Instead of making general statements would you be kind enought to post where i've been proven wrong with facts instead of just claiming i am wrong with out backing it up.

Yes generally consoles start with a bad line up for the first few months it's gone well past that point now for the wii and it is clearly tracking behind all other consoles in terms of quality games. I've done several direct comparisions showing this.

Yep you got it wrong again. I have my own opinions about games, it just so happens the majority of the time they match the average review score for each game. Reviewers are picked because they have good taste and good opinions about games and they can articulate about them. Anybody can like whatever they want to but their is such a thing in life called bad taste, people have to learn to accept that just because they like something it doesn't make it good. Keep telling yourself the review system is some how flawed and the low quality of wii games isnt the problem if it makes you feel better.

Since you are constantly changing the topic it is difficult to prove you wrong, but I'll compile a list here with all the weak arguments you have:

1. Reviewers tastes are not everything. A lot of the Wii's million sellers have arguably been too low scored because they are not epic single-player games but funny multiplayer party games. Fact is, they are doing right what they want to, they have no flaws like other 70 % rated games. They just represent a different way of gaming.

2. Very few people are buying consoles because of games that are about to come out. Most people except a few hardcore gamers are waiting for the game they want until they buy a console.

3. You were constantly saying that the 360 AND the PS3 have more good games than the Wii although you proved yourself wrong on that before. The PS3 may has more "good" games than the Wii in percents out of their million sellers, but in absolute numbers, Wii is clearly better even after your standards for good games. I don't think you can argue that the important thing is the absolute number of good games and not the relative one, because why should I bother if there are a lot of bad games when there are still more good games than there are on other consoles?
That the 360 has more is easily explained by its one year head start. If sales trends continue like this, The Wii will even catch up the 360 in terms of good games by your standards and in absolute numbers.

4. You said that the Wii will be the first console that has not the best games out of a generation but wins it. You clearly show your bias here because this generation just has started, how can you know which console will have the best games at the end?

That's all I can think of right now, just tell me if I forgot to disprove an argument of you.

Wii -- 20 Million sellers 70.8 Million sales.
360 - 34 Million sellers 71.2 Million sales.

The Wii has more triple platinum sellers 6 to Xbox 360's 5

OK I'll prove you wrong.

You say: PS2 sold very well because: MGS2, FFX, DMC, GT3 and R&C were coming. Using that analogue the PS3 should be selling like PS2 did, which it isn't (and if you show me the graph I'll give you a detailed post why it still isn't).

Wii on the other hand sells even better than PS2 did.

Games: 1) Wii has the best game of this gen so far, 2) Casual games sold very well on PS2, yet no-one complains about it, 3) Good games take a while to make, Wii will definitely see an increase in quality 3rd party games this year. Devs were not suspecting the huge success, therefore run behind in development compared to PS360 4) Quality of "fun" games is very different from single player experiences. You sound like you never used your console for multiplayer fun, I suggest to invite a couple of people (including some girls) and try WiiSports, M&S at the Olympics heck even Carnival games. You'll have for the bargain of $50,- an amazing evening/night.

^^^ Couldn't say it better...

I'd like to add that i'm tired of people judging games by their own tastes only: games are supposed to be for everybody, and so it's normal some games will bring joy and fun to an 9 year old boy, or a 60 year old granny...

Not all games in this world are supposed to be hardcore online FPS stuff made for some 15/25 years old nerds... it's just ONE kind of games, but it's also not automatically the best of them all: some people still have more fun playing Tetris than some "blasé" hardcore players with their copycats games...

You're not in the head of these other person's playing, you have absolutely no right to call all these games "shitty" just because they don't meet your expectations, your own very limited tastes...

Sometimes, i play all alone, but i also play very often with my kids and my partner these days, and i'm glad Wii and DS are there to bring some great fun in my family... it doesn't mean i'll buy a crappy game, but i'll buy good "family oriented" or "casual/puzzle" games and enjoy them (nearly) just the same as my beloved action/adventure or rpg's...

