Kotaku: Switch Has Three Times As Many Games as Wii U Did At This Point - And They're Better

[GhaudePhaede010]

pikashoe said:

GhaudePhaede010 said:

The Donkey Kong game was a spin off that did reach 1 million.

The Pokemon game was also a spin off that sold over 1 million.

Wii Play needs no discussion.

Zelda on Wii had to compete with Wii Sports which no game on Switch has to deal with a game of that magnitude but it was still the best selling Zelda up to that point.

Mario the same story. In their context, best selling game up to that point.

I am not saying the sales of these games is better than how Switch is doing, no no. Sales are the consequence of many factors outside the game. I was just saying that these games did sell well. Outselling Wii titles does not make them better games either. If that were the case, Okami would be one of the better selling games of all time... but candy crush murders it is sales. My point was that those games that did not review well did manage to sell well and I could use their sales as proof that scores mean nothing in the long run. I was not using it to discredit Switch's sales in any way.

The point of my comments is to raise awareness to something that nobody wants to admit. Wii sold well for all the right reasons. Wii gets shit for the, "casual" games it brought to the table but the fact that there is an argument (in my opinion Wii's first year is better) for Wii vs. Switch proves that Wii was successful for all the right reasons and that it is not a console that deserves the insane amount of shit it has gotten over the years. If you think Switch is better, more power to you. But I will take Mario, Metroid, Zelda, Pokemon, Fire Emblem, Wii Sports, and then all the third party stuff as well as games like Strikers over what Switch has offered me so far. It is close, but Wii gets the edge in my opinion. Regardless, the fact that there is a legitimate argument that can be made for Wii is the most crucial take away. I hope people come to their senses about Wii and why it was such a smashing success. It offered games for everyone.

According to this website, the donkey Kong game sold .6 million. It was both a critical and commercial failure. 

Wii sports didn't compete with anything, it was a pack in game. It is unlikely to have affected the sales of anything else on the list negatively. If anything Wii sports may have helped some of those games sales. The games on switch are competing with 3 times as many games on the same system, as well as competing against two fully established consoles, with the ps4 and Xbox 1. 

I think the Wii had a great first year. I have at no point denied that. But There isn't much in your favour here. The switch has 3 times as many games, and those games are getting a better reception. Even just going by the games you listed 5 out of 12 were mini game compilations. I have nothing against those types of games but that isnt a good sign of variety for a console. The games i listed on the switch come from a wide variety of genres and they are all very distinct from one another and they are aiming for various different audiences. 

You may personally prefer the Wiis first year and that's fine I won't take that away from you. The wiis first year was great. But Looking at the nembers there isn't much in the Wiis favour here.

This website stopped tracking its sales. This website is not exactly reliable.

Every game competes with every other game. I did not buy anything with my original Game Boy because Tetris was packed-in.  I did not buy any games with my Wii and I did not buy Zelda on Wii until I found it second hand for less than 20 dollars. You cannot separate it because it was a pack-in title. That is a tough sell.

More games does not make for a better first year. Nor does reception since it is, as far as we can all tell, subjective. Calling a game a mini game collection means absolutely nothing to this conversation. Wii had a wide variety of games. Just because I am too lazy to list them all does not mean they did not exist. I expected you to know what was out there for Wii. Strikers, Battalion Wars, Fire Emblem, Mario, Metroid, Zelda. Do I need to get into the third party games, really? The point is that there was a tremendous variety on Wii. Me not listing it all does not negate their existence.

I am obviously giving my opinion. You are giving yours. Wii's first year had more for the average gamer than  many would think. It also did not have the benefit of an indie community as it was in its infancy. However, all the indie titles combined do not equal what Wii Sports was to gaming. Name one developer that would not like to have a Wii Sports like success. Would Nintendo trade the Wii Sports success for Binding of Issac? Please. Again, I get that it was one game but it was the biggest game of the generation by far. Numbers, as I have stated over and over, do not tell the whole story. That is also a fact. Especially when you are using subjective opinions as a portion of your numbers. Again, we are just talking opinions. I am not telling people they are wrong, I came in saying that one person (Josh Thomas) was not as wrong as people like to think. That his opinion that Wii had a better first year is not crazy because Wii did have a killer first year. I am not telling other people that they are incorrect, just creating conversation on the other side. I happen to agree with Josh Thomas, but I repeatedly said it is a close one and that I am not trying to tell anyone they are wrong in their opinion. I mean, there are people out there that think XBOX 360 had the greatest launch in history. I do not begrudge them either. Everyone is entitled to their opinion especially when the opinion expressed is not insane (nor should people be recommending to unsub someone for an opinion that I feel can be argued) or contrived. I enjoy the conversation when it is healthy and positive such as this one. But do not think I am trying to sell my opinion as fact because I am not.

Last edited by GhaudePhaede010 - on 08 February 2018