Understood. I still think it can be fun in spots, Black Ops 3 was good, and even though Infinite Warfare's multiplayer was terrible, it had a surprisingly fun campaign. I also liked the beta for WW2. But yeah, I would prefer Mario Odyssey outsell it eventually, since it's bound to be a much better game. 

I think cod will win in preorders, first week and lifetime. Mario could do it in a few years but the Switch simply doesn't have the install base to compete with a heavy hitter like cod. Nintendo first party games are known for their legs though and, just a scary thought, the Switch will be hitting it's peak years as the ps4 dwindles and makes way for a successor. If it gets bundled heavily along with them sexy ninty legs... Who knows.

Fine, if you want to call the argument based on attach rates, then we will say it's based on attach rates. Let's chalk that one up to my lack of sleep yesterday. 

"Just because Mario sold 10:100 or 1:10 on the Wii, doesn't mean it would take 130 Switch's sold in order to get Odyssey to beat COD on the PS4. That's not how attach rates work. 

I then gave the example that Mario Kart 8 Deluxe had an attach rate of 60% on the Wii U, so by your logic it would sell 60 million on Wii. Your response to this, ironically, was that "of course it would have a higher attach rate because it had few system sales and a high amount of hardcore Nintendo fans". Which, quite literally, was my point. Not only that, but Galaxy sold at least 11 million physically so that's not even the right figure you were using. Even then though, Nintendo is getting a consistent record of higher attach rates."

Your argument here is a reductio ad absurdum. According to you my argument is as follows... 

1. Call of Duty had an attach rate of 1:4 on PS4 with 60 million units.  

2. Super Mario Galaxy had an attach rate of 1:10 on Wii with 100 million units. 

3. If a game has a better attach rate it will sell more units on a console with fewer sales, than a game on a console with higher sales.

Therefore CoD will sell more units than Odyssey.

Your counter argument looks like this... 

1. Mario Kart 8 had an attach rate of 6:10 on the Wii U with 14 million units. 

2. Mario Kart Wii had an attach rate of 4:10 on the Wii with 100 million units.

3. If a game has a better attach rate it will sell more units on a console with fewer sales, than a game on a console with higher sales.

Therefore Mario Kart 8 will sell more units than Mario Kart Wii.

But Mario Kart 8 did not sell more units than Mario Kart Wii, therefore premise 3 must be wrong. 

This all looks fine and dandy from where you are sitting, but that wasn't my complete argument. 

1. Either the Switch will outsell the PS4, or it will not. 

2. Call of Duty Black Ops III (the closest comparison to CoD WWII) had an attach rate of 1:4 on PS4 alone.

3. Super Mario Galaxy (the closest comparison to Odyssey) had an attach rate of 1:10 on the Wii. 

4.  If a game has a better attach rate it will *PROBABLY* sell more units on a console with fewer sales, than a game on a console with higher sales.

5. Therefore if PS4 winds up getting fewer lifetime sales than Switch, CoD will *PROBABLY* outsell Odyssey in lifetime sales. 

6. Premise 4 implies that there's always a small chance for a game to outsell another game despite attach rates, due to higher console sales, overriding attach rates.

7. Therefore if Switch outsells the PS4 there's a small chance of Odyssey outselling CoD despite attach rates, due to higher console sales overrideing attach rates. 

8. Therefore if Switch outsells the PS4 it is unlikely that Odyssey will outsell CoD. 

9. A game is extremely unlikley to sell more units than a competing game, on a console with higher attach rates (per these series) *and* higher console sales. 

10. Therefore if PS4 outsells the Switch it is extremely unlikely that Odyssey will outsell CoD. 

11. Therefore whether or not Switch outsells PS4 it is unlikely that Odyssey will outsell CoD WWII on PS4.

And that was my argument up to the point where it applies to the thread title. I implied an additional argument that since CoD WWII is releasing on other consoles that the total sales of the game across all platforms would crush Odyssey. But that wasn't exactly on topic. The only flaw I see in it is if CoD WWII winds up not being comparable to Black Ops III. For all we know it could wind up being a terrible game, and a dud ala Ghosts. But I think that's unlikely for several reasons I won't go into here. 

This response is so nonsensical I don't even know where to begin. Again, I think you're overanalyzing attach rates too much, since my comment was *against* your argument about attach rates. My point that Nintendo's attach rates are getting better in recent memory was not to say that Odyssey will sell a gajjilllion billion units on 13 million hardware sales, it was just a sidenote that I thought was interesting in the whole attach rate mess. I still honestly do not know how you can misrepresent the Mario Kart example so badly after having it explained to you, I guess you either like fallacies or just don't get it. 