The elitist way of thinking of some hardcore players/fanboys, their narrow-minded opinions and their pretention are boring, and stupid... let people enjoy the games they like, and enjoy yours without insulting the "casual crowd"... or in other words, to each his own...

I am not changing the topic i have made my point and others are changing the topic in an effort to try and prove me wrong but are failing. So now let me answer your 'arguements'.

1). Reviewers tastes aren't everything but for decades the average review score for games has been accepted as the best way to show how good a game is. You don't have to agree with all or some of the reviews but the fact is most people do, just because a new breed of casual gamer has come along who don't have a clue what makes a good game and they like shallow, easy, short games with many flaws instead, doesn't now make the review system flawed, a bad game is still a bad game no matter how many casual people buy it. A wii game that scores 70% is just as flawed as any other game that scores 70%. Lets take wii play for example with an average review score of 60%, why did the game score so low? It only contains nine mini games, they are all too short and the entire game can be completed in less than 30 minutes. The controls are basic, like kinder garden 3 year old basic, with some games having basic movement taken away from you for no reason other than to make the game ridiculously easy. Speaking of difficulty, the entire game is too easy and has next to no skill involved. The graphics are poor, theirs no proper leaderboards, it has no online play. The games are mainly just shallow rip offs of other older games that are better then what is contained in wii play. The sound effects are basic, their are zero options for each mini game you just get to play the one basic version of them and most of the mini games are boring with little to no innovation. Wii play is a bad game and scored 60% accordingly.

2). Some people buy consoles in advance of games coming out, i know i did, i've seen hundreds of people on forums say they did and so do some of my friends. I said people buying consoles in advance of the games they want is just one reason, buying a console as a movie player and backwards compatibilty are two other reasons i gave and their are many more.

3). If you want to talk absolute numbers on gamesrankings.com the x360 has 70 games rated 80% or above, the ps3 has 35 games rated 80% or above and the wii only has 14 games rated 80% or above.That's a huge difference in class and you'd have to be in denial not to see it. If you want to just talk about million sellers then yes right now the wii is just ahead of the ps3 in terms of million sellers that are rated 80% or above but the ps3 is catching up. By the end of the year the ps3 will have more million selling games rated above 80% then the wii will and chances are it will overtake the wii by the end of the summer on that front.

4). It's clear to see the trend of quality games coming to the 360/ps3 and not the wii. This hasn't changed at all this year and it's too late for it to change until next year at best but it's very unlikely to happen. The trend is to make 360/ps3/pc versions of the same game because those systems are of a similar spec and will sell more games then just a seperate wii version that has to be completly changed (a.k.a. dumbed down). Console generations only last 4-6 years in terms of proper software support, do you even think the wii will last 6 years? I don't and it would have to be one hell of a software market change for the wii to catch up to the 360 and ps3 which just isnt likely to happen.

I didn't say the only reason why the ps2 sold was because of upcoming games i said it was just one of the reasons. Also Gran turismo 3 came out in the summer not christmas and plenty of people brought the system just for that game. As well as that it was a cheap dvd player and was fully backwards compatible. The ps3 is in a worse position because most of it's top franchises still haven't been released where as at the same point in the ps2's life cycle they had been released and on top of that the ps3 was priced too highly and probably is still to expensive where as the ps2 wasn't. To answer your other points:

1). One game is not enough by itself.

2). Casual games sold well on the ps2 but they didnt dominate it, i've already shown that 64% of the ps2's million sellers were rated 80% or above where as the wii only has 40% of it's million rated games at 80% or above. 

3). Good games do take time to make but by now you'd expect a few of them to have been annouced but they haven't. In the mean time more and more top games are being annouced for the 360 and ps3.

4). I play all types of games and invite guys and girls over to play them, the casual gamers i know fully acknowledge they don't know much about games and what makes a good game, they know when they are playing something which is just abit  of dumb fun and they fully accept that it is a lower quality of product, they just don't have the time, the skill or the money to play bigger and better games.

