Oh, I'll admit that 3D World isn't moving consoles in abundance but that doesn't change the fact that your comparison is complete folly.

However, I believe (or hope anyway) that you're not really trying to be taken seriously with most of the things you say, so, carry on.

Its very hard to predict the future, but it looks almost inevitable that PS4 will lead sales of the 3 current gen consoles by this time next year. However, currently Nintendo have the leading current gen home console and are destroying the Vita in the handheld market. This comes on the back of incredible sales for the DS in the last generation and the Wii selling over 100 million units. The company is frankly on fire. Remember traditionally Nintendo have a 5-6 year lifespan for their consoles whereas Sony/Microsoft tend to look for longer. This, combined with the fact that Wii U was a year old prior to XBone/PS4 could mean that the next Nintendo console might be out 2-3 years before the competition is ready to upgrade. If this occurs they might find themselves well placed with the most powerful hardware and 30-40 million Wii U sales under their belt. Talk on these threads of Nintendo doom is frankly laughable.

You must be joking! You do realize that there are not 300 million consumers in the U.S right? If that was the case, the gross revenue reported for holiday sales would be almost 3x higher than it currently is. Please try and think before hastly replying as it makes you look utterly foolish. Interesting how you've picked an established game series to claim a similar comparision in a shoddy attempt to prove I am wrong.  You also have not provided any statistics regarding impulse buying or really anything intelligent for that matter. First of all, and I don't know times I have to say this until it gets through your thick skull but like I stated, reviews are a major contributing factor to sales and there are the exceptions. You've seem to have provided an excellent example without realizing. GTAV has a meta of 97 vs TLOU at 95. GTAV is the highest reviewed game this year and outsold ever other game released. See, I don't have to debate you because eventually you end up refuting yourself due to your own stupidity!

Your not getting the point. Were you dropped on your head numerous times in your youth??? Again, I'll repeat myself because you simply can't quite comprehend. FOR THE MOST PART REVIEWS "CONTRIBUTE" TO SALES!!! Your argument claiming it is not is absolutely absurd.  Also, please stop talking about the market because you obviouly (and it's very apparent)do not have a damn clue about about how the market actually operates. Your argument can be easily flipped and you fail to include the userbase on each console. High rated game like GTAV on consoles with 80Mill userbases will have signifcantly more sales than a game that came out 2 weeks ago with a userbase of now 4.5 mill.

I have refuted as well as pointed out the lack of "quality" in your absurd posts and misunderstanding of game sales. Every time you are proven false and I bring up a new point, you continue to regurgitate the same "as you Brits would call it" poppycock that has already been renedered moot. But, by all means keep going. I enjoy refuting your impared logic! 

Define "consumer" because if we look up at the dictionary it means "a person who aquires goods and services for his or her own personal needs" and by using that definition it clearly means that everyone is a consumer because they need basic resources such as food and shelter so they are essentially "consuming" in this sense. Your the one who looks foolish now. It's better than bringing up dumb fallacies such as the "impulse buy" excuse. Yet your clearly grasping at straws here because I asked why sales were not "comparable". Can you explain to me why there is over a "20 million" game sales difference between these titles despite having almost the scores? I thought so and you probably can't explain why the rest of the shit is different ... Start by properly reading somone's post or you'll only keep giving dumb replies. 

Well gee if that's true then why are there soo many inconsistencies ? The highest rated game in 2008 which was GTA 4 got beaten by mario kart WII. Can you explain the same for 2009 when uncharted 2 got shitted on by COD WAW in terms of sales ? Or how about in 2010 when super mario galaxy 2 got it's ass handed to Red Dead Redemption ? You probably couldn't do the same in 2011 for why Batman got destroyed by the likes of battlefield 3. 

If I don't know how the market operates then you obviously don't know shit about the market. The masses clearly do not operate on game scores. Guess what ? These are all games different from each other so no excuses. 

Don't give more "it's on smaller install base" crap. The point of the game is that it's supposed to make you buy the god damned console.

The one with impaired logic is you cause you clearly can't explain all these distortions between the game sales and metacritic scores. Give up dude, it's obvious that review scores =/= sales. 

Yes, please, add more  filler to the conversation because we are well aware at this point that you have nothing intelligent to contribute. Unless things work differently in the the UK "Not every single person has the ability to make purchases" . To assume that is to make an ass out of your self, which you have clearly done agian. Oh and now due to your inability to intelligently debate you basically copy and paste my comments directed at you "properly reading and straw man".  So for the thousandth time, THOROUGHLY READ MY RESPONSE. I gave you a clear explanation as to the difference in sales between the two games. You need to go back to highschool if you cannot understand why 160 million consoles combined would have substantially larger sales for a game released several months ago than SMW3D which was released 3 weeks ago. Do you need further explanation?

"Shakes head" you clearly do no read responses and go off in a nonsensical rant without actually addressing the comment properly. All of those games were reviewed with high scores? Correct. Therefore as I said earlier high scores contribute to sales, which is correct. If you underestimate the average consumers ability to incorporate reviews into their buying decision of a game (Wii was the exception) then your even less intelligent that I thought. Marketing is a big factor as well as previously stated. 

