The Truth Behind Hardcore Wii Software Sales

A lot has been said, written, and typed about hardcore third-party sales figures on the Nintendo Wii. While numbers for such titles may not rival that of the cutting-edge systems, we may not be seeing the complete picture. It is no secret that development costs on what is basically a last-gen console "retread" are exceptionally less expensive than the current-day process. Also, it seems that today, software sold is NOT considered successful until it reaches the 500,000 unit mark. Could these facts be causing a misinterpretation on the part of gaming and enthusiast press?

[Chris399]

selling 250K of something is nothing to brag about. Especially when your competitors, at almost 1/2 the install base (PS3/ 360) easily do 500K+ in the same or smaller periods of time.

It's obvious where the majority of the "core" audience is this gen. I'm really tired of Wii fanatics proclaiming that there is a vast ocean of "core" titles to choose from on the system. There's not. There are several gems and a few titles on the horizon, and not much else unless you are a fan of Mario (which I'm not and have never been). And if we're to talk about sales, which this article does, it is evident where the core audience is spending their cash - that being, not on The Conduit.

Demon's Souls sold around 250K and it's not even out in NA or EU yet. That is an example of a niche/ core title selling well in relation to it's install base.

Gotta get back to work. Don't get me wrong, I like my Wii, but it's definitely not where I find sustenance for my core gaming needs.

Edit @ below. What about new IPs? Not established franchises - Resident Evil, Zelda, etc., will ALWAYS sell based on name alone.

[Dringostarr]

You have a point, a lot of core Wii games have flopped.

Still, Twilight Princess sold 4.2 million (not as much as usual, I admit), Red Steel sold around 2 million, Resident Evil 4 sold 1.5 million, Resident Evil: Umbrella Chronicles sold 1 million and House of the Dead this year did well, and Metroid Prime is nearing 2 million with the re-release. Don't know No More Heroes off the top of my head, but I gather it did okay.

Of course there's been just as many hardcore flops.

The problem with The Conduit is that it isn't a great game, and core gamers only buy the good games. Mad World is also stupidly niche, I mean that would be a cult game on the 360, let alone the family-friendly Wii.

A real test will be this Christmas. Dead Space Extraction, Darkside Chronicles and Silent Hill... will they sell....

[Gr81]

HD consoles only sell "established titles" as well if you want to play that game. So if the Wii recieved the RE5's the SF4's the GTA's they'd sell, but that's supposed to happen. I wonder what would happen to a game like HoTD if that were on the HD consoles, an on-rail shooter? Didn't Time Crisis flop big time? What about Bionic Commando? Wanted? And let the record show, when you flop on the Wii you don't go bankrupt. Flop on an HD console and its curtains.

Give the compared to userbase talk a rest, its useless baseless and really holds no weight in an argument.

[-Mezzo-]

You brought a very good point to the table CHRIS.

[xztence]

While the install base is very high, it certainly remains risky for new IP to get good sales on the platform.

[Chris399]

That makes absolutely no sense. It's only "irrelevant" if you are a fanboy. How is that not related to this conversation?

A greater percentage of the PS3/ 360 user-base seem to purchase niche and core titles. Get over it. You can still have a Wii and have a blast with it, but convincing yourself that there are as many deep, core (note that I said, "as many", implying that there are indeed some) games on the Wii as there are on other platforms just makes you appear delusional.

Percentages matter. They are as important as attach rates. They signal to publishers and developers where to place their interests. So while you can bury your head in the sand and pretend that there is a wealth of quality, core titles being bought by everyone with a Wii, the rest of the world sees a different story. One populated by Bratz, Rabbitz, fitness games, HEART MONITOR SOFTWARE (for Chrissakes) and Mario Party/ Jam/ Spaz/ Race/ Dress-Up games being bought by soccer moms.

There's nothing wrong with that - the broadening of the gaming demographic to include women and people of all ages is great - it's just how things are.

Edit: Again, you've missed the point. Do you have anything aside from "Mario" to say in rebuttal? Anything branded Mario sells like crack in a crackhouse. Almost all of Nintendo's first party software sells brilliantly. No one is disputing that. We're talking about 3rd party and new IP software. What conversation are you in?

Furthermore, a lot of companies - ID, Valve and Epic, to name a few - just don't think that the Wii is worth developing on at this point. But you're the expert right? The Wii is a great platform for a lot of games, but it certainly isn't the platform of choice for ALL games and genres.

