Did you mean that in about a year wii will have nearly the same amount sold as 360.. first week? That sounds possible. If you count wii WW sales and only others sales for 360 version.

 Actually thats the problem, Nintendo already knew this before, but 3rd parties didnt heer the warnings. Gamers dont care about a game being graphically extensive anymore, it already shows on sales and being mature games  only caters to one group of audience. Making it online makes it worse because gamers only play that game not want to play anything else till some new game came along. I've read a post that someone plays 4-6 hours a day, some are to extent till 8 hours. And thats the Wii version of COD: WAW what more with the PS360 version? The large install base proves that MS and SONY is in rickety slopes right now, its not that the games in PS360 versions sells on broad audience why it became always a million seller, it sells because it sells only in one group of people, same audience. What will happen if that group of people dont add up?

MS and SONY wants to fix this problem like Lips, Seen you at the Movies and LBP but it didnt do anything. Most of the gamers that plays the Ps360 are always play the same genres(shooters, RPGs,FPS, action games) the games are becoming fewer and fewer and the variety was shrinking. Most third parties are doing iterrations after itterations. And guess what? Ninty dont care about that, Wii can sell for itself and not because of the so called AAA games made by third parties, its not Nintendo needs third parties, third parties needs Nintendo and it seem they missed the boat. YEAH, even for a port COD: WAW was good even for the Wii, but sadly its not that kind of games that Wii is focused anymore. Not that Wii dont need core games, its that Wii dont need plenty of shooters and mature games. If Activision could create a game that can cater to hardcore and the casual and not the usual wii sports rip off crap. But seem Activision cant do that.

I reject your reasoning again, sir. I apologize. I may be doing that a lot?

Call of Duty is a tired series with a tired image, especially the World War II iterations. Youor idea of a proper core title is a multiplat for the most tired subgenre in the most tired genre in gaming today, when it has no splitscreen multiplayer for the one console where local multiplayer actually matters more than online? Really? You don't see the problem there?

Again: this is hamfisting it. Also: it is half-assing it. World at War is not a top-of-the-line product. It has nice production values, sure, but it is stale, it is a "seen it before" sort of thing, it is wose than the other versions of the game, the multiplayer is neutered, and I could have told you when it was announced that this was a bad idea.

You want a core game on the Wii that's substantially enhanced by the experience? Look at Resident Evil 4. Something like 1.5 million copies sold on a two-year-old port because it's the definitive version of the game substantially improved by being on the Wii.

Equating a rejection of World War II FPSes which are worse than what can be obtained on othr systems cannot be equated with a rejection of core games. To pretend so is lunacy, sir.

Since this is getting out of hand, Im posting my final remarks on this:

1) Dont believe Reggie, he is just a good speaker and a good businessman, he is the same Reggie that promotes Ubisoft games like Rayman raving rabbids and says Animal Crossing is a core game.

2) Our assumptions and fears about Wii and its games will end in 2009, third parties dont realized this but HD console audience are becoming smaller and Wii userbase is becoming bigger. It will happen in 2009 the October conference proves that there are more surprise awaits for us.

3) This is only 2 years of the system lifecycle, the games will improved overtime. We cant see it now because we're only seeing the negatives. Sooner or later even the casuals will be sick of same Wii Sports rip off.

No, it's you ignoring how Wii games have better legs than other games. And they didn't put at lot of copies of the Wii version in circulation, which creates artificial low sales.

Not following your logic here. Don't believe Reggie when he says that third parties aren't putting their best on the Wii yet, but that games will be coming down the line? How is that not something to believe?

On the other hand: Rayman Raving Rabbids is awesome and Animal Crossing is definitely a core game, one of the biggest timesinks in the history of consoles.

Compared to Gears of War 2 and the likes? YEP its not a core game. You can see the meltdown E3 had done on this board you should check it. And dont forget what Cammie says after E3, "just keep playing SSBB and Mario Kart" and with that Im off.

I dont want to entertain any comments anymore, I can feel the flame here this will not turned out good.

....You realize, of course, there is not one single metric for "core" games, right? I' consider Animal Crossing more core than Gears of War if only because Gears appeals to the super-casual Drunken Frat Dumb-Ass demographic that makes Halo so huge. They're super casual, you know.

for most games with higher requirements i could see where you're coming from, but wworld of goo it will run on most any pc made in the last 5 years. As such, it would be kind of silly to consider it an exclusive to a certain console when a much larger group of people have a PC capable of running it.

Damn, wtf happened to this thread? Yikes.

@yushire: Animal Crossing is a core game. I think it's now you who don't understand what core means.

@Ail: You're right about what the big publishers would like to do, but you're wrong about how they get there.
Wii, as the most popular platform, is important for the publishers in order to maintain the reputation of their big IP:s. If they keep on putting out half-assed ports of their HD games, the Wii owners see the IP:s as bad (think what happened to Sonic). Then, this is what gives a lot of room for the smaller publishers and their Wii specific games, that aren't half-assed.
If for example Conduit is successful and has quality, it may be the biggest shooter IP next gen.

@Esa-Petteri: Name fits btw.

Nintendo is remaking some GC titles, but the thing that is different, is that GC never sold in big numbers, so the remakes are more or less new games for most of the Wii owners, despite selling well on GC. And this is the difference; 3rd parties that put their cheap PS2 ports on Wii, are either putting out games that were on PS2 at the time and everyone who wants one, already has it or a straightforward port, that isn't using Wiis abilities at all (outside maybe adding "some" motion control for a gimmick, to get good ol' waggle out of it). So basically their idea would be to sell the game for the former GC owners, that own Wiis.

Since none of the remakes are out, it's hard to judge how they will be made.
In any case, it's a good way to offset the supposed lack of 3rd party core games on Wii.

And lastly, i didn't get the idea of your list for two reasons:
1. What difference does it make who the publisher is? "3rd parties" isn't an instance, but a number of them. We have atleast Nintendo, Sega, Ubisoft, Take Two and Capcom and EA having successful games on Wii, which apparently should mean, that publishers outside the ones mentioned, can't succeed.
Besides, you yourself made the whole "3rd party" -argument irrelevant by mentioning the genre and using SMG as an example for a genre that can sell.

2. Apparently your list was about games that already have a name and there have been put some effort to them. Which basically is the same thing with best selling PS360 games.