Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Nintendo What-If? #4

Would the N64 have been more successful if it was disc based?

Yahoo!! (Yes) 69 78.41%
 
D'oh I missed!! (No) 19 21.59%
 
Total:88
bdbdbd said:
Ka-pi96 said:

Perhaps that's your problem, you're looking for something "special". For me, and it seems the mainstream audience, all that's needed in a console is to play the latest big games, have good graphics, use a regular control scheme and have a decent UI/online account setup. The PS4, unlike the other consoles, checked all those boxes from the moment it was announced.

Games like COD and FIFA don't sell so well for doing something "special", they sell well because they simply offer what people want. IMO innovation is overrated.

This is true, but only on the FIFA and COD. There are lots of people that want something else than just your regular COD and FIFA, just like there are people that only care about those two. PS4 was what these people wanted, while none of the three was what everyone else wanted.

True, but a lot of those people still fall in to what I'm talking about. People that just want a good place to play games, that's who the PS4 is for and that's a pretty sizable market by itself.

Sure there no doubt are people that want new control schemes or other innovations/gimmicks like that, but there's always going to be a large audience that just wants to play bigger/better games with a familiar set up. Being succesful due to that audience isn't because "the others fucked up" it's because Sony knew exactly what that audience wanted and they made a console that suited those people down to a tee.



Around the Network
Ka-pi96 said:
bdbdbd said:

This is true, but only on the FIFA and COD. There are lots of people that want something else than just your regular COD and FIFA, just like there are people that only care about those two. PS4 was what these people wanted, while none of the three was what everyone else wanted.

True, but a lot of those people still fall in to what I'm talking about. People that just want a good place to play games, that's who the PS4 is for and that's a pretty sizable market by itself.

Sure there no doubt are people that want new control schemes or other innovations/gimmicks like that, but there's always going to be a large audience that just wants to play bigger/better games with a familiar set up. Being succesful due to that audience isn't because "the others fucked up" it's because Sony knew exactly what that audience wanted and they made a console that suited those people down to a tee.

No, no. You fail to see the big picture here. PS4 and X1 are pretty much interchangeable, PS4 sells while X1 doesn't. Why? If you wan't something more special, there's Wii U, PS4 sells, Wii U doesn't. Why? You can't just go on to say PS4 is selling better than Wii U because PS4 has nothing special in it, at the same time saying X1 isn't selling because it has nothing special.

While I agree you on that Sony managed to deliver what it's market wanted, there was a huge drop from the 7th gen. Even if none managed to reach the whole market, there was a huge overlap between console owners, with many having two or three of them. 



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.

bdbdbd said:
Ka-pi96 said:

True, but a lot of those people still fall in to what I'm talking about. People that just want a good place to play games, that's who the PS4 is for and that's a pretty sizable market by itself.

Sure there no doubt are people that want new control schemes or other innovations/gimmicks like that, but there's always going to be a large audience that just wants to play bigger/better games with a familiar set up. Being succesful due to that audience isn't because "the others fucked up" it's because Sony knew exactly what that audience wanted and they made a console that suited those people down to a tee.

No, no. You fail to see the big picture here. PS4 and X1 are pretty much interchangeable, PS4 sells while X1 doesn't. Why? If you wan't something more special, there's Wii U, PS4 sells, Wii U doesn't. Why? You can't just go on to say PS4 is selling better than Wii U because PS4 has nothing special in it, at the same time saying X1 isn't selling because it has nothing special.

While I agree you on that Sony managed to deliver what it's market wanted, there was a huge drop from the 7th gen. Even if none managed to reach the whole market, there was a huge overlap between console owners, with many having two or three of them. 

Does the X1 really not sell though? It was outpacing the 360 for awhile, at least until we stopped getting updates from MS at least Plus looks like it will end up over 50m when all's said and done, 50m is definitely a respectable amount. Besides, the PS4 does a lot of things better than X1. All that attention resolution and stuff the PS4 got before release came from somewhere. Then there's the infamous X1 reveal, sure you could argue that Sony did gain sales from MS fucking that up. But if MS would have started out with the current X1 instead of the DRM infested thing they announced would that have made the PS4 not succesful anymore? Not a chance as far as I'm concerned. PS4 was going to sell well regardless, sales would have been more evenly split between the two but MS having a better X1 reveal wouldn't have turned the PS4 from a success in to a failure. I'd bet it still would have been the #1 console for the gen, not by such a large margin but still by a fair bit.

