Madden here is an incredibly bad example, because EA made each Wii version of Madden progressively worse than the ones that preceded it, starting with that "All Play" crap in 2008.

I know, I'm having a hard time finding numbers that help. AC wasn't adequate due to its focus on HD as a selling point (if I want to be really picky), which is not doable on Wii.

I took NFL because it was another take, but this time it was due to quality that the HD versions kept the upward trend and the Wii version didn't.

But let's scrap the Wii trend, we can still do the same analysis (I think).

For one, both 360 and PS3 versions rose from 0.60-ish up to 1-1.5M. I didn't include this in the graph:

At their gen 7 peak, the NFL games sold, PS360, a total of 4.5M total. I believe had the market leader been respected in the West, the Wii could have easily sold top-tier games at that volume.

A similar EA example, but this time in the fantasy genre:

These are numbers EA could have easily reproduced if not surpassed on Wii. Mind you, this is all in hindsight.

Now the Assassin's creed example is an interesting one, it makes one wonder how much of the mainstream sales garnered by that game were due to fancy visuals, à-la Hollywood. For example, a movie like Startrek (the new one) sports good visuals, and so does a movie like Avatar, but one also has much more to offer. Yet both had very good sales.

Star  Trek: $257,730,019

Avatar: $749,766,139

Consider eye-candy the path to a ticket, and depth the path to word-of-mouth and explosive sales.

Mind you, a few games on the Wii sported absolutely gorgeous graphics, but they are few and far between. Even when they do, there is always something to complain about. But here are a few examples of games with gorgeous Wii graphics:

I am certain that the effort invested in HD games could have been used to create these kinds of visuals, as well as true gaming depth of content.

So if a game like Madden PS360 totals up to 4.5M, I believe Western devs could have offered unique experiences on Wii of AC level of quality and generate high sales even with Wii visuals.

Top EA Sports game (gen 7):

Top EA game (gen 7):

Top EA PS360 game that could have sold likely as well on Wii (Non-shooter, non HD-focused):

See Dragon Age above, 3.67M total tops

Obviously, in hindsight, some games were more reasonable to release on the HD twins. However, other could have done probably much better on the Wii, especially with the resources saved to make the game even more appealing and deep (see Star Trek to Avatar sales comparison).

That wont work for AC, have you played those games?? They are open, you CANNOT compensate for lack of graphics in that kind of game, you will lose the illusion of the open world, and the game will fall apart.  Story and art direction??? The AC story is already good, graphics have nothing to do with that, art direction. Are you suggesting they do cel shaded or something to compensate, that wont fly on a game like AC, hell it didnt fly for the Maddens.  You have more hardware you can do more things, Its that simple. THe Wii was never going to be the goto platform for all your gaming needs, not with that weak hardware.  You use the word compensate and the is interesting. You kind of answered your own question, the face that it HAS to compensate ensures that it would never do as well as the HD ones, why would someone settle for what will surely be an inferior product, wheh their are TWO viable systems that will run the game the way it was intended?? 3 if you count PC

BTW I didnt even bring up the online portion, that cant be dont on WII, it would be like Dead Rising but much worst

The PS1 vs N64 answers your question.

Also, at bold I was mentioning a non-AC game, one that had appealing SD visuals as well as strenght in other more important features (is what I meant). The COD HD vs Wii would not be in the same category as said hypothetical.

The PS1 was only half as powerful as the N64. And the fact that Ninty decided to use cartridges again, made it even harder for devs to want to mess with it, so they took a hardware step forward but like 2 steps back.  And the PS360 are about 5x+ more powerful than Wii is?? Its all semantics but when you have a system that hardware is so weak it cant even run certain games, well you get what you pay for.

Fair, the N64 couldn't run certain games because of limited memory and whatnot. But you were talking about graphics here:

Considering PS/N64 multi-plat games (ie games that could run on the N64), when gamers prefered the PS version, I'm not sure your argument completely holds water.

THe PS and N64 versions of games are usually not that different. Hell if you really think about it, they both complement each other. For example Rayman 2, ran better on n64 looked better, but did it look and run that much better?? Did it look that much better that PS1 owners were going to shell out more money for a system to play a game that they could already play just for the sake of graphics, history says no and lets not forget the cartridges didnt allow for things like voices and better sounds, so really the issue of a PS vs. N64 version is quite subjective.  Its not that they preffered it, but the differences were so minuscule that its not worth it to get it on another system

the poor Wii, is so underpowered that publishers had to hire out lower devs just to run a different version of the game on the system, while the HDs got the "actual" game (Force unleashed, wolverine, etc.) or they make a spinoff which people hate(RE) or they just say f**k it and dont even bother. Lets be real, how much multiplat games can you say that the Wii version was damn close outside of the dance and fit games that use the Wii as lead hardware anyway??? All i can think of is Sonic allstars racing, the recent CODs(and thats a stretch) and... I cant think of nothing else

Fair, the PS did have certain advantages the N64 didn't have, such as better and more complete rosters, proper licenses,  media (voice, pop music). These are things that made the PS versions superior. But I really was just talking in terms of graphics.

True, the HD systems have capabilities the Wii games can't take advantage of, but the question remains, that purely for business reasons, in support of the market leader, could these studios not put those features aside in order to offer a still very good game, and take that spared energy and place it on something else. You know as I do the answer is clearly yes, and the DS vs PSP demonstrated that.

Games that could fit the Wii would be more Japanese games: DmC, Megaman, Final Fantasy,... in other words game that require less realism than most western games.

Again, purely from a sales perspective, was it better to go PS360 rather than Wii? Comparing total PS360 sales to sales of the gen for a single goto plat (ie PS/PS2), it's a close call.

Since it's close, I can see why companies went that route, especially with the money incentives involved ;)

Impossible of course being hyperbole, but yes, as you said, unless you were there before the store opened, or very close to opening, NO WII FOR YOU.  I also got mine at launch, camped out in the Walmart parking lot til 6am because this Walmart wasnt doing the midnight launch thing, weak. 

I remember the PS2 launch well, several friends went to Best Buy and marched through school holding that blue box above their heads as they marched down the hall.  As I also remember, that launch had a pretty weak line up, but the graphics were so good for the time we didn't care.  

I do hope that Wii U is a smashing success.  I love Nintendo games, and want to be able to play them as they are meant to be played, on Nintendo consoles.  Can you imagine Microsoft or Sony allowing Mario to come out unfiltered on their platforms?  There would be online multiplayer and Yoshi Armor DLC tacked on.  Really looking forward to E3 so we can finally find out all the juicy details about this new beast.