But over a million people bought Boom Blox...

I do touch-type, actually. It's not nearly as hard as you think. I didn't get taught it, or anything, I just started doing it over time.

Anyway, as I said, the whole point of my post was to emphasise the nonsense of suggesting that sales of three specific games is somehow indicative of how the Wii sold. I demonstrated its nonsense by picking alternate games on the Wii, and then games on the 360, that show that you can reverse the argument or apply it to another console just as easily.

I can't comment on CoD3, as I never did get that game. I got WaW and BO, and I enjoyed WaW (I actually still haven't gotten around to actually playing BO - it's a game I'll play at some point, though), but I could feel the lack of features in that game. I don't blame Treyarch for that - they had their hands full just porting the main engine over, considering that it was IW that made the original engine. Anyway, you said CoD3 was why people weren't playing CoD on Wii... but I doubt that, since WaW sold nearly as well as CoD3 did.

And the FPS genre didn't gain traction because third parties couldn't be bothered trying to make a quality Wii online experience, and online was where FPS was flourishing. Treyarch did put the effort in, at least, and they saw reasonable sales, but like I said, CoD was already lost for the Wii after MW failed to turn up in 2007.

Also noteworthy was that there was no top-notch FPS, nothing to drive interest in the genre in the way that Modern Warfare did on the PS3 and 360. The CoD games were lacking functionality, MoH:H2 wasn't exactly highly-rated (metacritic rating of 73), Red Steel was a buggy mess (although it showed potential - I honestly think that a 2008 Red Steel 2 that expanded on the first game and fixed the problems rather than being a completely different experience would have done incredibly well), and The Conduit was simply lacking on all fronts. In short, nothing showed that the genre could reach its potential because developers didn't really provide a game that had the potential to do so.

More importantly, there was no standout exclusive FPS. As you pointed out, 360 had games like Halo, PS3 had games like Resistance. You could say "well, it was Nintendo's job to provide that game", but third parties routinely argue that you can't compete against Nintendo in their genres. If Nintendo had released an FPS that sold 20 million copies, third parties would go "well, how are we supposed to compete with that?" and put all their games on the 360 and PS3.

As for Monster Hunter, there are a few things worth noting. MHTri on Wii outsold all other MH games in North America, and all bar one in Europe. In Japan, yes, it's been more of a "trend", but I wouldn't exactly call the trend an ordinary pattern. And the PS3 version of Portable 3rd didn't exactly light up the charts in Japan. But I don't think it's worth really arguing over it - it's kind of a side point at best. The point to make is that MH clearly sold very well on the Wii, which demonstrates the absurdity of using games like NMH to argue that the Wii doesn't support those sorts of games.

I have a ton of third party games but more like Little Kings Story etc instead of fail rail dragonquest/resident evil/dead space. etc.

I bought stuff like (as said before) Little Kings Story Okami Muramasa Zack n Wicki Epic Mickey etc. games with at least a little pit effort put into creating them.

There is 1 funny think i dont understand. I mean I have a DS and a ton of third party DS games and those are great.  why cant the devs just make good Wii games?  I dont get why they treat  portable Nintendo systems different than they treat the home consoles.

Oh... and where are the stats backing up your argument, Rol? :p

Best third party games my foot...

i buy 3rd party games if they are good. why should i buy their half ass games? I have no interest in Assassin Creed series, i will buy Darksiders 2 when i feel like it, and i will buy Ninja Gaiden 3 Razers Edge and Alien: Colonial Marines (WiiU version) whenever they release in Australia.

@aielyn LMAO my argument is absurd? but you cherry picked two games that were LATE ports to some WIi games LOL. PLease. Madworld? that game has been selling for five bucks on AMazon, NEW for over two years now, it selling 700,000 copies is nothing to be proud of especially when some people on this very website were swearing it would sell 1mil? Same goes for Conduit it was supposed to sell 1mil plus, not even going to get into the sequel. which sold much worst than any of the HD games you mentioned.

