madskillz, you just changed your argument from "wii has only shovelware" to the tired and false "3d parties doesn't sell on the wii" rant. And the "I do like the wii blah blah blah BUT.." argument makes me think that in reality you don't have a wii and that actually you're a HD fanboy disguising the truth.

The only ones to blame for bad support on the wii are the 3d parties. Period. Blaming Nintendo is idiotic, immature and just plain ignorant.

Mature games don't sell on the wii?! Nu-huh. More correctly will be "BAD Mature games don't sell on the wii". an example, Call of duty was dumbed down because again, 3d parties treats wii owners like if they were retarded or worst. Forget the tech capabilities. The main concern was the lack of content. And don't tell me that Wii can't handle it. If the Gamecube and the PS2 could I don't see why the Wii cannot.

I am tired of these kind of arguments. Think whatever you want. REALITY, is way much different.

No, I didn't change my argument. You never responded to my question - and then others were encouraged not to touch it.

The topic is making the Wii the lead platform for third-parties and all of my posts are reflecting that.

As far as your comment, funny you'd say I don't own a Wii. I review games - and have every console and a DS. I bought it to flip - played WiiSports and enjoyed it.

Did I ever blame Ninny once? Proof, link? Did you not look at the sales figures? Those figures will make it a hard sell to justify the Wii is a 3rd-party monster when 14 of the top 20 titles are - gasp - FIRST-PARTY. You can slap Mario on anything and folks will buy it. And ... correct me if I am wrong, but a vast majority of those games require more than one person to play - with Wii Fit being the only one - and then, you can buy a second board.

Dude, whether you like it or not, I am staying topic and just shooting holes through the lead platform argument. Doesn't mean that I don't like my Wii - I think it's awesome - but when folks wanna blast fools into pieces, they turn to Gears or COD.

EDIT: Here's my old gaming setup from Nov. 07 - a year ago.

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/post.php?id=292075

and my current games - in 3 rooms:

Wii, PS3, HD DVR and HD DVD player:

What about profits on the Wii side if it tanks? If the game is not selling, it's not selling.

You tout an old game - RE4 - that sold well. You should see that as an insult more than anything. So, with this system selling so many first-party games, and an old game is in the top 20 - when other FPS aren't even close? Dang ... I'm speechless.

The more folks understand a system, the quicker it becomes to develop for it and guess what? $$$ and profit.

R* are overgrown frat boys who were acting like drunken sailors with their money. And T2 let them. You should see some of the swag they send out. It's insane.

They live large - and they're paying for it. They could care less - they'll sell even more copies of GTA IV this holiday - and when the DLC comes out folks will snag it - used but could get a new copy for much cheaper.

You say that you are looking at what games that sells on Wii and then you only look at the top 20, I call that bull. First, Resident Evil 4: Wii Edition and Game Party will fall of the list and Wii Music, Animal Crossing: City Folk will take their place, which means that there will be two less third party games in top 20 (that would be 4 third party games in Wii top-20 left).

Does that mean those two third party games did bad or that third party games don't sell on Wii? The answer is no! That just means that top 10 on Wii will be a impenetrable block of games, all from or at least related to Nintendo, at very high numbers. To be on top 10 a third party game would soon have to sell 4-5m to get there. A higher limit then Xbox 360.

For a new third party game to come between 11 and 20, it has to sell over 1.60m (soon 1.75m). Granted, lower number then Xbox 360 has, but that does not mean that a game that sells less then 1.60m is doing bad. If we look on all gathered data of all Nintendo consoles, we see a similar pattern. That does not mean that third party sells bad at all. Just look at how the Wii top-50 is on it's way to be a place for games over 1m, only.

Non of the Resident Evil titles are FPS. If a third party game had to be on top-20 to be significant in any way, it would mean that the console would not be sustainable for a lot of games. You can't see a Call of Duty game in top-20 on Wii? me neither, not even on top-50. Maybe Europe numbers of Call of Duty 3 and the so far steady sales of Call of Duty: World at War can put Call of Duty higher up. But at the same time, if 18-21 FPS games of around 30 can't even reach 1m on Xbox 360 (list), how is 7-8 FPS games on Wii ever going to manage?

On the FPS part, both Wii and Xbox 360 lacks lot of Others numbers, but if I'm still wrong in anyway, tell me.

Several game game developers take pride in what they make. Sure its also about money, but they also want to have the best graphics, the coolest content and mature themes that attract an older fan base. All this is heavily restricted by the Wii. Its just not fun. The only advantage the Wii has is its ingenious controls. Ill give Nintendo props for that, but imagine what the same controls could on the HD consoles.

A bit of a rewrite to cover how I feel about what you wrote.

Im just saying from a developers perspective its not as fun making games for the limited hardware on the Wii.  Sure its simpler but its also restricted.  Most developing staff I imagine are hardcore tech junkies. They want to be on the cutting edge of the gaming industry and push the envelope graphically and with gaming physics.

I think the Wii doesnt offer so much to game developers.  Plus they cant expect to make as much money on the Wii.  Wii first party games steal their sales. The 3rd party developers are left wondering why they cant compete with those games even though nintendo encourages them to try and do so.  However, some developers still try.  Though they have better success on the other platfroms.

Most developers just aren't very good, they can't produce games that can compete on the Wii, look at some of the million seller games that are on Wii, Mario Kart, Galaxy, Zelda, Metroid, RE4; all quality games, and most developers just aren't that good, they can't compete with the big names on the Wii so they create shovelware instead, and stick to the kiddie pools of the PS3 and the 360

Yes, some people don't like or wants to work with the limits of Wii. But with Wii Remote, Wii Balance Board and soon Motion+, working with games for PS3 and Xbox 360 gets more and more limited against Wii. There is still room for better looking games on Wii, so it ain't that bad there either.

Developers can't be expected to make as much money on Wii you say? I don't agree. But you have some points. Look at the FPS games sold on Xbox 360, a few of them does really good, but most of them don't. Core games on Wii might not make as much money on Wii as the top level 2.5-8m games on Xbox 360, but core games can sell good on Wii and should have lower budgets which should mean profit at anything from much to little lower gamesales then possible on Xbox 360. If a game on Wii would sells as much or close as a Xbox 360 game, it should mean more profit for the Wii game compared to the Xbox 360 game.

If publishers are interested in money (which is debateable considering all the layoffs of western devs) they need to develop and design for the #1 platform, then port to the 2nd and 3rd platforms.

All the problems PS3 has accepting 360 ports?  Those would be gone if they were Wii ports.