Guys, when have light gun games ever been considered "core". They've never been. They are the definition of casual. It's easy to pick up and play, no exploration, no puzzle solving, and basically the camera takes the player where he has to go and the player shots at everything. The type of content does not all of a sudden make a casual game into a core game especially if the games mechanics do not change.

EA, targeted this game to the expanded audience and expected them to push the game sales up to the level of House of Dead 1 and 2 and Resident Evil:Unbrella Chronicles. This game had nothing to do with the core gamer. Just because someone wants a Light Gun game to be a core game and calls it core does not make it core. The game failed since the target audience "the casuals" did not know the game was in the market place or maybe they just did not care for the game.

I asked why you kept choose these random and arbitrary points that are virtually meaningless with no context. I have seen you respond several times since then and that includes a post directed at me. If you cannot justify your argument then why on earth is it worth paying attention to? If it is so weak that it cannot be backed up, then it is worthless.

So anything that is easy to pick up and play is a casual game? That's not my definition of it. Core game is a game targetted at gamers as in people who played games on a solid basis before Wii sports was ever released, not casuals people who joined gaming with Wii Sports, Play and other games that are made to be really easy and accessible and have non traditional controls to do that.

In some cases those casual gamers play core games (though that often if you see the difference of sales between Wii Play and Mario Galaxy or Twilight Princess). On the other hand a game like Mario Kart does much better to with this casual audience because of easy controls and relatively simple gameplay (compared to Zelda), I guess Mario Galaxy is not yet easy enough for casual people to buy it as much, but the new Mario Bros. game seems to be made with casuals in mind with new features.

A game's success is based on its sales. What is a good selling game to you? 100,000 or 500,00 or what? These are the top selling Wii games, in this list the number of third party core games is overshadowed by Casual and first party games, especially the further up you go in the list.

That is why I used 1.5 million or 1 million as benchmarks for best selling games on the system. You want me to count every game that sold more than 100,000 that will take a long time and I think my point is already made: 3rd party core games are not selling as well as casual or 1st party games which is why EA will release more Carnival Games and Sports Active and not going to bring Left 4 Dead or Burnout Paradise (unless it's some spinoff farmed to a minor developer) or Mirror's Edge or Dead Space (cause they tried that and it failed in their opinion).

Wii owners have been asking for more 3rd party support since the generation started, but the major publishers (Except maybe Sega and even they are financin big budget games on PS360 rather than just sticking to Wii) focus more on the HD consoles than the Wii, there is a reason behind that, companies aren't against making profits!

About development costs for 360/PS3/PC, after one version is fully made the cost of the other versions are much smaller.

http://www.kotaku.com.au/2009/09/japanese-developer-microsoft-making-ps3-development-easier/

People go on and on about how Wii games cost half or a quarter to make compared to an HD game,but after one version is made at full cost then it is ported to PS3 and PC at fairly low costs so making a multifplatform game on HD consoles is logical for 3rd parties and combined profit across PS3,360 and PC (in the eyes of most major 3rd party publishers) makes up for not having released it on Wii and makes a profit or we would not be seeing the flood of high quality 3rd party games to 360/PS3.

I didn't ask for million sellers. I asked why you picked 1.5 million. You still aren't giving any reasons, you're just going in circles. You're talking but you're not saying anything.

Your argument is worthless. It is pretty much casual casual core core Carnival games sports active Wii doom. It revolves completely around arbitrary numbers, buzzwords and FUD. It's almost 2010. The Wii won the console wars. Get over it. You can scrutinize the software sales until the sun comes up, it's not going to change anything.

And we already know about your definition of fanboys being people that disagree with you. You haven't stopped labeling people since you started this thread.

'Because MH is one of Capcom's biggest franchises but isn't popular in the West so that gives them a good incentive to make MH3 Wii exclusive because they lack the marketing abilities to do it themselves.'.

You said it, it isn't popular in the west.

You haven't answered WHY Nintendo would promote a third party game though. Do Nintendo promote Konami Wii games in the west?

There is not an arbitrary point where success magically happens. That is why I used the word arbitrary. Because you are picking numbers that have no absolute meaning. If FF13 sells exactly 1 million on both platforms it will be the biggest bomb of the generation bar none. Hell it might make its way up to biggest bomb in video game history in this impossible scenario. In contrast No More Heroes is chugging along at 300k and its getting a sequel.The game was such a success that they threw a party over how amazing the sales are.

The breaking point is when a game gives a good return on investment. There is no arbitrary number that shows it happened. Shovelware games need to sell less than 100k. Blockbusters need to sell more than a million. Yes, that means you cannot make your argument with the data we have.Accept that and move on.

I already have a thread stating my opinion of RPGs as a genre.

@Bolded If you knew anything about the game you are talking about you would know it isn't a spinoff of any main series game. A spin-off in essense is a side story, and Crystal Chronicles doesn't share any story features nor gameplay features to classify it as a spin-off of the main series. It is in the same situation that Saga and Mana were. They started off in the West as Final Fantasy games that weren't really Final Fantasy games then eventually ditched the name.

...does Konami even have big Wii games for Nintendo to promote?

You have to ask Nintendo. We aren't making this up with suppositions. They have actually pledged for helping promote this game in the west, as well as the Dragon Quest games on the Wii and DS.