Faring worse on Wii as compared to PS360 is not the same as making profit just because it sold a million or so more units.

To me, COD proves beyond a doubt its fully capable to downgrade the HD game largely unchanged in terms of content (obviously visuals tech suffer) and still make a solid profit.

Capcom already had a solid control scheme they could have used, it was only the resources to downgrade. I think RE4 already proved they could of gotten a million sales at $50 price point and made a solid profit.

But, you're right they simply didn't think it was worth it. I think they were wrong.

Its the same with other 3rd party games. Had the games been on Wii, even downgraded visually, I wouldn't have purchased a PS3. I would have been fine. But, they largely felt the costs needed to flesh out the engine to down grade the games weren't going to be worth it and instead kept it simple with their PS360 approach.

Thankfully everything is pointing to next gen not being like that and I will hopefully be back to one console ownership.

Dead Rising Chop Till you Drop - Release Feb 19 '09 (Jp)

Resident Evil 5 - Release March 5 '09

RE5 must have started development prior to DR:CtYD - But if Capcom was considering a (later) RE5 Wii port, the critical and comercial devastation of DR:CtYD probably tanked the idea.  Conversely if DR:CtYD had been successful, RE5 most likely would have come over next (on the same RE4 engine no doubt).

You dont know how profitable a RE5 for Wii would have been, Capcom felt it wasnt otherwise they would have made it, they are the ones in the know so im going go with what they do/say for now.

RE4 didnt sell a million at 50 bucks, I doubt it even retailed for that much when it first came out on WIi, where are your prices coming from. I only ever saw it for 30 and that was before it became a million seller. Plus that was a quick port, cost little to produce, where talking about a game that they would have had to built from scratch. Unless you really believe all they had to do was downgrade, but thats what they did with Dead Rising and looked how well that turned out, and that is a much less taxing game than RE5

You say COD I say DR and i could probably name a few others, COD is not a good example, we're talking about a game that doesnt come anywhere close to pushing the HD consoles, and despite that, it STILL runs like crap on WIi, screen tearing pop in, lag. 

You honestly believe your GTAs, Red Deads, MEs, Just Causes, Skyrims could have run on Wii with simple downgrading and you would have been fine with crappy versions of those games?? More power to you, but you would have been in the minority

oops didn't mean to imply RE at $50.... RE4 sold more than a million starting at $30. That line meant to say that RE4's popularity proves an RE5 at $50 could have sold a million.

The rest is just disagreement with no proof either way. I know I wouldn't have bought a PS3 had Wii had 3rd party support. Its simple as that. I would have been fine with COD type differences and i never said Wii versions would have sold on par with HD versions. But I'm sure they would have been profitable and I think far less people would have abandoned the Wii for an HD twin.

I'm assuming it's because they would have needed to alter the technical aspects of RE5, more than RE4.

im sorry im not seeing how a 30 dollar port proves a 50 dollar gimped version of a game could have sold a million. I doubt it would have done that well. Even if it did, would it have been any good?? IMHO, no.

Thats it though, most of these games wouldnt have COD differences. Not the ones that use alot of assets. Hell, no. I think it would not have made a difference, people arent dumb, they know what generally what system could do what, they didnt abandon the Wii, they just got another system so they could stop playing crappy versions or straight up missing games, not so much different than what you yourself did.

on a side note, how come everyone always uses the RE4 Wii port like some kind of proof? By that logic RE5 should have been on PS2, because that version of 4 is the best selling one and it wasnt sold at bargain basement price

The idea was firmly shot down long before either game came out, by about six months if I recall. Now, you can try to argue that Capcom was actually considering it and waiting until DR's sales came through before they began the long process of converting RE5 from the MT Framework engine to the RE4 engine. But this is Capcom. They announce RE ports and sequels before the game they're porting/sequelizing has even released.

Long story short, I'm extremely skeptical that one had anything to do with the other.

It has insane graphics, amazing co-op (spilt screen, online)  huuuuuuge reply value, solid gameplay (altho it takes some time to get used too it), crappy story, irresponsive controls, TONS of different weapons. TONS of different co-op modes, uncountable amount of unlockables and it feels NOTHING like a RE game

So the game is good unless you expect it to be like other RE games then. I’m ok with that