| GhaudePhaede010 said: Your first sentence does not negate the impact of Wii Sports. Nor does the rest of your post negate that reviewer opinions would not tell the whole story. Unless you are going to say I am wrong somehow, it is pointless to argue against Wii Sports or the first year of Wii. You are simply trying to make an excuse to negate Wii Sports. Every indie developer out there would kill for a game that breaks through like Wii Sports did. Since the rest of your post is an attempt to justify that silly first sentence, I have nothing further to say. You have to bring me a point that actually negates mine or we are just creating pointless banter. |
I brought you a point you just ducked it, your argument hinges on impact determining what platform has a better library which in itself is flawed as for one Wii Sports was a packed which you're comparing to games that aren't packed in meaning even if someone bought the Wii for another game WS would get a sale just from the Wii unit being sold another case is Wii Play which came with a free Wiimote for like 20 quid which was cheaper then buying a Wiimote by it self. What you're perceiving as impact had many different factors to it behind those numbers this is why similar games or sequels to them didn't even come close to their predecessors because the actual impact wasn't really the game per say it was a combination of the Wii being appealing, different, the blue ocean and super cheap during a recession to the point it cost less than some prior gen platforms.
When on a platform that had none of what the Wii had all of these titles struggled to take off yet the comparable titles on the Switch still sold well and had a semblance of an impact this highlights as impact goes which library is the better of the two as consistency brings more context to the numbers. The irony is your point on numbers painting a different story is also misleading because the numbers the Switch is doing also highlights the impact of its library.
