You didn't answer my question; Wii U was still on store shelves for years, with games and everything. In addition, third party games didn't sell any worse later on than they did early on in the Wii U's lifecycle. Assassin's Creed 4 initially sold better than 3 on Wii U despite the console supposedly being dead. People were still buying Wii Us every year despite the fact that the console was dead. I'll ask again: Do you buy consoles based on your perception of whether it is doing well on the market or not? Or do you buy them because there's a game on it you want to play, or a price drop occurred?

But I'll put it this way instead:

In the first two months, instead of Breath of the Wild, 1-2 Switch, Puyo Puyo Tetris - Just Dance 2017, Skylanders Imaginators, Lego City Undercover, Mario Kart 8, Disgaea 5, Street Fighter 2 it instead comes out in 2012 and has in its first two months:

* Nintendo Land (bundled)
* Assassin's Creed 3
* Batman: Arkham City
* Call of Duty Black Ops 2
* Ben 10 Omniverse
* Darksiders 2
* Epic Mickey 2
* Fifa 13
* Just Dance 4
* Mass Effect 3: Special Edition (port)
* New Super Mario Bros U
* Trine 2
* Tekken Tag Tournament 2
* Zombi U
* Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate
* Warriors Orochi 3
* 007 Legends
* Ninja Gaiden's 3: Razor's Edge (port)
* NBA 2K13
* ESPN Sports Connection
* Game Party Champions
* Rabbid's Land
* Tank! Tank! Tank!
* Transformers Prime
* Fitness Evolved 2013
* Madden NFL 13
* Sing Party
* Marvel Avengers
* Scribblenauts: Unlimited

Do you really think the Switch would launch with these and then die in 2 months?

If your answer is yes, then read below:

According to VGC - Arkham City, Mass Effect 3, and Assassin's Creed 3 all sold a combined 240K in 8 weeks.
According to VGC - It took a 40$ USD Street Fighter 2 only 10 weeks to equal that 240K - but according to Capcom the game sold 450K in its first 8 weeks.
Why is it that a port of such an old game potentially close to doubled three of the biggest releases of 2012? Despite the fact that virtually the same game with a much larger roster and feature list was widely available on other consoles for a cheaper price?
I'd suggest that it's because people wanted to play Street Fighter 2 on the Switch due to Switch's unique features.
In 2012, would a $40 Street Fighter 2 on Wii U have sold 450K in 8 weeks?

I would also suggest the same games that failed on Wii U would have done significantly better on Switch, even if they released today on Switch they would do better. Users would have the ability to take several of the biggest games of the year and play them anywhere: In your living room on TV, on a park bench, waiting at an airport, on a flight, in a van, at a sports game, on your lunch break, in a stadium, on a rooftop party, and toilets across the world! :P

I'd also suggest that the presence of Splatoon, Mario Kart 8, SM3D World, and Mario Marker in the first couple of months would not have improved the sales of any of the rest of the launch lineup on Wii U in any significant way. They might have boosted hardware, but would it have significantly improved sales in the long term?

Wii U was an unattractive console, it was slow, bulky, and the lead concept of asymmetric play was not very appealing.
On the other hand, Switch is an incredibly attractive console, fast, sleek, and the concept of playing with your friends/acquaintances anytime, anyplace, anywhere.

In order for people to buy them, they have to want to play them on the console. The Switch is a console people want to play a large variety of games on whether they're new releases or old ports... and in some cases, ancient.

A software's ability to attract purchases is not independent of platform/hardware - this is why I have been saying that games that might not have been very strong/appealing on the Wii U would be much stronger/more appealing on the Switch. If both were released at the same time with the same software, no doubt Switch would have murdered the Wii U in hardware sales.

Sry, but I dont understand what exactly is question!? Fact is that huge majority of industry did not pay attention on Wii U becuse was consider for fail in its 1st year, exept some hardcore Nintendo fans, there is reason why Wii U ended up with only 13.5m sold units and why Nintendo after Wii U prepared so many huge games in Switchs 1st year, obvoulsy beacuse Wii U didnt had strong system seller games in 1st year, even Nintendo talked about that and they said they dont want to repeat that mistake with Switch.

Evre console have good launch, problem is what after launch, Wii U start having catastrophic sales only 2 months after launch, it didnt had system seller game on launch and in its 1st year and huge software drouths.

