Didnt say they ALL do much worst, just MOST of them as Im sure you know.

Tiger Woods, fair enough

I will scoof at Table Tennis, doesnt matter if Rockstar made it it still in the same category as Game Party and the like which brings me to my next point.

That entire list you just made, made my point for me. Every game there minus TR is geared toward the family, not going to call them casual, but you can see what types of games those are. Contrast that to the games that DONT sell better on Wii, Both Force Unleashes, just about all CODs, Madden, NBA, Bully, Need for Speed, etc. I know you say but "quality" but there are so much more Wiis out there than either HD console, it doesnt make sense. Surely some of those people dont have an HD console so whats stopping them from getting a game on Wii.

1. That's only the list of games that without a doubt did best on Wii. It doesn't include games where the Wii version outperformed one of the two others, or cases where the Wii version is only a small distance behind.

2. You consider Table Tennis, Tiger Woods, and Sonic to be "geared towards the family", yet Madden and NBA are magically "hardcore"? Really?

3. Yep, you're moving the goalposts again. You made the claim that Wii versions never outsell unless they're games like Just Dance. No rational person would consider Tomb Raider, Sonic, or Epic Mickey to be anything like those.

4. I guess that means that the only way for the 360 or PS3 to do better than the Wii is for the game to target a tiny sliver of the market. And they can only outperform the Wii when the Wii version is significantly worse than the other versions. So yes, "quality" - you can't rationally expect the Wii version to perform best when it's an inferior version in terms of gameplay and features (not graphics), even if the Wii had three times the install base.

5. Why is Golf considered a normal game, but Table Tennis is considered in the same category as Game Party? They're both sports, they're both a single kind of game (as opposed to the minigame collection of Game Party), and they're both sold in a way that targets enthusiasts.

6. What's Bully doing on that list? It was a port of a game from the previous generation. You're the one who laid the ground rules, here, not me.

To bring it back to one of the points again - yes, "quality". Tell me - if the PS3 and 360 versions of a game are high quality, but the Wii version is low quality, why would one expect the Wii version to sell well? Don't give me crap about "Wii-only owners should still be buying it" - there's higher quality games on the Wii that Wii owners are going to buy instead. Why buy CoD:WaW on the Wii when you can buy... well, pretty much any Nintendo title, or most of the real exclusives... and get a better-quality game? Why buy an inferior Madden when you can buy a superior Tiger Woods? Why buy Need for Speed when you can get a better experience from Excite Truck?

When you go back to the launch period, the truth becomes a lot more obvious. When Wii owners didn't have quality to choose from, they bought any game that would at least be acceptable. They bought CoD3 for the Wii, even though it didn't have ANY multiplayer (in an FPS, on a system that emphasises multiplayer), let alone online multiplayer - and they bought it almost twice as often as PS3 owners bought the PS3 version that had all of the features. The only reason that WaW was able to sell decently (and don't kid yourself, even when the PS3 and 360 versions are selling up around 8 million, selling just under 2 million is still a strong number of sales) was because it did add some multiplayer, and because the only FPSes it had to compete with were CoD3, Far Cry Vengeance (I forget, was it rated 2/10 or 3/10?), and Medal of Honor: Heroes 2 (yay, PSP port). And lets not forget that the Wii version of WaW was still missing a lot of features, like the Zombie mode, for instance.

And of course, by the time Modern Warfare: Reflex edition came out, Wii owners had plenty of better-quality titles to prefer, and weren't really interested in getting a two year old port, at the same time that its direct sequel released on the other platforms. And STILL it managed quite respectable sales, despite still lacking features from the original.

So, where are you going to move the goalposts to, this time?

I'm not going to buy garbage.  Every review says that mass effect 3, darksiders 2, assassins creed 3 are shit ports with major framerate issues.  I will never support a 3rd party that can't make a decent effort.

Trine 2 Director's Cut on Wii U is apparently a high quality third party effort. ZombiU also has appeal to many.

1. Well where are the games that sold better on Wii on either one of the consoles. And i mean better, not some small distance behind. GH, deBlob, Sonic, JD, Zumba come to mind and as ive stated those games are family geared. What about the ones that are not? SHow me

2. Never said Tiger was, stop putting words in my mouth. Sonic yes, Table Tennis, yes its a damn arcade sports game. Madden isnt hardcore or Fifa but those are sports simulators, the hell does that have to do with Sonic or Table Tennis, whats your point?

3. I said games geared to family, family friendly games, your putting words in my mouth again. The only game you mentioned that did not fit that was Tomb Raider, oh wow ONE game. Lets ignore that Underworld sold much worst than the HD versions.

