By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Captain_Tom said:
RolStoppable said:
Captain_Tom said:

So enlighten us all knowing one.

Your claim: "The Wii and Wii U followed the same strategy."

The facts:

1. The Wii was sold at a profit.
2. The Wii U was sold at a loss.

The explanation (shouldn't be necessary, but in this case it is):

1. Profit means that a business gains money.
2. Loss means that a business loses money.
3. Profit =/= loss.


So that's it.  Because it was sold at an incredibly slight loss it is not following a similar strategy?  Yeah I didn't know what you were talking about because it was completily moronic.  Just because one thing is different, doesn't mean these things aren't true:

-It was launched with inferior processing capabilities that held it back to last gen ports.

-It's online capabilities and features are more than a generation behind the competition.

-It uses very little energy and comes in a small package.

-It has "Wii" in the name lol.

-It has an unconventional gimmick as its main selling point.


Add to that they very obviously tried to replicate the Wii launch just in a different way. Nintendo Land very obviously was supposed to be "Wii Sports" for the Wii U and demo the game pad with a variety of mini-games. NSMBU was supposed to be the core Nintendo title like Twilight Princess was, except 2D Mario has far more casual appeal to boot and is a bigger seller. 

That was their logic. They just didn't realize the audience had completely moved on.