Madworld and Conduit werent put on PS360 cause those games are bland, why play Madworld when you can play DMC, GOW, hell that new Anarchy is getting better reviews, Conduit? There are way better FPS on HDs, if people didnt buy that crap for their WIis what makes you think they would buy it for PS360 which has too much FPSs if anything.

COD still sold less than 360 which you are trying to downplay, what about the rest of the COD games on WIi? They just sold worst over time. What about the bunch of other games that sold better on HDs, Spiderman, Both Star Wars Force Unleashes, A few Legos, Dead Rising, Bully Schlorship edition, Rayman Origins, just about all the sports games, IE Madden, Fifa, Tales of Graces (just the Japanese sales) a few games did well on WIi and thats just about it a few, unless they were dancing or exercise.

BTW COD isnt a fair comparison, but games that were ported 1 to 2 years later are? No doesnt work that way, ill keep using COD as long as people keep using old ports.

Very good point

On FPS' I think if Nintendo released a top selling FPS that you would have seen a much greater push from third-parties. The excuse that Nintendo games outcompete their games was usually used after a games done poorly. Afterall, how many third-parties released party games after Mario and Sonic at the Olympics did well or all the fitness games after Wii Fit showed their was a large market for it.

The closest Nintendo had in terms of FPS was the Metroid Prime trilogy but even that sold relatively poorly (compared to other Nintendo franchises), so nothing really showed the FPS market was present for the decision makers at third party publishers.

Is scrolling down a post or two too much for you to ask after I took the enormous effort of googling a quote and posting a link? Shall I also transcribe and footnote the conversation for you, sir?

You're missing something. Something shiny, in gold, and very official.

I didn't cherrypick anything, I demonstrated the absurdity of YOUR cherrypicking. Even you admit that MadWorld and Conduit were bland games, and that's why they weren't put on the PS3 or 360. So why are they good examples of why the Wii isn't a good market for such games? In other words, you just demonstrated the absurdity of your own argument by explaining exactly why those two games didn't sell massive numbers. And for the record, I couldn't give half a hoot how many copies people on vgchartz said they thought those games would sell.

And I'm not trying to downplay CoD3 sales on 360 at all. The point of giving that example was to show that Wii versions were capable of selling similar numbers. I wasn't trying to claim that the Wii was the optimal platform for FPS games, just that the platform should have been competitive on the FPS front. And again, my whole point is that you cherrypick examples, and I make the point by intentionally picking counterexamples. After all, if someone were to say "the sky is always blue", and I then pointed to the sky during sunset, it wouldn't make sense for that person to go "but you're cherrypicking the time of day!" - I disproved the claim by providing a counterexample. I don't have to show that counterexamples are more common than examples, only that counterexamples exist.

I like how you mention Dead Rising as an example. Yeah, that's DEFINITELY a fair comparison, considering that it was a late port that sucked arse. Meanwhile, Force Unleashed on Wii was comparable to on PS3 and 360, as was Rayman Origins and Spider-Man 3, most of the LEGO games did best on the Wii, the Wii did particularly well on Tiger Woods, Grand Slam Tennis on Wii far outperformed GST2 on PS3 and 360, and Rockstar's Table Tennis did better on Wii than 360. Tales of Graces F for PS3 had added content (thus it's not a fair comparison).

Let me emphasise this again - the problem is that you cherrypick, and then when someone points out the absurdity of your cherrypicking, you then bring up arguments against their counterexamples that apply just as well in reverse. People like you keep bringing up games like Dead Rising, Dead Space, Modern Warfare, etc - they were late ports. And why do you get to use Wii exclusive games (that you, yourself, admit were dull games) as proof that there's no market on the Wii? Why don't we then get to use equivalent examples on the 360 or PS3 to prove that it has nothing to do with the Wii, and everything to do with the game itself?

When you have a reasonable argument to make, I'll listen.