[Gr81]

Because if that's the case then damn near every game on the ps2 was a flop "compared to userbase"

There's nothing to get over. you seem to be the one with a bug up his ass. Mario Kart outsold by itself on one platform more than the biggest budget mulitplatform game on two competing consoles, but I guess that doesn't mean much.

I guess anyone with a different perspective is a fanboy though. Fair enough.

@Ezten: New IP's are risky on any platform. Difference being a flop on Wii doesn't mean the company goes under. That's not the case for HD consoles. So if this is true which platform truly is "risky" to develop for?

[jsslifelike]

I think you BOTH might be correct. Isn't this the reason that we have different consoles? In order to experience the best gaming has to offer in a particular generation, you need at least two consoles. Even if the attach rate is lower, selling 250,000 copies when development tech is cheaper and cost is lower may be advantageous. I can't really say anything about all of the games ending with the letter "Z", though... ;)

[Max Power]

I believe there is no plan to bring Demon's Souls to EU. Sadly it's due to no publisher and the like.

[Chris399]

I think that people may have forgotten just how thoroughly Sony cornered the market last generation. Almost every console - and several PC - title was in some way on the PS2. It was that prolific. And it wasn't as if a new engine or tech was being created for each piece of software either. A vast majority of the code was reused from game to game, company to company. Nippon Ichi Software is an excellent example of this and made dozens of games off of only a couple of engines, so it didn't really matter if they only sold 200K - they easily recouped losses and made a profit. There was only one audience to sell to really, Sony. There weren't multiple, profitable contenders (PS3/ 360/ Wii) to spread your development dollars around to.

This belief that all Wii games are dirt cheap to make is relatively unfounded too. No doubt Nintendo invests heavily in their own software, which is why it is as polished in appearance and game-play as it is. When people cry for AAA 3rd party titles on the Wii, they need to understand that if developers invest the amount of cash necessary to create these titles, sure we will get a few AAAs, but just as many flops, and just as many studios going under as we see with HD projects. That is the risk that certain publishers and developers just aren't willing to take. And why would they when these publishers are already deeply rooted in - most instances - profitable HD development? Why incur more risk and costs?

[Gr81]

Whether you know it or not you are proving the point of this guys article. Wii is largely in the same boat as the PS2 was in that devs recoup dev costs on a majority of their games even if they aren't clearing 500k.

No matter how you slice it Wii dev costs are 1/3-1/4 lower than the HD consoles and by the end of the year will probably have a larger installed base than both combined WW. MH3 seems to also contradict your reasoning, I'm sure DQX will as well.

You can attempt to segment gamers into catagories all you want, devs and publishers are guilty of this as well, it doesn't matter.

Gamers go where the games they like are. And if HD development was so profitable why are companies that focused heavily and primarily on HD development see more red than Compton LA?

[EvilTwin]

A brand new engine with brand new tech obviously isn't being made for the vast majority of Wii titles either though, so I'm not sure what your point is there, Chris. I gave a list of plenty of great PS2 titles below, and I seriously doubt Fatal Frame, Okami and Smuggler's Run are so similar that their development time was akin to a cut and dry port done on the cheap.

Compared to making an HD title, it IS cheaper to make a Wii game. Sega said HotD:Overkill turned a profit, and that's with about 250,000 copies (plus this game actually took its time and had some polish and production values). Sell that much of a decently made title on the PS3 or 360, and you're guaranteed to lose money. That's just the nature of the beast here.

If a third party invests the money for a AAA title on Wii, it'll cost less than on the HD consoles. HVS made its own customized game engine for some of the best graphics and control on the Wii, and they did it independently without a publisher for the first stage of development. If they had some better writers on staff, and some more talent in their art department, they would have created a AAA-level title. Working from scratch. Independently.

As it is, they've probably already turned a profit, or will before the end of the year. On the 360 or PS3, they'd be out of business.

[Chris399]

Monster Hunter and Dragon Quest, honestly? Of course those will sell well - on any platform.

Again, I have a Wii and I like it, but I have no illusions about where Nintendo and the development community as a whole sees profit for the machine. And that's with casual/ lifestyle/ franchise/ shovel-ware games first, with the core demographic far, far behind.