Part of me really wants to continue this discussion because exiting a discussion always makes you look like the loser. But if there's one thing i've learned from VGChartz, it's that people will argue all day and defend their arguments, even if they are poor. That applies to me as well. I was satisfied with my last response. I don't think nintendo's attach raes will make Odyssey sell better automatically, that wasn't my point. It was that attach rates suck during arguments, and that if we did look at them Nintendo's attach rates are getting better. But of course, you somehow didn't get that. It's so ironic to me that you deduced my argumen down to make it look stupid, when my argument was using your own logic. Yes, the entire point was that the Mario Kart example was stupid. I don't know how you could not understand that ....

It's seriously frustrating when my entire point was "attach rates suck, stop using them, but even if we did use them Nintendo attach rates are improving, but we shouldn't use them-" and that's cut off with "LOOK AT YOU USING ATTACH RATES HERE ARE ALL MY ARGUMENTS ATTACH RATES ARE IN ALL OF THEM!" That being said, you are correct that a game with higher attach rates and on a console with higher sales will get more sales *most of the time*. Good thing WW2 looks to have a much worse attach rate than Black Ops 3. 

Oh and uh ... by the way ... do you want to talk about the n64? Or is that somehow "off limits" because 32 million isn't enough? lol

I've already explained this, but Black Ops 3 is *not* the closest comparison to WW2. Stop messing with the entries to try and makean illogical point.

Oh, and by the way, Black Ops 3 was at over a million pre-orders this time in 2015. WW2 is at 250k. Infinite Warfare was at 150k. Go figure.

Wait a minute ... I just said I would stop arguing. And I just .. argued. Oh well. Just wanted to point  out how ridiculous this was getting.

But anyways, I'm done. 

Is there ever a point doing these when it's comparing Nintendo games to another.

While not the rule, this is pretty standard
Nintendo 40% front end, 60% legs
All others 80% front end 20% legs

Nintendo never sets records for first day/week numbers.

This isn't even mentioning that CoD will probably sell more first week than there are Switch units.

1. I don't get what you are trying to say then. 

2. It's pretty much impossible to refute a reductio ad absurdum without addressing your own logic. I showed how the logic of your argument wasn't exactly the logic of my own argument. That makes your counter argument an unintended strawman. 

3. Well I agree that attach rates can't be used to 100% accurracy. That's why I said that there was a small chance of SMO outselling CoD despite attach rates. Anyway, sorry for coming off that way. I really didn't mean to respond with "HERE ARE ALL MY ARGUMENTS WITH ATTACH RATES! I"M IGNORING WHAT YOU SAID ENTIRELY LOLOLOLOL!"

4. Nah, we can talk about N64. Nothing off limits about that. 

5. I'm open to the idea that Black Ops III is not a good comparison to CoD WWII. 

6. Now that's new information that I did not know. I guess we will have to wait and see. Black Ops III sold well because the CoD community has always held the Black Ops games (and all the Treyarch CoD games in general) in high regard. I'm assuming here that since CoD: WWII has a similar name to CoD: World at War that most casuals will associate it with Treyarch without looking. But then again maybe casuals aren't that dumb. Your pre-order information would imply that they aren't, but who pre-orders games? Is it always the hardcore players, or just the casuals? If a large majority of pre-orders come from hardcore gamers, then point six could be meaningless. If pre-orders come largely from casuals, then that does not bode well for CoD: WWII. 

Edit: Oh and don't fret about me responding to any further responses for a while. I'm nearly at 1000 posts, and I want to make an "introduce yourself" thread about it, but I need to take pictures of my collection. So it'll be a while. 

1. Attach rates are not a good thing to use in some arguments. They are good some times, other times misleading.

2. It's not an unintended strawman though. See, THIS is my problem with your replies. You first said that a majority of your argument wasn't about attach rates, which I proved wrong by literally reposting what you said. And now you're saying i'm not accurately describing your point ... but you don't show any evidence of that. 

"CoD will crush Odyssey in every sales catagory. It will have more pre-orders, more sales the first week, and more lifetime sales. Galaxy is the highest selling 3D Mario game and it only hit 10 million on the Wii, with a 100 million user install base. The last Black Ops sold 14 million just on PS4 alone. If the Switch winds up selling 130 million units lifetime, and Odyssey becomes a Nintendo Selects title for $20, then it might beat CoD WWII. But that's a really long shot. "

Literally a majority of your comment is ridiculous attach rate mumbo jumbo, so I showed you why attach rates are, *for the most part*, are bad in making logical arguments. Now you can keep saying "well that's not what I meant! well that's not what I said!" but it is what you said and I can only derive what you meant by what you said. It's not a strawman. And you backing up no evidence to show this just makes this point worse.

