your problem is that you use random personal experience without any value for your judgment.Maybe you wish core games on wii didnt sell, or that they didnt outsell 2 to 1 the ps3 games, case of mario kart selling 16 millions.Or that your idea of core is violence, which doesnt explains why afro samurai or bionic commando sold much worse than HOTD OK. For example,   because i go to wii tournaments of MKART and Brawl and I know plenty of hc wii owners training constantly for tournaments here.I have a couple of casual friends who happen to own PS3s that gather dust except on weekends...Whats should i think?that PS3 owners are casuals and wii owners are hc?No, because personal experience is limited and random.Yours is as limited.All we have are numbers to use as facs, not personal experience. Numbers say core games sell on wii, even if third party, if they are good. Numbers say that core games dont sell well on ps360 sometimes either.The issue is that wii has 2 big markets, a core and a casual market. Just because some wii owners are into casual entertainment,doesnt means a huge installed base isnt core. And apparently that installed base is as large as any other in the consoles that only have core. Use your head and dont let the media fool you, check the facts.

I agree with intro94 ^^

@Lord - Yeah I bet that they may see the Grinder with better engine and lots of chars in screen and must feel ashamed that a small team could that instead of a huge company like them..or at least they should be ^^

Wait. The Grinder was an HD game remade for the Wii, has levels laid out like Dead Rising? It's not, so you can't compare.

All those shops meant more textures and polygon models. On both the Wii and the 360, that ate up the polygon count for individual characters, but spread out the total polygons around the area. Plus the shops meant more textures used. Just from the trailers (so this is just a tentative analysis) it looks as though The Grinder is following the FPS layout of lots of repeating textures. It works for those games (since it facilitates larger areas), but Dead Rising doesn't have the same design philosopy (save for the tunnels, which are long in both versions), so it's not fair to compare those two. It would be the same as comparing Lost Planet to Dead Rising on the 360. Even though they use the same engine, their design philosophies are too different to compare properly.

Yeah that's off topic, but that comment has so many fallacies, I had to address them. You can't compare any game to Dead Rising, either version, unless you take into account EVERYTHING in a typical level, which is not only the enemies, but loads of different textures and polygon models for backgrounds, and animated characters.

Back on topic, the games will sell when they appeal to buyers. Many HD games flopped because they didn't have enough people wanting them.

No maybe because it attracts more casual gamers.

I'm glad this got overlooked.

Even though you are both rubbish?  I find that very strange.

I think the whole "casual vs. hardcore" dichotomy is grossly overblown and generally stupid. From my experience, both with WoW (where that stupid argument also dominates) and gaming in general, labeling someone boils down to their comparative interest level.

If person 2 is less interested in gaming, or has different tastes, person 1 labels him "casual". If person 2 has similar interest and taste in gaming, he's (hard)core. If person 2 is more interested, spends more time, or spends more money, person 1 feels he has no life.

In reality, there is no hard and fast "hardcore" or "casual", just different people, with different tastes and differing interest. Yet for some reason, people like to turn them into a dichotemy, with little to no overlap. KZ2 is hardcore. MKWii is casual. X360 is hardcore. Wii is casual. Etc.

In reality, I've never met anyone who didn't blend the two "opposites" greatly. My dad hardly ever plays games, and by hardly ever, I mean a few times a year. Yet he beat Mario 3 back in the day, and has beaten Resident Evil 4 (on Gamecube) like 4 times. The only other games he's shown interest in recently are KZ2, L4D and CoD4. Would he be casual (based on gaming time) or hardcore (based on gaming interest).

Or me. By many definitions, I'd be hardcore (own every system, have legions of games for all). On the other hand, I've got terrible reaction time, coordination and thus get my butt kicked in games like Halo 3 by people who don't even own the game. And Mario Party (and other "casual" titles) are among my favorite.

In short, casual and hardcore are self serving labels to try and boost one's own tastes in gaming, and put down those one does not enjoy.

Part of it is reviewers telling you these games aren't good.

The other part is the game actually isn't good.

Wii games built from the ground up that have catered to the strengths of the console have done well. They used motion to enhance the Wii experience and reaped the benefits. The guy from EA said that (to be slightly less vague).

Madworld, House of the Dead, Deadly Creatures, Castlevania Judgment - all niche, or in CJ's case too different from the norm. No More Heroes got lucky. The second one should sell much better, but even that is still niche.

piracy affects sales as much as it does on 360, i don't think it can make games flop

i think it's the lack of advertisement or promotion, the think that Wii has a big userbase so the games will sell, but the don't promote them

I don't think any self respecting "core gamer" would mod their console- that's actually a casual gamer thing, not thinking about what it does for the industry.

And core games do sell on Wii, just not all of them, and not the ridiculously violent ones.