| reggin_bolas said: I love how you amateurs and keyboard warriors reject a guy who is ten times more successful and gets paid six figures for what you do on your spare time. If he lost credibility "years ago" how come he's still a paid analyst? I've watched a few of his shows and he is definitely not some hack seer with no insight into the industry what so ever. His Wii U projections are based on current data which is extremely plausible. No one can perfectly predict the future, the Wii U could very well turn things around but so far there is not a single thing to suggest it will. Casuals aren't buying it because of poor marketing, lack of novelty, necessity (they have a Wii, why should they buy a Wii U) Core consumers like myself aren't buying it because it haz no gaemz, weak graphics, and the controller is uncomfortable and awkward to use. The Wii U is an abject failure, and that's the bottom line as of the present. . |
How come he's a paid analyst? I don't know. How come Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly are paid political commentators, when they have nothing intelligent to say? How come Dick Morris is a paid pundit, when he predicted that Mitt Romney would win in a massive landslide among other insane predictions?
Furthermore, how were Pach's predictions that the Vita would outsell the 3DS, that the PSP would outsell the DS, and that the Wii, DS, and 3DS would all fail? See, if he's right that the Wii U will fail, it's only because he bets against Nintendo EVERY time, and a blind squirrel finally found his acorn. It's not because of his abilities as a soothsayer, which are poor to pathetic. And even furthermore, if he's an "analyst" shouldn't he be somewhat objective, instead of predicting failure and having it out for one company despite the fact that this company is generally very successful?
