Retailer The Hut Believes The Wii U Now Has A "Respectable" Install Base In The UK

"It's a good news story". I don't know, something about how that sentence is said just seems a bit weird to me. Anyways, glad to hear the Wii U's doing good.

i have only had wii u since xmas and picked up some bargain games. some as old 2012 graphics are great and play really good. so much potential. im looking forward to this year, maybe some more 3rd parties will start making more for it

I'm very proud to be part of the UK install base! I go out of my way to promote Nintendo, resulting in two WiiU sales over Christmas and numerous 3/2DS sales within my family and friends

It's going to go the way of the GameCube, unfortunately.

In the UK, most people only play GTA, FIFA, or COD, and label Wii U as kiddies console. Their loss

@Ootfan98
Their loss is Nintendo's loss.

The Wii U has definitely been selling better in the UK but the install base is still ridiculously poor at around 300K (Nov 2014). Nintendo France said last month that just under 500k has been sold in France since launch which I THINK is the best in Europe.
The "kiddie console" image in the UK has destroyed the Wii U.

Can't argue with the games though. Superb quality. Just need more people to care and want to buy the console to play the games apart from fans... and here lies the problem. You can make the best games ever but if only a handful of people buy them the financial reward is underwhelming because of a very poor install base.

@Zen Turtle
If the Wii U get anywhere near the GameCube sales (approx. 22m) that would be an outstanding success. I held on to the belief that this was still possible until MK8 and even SSB. Now I am 90% this won't happen.

Making the best games to keep the fans that brought the console happy is now pretty much all Nintendo can do. Mainstream marketing of the console has virtually ceased.
It is such a shame that these awesome games will reach very few people.

It's kind of a weird cause for celebration. It's not even accompanied by any sales figures... just one guy who heads a major retail store. In fact, the article in question was asking 36 executives about what they were looking forward to this year, and he's the only one who said anything about Nintendo besides the Nintendo exec. In comparison, you have many software developer and retail executives commenting on the success of Xbox and PlayStation. Don't get me wrong, we have a great year coming, but I don't think this one small comment means anything, yet.

@Ootfan98 Every market in the world is like that. In the US the top 3 are GTA, COD and Madden with FIFA also in the top 10. In Japan there are 3 versions of Yokai Watch 2 in the top 10 and 2 versions of Monster Hunter 4.

The Hut is the retailer that's in charge of the Nintendo UK Online Store so this pretty much means nothing. I had to send my New 3DS ambassador edition back to them because it was faulty.

This article "feels" weird. "It's a good news story?" What would've been nice would have been numbers or some kind of data. The "it's selling better" with no data may sound nice, but is ultimately rather hollow without data or details.

And while Amiibos have been selling pretty well, I have trouble considering them a success if Nintendo isn't going to bother to keep the damn things in stock. What's out sold well-straight into the hands of resellers because Nintendo didn't care enough to deliver adequate stock to retailers.

@Ootfan98

Well, to be fair, the Wii U had many of those more adult-oriented games, and Nintendo fans ignored them. So maybe it is a kiddie console. How many of you bought Call of Duty, Splinter Cell, ZombiU, Deus Ex, Mass Effect, or Bayonetta? According to sales, Nintendo fans greatly preferred games starring, essentially, cartoon characters.

@Hotfusion I was going to say the same thing to him basically. I would be happy if it reaches Cube sales as I'm sure Nintendo would at this point in time.

A good news story?I feel really odd reading this,i'm not used to it.

@Quorthon All but two of them are multiplatform though (ZombiU and Bayonetta 2 are exclusives) so for the most part you could ask the question "Why buy on Wii U when you can get it cheaper and it's actually the complete package on PC, Xbox 360 or PS3?". The only answer which is in favour of Wii U is "I only own a Wii U"

It's not going to reach anywhere near Gamecube-level sales and that's ok. Times are different now for console gaming; nobody is going have the same numbers they had in 2004. The Wii U is eking out a respectable existence.

@Grumblevolcano

Yep, multiplatform. But that further backs up my point, as those multiplatform and adult-centric games sell better elsewhere. Multiplatform games do not sell as well on Nintendo platforms, typically, because the Nintendo audience ignores them. I did a full analysis on this at one point, using the GameCube, which was an equivalent platform to it's competitors in it's generation, but routinely saw 3rd party sales that were very noticeable worse than the competition, including the Xbox which had roughly similar sales.

It's this vicious circle I've noted so many times before--Nintendo fans don't buy 3rd party, so 3rd party games become rarer or lack DLC, so Nintendo fans ignore them even more, and then they just stop appearing--as has already happened on the Wii U.

Even the people who only own a Wii U aren't buying the games. Ubisoft noted that ZombiU lost money, and no official sales figures have been released for Bayonetta 2, which likely indicates poor overall sales.

Nintendo fans, since the N64, have a history of ignoring 3rd party games, and demonizing adult-centric titles like Call of Duty. It's part of why I've come to think Nintendo may be better off as a 3rd party company--even their own fans don't use the consoles as "game consoles," just Nintendo boxes. Ultimately, that will severely limit Nintendo's revenue.

MCV published a lot of great data on the UK market in the last couple of days and it's staggering how much Nintendo's machines are used just for Nintendo games. Nintendo are the 4th best selling publisher in 2014, but the 3DS and Wii U both only occupy a very small percentage of the market. More physical games were sold on PC last year than Wii U which seems nuts. I can't remember the last time I saw a physical PC game outside those Blizzard sprcial editions.

@Quorthon It really is the main point. We don't like to be seen as having the kiddie console, but then the games that do the best trend that way. I have Mass Effect, NFS, Deus X, Bayonetta, and one or two others I'd put in the older demographic, but that's hardly ever the topic of conversation.

The Wii U gets compared most to the Gamecube, but that even had a more mature software library. I think the games for the adult demographic have become much bigger budget, so there's risk when there won't be an assured large audience on a console. Third-party publishers gave it a swing when the U came out, when there were few out there thanks to some terrible marketing, found sales to be awful, and gave up. That will be the U's epitaph.

Wii U FTW! With the games we'll be getting this year, the new slogan should be Reggie's "What's wrong with you"?

@Quorthon As somebody who has bought five of the six examples you've listed (I didn't buy Mass Effect, because I stopped buying EA games a while ago without making any real conscious effort on my part) - why the heck should I continue to buy these games on Wii U when all I get out of them are missing game modes, lower quality textures (occasionally), shoddy ports and, all in all, an incomplete, inferior experience for no reason other than my console of choice? It's not like the Wii U can't do something the PS360 can or something. Of course, none of this applies to Bayonetta 2, which is my personal GOTY for 2014. But that's beside the point, here.

I agree, however, that consumers aren't entirely blame-free. People who want more "mature" titles on Nintendo consoles should be more willing to actually buy them; but by the same token, it's hard to justify purchasing a game on a Nintendo platform when it works out cheaper to just buy a PS3 or 360 and contribute to "the problem" at hand. That's the way it has been since the N64 era, and it's the way it'll continue to be with the Wii U2 (featuring New Super Bono Bros!), or whatever name a theoretical future Nintendo console has nowadays.

@Vineleaf

It's very frustrating. I've been a Nintendo fan since I was a kid with the NES, but (as should be obvious), I have grown up and I want the occasional adult-centric experience.

The last few Sonic games I played quickly lost my interest due to writing straight out of a Saturday-morning cartoon (which as I understand it, no longer exist on network TV in the US), but they sold better on Nintendo consoles because, as noted, the demographic prefers cartoons over adult themes.

It was interesting playing Ratchet & Clank: All 4 One with my son. The characters were cartoony, animated in a cartoony way, and had lively personalities, but at almost no point did the title (Rated E10) feel like a "kiddie" game. It was friendly for a younger audience, but written well enough for adults to find some enjoyment--and the action-packed gameplay was a pure blast.

With Sonic and a lot of Nintendo games, I get the feeling that I am totally not the audience for the game. I like the cartoony stuff now and then, and loved Kirby's Epic Yarn due to it cramming more pure cleverness into one package than almost anything, but I'm adult, and want to solve complex problems, explore adult relationships among characters, confront mature themes, and even churn through violence.

