Motion Plus come at summer 09, but Wii Remote Plus and Wii bundles with Remote Plus come out at end of 2010. Wii Sports Resort sold 33m, thats 1/3 of all Wii owners, also not false.

We can say that nearly 50m owners could have Wii Remote Plus or Motion Plus, but thats at least 50m people that needed to buy Wii Remote Plus or Motion Plus if they wanted to play Skyward Sword, so definitely SS sales numbers would be higher if game doesn't required Wii Remote Plus or Motion Plus. Also Wii was very dead at end of 2011. when IS finally arrived.

Of Course that install base is not only factor if talk about sales, but definitely one factors.

Bayonetta 2/Xenoblade/Fatal Frame are a good start, but they need to create more such games. Keep making Mario, Smash, Splatoon, etc, but balance them out with more so-called "mature" games, so you have a more even mix, spanning a greater range of genres.

Ocarina being one of the most critically acclaimed games of all time is a fact, but being the "best" is still an opinion. Popularity doesn't make an opinion a fact, it doesn't matter how many people share an opinion, it's still an opinion.

Yes we need more Bayonetta 2/Xenoblade/Fatal Frame type of games (and of course better 3rd party supports) in order that Nintendo console be more appeal to PS/Xbox users. But Mario, Smash, Zelda, Splatoon, etc, are almost perfect like they are currently, there is no need to be more "mature", why they need to turne them in something they are not, in same time thats one of reasons why are Nintendo games are so unique and different than anything else in market, you have that kind of games only on Nintendo consoles, also they are very popular and have great sales like they are currently. For mauture games Nintendo has Xenoblade and Metroid for instance, do some more completly new "mature" games, and make more 3rd party projects like Bayonetta 2/Fatal Frame, but they really don't need to change at all already great and very popular games.

Actual OoT isn't one of the most critically acclaimed games of all time, it is most critically acclaimed game of all time. That is not without reason, so definitely is one of the best games ever made.

It wouldn't be "turning Zelda into something it is not though", it would simply be returning it to its most popular form. (Twilight Princess/Ocarina of Time)

And I alredy wrote to you few times why I think those were most popular forms, not beacuse art style...I think there is no need to go around in circle again.

Whether you think it's because of the art style is irrelevant, the fact is, these are the best selling Zelda games. Therefore, returning to this style would NOT be "making Zelda into something it's not".

Yes they are best selling Zelda games, but also fact is that one of them is most critically acclaimed game of all time, and another was launch title on best selling Nintendo console ever, also fact is that MM with same art style is one of the worst selling 3D Zelda game.

If you referring only to art style (that screenshot you post would be OK art style for Zelda), than I withdraw what I wrote, "making Zelda into something it's not", but again there is no real need to go back again to that art style.

You have admitted yourself in this thread that darker graphics are more popular than cartoon graphics, so there's good reason to go back to that art style.

No really, you have some sort of problem with memory!?

I wrote you few time answer on that question:

"Of Course that "serious" graphics are today way more popular, but that doesn't mean that game that looks different and unique and dont have same graphics like every other game will sell worse, on contrary, I think it will sell better. Zelda is same like other Nintendo games but on even more higher level, very unique, different and you dont have nothing similar on market."

"Today almost all games have "serious graphics" on much stronger hardwares than Nintendos (I am including PC too), it would be impossible for Nintendo to top those "serious graphics" and make something that looks very good and attractive for today standards, but Zelda U art style basically top all non "serious" graphics, looks beautiful, very unique and attractive, and that's what exactly Nintendo wants to achieve with every main 3D Zelda game."

"And you again completely ignored fact that Zelda with "serious graphics" (espacily on Wii U) wouldnt look good at all for today standards, while Zelda U looks great for today standards. Those mainstreams you referred to, would look at Zelda U with "serious graphics" and said this dont look good at all because they have so many game that looks so much better, while those same mainstream said for Zelda U "cartoon" art style, this looks different and interesting."

"Agree that something like that would probably be more appeal to the mainstream (personally I wouldn't have nothing against this type of art style for Zelda), but Nintendo definitely could not make something like that in open world Zelda game with Wii U hardware, maybe on NX.. On other hand Zelda U art style its perfect, looks beautiful and Nintendo despite weak hardware can make huge and detailed beautiful world with it."

Once again, there is no really nice way to say this, so I apologize if this sounds rude, but you seem incapable or unwilling to put aside your personal bias and view things objectively.

Throughout this discussion, you continually try to pass off your personal opinion as fact, and spin reality to fit your “Nintendo can do no wrong” agenda.

You think that because you like toon graphics, that means gamers in general love them. But they don't. Your tastes are not mainstream. You are a minority.