I see someone has mastered the art of sidestepping.

That's completely beside the point.

But anyway, of course Wii U titles are expensive, especially now. The console was a flop, there ain't many consoles or games out there for the collectors, and, like many Nintendo consoles in the past, it's slowly getting vindicated, meaning it's increasingly sought after.

Physical copies of games like The Wonderful 101 or Tank! Tank! Tank! will certainly become rather expensive over the years due to limited amount of copies for the collectors.

Haha.

Well, the other option is to discuss the definition of handheld and hybrid and tablet and then we gonna get that endless war with a bunch of moderation and nobody agreeing and the end of the world. This forum and all the forums in the world have been there. So, since the point is the thing is not handheld because of price, well let's discuss how expensive Nintendo is. It's much more fun :D

Rather expensive over the years? Only physical copies?

Nintendo is expensive. Always expensive. Physical and online. Always. Any generation. I can boot my Wii U and check the online store now and it's gonna be ridiculous. I bet Tokyo Mirage is twice the price of whatever high quality game on PS4. It was a couple of years ago. That's how Nintendo does business.

I wouldn't be surprised if Zelda on Wii U online shop is full price. Actually I wouldn't be surprised if Devil's Third is full price. :D

PS5 will still get plenty of big games in Japan; some they'll money-hat, others will be shared with Switch, and yet others will be made for PS5 instead of Switch by devs who'll prioritize eye candy over being financially sensible.

Not strictly true, the Wii was a success.

Splatoon 2 wasn't a Wii U game, nor was Odyssey. As for using "almost every big franchise in the first 12 months" where was Pokemon, Animal Crossing, 2D Mario, Smash Bros, Donkey Kong, Mario Party, etc?

Wii was an exception. NES and SNES barely had competition.

My mistake was saying 12 months. Wii U had Smash, MK, Mario 2D, Mario 3D, DKC, Zelda. This is "almost every big franchise".

Wii was an exception. NES and SNES barely had competition.

My mistake was saying 12 months. Wii U had Smash, MK, Mario 2D, Mario 3D, DKC, Zelda. This is "almost every big franchise".

Exceptions still exist and count.

Regarding the second bit, you're being a bit confusing here, what exactly is your point? You were talking about the Switch selling cos of Wii U games and having all Nintendo's big franchises in its first year, now you seemed to have sidestepped into talking about Wii U's lifetime library? Either I missed something or your posts aren't making any sense.

You missed when I said that I committed a mistake in my statement regarding 12 months. Incorrect exaggeration.

0D0 said:

"Wii was an exception. NES and SNES barely had competition.

My mistake was saying 12 months. Wii U had Smash, MK, Mario 2D, Mario 3D, DKC, Zelda. This is "almost every big franchise"."

Regarding exceptions. I don't make general rule statements considering exceptions. If you do, you and me can't have a proper discussion. Every time I discuss Nintendo, I always remove Wii or I add it as a bubble and exception, not as a rule to Nintendo's home console business performance. Nintendo has never had a home console with that performance after Sony entered the market. Actually, Nintendo home console business has been shrinking since Nintendo's first home console. That's the Nintendo home console sales rule (except Wii). If I were a Nintendo sales analyst, I'd always put Wii on parenthesis.

You may disagree with that, but there's no way round it with me. The same with NSW that I'll never consider part of the home console business. An army of people can tell me I'm wrong based on a thousand reasons, which is fair but I don't care.

The premisses that I don't discuss and I don't negotiate:

- Nintendo home console business has been decreasing since ever (except Wii) from 60m NES to 13m Wii U.

- Nintendo left the home console business after Wii U.

- God exists.