"I am considering the Wiimote and Nunchuck together. Even together there is only one joystick. The Pro Controller has two joysticks. If the Wiimote had a joystick your argument would actually have some validity."

The games did just fine with what the wiimote + nunchuck had, so no.

"Haha! You consider 500K great numbers? The reality is that's why core support died on Wii."

GOSH, you didn't even read, did you? IN 2010, WII GOT 20 RELEASES THAT SOLD A MINIMUM OF 500K. most were multi million sellers.

"Those sales are crap compared to what PS360 were achieving."

ps360 had games that were multimillion sellers and also games that barely sold 500k. wii had games that were multimillion sellers and also games that barely sold 500k.

"Core games were lucky to do 500K on Wii while its competitors were doing multi millions"

Regardless of your definition of "core", that will always remain false.

"Again, you say CoD isn't core but ignore how well it does on core platforms."

Core platforms? you're gonna insist on those imaginary terms? anyway, if you think cod of all things is core, than you cannot possibly consider any genre as casual.

"I said show me Wii did better at moving core software than SNES/PS1/PS2. I didn't ask for proof Wii could sell casual stuff and Mario games."

"Casual stuff and mario games" This is pure downplaying. I didn't know that zelda, metroid, kirby, DK, fire emblem, xenoblade, punch out, sin and punishment... + many other 3rd party titles = mario games. even mario kart/party aren't mario games.

"if Wii was a successful core platform then the Wii U wouldn't be struggling this bad right now."

Absolutely no relation. A console's success isn't determined by it's predecessor. Just look at ps3 and ps vita.

Again, the Wiimote + Nunchuck is not a standard gamepad. Most people (core gamers especially) prefer a standard gamepad so that is why the Pro Controller exist. The Wii U basically dropped the Wiimote because they wanted to appeal to core audience with a gamepad that has a touch screen on it. Which was stupid because the Wii U is another casual console and casuals like the Wiimote. The Wiimote also helped distinguish Nintendo platforms from its competitors.

No, go do your research. There are few 3rd party core games released in 2010 that sold over 500K. The only 3rd party core games that sold over a million and were released in 2010 was Black Ops and Goldeneye.

Here's is a reality you're ignoring... platforms appeal to different audiences. The core audience is not imaginary and its something Nintendo wanted to acquire with Wii U. It failed and that's why compnaies like Ubisoft will keep bringing Just Dance but not Assassin's Creed.

1st party games did extremely or pretty well on Wii, but that doesn't encourage 3rd party core support. Also the people primarily buying 1st party games on Wii were casual.

The success of PS4 absolutely has to do with PS3. The PS3 had the largest core audience and they went to PS4. PSP had a large casual audience and that went away (casuals aren't reliable, Nintendo learned this). As you might notice the Vita library attempts appeal to core audience because casual audience is gone. X1 is doing damage control but its still doing significantly better than Wii U because Xbox has a core following.

I like how pugsly is intentionally ignoring the tie ratio of the Wii.

Tie ratio? Are you talking about software attach rate?

We can get into that discussion assuming I know what you're talking about.

No i think the video game market , would still be a good place for gaming without playstation in it. People seem to forget that sony only entered the video game market in the first place, because they had created a combo system ( cd/cart ) with nintendo and when nintendo realized they were going to get screwed over by sony, they dropped the joint venture. And because of this the playstation brand was born.
Also microsoft did enter the video game market, because they did not want sony to have the market to itself, and also some people seem to forget that microsoft got interested in the video game market ( console side ), when they worked with sega on the dreamcast ( provided sega with the operating system ).
I think the young video game players who joined the hobby during the playstation days, should respect nintendo more than they do, simply because without nintendo creating the nes, we would not have a video game market to play and enjoy like we have today.
In short, wether its been nintendo,sega,intellvision,colleico ( mispelled this i know ),neo geo,3do,atari,sony,microsoft or anyone else i forgot. All these companies have paved the way for the industry we love and enjoy, contributing all kinds of ideas over time and u begin to realize that no one company helped the industry more than the other. Yes certain ideas did push the industry further along, but its because a change was needed to evolve the hobby.
Been gaming since i was 4, i am 38 now. And i have a better apprecaition for this hobby i love, i think more than others, simply because i have seen its struggles over the past 30+ years. I sometimes wish the gamers of today , would just enjoy games in general and stop all the bs and system war crap , if u are a true gamer ( someone who can enjoy games on any system and spread the joy of this , i applaud u very sincerely ).

Sorry for the long post....

 They've never done anything short of paying for exclusivity. What Nintendo did was strong arm people into putting tech in their hardware preventing third party from venturing out and going multiplat. It was a scare tactic. Atari thought it was Nintendo trying to create a monopoly but it was really just Nintendo using strong arm tactics to hold down and force third party games to be exclusive. Its amazing how much people rationalize this stuff and no, MS and Sony have never done this.

Did you even read OP? Hes asking a hypothetical question.

Are you telling me that if millions of console gamers moved to PC, then hardware manufacturers wouldnt take advantage of the rise in demand?

Anyway, please send me the link for components that total £289 (how much a PS4 is on amazon) which can be assembled into a PC that will outperform a PS4, and state how long you expect that PC to outperform the PS4 for.

Like I have already said multiple times in this thread, if 3rd parties really felt they were being mistreated they could have developed games elsewhere. Nintendo only shipped 200,000 NES in North America by August 1986 which is right around the time Atari 7800 & Sega Master System released. Also Sega's SG-1000 released the same day as Famicom in Japan, 3rd parties had other options before Nintendo gained massive marketshare, nobody made 3rd parties make Nintendo games.

Video games were never seen as a toy or kids thing. The only reason it seems more main stream now is because 40+ year olds grow up playing games. That wasn't the case 30 years ago. If it wasn't for Sony Sega would still be making consoles. Not to down play Sony, but video gaming would still be huge without them.

Context is important if you're talking about the game industry in the 80s/90s, which is very different from today.

Also you need to understand in Japan having a monopoly is not illegal or even considered bad. In fact, it's considered a compliment of your business acumen, lol (this is from the Console Wars book). So Yamauchi would have viewed everything that he was doing back then as perfectly fine.

If you called Nintendo "monopolistic" at that time, it was a compliment.