By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
zorg1000 said:
potato_hamster said:

Well that's the problem. These numbers don't line up with things like Wikipedia. They have 122 retail third party games listed between release and April 2014 in North America alone. You have 116 total retail. Counting Japanese those numbers increase. Breaking down by fiscal years shows more between April 13-Mar 14 than launch to Mar 13, according to the source I'm using, and that's assuming Wikipedias list are complete. Maybe you're using a better source than me, but that's what I have.

As for switch, I haven't looked the numbers up, because they're not pertinent to whether the Wii U sold more in year 2 than year 1. But to be honest, I know those numbers contain dozens of these sub-$15 indie games. If you want to, that's fine, but again, that's a very very low bar. You can call it shifting the goalposts all you want, but if you need to lump in these tiny little titles than the vast majority of gamers will never even hear of to make the claim that "third party games are selling well" or "the Switch has great third party support", well that just makes your claim sound pretty weak in my eyes.

Im using Nintendo's official IR page.

So you're going to brush off any legit data as "moving goalposts"

Nah man you're just being irrational.

Okay. So there's titles on Wikipedia that aren't on Nintendo's IR page, clearly. Should these games not count because they aren't on Nintendo's pages? I mean it's obvious that there is an objectively correct fact here. I'm just no longer sure which one of us have come to it. I'll concede that ground to you. It doesn't really matter much anyways. My entire point was about how low of a bar people are setting, and I used the Wii U as an example of that. If that one turns out to be poor - my bad. But there are still other platforms I could have used to illustrate my point, so it doesn't really make sense to get hung up on an example when it was one of many.

And I'm not brushing off any legit data as moving goalposts. Quite the opposite. I'm saying that me brushing off those titles can be seen as "moving the goalposts" , and I can understand that. But again, I'm poking fun at how low that bar is. If you need to dip into that pool to justify a point your making, it's a pretty shaky point in my opinion.