Actually, if you've studied the mechanics of the Pokemon battle system, you'll find that it's so unbelievably complex (do IVs, EVs, abilities, and nature mean anything to you?), I think that the next generation will only be fully playable by OCD players.  That, it seems, is the true appeal of the main Pokemon RPGs: The "casual" players who are just looking for an RPG fix can just play the singleplayer game, while the "hardcore" players can get into team planning and multiplayer battles (believe me, I got sucked into it for awhile before the depth overwhelmed me).  Basically, there's something for everyone, with depth that can be found as far as they are willing to look for it.

2004  saw the release of Half-Life 2, Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, Halo 2, Unreal Tournament 2004, Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell Pandora Tomorow, Metroid Prime 2: Echoes, World of Warcraft, Metal Gear Solid 3, Far Cry, Doom 3 and many more games ...

Every few years (typically a middle year in a console generation) there seems to be a clustering effect where enough good games are delayed from previous years, and the good games expected for that year are released on schedule, and the year seems like an amazing celebration of gaming. Every time it happens it seems a little smaller and less special than the time before it partially because gamers are getting spoiled by the high quality of most games, and partially because these games seem to be spread over more and more platforms (If there were 4 amazing exclusives released for the PC, XBox 360, PS3, PSP, Wii and Nintendo DS this year how may would the typical gamer have access to?).

Too many crap third party titles are landing on the Wii. Quality of games is a lot more important than quantity.

As long as gamers continue to support Core titles, the companies will continue to develope them.

(and DON'T forget that many of the current 'Casual' gamers, will grow into Core ones in the future! So it's good for the industry, stop whining)

Agreed, though it can be said that at this stage of the game, Wii is having a similar growth pattern to the PS2. Lots of crap was put out for it alongside fewer AAA titles. They existed, and eventually became more common into years 4 and 5. Considering Wii isnt even at year 2 yet, it's to be expected that there's going to be a lot of lazy development. It happened with the PS2, so no reason it wouldn't also happen to the Wii. Just like the PS2, the Wii library will recover nicely.

wow what a whinner. seriously there are more than enough games out there that he will like that he can possibly play. Yet he makes a huge article just dissing games that apparantly millions of other poeple like to play

if i were to picture this guy i woudl see him sitting there on his fat ass, with greasy hair not showered and whooting and holloring at how awesome he is at COD4 or Halo 3.

Oh I'm sorry are you not able to play your 5 hours of games a day because your running out of high quality games. And these so called perfect 10 games you have that you give lasting appeal 10 that you say you can play forever.

People like him are retarded and dispicable. and anyone applauding him is also a selfish bastard as well.

Perhaps you are correct about it being anomalous or the fact that there are more gaming platforms. However, I have to point out the fact that you listed almost no original titles. Most quality hardcore games are merely sequels now and that's not a good thing for people who have been gaming for a long time. Maybe I'm just a pessimist.

I play as you would call harcore games and not casuals. And I'm even scared to jump into a game called MGS4 (just example, not saying I am) because of the fact it says 4.

I haven't played the first 3 at all, and for new gamers they probably haven't even heard of the first 3. This is gonna scare them away from the game, even if the game doesn't rely on past games for story.

Yet then they see a Zelda or Mario game. There is no number just a new title. yes it is not a new ip or anything and mario always sells you will say. But still it is a better strategy imo. You don't feel like your missing anything and not scared of being lost.

Having read through those comments in that page, it's pleasing that the respondents aren't unanimously showing "needless fear" at the market shift the Wii is causing. As for the Best Buy employee... who are you to tell the customer what to like!

You've definitely got a point about sequels. I do, however, have to point out that not all sequels are automatically soul-less cash-ins, or clones of their predecessors. The clearest examples I can think of are from Nintendo: while the genre is usually the same, Mario, Metroid, and (usually) Zelda all deliberately have different "gimmicks" that try to freshen the series up a bit. Ocarina and Majora's Mask may have been released two years apart, but they are radically different games, for example. Resident Evil 4 is another prime example. So I have no objection to sequels per se, so long as they do something to differentiate themselves enough to keep the gameplay interesting.