Nintendo's down, but not out.

[Mazty]

curl-6 said:

Mazty said:

The only sales that could be attributed to SSBB is 1 million consoles, and that's working with the outlandish idea that the peaks show buyers who all bought the wii just for SSBB. After that Mario karts was released so the sales become even more complex. However if we adjust sales to a baseline rate, and then add in the extra units sold, you are talking <1 million consoles for one title alone. Because of this, I don't think any one game will save the Wii U. Several may increase sales for a few months, but ultimately such a scenario didn't guarentee either the N64's or GC's success so why will it this time around?

Do you have a paper or some evidence for this social mechanic? Have you ever been to university because surely you know that just claiming something is so is not evidence - just a premise. 

Actually I do consider the increase in sales before SSBB. Again, the increase totals 1 million consoles - 1 million consoles for a very, very popular console. You literally just have a premise and are screaming that it's right without giving any facts or figures at all. Come on dude, we're not 14, can you please approach this debate as if it was a university question because at the moment my premise of "you're wrong, the spikes are because baby jesus made them do it" is literally just as valid. 

The N64 and GC both made money and defeated at least one of their generational rivals, they weren't really failures.

No ONE game will take a system from 25 million to 50 million, but we're not talking about just SSB but a whole raft of exclusive franchises too.

There probably isn't a published paper on the planet about the workings of Nintendo's userbase, but it's not a mystery to those who've been following this side of industry for a long time. 

You're not presenting any evidence that millions of consoles weren't shifted by Brawl. Its bump is spread for months and months before and especially after its release. And people don't need to buy a system ONLY for SSB to be tipped over the edge by it as a part of a larger library.

Ultimtely neither point can be proven beyond all doubt, and in the absence of that, it falls to common sense and liklihood. It's common sense that 11 million plus selling game from a series with a very large and very devoted fanbase, which was hyped to the moon and back, and widely cited as THE reason to get a Wii in '08,  pushed a huge number of consoles.

Dude how many times do I have to repeat myself? Stop acting as if sales & profit is the only metric in which to measure a consoles success. The N64 and GC had an increbily small market share. Look at the xbox. It sold very little BUT it was brand new and successfully established MS as a viable console company as well as creating several successful new franchises. Were they dreamcasts? No. Were they successful? No. What they were was nothing special and more to the point if Nintendo kept on pumping out the same level of sales they would have to ask themselves where is the company going? No growth = no investors. No investors = stocks dive and I'm sure you can work out the rest. 

That raft of franchises didn't help the GC surpass 30 mill sales and already 2d mario is released. 

Exactly there isn't a paper so stop acting as if your word is fact; it's not, it's just a premise. If it's so clear then why is there clearly only a spike in sales around Q1/Q2 08 and why is Q1-4 09 not higher? If your claims are true you need to find numbers to assign to it. 

That's a fallacy - burden of proof. The burden of proof is on you to prove your claim, not me to disprove it. 

Common sense does not apply to sales when you have the figures in front of you. That's just an excuse to avoid analysing the actual sales.