Part of the reason I so loved the GameCube was that it was attempting to break away from the kiddie aspects of the company. I grew up with Mortal Kombat, Doom, Killer Instinct, and Turok. None of these experiences are part of Nintendo now. Nintendo's lazy and lackluster support of Bayonetta 2 does not fill me with a lot of confidence in Devil's Third's success.

Retailer The Hutt! Is this an Episode VII spoiler?

@tudsworth

By all means, you can hardly be blamed when modes or DLC are cut from third parties--but as noted, it's because of the audience and buying habits that 3rd parties start removing DLC or features, and then games entirely. Nintendo is simply not a priority as generations of Nintendo fans have basically given 3rd parties to see no reason to treat Nintendo as a priority.

Remember the Batman: Arkham Origins fiasco? Warner Bros pulled the season pass and Nintendo fans got all flippant about it--but how many of them actually paid for the Season Pass? Almost none of them. This was a huge issue with Nintendo fans at GameInformer to the point that I wrote a blog specifically telling them how they brought it on themselves--I quoted angry users, the bulk of whom later admitted they didn't buy the DLC or even the game in the first place. Warner Bros didn't see how making the Season Pass content would pay off, and why should they release content people aren't buying? They tried. Nintendo fans said no. So they cut their losses before incurring more.

My point, which I think you got, was simply: General Nintendo fans complain when the company is called a "kiddie company," but spend the vast majority of their money on "kiddie" or kiddie-friendly games, and even more so on a few key 1st party franchises, most notably the MZP (Mario-Zelda-Pokemon) ilk. Every dollar we spend is a vote for the world we want--unfortunately, those of us who spent money on adult-centric Wii U games are an extreme minority. Most Nintendo fans voted against them, and almost anything else without the Nintendo logo on the front.

I also bought a load of the games noted--both Wii U Call of Duty games (the Wii U was actually my real prolonged introduction to the franchise), Splinter Cell, Bayonetta, ZombiU, Ninja Gaiden 3 (which I should've skipped as the NG2 was something I really hated, so I don't know what I was thinking), etc. I wanted the Deus Ex update, which reviewed really well, but never actually saw it anywhere.

Where was the Bayonetta 2 advertising? Was there any? I bought it last year but not got round to playing it yet. But bought it just as it was supposed to be really good!

@Quorthon It is a shame, and Ratchet and Clank is one of the reasons I get some Sony hardware from time to time. I much prefer handhelds, so that means I bought a Vita, and there's no shortage of mature content there. So I get what I need, while still getting a bit of a console fix on the U.

The tricky bit is that I also don't like a lot of the popular multi-platform titles. Call of Duty has frustrated me (I really like Medal of Honor: Frontline on GCN, though later titles got a little too Rambo for me... kind of how I feel about the genre), GTA is okay, but I liked the narrative and retro-cool of the original Driver better, and FIFA hasn't been fun in a long while for me. But I still want to support big titles. RPGs won't really ever be front and center due to being more akin to novels than films (to me, at least), so that really leaves action games and films with video game elements. I can't say either of those strike me as good for the Nintendo consumers I know.

I don't know about you, but I can't think of a solution, either, other than Nintendo getting out of consoles and staying in handhelds. Sony would make that deal in a heartbeat, too, to mix catalogs. Nintendo's handheld juggernaut could get hardware upgrades, and Sony's consoles would be even more beastly. Do I want to see it happen? Not really, as I do like Nintendo's innovative streak in their hardware. But I don't see it as unlikely if the next console bombs.

@Quorthon WB Games fired the first volley with Arkham Origins. I was fully prepared to drop money on a day one purchase for the game on Wii U because of my love of the franchise. Then I found out that the multiplayer was stripped out of the Wii U version of the game and I lost all interest.

It was weeks later that WB realized how that looked and informed everyone of the Wii U being $10 cheaper but by then I had spent the money I would have used to buy Arkham Origins to buy Windwaker HD. I wasn't going to pay full price ($60) for a gimped version.

I did pick it up eventually when the price dropped and found the following:

• Multiplayer was missing
• WB Account link-up missing, meaning free costumes and cross promotions with mobile apps were missing.
• Game had game breaking bugs like not fully loading the world so you would endlessly fall out of it and die (great fun in "I am the Knight" mode where any death starts you completely over).
• They had cancelled the season pass
• They couldn't be bothered to release the DLC mission add-on. (And yes, I've purchased everything but a skin pack out of what was available.)

So while I hate it didn't sell well, they didn't really put a great effort into the game either. It's a shame too because I have played it a lot more than I ever played Windwaker.

@Darknyht

I think there was a lot of stuff botched for Arkham Origins in general. It was a different team working on it as the normal team was preparing the next-gen Batman game in the background the whole time. The X360 and PS3 versions were known to have game-breaking bugs early on.

Ironically, the Wii U version was notable for being the most stable and least buggy of all the releases, but yeah, there was issues with it all around.

Wait, the Wii U version did come with the Deathstroke add-on content. Mine came with a code for it, and that was after they said it was missing the DLC.

On a personal note, I didn't mind the multiplayer missing as long as the game was $10 cheaper--as I was highly unlikely to be using the multiplayer anyway. I wonder if some of the communication problems and confusion over the game stemmed from Warner Bros gauging Arkham City and Injustice sales, and unsure if the Wii U was going to be worth their time. The confused decision-making seemed like writing on the walls concerning their Wii U support.

@Quorthon I'm in the same boat man, older gamers don't dislike colourful games and we're old enough to not get stick on the playground. Doesn't stop us wanting adult options to enjoy the full spectrum of gaming. I love Nintendo, only buy their consoles but have a thing for zombie games. I miss allot of adult game's I would play so I can still play Mario/Zelda etc but it's money that talks and 3rd parties are very hollow entities atm, as far as I read zombie u made money, it just failed to hit targets of profit hoped for so was dumped. My point being that the big third parties won't take risks unless gains are great, and likely. And that Nintendo won't back you in the media war even if you released a game of the year with the adult content fans have been screaming for!!!

@Vineleaf

For the next console to be successful, Nintendo needs to, essentially, turn the Wii U around the way Sony did the PS3, but I don't see that happening. I'm personally rather intrigued by the idea of them going third party, especially if they do it while they still have ample money in the bank.

I think them entering the industry as a third party would give them unprecedented value and possible influence, particularly if they set MS and Sony (and maybe Valve or Amazon) in a bidding war for their exclusivity, as I don't think Nintendo would "spread their games around" evenly like Sega did. Nintendo would want an exclusive deal where they could hold some sway and influence in the hardware.

That a more interesting and exciting future to me than seeing them trot out another console that will only be purchased for Mario and Zelda.

@ULTRA-64

Perhaps I misread that, I could've sworn ZombiU didn't make money, but remember thinking how unlikely that seemed, as it supposedly sold around 700,000. Maybe it was just about not meeting expectations to bolster their confidence in the franchise.

I really wouldn't be surprised to see another Zombi title from Ubisoft this generation, but I would expect the "U" to be dropped, and for it to be multiplatform.

With any new generation, I usually buy Nintendo first, and then my other console sometime later. For instance, I bought the Wii early in 2007 and the X360 in late 2008 (after it's 3-year anniversary), but the faster-than-ever abandonment of the Wii U prompted me to get a PS4 already. And I'm currently playing that far more frequently. Sony had their own indie sale last week, and I grabbed 5 titles for $25. Or something like that. Also had a 10% off coupon for the holiday down time.

@ZenTurtle
The Gamecube is one of my favorite systems with a ton of great games on it so if the Wii U is even close to that I'll be happy.

In terms of sales I'll take a console with fun, playable and unique games over a console with a bunch of cookie cutter 3rd party games any day. If I want better graphics I'll buy a PC.

@Quorthon Yes, but it was the confused communication that created problems for the game. I think most of us would have been fine without the Multiplayer. To be honest, I hate games that tack unnecessary multiplayer onto them in a bid to keep the games out of the used market longer. And this is a poster child for that as more time needed to be spent on fixing the main game.

I can't help but think that had they come out and clearly stated that "Yes, we are not putting the multiplayer mode in the Wii U version, but will sell it $10 cheaper," I would have still purchased it day one. I also think the general reaction might have been better. Instead they waited, and those that could purchased on another system to get the "full" experience.

That is part of the problem that Wii U owners cannot fix. Publishers consistently do moronic things to create artificial disparity between the consoles and then try to sell everything at one price. Then they complain when the inferior version doesn't sell.

