Oh he has been right partially. The games they announced made some group of the Wii market happy but the most who saw the GTTV around that time expected something else or had an different interpretation of Core games/franchises. Animal crossing may be one but the majority of the Wii owners expected something else (new zelda, Kid Icarus announcement, Pikmin 3 announced etc) and were dissapointed after E3 (atleast at the GT forums don't know how people reacted on VGCHARTZ about it I was not here).

Anyway this discussion ends for me here if it is okay for you I don't want people will think of me as an Wii hater (can be to late though).

And if this was the case the industry wouldn't be growing and it would have already collapsed upon itself. I guess this is what happens when you have journalists and sheep at other media sites and apparently forums who refuse to supplant conformity with logic and reason. How pitiful. Not even worth my time to fix the obvious wrong.

That's what I was thinking too. Obviously this can't be true, or there'd be more developers going down.

That has nothing to do with the fact that developers spend less money producing high resolution textures and other graphic elements during Wii development, simply because the Wii does not display them. Whether or not the system is theoretically capable of doing so has no relevance on this fact, and only makes it more likely that it was - in fact - a strategic decision by Nintendo, rather than a technological limitation.

Introducing Nintendo's latest game: Wii Steal Your Money. Based on Miyamoto's latest hobby of stagecoach robbery.

I wonder if they will post my (unregistered) comment.

You have got to love how the part about "less than on other platforms" was completely ignored by Kotaku.

Mike from Morgantown

According to Edge Magazine (a VG Industry mag) a 20m game needs to sell 1m units to become profitable.

That's the avg price of an HD game or Really high-end Wii game (Zelda/Mario). So clearly Reggie was misquoted. He was probably talking industry avg not Wii avg but the reporter didn't know any better.

It makes more sense if Reggie's saying, most [HD] console games need to sell 1m to be profittable but we made development costs cheaper on Wii [so you don't need to sell that much]

It is both: the Wii GPU can't output HD because of a strategic decision by Nintendo.

The lie in the declaration lies in saying that the reason to not have an HD capable console was to keep development costs down. That is, they had to make a choice: either improved visuals with higher development costs or current costs with SD-only output.

The emulator proves that current Wii games - though having a lower budget - stil look much better in HD. Thus the previous dicothomy is a lie.

Nintendo's strategic decision was to make higher margins per console by using a cheaper GPU. This worked great for them in the business sense, as they are making heaps of money. Still, Reggie's declaration was the PR spin of a falsehood.

Anyway, this was just to clarify my first post, let's not get sidetracked.

Really, I bet the reporter missed the word "don't."

Reggie would never talk about specifics of development costs. He would throw out generalities that paint Wii in a GOOD light. Like "Wii titles don't have to sell 1m to make a profit."

The reporter clearly did nothing to get clarification. Had they asked for a clarification, and Reggie had actually said this, then they would have reported on Nintendo's statement trying to backtrack. Plus, Nintendo would have told them about the 48-50 games that had shipped 1m units by the end of December worldwide, instead of the 16 that sold through 1m in the US alone.

This might be the best example yet on how terrible the gaming press is, because so many sites have picked up on this and basically just regurgitated it. A gaming website should be a bit more in the loop, and know that Reggie has basically said the opposite in the past, that way more than 16 games have sold 1m copies worldwide, and that most past estimates even for HD games puts necesary sales below 1m.

Hilarious to see New York Times make a mistake like this.