@Disolitude: You came here to annoy, that's it, you didnt answer the OP as of late, you were just bashing Wii games, calling the console kiddy.

That's what you get when you flamebait.

PS: Checking through your post history, well, all I can say is that you are really the worst Wii hater around, anytime on any thread there's a reason for you to bash Wii or Nintendo. You get what you give.

 And you came here 10 minutes ago...what would you know?

Ive been reading this thread since yesterday, and the only troll around here is you, I felt I had to respond to your bashing.

Well I'm glad that my posts brought out Nintendo defense force in full strength.

I actually think that the arguments with disolitude have started to shed light on why some core gamers would choose a PS3/XBox 360 over the Wii while others would choose the Wii over the PS3/XBox 360 ... The issue is where you see the substance of the game.

Some people see the substance of a videogame in the core gameplay mechanics and the story line, characters and production value are secondary to really good (and new) gameplay; for other people it is the complete opposite. What this means is that people like myself (who are very gameplay focused) will see two FPS games as being virtually identical even though one takes place on a futuristic hoop world and another is a modern war simulation; in contrast someone like disolitude may see two very different games (Super Mario Galaxy and Mario Party) as being virtually identical even though they share absolutely no gameplay mechanics.

So you were flamebaiting after all?

You are by far the smartest person on this thread.

Lets take 2 FPS games. FEAR and Timeshift. Both are tactical shooters both control the same and have similar indoor game design and both have the ability to slowdown time. To you these 2 games are probably identical. However to me FEAR is amazing and Timeshift is garbage There are some gameplay diffferences but the reason why FEAR is so much better to me is because of the horror vibe, story and production.

I've played a lot of videogames and seen lots of game mechanics come and go...what I look for these days are different ways to replay the same gameplay styles I've played for decades. This is accomplished with better production, different (previously uncharted) waters in gaming when it comes to presentation, story and atmosphere.

To me Nintendo fails on all those counts as I see their games exactly the same on those levels. I don't care if there is a new gaming mechanic in Mario Galaxy...I'm still saving the stupid princess, collecting stars and yelling "YAH" every time I jump... I see it as a gimmic thats there to make me replay the same stupid game again.

Like I enjoy their titles for 20-30 minutes at a time every couple of weeks...but I havent been able to lose myself in a nintnedo designed game since perfect dark.

Well, that's your opinion and you are entitled to it, no one will disrupt your game tastes.
But you shouldn't come up with garbage about all Nintendo games being on rail platform games or all appealing to kiddies, cause thats just not true.
And that will upset people, cause your generalizing.

In fact I dont see all FPS like the same games, I like the genre. Although releasing so many one after the other will saturate the market, therefore people will look for something different. Wii is something different, Nintendo as a developer is unique, and that's how Nintendo console owners feel.

We still don't know anything about Wii's future so it's too early to talk, maybe you will cahnge your mind about Nintendo after E3, maybe not.

Sorry if I'm late to the party but I've been writing for a few hours and I've read all the posts and I still will have to disagree with you my friend although in the past I have often agreed. First I think your genre definitions are way too narrow. If you go through my game library I like and have owned and played many racing games, Auto Modellista, Colin McRae Rally, Ridge Racer and every version of Need for Speed and Burnout. But Mario Karts (all version) have alwaysbeen my favorite RACING games. If you want to call them something else be my guest. Call them a prune danish and it won't take away one bit of my enjoyment or their popularity.

But now, the definition of Cutting Edge,is being in the forefront of progress and innovation in its area and then Merriam Webster defines innovation as 1 : the introduction of something new 2 : a new idea, method, or device : novelty

I have seen a lot of nice refinement (higher resolution) more shading, better light effects but none of these qualify as anything new. They are later improved version of things that already existed. In fact I have only seen two examples of true innovation, something completely NEW and that is the Wiimote as a device and motion control as a method and the balance board as a device and Wii Fit as a method.

I exclude the DS since it just added a second screen.

You are welcome to disagree but I have so far seen nothing new from either Sony or Microsoft and quite frankly I found that surprising and rather disappointing. I remember that E3 when I first realized that the PS3 was predictably going for better graphics and that was all, I kept waiting for the other shoe but it never fell.

eyetoy too name something, but at least Sony doesnt force it upon us.

Its true that in the last 10 years games havent changed much, but changing a controller doesnt change 1 thing.

All big nintendo ips are very similar to the GCN ones.
Wii fit and sports and just really shallow and simple games, but if you call this innovation i rather do without it.