Indeed. Makes me wonder if going for a straight-up translation was the best idea.

now that is an interesting query. Maybe just build a COD from the ground up for Wii? I think that would have done the same sales wise as others. However the quality would have been better. GE for Wii was IMHO essentially a COD with James Bond skin, nothing wrong with that I still play it. But would that help? Would people take it seriously or still see it as a spinoff game and not a true COD?

That's a big "if", and one I didn't fully mean to imply. I liked the look of the architecture in the Wii version, while the 360 version seemed comparatively desaturated (especially going by what I've shown) and dull in my eyes. Yet looking back, I remember that the 360 version was heavier on the combat and has instances in which the Prince was fighting many different enemies at the same time. The 360 is better equipped to handle those scenarios. In the Wii version, much of the effort was put into level design, which by the end was very creative, challenging, and possibly the I've seen from the series.

What I'm saying is that with the right design choices (both in gameplay and in art), a Wii game can look pleasing and handle like a dream. And since it offers abilities that the other platforms can't fully emulate, there is and always has been room for experimentation. "Creative density" strikes me as a subjective term - one person might find Assassins' Creed II's faithul depiction of Venice to be more artistically and creatively engaging that Okami's canvas-like depiction of mythological Japan. Great design can exist on any platform. It's just that the Wii opens up (and/or requires) different paths to great design.

That may depend on the marketing. If Activision markets it as well as they've been marketing CoD for Wii... then it's going to fail. At any rate, a CoD built from the ground-up would need a different focus. The Wii isn't the matter at explosions and falling buildings and what-not, so perhaps it would be best to tone down the action and turn up the atmosphere. No, wait. That's just my personal tastes talking.

I agree.

More enemies can be a good thing, yet fewer and more difficult enemies can have comparative gameplay value. One is more thought invoking, the other more reaction invoking. Both possible, both interesting. One better suited for Wii, the other better suited for the HD market, like you said.While Nintendo is restricted to design what's best suited for Wii, 3rd parties have the choice to make a good game, either on Wii or on the twins, depending on what they wanna do. The question that remains is, can they do what's possible on Wii on the twins? If so, what would push them to market games on the Wii and not just focus on the twins? Is it the motion controls, is it the cost, is it the separate market? These are all important questions imho.

An example Nintendo enthusiasts have brought up to me is Xenoblade. It has lush visuals, and great gameplay. Yet it sold poorly. What does that say about consumers?

lol wut?

I remember around the time Xenoblade came out in America that the Google search queries for "xenoblade ps3" went up quite a bit and I thought "Huh, I don't know what to make of this. Are people that stupid or misinformed? Or is it something else?". Also that recent (and hilarious, I think) Bayonetta 2 spat really shed the light on the idea of certain games and franchises must be on certain platform or else it's treason or automatically a bad business decision or the world will end or something. Basically what I mean is that sometimes platform doesn't matter. Xenoblade would've been amazing on a GameCube, Wii U, or any platform capable of realizing its vision. Yet I see people thinking as if it has to be available for a certain something in order to be, at the least, worth purchasing.

How does that relate to Xenoblade's sales? Not at all, really. Nor do I think Xenoblade is the shining example of everything the Wii can do. It's just more evidence that a great game can be developed for it. To answer the question, Xenoblade's sales tell me very little. It's as popular as Mother in Japan, supposedly, but sales don't reflect that. It's the highest-rated RPG to come out of Japan in a long time, but sales don't reflect that. I find that, in the grand scheme of things, sales paint no more than a vague picture. In Xenoblade's case, it's the picture of over 700,000 people across the world who have gained possession of a game I really like. It tells me that I'm not alone in my knowledge of the game's quality, even in the face of games I like significantly less sell 20 billion copies. What does all of this tell me about consumers? Every individual counts. If you're trying to make a point about how it would sell of the HD twins, don't bother. There's no point of comparision.

Now back to continuing from the first paragraph and tying it in with the topic. Some of the best Wii games are entirely possible on other consoles, but definitely not all. The willingness to market a unique, Wii-specific game stems from the assumption that consumers might like something different from the norm, as if the Wii is to be treated like a grounds for more experimental gameplay than a publisher would normally attempt with an established property. Marketing would have to revolve around the ideas implemented in the Wii version that aren't available in others (though the others would obviously have their own ideas relevant to the platform they are on). It's nothing more or less than doing what the Wii was originally intended to do - be a device where the best ideas, not graphics, succeed. Unfortunately somewhere down the line the experiment didn't go as originally envisioned. "What went wrong?" is the ultimate question.

The answer: A lot.

Can the situation be fixed?

The answer: Not without a time machiene.

What does this mean for the future of Nintendo and third-party support?

The answer: Hopefully, a better start (less mistakes) in the next generation.

That is a problem in of itself, it woudnt BE COD, at least only in name alone, sure even if they marketed it. People would know that its not like the main series, your essentially getting into spinoff terroity with that idea. As harsh as it sounds maybe at least from a quality stand point some games should just not be on Wii. 

Never even heard of this myth.

It never had a chance, because its initial overwhelming performance depended on two factors, Ninty starting very well and MS and Sony starting horribly, but MS and Sony were able to correct their errors because Wii didn't cater to their audiences. But it's also true that Ninty crippled Wii towards the end of its life, otherwise Wii could have stayed around 46%, like it was at the end of 2010. Considering that Wii is now at 41.5% and dropping, at the end of this gen (not meant as 8th gen start, but as definitive end, when all the 7th gen competitors will have zero or near zero sales) Ninty could have wasted the opportunity for a few tens million additional Wii sales.