Maybe this is just a case of you meaning to say something, but not communicating it in text. I'm a pretty big advocate for editing posts or replies, and I don't think it's something to be ashamed of. Sometimes I don't communicate an idea how I want, or I don't get my full point across so I just edit a reply or post. Given that i've read what you wrote, maybe that's the case? I can only argue with what you write down, i'm not telepathic. 

3. No problem. I will admit, I got a bit heated, so apologies on my part from coming off like an asshole. But a majority of my replies were against using attach rates, the part about Nintendo having better attach rates was just an interesting factiod that could be used as a logical point. 

I'm only focusing on your notion of attach rates so much, because it composed a majority of your original comment. Like I said, i'm sure you have some other logical reasons why WW2 would outsell Odyssey, and I might not even agree with them - but it seems like attach rates and console sales is your main reason. 

4. I really shouldn't have to explain this, I mean you probably already know where i'm coming with this. Buuuuuttt.....

Super Mario 64 got 11+ million sales. On a system that sold 32 million units. That pretty much throws out the attach rate argument.

Now I have just been criticizing your same point over and over again. So you might say "Well jeez alchemist, you fucking piece of shit. If it's not console base what is it?"

Simple. Interest. That's the secret here. You see, Mario and Zelda games sell more on interest then they do install base. Now of course, if it's a platform with few sales it's chance of exceeding said platforms sales is nearly impossible. Or if it's a newly marketed platform like the Switch, then it's sales might be capped early on because not everyone has the console. There's also the chance  that niche franchises like Metroid might sell bad on a system that does not catter to that audience. But because games like Mario are so mainstream, they sell more based around how much hype, interest, or innovation there is in the product than any other factor.

A great example of this is Super Mario Sunshine. Super Mario Sunshine sold only 6.3 million units. Now ... I know i've been slamming attach rates, but like I said they make sense to use in some contexts. Without sounding like a hypocrite, let me say something interesting about the Gamecube. The Nintendo 64, which sold 32.93 million units, sold 224.97 million software. On the other hand, the Gamecube, which sold a measely 21.74 million consoles, sold 208.57 million units of software. This gives the Gamecube a much better attach rate of software to hardware. The Nintendo 64 sold 6.83 software per 1 console sold. Whereas the Gamecube sold 9.6 software units per console sold. Software clearly sold on the Gamecube, to the point that it almost had software sales matching the Nintendo 64 despite having 11 million less units sold. This is all using Nintendo's official numbers, by the way. Did Super Mario Sunshine do 6.3 million because of the Gamecube's low install base?

No. It sold because the interest wasn't there, similar to Wind Waker. I've said this before and I'll say this again. In relation of software to hardware, Switch is most easily comparable to a Nintendo 64. The games that they are trying to sell on Switch are innovative titles that push the boundaries of what these franchises can do, similar to Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time. Also similar to the N64, these are games that are technical marvels in comparison to the hardware they're running on. Sure, the leap might not be the same as 2D to 3D, but in some ways you could argue going from a 3DS to a Switch is just as big. We're seeing almost as much hype for Odyssey as Breath of the Wild, a game that was advertised for 3 years and teased for 5. And we've only known Odyssey's existence for 6 months.

Add to all this that the game will most likely have an addition 1 mil from Japan, and things are already looking clear for Odyssey.

6. (I skipped 5)

" If a large majority of pre-orders come from hardcore gamers, then point six could be meaningless. If pre-orders come largely from casuals, then that does not bode well for CoD: WWII. "

This is entirely a non-point. The people who pre-order are both casuals and hardcore gamers. Hardcore gamers do not account for that other 700k. Even if they did though ... wouldn't that just mean that hardcore gamers would buy the game LESS than Black Ops 3? You're looking at demographics as if what demographic pulls out will change how much potential sales the game gets, but that wouldn't balance out with more casuals buying the game,  that's not how demographics work. You can tell that by just about any franchise gone casual that had a hardcore fanbase, what matters isn't what demographic has the most sales, what matters is that you try to get the biggest demographic possible to control sales. If only hardcore gamers pre-order, and those pre-orders make up the 700k difference between BLOPS3 and WW2, that means that the sales would potentially be devistated by a few million copies. Since this is *just* accounting for the pre-order demographic and not hardcore gamers who don't ever pre-order and don't have interest.

 I was being lazy in my original post. I should have elaborated more. Nothing I can do about it now other than try to be clearer in what I say in text, in the future. 

People should stop using the attach rate of galaxy 1 as an example. Like more than half the userbase of wii were casuals who didn't really give a shit about anything outside of like wii sports and mariokart. Another things that proves this is that skyward sword sold 3 million on a hundred million console, when the reality is that 60 million of those consoles are gathering dust in people's homes since 2009. switch gamers look to be dedicated, looking at the attach rate of Zelda, splatoon 2, and arms. A more fair comparison would be Sm64 and its attach rate with n64.

Update