Nintendo Switch: any other salty WiiU owners out there?

[bdbdbd]

Insidb said:

bdbdbd said:

You just make no sense. There's no cohesion in your posts. Either it matters or doesn't matter, but according to you, 3rd party support matters only when it fits your argument. Wii had something like 1500 games, I wouldn't go on to call that nonexistent. 

Obviously the EVERYONE was buying games, so one might think the console was bought to play games. So, if Wii had a gimmick and Switch has a gimmick to sell it, why would the third party support matter? 

Why would anyone buy games for the sake of them being multiplatform games? I don't get it. I do know, however, lots of people that buy games they like, no matter if they are multiplatform or exclusive.

The last decade of gaming had first party sales driving the sales of Wii, so maybe it was you and not me who missed the last decade of gaming. 

All you've done is conflate points that were painstakingly parsed out to prove (Emphasis on "prove.") a point you completely missed.

Ok. So go ahead and prove your point. I'm waiting. You've made some claims and I've been waiting for you to prove them for a while already. 

Cherrypicking facts and being in denial about everything that doesn't fit your argument is not a proof of anything. Even if we could accept your view (about the importance of third parties) being an acceptable explanation, you go on to make a 180 degree turn and say that the third parties didn't matter after all. We can't have a situation where at the same time having 3rd party support is bad thing and not having third party support is a bad thing; it is not logical argument.

No, you can't go on to say "X" was bought because of the controls, when the game sales on the system were huge, that, by itself, prove otherwise. Or, you can't go on to say 1st party games don't sell, when we have a console to prove otherwise. No, and saying it is innovation that sold "X", when X's successor "Y" did not sell despite it innovating.