Look at what your post said mate the's only one context anyone can get from that post no matter how it is read if you can't write your own views properly it's your own fault no one else's. What do you think saying IPs outside of pokemon are niche is going to come across as? What further calls you into question is your first reply to me as what you said in that post and what you're pushing now is in stark contrast as it seems you realized how the post came across and attempt to damage control the view, the first reply asking the 70m question further adds to the original context people thought you were saying.

Yes Pokemon has more reach than other IPs but that still doesn't mean that is the correct use of niche, Mario is recognized by more people on the planet than Mickey Mouse for reference.

Here's the flaw in those stats you're using firstly the's no indication of the sample size they got these numbers from, secondly the % don't make sense as they're not even out of 100 so how are they calculating these stats exactly as after PC and Consoles they've already gone past 100%, they even fall short of 200%. This indicates to me that these stats are portraying what you think they are, most frequent players means what exactly? If they're talking about the so called core group then that even spins the stats further away from your point.

The problem here is that you can't read worth shit. Reread what I wrote slowly then reply and perhaps we can continue this discussion. If not I'm done with repeating myself over and over. 

Did you not look at the sources in article? I guess not. Of course, you wouldn't be asking that question about the sample size. 

No it's more that you can't write for shit someone else as well has also highlighted this problem with a few of your posts.

I also did look at the sources of the article, the source that gave that part you're touting doesn't answer that question hence why I'm point that out, the source leads to a PDF by the ESA that just has the percentages and note you don't even have a response to the odd percents in themselves with the stats not adding up to an coherant overall %. Well at least not coherant in the context you're trying to use them by looking at the source it looks that it's not saying portables are only 17% of the market at all but the devices that get the most use among gamers which ironically calls into question your reading of the data.

Why are you so focused on the handheld market?

1. I disagree about what demographics nintendo focuses on (yes, i watched that youtube vid btw). I think they are including more teens or adults in their marketing but in general, nintendo focuses on what they've always had. I'm not arguing for nintendo to change their art style in their games at all but I was pointing out what nintendo is doing or has done since the NES. I rather just call an apple an apple and not dance around it because some people might see it as a burn and turn the conversation's focus on defending that. 

4. Yes, I was talking about it in this "If you mean to say that Pokemon is the only Nintendo series that has appeal in movies, animation, and playing cards outside of gaming" sense. It has more reach than mario outside of gaming. That's what I meant with "outside of gaming". It does help sell games and move consoles though with it's brand recognition. How many handhelds do you think pokemon help sell? Also, that pokemon go craze was pretty wild, right? . If I remember correctly, alot of ya were estatic about it because it was nintendo's baby doing well. I didn't say that mario couldn't pull in people into gaming. I'll agree with those three probably pulling in as much pokemon does.  

5. i don't know if I'm understanding you right but here's my response to what I think you're saying there. Nintendo is specializing toward or focusing on a certain niche part of the gaming market which is generally outside of the average gamers. Nintendo also makes a few games for the average gamer but not enough to pull the average gamr in numbers to nintendo consoles. With both specializing and making some offerings for older teens/adults, one could say that nintendo is going after a broader range of consumers but in actuality, it's not bringing them in. Most 3rd party devs and sony/ms focus on the average gamer and don't really pay attention to the portion of the market that nintendo focuses on.

How many times did I say that I didn't say nintendo's IP were niche and yet, you kept saying that i was saying that their IPs are niche. I was pretty crystal clear about it repeatedly. I think that some of you are just skimming through what people post and fixate on the certain phrases or words then assume what the rest of their post says based on those small bits.    Oh no, he said nintendo and niche in the same sentence, he must be calling nintendo's games niche.

https://www.polygon.com/2016/4/29/11539102/gaming-stats-2016-esa-essential-facts

Here's a different source with the same data as the other one but it doesn't have other statistics lumped in.  

It's not that confusing. The 17% can only fit into one group. It doesn't dispell that the handheld market is shrinking compared to other mobiles and in the overall gaming market.

Yes, that was when you asked if Nintendo's IPs help to sell 70m+ consoles on a regular basis. That's also the point where I would have made you a compliment for impersonating someone who doesn't know better, but I know that it isn't an act of yours. It's the real you.

Anyway, Nintendo's IPs have sold 70m+ handhelds without exception since the inception of the handheld market. Being made aware of that, you moved the goalposts and claimed that handhelds only account for 17% of the overall gaming market, so it doesn't counter that Nintendo only caters to a niche.

Now for a list of problems:

1. The same statistics put all home consoles combined at 53%. How many percent points of those are Sony's? The stats aren't broken down, but Sony would have below 30. Of course Sony gets one or two percent points of the handheld pie that isn't broken down either, so let's make that a flat 30%. Nintendo has a share in home consoles, so their total would be 20-25%, only marginally lower than Sony's share. But your argument is that Nintendo is niche because they don't have the wide reach of Sony. Hm...

2. You might wonder why I estimated Sony's share to be so low, but that has a good reason. The statistics you are using only concern the USA where Xbox One and Wii U combined have sold more units than the PS4, therefore my estimate of Sony accounting for half of the home console usage is fair. In any case, the important catch is that what you called the overall gaming market is actually only the USA.

3. The next important catch is that the statistics you used show the results for a question that allowed multiple answers, but only from people who identified as "frequent gamers" in a preceding question. A frequent gamer is probably determined by nothing more than passing a certain threshold of hours per week spent on gaming, hence why even browser games are included. So the statistics don't even represent the entire US market, but only the subset of people who play a lot. You have yet to provide statistical data that indicates Nintendo's reach to people who do not identify as frequent gamers.

Honestly, your argumentation is bad and you can't read statistics. Unsurprisingly, otherwise you wouldn't have come into this thread to say 30-40m lifetime for Switch, maybe less.

The important question I have to ask myself is why am I even trying to help you.

I brought up Sony to demonstrate how nonsensical your argument of Nintendo catering to a niche market is. By the way, a strawman is a misrepresentation of someone else's argument, but I left your argument as it is and merely provided additional context to the statistics you used.

And by all means, go lower than 30-40m. This thread is going to be active for years to come. Your name and prediction will be remembered.

You brought up sony as a strawman then. I used those statistic when someone else brought up handhelds. You know damn well that nintendo is focusing towards certain demographics over the average gamer. I'll leave my prediction as is.