It will be notable for the rerelease of the NES.

Greenmedic,

It is easier to focus onthe crappy shovelware games of different systems you do not own. Last gen the PS2 was the shovelware king and then gen before that it was the PS1. Nintendos hardcore strategy is eventually one that ruined them with the third parties. It was neccesary for the NES because it came after the crash. So let's take a look at that.

In 1983 if you bought a game it may have been fun and you might of enjoyed it but then you went to buy another game from the countless and confusing lists of games being released by anybody only to find that it was the exact same game you woned before but sucked more. There was no control or quality assurances. ANy number of games had game ending bugs that would make it impossible to continue on in that game. It happens much less now and when it does it is all over the press.

With the NES Nintendo said developers could only release 5 games a year per studio so many companies created other studios like Ultra to produce more titles but that took time and investment so they had to think harder about wanting to produce those extra games. Games had to get a certifiaction and meet certain requirements with regards to techincal(Title safe areas and such not graphics), bugs, and so forth. This meant that while crappy games were still being made they were less in percentage than in 83. This is still the case today with the exception of the studio limit and not being able to produce games on competing systems.

When Sony released the Playstation Sony offered a relaxation on these rules that dragged in 3rd parties and increased shovelware but it also increased the number of good to great games on their system. The thing is if you owned a PS1 and PS2 you went right by the shovelware and got the games you wanted leaving that stuff to misguided parents to buy. The DS also has a ton of shovelware as well. In contrast the N64/GC/XBOX had comparatively less shovelware they still had it but it was less in the number of games because the market size was unable to support it.

Today with the Wii we have a rocketing market share and base. We have a bunch of developers who do not know how to target the demographics or thin in terms of how a Wii game is to be made. So they do what any person would do before swimming dangle their foot in the water to see what the temperture is. They make crappy PS2 ports and rip offs of Nintendos own games. Some succeed most fail and hence the Wii is all shovelware. Already this is being pulled back and HD ports are coming in as well as orginal third party exclusives are on their way. But even at its worse it was never 1983. If you are old enough to play games back then than you would know that.

I am sure grampy could I know I can. I can also say that even during the crash their were many great games that were being made and were fun. You just didn't have to stare at a wall of 800 games with crappy descriptions that had nothing to do with the game to sort through them to find them.

BTW I just wanted to add that if things didn't change we would of had a crash of 2012. As games became more narrow and parroted the top sellers with less and less variety to style and gameplay and nothing more tehn more of the same.
PS3 owners can look at LBP to see a new game that is unique(though it si like The Lost Vikings) but most games today are FPSs and Tomb Raider Clones Licensed games(King Kong anyone). Even RPGs are becoming more like FPSs...I like Fallout 3 and Oblivion and Mass Effect but they are only a step away from Bioshock. It si enough to satisify the Hardcore gamer now but even after 3 gens you will become bored with them.
If 3D hadn't come around during the PS1/Saturn/N64 era we may have seen anotehr crash but obviously it did and it opened new doors while the Hardcore gaming crowd moaned and whined about it. They grew up and filled into it like everyone will next gen. Some will leave some will stay more will come in and fill the gaps and perhaps even grow the market.

I agree with part of what you're saying, but you miss my point.  I played Boom Blox with family and friends last evening.  It's a great Wii game, and a good example at aiming at the casual audience.  But, weeks back I played something called, perhaps, 'Summer Games' at my in-laws.

The second title is aimed at a broader audience, and that is where its Wii merits end.  Unfortunately, it is not alone.  And, the number of these inferior titles are increasing on the system.  The danger I see is a historical one, as I stated, from the eighties.

Like the Wii today, the Atari 2600 and its games sold in great numbers.  Somewhere in its life-cycle developers misused the public's trust in what an Atari game was.  Shovelware was published left and right, eventually eroding consumer trust, and among other forces bringing the console to an ugly end.

Claiming that 'because a game sells well it is good' simply is not adequate.  And, unwillingness to fairly critique a title because it is 'casual' will be bad for all gamers in the long-term.

My point is that we need high quality games no matter what the console or audience.  Sub-standard software in the name of casualness (and publisher greed) will damage gaming.

But unwillingness to critique a game for what is is jsut as bad. If I were to review MGS4 as a Final Fantasy game it would get low ranks because that is not the type of game it is. Yet this is what is happening to casual games.

Shovelware happens on the leading platform pile and piles of shovelware. In the 80s you had the issue of no regulation no approval to publish on the platform. 80% of the games released were the same game somethign that is starting to happen on the HD consoles. The descriptions onthe back of the box had nothing to do with the game formany of them and the titles of the games were so similiar that people intending to buy one game would in fact be buying a crappy rip off game for the same price.

The console market literially was flooded with different consoles and clones of those consoles. The PC market was booming and providing competition. In fact todays HD consoles are chasing PCs again. I do believe that the industry was headed for another crash and it is was not because of the Wii. What you are describing was said about the PS1 way back when and look what happened.

I love the Wii hate, the bitter tears of the Wii haters taste so sweet.

Besides the more they hate, the more you know Wii is winning

I rather liked the article, if it matters.

The reactions to it are somewhat more troublesome.

Avinash_Tyagi, you are not helping.

How?

Why?

How does somebody making a game for girls alienate male 12 year olds aged 12-25?

I thought it was a great analogy.  Both involve an industry change that changed the skillset necessary to be a master.

Surgeons needed a new skill set to be the best surgeons.

Wii games need a new skill set to be the best gamers than traditional gamers.  Now you aim with IR instead of an analog stick and you swing with your whole arm instead of pressing a bunch of buttons.

In both cases the people with the old skill set are angry at the people with the new skill set AND angry at the industry for making their skill set obsolete.

In the case of the hardcore gamers, Nintendo has just showed them that the last 15 years in their mom's basement honing their 1337 skills was a waste of time, because now anybody can play games.  With one fell swoop Nintendo has just told them they wasted 15 years, and they're mad as hell and not gonna take it anymore!

So there are only rabid ninty-fanboys and hardcore bitter fanboy haters?

You don't see a possibility of a game critic actually being educated and informed before they write?

That's how film critics do it.  They actually go to school.