lol, no.  MH3 was built ground up around Wii spec, there's literally no shared code with MH2.  And it looks dramatically better too, as one should would expect from a machine with double the clockspeeds, triple the memory and a superior GPU.  And it's not just looks, monster AI has been dramatically overhauled as well.  MH3 is a shining example of what developer *should* be doing with Wii, it's a game that PS2 literally couldn't handle unless it was significantly scaled down.

Any current demographic issues are directly a result of 3rd party efforts.  I agree there's some problems now, but that's entirely due to 3rd parties not cultivating those audiences in the first place.  Just look at the difference with how Activision's handled Guitar Hero versus Call of Duty on Wii, and how that's shaped the target base for each IP on the console.  This isn't something a $10 price increase would fix, if anything it'd likely make issues worse (as I seriously doubt a $10 would bring general Wii budgets in line with even AAA PS2 games, it'd still be getting mainly shovelware).

I'm not. I am referring to the end rsults rather than the resources devoted to them. Perhaps I misspoke.

You know Call of Duty 3 was on the Wii before World at War though, right?

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/monster-hunter-3-hands-on

To help illustrate this point

The bolded is 100% conjecture, on your part.  And actually, so is the italicized.  I heard different -- have a link?

EDIT: nm, I see that Khuutra's link says "new engine"... also later in the article it says "It is an exceptionally good-looking Wii game, even if most of the animation is recognisable from the PS2 version of Monster Hunter 2"

...hmm, isn't animation supposed to be one of the big savings of developing on the Wii?  Sounds like they re-used their PS2 anims.  So the code is new... but some of the major art resources are re-used.  I call that a port, at least somewhat.

So is that where 3rd parties should come from, then?  PS2 games ported to the Wii, for quality game experiences?  Indeed, many of the best Wii games are PS2 ports, like Okami, and it looks like MH3 is something of a port as well.

Procrastinato, you are reaching on that point and I think it would be better if you let that go, since animations would be one of the only art resources that's being re-used - you can read the rest of the article to help illustrate that.

Now, I do have a solution to this, but you're not going to like it, and it's not going to happen, and it's not really possible - but it is more tenable than just raising prices by ten dollars.

There's a link above me.  Any "source" to your own "heard" shared code notions, I'm curious as to why you'd think that exactly?

And the latter "conjecture" is just common sense... 3rd parties relegated Wii to old ports, spinoffs, shovelware and niche games from the start, when they should've been making AAA stuff for the clear market leader.  You have to cultivate your audience, which Nintendo did on Wii and 3rd parties did elsewhere.  And now, that's where the games (mostly) sell.

Basically everyone bet on HD and it (largely) hasn't paid off going by the alarming frequency of studio and even publisher closures.  It seems like it's getting to the point where you either have a hit, or you have bankruptcy. Basically everyone's screwed at this point, developers are locked into expensive/risky HD games, publishers are locked into into the false dichotomy of hardcore vs casual, and the actual massmarket (ie: Wii owners, 70% of which also owned a PS2 according to NPD) are locked into a sea of shovelware.  Worst generation ever.

What's the solution, and why wouldn't I like it?

btw: did anyone bother figuring out how many units/titles it took to garner EA that $137M this quarter for Wii, and also the $137M for PS3, or are you all just assuming that its "about the same"?

Because it requires acknowledging the idea that third parties may be responsible for the current situation - not that they're at fault, so to speak, but that the demographic split is of their own doing.

Look, we agree that the demographic split is the primary reason that games like Call of Duty don't sell as well on the Wii, right? The typical Call of Duty buyer owns an HD connsole, yes?

Yeah, the demographic scatter is the primary reason Wii games are so unprofitable for 3rd parties -- they find it hard to target their traditional demographic there, and they are not used to the blue ocean demographic (like Ninty is), so they find it difficult to create games for the blue ocean.

I'm not really addressing that, however.  I'm addressing Reggies recent comments about how he wants to see games like AC2, etc. on the Wii.  I'm suggesting that, that just isn't going to happen, because the Wii is all about the blue ocean, and not about the traditional demographic at all.  If traditional demographic games come to the Wii, they need to cost more... or something.  The buyers just aren't there.

lol. MH3's less of a "port" than MW2 if code/asset reuse is what we're going by.

Also, the article's not totally correct even, monster animations were hugely increased/improved in MH3. It's the standard character animations that look like basically a PS2 retread, though even there there's huge additions thanks to swimming.