Topic: The key to winning the console war is glaringly obvious...

So, what your saying is Nintendo using their best selling franchises that have appeared on every Nintendo console and handheld to date to sell their current home console means they're spicifically targeting 3DS owners? Is there going to be over lap between people who bought MK7 and those buying MK8? Absolutely, but is it because Nintendo is spicifically targeting 3DS owners, no. They're targeting people who like Mario Kart regardless of when or why they liked it.

Nintendo tends to use the same sort of terms between releases to convey themes but they don't really have a pattern, not like, say, Capcom always following up a numbered Monster Hunter with a G-rank edition. World, for example, implying expansiveness or vastness (thats my guess anyway). MK8 and 3D world are expanding off existing ideas so their names tie into those games in some way to convey that.

As far as Pokemon goes, I doubt there will be a main series game on Wii U, the only console games that are considered canon are colosseum and XD and they didn't do too well either. You could probably argue that R/B (or R/G) wouldn't have succeeded if they weren't on handhelds. One of the biggest criticisms of the GC games is that the battles don't translate as well to consoles, battling on-the-go is a big part of the series.

In the way you are suggesting? Yes, it is ludicrous. They are using existing brands as a low risk strategy rather than coming up with a new IP which is a common theme across the industry. Some of those brands also exist on the 3DS but a lot of them don't. Like I said, you are cherry picking to make it look like there's a pattern when it's really just noise. At least you admit this....

Although you don't appear to understand why rolling dice and saying half of them were even isn't proof that the dice are conspiring to roll even. Cherry picking is a logical fallacy, deliberately ignoring contrary evidence makes your argument lack any weight.

Yes it does, it's called evidence. Some of the games last appeared on the 3DS and some didn't. Ontop of that the only game that you could argue was first on the 3DS and is now getting a Wii U sequel is Super Mario 3D. Even that isn't unique to the Wii U and you only have to look back as far as the Wii and New SMB to see that this happened even with a non-struggling console. The fact that they are both pulling brands from consoles other than the 3DS and that they did this with consoles that weren't struggling is definitely something that strongly counters your argument.

The difference between 'inevitable' and 'wouldn't be surprised if they announced it tomorrow' is fairly small. You think it's highly likely and I think it's incredibly unlikely. The difference between your position and 'inevitable' is basically a measure of how confident you are that you're right about this. Apparently not very much. Also I didn't claim that you were saying that "only the 3DS was being used in this way" I was just saying that there doesn't appear to be a bias towards the 3DS remakes in the Wii U's library both current and upcoming.

I'd say, let's agree to disagree. But I suspect you wouldn't agree with that either.

So for the record, as far as I'm concerned, the fact that there have been other cross platform sequals, and there are also sequals to Wii games is not evidence that my beliefs are wrong.

And cherry picking is allowed in the context of my point, thank you. I am citing examples of games which I believe are proof of the 3DS userbase being targeted. Again. I have not said that every single game coming to the Wii U is a 3DS game.

And there is a very clear difference in meaning to those words. I didnt say that I think it's highly likely, and that's not what those words suggested.

the key to win the console wars is to buy the oponents!!!!! what I really doubt would happen.

I want to see everyone pony up their last professional speech concerning the psychology of debate. @skywake I think you're great, man, but you're coming off as pretty arrogant. Unless any of us hold a PhD in psychology, let's just admit we're all armchair quarterbacking here and not try to pretend we know more than people who study this stuff for a living.

Moving on - @Tim_Slim, you have a definite point and I do agree with you. The Super Mario 3D Land branding is the biggest one, I would say. Perhaps they're not doing it as their only strategy for selling more copies, but they're certainly not stupid and they know they might snag some 3DS consumers here and there if they play it close with their naming systems.

Apparently even you don't agree with this because you then went on to cling tightly to your flimsy argument before I even had a chance to agree with it

wikipedia:
"Cherry picking, suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position. It is a kind of fallacy of selective attention, the most common example of which is the confirmation bias.

