You clearly also do not understand it at all.

I do apologise. I quickly read the article and thought that you had written the comments. Unfortunately it wasn't until people had had a chance to reply that I noticed :)

Ah, Until the end I know what he mean and is not pretty.

A few of things Nintendo did:

• Announced a console that was technically inferior with a new simplified control method, designed to make gaming more assessible to non-gamers;
• Spoke at every opportunity of strategically targetting non-gamers, designing games for them, and how the controller was beneficial for non-gamers;
• Launched the console with its key game a simple, mini-game collection with last generation graphics and a simplistic control method;
• The success of the DS itself was built around expanding markets with simple games designed for non-gamers or very casual gamers. The Wii was designed as the console equivalent;

At the end of the day, Nintendo designed a console to appeal to non-gamers and they achieved their aim. They designed a fantastically simple title to bundle with the console and it proved a big success. They released games like Wario, Wii Play and Wii Fit that appeal to the very casual set. Everything about the console is designed to reach the maximum possible audience and yet when other developers go down that route its apparently bad. Sure Ubisoft is designing games for the lowest common denominator but Nintendo designed a console to appeal to those same people. If you design a console to appeal to those that are non-discrimminating against the quality of software then surely you would expect an unusually high proportion of poor games to be released? That is logical. The only absurd thing Ubisoft did was announce that that was their strategy.

 Quite simply the success of the Nintendo's strategy encourages simple and badly designed games. What we are witnessing with Ubisoft is the one clear downside of expanding the market to non-gamers. The interesting thing of course is that Ubisofts strategy clearly suggests that its more profitable for developers to make rubbish games than try hard, which is counter-intuitive (and why no one on here would dare believe it).

And for the record I don't like what Ubisoft is doing, I only play good games and therefore I believe Ubisoft is wasting resources that could be used to make great games. That said, I do recall saying that it was a logical and rational move given what is occurring in the market.

Malstrom is quite right, but this also means that there's very little hope Ubisoft will get a clue about Wii, at least for the next months to come. Perhaps, after a Christmas of huge missed earnings, they'll try to understand it better.

First of all, I edited that comment when you clarified what you did.

Second, Nintendo's strategy does not really encourage that. It's just interpreted that way. And even if there is a profit in those games, it's short term, while sacrificing quality in the eyes of their intended demographic.

If Chuzzle, Bejeweled, and Dr. Mario were glitchy eyesores, I don't think my mother would play them. Non gamers get into gaming when they find games they enjoy. Shoddy games will just drive them away. That is not Nintendo's plan, and I really hope ubisoft gets away from it soon.

Nintendo intends to get new gamers in and make them stay. Ubisoft should follow that pattern, because it helps them in the long run. Cheap shovelware games are just that, cheap shovelware. They'll rarely flop, but they rarely sell that well. So again, it's short term gain at the cost of long term customers.

@ Picko Please read the article in my sig. You really need to.

Err... "non-discriminating against the quality of software"? Just because you have been gaming longer doesn't mean that someone who doesn't can't distinguish between something that's decent and something that doesn't have any efforts put into it. Ubisoft announcing their strategy isn't the only absurb thing here, but the elitist tone that certain long-time gamers have also is.

The only disadvantage that the "casual" gamers have is that they are less-informed on the quality of a certain games. Plus, their difference in taste compared to a more avid gamers often leave the latter to believe that any type of cheap games will do for them.

Personally, I see the arrogance of core gamers and the arrogance of developers that believe true gaming is what core gamers like are the problems.

Picko, what you fail to grasp is that none of those Nintendo games are for casuals alone. Those games are for everybody. Core gamers (not necessarily all of them) can have a fun time with Wii Sports, Wii Play, Wario Ware, Wii Fit, and Mario Party 8. Tons of core gamers on this very site own and enjoy these games. Nintendo doesn't try to make games for 5 year olds, they make games for everybody, including 5 year olds.

Ubisoft's 'Z' games aren't for everybody. They're targeting isolated demographics, like 5 year olds. Almost nobody who would buy these games is a core gamer. RRR3 has some appeal for the core gamer, but being the third game in its franchise in less than two years, the series has kind of worn out its welcome with the core crowd. All other Ubisoft titles on Wii suffer from a real or perceived lack of quality.

Every Nintendo title has a measure of appeal to the core gamer. Ubisoft could not be further from offering this core appeal on the Wii without abandoning the platform altogether. That's why the core Wii crowd is pissed at them.

It's still amazing the number of people trying to give Ubisoft business lessons a few month after the company just had its best yearly profit in its history.

Whatever you may think, so far what Ubisoft has been doing has been working very well for the company....

I can understand not liking what they are doing, but trying to argue it's bad for their business clearly doesn't match the facts.... 

And when most developers act the same way as Ubisoft and you see rabid Wii fans complaining about it you have two choices :

- about every executive holding a position in a gaming development company is wrong

- maybe the week-ends CEO and CFO we have posting on this site aren't as qualified as they would like to think they are and maybe those developers have valid reasons for not massively migrating to the Wii....