Your sarcasm detector is broken, Viper.

 Care to explain how that's possible?

Pardon me if its been mentioned already... but did anyone esle completely disregard the article after the "Guitar Hero III, Sega of America's Mario and Sonic: Olympic Games, and TTWO's Carnival Games are the only third-party Wii games that have sold more than 1 million units to-date according to NPD" line?

what about RE4, or RE:UC, Red Steel, both RRR games!?!? The are more than 3 Million selling 3rd party titles, for them to write that shows their ignorance to the specifics. Even if they are just reffering to america, the number of million sellers from ALL platforms will drop pretty significantly. And IMO, to focus on one territory like that when publishers love money from all territories is pretty silly. also...

"Considering the great reviews in addition to the hype this game received for its connection to Spielberg, we are more than surprised by this lackluster performance."

Where the hell was i when this "boom blox hype" hit!?!?! All i remember is "heh, looks cool... wont sell at all..." or "why the hell is spielberg making THIS game..."

SaviorX said:

"Care to explain how that's possible?"

Didn't I already? I went into great length in my post. Epic's entire business model is built around cutting edge technology; their games partly or largely sell on their graphics/tech, and Epic literally sells technology, in the form of the UE3 engine. The Wii challenges the notion that graphics/tech are relevant to video games. Therefore, the Wii directly challenges Epic's business philosophy.

Here's another example: it's clear that performance cars are in decline. Especially in the recent past as gas prices have risen astromically, people have become increasingly concerned with reliability and efficiency. Car size, top speed, and acceleration aren't as important to consumers any more; therefore, SUVs have stopped selling as well, and muscle cars like the Mustang are almost non existant. Companies like Toyota (that have always emphasized reliability and efficiency) are flourishing, while companies that have built their company around performance and power are struggling (American car manufacturers have literally bled billions of dollars in the last couple of years).

Again, Epic has placed value in performance. That's a core part of their business. Now, the Wii is challenging the notion that tech performance is relevant to selling games -- this explains why Mark Rein has consistently been so hostile towards the Wii when questioned about it in the press.

 They can't make good games without the crutch of better graphics seems to be the  suggestion.

Which... if that's the truth about most of the videogame market.... that's just freakin depressing. 

It's not a crutch, Kasz, it's a different set of emphases.

Again, I think muscle cars are a great example. Is the extra acceleration and top speed of a Pontiac GTO a "crutch"? No, it's just a different set of priorities for what the car should be, and clearly some people prefer those priorities. 

 @naznatips

I didn't know you liked Star Ocean.  I am waiting for SO4 as well.

EA should have marketed the game to a wider demographic, it would have sold better. 

That third parties are having a hard time on Nintendo Wii is actually a consequence from the SNES/Genesis era and the generations after it. The culprits are ALL console and game developers. They lead gaming to a dangerous point. No, this is not to criticize PS360, but game development and marketting resulted in previous generations.

Starting from the SNES era, the market who buys the games became "core gamers", people who love to play games as much as they want. This market got so known that game design, development and marketing bacame so much easier to the point to make the game a success is to let "core gamers" know that their game was better than the rest, that it stands out. This is not wrong or a sing of failure, because if you keep gamers happy, they will buy your games.

In the world of gaming all was well (aparently) until Nintendo found out the real problem, and with the DS and the Wii they actually revealed that problem to the public. And no matter how hard or loud fanboy hardcore gamers shout that this is a big lie. Wii' sales numbers and third party sales numbers on that console are the solid evidence no one can deny/

What is this evidence? Market segmentation

The first segmentation was gamers and non-gamers. Since the SNES/Genesis era, developers were making more and more games for gamers and less games for non-gamers, so they got specialized in that part. But then, games like Mortal Kombat (which is an awesome game) caused a games' age ranking, which make things a lot worse. A segmentation inside a segmentation made game companies change focus on the new segments they found to be the most "profitable" one. Companies segentaded themselves to cater these new audiences in age groups developing games.

This was the evidence that we never saw until the Nintendo DS and the Wii cameinto the picture... when you segmentate a market too much, you specialize to the point of enclosing yourself and be trapped inside the cage you built without knowing... This proves how Epic games, who developed GoW1/2 and UT3, are after a segment inside a segment of the market: mature core gamers, can't understand other segments (age groups) within the same core market properly, how can they possibly understand the other market the Wii showed?

Third party companies are treating the new market the same way they were treating the old for years as a resut of their years of experience. But in the new market they're blind to see what the non gamers really want from a game. This in result gives what a picture in Malstrom's birdmen article express better

Third party games that don't understand the new market will make plastic dog-like games (casual or hardcore) and when they see that their games don't sell, they blame it on Nintendo with arrogance instead of being humble and accept that they need to study this new market properly before releasing a game that WILL sell. For example: games for everyone and games for different age groups can be confusing, but if you understand that if you make mature (age 17+) for core gamers and expand to mature non-gamers, it's a WIN opportunity.

and don't get me started on marketting a game for non-gamer.... 

The game industry can't erase the age group segmentation, but they can tear down the non-gamer Vs core-gamer wall.

And this is from developers part.... the publishers are another who don't understand the wii market either. They were responsible for making games like Zack and Wiki and No More Heroes flop. They don't know how to market a Wii game becuase marketting a game for non gamers is different from maleketing it for gamers. And they become arrogant with excuses that they don't buy the games instead of admiting their mistake and study. 

Look, Wii 1st party games dont sell magically. Wii Fit, Wii Play, Wii itself all had great ad campaigns. Do you still think people would have bought Wii Fit if it wasn't advertised?

People you make laugh sometimes.

 I agree.