Continue to valiantly defend the Wii's anemic core line-up. Even after Nintendo themselves has admitted that they have an issue:

http://www.computerandvideo...

http://arstechnica.com/gami...

Mario and Zelda just aren't my thing. And I'm not alone in that camp. And suggesting that the success of the Wii is in ANY way indicative of it's quality or the quality of it's software is ridiculous. Millions upon millions of people eat Macdonald's every day and as a health and fitness professional I can GUARANTEE you that there are few if any positives to that choice.

Anyways gents, let's just agree to disagree. I'm outta here for good before Sidar shows up brandishing a Wii-mote.

Peace.

P.S. The Wii is not in the same boat as the PS2. The PS2 dominated the market, owning over 80% of the market share. The PS2 did not have competition like the 360 or PS3. The Gamecube and original Xbox were all but stillborn that generation, the Dreamcast was killed in the womb and none of those systems provided any real competition or incentive for developers to stray from the PS2. This generation the market is also much larger than the last. I don't know why you insist on referencing history when the specifics of this generation are so different than the last.

@ EvilTwin, you're shooting yourself in the foot. Neither The Conduit nor House of the Dead were AAA titles. They might have turned a profit, but it was at the expense of their production values. Should'a, could'a, would'a, but didn't. We'll never know if those games would have succeeded with extra polish or marketing, because they never had it, so stop speculating. Keep in mind too, that many "core" gamers who have a Wii are also likely to have another system. When presented with a choice in this scenario, what game do you think they will choose: The Conduit, Killzone 2 or Halo 3?

[Gr81]

All I am saying is that established franchises are all that sells on HD consoles as well, why you feel the need to disregard Wii sales due to "established" franchises but not do the same with the HD consoles are beyond me.

I am against the segmentation of gamers into this demographic or that demographic, I am not defending the Wii just providing a voice for another perspective which is underserved around here, but no less valid..if I do say so myself MORE valid lol.

Same boat not in percentages of marketshare but in dev costs Chris, again, you must have misunderstood me. Wii will probably outsell PS2 LTD but it would still not have 80% of the market. Some things have changed and honestly after this gen many things will not be the same.

[EvilTwin]

Chris -- Shooting myself in the foot? From what, you offering no rebuttal to the real cost of making Wii games vs. PS3/360 games? And c'mon, it was a laughable assertion that PS2 games all shared some secret underlying code that allowed developers to make them all ultra cheaply. (Clover studios would've loved that secret, btw.)

Conduit and HotD aren't AAA. Didn't say they were. But if you made them on one of the HD consoles, and they sold the amount they did on Wii, they'd bankrupt the dev. Not turn a profit. That's the whole point.

AAA titles have sold great on Wii. They just happened to be first-party games (I don't see anyone dismissing the sales of games like Halo or God of War, though). Third parties have been lazy. But we'll see how well games like Red Steel 2 and Shattered Memories do, as well as the Modern Warfare port.

But it's not like PS2 games all sold great. Psychonauts and Ico were favorites of mine. Maybe not AAA-level, but they had some spit and polish put to them. They sold comparably to Wii games that have had a bit of polish put to them. I don't think that's a coincidence.

[Chris399]

Pure fantasy. This scenario never happened, so why discuss it? We don't know how successful these games would have been on HD consoles. You're dense in thinking that the Wii and PS2 market are comparable - I've listed numerous reasons in previous posts why this isn't the case - and even thicker for believing that Wii development costs are minuscule.

To produce the kind of first party software that Nintendo does, or the kind of polished AAA games that people lament not having on the Wii will cost somewhere in the same ballpark as a next gen title. You do realize as well that a large percentage of PS3/ 360 games are made using the Unreal Engine 3? That itself keeps development costs on those platforms relatively low. And again, several "core" segment software developers just aren't interested in the Wii - Epic, ID, Valve - but you and Arius know better right? You're publishing house CEOs or successful software developers, I assume?

I don't dislike the Wii, but take issue with people who defend the blatant lack of non-Nintendo quality software on the system. If YOU feel that all of your gaming needs are satisfied by Mario and Wii Fit, great. It's wonderful that you are so content with the system. I'm not. I have what is at most times, a $350 paper weight ($249 + $60 controller + tax) sitting in my living room. This year I have Muramasa and Arc Rise Fantasia to look forward too and little else.

