Nights and Rygar, maybe My Sims, pretty sure thats exclusive and made just for the Wii. But I digress. Even when these type of questions are asked and we present the answers, someone finds a way to discredit them. But since you asked, I figured I would answer anyhow.

Exclusives are important, and Wii does have them, and so do PS3 and 360. But I think what is more important is the fact that Wii seems to be getting a share of the very popular multiplat titles. You are right, exclusives are becoming a thing of the past, but the Wii will ALWAYS have a good share of them because of its controller alone. The problem begins when Wii gets all of the mainstream very popular high selling franchises that are multiplat (GH3, Rockband, Online Madden 08, WWE games) and then also manages to court exclusive titles all its own due to its different nature (Soul Cal: Legends, Rygar, Nights, DQ:Swords, Treasure Island:Z, RE:UC, My Sims).

Exclusives are indeed a dieing breed, but much more so on the 360 and PS3 than they are the Wii, and it will remain that way simply because of that damn remote. The 360 and PS3's similar nature and dev cost will lead to less exclusives for those platforms in my opinion. Hell we are already seeing it. So long as those serious system selling 3rd party multi plat games like Madden and Guitar hero keep showing themselves on the Wii, its not going to fall off of a cliff, ever.

And this diehard idea of yours that the Wii will be rereleased as a new console less than 2 years from now is really tired in the face of Reggies speach at that event last week. I saw you completely sidestep his comment in that thread too. Made me want to vomit man, seriously, stop it, your as bad as the people here predicting the PS3 will pull a Dreamcast. In the face of not only video game console history, but direct quotes from Nintendo themselves, not to mention common sense, and you are still holding with that insane idea. The same way the Ntards keep going on about PS3 being dead in the water just 6 months in. Here, add Senior VP of NOA George Harrisons recent quote to the long list of direct sources from Nintendo that directly refute your idea that the Wii wont have a traditional life cycle.

http://blog.wired.com/games/2007/05/interview_noas_.html 

WN: In five years, where do you see the Wii? In the US.

GH: Certainly I think that as we get through this entire lifecycle, and already people are starting to guess, "who's going to win the lifecycle," two things are going to happen. First of all, I'm not sure it's going to be a typical lifecycle. In the past, we've always had five- to six-year lifecycles which were sort of forced by someone jumping ahead and using a new piece of technology. And we're finding out now that the appeal of faster processors and better graphics is really sort of reaching a diminishing point. There's a price point and there's the quality that's holding the PlayStation 3 back. They're selling so many PlayStation 2s because people are saying, "You know what? The graphics are pretty good, the price is good, and the library is good." So we have a great expectation that this lifecycle's actually going to last more than five years.

Please.....drop it.

Well back again after some calculations: Looking at the last four weeks we got that on an avarage Wii has gain 67k on xbox360. Halo3 is released 25 september accodring to: http://xbox360.ign.com/objects/734/734817.html or week 39. We have date availible until v 20, that would mean 19 weeks untill the release of Halo3. If we will assume that Wii will continue to gain atleast 50k on xbox360 untill the release of Halo3 then Wii would have gainen 950k on xbox360. At that point I don't think sales for Wii will drop dead. That might just be me. See ya folks

NiGHTS is pretty much the only top-flight title that Sega hasn't sullied yet. There is one. My Sims is another: I'll go ahead and wager that "The Sims" has sold more copies than pretty much any game you personally care a great deal about. 

Otherwise, as others have mentioned, these things take time to develop. I think the general trend towards Wii development will go like this:

1) February-November 2007, Shovelware. Desperate developers try to get something, anything onto the Wii platform.

2) November 2007 - June 2008: Middleware. Software that may (or may not) have been exclusively developed for the Wii, but isn't a top title. Easy example: Katamari Damaci.

3) June 2008 and beyond: Top exclusives.  By June 2008, I expect to start seeing top flight, substantial 3rd party software being announced for the Wii. None of these may come out before Christmas 2008 or beyond, but the games will clearly be well into development (9+ months) by the time they're announced. Some possible examples: Dragon Quest, Resident Evil (not 5, obviously, but some other title in the franchise), Mega Man, Soul Calibur. I have no insider information of any kind -- I'm only naming franchises that have reasonable ties to the Nintendo platforms.