Deus Ex is an excellent game, but I can't blame anyone that paid $30 to purchase it on the 360/PS3 instead of the $50 being asked on the Wii U. But the result is that Square-Enix hasn't bothered to do anything else on the console, never stopping to see how their actions contributed to it. I picked it up when it finally dropped to $30 and fully recommend everyone else do the same (if they can find it).

@Yorumi That's what kind of baffles me. Is it that Nintendo's architecture is that different? There are so many niche titles on Vita, released at retail, and I can't imagine how they do it. I love it, of course, as my Vita library very much rivals my 3DS, and I know a lot of titles I like are more likely to show up.

It's the only thing I can think of: porting is a colossal chore to get it over to Nintendo (thinking U here... the 3DS does alright with support). They simply have to beef up their specs if the future if they keep doing consoles.

@Darknyht

Fair enough. Perhaps not the strongest title to use as an example. Injustice itself may have sufficed, as it took them a long time to get the DLC out, and indicated several times that the delay in the DLC was due to Nintendo's actions. Or inaction. Or general slowness.

Nintendo, as well, shares blame in this in a big way--that the Wii U comes with a maximum of 32GB of storage space means that most 3rd parties were likely to view DLC as a high-risk endeavor on the system as a large portion of the consumers would likely have no place to store it, limiting sales. This, along with the historical "apathy for 3rd parties" that Nintendo fans exhibit, and the limited power of the Wii U meant it was unlikely to ever be a safe place for 3rd parties to release games or content.

To be fair, I think the only system that didn't totally botch storage this generation is the 3DS. Mandatory installs on the PS4 and XBO eat up that 500GB of storage space at remarkable speed, and the proprietary cards for the Vita are hellishly expensive and hard to find.

@Yorumi

When Nintendo is spending the bulk of their time churning out platformers--side-scrolling platformers at that--the amount of creativity that can really be explored there is ridiculously limited.

Resogun, Unfinished Swan, Proteus, Flower, etc--these games ooze raw creativity, style, and freedom. I'm seeing Nintendo cling to as much tried-and-true content as they can muster, but very, very little in the way of creative or bold new concepts.

Hopefully, Splatoon, Codename STEAM, and Xenoblade Chronicles X will help the company find a new spark of creativity this year.

@Vineleaf

Sony cultivated an audience with the PSP, which was popular with those Aksys, Atlus, and NIS America anime-centric titles, so I would imagine that those actually sell pretty well on the Vita. I think these games would be easy to port to the Wii U, given that it's substantially more powerful than the Vita, but the publishers clearly don't have the confidence in the system.

@Quorthon I have all the games you mentioned. Granted, I only bought Splinter Cell, Bayonetta and Deus Ex at anytime close to release- COD was bought in the bargin bin.

@Yorumi
I was more referring to the XboxOne but I'm tired of people referring to things about the Gamecube as bad when that system was loaded with quality games.

As for unique, you're correct and I should have used quality instead of unique, Happens when I'm typing in a hurry. I don't care what system someone plays on if they enjoy it. I know what I like to play and I know where I can find it.

@Yorumi I think the whole competition concept comes to mind. Of course competition between the big companies in general makes the games of better quality. This generation doesn't really have that competition at all.

Wii U blew its chance of huge success by bad name choice and poor advertising. Microsoft ruined the Xbox One's chance of huge success because of the DRM approach on reveal day in 2013, higher price and the concept of releasing pretty much everything on last gen as well as current gen. That left Sony to easily buy a lot of gamers' hearts just by making fun of Microsoft's bad choices.

Sure Xbox One did end up top selling one month but that was likely due to the large price cut of which even the 3DS showed that strategy works well.

@ZenTurtle At this point, Wii U sales matching those of the Gamecube would be a good thing.

@Quorthon I agree. They badly need a New Wii U (because the original name isn't confusing enough) that ships with a 500 GB or larger external HDD and make the Wii U deluxe the new basic model.

I think they looked at Microsoft's Xbox 360's Slim configuration that shipped with 4 GB when designing the Wii U storage options. The problem is that I could plug just about any USB storage into the 360. But in light of that, 8 GB is great and 32 GB is downright generous.

@Yorumi Those were great days, and I still have so many games from that era that have held up. I wonder, though, if mobile gaming has so eaten into console and handheld sales for casuals that none of the three have enough strength to really battle. That's just my perception, not based on any available numbers. The people I know who loved video games have less free time now, or more media choices, and so are getting small doses of games through Facebook or phone.

@Yorumi

I can't agree more with the comments on competition. Nintendo actively trying to act like they aren't competing with MS and Sony has done untold damage to the company, and outside of a determined core of Nintendo fans who cling to this mantra, the rest of the world sees Nintendo as not only in this competition, but failing at it.

You can tell things are bad when fans cling to even paltry non-news like the non-information in this article as some kind of turning point or moment when "naysayers were proven wrong." What's a respectable install base? How about some numbers?

Years ago, Nintendo justified the Wii by saying that "if there were only powerful, aggressive dinosaurs, they would die off." Those competitive animals led to forms better adapted to survival. It's like Nintendo chose to be a prey animal with no real survival advantages.

@Vineleaf

Your sentiment is why I think it's time for the industry to move towards a unified plaform. Ah dammit, I was going to write a blog detailing the best way for this to work, but got distracted by, you know, life and such. But then, both MS and Sony came to the table this time with hardware that earned them profits, as opposed to losing money for a while hoping to make it back on revenue.

@Darknyht

If the New 3DS continues to sell, I wouldn't be surprised to see a New Wii U next year, with some kind of larger internal storage.

@ZenTurtle

With one of the best (albeit smaller) core lineups from Nintendo, Gamecube, no matter how small had a great library of exclusives!

@Darknyht You could add official internal hard drives to the 4GB model too so lets say you have 250 GB internal hard drive and run out of space, you could then easily upgrade to 320 GB or 500 GB without having to buy another console. Rock Band DLC returning for example has tempted me to upgrade from 320 GB to 500 GB while keeping my current console.

@Grumblevolcano

Yeah, Microsoft did a great job with how harddrives were utilized and replaced on the X360. Then screwed it up on the XBO. Opening the One voids the warranty. But you can install an external.

You can replace the interal HDD on the PS4 without issue, though.

Literally, almost everything this generation is the opposite of last generation.

@Yorumi

I think the PS2 maxed at around 145 million, not 160, but whatever. I've also found, when it comes to those older machines, Wikipedia is a vastly better source than VGChartz. Granted, if I pulled numbers out of a hat or picked them with a Tarot deck, I'd be about as accurate as VGChartz.

Anyway, hard to argue the point that casuals bloated sales last gen--they totally did, especially for Nintendo and, to an extent, Microsoft. I didn't expect this generation to pick up as quickly as it did (well, with Sony and MS anyway), but holy crap, did it ever.

I've long felt the last generation was unnaturally rushed--the X360 coming only 4 years after the original Xbox, and that the industry and consumers weren't ready to move on. The last generation ran for a pretty solid amount of time, and stayed pretty consistent through and through, especially years 2~6. I think it ran until its natural end, and audiences were more than ready for a new generation to release, given the massive sales of the PS4 and the XBO, which is selling better than the Xbox 360 and original Xbox.

It'll be interesting to see if sales actually fall below last generation or not. Originally I would have said "yes," but Sony and MS have some of the best sales of their game console histories, and the line-up for 2015 looks spectacular. I think Nintendo is going to be far more hurt by the casual absence than MS or Sony.

To your last point, my biggest fear is that game development costs skyrocket to such a point that more games are made to the lowest common denominator in order to desperately make money back. I hope that doesn't happen, but it was starting to last generation.

@Yorumi

My concern about the industry shrinking back down to a "gamers-only" kind of audience is just about the exclusion. There is something to be said about feeling like something "belongs" to you on a kind of personal level--but there are extremists with this viewpoint that are damaging to gaming.

I've come to enjoy the inclusionary aspect of modern gaming, and while there is still problems with sexism, it's still more welcoming to women, and I'd rather be able to play games with the woman in my life than always away from her. I enjoy having that Dom to my Marcus, as it were. The Siren to my Gunzerker.

