Glad to see the whole field finally present, but I do think this generation will be rather boring and a lot of people will be disappointed.

Would still appreciate a response from Lucas about how his prediction is planning out. Why would he possibly want to avoid the topic?!

Your avatar is really cool! Did you beat the game? :O

Would you want to explain how a console will go from selling about 40% of its closest competitor (that has been on the market for eight years) to moving over 8 million units in six weeks?

A jump from 82k to a weekly average in excess of 1.35 million would be a sight to behold, 1700-1800% increase incoming! Or perhaps a slow climb and then a couple of 3 million selling weeks. It will be shocking news at any rate.

I'm sorry but I won't answer your mega-giant post. It's impossible for me to do so. I will just focus my energy into what is really relevant and was the core of this debate.

Reading my previous post addressed to Final-Fan, you can already have an idea about what it is: Nintendo games have huge sales, great critic scores...but that's it. If we try to objectively assess what Nintendo produces, the result is miserable. First of all, and I think it's the most important thing, Nintendo does not re-invest on the industry like the other players do. Nintendo makes huge profits that go mostly to the pockets of its shareholders. That can be seen in Nintendo's financial figures as well as the contrast between the lists of "best selling games ever" and "most expensive games ever". This shows willingness to spend, re-invest, do more and better and ultimately respect the gamer's money.

But one could think Nintendo profits a lot because it's very efficient. In other words, Nintendo would be able to deliver the same level of quality Sony and Microsoft do for much less money spent. That is again not true. Assessing quality through substantial requirements like those I've defined earlier proves that. Also the way Nintendo choses its niches: arcade racing, platformer, cartoonish games, fantasy RPG, fitness, party, motion mini-games, etc. And the way Nintendo closes doors such as: racing simulators, photo-realism, MMO, sandbox simulators, realistic games, massive sports games, fully editable games, etc. Even just talking about genres and niches, Nintendo avoids everything that is either massive money spending (which would dramatically lower their ROI's) or monsters of uncontrolled quality detail such as MMO and game expandable by users (which would demand much more effort in order to receive good critic scores).

This way, Nintendo is able to get everything it needs: high sales and high critic scores. The gamer is not a priority, only his/her money. The sales are the milk and the critic scores are the grass the cow eats to happily continue milking. What happens to the milk? It's removed (it's far too much precious than the grass) to the pockets of a very small amount of people. I know Nintendo is very competent in developing games and so I believe Nintendo could have been creating state-of-the-art masterpieces that would go trough the boldest game concepts so far invented (such as MMO, sandbox simulators, etc.) or even create new ones...but that's not the way Nintendo works. In comparison to Sony or Microsoft, Nintendo is far more greedy and this contrast between earnings (money and critic scores) and spendings (money and intellectual achievements) leads me to think the king has no clothes.

When someone like you creates a forum topic like this (saying Nintendo is the best and it's doing the revolution) my answer can only be: the king has no clothes.

Ha, it's unexplainable, that's why I think he'll say VGC is massively undertracking. Obviously we have NPD October and weekly mediacreate though.

Ironically, Mummelmann predicted 11,5 mill WiiU sold by this calendar year, just shy of 500k below John Lucas. I assume he now has a more sober prediction? He seem to have admitted to being dead wrong judging from his posts in this thread. What remains is for John Lucas to admit he was wrong so we can all calm down. Ofcource, i was hoping he was right but that probably requires divined intervention at this point.

That is a good point, my prediction was made in the transition December/January 2012/2013 (I do all my predictions at that time and I never change them over the year, where's the fun in that?). I chose not to alter it to remind myself just how things turned out. JL made his in August, by that time, it was all but clear to 99% of everyone else that 12 million just wasn't happening this year. Heck, I don't think it will even happen next year. As 2013 progressed and sales slumped and never rose, I began to realize that my notion that the Wii U would be lacking appeal would be more serious than I imagined and become crippling in the end. I have not had massive faith in it since it was unveiled and I believe I've said as much all along but 2013 was the year where it truly showed what kind of trouble it was in.

I have also stated in this; http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=152931&page=-1#1 thread that I thought the Wii U had the chance to sell the most in 2014, this was before the PS4 and One were even unveiled and we knew nothing about them at all. Just in case some people thought I'm a petty hatemonger with an agenda to paint Nintendo black. I'm afraid they've gone and colored themselves dark all by themselves this year.

So Xbox One sells more than 1m in less than 24 hours (still 7 - 10 hours of Americas to include).