I clearly did explain the differences. Your inability to process information when it's  provided to you is not my fault. Your pathetic attempts at continuing this conversation with nonesense and attempting to put words in my mouth by not looking at every fact I stated (reviews "contribute" , marketing significantly "contributes") once again proves you have absolutley no clue what you are talking about. You've been defeated but by all means keep the comments coming, it's rather amusing.

Again with the excuses. We all know that 3D mario has smaller legs in comparison to other mario franchises. The point of of the game is supposed to make you buy the console. It's strange that you keep denying this notion. 

You still don't explain why there is a massive difference in sales despite the fact that there is very little difference in between scores. To say that your correct would simply be a stretch because you still don't give any reasons to my obvious question. You still probably won't be able to explain why the new medal of honor had higher sales than alot of the higher rated games like bayonetta as well as for the rest. Why is the WII an exception when it clearly had the most titles that sold over 5+ million ? It can't be just some coincidence that it happened because otherwise it would make your "you underestimate the average consumers ability to incoporate reviews" point null for the most part. Your the one that's less intelligent if you can't give me a clear relationship between review scores and sales. It's clear that the data you've shown to me only proves my point further as to why review scores don't correlate with sales.

Then how about games like medal of honor where review scores don't contribute to it's sales. Or how about nintendo dogs being able to move 22 millions copies with an average metascore ? The same applies to games like mario party DS. It's clear as day that review scores don't correlate to game sales at all. What's funny is that your trying to back up a dead point by down playing someone's question. Marketing is just another excuse as to why you can't explain the difference in games sales across the board. No matter how good your marketing is it won't save trash like duke nukem forvever. Why did BF4 have lower sales than BF3 despite the fact that it had a bigger marketing campaign ? There's lot's of holes in your points that you can't fix.

When the user base is big and you have few good games, those game will easely reach millions since there is little competition for the consumer's budget. If a console with a big used base like PS360 has less million sellers is becuase there were more good options and the competition for the consumer's budget was greater.

This shows that the wii having a big user base but few good games, is more likely they are all million sellers.

Yes, let's go ahead and ask that one buddy.

If marketing means nothing to sales, why did it sell less?

If word of mouth from gamers means nothing, why did it sell less? 

If reviews mean nothing, why did it sell less?

How can quality be known to be less, if people don't play it?

How then, is it possible for a sequel to a very hyped and liked game, sell less than it's predecessor?  You can't say it was reviewed less, because that doesn't matter.  You can't say that gamer's didn't enjoy it, because word of mouth doesn't matter.  You also can't say it was marketed poorly, because that doesn't matter.  And, according to you, you also can't say sales are indicative of it's quality, because how would someone know if a game is good if they havent played it without reviews, marketing, or word of mouth?  Why don't you formulate some crazy response to that one.

Well technically WiiU is winning......it got the year head start. Which I totally think is a legit move ;P

It’s not an excuse, it is a fact. 3D Worlds was released on an extremely small userbase and has helped contribute to over 500,000 consoles moved in two weeks (sold over 700,000 copies). It increased the user base by 12.5%. Obviously people are “buying the console” due to this.

 I’ve already explained it to you thoroughly , maybe you should bring our conversation to the remedial teacher you had in high school and maybe they will have the patience to slowly explain it to you so that it sinks into your head J As for Medal of Honor moving more copies than Bayonetta, that is where the established game/marketing comes into play as I’ve previously explained to you. Which is why I’ve stated reviews CONTRIBUTE TO SALES!!! It does not make my point null and void. The average consumer will incorporate reviews, the soccer mom phenomenon does not. Impulse shopping as previously stated which occurred throughout the Wii’s lifetime which is why shovel ware became predominant. I’ve provided you different factors for each of my points yet you still cannot comprehend.

 Medal of honour was a 74/75 on consoles ( to a lot of people still worth a purcahse), Duke Nukem was 49/51 Therefore my logic applies. Nintendogs had 70-80’s on Meta and excellent marketing, the TV ads especially in which multiple ads were released targeting different demographics. Once again you failed to understand that reviews do in fact contribute to sales, as well as marketing, how many times does this has to be beaten over your head under you finally acknowledge it. It’s not an excuse, its fact. Using games like Battlefield, COD and Assasins Creed will not help your argument. I’m not sure if you’re aware but when you release a multigeneration game, it tends to break up the sales. Also Battlefield 3’s reviews were higher than that of 4’s. You claim the market decides what is popular yet you do not explain where it comes to this idea. If it’s not reviews, the media, marketing, then what is it? Word of mouth? And where would this word of mouth come from? Opening sales would not be nearly at the level they are if it was purely word of mouth of the consumer. If that does not explain it then it's impulse. Or maybe, just maybe like I've tried to explain to you, all of these factors CONTRIBUTE  to the overall sales! See your logic is so terribly flawed that it’s hard to believe whether you are being serious, or again if you just really do not have much of a life and the purpose of your account is to live vicariously through it and troll people. I just fixed those apparent holes for you, what’s next?