The expansion has allowed so many of those core indies to find solid footing, and I'd like to see the industry be able to reach a comfortable openness and audience to compete, toe to toe, with Hollywood. I would just prefer if we could get away from dedicated hardware and focus on games vs games to drive healthier competition.

Frankly, I think there is some appeal to the "games for gamers" kind of thing, but--and I mean no offense in this--I feel like I've outgrown that. I love sharing my hobby with my girlfriend or my son, or even my folks in that rare occasion.

I think lowest common denominators are here to stay, but I also think indies are as well. The industry has reached a point where we can appeal to almost everyone on any level--in my opinion, our final hurdle is to get rid of dedicated hardware and move the competition entirely to games vs games, and shops vs shops.

It's taken me a while to fight the urge to be a snarling misanthrope against people I view as "not real" in my interests in various things--gaming, science fiction, Star Trek, Transformers, etc. Sure, when a lot of things get popular, they get watered down--the new J.J. Abrahms Trek movies are pretty terrible, and the first two Transformers movies left a lot to be desired (particularly in character development of the Transformers), but some of these things ebb and flow in popularity. We may be welcoming a bunch of new hardcore fans to befriend.

I can see some positives in the industry shrinking again, but I like it's growth and open arms right now. Even with all the cookie-cutter releases (even from Nintendo), there's still a lot of substantially amazing experiences to be had and shared. I mean, when I was a kid, I would have loved to be able to share my love of gaming with my parents, but they were removed from it and didn't understand it. My kid, on the other hand, gets to enjoy that experience, be it in Ratchet & Clank, Lara Croft, Smash Bros, EDF, or Rayman.

The biggest mistake gamers make, is assuming that the majority of gamers are actually gamers like them- ya know, ones that go to fan sites and keep up with news and reputations and all that. We account for a very marginal slice of gamers. Most people don't think anything bad or good about Nintendo. Just like most people don't think anything bad or good about Mr Coffee, Sharp, Vizeo, or any other brand.

We live in a bubble where gossip makes the rounds, reputations of consoles rise and fall, and discussion about console wars is king. Most gamers have no stake in all that. 90+ % of people who will end up buying a console this gen, don't think about Nintendo one way or another- they dont have an invested opinion about how Nintendo is doing- financially, sales-wise, or any other manner. Nor do they care. To most people who will buy a console, MS Sony and Nintendo are just another brand name. They don't care about "oh Nintendo only sold X amount or Nintendo isn't getting multiplats". They'd probably laugh at us if we told them we care about that kind of stuff.

In the end, the average Joe is going to buy what his friends and colleagues tell them is fun from personal experience, or they'll buy what they're familiar with already. All this stuff we think makes a difference, doesn't make a difference. I'm convinced Wii U is an appealing product for normal, average Joe gamers. My co-worker who owns a PS4 just bought a Wii U today during that eBay sale for $260. He'd never considered Nintendo because, well, habit you see. He's just always played PS and that's what all his friends play. But once I told him about Wii U and showed him trailers for games I was playing, he started showing interest. And today he bought one with 3D World, Smash and DKC. That's the fifth person who's bought a Wii U after I told them about the system since launch, all five of which weren't Nintendo gamers. That tells me something- people like what they see, they just aren't seeing it without word of mouth.

@NintendoFan64 Good news for the retailer anyway. And we want Nintendo products to make money for retailers and especially for Nintendo.

@JaxonH "They'd probably laugh at us if we told them we care about that kind of stuff."
Many of us laugh at us for that.

@JaxonH Also my friend and I have a Wii U each. The other day my friend took his around to another friend's place and with MK8 and Smash Bros he's hooked. He had a Wii but it gathered dust.
My first friend only got a Wii U after playing my launch console. I "got" the console on it's first annoncement and it has delivered, whereas most people don't get it until after they've actually played it.
Nintendo need to do some marketing to help this word of mouth amongst western male gamers and actually have some western male gamers in their campaign - maybe just before the release of Splatoon would be a good time to get such a campaign going.

@MadAdam81
Ya I noticed that too- everyone seems to have owned a Wii. I think the over-abundant shovelware paraded as equals with quality software is what led many to miscalculate the entertainment value of Nintendo consoles. Most everyone owned a Wii, yet none of them had heard of Metroid Prime 3, or Zelda Twilight Princess, or Xenoblade, or even Mario Galaxy (usually just New Super Mario Bros Wii and Wii Sports, and shovelware).

So I think people just aren't taking the time to research what Nintendo is offering this gen, because they have a false impression of what the entertainment value is of Nintendo platforms. But once they see the good stuff (usually by word of mouth) they buy one. I have yet to show a person the Wii U and it's games who hasn't, at the very least, thought about buying one. That tells me the Wii U would be a spectacularly popular console, if people only saw the side of it that we know and love.

It's ok though. I wish Nintendo well, but they'll survive regardless. I'm not too concerned with their financial well being. They're not going anywhere, so we can sit back, relax, and just enjoy the ride.

@JaxonH Xenoblade is excusable though, the main way you'd really know it outside of Japan is as "the game that Gamestop scalped".

@Grumblevolcano
Fair enough. Of course there's two dozen other games that could've been listed in its place, was just making a point is all.

Honestly though, I'm kind of greatful to Gamestop for what they did. That's one scenario where they serve the greater purpose, even if it was to line their own pockets, we (gamers) still benefitted. Selling the game used for $90 on the other hand, well [cackle...] that's another story.

All it took to convince my friend to buy a Wii U was one evening of Mario Kart 8. We all need to spread the Nintendo gospel

@Yorumi

Ohhh okay, then. Ha, I went off on a little tangent there, so sorry if I confused your response with those little monsters who are intent on driving women out of gaming (I was not lumping you in with them, it just triggered that rant).

You're viewing the casual fad as a lowest common denominator style of game development. I was just viewing that as it was--a passing fad of generally low-quality games built to make money off of a popular gimmick.

I view lowest-common-denominator games as those that are largely predictable, with regular releases, and designed to appeal to the widest possible audience. This is where I put sports games (Madden, Fifa, of course), and titles like Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed. These are popular franchises specifically designed to sell to a wide audience.

Much has been made of the repetitive nature of Call of Duty, the predictability and familiarity in the releases, and the formulaic design--and these are intention in order to appeal to a mass market. Any shooter that largely just follows CoD's basic design concepts is another lowest-common-denominator title, and as far as I'm concerned, so is any Mario, Zelda, or Pokemon game (the MZP titles I refer to frequently), as they are largely predictable, generally unchanging, and released frequently to appeal to a wide demographic. Nintendo almost never varies from the formulaic nature of these titles, because they are specifically designed with that formula in mind. I find it ironic that Nintendo fans will often bemoan the "predictable sameness" of Call of Duty, but totally overlook it in Zelda, Pokemon, or Mario themed games. It required almost no effort for me to pick up and play Mario Kart 8, and the game had no tutorials--because it has been following a very specific formula two decades old.

In that, I would very much like to see what, I believe, you are talking about--games that gamers would seek and enjoy. Stuff that breaks formulas, dares to be different, or is happy to be a throw-back or an inspired classic genre of some sort. Gamers are the people who look forward to new shmups (finally got Resogun, it's fantastic, but damn hard!), and likewise old genres.

I think there will always be fads and gimmicks like Kinect and the Wii Remote, and games that utilize them well surrounded by games that are crap--and I'm fine with that. That kind of weird stuff helps shape up the industry and remold it in better ways--either the new gimmick (like analog sticks at one time) works in molding a new gaming landscap, or it fails and we have an experience that, at least for a moment, added something unique to the landscape, even if it didn't work.

It's another reason I want the bigger industry with a unified platform--because then the audiences are big enough that maybe, the next Bulletstorm or Sin & Punishment will actually find enough of an audience to continue to grow as franchises.

That's what I usually mean when referring to "lowest common denominator" game design.

@JaxonH

I don't think there's any reason to be grateful to GameStop for selling Xenoblade Chronicles. If GameStop wasn't there, it just would've been Best Buy or some other place. Really, the problem was that NoA gimped its release, and prevented it from receiving the attention it deserved. And when GameStop discovered its popularity, they turned into scalpers.

GameStop makes their money off the hard work of other people. It's one of the crappiest companies out there.

@Quorthon
Ya they're a crap company, but no, it wouldn't have been sold at Best Buy or any other place. Gamestop proactively funded localization, and like them or hate them, there's no getting around the fact that we would not have gotten the game without them.