Cherry picking can be found in many logical fallacies. For example, the "fallacy of anecdotal evidence" tends to overlook large amounts of data in favor of that known personally, "selective use of evidence" rejects material unfavorable to an argument, while a false dichotomy picks only two options when more are available."

Nice, so you're just going to disagree with everything I say. So then my view on what you were saying is that Nintendo is using this 3DS userbase abuse as a strategy and that they could extend that to Pokemon. That you think this would be a good idea despite knowing nothing about Pokemon. However you think it's highly unlikely because Nintendo are too dumb to realise the potential market for a game they make and you don't understand.

Go ahead, disagree with everything I said again. It would basically be an admission of defeat.

It's not Psychology and who exactly in this argument studies it for a living? It's just that apparently I'm the only one here who values an argument that tries to avoid logical fallacies. Speaking of... Ad hominem. Instead of arguing the substance of the argument being had you decided to call me an arrogant armchair quarterback. Attacking the (wo)man instead of the argument.

So please if you want to attack my posts attack my posts rather than the person behind the keyboard. Like I said, I would have accepted the "I'd say, let's agree to disagree" from @Tim_Slim in the previous post if it wasn't followed by "ahh, screw it. Fire the cannons!"

The reason the Wii U isn't selling is because the software isn't compelling. It's ALL Mario games.. Where's a new Zelda? Where's Metroid? Where's Kid Icarus? Golden Sun? If Nintendo hasn't been working on these yet then the Wii U is doomed because these are the types of games that will sell the system and they're the type that take the longest to develop. Heck, if they told me The Wind Waker had a couple extra dungeons or a master quest, this would make me want a Wii U. Or how about footage of a New Smash Bros tournament with some opinions from veteran players? New characters we actually care about (Megaman doesn't do it for me, just my opinion, probably not yours I know...)? Key changes to existing movesets? Items? Stages? These are the Wii U's biggest upcoming games and Nintendo is so insistent on withholding information that the advertising comes across as terrible.

thank you for your post about things that mostly would never sell a console ever

I'm going to make you very clear for Skywake.

Wii Fit U is not evidence that Mario 3D World is not targeted at 3DS owners. Nor is anyother piece of software. You can quote definitions all day, it doesn't change anything.

What you're saying is, I have to proove every single Wii U game is a copy of a 3DS game for my point to be true.

And seeing as we're qouting Wikipedia. He we go

Evidence, broadly construed, is anything presented in support of an assertion. This support may be strong or weak. The strongest type of evidence is that which provides direct proof of the truth of an assertion. At the other extreme is evidence that is merely consistent with an assertion but does not rule out other, contradictory assertions, as in circumstantial evidence.

That was just as pointless as your reply.

Edit: what are you talking about in that final paragraph? Are you listening to me, or the voices in your head?

Is this because I said Wikipedia wasn't a valid source when you quoted the 25 best selling games off all time?

Is this why you're trying really really hard to prove me wrong? Have I got a forum board nemesis? Golly. That's swell.

You might want to try again, in a different topic though buddy. You'll get me eventually, keep at it kid.

Only Nintendo knows how to win a console war... It's glaringly obvious mate

Here are some of my tips to winning the war and who I think is winning each factor

1. Buy every decent studio (too close to call who is winning because I prefer Nintendo but Sony have lots of talent absorbed into their first parties)
2. Bribe media organisations to promote your products and not badmouth your products (Sony)
3. Make the best games (Nintendo)
4. Suck up to 3rd parties and pay them to not deal with your rivals (all 3 have previous in this respect but currently MS and Sony are doing a good job)
5. Have the best marketing (MS)
6. Have a decent library of exclusive games that resonates with general gamers (not sure who is winning at present because of generational transition but Sony and MS will never get a 30M unit game like MKW)
7. Have no concern about actually making profit so you can lose money and still pretend it's a win (MS just pipping Sony)

@Tim_Slim
If you can find a better source than VGChartz and wikipedia for the best selling games that disagrees with either or both then go ahead. Cite it and claim that it's wrong. This isn't academia, this is a forum, those sources are fine. Same with the definition and validity of cherry picking data for an argument. If you can find a third party source outside of this forum that agrees with the use of cherry picking data in an argument then go ahead. Cite the source.