And I don't think the decline from 7th gen really means anything. I think it's pretty obvious that the huge sales of 7th gen were only a one off, it's not that noone is reaching the whole market, it's just that the market isn't as big as it was in gen 7 and most likely won't get that big ever again. That shouldn't take anything away from the PS4s success this gen though.



Probably a bit more successful, because that would have allowed Nintendo to correct mistakes more easily. But merely swapping the storage medium wouldn't have stopped these problems:

1. Nintendo having the idea of building a dream team of developers, consisting of themselves and various bigger third party developers and publishers. The third parties who didn't belong there would have had to go somewhere else anyway. The higher production costs of cartridges made it an uphill battle to convince third parties of a change in stance, but the likelihood for a return would have still been small with CDs.

2. Nintendo deciding that 3D gameplay is the way to go, thus leaving fans of Super Mario Bros. (SNES games sold ~30m copies combined) and Donkey Kong Country (SNES games sold ~20m copies combined) in the dust.

3. Repeated game delays that even affected the system as a whole. The Nintendo 64 was late to the party to begin with, but the system got pushed back twice (totaling for half a year) because Super Mario 64 wasn't finished in time for an earlier launch.

4. Sony moneyhatting third parties. What do specs matter when another console manufacturer buys up exclusivity?

5. Sony's marketing message. Sony's clear advantage in distribution channels. Sony's ability to leverage their other divisions to sell PS1 hardware at a loss.

CDs might have made the N64 marginally more successful, but there were much bigger factors than the storage medium going against it. Sega used CDs for the Saturn, but they suffered even more than Nintendo during the fifth generation. Of course, Sega made their own mistakes too.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes

SegataSanshiro said:
Mummelmann said:

I seem to remember that Nintendo screwed Sony over due to the terms of the contract that Sont wanted and then went with Philips instead for their CD drive, all this without telling them and Sony only found out when Nintendo announced their new partnership with Philips on Stage. The Playstation was born out of no small amount of spite, it would seem. I bet that this is a decision that Nintendo have regretted more than once through the years and it ended up changing the industry forever.

Nintendo didn't screw Sony. Sony wanted nearly all control and profits. After the PS project with Nintendo it basically was canned. Ken wanted to keep it alive but the final product is using the specs SEGA of America proposed to Sony. Had Nintendo used Discs and Saturn was not so poorly designed PS1 would have been a footnote inhistory. PS1 only had success because SEGA made a system impossible to develop for and N64 used carts. PS4 became a success out of the gate because MS and Nintendo messed up not much more to it than that.

If you start negotiations on a contract for hardware and then decide to pull out and join another partner without telling the previous one and then proceed to drop this bomb on stage; that's screwing someone over. No two ways about it. And yes, Sony wanted to make money off of this, they were a huge deal in formats, movies and music and their distribution channels alone were easily worth the cost, it wasn't really such an unreasonable demand for what they would have brought to the table. Your second sentence is also a bit funny when you think about Nintendo's own policies towards 3rd parties in the 80's and early 90's. They were now faced with having use of someone with influence and platforms into markets they wanted to access and they needed to forsake some profits and control to get there, but felt that this was really unfair, despite their own Hitler-esque tactics employed against both developers and retailers for about a decade. It's a special kind of irony, this.

PS1 being a footnote in history if N64 had disc and Saturn was simply better designed is simply speculation, it's highly unlikely that it would have been irrelevant. It brought 3D fighters to the fore with titles like Tohshinden and Tekken, it had the arcade crowd appeal with titles like Ridge Racer and Wipeout, it even had computer fans excited with titles like Road Rash, Warhammer, later Diablo and similar fare and it had more childproof games like Jumping Jack Flash. Great platformers, action titles, racing greats like Need for Speed and some really good RPG's and ARPG's to top it off. This wide appeal wouldn't have gone away even with stronger competition and with decent pricing and hardware as well as CD audio and FMV capabilities, it's really hard to make arguments making it a "footnote in history", perhaps even impossible.

