I totally agree! The real innovation in the wiis motion controls is the implementation, accessibility and ease of use. I still play wii tennis with collegues who have a wii ~once a month. I would not buy a wii for solo play but in groups its pretty awesome. (although gran turismo and calling all cars have leveled the playing field somewhat)

@ Kyros: I think I overreacted to your lack of response. I saw it as that you disagreed with what I said but couldn't come up with any counterargument so just ignored it. I have seen that in other cases but was completely incorrect with you. Sorry.

But why do you keep saying that (non-Nintendo) Wii games don't really look better than PS2 games? That is just blatantly not the case. Example 1: RE4 took a HUGE graphical hit going from the Gamecube to the PS2. I am pretty sure that the Wii version looks at least as good as the GC version, ergo it looks a lot better than the PS2 verison. And that's a port of a 3-year-old game; the difference would be much bigger on a game made for the Wii.

I'm sure there are numerous examples of shoddy Wii games or Wii games that just aren't trying to look good that are on par with PS2 games, but I don't think that your blanket statement is very defensible at all.

Upon further inspection, you seem to be basing your statement on the argument that multiplatform games (for the PS2/Wii) often fail to use the Wii's abilities because they have to keep it dumbed down for the PS2 anyway. While this may be true, that hardly justifies saying ALL Wii games (not from Nintendo) look comparable to PS2 games.

Maybe you should say instead that Wii/PS2 multiplatform games often don't look all that much better on the Wii than on their PS2 counterparts. But that's not what you said.

@Crazzy

I must again ask you to do some research before posting numbers. Mario Kart Wii is more likely to break a million copies in Japan than MGS4 is. The Metal Gear Solid franchise has never sold over a million in Japan alone. The worst Mario Kart game sold more in Japan than the best Metal Gear Solid game. Mario Kart is a much much bigger franchise than the Metal Gear Solid franchise. This is true in every market, and especially true in Japan.

ookaze said: Kyros said: "They do that because their console propose nothing new except graphics." Yeah nothing. Besides great online capabilities that outclass the Wii (friend codes lol), media capabilities( like BluRay playback for the PS3, media streaming from your PC etc. pp. HD movie download for the 360), more power for gameplay aspects like better physics for example in Star Wars force unleashed, a Hard-disc for game demo downloads (of gigabyte size) etc. pp. This is the most astonishing thing about Nintendo fanboys to me they seem to have a warped view of reality. I can concede that the Wii has revolutionized user input and that Nintendo is doing great things in bringing casual gamers to its console. But some/many Nintendo fanboys really seem to think that the only advantage of PS3/360 is graphics? Perhaps you should use one of them. Now you're bordering on stupidity. Read again what I wrote : "nothing NEW". I shouldn't have added "except graphics" because it's not even true and misleading, they are not new either. But I did that because typical SD displays (interlaced and analog signal) are very different from typical HD displays (progressive and digital signal). Can you make a difference between the words "new" and "improved", or do I have a problem understanding them? There is nothing new in anything you cited: online capabilities are not new to this generation, they're only improved. Media capabilities (movies, network, ...) are not new, only improved, more power is not new, hard-disc is not new, ... This is the most astonishing thing about HD fanboys to me, they seem to have a warped view of reality. I can concede that the PS3/XB360 can deliver HD and that their respective companies are doing great things in bringing graphics whores to their console. But some/many HD fanboys really seem to think that the only advantage of the Wii is the wiimote? Perhaps you should use one of them.

I have to say, ookaze, I think you're very wrong here.  This is the same sort of stretch that others make when they say that the Wiimote is not new because the Power Glove did it first.   Yes, the first bumbling steps may have been done earlier, but these systems took it all to a whole new level. 

Online play is the only place where I would not call the changes new or revolutionary but "only" greatly expanded and much improved.  Well that and "better physics" which pretty much by definition admits to being simply an improvement.

(On the other hand, some other changes were truthfully a step backward, such as HDDs being only in some 360s (albeit most), and having to pay for online play.)

Most non-Nintendo games simply look like the PS2 version that is inevitably also released by most publishers like EA because they use the same textures etc. for both. That may not be the fault of the Wii but its simply the case.
Resident Evil and Zelda of course do not look like PS2 games but are essentially Gamecube games. So they also do not take advantage of any additional capabilities of the Wii over its predecessor.
(Besides if you look at God of War2 I think its fair to say that the advantage of graphical looks in Gamecube games over PS2 games is sometimes exaggerated)



In the end I won't argue over exceptions etc. and my statement may have been too blanket. but I think by and large its pretty defensible that most (if not all) non-Nintendo Wii games do not offer a significant graphical leap over last-gen console games like Gamecube or PS2. This may and will probably change the Sonic screenshots looked pretty nice.



As said above I won't nail myself on the ALL. I should use a bit more lawyer speak but thats too cumbersome .

FishyJoe said: The controller is not so much new as accessible. You can give the Wiimote to anyone and it is intuitive enough that most people will be comfortable. That is not the case with the power glove and other such devices. The typical joypad is not terribly intuitive. Give it to someone who has never used one before and chances are they will not feel comfortable. It's like the iPod. All the technology that went into the iPod existed before Apple created it. But Apple made it accessible enough for everyone to use it. And people certainly didn't choose the iPod because of price or features, because the Ipod was more expensive and had fewer features than most mp3 players. Apple created a device that everyone could use that was intuitive. The same way the Nintendo has created devices that are intuitive. Features and price were only secondary to accessibility.

This is definitely Apple's forte. Xerox PARC invented the computer mouse, GUI, etc., but Apple made them usable.

As you say, this is what Nintendo has done with the Wiimote... made it actually work well enough and in an intuitive way so that it transcends being a gimic and becomes a popular solution. 

Once again, Kyros, your assertion is based on "non-Nintendo Wii games = PS2/Wii multiplatform" which is NOT the case.

So, here's a simple question to see how far we apart we truly are on this issue: Do you think it's more accurate to say "Wii/PS2 multiplatform games have PS2-quality graphics on the Wii version as well" or "non-Nintendo Wii games generally have PS2-quality graphics"? 

[edit:  after you answer that question we can discuss the issues I present in this post's first paragraph:  whether my impression of your characterization of non-Nintendo Wii games is accurate and, if so, whether you are right.  (Hint:  no.)]