Er, I'd say "Wii fans" are long past acceptance at this point.  I know I foolishly expected publishers and analysts to simply follow the mainstream market rather than continually betting against it, like they did with NES, PlayStation and DS, and for whatever reason, that didn't happen.  Too bad, so sad, better luck next gen everyone.

I think the biggest reason the games have failed is because they are seen as dumbed down versions of their HD counterparts. 

Dead Space for example saw a huge graphics decline and was stuck as an on rails shooter. Both major declines for the HD Version even if the game was still very good.  

Call of Duty World at War Major graphics downgrade, and no online serious hurt this game compared to the HD versions. Yet it was pretty good shooter especially for the Wii and did break 1 million.

Add in the fact that many of the best 3rd party games are just not on the Wii and it is easy to see why people call it a failure.

The thing is, for all their groaning, publishers don't seem to be doing that badly by focusing on the HD twins. We are, in fact, going through something of a core gaming renaissance, with new IPs being regularly introduced and performing pretty damn well without so much as shaking a stick in the Wii's direction. The reason for this is clear: a core game gains nothing by released on the Wii because that's not where the core gamers are.

It's not circular logic, it's a statement that no, hardware itself doesn't have any intrinsic sales effect.  Games sell hardware, it's always been that way.  Cute, if irrelevant, analogies though.

Other than that, it's nice to see you basically agree with me.  Well, except with your apparent extreme ignorance of handhelds. ;)

Are you kidding me?  There have been more layoffs, buyouts, bankruptcies and closures for developers and publishers in the past 4 years than at any time since the big crash of the early 80s.  Companies now have to target a combined 3 platforms (360, PS3 and sometimes PC) rather than just one, spend up to 10 times what they used to on PS2 for development and promotion (budgets for AAA HD games have reached $100m plus this gen), and they get generally comparable sales as they did on just PS2, at best (most franchises are down really).  Most companies are barely staying afloat this gen, this is what you call a "renaissance"?

1. Core gamers are interested in graphics. Core gamers are interested in real controllers. Core gamers are interested in online. These are things that the HD twins have and the Wii (for the most part) does not. Core games were never going to appear in large numbers on the Wii because core gamers just aren't interested in it as a console. Games sell hardware, but hardware is a fundamental prerequisite of selling games.

You seem to be fond of comparing the present generation to the last one, but I'd say you're stopping a generation short: the last generation to have such a tremendous disparity between the capabilities of the main consoles wasn't PS2 vs Xbox/GC - it was PS1 vs N64.

2. The DS is doing better among core gamers than the PSP. But the difference isn't huge - most of the DS's "margin" comes from its appeal to the Blue Ocean crowd, just like the Wii.

I think this list probably illustrates exactly why 3rd party developers aren't using the Wii as a flagship development platform for higher profile, big budget games.

These are the kinds of 3rd party games that the majority of the Wii user base has been buying, which means these are the types of games they'll continue to produce if they want the best chance for commercial success.

It's not necessary to make a big budget game for the Wii that is commercially successful.

We're seeing consolidation, but none of the big players are in any serious financial trouble. The industry is becoming more efficient because production costs are higher. That's not a bad thing.

1. You keep saying this, but I'm not really seeing anything that supports it.  The "best graphics" or"best online" or "most traditional controller" has never led to the most active core marketplace before.  And again, DS versus PSP pretty much completely dispels these ideas, otherwise PSP would have steamrolled DS.  The core difference between DS and Wii, is that core content eventually centralized on DS, and their subsequent markets really reflect that.  The DS market became more diversified as a result too, more like NES or PS1 than Wii.

If better graphics, better online and old controls were really what core gamers valued most, they'd have skipped 360 and PS3 entirely, and just kept upgrading their PCs... computers will unquestionably always best dedicated consoles in that regard... so why haven't most "core gamers" given up their consoles yet?

2. Not really true, the "core" market is still much stronger on DS, even though it's mainstream titles utterly decimate anything on PSP.  Which is also a result of the sort of content it gets... for a good comparison, just look at a (fairly equivalent) niche game like Puyo Puyo and what it sells on DS versus PSP (or versus Wii actually).

Thanks, I appreciate it.

EDIT: @greenmedic88

"I think this list probably illustrates exactly why 3rd party developers aren't using the Wii as a flagship development platform for higher profile, big budget games. These are the kinds of 3rd party games that the majority of the Wii user base has been buying...It's not necessary to make a big budget game for the Wii that is commercially successful."

Correction, These are the only type of games 3rd parties have ever attempted making. The only AAA game I saw from them was Monster Hunter 3, and that sold 1.6m and counting. RE4 was a port and that passed 1.7 million. The biggest budget I think a 3rd party has ever allocated for a Wii game is $10m for the original Red Steel; MH3 was probably more, but no number has ever been stated; not like it didn't recoup expenditures in the 1st week of release.

If I've said it once, I've said it 1 million times, you cannot buy videogames that DO NOT EXIST. You cannot buy games you have never heard of. You cannot buy a game no one wants to make.