I dont want to see them fail, but I love the monkey wrench the Wii has thrown in the gaming world. HD games cost out the ass and are putting good studios in financial trouble which is causing all the devs to be bought up buy the big guys. The big guys are less likely to green light innovative ideas and new IPs for fear that they will not make a return on an investment. Assuming this is true, we will get tons of generic, cookie cutter games games(Im looking at you 95% of FPS's) and sequels.

The Wii allows devs to to make games at cost effective prices which results in more innovative games. Unfortunately this also results in a lot of low cost crap. HD is the future but it is too risky for the little guy.

 Thanks for the response. I appreciate your taking the time to explain your viewpoints more thoroughly. However, I still take issue with it. The supposed difference between the two words, or any word for that matter, simply can't come "completely down to opinion", or else we'd all be using completely different meanings when using the same words. The rest of us are not mind-readers: we interpret the words you use the same way we'd interpret that word if someone else was using it in the same context. If you try to have your own, personal definition, you'll run directly into the situation we have now: you said something, and the rest of us have no idea what you could possibly mean. We still don't, to be honest, and that's hardly surprising in light of what you've just said. To further your own analogy, it might be meaningless to dispute someone else's review scores, but it's necessary that we all know what the reviewer means when he says he's dinging a game because it has awful controls, or because it has bad graphics. The score itself is a subjective thing, but it's composed of a series of objective terms that we can all understand. I'd also like to add that if the two terms are as purely subjective as you're making them out to be, then there was zero point in starting this thread; a large part of your thesis is that "casual" games are somehow going to destroy "hardcore" gaming, but if you can't tell us what either of those terms mean, how can you expect any of us to respond?

Second, you may have noticed that at no point did I ever actually criticize your choice of platforms or games. You posted that one (objectively defined) category of games is somehow going to destroy another (objectively defined) category. I pointed out that that hasn't been the case at all so far, and that if anything the Wii may well encourage further development of those types of games. Mind you, it was a very long post, and that type of ad hominem attack is pretty common, so I can understand why you assumed that I did so. But I didn't. I would like to add, though, that I'm all in favor of letting everyone play whatever games they want, so long as they're having fun. That's actually precisely the reason I despise the "casual" and "hardcore" terms, since it implies that some games are inherently beneath some people. I'd also like to point out that if the Wii really does introduce more new types of games, and thus creates new types of gamers, we ALL win, because most of us enjoy our Half-Lifes AND the new stuff like Wii Sports. I'd also like to point out that the term "casual" has, in fact, been used as an insult with wearing regularity. Again, it wasn't too long ago that we had yet another example show up.

http://kotaku.com/386573/rockstars-houser-+-fuck-casual-gaming

"Yeah, fuck all this stuff about casual gaming. I think people still want games that are groundbreaking.. " That rather implies that this "casual" stuff is something tired and rehashed, which I believe is usually an insult...

Finally, your statement that you "can speculate that one of the reasons HD gaming has been on a slow uptake is because it has been simply too early for an HD console to be successful with the high prices of HDTVs and general ignorance on the subject." You needn't speculate, because we already have quite a bit of evidence that it isn't true. Japan leads the world in the adoption rate of HDTVs, and has for years. It's only now slowly becoming more mainstream here in the West, but in Japan it's been the norm for some time now. Yet the Japanese have overwhelmingly chosen to favor the Wii over the PS3. In fact, it's doing about triple the numbers, and one game (a "casual one!) is poised to outsell the console as a whole. So I would say that a lack of early HD adoption is probably not the culprit here.

Your last paragraph, however, IS right on the money. A varied diet is good for the stomach, and for the gamer. I, and many others, believe that Nintendo is doing the most of all the companies to expand the offerings we gamers receive. And time will indeed be the final arbiter of whether or not the Wii somehow destroys gaming. I think you can rest easy.

 That's in famousringo's sig. Once again, the man manages to contain more wisdom in a short sentence than I can in a book.

The 360 was and still is very successful software wise. It practically gets a new million seller every week, and broke new grounds for several franchises (Call of Duty, Tom Clancy, Fight Night, Elder Scrolls).

As for the DS, I can't believe you just said what you did. Are you seriously implying that the majority of the games on the DS aren't casual? As if we could even define the word these days, it really doesn't take much to look at a game like Imagine: Babies and see the kind of things developers have in mind for the DS. Hell, for every The World Ends With You, we're getting 20 puppy games. And the trend has already shown itself in the Wii, just look at some of the games that came out during holiday season 2007.

Anyways, the HD consoles aren't dead, nor will their games change. The PSP is getting beaten by the DS and its casual strategy, but we still don't see many of the games on the PSP as we see on the DS. And since the software sales for the HD consoles are much better than the PSP, I think that hardcore games will be safe, at least for this generation.

Hopefully Microsoft and Sony can find a way to make improvements in their next consoles that don't involve absurd development costs.

Your definition of "downfall" is your downfall.

Its the classic reason why "win" & "lose" cannot be easily applied to the games industry - it just doesn't make sense.

Just because the 360/PS3 are NOT outselling the Wii, does NOT imply downfall. 

I think the current sales levels make perfect (common) sense - the Wii is simply a console designed to appeal to non-gamers, hence it has a much larger potential sales market. Note that it happens to ALSO appeal to (some) gamers - but big deal.

(Do I enjoy seeing the really good games NOT come to the Wii? Hell no!) 

End of story. 

Why would anyone enjoy seeing the downfall of any console. That whole console wars thing is silly. I just like being right on who is going to sale more given a certain market, trends, ect. But it's never anything personal just something I enjoy predicting. I like all 3 consoles and want all to be successful. Seriously people take all that stuff way too far just like PS2 fans did last generation.

I prefer to see gaming companies have more success than gaming divisions.

So yeah, I'm enjoying it.

But I also like to watch fresh butt-naked ideas have more success than old ideas with fresh clothes on.

So I'm enjoying it on two fronts.

Don't worry though.  You'll still have video games and fun and whatever else you like.  It's not the end of the world.  For 3 more days.

as a wii owner, obviously i'd like ps3/360 to fail so that they can stop making all those FPS's and so-called "epic" RPGs or things like GTA and have developers focus and put more resources into other kind of games that i actually have a chance of liking.

it's the same reason why guys like Kwaad wants the wii to fail. simply put, it's a threat to what you like.

of course, i wouldn't mind if the market expands sufficiently that the resources going into the development of the category of games i don't like is but a fraction of resources going into development of the kind of games/software/edutainment that i enjoy.

No. I don't enjoy seeing the high def systems fail. The attitudes that those two companies have towards Nintendo make it not nearly as depressing as it should be though. They both dismissed the Wii entirely and made statements basically saying that it would be Nintendo's final system. The Wii remote was looked at as a gimmick until it was seen that it actually would work. Statements like Nintendo's bringing back the Power Glove were being made. Sony had the attitude that they ruled the world and that everybody would run out to buy there system regarless of the price or the lack of games for it when it was launched. All of this said, I suppose that I'm happy that Sony and Microsoft got a wake up call. I don't want them to fail. Also to touch on another point tha the OP made; the Wii is not going to destroy gaming as we know it. The "fad" of SO MANY high budget FPS games will end though.

 Yeah, but having a non-game do the job just makes it so much more funny...