You still missing point, no Switch wouldnt die like Wii U in any case beacuse Wii U didnt had problem with only games, branding/marketing was also bad, concept was not appealing for market and price point was not good compared to competition. Again, point is that Wii U would sell better than it did if it could get some of heviy hitters in its 1st year instead they come out when system was already dead (Splatoon, MK8D and Mario Maker in 1st year would definatly make difrence beacuse people would have reason to buy console), also you can bet that Switch would have worse sales if it didnt had Zelda BotW, MK8D, Splatoon 2 and Mario Odyssey in its 1st year, beacuse one of biggest reason why Switch is selling great is already solid number of great and strong 1st party games (4 huge hevy hitters in 1st 9 months of console on market).

Thats my point with my inital post that you repley to me, those great games couldnt change nothing on Wii U beacuse Wii U was dead, but on Switch Wii U ports they will have stronger effect and in all most cases will have better sales compared to Wii U, becuse it more easier to keep momentum than to save failed console.

Offcourse that those games would largle improved Wii U sales, one of main reasons why Wii U failed is beacause there was not system seller game in its 1st year, of course that multiply system seller games would largle improved sales in its 1st year and Wii U probably wouldn't be dead after only 1 year on market, perception of Wii U would be difrent on market and it wouldnt left out whitout any 3rd party support in its 1st year like it did.

I dont compare Switch and Wii U, Wii U had too many mistakes to bi succfule like Switch in any case, while Switch have done almost anuthing right, but point is that great exclusive games on 1st place are reason for buying some Nintendo hardware (great brand/marketing, concept dont mean much if you dont game/s that will sell you all that), Wii U didnt any system seller game in hole 1st year, no reason to buy console, while Switch have 4 huge games in 1st 8 months on market.

Nobody said that it's only the Gamestop CEO wo knows more than we do. Other retailers might know as well.

Come on GTAV Switch!

Persona 5 Crimson
I know it´s highly unlikely but please...

Boom! I bolded the point I have been trying to communicate.

I'll try to put it in the most organized manner to show my path of reasoning (conclusions bolded with supporting points in referenced in brackets):

1. Appealing hardware and strong software encourage hardware sales.
2. Appealing hardware involves a combination of a good concept and a good price point.
3. The Wii U had a poor concept because its concept is unappealing (asymmetric gameplay, a limit of 1 Gamepad, and a 5-meter limit).
4. The Wii U had a poor concept and therefore had unappealing hardware.
5. The Switch has appealing hardware because its concept is appealing.
6. The Wii U and Switch's concepts both increased cost.
7. The price point of the Switch is good because the concept justifies its cost. (1,2,6)
8. The price point of the Wii U is bad because its concept bloated its cost. (1-4,6)
9. The Wii U launch lineup was weak.
10. The same software of the Wii U launch lineup was very strong on other hardware.
11. The strength of software is not independent of hardware. (9,10)
12. The Wii U launch lineup of the Wii U was weak because of the Wii U's unappealing hardware. (4,9-11)
13. The Switch launch lineup is strong.
14. The Switch launch lineup was not as strong on other comparable consoles as the Wii U launch lineup was.
15. The Switch launch lineup was strong because of the Switch's appealing hardware. (5,11,13,14)
16. Had the Switch and Wii U hardware been swapped, with Switch instead coming out in 2012 with the same software as had landed on Wii U, the Switch's launch lineup would still be strong.
17. The Switch would have still been successful because appealing hardware and strong software. (10-12,14-16)

In short, the concept of the Wii U greatly weakened the strength of the software - the Switch wouldn't have had this problem.

Even if the Wii U did launch with its most stellar software in year 1, that software would have appeared weaker than it would otherwise have on Switch. The Wii U would still be suffering from all the other issues that contributed to its failure. Basically, asymmetric gameplay was a failed concept that didn't justify the single gamepad per console - and we were otherwise stuck with an overpriced Wii HD where not a whole lot of software designed to properly support the Wii remotes; so there goes the Wii HD appeal as well (an actual Wii HD would have been preferable). I don't think I need to do more than just mention the bulky and slow OS that we needed to slog through to get to any game (the OS was all part of trying to support the gamepad, wouldn't have happened with an actual Wii HD interface). Wii HD would have been a great iteration until we could have got the technology for a fully baked Switch; asymmetric gameplay is not what they were going for, it was most likely a result of realizing they needed something because the offscreen play on a limited-reach device was not going to be enough.

Lol, you again missing point, I dont compare Switch and Wii U, and I dont saying that Wii U could have sales like Switch in any case or that would even be succfule at end, pls for last time, my point is simple, despite problems Wii U had and that I mentione, Wii U would sell much better than it did if it could get some of heviy hitters in its 1st year instead they come out when system was already dead (Splatoon, MK8D and Mario Maker in 1st year would definatly make big difrence beacuse people would have reason to actualy  buy console), also you can bet that Switch would have worse sales if it didnt had Zelda BotW, MK8D, Splatoon 2 and Mario Odyssey in its 1st year, beacuse one of biggest reason why Switch is selling great is already solid number of great and strong 1st party games (4 huge hevy hitters in 1st 9 months of console on market). So I really don't know what exactly you trying to prove.

