If they release too many core games at once they start going into competition with themselves. I'm sure a lot of their games are already very near complete and are simply charting release dates to make them most effective saleswise.

Why come out with a Mario game and a kid icarus game when mario will cause KI to lose sales.

besides nintendo announced before TGS how many core exclusive games for wii and mostly new IPs that will be released next year? 6? 8?

Like some people said before it could be they prefer quality over quantity such as Blizzard Entertainment. Could Blizzard crank out 2-5 games a year? Probably... However, their reputation for high quality games would definitely come under attack.

I'm sorry but are you supporting me or arguing against me i'm confused ...

I stopped reading the second someone said Ubisoft made great games.

Sorry but I have to disagree with this statement , everyone would have argued the PS3 was sure to suceed based on the PS2's sucess in comparison to it's competiton but what everyone didn't anticipate was a change in the competition's strategy , Sony's success last gen was the main cause of their faliures this generation.

This generation will serve as a learning oportunity for Sony and MS in the same way that MS & GC learnt a lesson last gen ( obviously MS didn't learn as much as Nintendo) . Sony has far more development resources than Nintendo and even if they're aim isn't as good as Nintys when it comes to targeting this new demographic , they have a shit load of fire power.

Nintendo did what everyone least expected to do when the GC didn't suceed much , why would Sony do what everyone expects them to do when the PS3 isn't suceeding much ? it's ironic.

because one team is making a lot more games then just one

They always produce the highest quality titles that are ready, plus it is One Developer (i know it has loads of studios) . They have a lot of projects going at this same time, plus the DS games.


listed games are from 3rd parties etc. that only concentrate on few titles and those are their big titles that such most time and money.

The PS3 didn't fail because of the PS2's success, it failed because it overshot the market. They just kept with the incrementing of graphics (PS1 -> PS2 -> PS3), but it didn't work this gen because the PS2's graphics are good enough.

It doesn't matter what MS / Sony has learned this gen if they can't come up with anything new. Look at it this way - even if Nintendo knew they needed a disruptive console to stop Sony from dominating in the PS2 era, there wasn't much they could do until this gen. Since customers were still satisfied with just an upgrade in graphics (PS1 -> PS2), Nintendo was forced to do the same. It was only this gen where graphics no longer mattered, and only Nintendo picked up on it.

The Wii wasn't proof that anybody has a shot at #1, it only proved that disruptive consoles do. If you disagree with the statement, does that mean you think a PS4 that's essentially a stronger PS3 with Wii controls tacked on has a shot at retaking the lead? They need more than that to dethrone Nintendo. You even say yourself, Sony would have to do something unexpected. The problem is, it isn't easy coming up with something new like the Wii.

I stopped reading when the op said the leo j had a point.Anyway who cares how much they take most of the games they make are awesome and have a great impact sales wise and on quality.