Like, rather than 1983, the crashed happened in 1999. And everything went the exact same at first, but with more powerful hardware. Like, Nintendo has the NES, but the NES has GameCube capabilities, (And Mario was still a hit), and so on. How do you think things would be different in terms of sales & competition.

I think the most obvious thing would be, that the NES would be able to handle the original vision they had for Zelda 64, with the Disk Drive, so they might make something like that, which would make all the Zelda games after very different. Sonic games would also be a lot different, either being similar to the ones we have now, or designed differently to fit 3D as the original game would probably be on a console. Plus stuff like the Wii might not happen.

So what do you think?

That's the fun in it. Lots of variables. Like, if gaming didn't crash after a longer period of time, Nintendo might not have made something like consoles as we know them. Or something like the sales of the N64, with it being at the hardware level of the PS4. It's interesting to think of all the possibilities imo

Wut?

Why 1999 that was literally during the highest growth % time for console gaming.

Just... how does one talk about the crash and not mention Atari?

You sir offend me. Remove thread!

Would Ninty release the NES on their own? They tried giving it to Atari in 1984 ,but they were focusing on computers and Jack 'the Cuck' Tramiel declined it saying home consoles are dead. Atari might have accepted the deal if it weren't for the crash...

2-year-span between that and 2001, which is when the GameCube released.

Plus the amount of growth/decline would be different in this timeline, since the consoles and games in our 1999 isn't the same as the one in the imaginary 1999.

There would be a new IP that does pretty good.