I responded to an article called "Opinion: Wii Won't Rock You Revisited; Were Wii Wrong?" (http://www.gamedaily.com/articles/features/wii-wont-rock-you-revisited-were-wii-wrong/71311/?cp=1) I responded with a post stating the author was bias among other things.

Another poster responded (jbl0611/winger0611) to counter my points and back up the author and I responded back. We have been going back and forth for about 2 weeks. I also emailed the author but he hasn't responded back.

 If you have time you can read the debate, and if you do can you tell me who won or is winning the debate or at least who is being more objective?

Thanks.

I think you both got stuck on points and maybe lost focus on the bigger picture. Or in other words, your both right. FPS/realistic action games sell better on xbox than Wii. In fact FPS consistantly sell better on 360 than PS3, so is PS3 doomed? Nonsense.
You are right that there much more to games than just those type but he's right in that western publishers are pretty focused on those types right now as that's where their established IPs are and launch new IPs better suited to Wii is risky.

But the bigger picture is this - so far is appears core gamers will get a 360 or PS3 as their primary system and quite often a Wii as well for when friends are over. Everyone else in the world will get a Wii.

Western 3rd parties can continue to make titles for 360/PS3 yes, but!! Even last generation those same 3rd parties were all whining about declining returns, shrinking market, growing costs, dwindling profits. Will Wright is right, 360/PS3 are just pretty versions of the last generation, with the same problems except more pronounced. Unless those 3rd parties make the top rated games (CoD4) they face HUGE losses (Blacksite 51, Timeshift and many others) and many will go out of business banking on 360/PS3. That's okay though, new companies with fresher ideas will replace them and the cycle continues.

Ok, thanks for the feedback.