Look, if you want to argue against my point, then do so.  If you want to argue against the article's point then also do so but don't confuse the two.

But both points are heavily connected ...

Shovelware games are low budget games which tend to have low sales, low review scores, sell based on the ignorance of a segment of the gaming population, and flood the library of systems which sell (particularly) well. Your argument is that people will feel duped by buying one of these games because they are so awful which is (generally speaking) not true ...

Games like Carnival Games, Boogie, Bomberman Land, and Bust-A-Move Bash! all fall into this category of "Crummy" games and could be considered shovelware but there is still a lot of enjoyment to be had in each of these games depending on what you're looking for.

Certainly, there are lots of games that fall into this range of "quality" which are absolutely awful; and in my opinion these tend to be games that are trying to be a game where their budget will work against them.

ARSEnal suck

I'm going to have to partially agree with Words of Wisdom on this one. People do know what crap is, even if they are one of the "casuals." You hardly need to be an expert in video games to know when you're not having any fun. And addressing your larger fear that shovelware will give "uneducated consumers the opinion that ALL Wii games are shovelware"," I admit it's possible that a person who repeatedly gets burned by shovelware will come to abandon video games as a whole in disgust.

However, I think the effect of this is far more limited than you fear it might be. I'm sure all of us have been burned by "shovelware" at some point in our lives, and I'm not just talking about in video games. I, for instance, would be a "casual" consumer of movies, plays, and other forms of entertainment. I've spent good money to watch good awful movies, see horrible plays, and read incredibly stupid books. But I'm still quite aware that my bad experiences can not translate into "ALL movies etc. must blow."

Granted, video games are much more shunned compared to those other media, so the chances that a person will play Ninjabread Man and tell himself that he's justified in having never previously played games is higher than my having a similar opinion about movies after watching, say, anything by Uwe Boll. But there's two things that mitigate this for the Wii. First, if many games' long legs are anything to go by, a lot of people are purchasing their Wii games by word of mouth, or after trying them at a friend's house, so there's a pretty good chance that someone who bought a game at least knows what they're getting into. Less theoretical is the fact that every Wii comes with one of the best games ever made, Wii Sports. After playing that for hours, people will know that quality games do exist, and I submit that they're less likely to stop playing games after one or two bad experiences than you may think.

That said, if we never see another "Cars" again, I won't complain.

Edit: My tortoise-like typing speed strikes again! 

A Wii game who gets a 7 or 8 from a so called "core gamer" can be translated to a 9 or a 9.5 for a "casual gamer"

The reason I say not to confuse the two is that my definition of shovelware is different from the article's. If it's fun, it's not shovelware IMO irrespective of other factors. Fun is subjective however so you can't just point to a couple numbers and make a judgment call on it.

As for people feeling bad when they buy a bad game, it happens. Believe it. When I was younger, I got to pick out the 3rd game for my SNES at a store. I picked Rocketeer. I was crushed by how bad that game was especially coming from Super Mario World and Super Mario Kart. Luckily it was back during the time where you could return opened games and I exchanged it for Gradius III which I absolutely love. I didn't know what shovelware was back then, I had never read a game review in my life either, but I knew Rocketeer was a bad game that made me really sad.

Children are more forgiving about problems in some ways, but they aren't so dumb that they will think bad games are good.

 Fixed

 I can't completely agree. Again, some of the so-called "casuals" may have different tastes in games than we do, and they are likely seeking a different experience than you or me. But they still know what does and does not suck. The only way I can find a way to agree with your statement is if I admit that many of the enthusiast reviewers whose opinons are collected in meta-critic and the like are likely to rate a mini-game fest lower than they would another game of a different genre, even if they're of equal caliber. But as Words of Wisdom pointed out, anyone who watches little kids playing games will find that the kids know full well that Sonic and the Secret Rings is not in the same league as Mario Galaxy. Sonic nuts excluded, of course.

As amp316 states, bad games tend to show up more often in the console with the highest market share.

We have to face it: bad games are a fact of life. This includes potentially good projects that end up underdeveloped in order to meet deadlines, like holiday season release dates and such.

Some developers want to cash in on the console of the moment as quickly as possible. Bills and mortgage payments aren't going to wait until you to create the perfect game.

So if you're even a bit smart about it, you will attempt to release your game for the largest possible consumer base.

If I were a console maker, I would be ecstatic that my product had the lowest average game scores, since it would indicate my machine has a high market share and developers (both good and bad) are flocking to develop to it.

So, in a nutshell, there is nothing remarkable AT ALL about arsenal's post. It indicates nothing any console maker should be worried about. We the consumers are the ones who have to be picky with our games, not them!

"even worse, giving uneducated consumers the opinion that ALL Wii games are shovelware."

That was the point I was commenting on. You may think it works that way, but it doesn't. If it did, the DS would not have survived its first couple of years, as the shovelware ratio was high too.

So far, the only people with this opinion are people looking these doom and gloom articles, and not recognizing them for the fanboy drivel they actually are.

Now if you want to talk, show me proof that SALES of games lean 60%+ in favor of shovelware, not just the presence of games.