@Quorthon to say Zelda is as "predictable and sameness" as COD is laughable

@Quorthon Firstly, as of last October, Zombie U had sold jjst over 2 million copies, and HAD made Ubishafted profit. Also, an article was written a few days ago by an industry analyst, which I tend to agree with.

Many many 3rd party devs are scared of trying to lroduce for Nintendo/Wii U as they cannot match the quality offered by Nintendo themselves. Most 3rd party ports on the Wij U have been lazy, and just been run through Unity 2.4, and then touched up here and there. If devs actually took the time to work out the strengths and weakness of the Wii U, we would se much better games from 3rd partys devs. However, it has now got to the point where the DEVS dictate to the console makers what their consoles MUST have, so their job is much easier. Nintendo, not being a sheep, does not follow this trend, and rightly so. Seriously, is it too much to ask devs to actually have to learn new stuff? They get rediculous amounts of money as it is, God forbit they might have to do some extra work.

A very well known on-line review site wrote something about a year and a half ago, which is true. Using a vastly under powered console, Nintendo smashed the last generation. Now, not only devs, but review sites and the games industry as a whole wants to see another company win this generation.

Right now, Nintendo will be fairly happy with how their system has picked up over the past eight months, and they continue that momentum into this year. With the line-up we know of, it is trying to do that. We also know from Myamoto, that their are other projects in the works, that have yet to be announced. Until now, when it comes to quality titles for this generation, Nintendo is clearly winning the battle. Only time will tell if they can continue that trend. A small price cut right now would do them a massive favour. Microsoft have had three price cuts in its first year, the first home console to do so. It was not done because of massive sales, but out of necessity, and they are noew reaping the rewards. Nintendo could/must do the same, and their sales will improve, and that will attract more devs, including more of the 500 or so Independent devs who are developing for the Wii U.

@JaxonH

If GameStop funded localization (which it did not need, as it was not re-localized for US audiences), that'd mean GameStop has publishing rights on the game. GameStop may have sought out a deal, but they didn't fund anything.

@Ootfan98

Um no, not if you're familiar with either franchise. They are both predictable and formulaic. It's not a bad thing, but it's a sign that the developers and publishers, specifically, do not want to mess with the formula. Most Zelda games follow the exact same story and plot elements, they use the same items or the extremely similar items with slightly different names. They feature a kidnapping of Zelda, they feature puzzle-based dungeons, and new weapons found in dungeons also happen to be the key to fighting the boss of said dungeon.

Zelda games are extremely formulaic. So much so that the few different titles are also those that have been the least liked, worst-reviewed, and worst-selling, notably, Zelda II: The Adventure of Link and Majora's Mask. Even with the slight change with how weapons worked in A Link Between Worlds, the game still followed the hallmarks of the Zelda formula.

Hell, for the most part, every game is a stand-alone title precisely so they can more easily maintain the formula, reusing the same items and enemies and bosses and concepts time and time again.

@akaDv8R

I sincerely doubt Nintendo is "very happy" about the slow pick-up for the Wii U over the past 9 months, especially considering that the sales are still below projections they had well over a year ago. The sales they now have are what they were targeting for the holiday season of 2013. If anything, Iwata is wiping sweat from his brow as he sighs in relief that they finally have profits.

As for Zombi U's sales, I'm sure if they were 2 million, we'd actually know about it. Those are numbers any publisher would love to tout. Whatever dark region of your anatomy you pulled that number from is not to be relied upon for such things. Even notoriously over-estimating-everything site, VGChartz, only puts the game at 820,000. Most estimates are closer to 600,000 or 700,000.

Even this very site reported that Ubisoft did not see the game as profitable: https://www.nintendolife.com/news/2013/07/ubisoft_ceo_admits_zombiu_sales_were_disappointing_no_plans_for_sequel

If you're pulling the tired old Nintendo fanboy cliche of "other developers just can't live up to Nintendo's quality," then you are truly deluded. Nintendo fans don't care about quality as much as they care about the Nintendo logo on the front. That's why poor-quality games like Game & Wario and the entirety of the Mario Party franchise continue to earn high sales--they're from Nintendo, and one of them has Mario slapped on the cover.

Hell, the best reviewed Nintendo DS game is Grand Theft Auto: Chinatown Wars--and it had notoriously poor sales (and is an incredibly fun game). It's very easy to argue that GTA: Chinatown Wars is a higher quality game than literally everything on the DS, but it sold worse than even the most sub-standard crap from Nintendo. http://www.metacritic.com/game/ds/grand-theft-auto-chinatown-wars

Essentially, 3rd party devs don't like Nintendo because Nintendo frequently doesn't give them the tools they need for development--the Wii U is the only current-gen home console that can't handle the Unreal 4 engine, for instance. Nintendo's online infrastructure is a joke compared to MS, Sony, or PC, and the consoles have so little storage space that it severely restricts the ability of 3rd parties to sell games digitally or to sell DLC.

On top of that, Nintendo fans as a whole--let's face reality here--are notoriously closed minded about anything--not just non-Nintendo games--but anything outside the MZP (Mario-Zelda-Pokemon) trinity. This is literally the only fanbase in gaming that has a deliberately adversarial relationship towards 3rd party developers, not only ignoring the games when they are released, but also being angry when that treatment drives away 3rd party support. You know what MS and Sony fans do? They actually buy the 3rd party games in addition to the first party games. Funny, third parties have no problem releasing games against MS and Sony's high quality first party games.

I'd suggest you stow the "3rd parties can't live up to Nintendo's quality" nonsense. It has no basis in reality, and only serves to make you look like a completely blind fanboy living in a fantasy world where, magically, Fling Smash and Pokemon Rumble U are "high quality games."

@Quorthon
But they do. It's why the game was exclusive to Gamestop. They might not have invested in new voice actors but they paid for the publishing of the game on Wii in North America, which is why the game was available exclusively at GameStop. Doesn't mean they necessarily "own" anything- I doubt Nintendo would give ownership. But they did pay for the game to be published in NA, and as such were the only ones allowed to sell the games printed with their funds. Of course, If Nintendo ever wanted they themselves could print a new run and publish in NA, but as of yet the only copies to be sold here were the ones Gamestop paid for.

@Quorthon I am still laughing.

You might have valid points regarding formulae, but to say it is the same league as COD with regards to sameness is mind boggling

@JaxonH

Well, that's precisely what publishing means--companies that pay to publish a game have some amount of ownership of it. It's why there's such a fiasco surrounding the ownership of the N64 Goldeneye. Rare made it, Activision now owns the Bond license, but Nintendo published.

I'd like to see where you found this information. Something is clearly amiss here. There has never been a case of a retailer getting publishing rights or paying for a game to be published. They tend to secure those exclusives in ways such as promotions and marketing. GameStop would get exclusive rights to a game because they work a deal with the publisher on sharing marketing or something to that extent.

@Yorumi

I would also like to see a market where niche titles are able to be more profitable and find the audiences they need. I think there are a few companies that do well in the niche market, and catering to those audiences--Treasure for example. Maybe WayForward, which is why I so adamantly support both of these guys.

@Ootfan98

So which is it to which you are unfamiliar? Zelda or Call of Duty?

@Quorthon
What makes you think a company has to get ownership wen they publish? There's no absolutes with this sort of thing. Each contract is different. Nintendo publishes 3rd party Japanese games all the time in the west. They don't "own" them, they just reap the benefits of the profit from their investment. Franchise owner gets their game exposed to a new region (and maybe even receives a cut) and the publisher makes money and/or adds a game to their console lineup, or in the case of GameStop, adds an exclusive to their store that no one else is selling in NA.

Yes, it was very unprecedented for GameStop to do this, because you're right, I don't think it had ever been done before. But ever since Xenoblade the trend has been set. They "supposedly" did it again with the Metroid Prime Trilogy, Xenoblade and Fire Emblem Radiant Dawn reprints, and yet again with Tales of Hearts R on Vita, physical copy exclusive to Gamestop because they funded the manufacturing of the copies. It was originally slated for digital only.