The PS4 also carried the flag of three successful consoles before it, the worst of which sold about 90 million, so to attribute its success solely to the failings of MS and Nintendo is grossly inaccurate by all logic. It doesn't innovate or surprise or go anywhere unexpected at all, and this is exactly why it's selling like it is. Placid and safe, a decent business proposal but not hugely exciting for old, grizzled gamers like myself, but that's a different matter. Even if I'm not over the moon about a product, that doesn't mean I can't respect what it accomplishes or that I should disregard its merits as they stand.



End of 2016 hardware sales:

Wii U: 15 million. PS4: 54 million. One: 30 million. 3DS: 64.8 million. PSVita: 15.2 million.

Ka-pi96 said:
bdbdbd said:

No, no. You fail to see the big picture here. PS4 and X1 are pretty much interchangeable, PS4 sells while X1 doesn't. Why? If you wan't something more special, there's Wii U, PS4 sells, Wii U doesn't. Why? You can't just go on to say PS4 is selling better than Wii U because PS4 has nothing special in it, at the same time saying X1 isn't selling because it has nothing special.

While I agree you on that Sony managed to deliver what it's market wanted, there was a huge drop from the 7th gen. Even if none managed to reach the whole market, there was a huge overlap between console owners, with many having two or three of them. 

Does the X1 really not sell though? It was outpacing the 360 for awhile, at least until we stopped getting updates from MS at least Plus looks like it will end up over 50m when all's said and done, 50m is definitely a respectable amount. Besides, the PS4 does a lot of things better than X1. All that attention resolution and stuff the PS4 got before release came from somewhere. Then there's the infamous X1 reveal, sure you could argue that Sony did gain sales from MS fucking that up. But if MS would have started out with the current X1 instead of the DRM infested thing they announced would that have made the PS4 not succesful anymore? Not a chance as far as I'm concerned. PS4 was going to sell well regardless, sales would have been more evenly split between the two but MS having a better X1 reveal wouldn't have turned the PS4 from a success in to a failure. I'd bet it still would have been the #1 console for the gen, not by such a large margin but still by a fair bit.

And I don't think the decline from 7th gen really means anything. I think it's pretty obvious that the huge sales of 7th gen were only a one off, it's not that noone is reaching the whole market, it's just that the market isn't as big as it was in gen 7 and most likely won't get that big ever again. That shouldn't take anything away from the PS4s success this gen though.

360 did have a bad start (so did PS3, though).

So, what is the size of the market then, if you think 7th gen sales were a one off and you obviously project the sales somewhere? Where did the people go and do what if they no longer buy games?



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.

bdbdbd said:
Ka-pi96 said:

Does the X1 really not sell though? It was outpacing the 360 for awhile, at least until we stopped getting updates from MS at least Plus looks like it will end up over 50m when all's said and done, 50m is definitely a respectable amount. Besides, the PS4 does a lot of things better than X1. All that attention resolution and stuff the PS4 got before release came from somewhere. Then there's the infamous X1 reveal, sure you could argue that Sony did gain sales from MS fucking that up. But if MS would have started out with the current X1 instead of the DRM infested thing they announced would that have made the PS4 not succesful anymore? Not a chance as far as I'm concerned. PS4 was going to sell well regardless, sales would have been more evenly split between the two but MS having a better X1 reveal wouldn't have turned the PS4 from a success in to a failure. I'd bet it still would have been the #1 console for the gen, not by such a large margin but still by a fair bit.

And I don't think the decline from 7th gen really means anything. I think it's pretty obvious that the huge sales of 7th gen were only a one off, it's not that noone is reaching the whole market, it's just that the market isn't as big as it was in gen 7 and most likely won't get that big ever again. That shouldn't take anything away from the PS4s success this gen though.

360 did have a bad start (so did PS3, though).

So, what is the size of the market then, if you think 7th gen sales were a one off and you obviously project the sales somewhere? Where did the people go and do what if they no longer buy games?

Well the most obvious answer would be that they went back to whatever they were doing before the 7th gen and they started buying games

Yeah, sales may look like they fell off a cliff this gen compared to last gen, but last gen they also climbed up that cliff in the first place. It wasn't just a steep drop in sales, it was a steep rise followed by a steep drop. That's why I call it a one off.