And no, Wii U 1st year lineup was weak in any case, simple because didn't had any big system seller game (fact is that main reason for purchasing Nintendo console on first place are strong Nintendo games).

Also talking about taking advance of Wii U hardware, from big games Splatoon and Mario Maker are games that used most of gamepad.

Both your statements "the Wii U would sell much better" and "the Wii U was dead" aren't really true though. I also didn't miss the point with my last post, it explains why the Wii U failed, and that's the part you are getting wrong.

You keep suggesting the Wii U just needed more major software, despite the fact that it already had lots of major franchise software at launch and through its first year, many times more than Switch; more second party exclusives, and significantly more major third party franchise software. It DID have three major first party games in its first year - 3 sequels to franchises that traditionally sell between 10 and 30 million units - one (NSMBU) was a launch title, the sequel to a game that sold over 28 million units. It didn't help, demand for Wii U remained very low. There's absolutely no reason to believe three more games would have made much of a difference - the console was THAT unappealing. My post above explains why popular franchise software wasn't helping the Wii U.

Calling the Wii U dead is misleading, it would be more accurate to say it wasn't selling well; a dead console is not available for sale. The Wii U was widely available. My previous post that you claim "missed the point" explains WHY it wasn't selling well.

Arguing the Switch wouldn't have sold well if it didn't have any major franchise software isn't going to get any disagreement from me. But it's a non-argument because that is NOT even close to the position the Wii U was in. In order for it to be an argument, you have to show why the Switch wouldn't sell well if it had been released in 2012 with all the games the Wii U had.

In order for software to be strong, it needs the right hardware: the Wii U was the wrong hardware for just about everything. That's a big part of what my last post explains through numerous argument points. Even if it did get those three games (Splattoon, MK8, and Mario Maker) in year 1, how far would that take it? Those games on Wii U would still have been a lot weaker than it seems you think they'd be; moving them up the schedule would not have had even close to the positive effect you seem to think it would. The rest of the software would still be weak (as a result of the hardware being wrong for it), the console would still have an unappealing concept, and the price would still be bloated - and it would have still failed catastrophically.

Yes they are, Wii U prackticly died in first year, perception on market was like that and all 3rd party left platform in its 1st year, later not even huge games like SM3DW and MK8 couldnt move Wii U. Of Course that are hardware and especially Nintendo one would sell much better if it would have several big system seller games in its 1st years.

Pls read what I wrote, I never said that Wii U needed just stronger software, this getting ridiculous, I just wrote that Wii U wold defiantly sell much better if ith had games that I mentione in its first year. Multiplatform games and not big exlusives are not what is selling Nintendo hardware in 1st year, big strong system seller games selling Nintendo hardware. NSMB was basically NSMB HD and actually one of reason why Wii U had problem with brand recognition and why was confused with Wii, it looked totally same like NSMB for Wii just in HD, game made more harm to Wii U than good. Games like MK8, Mario Maker and Splatoon are one of biggest and strongest games on Wii U, they would be definatly quite good system seller games in Wii Us 1st year.

Wii U was selling catastrophic, it shiped only 160k in 3 months after launch, thats one worst quarter in ever, it shiped only 460k in 6 montsh after launch, so not even half of million world wide in 6 hole months. Dont take "dead" literally, but it's very obvious thats failed console in 1st year, also perception was terible on gaming market.

Lol, again, I not comparing Wii U to Switch (again, Wii U also had some other big mistakes while Switch done evrehing right, but thatas not point here), but fact is that strong, great Nintendo system seler games sell Nintendo hardware on 1st place, so yeah Switch would definitely sell lees without heavy hitter and Wii U would sell more than actualy did if actualy some of hevy hitters in its 1st year. Again, Nintendo basicly said that one of biggest Wii U mistake was they didnt had big games for launch in 1st year, and they said they will not made that mistake with Switch also, why do you think Nintendo released 4 hevy hitters for Switch in 1st 8 monts after why they done with Wii U!?

Software can be strong even whitout hardware, it clear math, not right hardware + strong, great system seller games means stronger sales in any case compared to not right hardware + weak lineupe whitout big, strong system seller games and software drouths.

Probably referring to some first party games maybe Smash, AC and what turns up at E3.