4. Better in what way, sales. THats funny, PS2 version had worst versions of multiplat and there versions still blew the other ones away sales wise. But those versions are closer, so you might have something there. But that doesnt explain COD, which some people would swear is better the Wii version is better, but hell they are so tiny it dont matter. But then I would ask whose fault is that the those versions or worst? Not 3rd parties fault that they decided to go with such cheap hardware, they did the best they could with what they had. The only way for that not to have happened was to purposely gimp the HD versions, I bet some would have and had wished that happened.

5. Which Golf are you talking about? Far as im concenred there are two sports type arcade and simulation. I wonder which one does best on which system?

6. I put Bully there because the SHCOLARSHIP edition was also released the same time on 360, sure it is a port, but i used it to show that 360 gamers were clearly more interested in it, despite selling less than PS2 version.

What are these games that MWReflex had to compete with? Far as I know there were still NO competition in the FPS market for Wii. Doesnt matter if Mario was out, if you wanted to play a FPS what choices did you have? Most people just got another system.  ANd to sound blunt, if Wii owners were that starved for games they were buying games that sucked, then they were fools. I rather have 3 good games than 10 bad ones.

Wii has a pretty good third party library, i even made a thread about it
It is completely overlooked because of the "dated" grafix which is sad...

Just Dance and Guitar Hero Carnival Games sold great on Wii, so it's not true third party stuff doesn't sell on Wii, it was just different types of third party content.

The whole concept of the Wii is "get off the couch" social gaming with family/friends.

Things like Monster Hunter Tri and even GoldenEye are going to have a limited appeal on a platform like Wii.

The audience for the Wii outside of the hardcore Nintendo fans, if they wanted some "serious couch gaming" would dabble in a little NSMB or Mario Kart or LEGO Star Wars/Harry Potter/etc.

ulieq said:



TheBardsSong said:
Not many Wii U owners are buying 3rd party games...

I did my part, I own 4 3rd party titles of my 6 games.




I'm not going to buy garbage.  Every review says that mass effect 3, darksiders 2, assassins creed 3 are shit ports with major framerate issues.  I will never support a 3rd party that can't make a decent effort.



They're better than most PS3 ports and you still see PS3 owners supporting 3rd parties. I'm not saying they shouldn't be better, but a few dropped frames isn't game breaking by any means and all of the multiplat games I've bought for the system are great. The ability to play them on the gamepad is a feature I really enjoy.

Actually I can say the mass effect port is very well done. Assassin's creed and darksiders are clearly rushed though.

1. First of all, most developers never put non-family titles on the Wii. Second of all, neither Sonic nor de Blob is "family-geared" - that's just revisionism. They aren't gory pseudo-realistic FPSes, but they're games designed for gamers. And if you want examples of games selling better on Wii than one of the other two, that's a lot easier to do. CoD3, for instance, did significantly better on Wii than PS3, despite the PS3 version having multiplayer.

2. Your definitions don't make sense. That's all I can really say at this point. Table Tennis was as much a simulation game as golf or soccer.

3. What makes Tomb Raider non-family, but Sonic family? And no, you explicitly said "My point is that multiplat games do better on HDs(especially 360) than they do on Wii unless its some dancing for fitness game." - "dancing for fitness game" doesn't translate to "Family-friendly".

4. I'll be honest, your wording here is strange enough that I'm having trouble parsing it. Perhaps if you re-word it, I'll understand what you're trying to say.

5. How do you define "arcade" vs "simulation" in this context? And how, by that definition, does Table Tennis become "arcade" while Fifa becomes "simulation"?

6. Oh, Scholarship edition counts because it was released at same time on 360 as on Wii? How does that work? My understanding was "not counting late ports". An easy argument to put forward would be that most of the people who owned a PS2 bought a Wii, and thus didn't need to get the game again, whereas 360 owners at the time were mostly Xbox owners before that. Just one example of why using ports from the previous generation is a bad idea for these comparisons.

And I didn't say that MW Reflex had to compete with other FPSes. I said that it had to compete with better games. Why would you buy MW Reflex when you could buy Smash Bros, Mario Galaxy, Mario Kart, House of the Dead 2&3 Return, Resident Evil 4, Metroid Prime 3, etc, etc? Meanwhile MW Reflex, which was 2 years later than the other versions and lacking in features, still managed a healthy 1.46 million copies sold, with NO advertising. And that's the other factor to consider regarding CoD titles on the Wii - Activision didn't advertise the existence of the Wii versions. They did make mention of WaW during E3, but their advertising around release didn't list Wii. They didn't even include the existence of Black Ops for Wii in their press release in 2010. And yes, by 2009, there was most certainly competition for the FPS market. It had to compete with World at War (which had been ported alongside the other versions), The Conduit, and Medal of Honor: Heroes 2, in terms of online, etc. There was, quite simply, no reason to expect MW:Reflex to sell particularly well - it probably sold better than anybody expected, actually.

And you just suggested that Wii owners were so starved for games that they bought games that sucked... what's the basis for that claim? I said that they didn't buy CoD titles en masse because there were better games to buy.