opposed to the Wii, which mostly gets low budget exclusives.