You are ignoring it because you don't understand audiences. You don't understand evergreen titles.

Zelda: Launch.

Because - hype. Nothing comes close in terms of hype and they need hype to sell consoles.

3D Mario: Holiday.

Because: It is the next big franchise in the hype list.

Pokemon: Summer.

Because: Pokemon audience is not going to buy a new console just for a third version. This is more like an incentive for the existing userbase.

3D Mario is a bigger game than a third Pokemon version.

Interesing how few people remember that console. 

Yes, the one that opened with Zelda and not Mario, the console that won the 7th generation war despite how many gaming enthusiasts try to insist the 360 did. 

Ladies and Gentlemen, does no one remember the Wii and Twilight Princess!?

That's basically what your post comes down to. It's fine though, soon you may see that Stars isn't "just" a third version, and eventually that the Pokemon fanbase is far more dedicated than you realize. After Stars outsells both Zelda and Mario, we'll be looking back at this and having a laugh over it.

No, I am ignoring it because you have offered absolutely no proof to support your argument.  I mean, two of these titles aren't even announced yet, so we don't even have any consumer interest data to go on. It's all gut feelings and assertions. These things have their place in marketing (and in this discussion), but they are too easily colored by personal biases and emotions. Cold hard numbers are far more relevant. You feel that a third Pokemon won't drive Switch sales as much as Zelda or Mario, but I know that no mainline Pokemon title has ever sold less than 6 million, and that many "third entries" have sold more than 7 million, which puts them in the same league as the best selling Zelda titles and ahead of many Mario games. Yes, I feel that this being the first Pokemon game on an HD home console will be a huge selling point, but I find the six million minimum number, coupled with how huge Pokemon has become in the wake of GO, to be more compelling.

Personally, out of the three titles, I think Mario sits on top in terms of potential guarunteed sales. 3D Mario games have had a higher ceiling and floor than Zelda titles, looking at their sales numbers. Pokemon comes in second because, while I think it has potential for huge sales, third versions have typically sold about 7 million, which puts it below several 3D Mario titles. It depends on how big and long lasting the new Pokemon craze is, how enticing console play is to current, lapsed, and potential Pokemon players, and as you have pointed out, whether hardcore Pokemon players will be less willing to shell out money for another console for a third version. We can only speculate on these things, since it's all pretty unprecedented as far as Pokemon goes. So while I feel it has the potential to sell more than Mario, past sales would indicate 6 and 8 million for this one. Zelda sits at the bottom, because even the highest selling Zelda game ever, Twilight Princess, only sold 7 million units on the Wii. It's launch sales in Japan were middling (14,000, Miyamoto expressed disappointment over it) to boot. 7 million is well below what 3D Mario's best seller, and as I've pointed out before, typical for a third Pokemon game. I'm sure Zelda fans are hyped for it, but the franchise has never quite matched the widespread appeal of Mario or Pokemon. Of course, Breath of the Wild is a very different Zelda game, so that could change here, but at the moment there isn't really any evidence that Zelda can surpass Mario or a third Pokemon in hype or sales. That it's not even Switch exclusive, unlike Mario, certainly doesn't help it, as many of the games hardcore fans don't even need to buy a Switch to play it. Of course, this didn't stop Twilight Princess Wii from becoming the best selling Zelda release in franchise history, but the Gamecube version DID still crack a million. 

In any case, I think I might be done here. Not much else I can really say against your argument, and there's not much else I can get out of it if you don't start throwing proof at me. There's only so much I can say when your reply boils down to "this is what will happen because this is what I think will happen". But still, fun discussion. Thanks!

Disagree, Pokemon become easily strongest Nintendo IP (espacily now with Pokemon GO effect), just look sales of last Pokemon. You can bet that even a third version, that will actualy be 1st HD Pokemon game and on completely new platform will be huge system seller and very popular.

And where did I say that Stars won't outsell Zelda and Mario? Can you understand how different audiences moves consoles in different circumstances? Do you really believe that after the release of S/M last month, people is ready to buy new hardware for a third version? Really? Just admit that you don't understand. This is the same as the 3D Mario vs Zelda thread we had months ago. Mario is going to outsell Zelda, but Zelda is going to move more consoles at the launch considering the hype. In the long term Mario is going to outsell, but people won't be in a rush because it is an evergreen title while Zelda is front loaded.

People can't learn their lesson.

Personally just read above because you are way out of what I'm talking here.

And where did I say that Stars won't outsell Zelda and Mario? Can you understand how different audiences moves consoles in different circumstances? Do you really believe that after the release of S/M last month, people is ready to buy new hardware for a third version? Really? Just admit that you don't understand. This is the same as the 3D Mario vs Zelda thread we had months ago. Mario is going to outsell Zelda, but Zelda is going to move more consoles at the launch considering the hype. In the long term Mario is going to outsell, but people won't be in a rush because it is an evergreen title while Zelda is front loaded.

People can't learn their lesson.

Yes, i am willing to take that risk.  I have plenty of games to play already. I'm not sure I could even find time to "fit in" Nintendo games right now. So I much rather have to wait, than spending full price for a console that will sit around and do nothing.

Not to mention that by waiting it will be cheaper(well maybe a little given it is Nintendo) and have a lot of games (which also may be a little cheaper).

Switch + launch day mario is worth me pre ordering. I get a game to play, and I don't have to deal with the hassle. But if I have no games to play, I'm willing to just wait.

edit: Although price does factor into that.  If we are talking as low as $200? I may do that and just wait for a game I want. But higher than that I think I will take the risk.

You didn't say it, but that's what I had to assume you were implying. Moving more consoles despite selling less? That just doesn't make sense. I suppose there's no way to truely prove what exactly people are buying systems for, so I guess I can't say that's impossible, but definitely highly unlikely. Certainly makes more sense to assume the system sellers are the games that are bought the most. The higher the attach rate, the more system owners that have the game, the more likely it is people bought the system for that game. I guess this is where we'll be at an impasse as I'd rather believe in logic supported by hard numbers than biased assumptions. Thankfully I believe most everyone else on this site also uses numbers to define system sellers.

Now to answer your bolded question (which you should kind of already know the answer to if you've been paying any attention), yes! For one, I don't believe it'll be a third version like Emerald/Platinum as you are probably thinking, but more like Black2/White2, sequels, a continuation of the story. That means every Sun/Moon player will have good reason to pick it up, not only the enthusiast if it were just a third version with same story. This remains to be seen of course, but there are a lot of signs of this being the case in Sun/Moon. And again, it's the latest Pokemon game, it'll be the first one on the Switch, and it'll be HD and playable on TV.

Oh, it has plenty to do with what you're talking abou. You are making assertions about hype and sales potential. I am applying what data I can find to it. Then you proceed to ignore the data, and offer none of your own. So I think, rather than just abandoning this discussion, I'm gonna try one more tactic...

Prove it.