The Wii is actually evidence that hardware isn't as significant as marketshare is when concerning multiplat support. The PS2 is further support of this claim.

Ehhhh... I don't agree with that.  The Wii actually had relatively poor third party support compared to its market share.  The PS2 was really close to other consoles in terms of specs, certain closer than Wii or Wii U were.

And a lot better third party support than its specs should have allowed.

And I am not saying discounting that the Wii sold to gamers as well as non gamers. In fact, I'm saying we can't divorce the too we simply don't have that information.

Instead, I use the 5th (30 mill) and 6th (20 mill) generations and compare that against the Wii (100 mill). That's at the very least 50 million non-gamers as rough low estimate.

Isn't divorcing the two what you're doing here?  Actually, 0 non-gamers bought the Wii, unless they didn't play it.  But, out of the 50 million previous "non-gamers",  how many of those were previously playstation gamers?  How many of those were simply new gamers who later bought a 360, PS3, or PS4?

At least a 300% difference in overall sales, just by changing the primary addressed market.

Thus, its simply as this Post-PlayStation, when Nintendo adresses a non-traditional market, traditional defined as people who have gaming as a hobby on home consoles, they succeed. This is because Nintendo is no longer compatible with the new standard which favors PlayStation and Xbox. I consider Handhelds as non standard because Nintendo succeeds in it, but thus far it hasn't helped the home consoles. It could have helped the Wii, but we have no solid information on its effects, similar how we don't know what the GBA did.

Then what is the difference between the handheld market and the home console market OR the difference between Nintendo's strategy on those systems?  That's a big part of the puzzle you can't simply ignore. 

There is little to no difference between Nintendo's strategy for handhelds and home consoles. This is the Issue, and why I can divorce the markets because they sell for different reasons not because of different strategies. In other words, Nintendo's has one strategy, that works for handhelds but doesn't work for home consoles.

Calling anything the "standard" is a weird proposition.  I'm not sure what you mean exactly, and I'm not sure exactly what your point is.  I mean... Nintendo's obviously not competing well in the market right now, but we didn't exactly need a thread for that.  But to say Nintendo can't succeed in that market is a bit of a jump that you don't really provide evidence for.  Nintendo isn't really trying to compete in this market, and even claiming that it tried to during the Gamecube era would be a tough claim to make.  Rather, I would say Nintendo has always tried to appeal to the market that the Wii succeeded in, but the Wii is just the first time it clicked as it did.

There is no point in arguing semantics. Standard is just another word for Traditional, and the traditional market is the one of primary focus for the industry. That is without a doubt the home console industry. As for the necessity of this thread, that argument is pointless. I wanted to make this thread, so I did. I don't care about its necessity or whatever. The 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th gen current are evidence for Nintendo failing to compete in the traditional market. My argument is that the Market has changed, but it is built on the foundation that this is true and the subsequent generations up to know are the evidence that back that up.

It is impossible to say that Nintendo has tried to appeal to the market that the Wii did, because there is no evidence to support it. The performance of the Wii U has is contrary to that claim as well.

Instead, I use the 5th (30 mill) and 6th (20 mill) generations and compare that against the Wii (100 mill). That's at the very least 50 million non-gamers as rough low estimate.

Instead, I use the  6th (20 mill) generations and compare that against the XBox 360 (80 mill). That's at the very least 60 million non-gamers as rough low estimate.

Instead, I use the 5th (30 mill) and 6th (20 mill) generations and compare that against the Wii (100 mill). That's at the very least 50 million non-gamers as rough low estimate.

no because their appeal is subjective

Uhhhhhh... what does that mean?  The appeal of every game is subjective.

It means you cannot make assupmptions based on popular casual franchises.

So... the fact that franchises were popular on the PS2 became popular on the Wii in no way suggests an overlap of fans?  Seems pretty sound logic to me.  I'm not sure what you expect, a letter from each person who bought Guitar hero world tour?

Addressed above

Ummmm... how does that exactly suggest that the 50 million people were non-gamers?  You've shown that they're 50 million non-nintendo gamers, but that says nothing about their previous gaming habbits.  So here, have your jpg back.

You're right it doesn't. All it tells us that it was an increase in Nintendo's Marketshare. But in hindsight, it really doesn't matter what you or I call them.

Wait let me try something...

Applying the same logic to the XBox 360 as you did to the Wii (that is that we compare a system's current gen to last gen and every new owner is a non gamer).  Then you get that the XBox 360 had 60 million non-gamers.  Of course, that doesn't work, but it doesn't work with the Wii either. 

that can't count by the rules you set up. 

We can only use information we have, this is the point of being objective.

The data is objective.  Your conclusion is subjective.  The data does not state that 50 million people were non-gamers.  The data states 50 million people did not previously own a Nintendo console.  Big difference.

I can agree to this. However, its simply a change of terms not a change of meaning. The increase in marketshare can be attritbuted to a change in the adressal of markets

Yeah... ya did.  Nongamer-outlier.  Outlier- someone not included in your data set.  You identified anyone out of the 30-50 million N64 cube range as an non-gamer, and excluded them from the market.  Hence, outlier.

Technically, you consider Non-Gamer as outlier, I never mentioned it.

As for the information regarding the demographics of the Wii's audience.

Right back at ya slick.