1) Alright you've just taken the one example that works here. I completely agree with you, Wii Play is a terribly bad game, I have only played it once and after that I put it away. But let's look at the other party games in the Wii's million seller list:
Wii Sports is just a blast, it is still fun to play and it is the game that people want to play first when they come to me. This is easily an 85% + game in my opinion, its only lack is that there are no tournament modes in my opinion.
Mario Party 8, to be honest, I haven't played yet. I own Mario Party 1 to 6 though and I liked them all, they are just great to play when you have three friends around. I also played those a lot with my family, and I think those games have a concept that works great and where not much should be changed.
Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Games is very challenging when you play it alone because there is a ton to unlock, and it is fun with friends. The controls are easy, but they work, the game has different modes and quite a lot of diversity. I don't know anything that it makes wrong actually.
Wario Ware: Smooth Moves is probably more of a handheld franchise, so there are some things to complain. The single player mode is done a little too fast, and trying to make new records is sometimes not enough for me to turn the console on again. Still, the microgames are very funny and the concept of the franchise is great, and with friends and a bottle of booze, this is still the best party game.
Rayman Raving Rabbids is very funny, but also very bad structured. The single player mode is quite repetitive and therefore boring, the multiplayer mode lacks a structure that gives the minigames some "deeper sense", i.e. something like the board of Mario Party. But the minigames itself are some of the funniest I've seen in a while, and I had some afternoons spent with this game and friends although it lacks structure.
Carnival Games may be flawed, it may be not. I don't own it, I can't judge it.

You see, all those party games warrant a 80% + score in my books. I can understand when some reviewers score Wario Ware and RRR lower, but the others should clearly have higher scores.

2) Those people you are talking about are hardcore gamers, because only these post on forums. And hundreds are still an incredibly low amount if you look at the total sales a console has. Anyways, I don't know what this point has to do with the original discussion anyway, and this is also the reason why I won't write about people that buy consoles because of other functions than games.

3) I was talking about million sellers only since that was the number you gave earlier. That really absolute number actually shocks me. I won't talk about the 360, because I actually agree that the 360 has more good games than the Wii at the moment. The PS3 on the other hand doesn't have more good software in my eyes. I didn't know about the actual scores on Gamerankings before I checked them now, and as stupid as it sounds, it really seems reviewers are biased against the Wii. I mean, how can it be that Tiger Woods PGA 07, that arguably offers quite a bit more on the Wii with the motion control, is scored over 80 % on the PS3 while it is lower on the Wii? The same goes for most of the EA Sports games as they make up quite a big part of the PS3's list while on the Wii, only Madden 07 scores above 80 %.
I know I am a bit on a lost post here because this is actually the fact I want to prove, that you can't just trust reviewers, but I still want to say another thing: Actually, you should only compare reviews for games on the same console, and even better, in the same genre, because you just can't compare Final Fantasy XII to Tetris imo for example.

4) Why shouldn't the Wii be around for 6 years? Do you think after three years, the tech advantages of the PS3 will immediately start to matter? Exactly at that time when the PS3 will also be outdated compared to new PC's? I tell you something: The console that sells the most is around the longest, no matter how good or bad its tech specs are. That said, if third parties are only somehow intelligent, they will start putting their high profile games on the Wii (and the smart ones already have started with this). You are right that it is at the moment also a good choice to make a game for the PC/360/PS3 combo. I doubt however that this brings more money than making a Wii only game, because development costs are much higher for those consoles and porting a game twice isn't exactly cheap either. With every Wii sold, it becomes more attractive for third parties to concentrate on it and that is exactly what they are going to do. You won't see much Japanese high profile games on the PS3/360 anymore because in Japan, the Wii already has an advantage because of the bad 360 sales. It may take another year until the high profile western games completely change ship, but I promise you, at the end of this gen, the Wii will have more good games than the other two consoles.