Your evidence quote from wiki that doesn't add anything to the thread is indeed odd. Although it would at the very least put your evidence for your claim at the weak end of evidence according to that definition. Your evidence supports your assertion but does nothing to rule out my alternative hypothesis. That the use of 3DS brands is purely a product of them using pretty much any brand they think will sell. By chance some of them are but by chance alone. However your intent was to try and take the p**s (auto forum censorship for TBD) of me quoting wikipedia. The difference is I quoted wikipedia and it agreed with me, you quoted it and it didn't.

And no, don't flatter yourself. I am not your forum nemesis and you are not special. Infact I didn't even realise you apparently had a go at me for quoting wikipedia previously. Actually I have had arguments with plenty of people on this forum and others on topics across the board. Often jumping into a different thread and agreeing with the same person on a different topic. Time to reduce the size of your ego a bit I think.

I would would agree that my evidence is on th week end of the scale. But its still evidence. And for the record, you quoting the definition of 'cherry picking' was even odder, and offered even less to the thread.

If I look at all the software available on Wii U, and highlight Mario 3D World as evidence, I have then considered every piece of software, and not (technically) cherry picked. The fact that there are examples which don't back my point does not take any weight away from the evidence shown in Mario 3D World.

_{And you need to lay off the personal insults. Let's stick to the original argument rather than throwing insults at each other -Lz}

How? You were claiming, and still claim, that cherry picking is perfectly fine. That it's all good selecting cases that support your claim while discounting those that don't. I called you out on it, presented the omitted titles, cited a source which explains why it's a logical fallacy and you still claim you are right despite this. What I want to know is if cherry picking is so great and so fantastic and me calling you out on it added nothing to the argument we were having then.... why are you now trying to pretend that what you were doing wasn't cherry picking?

_{Same goes for you. Let's stick to the topic at hand rather than argue about each other. -Lz}

Here is my warning to everyone here. Let's stick to the original topic (Nintendo and/or Wii U) rather than discussing about each other's ability to argue. This will lead to nothing more than a flame war.

You have to think they're cooking up an Infinity or Skylanders style Pokemon Wii U action game, right?

That would be a great way to separate the two entities. Even better, let me upload my 3DS Pokemon's stats from X and Y to the specific action figure and make the Pokemon stronger with a better move set.

Even better, make it a Nintendo NFC character action game. Nintendo has the best collection of characters, EASILY, of any video game company. They have mascots sitting on the shelves who could sell games right now simply based on nostalgia. Smash Bros. is one of the most popular games ever.

Boom, you just made a bajillion dollars, Nintendo, thank me later.

I say that I am not cherry picking, in the context that you are presenting it in. I initially admitted cherry picking because I didn't take the time to think about what you are saying. And neither are you, you are sticking to a strict definition of the phrase 'cherry picking' without thinking about how it applies to the suggestion I am making.

Again, I have not cherry picked because I have looked at every game on the Wii U and have highlighted certain titles as evidence. The fact that there are also games that do not prove my assertion does not take anything away from the evidence in Mario 3D World. Put simply, a game like Wii Fit U is not proof that Nintendo are not targeting 3DS owners. Which is what you seem to be suggesting.

(Edit: You've probably already read this and I do apologise for the late edit (I havent changed any of the original text). But I need to point out that the key component to disproving your cherry picking accusation, in the context you are using it, is that other games are not evidence against my point.)

Let me change things round. If I was saying that Wii Fit U makes me think that Nintendo ate deliberately targeting Wii owners. Would you say that isn't true because games like Mario 3D World exist?

And one more thing. Get off your philosophy high horse please. You clearly aren't as clued up as you think you are.

P.S. Sorry mods. I will stop here. But this incorrect academia that is being thrown around is really annoying me.