Japan doesn't take too kindly to showing their WW2 allies in a negative light. Most of their media influenced by WW2 Germany portrays them as neutral or sometimes even a positive light. From anime classics like Legend of the Galactic Heroes and Mobile Suit Gundam to more recent light novels like Tanya the Saga of Evil the forces representing Germany are power-hungry but never shown parallel atrocities to the Nazis. Wolfenstein goes against their revisionist WW2 history. Also shooters aren't that big other than Call of Duty.

Well, no. I saw plenty of adverts for the game, both in stores and in various websites. People knew this game was being released. That said, I knew that some European versions were going to remove swastikas and other Nazi emblems from the main campaign, but I was surprised to see, that these were also absent from the Japanese version, so you might be on to something. Still, being outsold by Ark is offensive.

I don't think Japan has ever cared for Wolfenstein. In fact wouldn't be shocked if they didn't care for Doom either.

Can someone tell me what was Doom 2016 FW sales so i can be proven right or wrong?

Don't be so angry, mate. Stress is bad for your health.

I'm not saying Nintendo only sells to kids, I'm saying that Nintendo has a better participation in the kids market than Sony and MS since these two have very few. games rated E. What can a 5-year old play on PS4? LBP, Lego and Minecraft? A small kid has tons of options on a Nintendo platform. That's why you see a good participation of 10-19 old there.

And also, do you think all the 6 or 8-year old are over there answering Nintendo surveys? Another factor is that a lot of people on their 20s and 30s have small kids. Parents have an extra motivation to buy a platform that allows them to play local multiplayer (almost a Nintendo exclusive at this point) with their kids (rated E games, another Ninty exclusivity). Hell, you don't even have to buy anything else to play MK with your kid, just give half joy-con to each one and start playing.

Of course, this is not a bad thing. It's actually great that they have a big appeal with a market segment where they won't have competition while still appealing to an older demography.

Yes, in order to declare that, we do need that data. Luckily, I am not declaring that portable mode is used more. I'm "declaring" (if by declaring, you mean quoting Nintendo's own data) that among those that have a factor of 4 or more difference between the two modes, the portable mode is represented 50% more.

There is nothing to argue here. Unless you believe Nintendo's stats are wrong...

The context of the argument still remains whether you ignore what he's replying to or not.

Can you for certain say it's not having an effect on PS4 in the long run it can have a significant effect we're seeing the PS4 get steamrolled in Japan which has had an effect according to Namco's own words Japanese developers are scrambling to get on the platform which can be assumed that they were purely PS4 based before which would push the Switch further into the favour of consumers as that means increased support, that's an example of an effect happening.

Yet the argument being disputed is the one that a portable bias is driving sales the most if that is not your argument why are you replying to bolster that stance, the data showed that 52% use both modes which backs my stance that it's mainly the hybrid concept selling the platform mean while you're highlighting the two smaller groups like that means something to the argument when the context is about what is driving sales the most.

To declare portable is what's driving sales the most you'd need the usage among the 52% data which neither any of you have simply say "But more people are using portable" on the undefined data means literally nothing to the context of the debate.,

The groups we have data for imply a handheld bias. Should we just ignore the goups we have data for, because we are lacking data for other groups? Until Nintendo discloses any more data, we have to work with what Nintendo has given us.

Our arguments is based on albeit limited data, while your argument is based on presumptions regarding the groups we have no data for.

Do I think the Switch would have sold as well if it was just a handheld? No. However I think it would have done a lot worse if it lacked the handheld functionality compared to if it lacked the home console functionality. Hence I think the handheld form factor is of greater importance for the high sales than the home console functionality.

Just to address some comments made a few days ago, this thread is about Japanese sales first and foremost. If people try to derail the thread with sales discussion from other regions, they may be moderated.

Maybe you're having trouble understanding what the debate is here, you're arguing about two particular groups yes but the original argument is someone claiming handheld is driving sales more than anything else, in order to make that claim the usage of the middle group is required because right now you're just taking one minority group and trying to peddle that as proof an argument doesn't work that way you have to prove the vast majority use handheld mode more to say that is what is driving sales.

If that is not your argument then it brings up the question of why you're replying because that is what the whole debate is about and so far you have done nothing to debunk the point that its the overall hybrid concept that drives sales and the data backs this up right now you're just repeating the rhetoric of one minority group being bigger than another except that's not even the argument to begin with it's what is driving sales and making the platform competitive.