If Nintendo hadn't reneged on the deal with Sony then Sony wouldn't have entered the market and it wouldn't have mattered what format the N64 used. 3rd parties would have had no choice but to adapt to using cartridges for same games, like Resident Evil 2 for the N64.

If Nintendo had gone with CDs or even something similar then Square would have stayed with them and all those sales Sony got from FF7 would have gone to the N64. Games like Resident Evil would have at least been ported to the N64 and may have been Nintendo exclusive. Would the N64 have sold 100 million like the Playstation? Maybe not. But it would have easily outsold the SNES and won the 5th generation by a wide margin.

Either mistake could have been minor on its own. But both together were disastrous.

Mummelmann said:

If you start negotiations on a contract for hardware and then decide to pull out and join another partner without telling the previous one and then proceed to drop this bomb on stage; that's screwing someone over. No two ways about it. And yes, Sony wanted to make money off of this, they were a huge deal in formats, movies and music and their distribution channels alone were easily worth the cost, it wasn't really such an unreasonable demand for what they would have brought to the table. Your second sentence is also a bit funny when you think about Nintendo's own policies towards 3rd parties in the 80's and early 90's. They were now faced with having use of someone with influence and platforms into markets they wanted to access and they needed to forsake some profits and control to get there, but felt that this was really unfair, despite their own Hitler-esque tactics employed against both developers and retailers for about a decade. It's a special kind of irony, this.

PS1 being a footnote in history if N64 had disc and Saturn was simply better designed is simply speculation, it's highly unlikely that it would have been irrelevant. It brought 3D fighters to the fore with titles like Tohshinden and Tekken, it had the arcade crowd appeal with titles like Ridge Racer and Wipeout, it even had computer fans excited with titles like Road Rash, Warhammer, later Diablo and similar fare and it had more childproof games like Jumping Jack Flash. Great platformers, action titles, racing greats like Need for Speed and some really good RPG's and ARPG's to top it off. This wide appeal wouldn't have gone away even with stronger competition and with decent pricing and hardware as well as CD audio and FMV capabilities, it's really hard to make arguments making it a "footnote in history", perhaps even impossible.

The PS4 also carried the flag of three successful consoles before it, the worst of which sold about 90 million, so to attribute its success solely to the failings of MS and Nintendo is grossly inaccurate by all logic. It doesn't innovate or surprise or go anywhere unexpected at all, and this is exactly why it's selling like it is. Placid and safe, a decent business proposal but not hugely exciting for old, grizzled gamers like myself, but that's a different matter. Even if I'm not over the moon about a product, that doesn't mean I can't respect what it accomplishes or that I should disregard its merits as they stand.

Actually Nintendo's 80's policies were a result of Atari crash and their own experiences in Japan, where Nintendo had no control over it's own market (similar to Atari in the US). 

I think the logic with Playstation getting quickly forgotten was that if Nintendo and Sega had been more friendly for third parties, the gmes had been on Saturn and N64. The game centric microcomputers disappeared in the 90's, and the developers had to go somewhere. Playstation was the easiest to begin with, so that's where they went. Nintendo's problem with the N64 was to focus on the big players of the industry, pretty much the same problem Sony's been having for the last decade. If we put today's things into 90's context, we have Switch that tries to capture the 3rd parties that didn't have a market anymore due to the shift in the market: 90's microcomputers and devs making games for them, today's bankrupted studios that employees are making new ones based on them.



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.

Around the Network
Ka-pi96 said:
bdbdbd said:

360 did have a bad start (so did PS3, though).

So, what is the size of the market then, if you think 7th gen sales were a one off and you obviously project the sales somewhere? Where did the people go and do what if they no longer buy games?

Well the most obvious answer would be that they went back to whatever they were doing before the 7th gen and they started buying games

Yeah, sales may look like they fell off a cliff this gen compared to last gen, but last gen they also climbed up that cliff in the first place. It wasn't just a steep drop in sales, it was a steep rise followed by a steep drop. That's why I call it a one off.

I agree. But why aren't they buying games anymore? Did the market stop existing or did the industry just stop caring about them? Why are the current gamers there? Do they buy any kind of shit because it's games, or are they served? And how big is that market? How volatile it is? 



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.