2D Mario didn't lose because they were launch titles ... they pretty much *did* lose in the long term. I can't say I agree. While it would be great to see Nintendo put a lot of effort into a 2D Mario, assuring quality into a short lived series that was milked to death probably wouldn't make for a console seller. And even then it would probably come out around the holidays, obscuring any sense of whether it's the title selling the hardware or the holiday itself. The reality is a 2D Mario on Switch would probably sell 4, 5, maybe even 6-7 million, but I don't think it would be a huge system seller. It would probably sell systems by itself, maybe even a big amount, but not over a long stretch of time. It would be incredibly short lived, and then it would rely on the holiday to get it past. The general interest just isn't there. These are fun, little, quirky titles you buy along with a system. Not system sellers. You already have Kirby and Yoshi(both by the way should have more effort put into them, i'd rather see them improve than 2D Mario) for families as a backlog title, and maybe a new DKC for the hardcore gamers. None of those games will sell like 2D Mario, but it doesn't really have a place in the system already. Honestly, id be much better for like 2019.

We actually have already seen what Nintendo do when they want to make 2D Mario into an actual project with effort that may even have console sales appeal. It was called Mario Maker. I don't know how much they can improve on that game though, but hey,  I wouldn't be opposed it becoming the Minecraft of Switch!

Well, that is interesting, although I kind of expected that because it seems like that's a very Japanese centric thing to do. I should have added an addendum in my last reply, but basically, I can't say that I didn't believe that already, because it seems like a lot of Japanese gamers are more into 2D games than 3D ones. 

The Wii U did not succeed in it's first few months because of fucking New Super Mario Bros U, are you kidding me? The Wii U suceeded, *barely*, because people put stock in it being a new Nintendo console. Literally all you heard from people who were considering a Wii U(assuming they knew the damned thing) was that they weren't going to get one because they weren't any Nintendo games.

Bringing up the Wii era? Are you serious? I'm not fucking retarded man. Everyone knows the Wii/DS era of 2D mario sold systems! But the Wii U era? Nah. Even the 3DS was boosted more by other titles than New Super Mario Bros(and you could argue the price cut was more so the determining factor). Don't come at me with arguments so poor they're almost condescending. Everyone knows Super Mario Bros was a big deal in the DS/Wii era. we're talking now. What you showed wasn't proof the game sold the Wii U. In retrospect everyone criticized the Wii U because it didn't have a big game like Zelda to sell it months on end. Even your use of statistics is terrible. It literally launched during a holiday season and beyond that the Wii U's sales were so poor that coming up with a 25% figure makes it seem a lot more potent than it really is, to almost misleading degrees. The Wii U sold alot because a new console almost always sells well on launch, especially during a holiday season.

Oh my God. You think that a 2D Mario on Switch will sell 7 million... at most? When the absolute laziest Mario game ever passed 11 million on 3DS?

Weren't you just criticizing Lawlight for making predictions based on what he hopes will happen? Talk about hypocricy.

How is it hypocrisy? You're assuming I don't want a 2D Mario game to succeed. I'm not making productions based on what I want to happen, you shouldn't make that assumption. Lawlight literally wears it on his sleeve.

I think that it's a declining series in terms of sales. Never said I wanted it to be, but a huge seller, let alone a system seller? Not really. It was a fad, honestly. 

I think it's pretty clear what you want to happen:

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8575197

You think that 2D Mario is a declining series even though Nintendo's console sales declined to a greater degree than sales of 2D Mario.

It's more that we want to spare you from future ridicule.

If we go eight years back, we find people like you who called 2D Mario a fad, a series whose days were over. The argument that got made was that New Super Mario Bros. Wii had no chance to sell more units than Final Fantasy XIII in Japan; this became a comparison because both games launched within one month of each other. The reasoning was backed up by pointing to the sales of Super Mario Galaxy, so if that game couldn't measure up to sales of mainline Final Fantasy games in Japan, then what chance could a 2D Mario game have? After all, 3D > 2D, everyone knows that.

Then the launch week of NSMB Wii came and it slammed in a safe 900k. By the time Final Fantasy XIII released, it was already a done deal that Square-Enix's game had no chance anymore.

That is your future if you continue walking down that path.

But you did repeatedly make ridiculous claims in your previous posts.

If Nintendo doesn't make a 2D Mario, you can consider yourself lucky. That's the only realistic way you could escape ridicule.

EDIT: By the way, you'd get ridiculed harder. You are on your own, but the history I cited was a majority opinion on VGC.

You are mixing up numbers. Nintendo's fiscal year starts in April and we've only got one quartely report so far. Switch's launch month fell into the previous fiscal year and has no connection to the 10m units that were forecasted for the current fiscal year. The upcoming earnings release on October 30 will be only the second chance to announce an adjustment to the forecast.

I don't remember what your point about 3DS's price advantage was. When it comes to long term sales, a console like Switch that can go for over a year without a price cut has the advantage, because it can use price cuts down the line to sustain higher sales. What I was trying to tell you in the previous post is that selling 13m units without a price cut is a stronger position than selling 15m units with a significant price cut.

The possibility that Switch could end up behind the 3DS comes exclusively down to production capacities, not demand. You are trying too hard to score a win in an argument.

I realize that Nintendo's fiscal year starts at April, I was using quarters in respect to calendar year ... 

Nintendo will have had 3 chances to set forecasts, the first and initial one being last quarter of last fiscal year then the first quarter of this this fiscal year (which they didn't change) then the second quarter of this fiscal year too ... 

It was the fact that the 3DS was built around a lower price point is an advantage in similar vein to the Wii. Being built around a higher price point like the Switch is not smething to be praised for when we take a look at the PS3 which struggled with it's inflated price point ... 

The 3DS was very elastic in terms of marginal cost but the same cannot be said of the Switch which will almost never be seen at a $200 or below MSRP for the next 2 years ... (these are very slow times when component costs aren't falling down fast enough in the Switch's favour compared to the 3DS back then) 

That issue is overblown, if Nvidia is able to sell Shield consoles for $200 right now which features similar technology to the Switch then I'm sure Nintendo themselves have more than enough overhead to increase production ... (even if we're considering the possibility that Nvidia is not making making any profit off of the Shield system and the fact that the Switch is more integrated while Nintendo has to pay licensing fees too)