There's nothing wrong with holding a company and it's practices in a critical light. They are not our friends or allies, we hold no emotional attachment to them. It is a consumer/ corporate relationship. They are providing service relative to value. I do not see the value in my Wii yet.

Cheers.

[EvilTwin]

Chris -- It isn't fantasy that it costs more to make a 360 or PS3 game. It's "dense" to deny that, actually.

No, I'm not the head of a studio or publisher. But I'll listen to one like Brian Ferrell, THQ President/CEO. But I guess he must be lying, right? Because he disagrees with you?
http://www.gamespot.com/new...

This isn't a POV Arius or I created. The people who make games have said it, and they have numbers to back them up. For instance, Red Steel was supposed to be Ubisoft's AAA launch game; they messed up the controls, but not the visuals or audio or art -- it had time and money put into it. It was also a new IP from scratch trying to implement a new control scheme.

Total development cost? $12.75 million.
http://www.n-sider.com/cont...

Ubisoft's usual cost for PS3/360 developement? $20 million to $30 million.
http://www.edge-online.com/...

(Now before you say "that's AAA development only and it's skewed," the average/overall costs are also much lower: $5-8 million vs. $12-20 million.
http://www.gamedaily.com/ar... )

I never said Wii dev costs are "miniscule." They simply aren't as much -- in Ubisoft's case, HALF as much (maybe more, depending on the game), which is why NMH was a hit despite "only" selling about 400,000 copies.

You're using the Unreal engine here for comparison? Really? Compared to a dev kit that uses cooked up technology from the LAST gen of consoles? C'mon. That makes zero sense. You wouldn't say a PS2 game costs more to develop than a PS3 one, would you? Of course not. The Wii added some horsepower, but "Gamecube 1.5" just isn't as complex as the PS3.

Now if you disagree with this POV, your beef isn't with me or Arius. It's with Brian Ferrell or Yves Guillemont, or Midway's CEO David Zucker. Go take it up with them if you feel they're wrong.

I'm not a Nintendo apologist (Bioshock is honestly still my favorite gave this gen, and you're sure as hell not going to get it on Wii). What you're saying simply isn't true and is not backed up by the facts and figures publishers and developers have given for development costs.

That said, if you think the Wii is only Mario and Wii Fit, I can't help you.
Galaxy, World of Goo, Prime 3, Tiger Woods 10, Twilight Princess, No More Heroes, Pro Evo, Battalion Wars II, both Trauma Centers, MadWorld, deBlob, Paper Mario, Conduit, the best versions of RE4 and Okami...I've got my hands full with good games. And less than half of the ones I listed are first party.

[Chris399]

You think things might have changed in say, 3 years?

Quit while you're ahead, seriously.

And the Ubisoft article never discloses whether that is $20 million per platform, or $20 million total for a multi-plat game. And note that the cost of "HD" game development has been cut almost in HALF (if we reference the first article that you linked).

P.S. No where in any of my comments did I state that it costs less to make an HD game. I stated that some titles on the Wii - AAA, Nintendo stuff mostly - likely cost as much to develop. Careful reading is key. And as far as your "games list" (die-hard champions of the cause always resort to said lists), 4 have Mario or another Nintendo mascot, 5 are available on other platforms (including the PS2) and I'm not into Blobs or playing doctor. NMH and MadWorld are really the only ones to my taste. Hey, if you're happy with your Wii, that's wonderful. Other people are allowed to have different tastes. I don't enjoy plumbers, princesses or blobs, sorry.

[EvilTwin]

Lol, you just can't stand to say you're wrong, can you? You insist this POV is a phenomenon among people like Arius or me when it's not -- these are the devs and publishers.

But that's just not good enough. What, you think that because costs may have gone down somewhat on the PS3 or 360 these past few years, they've stayed stagnant on the Wii? Are you kidding me?

Here, this is from February of THIS year:

http://www.develop-online.n...

EA's CEO says Wii development is STILL a third to a fourth the cost of the PS3 or 360. I'll take his word over yours. Quit while you're behind. Seriously.

[Oh, and the bit about AAA-quality stuff being the same price regardless of platform? Again, Ubisoft says otherwise with Red Steel. The first link even likens Wii development with GC dev costs. "Careful reading" required, indeed.]

Your disagreement is with the people quoted in those articles, not me or Arius, so there's no point in arguing with you about it.

