I like how you read enough to know where to cut the quote off, but not enough to actually, y'know, read what you cut out.

I'm torn between shaking my head and just plain laughing at your requirement that first-party games not be included. Let's ignore the fact that core Nintendo games are far and away the best examples of Wii titles with effort put into them, because if we can make those games not count, our trolling gets easier! Oh, but we can include "casual" Nintendo games, like Wii Fit, Wii Play, and Wii Music, because when those sell well it causes third-parties to take the casual route.

Do I have this right? Nintendo only counts when it's convenient for it to do so? Brawl, Galaxy, Corruption, etc. would all destroy my argument before it began, but I can bring up "casual" Nintendo titles because they explain why the system itself is "casual" (Nintendo leads the way!!!)? Ah no, you say with hurried chagrin, we're excluding first-party titles because this is a thread about third-parties. Nintendo games always follow these magic rules that don't apply to other companies: had anyone else put the same effort into their game as Nintendo did with Mario Galaxy, they would still have been outsold by Carnival Games. This is in sum your argument, correct?

It's fine if it is, because even under your meaningless criteria you manage to be wrong.

Alright, let's play a game. You name a Wii game that deserved to do much better than it did and that would have sold better on another system, and I'll explain to you why you're wrong. In the meantime, I'll rattle off a list of non "casual" (whatever the hell that means...) Wii games that met or exceeded the publishers' expectations.

I suppose there's no point in mentioning any of the Guitar Hero games, because although they were embraced by the snobcore last gen (and still are...) they now all sell best on the Wii, to Activision's initial surprise, so they are de facto casual games. That's three titles down (four, as soon as Metallica joins the club).

Hey, Remember Resident Evil 4? Y'know, the game that's been released three times already, and wasn't expected by Capcom to do all that well? Yeah, it turns out its approaching the Gamecube version's sales, despite all those previous releases. Ah, but Kantor assures me that because it's from a known franchise, it doesn't count.  Four down.

Ooh! Resident Evil: Umbrella Chronicles. Capcom's expectations were about 2/3 of a million lifetime, and it passed those easily. That makes this game (a low budget title that reused PS2 assets, and was became a light-gun game to reduce costs) a non-casual, third-party Wii success, right? Aw nuts, it's from a known franchise, even though it's a spinoff that did far better than the other, similar RE spinoffs. That's five.

Hey, Lego Star Wars and Lego Indiana Jones sold the most on the Wii (excluding Indy's giveaway bundle). Those count, right? Nah, they're family-friendly and cutesy. Disqualified, I suppose. Six.

Sonic. Sonic's not casual, and his Wii games are doing way, way, WAAAAAAY better than their HD counterparts, despite the fact that the HD version retains Sonic Team (or should I say "because"?). No, wait, known franchise again, even though it's selling better than on the HD twins. F***. Eight.

Tiger Woods!...is a known face. That's ten.

What about Super Monkey Ball? No, hold on, it's cutesy, and therefore casual. Eleven.

Force Unleashed? It ain't casual, and it did better than the PS3 version while getting within striking range of the 360 version. But it's still from a big-name franchise. Twelve.

Red Steel? Shaun White? Call of Duty (both of them)? Trauma Center? GT? Two House of the Dead games, Ben 10, Ghost Squad, FIFA, BoomBlox No More HeroesDeBlobDragonquestetcetcetc.

Face it, even by your own arbitrary, meaningless, stupid standards, you're still wrong. All the data contradict your opinion; unless you come up with yet another way to move the goalposts, reality will take a gander at your thesis and laugh. I'll admit, I'm dangerously close to doing the same myself.

But I look forward to hearing why none of the above really count. *sits back and grabs some popcorn*

You seem to be implying that Wii sells no "gamers" games. Which is excuse my french "Bull Shit"

I mean 3rd party games. 3rd party "gamer games" don't sell well on the Wii, they did sell well on the PS2.

If you had looked at the game before linking to it, you would have noticed that those were only Japan sales. America and Others are both at 0.00 million with no weekly data.

Meanwhile, MadWorld isn't even confirmed for a Japanese release.

As for No More Heroes...wow. It clearly wasn't a very big budget game if they threw a party with cake because it sold 400k... especially considering that a crap game like Deca Sports sold more than quadruple that. Well, if they're happy with it, who are we to proclaim it a flop? Although the term "flop" is used pretty loosely; it's even used to describe new 2D IPs involving playing as a doll and jumping around, which become double million sellers within four months of release!

Considering that your reply comes boils down to "sorry I can't argue with any of that, so I'll just go now" I'll just assume you concede the issue, and look forward to having this exact same discussion (with you or someone else, believe me you ain't the first) in a week or two.

Good night.

 Again, straight Bull $hit..Please read NoNames post above mine for an extensive in depth look at why.

There is third-party support for the Wii, the problem is that some people don't want to acknowledge that third-party casual games on that system sell the most and cost the least to develop.

I just checked the list and the top 3rd party hardcore game to sell well was Resident Evil and its #26.

Resident Evil: The Umbrella Chronicles #35

Star Wars: The Force Unleashed #38

The other 3 are CoD 3, and 5 and Red Steel. Those are the only ones in the top 50.

So yeah, if you think 3rd party games are sucessful on the Wii, then you are delusional.

Many "Casual games" outsold games like God of War..so?

If that is all you've got, than you must be delusional if you think you've made a point. I really do not have any reason to prove you wrong. NoName has already done that. There is really no reason to even carry this any further.