KH 3 on Wii, depends upon how well DQ:Swords does.
Heck, Square might pull a goofy from the hat with KH 3 on the DS.

Well that's actually one of my major points of disagreements with him.  I don't think it's been started.  I think the only thing that's been started is Knight's Story, and this is being held off on until later in the generation to scope out the status.  I agree that there is always the chance of it being on DS, but I think a game like that is more likely on a home console.

KH3 = Wii/PS3 (Wii because it'll sell best there, PS3 because KH started on PS)

KS = PS3.

Kingdom Hearts 3 should be on the Wii...cause thats where the profit is at.....and the other game i dont know about....

As a gamer I'd just like to see it go to the system that could provide the best gaming experience given the possible choices. It's just too bad that the fanboy in some people make them want to have *every* game on their system even if it would likely be a better experience on another.

As for those talking about profit and that should be the reason it goes to the Wii, I'm curious, when you heard Resident Evil 4 was originally going to be a Gamecube exclusive did you argue instead that it should go to the PS2 because that's where the profits were?  If you didn't argue that then maybe you're a fanboy since that's basically what you're doing now.

But see, now you are applying your opinion to it. Honestly, I think it's a much better gaming experience to have motion controls than slightly smoother shading on Sora's shoes, but our opinions don't REALLY matter. I think most people here have admitted that as long as development wasn't started a year ago or more, by far the most logical choice from a developer standpoint is the Wii. You are being very hypocritical when you talk about fanboys wanting every game. You just dislike the Wii, so you search for topics to attack it's game library with.

As far as RE4, no I wasn't surprised at all that it went to the PS2. I wonder why? Oh yeah, because that's where profits are. That's why 70% of all games released last generation were on the PS2. It doesn't take a genius to see the basic demographics and profit opportunities available on each system. You seem to like attacking people for acting the way you do on every topic you visit, and when you fail to prove your point you call people who disproved you fanboys. It's getting annoying.

Well at least you are not a fanboy. Obviously if you are a gamer, you want every game available to be on your console of choice. If you call that fanboyism, well I guess I am a fanboy. I like to play games. Why in the world would I want to buy 20 consoles to play every game when I could have one?

Also why do you think everybody here that has a Wii had a gamecube before. I previously had a PS2

Your logic is also week. The thing is the people who say that they think games will be on Wii is because it is more profitable for the developer. You have acutely managed to avert the question and come up with a different question yourself, trying to tie it to fanboyism. Kinda strange. I for one couldnt connect the dots. You might want to help me out here.

edit: wow didnt realize so many people had already responded.  

No I definitely think Blue Dragon looks a lot better, you don't. The Blue Dragon environments look as bland as Pokemon Battle ones when in battle mode. Normally there is a lot more detail while exploring.

It's harder to point out how a game with this kind of style is graphically better on one console over the other so that's why you can somehow think that Pokemon Battle looks better than Blue Dragon.

PS: Your argument about no detail on the ground is debunked because as you can see in some places there is detail. Of course when they are on the beach you are gonna see sand not designs on the ground :P so how is it fair to compare a sand surface to a design on the floor of an arena in Pokemon? 

This entire thread is based on people's opinions and yes people are allowed to have opinions that differ from yours so accept it and just move on.

Of course people's opinions do, I'm trying to express logical points to enforce my opinion, but you openly admitted you think it will be on the PS3 or 360 because you want it to be, no other reason. 

As for your post ckmlb, in my opinion it looks signifficnatly worse than SSBB and somewhat worse than pokemon (though again, both of these games use a style that makes it easier for the graphics to look better).  So our opinions will obviously continue to differ on the subject.  But this isn't really what this topic is (or at least was ) about.  What it's about is the location of these games, and the reasons for their location.  I fail to see any purpose in continuing discussions on individual graphics here.

I believe KH3 will be on the Wii because it matches the demographic, uses an art style that will not be harmed by the Wii's hardware limitations (and can't be improved on a whole lot more on the other systems), has cheap development costs, and a large user base.

I believe Knight's Story will be on the PS3 because it matches the demographic, uses more advanced less cartooney graphical techniques (at least in the trailer), and uses darker themes.  It seems to me that this is the perfect method for Square Enix to expand their profits in the KH series.