Were held back in what way? Selling a few extra copies; a bunch more; a ton more?
How can you be so sure that every game was significantly held back? I assume that's the kind of "being held back" you are talking about?

"Smash selling close to NSMBU says absolutely nothing about NBMBU not being held back"
Not directly, but it does: a more popular franchise, with a bigger potential, should have been clearly the winner here. But it wasn't.
And if Smash didn't get a 3DS port, it would be below Smash.

If all games were held back, than that means the starting point was equal to all, thus, making the more popular, wide appealing titles, the sure winners. Did that happen?

"All it likely says is that Smash is more popular among Nintendo hardcore fans (...)"
This is the type of argument i wanted to hear.

Likely being the key word.
You have an idea based on who knows and you made an assumption - as you said after the quote above.
I don't see anything wrong in that.
 

I'll say this: it's a possibility.
My vision of this is that NSMB U, being a greater franchise and clearly having more exposure (launch titles, 2 bundles, physical copy bundled with Luigi U (added value!)), wasn't able to reach it's full potential (of the franchise).
Why? People just didn't see in it enough value. So, it didn't sell as much as it could have. And not necessarily because the Wii U was made of more Smash fans than games like NSMB
MK is also a very popular franchise amongst both casual and harcore Nintendo fans, and whatnot, and it still managed to outdo both Smash and NSMB U.
Why exactly couldn't NSMB U replicate that? Probably because the game had less appeal than MK8 and Smash. Which, again, doesn't necessarily mean the audience wasn't there!

Let's assume the audience wasn't there for NSMB U. Why should it be now, when Nintendo is selling Switch to the PS4 and XB1 users… mostly (using the info that came out regarding US Switch owners) and not to it's usual crowd?

"And using the PS3 to PS4 makes no sense because we have better data/exemples."
Aren't we looking at people's behaviour? Then it doesn't matter if it's about this or that console.

Actually, there were cases for Switch, where, given the same userbase, ports didn't even to the same numbers they did on Wii U.
And to be honest, there's no real need for exemples. Even if all ports did better are way better on Switch, that wouldn't necessarily mean anything. It could help predict, but it wouldn't automatically determine anything. Yet, for some reason, people have this thinking that "of course it's going to do better. Other ports did. This will do to."

The last part was about comparing PS3 and PS4 games, taking into consideration their respective userbases.

"No, every game would done better even if install base is only 20m compared to 13m, not to mentione 100m."
What? A copy more? I'll agree.
Significantly more? That's a bold statement. How do you know this? Then why didn't all games sell in the millions? If just a question of how big a userbase is, then they should have all sold the same.

Then, if they were all held back, then no one was held back. Understand what that means?

"You do realise that Pokken Tournament already sold better on Switch than it did LT on WiiU"
And do you realise that it didn't sell as much when both HW were equal?
Probably because ports tend to have less appeal than the original?

So people who buy Switch are different from the people who buy other consoles? That's what you are implying by saying i can't use PS4 ports as an example. If they were the same, then it would be irrelevant where i get the exemples from; if they are different, then you are probably right.

I'm not even going to ask you to prove this, i'll just refer you back to the 70% Switch owners who own a PS4/XB1.

What i'm trying to say is that the expectable thing to happen would be NSMB U clearly ahead of Smash. Bigger franchise and whatnot.
To me, that didn't happen because the game did not have enough value (not the series, mind you) to push it firmly ahead of Smash.
My point being, if Smash could sell that much (better if not for the 3DS port), then, it would be reasonable to expect NSMB U to outsell it by more than 600k.

I'm not talking about a massive gap, btw.

To be clear, i'm also taking into account the 3DS port. 
The game sold 13.5+ millions. Wii U accounted for 5.07 millions.
Had the game come out only on Wii U and it would have easily surpassed NSMB U.  

But i'm not against it selling more on Switch. I never was.
The point has been that i see the 10M sales probably too high for this specific title. 
I also said that i'm open to a surprise.

For some reason it's being read as if i'm claiming that the game won't sell that much or better than the original. That's not the case.
To quote myself: "I'm not sure".

Last time i checked, there were a few titles (i think that at that time, there were fewer ports, too) that did not manage to sell the same on an equally sized userbase.
The beahaviour is also evident on PS4 (probably XB1. Didn't check).

