To preface I DO NOT believe that selling a million consoles is indicative of future success AT ALL.
That being said, this is just about as shitty an article as one can write. I mean this article might as well have been titled "Don't Know What 'False Equivalence' Means?: Read Below"
Using the Wii U numbers and claiming it is a "good cautionary tale" is pure bullshit. Especially when the author then states that the reason the sales numbers dwindled is because of poor support and poor impact on the market (whatever that means).
Sure talk about correlation, but don't ignore causation when you have more than enough facts to discuss it in the article. Everyone already knew that going forward Wii U was not going to be supported by 3rd parties, especially once the PS4/Xbox One released simply due to the fact that games made for those two systems (exclusively, NOT cross-gen) would not be easily portable to the Wii U. Everyone knew that the Wii U name would confuse the heck out of consumers, which I'm assuming would fall under "market impact" since the general public would be confused as to exactly what the Wii U was, a new console or an add-on for the Wii.
The PS4 will not face these two issues, which in my opinion are two of the major reasons for the Wii U's failings. Ignoring these facts and simply stating " Wii U good launch sales numbers : poor post-sales numbers :: PS4 good launch sales numbers : make your own conclusion (wink wink)" is the comparison of a second grader barely learning what compare and contrast means.
That being said, this is just about as shitty an article as one can write. I mean this article might as well have been titled "Don't Know What 'False Equivalence' Means?: Read Below"
Using the Wii U numbers and claiming it is a "good cautionary tale" is pure bullshit. Especially when the author then states that the reason the sales numbers dwindled is because of poor support and poor impact on the market (whatever that means).
Sure talk about correlation, but don't ignore causation when you have more than enough facts to discuss it in the article. Everyone already knew that going forward Wii U was not going to be supported by 3rd parties, especially once the PS4/Xbox One released simply due to the fact that games made for those two systems (exclusively, NOT cross-gen) would not be easily portable to the Wii U. Everyone knew that the Wii U name would confuse the heck out of consumers, which I'm assuming would fall under "market impact" since the general public would be confused as to exactly what the Wii U was, a new console or an add-on for the Wii.
The PS4 will not face these two issues, which in my opinion are two of the major reasons for the Wii U's failings. Ignoring these facts and simply stating " Wii U good launch sales numbers : poor post-sales numbers :: PS4 good launch sales numbers : make your own conclusion (wink wink)" is the comparison of a second grader barely learning what compare and contrast means.