Eurogamer fails on all their articles. Very X360 biased. Never pay attention to them.

But.... Crazzyman told us all the PS3 was in CRISIS!

and that's why they're journalists, not economists

@Usul: People don't comment it for it not making any sense.
But if you want to:

1. We know from a lot of the reviews that AC (i assume it's the Wii version in question) is too similar with the GC version, so how is that "each day far away from its faithful niche". If we turn the comment to, for example, Halo 3, you propably get the point.

2. Niche. Considering the sales of life simulation games, ACWW, Sims etc., i'd hardly call the genre it's in a niche. That would be like calling GTA a niche. Also, Animal Crossing: Let's go to the City, is fourth game in its series (technically 3rd, since GC version was a port from N64 version, and N64 game had only japanese release), so it's still establishing itself.

3. There's no sense in making the games only the faithfuls. It only ends up killing the franchise, since nobody is going to be interested in it for a while anyway. Franchises that have been able to expand their audience, are the only successful ones.

4. Where we can see this apathy? Nintendo is making games from their existing franchises and making new ones. They also put out more games than ever and experience huge sales (software and hardware), so people seem to like the games.

5. The "mainstream" audience isn't any more "jumpfly" than any other audience. If it is, you know you fucked up somewhere. Keep making games that appeal to people and the audience keep going along. I'd like to see the core audience that isn't going to jump away from gaming the moment games, that appeal to core, stop coming. Basically the author was just complaining the old "but no HD", "but no blood and core" and "i don't want anyone else to play games but me".

As for your "easy money" comment; if Nintendo is making easy money, why aren't others making it? That's because there is no "easy money" in the industry. Sony thought it was making easy money and look where it is now, Nintendo didn't. Do you see the difference?

Wii -> more casual product, do casuals 'need' wii? No, not really. Its more like luxury product for them.

Do core players need X360 or PS3(And games...)? YES! :)

And for X360&PS3 vs recession, X360 will be less affected because of low price. PS3 is more like luxury product compared to X360.

(Just commenting logic behind that article.)

It was a translation from Spanish to English, maybe not too accurate but, anyway

1. It's insulting releasing a game that it's practically identical to the GC and DS version. But if people like to buy the "same game" twice, let them, Nintendo is very happy about it  Nothing to do with Halo IMO, at least Bungie tries to evolve in each new game in the series.

2. Niche was not the best word to describe it. In that article the reviewer was talking about Nintendo loyal fans as its real niche, not fans of sims. Bad translation I guess.

3. I do agree about there's no sense in making games only to the fans, companies have to expand and atract new consumers, but the point is al least giving "something" new in each new installment to the people who are purchasing the game.

4. Call it lack of effort or lazyness if ya want. No need to explain why Nintendo is becoming veeeeeeeery lazy.

5. We still don't know what will happen with the new audience in the future. I guess a lot won't buy the next Wii. A lot people are not very satisfied with the Wii (not what they thought it was), so we'll see... You didn't read the full article so you couldn't know, but the author said nothing in favour of HD gaming, was only complaining about the lack of effort seen in Nintendo these days and saying that the new audience may be ephemeral. Nothing more, nothing less.

6. All companies would like to make easy money if they could. Nintendo can do it know as they are the leads in sales, but I don't find it good for Wii users and Nintendo supporters. Making easy money with them, buying effortless done games, GC and DS ports to Wii...

Really?? from my experience it's the "hardcore" who have the least amount of money to spend on games not the "casuals" beacuse "hardocre" gamers tend to be people around their teens.

Let's assume that we have a group of 1000 people, each have 100€ disposable income on average.

50% of the group spend the whole 100€ to games, while the other half spend only 50€.

Recession hits and disposable income is cut by 25%, which means that the groups now have 75€ disposable income.

The segment that is using all their money into games, is hurt by the 25% directly, when the other group still can maintain the 50€ level to spend to games. In reality, the group that's using only half of their income to games cuts down their expenses too, but the percentage is smaller than in the other group.

The less people (per person) are spending into something, the less it's affected by recession and the opposite. No matter if it's even food.

1. Yes, and because of that, how is it taking away from the fans? That's excactly what the fans always want. The thing isn't different from Halo 3, since it was "the same game as the two previous games with new levels". It's interesting how people complain always for not having anything new in the game, when they want to purchase the same game with new content at the same time. The complain "not having anything new", is only to complain "it's still not for me".

2. Which makes it pretty odd comment. The reviewer actually wants Nintendo to make the game only for the relatively small group of people, propably because the author wants "Nintendo to go away from sight". The "Nintendo loyalists" have been abandoning Nintendo for decades now, so why would Nintendo want to make a game for the dying audience? Why Nintendo wouldn't make the game for its actual market? Why did Nintendo release AC as a new IP back then?

3. That should be case. I haven't played AC, so i can't say did it have any changes. As far as i know, it did, but obviously they weren't big enough. Maybe we should ask it from people who actually like life sim games.

4. Oh yes, if someone makes the claim, it needs explaining. Nintendo has been releasing more games than ever in the past few years. We all know it has "big" games in developement, along with the new IP:s, while new ideas need a lot of R&D. Nintendo isn't any lazier than ever. If Nintendo would be lazy, they wouldn't be putting out Wii Motion Plus, or especially be remaking their current projects to support it. People complain about the lack of HD.

5. You're right. A lot of them won't buy Wiis successor, just as alot of PS360 owners won't buy their successors. The thing is, that all of the audince is new to an extent. The current core audience exists only because the industry caters for the market. As long as you can cater the current "new" audience, they keep on playing games. The whole idea Nintendo has, is to get new people into games and keep them playing.

6. There really isn't effortless games. If i can recall, there's no DS ports and the GC ports are targeted to core gamers. If Nintendo would start making "easy money", they'd be without market in no time. That's the reason why Nintendo is pushing its new audience games. So far, as i can tell, Nintendo is the only first party developer that is really putting effort instead of trying to make the "easy money". Milking money from the market is just as easy/hard for Nintendo as it is for any other developer out there. Only that Nintendo knows the strategy isn't sustainable, which is proven by the sales of a lot of third parties, who are after the easy money. And in the end, you can't sell consoles if all you're after is easy money. Wii Fit, Wii Sports, MKWii, all sell because of being good games that appeal to people. For that appeal, Nintendo has had a lot of work to do.

Hrm, I don't know. It's an interesting argument but I'm not sure how valid it is. The Wii's cheaper price helps it go a long way.