You do realize that 3DS got a 2D Mario just a few months before Wii U did just like what happened with Smash? It could also be argued that NSMB2 on 3DS affected NSMBU sales on Wii U like you are saying about Smash.

I never argued about you saying it wouldn't hit 10m, my original reply to you was saying that PS3/360 ports on PS4/XBO is not a good comparison to use since we have a handful of Wii U ports on Switch to compare to and the trend is that they sell better than the original release.

10 million? Easily.

I'm really baffled by how much hate NSMBU gets. It really offers up the most creativity and variety of all the NSMBU. Lots of cool powerups. Lots of variety in the level design. It really sets the standards you really want this series to achieve. New Super Luigi U in particular is the standout entry of all NSMB games. People just shit on these games because they don't like the art direction or something. Or maybe they're just bad at 2D mario.

Really what I take issue with this game is that NSMBU's best co-op feature - the Gamepad is now MIA in the Switch version. People won't even know they're missing that. If you have a WiiU - NSMBU is really better experienced there than on Switch.

Actually, when making my first post i didn't remember that. 
I did remember a couple posts above, though.

I agree. The Wii U game suffered due to the proximity. But, in all honesty, i question if the hit wasn't more on the short term than on the long run. 
When the Wii U came out, the game had already sold 3+ million copies. Reaching 5 million at the end of the year.

One or two years wasn't enough for people to pick it up? It's not like Wii U had a lot to choose from.
Pokémon sells a lot each year, like Fifa and other games that don't really change that much. If time was the main reason for, in the short term, lower NSMB U sales, then the game should have picked it up with time, right?

Also, Nintendo did try to offer reasons for that: NSL U; a bundle with NSMB U; that bundle + NSL U; physical release of the two games.
The release of other system sellers didn't seem to convince gamers to give it a proper chance.

That's why i don't necessarily see the release schedule as "the" reason. But a reason, without a doubt.

But if i'm trying to show that ports of big games don't necessarily translate to equal or better sales, why should i use examples that contradict that?
And again, it's about the people buying the games and these same people are the same no matter what console they have.

Even if i tried to see them as different, the data we have for the US shows that the vast majority of Switch owners own a PS4 and/or Xbox. Wouldn't that nullify whatever i could say about the uniqueness of Switch owners?

From what i have seen, it's not that they don't like the artwork, it's more that people feel the series hasn't really evolved (visually and gameplay wise, mostly).
And honestly, it's true.
Each Mario game was unique. And after 4 games that look the same and play the same, it's hard not to criticise them for not doing more with the series.

Personally i think the game was the best i played.
But i too felt that way when i tried replaying it after Mario 3D World. It just felt outdated - in a big way.

The big flaw in this reasoning is that most PS4/XBO owned a PS3/360 so they already had the opportunity to play those games. Most PS4/XBO owners did not own a Wii U so when they get a Switch it's the first time they have a chance to play these games.

I wish that Ninty would at least expand the game a bit with actual new levels. If they would add 15% or so, I'd consider double dipping. But, out of principle, I'm not going to buy nearly the same game again 5 years after I bought it the first time.

But that doesn't really change a lot: it's still port, sold as a port. And as far as we know, there's no real incentive (new content) to make people interested in a 6/7 year old game.
Not to mention that at that time, the game, itself, wasn't enough to help Wii U have a decent post launch or even a ressurgance, down the road.

Also, given that XB1 and PS4's fanbase care more for other genres, they MIGHT now behave the way you think they will.

Overall, what you said makes sense. The question is how much sense does it make.

It changes a lot and we have data to back this up. The majority of PS3/360 ports to PS4/XBO sell a fraction of the original. Almost all of the Wii U to Switch ports have sold as much or more than the original.

There is very little reason to believe NSMBU Deluxe wont outsell the Wii U version.

Even if they all sold the same or more, there's two things that need to be considered:
Not all of them did that when Switch had already sold as much as Wii U;
Newer ports are arriving when Switch is already past Wii U - and by a significant margin.

I'm not questioning the ability to outsell the Wii U version. I'm merely questioning the ability to sell the double (which this thread is about).

From the little i have seen, i didn't see a title that doubled the original's figures.