Its strange how Nintendo says that 3rd parties don't get Wii... when Nintendo themselves don't actually get anything except casuals. Perhaps if they didn't release a GameCube in a different box and different controller then 3rd parties might have tried. But then again, Nintendo isn't exactly helping the Wii's rep releasing GameCube ports and fitness games.

What I don't get is how poor the visuals are compared to say the PS2 for example I understand the Wii is not made for high end visuals but from what I am told its meant to be more powerful than a PS2?

I look at a game like God Of War 2 or Final Fantasy 10 on the PS2 then I look at well any game on the Wii and it just looks bad.

I love Res Evil 4 on the Wii but the game is diabolically scratchy and fuzzy surely they could have made it look a lot better?

I still feel the Wii is for the casual gamer or those that loved arcade games like House of the dead other than that its not a game for the hardcore or serious gamer.

Hardcore and serious gamers want games with top visuals, gameplay, online and well such consoles like the Xbox 360 and PS3 which offer said experiences.

not having a go here ss4, but what exactly does "serious gamer" mean anyway.

surely the word "game" denotes a sense of fun, playfulness, etc etc, so serious fun? hmm, just a bit of an oxymoron to me. i hate all these terms, people play games. yes, we dont need to classify people. i dont think, doesn't REALLY happen with other media. yes i realise there are target demographics. but i think its all a bit, well, wanky.

"im a more serious gamer than you, therefore my playing experience is more justified." or what have you, it all just seems a little bit, well juvenile.

oh wait, we are talking about people playing games.
it all makes sense now.

not having a go here ss4, but what exactly does "serious gamer" mean anyway.

surely the word "game" denotes a sense of fun, playfulness, etc etc, so serious fun? hmm, just a bit of an oxymoron to me. i hate all these terms, people play games. yes, we dont need to classify people. i dont think, doesn't REALLY happen with other media. yes i realise there are target demographics. but i think its all a bit, well, wanky.

"im a more serious gamer than you, therefore my playing experience is more justified." or what have you, it all just seems a little bit, well juvenile.

oh wait, we are talking about people playing games.
it all makes sense now.

Third parties getting the Wii: Atlus, Marvelous, Capcom if they haven't got their stupid hat on, same for EA really and finally SEGA.

And SS4 is not allowed to complain about RE4 for it's "gritty" graphics, RE4 practically started the "realism = brown and grey!!" trend everyone follows that makes console games involving anything that shoots. Only conclusion possible then, SS4 does not get "serious" games as well...the inevitable question after that conclusion: what does SS4 actually do get? Also, why do people say then that RE4 made the gamecube look like a Xbox?

I think it's more a case of the pseudo-hardcore not getting the gameing industry in general. Nintendo does not make Wiifit, Wiiplay or Wiimusic as low-quality third-rate games. They do put rather small teams on them but these teams are led by Shigeru Miyamoto, hell Nintendogs was made by one the top-teams of Nintendo (EAD2 I think) and they bloody worked two and half years on it. So the magic selling-power of these games is not some marketing ploy (that's only half the story) but that they are finely engineered pieces of software that trully hold Nintendo's age-old magic.

Offcourse games made by third string teams in a time-span of six months are going to sell like s**t. Really, people seem not to understand that Nintendo is doing exactly what was so good at in all of its existence (as a game company), making games that are completly bananas but who will eventually become the norm. The only difference now is you have some whiny niche of people who only manage to delay this process in comparison to the other norm-creating Nintendo games of the past.