I agree regarding the 'numbers' thing.
I think it's all contextual though. If a user purely exists to remind or rub 'teh numbers' in someones face, then there is an underlying motive for doing that.
Personally, numbers don't effect my enjoyment of a console or game series.
When a company does good numbers on a series - it's milked
If they don't do enough - they've failed
Miley Cyrus might sell a metric shit ton of music, doesn't mean I want to listen to it or think it has any merit.
My beef with the Vita was more about games (at the start), the merits of offering AAA experiences and pricing (memory cards etc...). The numbers the console sells don't really have significance for me unless I purchase a new machine and it tanks so badly it only has 1 or 2 games on it. Neither the Wii U or Vita is in danger of that.
What it comes down to are people entering threads regarding a fantastic looking and original title (Wii U / Vita), and rather than talk about the game quality or ideas, start bean crunching. Even when right, does that effect your purchase or the overall quality of the game?
History shows many fantastic games fail to do COD numbers or anywhere even close, it's not a good barometer of quality and makes for a very boring discussion topic IMO.
But, when it boils down to it, the numbers vs. quality arguement has become somewhat clouded with people from either side stepping over lines that either show unrealistic expectations or gleeful relish when something fails.
If you refuse to purchase something that you know you will enjoy because it's not selling xxx numbers, you are either cutting off your nose to spite your face, or are a fanboy and the numbers were irrelevant in the first place (you will always find something to complain about.)
The Wii is a good example: Good numbers, some people still hated on it.
Gamecube: Powerful, unique games, no 'gimmicks', people still hated on it...