Okay, but what does that have to do with the price of tea in China? The argument being made is that third party games aren't selling well, and incapable of selling well because the user base isn't big enough. Clearly the Switch's user base is big enough to have numerous games with over 4 million in sales, so that means the user base is big enough for any game, especially those that are selling millions on other platforms to sell millions on the switch.

Let me put it to you this way. Do you think GTA V or Red Dead Redemption 2 would only sell 1.1 million units on Switch like the best selling multi-platform game (FIFA) has?

Third party games did sell better on Wii, too. Several sold over 5 million, even 10 million. But different sorts of games sell well on Nintendo platforms. The games that have sold well on Switch so-far are mainly the system sellers - people bought the console for one or a few of those games. Zelda was the killer app, so it's not a matter of 20 million Switch owners deciding to buy 8 million Zeldas, but 8 million people who wanted Zelda and bought a Switch to play it; and some wanted Mario Kart or another game too. With the Wii, it was also Nintendo's killer app (Wii Sports) and first party software that spearheaded the way, but once the userbase built up, third-party games began to sell by the hundreds of millions. In the late years of the Wii, third-party software sold at phenomenal rates, a half a billion pieces of software (largely third party) sold from 2010 onward with the Wii, and that was after the console hardware sales had cooled off significantly from its hottest rate in 2008.

Nintendo has a long history of high selling games that are quirkier and/or great as local multiplayer titles. If you're coming up with a high fidelity game about cowboys in some historical US setting, that's a very weak pitch - it's not likely many Nintendo fans are going to be as interested as, say, squid people firing ink all over the place and at each other in order to take out opponents and acquire territory.

Graphics matter, but in a different way. Nintendo fans generally don't care as much about the fidelity of graphics so much as the artistic appeal; that's why you have pretty looking 8-bit games doing so well when higher fidelity games are available. While Nintendo is the clear master here, other game creators with similar style find that their titles sell best on Nintendo platforms.

I'm not missing a simple point. I'm disputing an illogical one. multi-platform game sales on an individual platform are of often times not indicative at all of the proportion of game sales amongst each platform. For example there are plenty of mult-platform games that have higher, equal, or near equal sales on Xbox One vs PS4 sales despite the fact that PS4 has sold over twice as many units vs Xbox One.

Secondly, for most games, the vast majority (over 80%) of a games sales are within the first six months to a year of release, and doesn't increase in any type of linear fashion. Most games do not have the "legs" where sales in year 2, or year 3 or year 4 after release are anywhere near the sales even in the first month of release. Let me put you a great example to illustrate this point: Killzone: Shadow Fall. As of Jan 29th, 2015 (3 months after release) sales topped 2.1 million - making it the most, if not one of the most popular release titles for the PS4. It has recieved no sequels, or experienced anything else that would prevent Killzone fans from obtaining copies. Yet, nearly six years later, total sales are less than 4  million copies. By your logic, shouldn't it have sold at least 10 million copies by now since it sold 2 million copies with just 10 million users to sell to, and now there are another 70 or so million potential Killzone purchasers out there that can now buy the game?

Also, by your logic, shouldn't EA expect Madden sales to increase every single year into a consoles's life, since you know, higher platform sales? Yet, on PS4, Madden 16's sales are higher than Madden 17's sales, which are higher than Madden 18's sales. Madden 19 sales look be falling short of Madden 18's sales at this point as well.

And no all of those Nintendo games wont have "much stronger sales" when the Switch reaches, say, 40 million in total sales. Sure, Mario Odyssey probably will (especially if the bundle it), but Breath of the Wild? Probably not. Let's not forget Twillight Princess was a launch title for the Wii, and Breath of the Wild's sales have already exceeded it despite it having an install base of 100 million units to sell to. Twillight Princess hit 4.5 million in sales 18 months into the wii's life, and only sold another 2.5 million in the years following.

Third party games like what? Multi-platform third party games with high production value that would be expensive to port? Because the argument is about  - "big games". Not the hundreds of third party shovel ware third party titles that flooded the Wii's library, that individually had mediocre to poor sales but when combined added up millions. Individual, high production, multi-platform titles, in general, never sold very well, and again, that's what this thread is about. Not Mario and Sonic at the Olympics or Boom Blox.

If you're going to say that a game like Red Dead Redemption 2 doesn't appeal to as many Nintendo fans as it does fans on other platforms, and thus it's unsurprising why these games aren't appearing on the Switch, then you're really not arguing against me, are you?

And it's a testament to how terrible the AAA third party devs are when their market researched formulaic games got stomped by smaller, yet more creative and experimental, studios who released "shovelware" type games expanding the scope of what a video game could be, and finding success; while the AAA studios fail with their big budgets and market researched formulas.

So in this very thread you have two groups of Nintendo fans:

One calling them idiots or having a bias against NIntendo for not bringing their top, high budget titles on Nintendo platforms and not giving their audience a chance to support these games with substantial sales, and another calling them idiots who are completely out of touch with Nintendo's audience and are foolish to think the games they aren't porting to Nintendo platforms wouldn't sell well on Nintendo platforms, and instead should observe the "creative, experimental, quirky" games that do sell better on Nintendo platforms, that you know, these third party publishers have historically made instead.

Like, you do realize games like Boom Blox are made by EA, right?

P.S. I'm sure EA felt super that they never bothered porting Assassin's creed to the Wii, but 50+ games like "Get Fit with Mel B",  "My horse and Me: Riding for Gold" combined to outsell what they projected Assassin's Creed would have.

Actually when we talk about PS4 vs XB1, almost all multiplatform games sold at least twice better on PS4 compared to XB1, why?  Simple, much higher install base. Just look here numbers for first 3 best selling games on PS4 and XB1.

Offcourse that not every game will have much stronger sales with higher install base (but fact is that will have higher sales in any case), espacily when we talking about games that are not popular, Killzone: Shadow Fall is not popular game, but games like Last Of Us, Uncharted Trilogy and Uncharted 4 are totally different story, they keep selling solid how install base is growing simple because they are some of must have Sony exclusives.

Results for multiplatform games for different platforms, espacily for yearly releases can be different, but remember, we were talking Sony PS4 games vs Nintendo Switch games, and thats much easier to compare.

You dont know what are you talking about, you do realise that Odyssey, MK8D, Zelda BotW and Splatoon 2 last few quarters each of them sold from 700k to around 1m per quarter without any bundle? And those games yet need to have bundles and price cuts. Only last quarter where Switch gain install base of  1.9m, Odyssey sold 750k, MK8D did 1.1m, Zelda BotW 850k, Splatoon 2 did 750k. You again missing point, Zelda TP would sell less if Wii install base was smaller, or would sell more if install base was stronger, same like Zelda BotW will continue selling how Switch install base is growing (offcourse that Zelda BotW will not left on 9.3m, probably will hit 15m LT of Switch only).

Offcourse that every game on one platform will sell more if its higher install base compared to sales of same game on same platform (Zelda BotW will have better sales when Switch has install base of 40m instead of current numbers on install base of 20m). Just let numbers speak for itself, at end of this month we will have again update for sales for Switch sales and games like Zelda BotW, Mario Odyssey, MK8D and Splatoon2, and you will how much those games sold in just one quarter, not to mentione how much those games will sell at end of this year when Switch install base will be around 30m. So no, your point where you comparing sales of Sony and Nintendo games on two different platforms where one has 4x higher install base, dont make any sense, and you even used that like proof how how Sony games selling better than Nintendo games, while fact is that when you look attach rate Odyssey, MK8D, Zelda BotW and Splatoon 2 destroying every Sony PS4 game.

Why would EA be bothered with Assassin's Creed?