@Quorthon lol, I guess it must be one of them

@JaxonH

All I asked for was that you provide evidence to your claim. I tried looking, and all I found was blind conjecture from Nintendo fans on random forums, mostly bordering on conspiracy theories about evil ol' GameStop. I sincerely doubt GameStop put any money into publishing Xenoblade Chronicles. The company's logo would be on the packaging at the very least, if that was the case. And again, NoA didn't have to do any localization work as it was already localized into English for the European release--all they had to do was print disks with the North American region lock. I doubt GameStop ponied up the dough to print those disks.

@Ootfan98

Well that much is obvious. I'm starting to wonder if you're familiar with any Zelda outside of Ocarina.

@Quorthon lol, if you say so

@Quorthon
Dude think about it. Nintendo refused to publish the game in NA for years. Then all of a sudden the game is announced for NA exclusive to Gamestop. Why do you think that is? You think Nintendo just felt like being charitable to them? After 3 years just up and decided to publish the game in America, and not only that, but only sell it at Gamestop?

Nintendo was against footing the bill for a NA version from the get-go. It's why fans latched onto Operation Rainfall- precisely because Nintendo didn't want to localize the game. They feared it wouldn't sell and didn't want to risk it. Gamestop took notice, saw dollar signs and struck a deal to cover production costs, provided the game only be sold at their store. The proof is in the pudding, as they say.

EDIT: Found this in less than 5 seconds...

http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/rumor/28666/gamestop-approached-nintendo-to-publish-xenoblade-chronicles

@Yorumi

I don't need proof. I'm just informing someone that that's what happened. It's a source, and sources are evidence. Believe it or don't, I don't really care. The fact the game was exclusive to Gamestop after Nintendo refused to publish in NA for years should already be proof enough. This is just further evidence. Speculation or not, I'd hardly label it "wild" considering it fits right in place with what actually happened.

@Yorumi
You walk down the sidewalk, see a woman lying on the road dead and a car speeding off, you can't "prove" they hit her. But even a child could tell you what happened, whether they have "proof" for it or not.

1 Nintendo has no interest in NA localization.
2 Operation Rainfall shows clear signs of demand in NA.
3 Gamestop, a company which has in hindsight on multiple occasions paid for physical copies to sell in their store, receives exclusivity for Xenoblade, a game Nintendo had no interest in localizing.
4) reports of sources citing Gamestop struck a deal with Nintendo to pay for publishing duties

Whether that's enough to prove it happened or not, I believe it. It's very unlikely Gamestop didn't pay for that game. Irrefutable proof? No. Statistical likelihood based on evidence and circumstances? Yes.

But again, I'm not here to get in a tit fight over whether they did or they didn't. Believe what you want, but most people can put two and two together. Nintendo isn't that generous to just up and pay for localization on a game they don't want to localize just so they can gift Gamestop with a freebie. I choose not to believe that. You choose to believe whatever you want.

@Yorumi

Are you reading my posts? I don't think you are. I just spelled it out for you that I never claimed proof of this.

But for the record, you can't prove Gamestop DIDN'T pay Nintendo to publish in NA either, so it's a moot point. You choose to believe Nintendo randomly publishes games they have no interest in publishing and just rolls the dice to see which retailer gets exclusivity and I'll choose not to believe such a thing.

@Yorumi
Yes, my own personal beliefs based on the strong evidence of what happened. Nintendo giving Gamestop exclusivity IS evidence Gamestop paid money to cover costs. That's just common sense. Publishers don't just grant exclusivity out of the goodwill of their hearts. It doesn't happen. The fact this was a game they had no interest in localizing is even further proof that Gamestop paid money to cover costs of bringing the game to NA.

If a homeless man went shopping at Macy's we could logically deduce that someone gave him money. Why? Because of the evidence that most homeless people are in fact homeless because they don't have enough money for necessities. If a publisher who has no interest in publishing a game suddenly publishes that game with a sole beneficiary, we can logically deduce that beneficiary paid money to foot the bill. Why? The evidence that publishers are in business to make money, and there's no such thing as a free lunch.

@Quorthon I have been reading some of your replies to other peoples`s statements, and seriously, you need to stop smoking what ever it is you take. Nintendo is on course to meet their sales predictions for the year, so that is one reason for them and their share holders to be optimistic. The Wii U is the ONLY console at the moment that actually makes profit, the other two won`t for at least another year or so.

So you claim to know more about the games industry than the people that actually work in it? The article that was written about 3rd party devs not creating software up to the standard of Nintendo 1st party stuff was written by a member of a large software company, but, you know better.

As for games, well,
Bayonetta 2 just won Metacritic game of the year, and Nintendo Publisher of the year. Puts a lot of the so called "Nexr Gen" titles, such as CoD, FiFA, to shame.

I am first to admit when a company does something that I believe is wrong. Nintendo should never have used the name " Wii " in their latest console. there should have been more aggressive marketing, and they should have got 3rd party devs locked into contracts, like Sony and Microsoft do, rather than just relying on them to hold up their promises.

However, in the time the other two consoles have been out, there has not been one game that can actually match the quality of Nintendo 1st and 2nd party titles. Going into this year, they have a great lineup announced, with more to come. People go on about how Nintendo keeps making MK and Zelda. well, let us think how many CoD games there have been since the 360....... around 20 or so, including PC titles. Now that IS milking a franchise, that barely adds anything new each year. Nintendo users are usually older gamers, between 24-38, as was stated in a report last year. They are mainly past playing the latest run and gun games, or a new FIFA title, with just cosmetic and roster changes.

I had a PS4, and the one game I played that I actually enjoyed was a re-make, The Last of US. Now for me, that is probably one of the finest titles ever made, but it has not been followed up by yet another great game. PS4 owners waited so long for Drive Club, and it turned out like dribble. Master Chief Collection on Xbox One, turned out like dribble. Microsoft are even giving players a month of Gold free for being let down so badly.

At this moment, I would rather be a Wii U owner than a PS4 or Xbox owner. Great titles already available, more coming this year, and the only one to offer FREE on-line play. combine that with my gaming PC, and I have the best of both worlds.

@akaDv8R

First, and once again you are wrong about the Wii U being the only console making money. Both the XBO and PS4 are being sold below cost, and both are known to be profitable (given a margin for error or change with the XBO price cuts, but those led to much higher sales). I've posted links to this countless times. Bother to do a little research before talking from your hindquarters, and stop making assumptions. The PS4, at the very least, was profitable the day it went on sale--before the Wii U was profitable.

Second, I never claimed I "know more than anyone in the industry." You saying that is a strawman fallacy, and for that matter, when did I say I wasn't in the industry or working in gaming in some capacity?

Third, Nintendo having the highest average Metacritic score for 2014 does not magically "put Call of Duty to shame." By that logic, those companies you're dismissing put Nintendo to shame in 2013 and 2014. So, what, you like Metacritic when it sides with your fanboyism? Because that's what this is becoming--siding with something when it is favorable to your tastes.

http://www.metacritic.com/feature/game-publisher-rankings-for-2012-releases
http://www.metacritic.com/feature/game-publisher-rankings-for-2013-releases

Hell, to that point, the first year of any generation is always the worst--at no point should we have expected Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft--or any other publisher--to be at their absolute best during that time. If you really want to compare next-gen to the Wii U, do it this year and next year. Most of the games on PS4 and XBO are cross-gen, so almost none of them are utilizing the systems to their fullest.

This makes your "in the time the other two consoles have been out" argument downright pathetic. What games did the Wii U have that were of this fabled Nintendo quality it's first year? Well, there was Rayman Legends, but everything else was pretty poor. Pikmin 3 maybe.

Your entire post is driven by cherry-picking and fallacious statements. Did you write this just to be as fallacious as possible? Your "I had a PS4" comment is also highly questionable. I question the very environment of that statement. For one, it doesn't make sense to get rid of a console during its first year out, because even the most uninformed gamers knows there will be more games eventually, and for another point, if you actually played The Last of Us, then you played a game of the fabled Nintendo quality that you claim doesn't exist on these consoles.

The entirety of your pathetic argument hinges on "MS and Sony don't have good games right now, in the first year, when they aren't generally supposed to, so that makes Nintendo superior, and I had a PS4 once, whatever that means." This gives me the impression that it was not actually your PS4, that you merely had access to someone else's PS4, and are judging the console based on your time playing one game--if you played it at all. It also gives me the impression that you are fully aware that the entirety of you post was fallacious and absurd since the PS4 and XBO have far more games coming to them in 2015 than the Wii U or 3DS.