If you must, go ahead and tell John Ricitiello he's wrong, since you obviously have more experience than he does.

As for belittling the list...the best versions of Tiger Woods and Pro Evo are on Wii. Sure, you can play them on other consoles, but they aren't as good...just like you can play Madden on Wii, but the best versions reside on the PS3 and 360.

You can play clunkier versions of RE4 and Okami on PS2, or you can play the best controlling versions on Wii. (Or you can play a pretty lame RE5 instead.)

You don't like TC, no skin off my back. But those are difficult games and I dig 'em. deBlob is a very good platformer. Now if you want to write off that genre because it doesn't look "core," by all means, do so. But you're missing out on some great games. "Hardcore gaming" means more than blood, gore and swearing to me...although I love some Travis Touchdown murdering sprees after a long day at work, too.

I'm outta bubbles, so go ahead and get your last word in. But you should probably reserve it for someone like Ricitiello, Ferrell, Guillemont or Zucker. Apparently they're wrong and you're right, so I'm sure they'll appreciate your input.

[Gr81]

So much is wrong with your last post Chris, but unlike Evil, I'm not even going to touch it..mainly because Evil pretty much was spot on with what I would have said any way lol.

Are you kidding me? Dev costs are not and will never be comparable between HD consoles and Wii that's laughable and totally wrong, it just is what it is man.

But, hey go along living in fantasy land, it can be fun for a little while, right?

If you don't see what the Wii has to offer beyond Nintendo's main franchises, then whatever, to each is own. But don't attempt to belittle someone else's taste in games, that's just so utterly arrogant.

I don't understand what you mean when you keep talking about us 'defending Nintendo', I'm more defending the reality of a situation to the B$ some folks spew..in this case your B$.

I have a beef with third parties, Nintendo's efforts in my eyes have been excellent, third parties are the ones dumping $hit on a stick and calling it ice cream. But guess what? I don't buy the crap I buy what I like. And here's the funny thing, third parties are coming around. I guess the combination or lower deve costs and larger installed base is starting to look pretty appealing, especially in such economic times.

Shovelware has always been in abundance on the marketleading console, no more apparent than on the PS2, you know Spongebob outsold God of War? Does this matter? not really, but in your context it should.

Well, that's it for me, I'm out of bubbles..How did you get so many? lol.

[Chris399]

I'm talking about experiences catered towards a mature audience. Mature storylines, that don't involve princesses or blobs. Do you read? And when you do so, do you chose books in the young-adult section? Or do you choose a biography or something by Paulo Coelho?

There's nothing wrong with wanting adult content in my past-time of choice (gaming). When I look at the Wii, all I have are questions. Where are the Personas? Where are the Flow or Flowers? Lost Odyssey? Even last gen we had a Eternal Darkness and Skies of Arcadia on it's fore-bearer.

Oh and regarding the EA link that you posted (and disregarding all of the ANCIENT links that you provided to back up your argument in the first place - honestly, they were three years old), what games is he talking about, comparatively? I'm sure that Carnival Games cost much less to make than Dead Space. I'll leave it up to you to decide which is a better game.

Edit: Neither one of you can read properly, it seems. I'll repost the text here: "No where in any of my comments did I state that it costs less to make an HD game. I stated that some titles on the Wii - AAA, Nintendo stuff mostly - likely cost as much to develop." AAA NINTENDO STUFF, MOSTLY. Did you grasp it that time?

I'm sure that WiiFit and MotionPlus and Galaxy cost somewhere in the neighborhood of an HD game. You two are very selective in your reading. And Arius, you really need to stop comparing the PS2 to the Wii, they're not even playing the same sport. Their circumstances, libraries and growth are entirely different (aside from being profitable).

[spongeboob]

That is the true reason why the hardcore Wii games don't sell.

oh know

I can hear the 2 or 3 Wii fanatics coming to attack me.

[kunit22c]

Its funny how some people add something at the end like that hoping that it stops people from replying and if they do they seem stupid when really your seeming kinda stupid, its supposed to be "oh no" and not "oh know"

P.S. Monster Hunter 3 sold 500,000 something in the first 2 days, and thats Japan only...

Just saying :)

[spongeboob]

Oh No i made a grammar mistake and the grammar police caught me. Can someone please post bail.

BTW the Wii still sucks. LOL

[kunit22c]

let me guess, you have a 360..