Yea, remember before E3 all the developers were hyped about the PS3 and working on projects for 360 and PS3. Lots of developers had given up on the Gamecube long ago. Then After E3 things started to change, some 3rd parties (i.e. Ubi) got on board right away (and have greatly benefited). Then after month and month of crushing sale figures more and more 3rd parties are coming on board. But even for the Wii that may be easy to develope for it would still take 12-18 months for a quality game to be produced. Some/most 3rd parties only started projects this year so we wont see anything too substantial until mid 08. Also, a lot of 3rd parties were able to make a lot of money pushing crap on the PS2 since it had a huge install base. Now if they put those same crap games (i.e. Spiderman) on the Wii it wont sell well at all. But if they make good games they will sell better.

Reason why developers has not shifted resources towards the wii: Because it's a step backwards. The best graphics I've seen on the wii has been achieveable on the PC for at least 5 years. There is nothing exiting about developing for the wii, besides the controller. Obviously that is not enough. I wouldn't want to be limited to the hardware the wii has to offer when I'm trying to make the best game ever. If the gaming business was all about money everyone would shift to the wii immediatly. That said, EA probably soon will.

Zaphodile, taking off for base for what you it wanted to say… We can conclude that all the hundreds of companies who had developed games for the PSone had given a step stop backwards… Why they could very well, to have developed games for the N64 and Dreamcast. It does not find? You really find that all the companies search in producing optimum game of all the times? Or that it tries to produce optimum game possible and it he finishes if becoming a classic! He does not confuse the things… They are companies live with money… Without money they will go to declare insolvent… Its illusion leaves this stops backwards.

To a certain extent you're correct, but then again the best graphics on the XBox 360 and PS3 have been obtainable since nVidia returned to multiple graphics card PCs with the Geforce 6 series over 2 years ago. At the same time everything the Nintendo DS can produce has been possible on PCs for (roughly) 10 years.

I've said this a few times and I think if I keep saying it it may eventually sink in:

"The only performance publishers care about is sales performance."

Publishers determine what games are created because they fund development and require a healthy return on investment. Most large publishers have several actuaries who study the market and :

• Make Sales projections for the platform
• Make Sales projections for the proposed game based on projected quality (based on team history) and sales patterns on the platform
• Make a budget projection based on the proposed game and historic costs on the platform

From this they calculate the projected profit and their projected return on investment. The ugly trap the PS3 and XBox 360 could find themselves in is that games cost more to develop for these platforms, and the smaller userbases will lead to lower potential sales, which leads to (much) smaller projected returns on investment.

A publisher who is given the choice to spend $40,000,000 to produce an epic, graphically advanced XBox 360 / PS3 game which will only sell 1.5 Million copies or fund 8 $5,000,000 games for the Wii which will each sell 500,000 copies will end up choosing the Wii games.

When have companies chosen to support the most powerful system more than the most profitable system before? PS2 was supported the most and was the weakest compared to Dreamcast, Gamecube, and Xbox. You can go back to any previous generation and see the same pattern. Also, looking at FFCC for the Wii, it looks very good graphics wise. Sure they could spend another 15 million to make it a 1080p game for the PS3 but it wouldnt translate into more sales. And if FFCC makes SE more money than FF13 on the PS3 (if it ever gets released) what system do you think the next installment will be on.

Take a look of the following link please !!

http://vgchartz.com/worldtotals.php?name=&console=Wii&publisher=&sort=Total

Frankly speaking, those 3 party publisher is get shock of Wii performance til now. I don't think they are going to release many good IP in year 2007 as they shift their focus to Wii too late. For year 2008, it's too early to say, so let's wait a couples of month.

 SOrry, but you are wrong: They have shifted resources to the Wii in the mean time but the development takes so much time, that many publishers haven't anounced their coming games for the Wii yet.