his reasoning make no sense whatsoever, in entire history of Nintendo neither publisher was important to their success and or survival, the most successful 3rd party publisher on any Nintendo platform was Ubisoft with Just Dance.

the others not so much, for example Fifa on Wii not even in Top100, on GCN not even in Top100 on N64 with pathetic 600k sitting near the bottom of Top100

their support is barely important for Nintendo

And even IF WiiU became success in the end there is hardly any market for them.

For Bayonetta 2... or at least that's what Pachter himself previously said he was going to buy one for.

I have two wii's and a wiiU, and duct tape.  Sorry but try as I might, your suggestion fails every time.  No a mount of duct tape gives me 1080p and all the other impressive wiiU features from my two wii's.

Yeah, the duct tape doesn't work; I'd recommend super-glue.

He forgot to mention the iPad mini which is also needed in addition to the two Wiis.

Hopefully Zelda WiiU will be a reason to buy it for me (unless it's a multiplayer HD version of the Four Swords Adventures XD, I'm kidding)

the real question is why should anyone listen to pachter?

I guess even a tool like pachter is bound to get a prediction correct once in a while, espeically one that would be obvious to a blind man.

pezus said: This article's writer should be fired instead Does nobody read the comments these days? Here the full statement is again: "And the PS4, priced $50 more than the Wii U? I mean, why would anybody buy a Wii U, you know, unless they just have to play Nintendo games?" Do you know the answer to his question?

He's still showing his obvious bias with the fact he used the $50 figure rahter than $100 (basic set).  

Plus, it assumes that the only exclusives on Nintendo platforms are Nintendo games, and that simply isn't true.  

There are also a LOT of people who play Nintendo games.  More people play Nintendo games than pretty much any other single developers out there.  

People don't buy Sony games as much as Nintendo, people don't buy Microsoft games as much as Nintendo, people don't even buy Call of Duty games as much as Nintendo games.  These are objective statements, what Pachter is saying still sounds extremely biased.

''They’re not going to sell a lot of consoles if they don’t have games like FIFA and Battlefield and Call of Duty and Grand Theft Auto.''

Because we all know that these 4 titles were the games that made the DS, Wii and 3DS successful systems.

Also this same guy said that DS, Wii and 3DS were going to kill Nintendo, instead they all became the top seller of their generation...

MDMAlliance said: pezus said: This article's writer should be fired instead Does nobody read the comments these days? Here the full statement is again: "And the PS4, priced $50 more than the Wii U? I mean, why would anybody buy a Wii U, you know, unless they just have to play Nintendo games?" Do you know the answer to his question? He's still showing his obvious bias with the fact he used the $50 figure rahter than $100 (basic set).   Plus, it assumes that the only exclusives on Nintendo platforms are Nintendo games, and that simply isn't true.   There are also a LOT of people who play Nintendo games.  More people play Nintendo games than pretty much any other single developers out there.   People don't buy Sony games as much as Nintendo, people don't buy Microsoft games as much as Nintendo, people don't even buy Call of Duty games as much as Nintendo games.  These are objective statements, what Pachter is saying still sounds extremely biased.

See but this whole first party is the important party crap is the one of the big reasons nintendo ends up on the losing end of the console wars more often than not.  They just use first party titles as a crutch and dont do a good job of supporting/marketing their 3rd party titles, and then they as a company and you as a supporter wonder why 3rd parties dont sell well even when in the case of the wii they had a huge lead on the hardware end.