Untrue. Granted that both systems are designed to expand the market and fight indifference, but remember that the Wii, unlike the DS, is deliberately designed to be a disruptive product. It seems like a minor point, but in fact it is not; one of the Wii's goals is to completely change the values behind gaming (in Nintendo's favor, of course), a goal that the DS does not really have (there is a difference between trying to appeal to a wider audience, and trying to completely change how the game is played. I can go into more details in a separate place, if you wish, but I feel like we're getting sidetracked). This difference, I believe, helps to explain the different levels of third-party support the two platforms are receiving...
I don't think disruption changes the market rather than adds a new one. Just look at the wikipedia entry.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disruptive_technology
An innovation that creates a new (and unexpected) market by applying a different set of values. (E.g., the lower priced Ford Model T)
Under that definition the DS fits right in. It is using new innovation and values to add newer markets, which therefore ties into expanding the industry. I can't really see how the Wii is different from the DS in this area. Maybe the Wii was planned out better because of releasing after the DS and there being more experience to back it up, but they both seem to have done the same thing and have the same goals. Maybe it is the word "same" I don't mean exactly the same, of course it would be different with one being a console and the other a handheld.
I don't see it that way. The DS' library is primarily, although not exclusively, focused on single-player experiences, with many of its top-titles being about single-player. Think of Nintendogs, Brain Age, Imagine, the Trainer titles, NSMB, Pokemon, etc.: while most of these titles have multi-player, the emphasis is definitely on the single-player mode. This emphasis is only heightened when you look at third-party games, which are much less likely to have Wi-Fi than Nintendo's own (and when they do, it's implemented in a much less significant manner, often as a throwaway feature).
The Wii, by contrast, focuses on social gaming to a greater extent: the flagship title, Wii Sports, is meant for multiple players. The much-maligned "party games" are another clear example, as these titles would have sold much less on any other system. Even NSMBWii, a Mario platformer, is emphasizing the fact that it has four player local play, and the big feature about Animal Crossing Wii is that I could visit my friends' cities and chat with them in real time. There are few titles, even third-party ones, that don't offer localized mutliplayer: even Madworld, a qunitessentially single-player experience if ever there was one, implemented a fairly decent score-attack multi-player mode.
Which again is a difference that should already be assumed when comparing a console and a handheld. I did say at the end of the first post that you quoted, if you like the way a console plays choose the console. By similar library I meant mostly similar series, genres, and gameplay. There is an uncanny amount of DS series that start out on DS and actually appear later on the Wii. A few that come to mind are Rune Factory, Spectrobes, Dragon Quest, and so on. The difference is that the DS has more than the Wii has, aswell as a few the Wii doesn't, and vice versa.
This is pretty subjective though (which reinforces, but does not prove, my point). I, for instance, own both systems, but despite DS games being about half the price I still own twice as many Wii games as DS games. The systems' tie ratios (at least in America) argue that I'm more the rule than the exception here, as the Wii has sold more units of software for each unit of hardware than the DS has. The future will only stretch the figures in the Wii's favor: I'm getting about ten new Wii retail games (and several WiiWare/VC ones) by mid-2010, but only about three DS games (and possibly six DSiWare ones, when I get around to buying the system).
I don't think you should use only one region. For example the OP isn't even from America , yet you use American numbers. I don't know how much different it would be in Others and Japan, but I do know that the Wii for quite some time would win America every week, while the DS would take the other two regions in hardware. Software can be just as different.
But if those libraries offer different experiences, as I maintain, the DS' breadth of titles is pretty irrelevant. Consider this analogy: there are two shops right next to each other. One of them offers a modest-to-large selection of great soft-serve yogurt, the other sells a massive variety of fantastic ice cream (we're talking Willy Wonka levels here). The choice of which to go to is obvious, right?
Well, not so much, because you're assuming that the customers treat yogurt and ice cream identically. In reality, tons of folks don't: while I personally love both, health nuts and the like will eschew the ice cream parlor and its wide variety of quality treats for the yogurt joint, because the yogurt offers them what they're interested, while ice cream does not. Similarly, there are folks who genuinely prefer yogurt to ice cream, people who can tolerate yogurt but despise ice cream (yeah, I don't get it either, but they exist), etc. etc. The point is that when products are similar, but not identical, offering a wider variety of ice cream when the customer is less interested in it than yogurt is probably not going to overcome a person's preference for the yogurt, especially when the yogurt place offers a "good enough" variety of stuff.
To relate this more to gaming, your average Wii owner doesn't give a flying flip that the 360 offers a greater variety of high-Metacritic-rated titles: they want their friggin' Wii Sports/Fit/Resort etc., and the 360 doesn't offer them that. Neither does the DS.
Your yogurt and ice cream reference makes a lot of sense, and I can't argue with it.
As for the Wii compared to 360 argument, I would like to say that those are two different demographics you are comparing. A better comparison would be comparing the Wii owners who actually look at metacritic to 360 owners. If the op is part of the the
more widespread demographic, which we are going to assume the word "core" refers to, then it is quite easy to do direct comparisons since every console has games that targets the audience, no matter how few.
A few points: first, while many (perhaps even most, I can not say) would agree with you, the point I'm trying to get across is that this is not a universal sentiment, because Wii experiences and DS experiences are not the same. I know we disagree on that point, and I look forward to more discussion on the subject, but for now it's still my thesis, and I've not been convinced to abandon it yet.
I think this is where the original confusion started. I started the post off recognizing it as my opinion. I was referring to how I thought of the Wii was a bad choice, and it wasn't to argue with anybody who thought the Wii is a good one. It is the same as the people who say "The 360 and PS3 have the same games, get the other ones" Yes I may find more value in the DS, but the OP did ask my opinion, and I would like to reinforce it as much as possible. I respect your opinion as well. I am happy to explain my reasonings. I just wanted to clearify that I do know that everybodies look on this is different.
Second, having software droughts is a different topic than the one we started with.
The software droughts was used to strengthen the idea that the DS gets much more support than the Wii does for the demographics of forumers.
Third, a person who's only just getting a Wii, three years after release, is going to take a long while before any software droughts affect him, especially when that person already owns two other systems (and presumably will be keeping up on those as well). WiiWare, Virtual Console, and Gamecube compatibility will only further stretch the time before he runs out of good games to play. Remember that this thread is trying to see the situation from the point of view of a person who does not own a Wii (and may never do so, for that matter).
Nothing to argue with here. I take back that point.
Okay, really need to get back to reading. Will continue tomorrow!