[TheMART]

"So, what does the bulk of this information mean exactly? These signs point to the fact that there IS still some segment of a core gaming audience on Nintendo’s tiny white console."

Selling 250.000 copies of a game with 60 mln. users out there is shiat either way you twist it. Thats no sign that there is still a segment of core gaming, thats pathetic. Not even a half % of all users have bought the title.

Plus, the development of a Wii game costs something like 40 to 50% of a 360/PS3 game. We've heard that for example the dev of Crackdown just broke even on 1.5 mln. sales. So lets say a Wii game can break even on 500k to 750k sold. Selling 250k is sad for the developer.

The Wii is meant for shiatware, piles of minigames and 1st party nonsense Wiifit, Wiisports, Wiimusic, Wiishiatware. That sells.

[Anon1974]

Ugh. What a terrible article. I can understand where it was trying to go, but it offered nothing new and no worthwhile commentary. It did, however, complain about low Metacritic scores from less reputable sites. Here's a question. Wouldn't those be somewhat cancelled out by high scores from less reputable sites? Isn't that the point of offering an average score?

Don't waste your time reading this article if you haven't already. Nothing to see here.

[Man_of_the_year]

You both are absolutely correct. I agree.

[bigjclassic]

Simple as that. Alot of those games are just PS2 games with a slap of HD paint on them. (infamous, Darkness, Turok, Crackdown, etc, etc.) They just look nice.

Also take into effect that the media hasn't been Nintendo friendly since 1996 (N64 launch). So those things you have to take into effect. Nintendo were right with their "blue Ocean" strategy because the majority of gamers are not ready to afford those high priced consoles at the time.

Usually, form gen to gen, you see a slight increase in GFX power, but the PS3/360 jumped almost 2 gens in advance compared to last gen. Nintendo just went the traditional and "safe" way when making the Wii.
And it is paying off big time.

But anytime you have one or two games (WiiFit and Wiiplay) that outsell all of your rivals exclusives (PS3 or 360)then you are doing something right. The gaming media needs to give credit where it is due.

*Fact- The wii is the only console that has 9 exclusives that sold over 4 million units and has the highest rated console exclusive to date (SMG)*

[jsslifelike]

...but you're right- I never thought of it in those terms.

[TheoreticalParticle]

You're based on VGChartz numbers, that makes you absolutely worthless.

[Dringostarr]

Nintendo need the core gamer. It was its core fanbase that carried it through the tough N64 and even tougher GameCube days. If casual gamers were to find their fix elsewhere... then what will Nintendo have to fall back on if they frighten off all their fanbase?

There are plenty of core games on Wii, some really quality gems too. But core gamers will get a lot more out of a 360 or PS3. A Zelda game every three years, with a Mario or Metroid game inbetween just isn't enough for most gamers.

The problem is third parties haven't been making the most out of the system. Even those that have tried, such as Sega and EA, haven't exactly done a great job.

It is up to Nintendo to lead the way. And maybe next year, with Sin and Punishment, Metroid, Mario Galaxy, Zelda etc... they will show that the Wii is more than just a casual toy.

Because right now, it's not so clear.

[ZoidsRaven]

People are still calling the Wii "last-gen"?

I guess that's all Wii bashers can do now, just hold on to their wrong statements about the Wii in hopes that no one proves them wrong.
(But would it really matter if they got proven wrong? ............ No.)

[Brasi82]

The Wii's graphics may be last generations as they are comparable to late model X-Box games, however the game play of the HD consoles dates back to the introduction of the Dual Analog controller and are comparable to the original Playstation.

I agree with you ZoidsRaven and Fierce Musashi

[lizard81288]

remember how the atari failed/died? because of "3rd" parties, they made crap. the Devs should make better games or but effort into them for the wii.there either very short, like MadWorld, or lack good gameplay, like NMH. for NMH it was good with the assassination missions, but other than that?...why would i want to pick up coconuts, or trash? atleast in The Conduit, its a new genre on the wii, i don't know of any FPS on the wii, however, people that do play them, thought The Conduit was average.

although i have noticed lately,with wii exclusives,ps360 fanboys are complaining about them, not being on their system, so they must be doing something right, right?

[Fierce Musashi]

How many times have we heard that? Any smart person knows the Wii is next-gen, simply because of the things it can do that last-gen couldn't.

[poopface1]

They suck.