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2015/01/20/2015-video-game-release-schedule.aspx

Or that the PS4 is the console with the most development occurring on it, followed closely by the XBO, while the Wii U apparently didn't even register during a current GDC survey: http://www.gdconf.com/news/gdc_state_of_the_industry_deve.html

PC and mobile are, of course, at the top because no one needs to meet any standards to release a game on there.

So again, to summarize: You're attempting to badmouth MS and Sony for having a first year roughly equivalent to the Wii U's dismal first year.
You are going to cling to Nintendo's 2014 Metacritic average, but you're going to ignore 2013, or 2012. By the way, if you're going to go running to Metacritic for your data, be sure to use ALL of the available data--or you're just cherry picking again. While Nintendo itself as a publisher did great, looks like the average scores for the Wii U fell short of the PS4 and XBO: http://www.metacritic.com/feature/best-video-games-of-2014

The PS4 had almost twice as many games as the Wii U, and they average over 5 points higher. Hell, the 3DS even fell behind the Vita, both in average scores and number of releases.

That's fine that you like Nintendo better than the other guys, but if the best you can do to justify it is a comment loaded with nonsense, cherry-picked facts, and fallacies, you might want to keep that crap to yourself. Frankly, if you have to do this much reaching, I can't help but wonder if you attempt to avoid reality this much in other facets of your life and if you have to do this much reaching to explain why you like something, maybe you don't actually like it.

Now, onto Nintendo apparently meeting their sales expectations. This is riddled with issues: Most notably that they are only now reaching the sales numbers they originally projected to be at by this time last year. They are actually a year behind schedule, and the only way they're actually "meeting projections" is because they've (wisely) lowered the number of consoles they expect to sell to a very sad level. They are expecting to sell as many Wii U consoles this year as Sony will sell in 2 or 3 months. Yes, they literally expected to be at 9 million in sales by Jan/Feb 2014. Actually, now that I think of it, I believe they actually intended to be at those numbers by December 2013.

Oh, and the free online comment. I rolled my eyes. That tired, lame argument again? Saying Nintendo's online is better because it's free is like having a bottle of water that's 98% empty for free as opposed to a full bottle of water that costs $1.50. That's the value of that ridiculous argument.

@JaxonH

Actually, @Yorumi did prove GameStop didn't publish the game, and beyond that, you are now demonstrating a fallacy of shifting the burden of proof and charging others to prove you wrong. This is basically a way of stating that you are wrong from the start but, for whatever reason, refuse to accept it. Your thinking on this is edging dangerously close to conspiracy theorist territory.

It's fine to be proven wrong, but the smarter way to approach any argument is to be able to prove or support it using evidence, or it has no merit. But you shouldn't go around making asinine comments and then just trying to make other people prove you wrong.

For instance, say I tell you there's an invisible pink unicorn that farts rainbows and flies ahead of me occasionally dropping loose change on the ground. You'd say that's absurd, right? That I should prove it? Well guess what, it's obviously real because you can't prove me wrong. That is the argument you are making.

Your "source" by the way is an unsubstantiated rumor from an "anonymous" source. Here's something else anonymous sources claimed: That Nintendo was about to reveal the Nintendo Fusion console... in 2014. This one, however, had the benefit of being traced to the idiots that invented it. Here was another one: Nintendo worked with EA to get a version of Titanfall on Wii U. Never happened. It was a poor April Fool's prank. Just because it's on the internet does not mean it's true, and if you never hear from it again, chances are, it was bunk to begin with.

The reason NoA passed on the game for so long was because Reggie was clearly trying to gear the Wii towards casual audiences. The reason it did get released in the US was because it had already been localized in English, so releasing it would cost next to nothing, and because Nintendo needed some filler for it's otherwise empty 2012 release schedule. The limited GameStop release is more evidence that Reggie and NoA simply didn't believe in the games chances at retail. Given that Nintendo fans tended to ignore Pandora's Tower and The Last Story, Nintendo was right to be cautious.

@Quorthon

It's not that hard to understand man. The situation indicates that's what happened.

@Quorthon If nothing else, you have certainly given both myself, and a few friends a great laugh.

Who are you to say if I owned a PS4? There were literally thousands of Xbox 1`s traded into both Game and CEX in it`s first few months. It got to one point, CEX had to refuse taking in anymore, countrywide, as they had too many to sell already.

No, I say when companies do bad things, as I stated before, but I will also praise companies for doing something that I, not anyone else, I believe is good. You are seriously misguided. It has been well known since launch that the PS4 would not start making Sony a profit for at least a year and a half. They had to sell off 2 offices, it`s lap top division, and part of it`s music division to bring the console to the market. As for the Xbox ONE, no other HOME console in history has had to have 3 (three) price drops in its first year. At its original price, it was not going to make a profit for at least a year. with the price cuts, done out of necessity, not due to massive sales, it won`t make them a profit for a while longer.

You are the kind of person who reads something on-line, and believes it straight away. You actually believe the dribble you are coming out with. as for you dismissing my point about FREE on-line, I thinks most people given the choice, would choose FREE over paid.

Your comment about the recent survey about companies producing software for consoles, those producing for Nintendo actually went up by 6%, so hardly "Did not even register". You get a lot of your info from Game Informer and other sites like them. You probably use Wikipedia for info as well. If someone added that Microsoft had shifted 20 million consoles to Wikipedia, you would gobble it up. That is another point, Microsoft got into trouble a while back, and have done it again recently. They list consoles shipped as consoles sold. At least Nintendo is open with their sales and profits and/or losses.

Sony originally said it would shift approx. 12 million consoles in 6 months, which it did not meet. Microsoft was way off their target for the first 6 months, and even the first year. I am not a fanboy, having had a PS4, still have a 360, Wii U and a gaming PC. Your comments make you sound like someone trying to defend their choice of console, be it Sony or MS.

While I will go off and have a laugh playing some quality titles, I guess you could play Drive Club, or Titan Fall or the latest Forza, all of which failed to live up to their massive hype. Never mind, you will always have your $1.50 bottle of water.

@JaxonH

The evidence indicates otherwise. That which is not supported by evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

GameStop did not publish, or in any way co-publish, Xenoblade Chronicles.

Sorry man, but gut feelings are not always correct. And if you don't have evidence, then you don't have anything.

@akaDv8R

Nintendo is not any more open with their sales or profits than any other company. Nintendo, for that matter, is traditionally the most closed and secretive company in gaming.

Outside of this, it seems as though you are not interested in an actual conversation, what with your classy and unsubstantiated ad hominem attack claiming I just read and believe anything online. Yes, I do use a variety of websites for my information. What do you use? A Magic 8 Ball?

The rest of this post is just as fallacious as possible. An appeal to popularity, ad hominem attacks, misinformation, and a bizarre distrust of notable valuable sources. GameInformer is pretty well known for avoiding extensive articles on rumors, for instance. The site, like most, is imperfect, but they tend to be factually pretty solid.

I also have some doubts that Sony outwardly stated "12 million PS4's in 6 months," not that that was such a difficult goal even if it was. They sold 5.3 million in the first two~three months, and that was noted to have beaten their expectations, as seen here: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-02-18/sony-sells-5-4-million-ps4-consoles-to-top-forecast

Oh wait! That's just a website on the internet! Surely that cannot be trusted! It's just Bloomberg Business reporting on business stuff.

By all means, keep shaking that Magic 8 Ball until it gives you the answer you want.

You might also want to do a search, like this one: https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=sony%3A%20ps4%20already%20profitable to see that the PS4 is indeed already profitable. You seem to fail to understand that Sony is more than just the PS4.

Saying people would prefer free online is no more a valid argument than saying people would prefer free food or puppies or money. It's a completely empty statement (and just one of your odd appeals to popularity), and deliberately avoids confronting the actual paid services out there. Does your comment make the free online of the Wii U suddenly fill with games to play? Does it suddenly make PSN+ or XBL Gold worthless? No, because the comment was completely useless.

@Quorthon
I lost interest in this conversation the minute you started puffing your chest with that childish "No I'M right" attitude. I expressed my gratitude, you asked why, I told you. Not interested in arguing proof or evidence. I have evidence for my beliefs- I didn't just wake up one morning on a whim and decide to believe what I do- there is evidence that supports my beliefs, whether you dismiss it or not. And I don't really care if you do or don't, you asked why and I gave you an answer.

