^Thank you, feel free to go even deeper into depth of what the things are that you described, and even more things that affect graphics.

Way too much to list here. To sum up though, most gamers are unaware of what they are technically seeing.

They see the end result and compare them to other games regardless of the various layers and factors that go into creating what is seen. This is fine on its own but becomes a problem when the average gamer begins trying to analyze and critique without proper context and circumstance.

The only "serious" 3rd party Wii games I can think of are Zack and Wiki, No More Heroes, MadWorld, and maybe House of the Dead. Find me a thread where any HD console owner begged for those games, despite knowing that it wouldn't be on their console. And Monster Hunter? The only reason people complained about the game was because it was SUPPOSED to be on the PS3, and then they canned it. It wasn't that it was in development for the Wii and then PS3 owners kep making threads about why it should be on the PS3.

And maybe if you didn't buy a Wii in the first place, you wouldn't be in such a predicament with regard to playing the games you obviously want. The 360 has an entry price of $199, which, if I'm not mistaken is lower than $250, so why did you buy a Wii if you wanted to play MW2, and you could have gotten it on a cheaper console.

And also, show some proof of MW2 being on the Wii other than "CoD: WaW took forever to finally get to 1.15M, while the HD versions sold 8.8M combined, so for some reason a Wii version of MW2 should be made, even though CoD4 wasn't on the Wii"

I know. I've only been looking at some of the less complicated parts of game design, and I've seen that gaming graphics are not a direct comparison across games.

Having the same engine is commonly believed to make games look the same. That is totally ignoring art direction and other design factors. UE3 engine games look radically different. The MT Engine games from Capcom look different. The Quantum 3 Engine games from HVS have their own unique looks. CTYD is a reduced remake a game that already looked different than RE4, so there is no way it will look as detailed, because the details are done in different ways.

Or polygon count. Only a handful of games have significantly high polygon counts for their systems, and gamers now think that's supposed to be the norm.

And lighting. Real time lighting effects were not that common in the 6th gen, and even the Wii can't do it with every game. Complaining about circular shadows ignores how hard the alternatives are. Since Ray tracing in real time is years away (one of the most impressive things of the Cell is it can do real-time RT, even though its at 15fps and with objects that look like late 1970s CGI), the ways to do real shadows are either polygon models with black shading to look like shadows (Devil May cry did this), or stenciling the shadows in real time. Either of those eats up resources and some games just will not have room (in fact, someone on the Capcom board complained about circular shadown in Spyborgs, and that very poster had told me in an earlier thread about those methods for real-time shadows).

BMaker11, do your own research. There have been several games, not just those you mentioned, that have been demanded to appear on HD consoles by their fans. Read my post on the previous page again. Never mind, I know you won't go look so I'll just post it again since you so obviously missed it/ignored it the first time.

"The desire to have other consoles exclusives on your console is natural and certainly not exclusive to Wii owners. It's a really inane assumption that Wii owners are the only wants desiring certain titles to appear on their platform."

From what I've seen.... HD consoles ask for much, much less. I mean hey, i like SMG, and if i didn't have a wii i wouldn't mind it being on the 360. But outside first party games, i really don't think HD console gamers want much...compared to what Wii owners want from the HD consoles.

I'm certain there isn't parity in the demand but by no means does that excuse the fact altogether.   Both sides want games the other side has.  Period.   It's a natural factor of human nature.

Trying, as some here are, to use it as some Wii bashing angle is immature and shows a lack of introspective of their own fanbase.

All the factors relevent to the Wii receiving an iteration of the game are there with one exception...the first game did not appear on Wii.  Some would say that's more than enough evidence to proof the Wii will not receive MW2 but I can list dozens of cases were a sequel appeared on a console that did not receive the original.

@BMaker, you can pay 200 for 360 but don't you have to pay for live subscription each month (or one lump sum for many months/year) to play it online?

You know, for what its worth, if you want the superior version, get the PC version. COD4 and 5 on the PC make the HD versions look and feel terrible. Fortunately I have a Wii and a PC, so Im covered either way.

I would buy Modern Warfare 2 for the Wii, if it's done correctly with good Online options.  Would expect a score of 80% or higher on average.  World at War was a good start, but I prefer the online play of MoH: Heroes 2 for wii.