You have absolutely no idea how this industry works in the slightest. 

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=6356343

Then they would have announced meeting their FY expectations with their FW shipment. Your assuming on zero actual information.

i dont understand whats the problem here, they state sell-through right there in the first sentance, which means sold to consumers. its right there, this is sold and not shipped. 

You just couldn't let go your chance to troll, could you?

I wouldn't be so quick to praise these numbers.

On paper, yes, impressive, but these are most likely inflated ''shipped'' numbers. EA and Square Enix have been doing this for years to fool its short buyers.

EA especially claim its games ''sell'' at least 50% more than they actually do, which is why a lot of their non BF and FIFA games go on sale quickly. They over ship, game doesn't sell as quickly as shipped units, game gets put on sale. This happened with ME3, Dead Space 2, Crysis 2 and SE's Tomb Raider and Hitman Abolution. All were widely available for half price 2 weeks later.

So, I don't expect VGC numbers to reflect what Ubisoft are saying.

Watch Dogs sold great numbers. The game is really fun to play and it's so easy to get sidetracked with all the content the game has.

Are you simply going to ignore all the good games that have been released and didn't sell well? Quality does not equal sales. This has been discussed to death.

Also, in terms of qualiy, Watch_Dogs has not received amazing reviews. If anything, it's extremely close to Infamous (82 vs 80) which has not sold anywhere near that, came out when there was nothing for ps4 for a longer time and is an exclusive. After getting an 80 the game was considered good (even average by some), but not great. How are things different with Watch_Dogs? 

How can the people who bought it have known that it would be a good game? It is thanks to hype that it got the sales. And I'm glad it did, cuz I like to see new IP's doing well and I've seen some very funny bits from the game that reviewers perhaps didn't catch while rushing to finish the game and wrtie the review.

@bolded

No they wouldn't. Not necessarily. In order for a game to sell you need many things including but usually a) interesting concept, b) hype, c) massive advertsing (especially for new IP's). The game could have turned out to be terrible and it would have still sold well (again, Dead Island says hello). Whether customers are satisfied with their purchase and consider a quality product can better be seen by looking at the legs that it'll have. It's obvious that Minecraft left many customers satisfied to achieve such continuous sales. Same with GTA and Mario games that keep on selling forever. 

"Where are the good games on PS4/X1 ?"

Infamous is as good of a game as Watch_Dogs according to reviewers (meta) and users (average scores). Yet it sells less. Quality is not enough. 

Watch_Dogs was hyped since it was shown. It would have done well whether it was released now, five months ago or by Christmas. Lack of good games never helped much good games to sell. Ask Ninty fans and Pikmin 3 or Wonderful 101. Great games, yet disappointing sales despite the long droughts. 

Hogwash, GAmes like wonderfull 101 is not a game that will attracy meainstream consumers.... Watch dogs is, and it is an excellent game (LOL at using metacritic), meta means nothing, what is 82 now was a 9 just 3 years ago, using meta is a laughable argument at best. USer scores?? MAss effectw as down in the 4's all popular games get reamed in user scores, another useless argument. Watch dogs is a great game of great quality, hacking is a great new mechanic that really gives choice in how to tackle each situation.

Did it sell consoles?