The lack of online is a *severe* disappointment, IMO. On the plus side, they have implemented the "one friend code per console," rather than per title. That saves a lot of unnecessary frustration.
Also, you frequently mention wanting to see VC games go onine; I'm not yet sure that we'll ever see VC titles updated beyond what they were at launch (a la XBLA). I don't recall them promising or stating that the VC would do anything but play the games as they originally played. It would be a major addition, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Besides, you don't want to see the damage I can do to you with King Slender.
I think the Wii has a lot of promise. I also think it's too early to declare that I'm satisfied or dissatisfied with it. I can see why people really like it, and I can also see where people see room for improvement, and I can see where people can express disappointment with developers like Ubisoft, who (Red Steel aside) see the Wii, at the moment, as a place to dump lackluster ports of titles with updated control schemes (e.g., Splinter Cell and Prince of Persia).
They have exceeded my expectations with the VC for certain. Sure, I don't much care for the prices. However, consistently updating the offerings every Monday (even a crappy one like this week) shows us the commitment they have to delivering content. I don't get people's argument about the game selection, because half of the fun is the anticipation (what's coming out next week???); if Nintendo "blew their wad" early on, that would be killed. Nintendo wants to keep our eyes (and, more importantly, our wallets) directed at the VC for *years* to come, and I wouldn't be surprised one bit to see some major titles strategically witheld to spurn interest in the Wii in the coming years when sales slumps occur. They're keeping the systems pretty spread out in terms of content (save for the lonely N64 game, but be patient).
It's a great system thus far; let's see how we feel about it in a year's time.
One thing I really resent is the praise lumped on Zelda. It's surely a great game (I'm going to start it soon enough), but I don't look at it as a "Wii" game. It is a GameCube title updated to play on the Wii, with the only difference being the control scheme. If we (some, anyway) can grouse about Ubisoft giving us Prince of Persia with Wii controls, why the Zelda love, when it is essentially doing the same thing? Nintendo is by no means the first company to rerelease exact titles on new systems (I'm lookin' at you
ers, Capcom, and your tens of millions of Resident Evils). I find the treatment of Zelda as a "Wii launch title" as the same thing if, say, Square-Enix put Final Fantasy Xii on a PS3 disc and called it a launch title. Both are surely fantastic games. But I don't think it is exemplary of what the Wii can and will do.