They expecting to sell only 800k units of Wii U for whole year (year ending 31. March 2017), that saying everything about their expectations from Wii U.

8 months away means a 2/3 of a year waiting with nothing more than Paper Mario, Lego and Just Dance in it. Add to it the fact that some won't get Zelda for WiiU but will go straight for the NX and its version counterpart.

Either you're very very patient or you'll go play somewhere different to make up for the amount of time you'll have to wait.

Or you can hardly find person that has only Wii U.

I don't think Nintendo's original plan involved releasing the NX in 2017. That's one horrible scheduling mistake, especially if "customer retention" rate is a thing Nintendo's concerned about, and like everyone else, they should be.

All I said is Nintendo is encouraging people to go play on a different console. Whether they already own them or have only a WiiU is irrelevant.

"The last Brain Training sold a lot with small resources."

Interesting considering the sales numbers we have here.

I don't know about anyone else but the line that really struck me the most was, "a Mario towel, Pikachu cookies, and room-temperature green tea given to attendees." Come on, Nintendo! These are your shareholders.

I'm getting really tired of that skewed slicing of the game price to make them look all innocent like.

 That is full of lies. First the marketing budget varies from title to title. Second, the developer gets nothing. They have been payed by the publisher already for their work hours. The ammount varies so it can't be that slice like it shows there. Retailers often make cut's to the price at their own risk.

What happens in reality is this:

Royaties are payed to the console manufacturers. I don't know if this is just one license or how/if it scales per print or plafonds of prints.

Retailers buy the copies for a certain price. They add their cut on top of it.Publishers receive the whole money of the copies bought by the retailer. Wether they actually sell doesn't affect them immediatly. Taking into account the values in the picture, the publisher gets 48 dollars per copy. They will get that for every copy sold to the retailer in the bulk. If copies don't sell, the deficit goes to the retailer and not the publisher. The only thing is next time the retailer will place smaller orders.

Once the game "breaks even" the developer share no longer can even be a thing, nor the marketing budget. At wich point they really get max money for every copy sold.

If its a digital copy, many of the costs of manufacturing are completely negated. I don't know how much the digital retailers charge in comparison to physical ones. But it can't be as much.

So, no publishers aren't poor sods that only make 18 dollars per copy sold. That is propaganda. The reason why they push pre-order is because they get a bigger bulk order from the retailers. Once they do, they already "sold" all those copies and if they actually don't the retailers are there to take the brunt of it.

The retailers are actually the poor guys here.

That's not true.  Bonuses and royalties are often included in contracts between developers and publishers.

Shouldn't the production costs include everything related to the development of the game, including the engine?