@Quorthon
Oh, and btw, please don't reply to my posts anymore. I'd rather prefer to enjoy my time on N-Life without arguments. And whenever you respond to me, within 2 posts you're arguing with something I said. I don't care about who's right who's wrong. If you read something I post that you disagree with, silently pat yourself on the back in the knowledge that you think you're right and I'm wrong. But please don't respond. And I will show you the same courtesy

@JaxonH

I'm not arguing with you, I informed you that A) you failed to provide evidence to your claim and B) the evidence we do have strongly contradicts your claim.

I also never said "I'm right, you're wrong." I said the evidence makes your position incorrect. That is all.

Remember, at no point did I argue with you. I questioned your claim, listened to what you had to say, asked for evidence, and ultimately you failed to provide evidence or back up your claim. @Yorumi then provided ample evidence contradicting your claim, along with the known facts. The more I inquired as to where you came up with this concept, the weaker your point became.

If you cannot handle someone presenting evidence that you refuse to accept, that's unfortunate, and is a way of thinking that will not be helpful to you in the long run. Frankly, if someone presented me with evidence that I was mistaken about something, I would hope to be big enough to walk away or admit my mistake. For instance, I was mistaken about Xeno X being possibly related to the first game. At some point, I missed where the developers said it was a spiritual successor and unrelated. A bummer, but I moved on.

@Yorumi
I'm not mad, I just don't come here for pointless arguing about things that don't really matter. Expressing differences of opinion respectfully is one thing, arguing with a "No I'm right, you're wrong, just admit it you're wrong" attitude, I don't have time for. Had the response been "I disagree and find the evidence in favor of otherwise" it would have been well said. But that's not what happened, as usual, but rather an endless debate about one speculative opinion being right over another. Even if it WAS something that could be proven against (which it's not), it STILL isn't worth arguing over. I grew out of the phase of desiring to bicker back and forth about being right. I just don't care. I just came here to express my opinion about being greatful for Xenoblade, and as usual this is what I get for it- the usual suspects still arguing with me two days later about who's right and who's wrong. I just don't have time for this kinda stuff anymore.

And I'm not the only one who's grown tired of the argumentative replies. It's why he got banned the last time, at least from what others have told me who have grown tired of him starting arguments with then as well.

There's only 2 people I've ever asked to stop replying to me in the long time I've been a member here. One of them was YOU, and the other him, just now. Which just so happens to be the two people arguing with me now (no surprise). There's a reason I asked that- because some people just don't know how to let things go. They've just gotta be right, and won't stop spamming replies until the other person gives up and says so. Being right shouldn't become an obsession.

If a person doesn't wanna talk to you, and you know that, why would you keep replying to them? That's how stalkers operate. Yes, this is a fan site, but that doesn't mean we aren't still human beings on the other end of the keyboard, and it doesn't mean we can't conduct ourselves in a civilized manner. If a person here observes that a particular individual isn't capable if responding without starting a 2 day back-and-forth session, and wants to minimize conflict, I see no reason the other person wouldn't want to honor such a request- unless their intentions are to argue of course. It's a gentlemans request, and one that I would hope any civilized person who also values minimizing conflict would honor.

I'm at work, I've got other things to do than sit here and go back and forth with you two. And I'm sure you also have better things to do yourself than keep replying to someone who doesn't wish to converse with you over a difference of opinion about something that doesn't even matter. Agreed? So let's leave it at that, shall we?

@Quorthon
Two days after I made a comment that doesn't concern you, and you're still replying to me about being right. All you had to say was you disagree and leave it at that. In MY opinion, the evidence says this. In YOUR opinion, the evidence says that. Ok, we disagree, there's nothing more to talk about.

I thank you in advance for respecting my wishes

@Yorumi
No, I simply expressed gratitude toward GameStop for Xenoblade, that's it.

When I was asked why, I explained, not "got mad". That's when the conversation should've ended.

But not only did it not end there, you wanted to play police ranger an butt in to tell me exactly what, how and why I was wrong.

I have nothing more to say to you. I suggest you do likewise

@Yorumi
Can we be civil if I answer that question? Because I'll give you a genuine answer, bu I don't want another argument

@Yorumi
Here's my answer then.

I don't get mad wen people reply to me. People reply to me every day, and conversation ensues. Sometimes, someone will even point out I'm wrong about something. That doesn't upset me either (just the other day I made a remark about Wii VC games not booting from Wii mode, and someone politely corrected me, to which I immediately thanked him for the information). None of these things are an issue for me.

The issue for me is when I state something not directed at anyone, and someone replies questioning what I said. I then explain why I believe what I do, and that person proceeds to reply OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER again, telling me I'm wrong, they're right, and they won't leave me alone for days on end about it.

What gets me is when it's my belief. Nobody has to believe what I do. Which is why I said yesterday, believe what you want, I'll believe what I want. But that's not enough. Said individual is not content believing what they want, no, I HAVE TO BELIEVE IT TOO. And they won't stop replying, badgering me to death, until I concede my beliefs to theirs.

I mean, even if it was a proven, undeniable fact, it doesn't justify that sort of badgering. Let's say I made a post saying the sky was red. Even then, is that worth literally harassing someone just because they believe something you know isn't true? Mass person replies, states they disagree and this is why, ok, nuff said. But some people just don't know when to quit. They find someone who believes something they don't, and they literally spam replies for 24, 48, 72 hours straight, sometimes making more replies than the entire thread combined, because they simply cannot accept someone having a different belief.

I get upset because I say "believe what you want, I'll believe what I want. I'm tired of arguing about this" but said individual refuses to stop pestering me about it. That's why I get upset.

Another reason I get upset is not about what a person says, but how they say it. The other day when I mad a mistake about Wii VC, the gentleman in question did not say "Nu uh, you're WRONG. It a proven fact blah blah blah. Your statement makes no sense blah blah blah". No, they politely said "Actually this is the case, and I know this because x, y and z. I thought same thing you did until blah blah blah." There's a huge difference between the two.

And I feel certain individuals are always the instigators, like they just wait for something I say they disagree with so they can pounce and argue with me til next Fall about it.

I hate arguing. I hate it. I really really hate it. I'm content saying "ok, let's agree to disagree" and leaving something alone, but others just can't seem to respect that. They HAVE to be right, and will stop at nothing until they get me to say as much.

In my view, I made an innocent comment directed at nobody saying I was greatful. I was not looking to argue. It was not an inflammatory statement. Said individual asked why, I calmly explained. Said individual refused I believe it, proceeds to tell me I'm wrong, an me refuses to leave me in peace for 2 straight days about it. I try to say "I don't want to argue, believe what you want and I'll believe what I want" but said individual has no interest in letting me believe what l want.

Anyways, that's enough, I'm tired of talking about this whole thing. That was a legit, heartfelt answer to your question. I hope my answer gave you the insight you were looking for

@Yorumi

That statement embodies exactly what I'm talking about. "Being true" is irrelevant. Pointing out you think it's untrue is fine. I'm okay with that. No problem. Heckling me for 20 more comments because I refuse to believe what you command me to, big problem. Besides, it's only "factually proven" IN YOUR VIEW, in MY view it's not only NOT factually proven, it's highly unlikely. Which is why I say agree to disagree. There is no problem here. UNTIL, we both express different views and I say let's agree to disagree, yet you keep on arguing to force your views on me.

Let's be perfectly clear here: I'm not forcing my views on you, him, or anyone else. But I am most certainly having views forced upon me. You have expressed that you disagree and that you believe otherwise and that is perfectly fine. Again, NO PROBLEM. But don't keep replying repeating that same thing over and over.

You stated your case and made your point, and I'm okay with that. But continuing to push that viewpoint on me after you've done so is the issue. It does take two to tango, but only one to be the aggressor. I have attempted to stop arguing about this and ask that others stop arguing with me about this more times than I can count now. Yet every single time I get another reply back telling me that I'm wrong and they're right. Telling me I got mad because they disagreed. No, I got mad because they disagreed and repeatedly heckled me about it afterwards.

I feel like you don't listen to what I say sometimes. I thought I made it pretty clear that I did not get mad because someone said something I believe wasn't true. I got mad because they wouldn't leave me alone about it after repeatedly telling them I don't want to argue about this, I'll respect your opinion and you respect mine