haha yeah I just posted in that thread too. I don't get how people are surprised that western devs don't support the Wii when the only games people buy are Mario, Wii series, and party games.

Just looking at the top 16 selling Wii games I see 6 Wii series games, 7 games that involve Mario, Just Dance 1 and 2, and Zelda. Just ridiculous. 

I would say part of it is popularity.  I would add a spin here, a concern I have about a genre becoming too dominant is that the videogame industry overly focuses on the dominant genre and sacrifices work in other genres, particularly both with those that people like and creation of new genres.  End result could be a serious downturn in the videogame industry.  Myself, I have 5 AT LEAST 360 FPS titles, and that is excluding stuff like Borderlands (part RPG) and L4D 2 (have it due to replayability), and also Mass Effect 2.  Do I need another one?

I think a lot of them actually fear change or creative growth.  They praise Zelda time and time again despite the fact that the series hasn't had any growth or experimentation since Majora's Mask on the N64.  Rockstar was willing to give them an exclusive Grand Theft Auto game for the DS that played to the system's strengths, and rather than loving how they made it work, they bitched about how it was "different."  Same goes for Dead Space Extraction.  

I'm pretty sure that when Nintendo made the Wii and DS, they hoped that developers would be willing to test their creative muscles on the systems and play to the their strengths (even if Nintendo didn't).  Too bad Nintendo fans didn't want any such creative growth.  Chinatown Wars rocked.  

This assumes that first-person games are all the same kind of flavor.  Fallout, BioShock, FarCry 2, Borderlands, Bulletstorm, Oblivion, Left 4 Dead, Call of Duty, Halo, Killzone, and Portal are all very different flavors of gaming goodness.  Yes, on the "realistic military" front, there is a lot of "sameness," but first-person games are not necessarily shooters, and they certainly aren't all the same.  The thing is, a first-person perspective works great for a wide variety of gameplay ideas, and if you're* dismissing games based on that perspective, well... you* really aren't much of a gamer, then, right?

That's not very open-minded.  It's no different than the people who dismissed Zelda: Wind Waker based on it's graphics, despite the fact that it was the same old formulaic (and predictable) Zelda experience.  Or the way some people believe Metroid games are only good when side-scrolling, never realizing how much the gameplay experience matters--Super Metroid and Metroid Prime deliver the same detailed, exploration-based, atmospheric gameplay experience.  Something that Other M fails to do because the developers of that title tried selling it on "being side-scrolling" and having the worst cinematic story since first-gen Playstation 1 games.

*(I don't mean you specifically, more metaphorically.)

Yeah I totally agree. I get that Mario and Zelda are awesome games but I don't get why people beg for more sequels to these but not for new Myamoto IP's. If he's so amazing how come he hasn't made a new AAA series in as long as I can remember. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nintendo_games_created_by_Shigeru_Miyamoto

Looking at that list all I see in the past 5 years is well established series like DK, Mario, Zelda, etc. Yeah he's done the Wii series this gen which is a fun game but its not AAA like main series Mario games or Zelda games. Wow and besides Pikmin and Nintendogs he really hasn't made any noteworthy new IP's in the 2000's

I'm not detracting from your points (nor am I agreeing for that matter) but I just wanted to ask why you clump Oblivion with FPS games, which are the targets of the OP's question? Oblivion is a WRPG and not a FPS.

First fps I played was halo combat evolved. Loved fps ever since!

The funny thing is that Link's Crossbow Training sold really well especiallys considering it's not even a full game, let alone full flat out FPS (mainly target practice).

I haven't played this game, but if anyone here has I'd be wondering whether it was sold on the basis of it being a zelda-themed games, for the peripheral (thinking it would be needed later like motion plus), or that it was actually a fun FPS despite being short.

Otherwise it really seems like Metroid is one of Nintendo's best chance of expanding on an FPS audience since the other games just aren't getting people's attention like the main nintendo franchises.

Because FPS sucks balls IMO.

And there's been way too much FPS this gen for my liking, at the expense of other ganres I prefer. There was a time that it felt like every new title announcement was a phreakin' FPS...actually I don't think that time has ended yet

Between PS2 and PS3 I think the FPS genre has seen the biggest expansion in terms of % of game library (and received a 200% absolute increase). And I think my favourite genres have shrunk, if not in % of game library then definitely in absolute number of games available. And possibly unfairly I mostly lay the blame for that at the feet of the current fascination with the FPS genre.

And you know what? Aside from CoD FPS games aren't major sellers on PS3. 200% expansion in number of games for the genre, 38% increase in SW sales for the genre, and that 38% increase is entirely down to the CoD series. That hardly spells major success for the PS3's FPS strategy.

Just please don't let Naughty Dog move to FPS in the next gen. If they do I might just have to go Nintendo.

BECAUZ THARE ARE LESS ARE PEE JEEZ THIS GEN, ONNNNLY SHOOTTAHS!