That's fair, but there are plenty of wii owners in this very topic expressing that thing I said.

calm down.yes silent hill dragon quest x and nba jam cant fill the gap but as long as nintendo develop good games and have little help from other companies like team ninja,everything is gonna be ok.i am a huge wii fan but after all ,,without an hd console (360 or ps3) you cant survive this generation. or you can go nuts with the excellent virtua console games.

Well this year ain't as bad as 2008, but the support still is years behind the hd consoles. Metroid Other M is enough for me, finally a Wii game that i can be hyped for.

Despite recent claims that Nintendo is "lazy," I believe that, basically, whenever Nintendo sets about to make a game, they have a sincere interest in making it as best as they can. Doesn't mean that they always succeed--Nintendo can fail, too--but I think they make strong efforts at creating "quality" games for their systems.

It would be difficult for me to judge the efforts of 3rd parties; I don't work for them. However, looking at the results, I find it really hard to believe that they're putting in the same kind of effort into their Wii games as Nintendo does. And that's what sucks.

It's not about "investment" as money, but overall investment: time, thought, concern, etc. Sure, a masterfully produced Wii game will, on average, cost less than a masterfully produced HD game. That's not a problem. In fact, that's great for the publisher. But sadly, I think that some of these third parties have taken the idea that Wii games cost less to mean that they can half-ass an effort, and it'll still be okay.

Over the years, Nintendo has built up a rep for good games. I think it's easier for a Nintendo game to reach, say, 10 million sales, than a game from another given company. But I also think that those kinds of numbers *aren't* unreachable for a third party on the Wii, provided that it's the right game.

What would a third party have to do, in terms of investment, to achieve a game of Nintendo quality? And how much would they have to market such a game, to eclipse 5, 10, 15 million in sales, or more? I don't know. But it's a shame--for them and for us--that they don't seem to have an interest in doing it. Or in trying, really.

Well what have u got to say? I totally agree. But at least we have a couple of good games this year in the west like epic mickey and MH3. Let's see how they do

I think the point here is that 3rd parties can't expect customers to come to them on their terms. If they want a customer, they have to meet that customer on his or her own terms.

3rd parties have been telling consumers for three years now that if you want their best games, you need to buy an HD console. Half the market has bought a Wii and Nintendo's games instead. If the "just buy an HD console" strategy had any merit, surely it would have worked by now.

Could you drop that old canard please. Obviously we bought Wii's for different reasons that people buy HD consoles. I don't play consoles generally, I have little/no interest in playing games with a gamepad, the games I am interested in I can play better on PC.

Any strong effort on the Wii would be something quite different from a strong effort on the HD consoles, even if they're in the same genre.

I'd like to see them go back to treating 3rd parties like trash. Only allow 2 games per publisher per year, only now no satellite publishing to get around the rule. See how much shovelware they make when they only get 2 shots at that sweet, sweet playerbase per year.

If their game is good and performs well, they get to make 1 addition game the next year.

Maybe Nintendo was right in the NES/SNES era in that regard.

I agree with the notion put forth by posters here that Nintendo should drop the idea of attracting third parties and just invest in more developers. They should expect to go it alone, but not block third parties either.