Quantcast
N64 Was A Sales Beast And Should Have Won Its Generation

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - N64 Was A Sales Beast And Should Have Won Its Generation

I see the N64 in similar vein to the PS3. Nintendo/Sony on a high from nailing it from the last two generation so they let their hubris get in the way of doing the smart thing. Both very good consoles that sold well enough.



Around the Network

IF Nintendo had gone with CDs over Carts, the major third party companies like Konami, Capcom and Square would have stuck with N64 over Playstation, so yes, in THAT scenerario, they would have won the generation by a landslide. PS1 did not succeed due to first party Sony software (though games like Crash Bandicoot certainly had success). PS1 succeeded on the backs of games like Resident Evil, Symphony of the Night, Tomb Raider, Metal Gear Solid, and most especially, Final Fantasy VII. If those games had come out on N64, instead of Playstation, then obviously, N64 would have likely been an overwhelming success, and PS1 might not have survived.

As it is, N64 did still have some of the highest selling and most sought after games of it's gen, games many PS1 owners (including friends of mine) were envious of, such as: Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, Mario Kart 64, Turok, Goldeneye, Star Fox 64, Diddy Kong Racing, Banjo-Kazooie, Perfect Dark, etc.



N64 had some really great games. It had a glut of platformers, racing, sports and shooter games. Unfortunately, it also sorely lacked conventional 2D games, fighting games, and especially RPGs. Playstation, in that regard, undoubtedly had the more well rounded library, by simple numbers: it had a TON more games released for it, as most top-selling consoles do.



It should have, and it was the best console going around. Nintendo short lived it to move onto the Gamecube era which was a mistake. They should have just stuck with it for 10 years like Sony do with there consoles and N64 would have surpassed 80m easily.
Definitely my favourite console of all time. The N64 library was full of so many amazing games, compare that to my PS1 which had so many cheap 3rd party (Shovelware/Broken) i think i have 4 to 5 great PS1 games (Half of them were on PC) while with the N64 there 1st party games were just in leagues of there own.



The only Nintendo consoles i don't own are the N64 and Wii. Of course they have great games, but i don't regreat not owning them. But anyone that own or did own them, and had fun with them, that's all that matter.



Soundwave said:
hunter_alien said:

Any day I would choose the PS list thank you, at least they where fresh in comparison to the vast majority of 3 gen old franchises Nintendo wasoffering

Should have, could have, doesnt matter... the fact is that the N64 was destroyed by the PS. It lost Nintendo all of their influence on the home console market and prepared the disaster that was later on the GC and even later on the WiiU. It was the first system that prooved it that others can easily beat Nintendo at their own game. Like it or not, the PS had the far superior offering in terms of games, and denying that is like denying basic math. Just because you were the outsider it doesnt mean that your opinion hodls any extra weight.

Also, IMO, Wipeout >>>> F-Zero. The fact that F-Zero is the dead franchise that nobody touches anymore speaks volumes.

I'm not denying the software library advantage, obviously when you have a virtual monopoly on all third party games, you're going to eventually have a better library. 

What I'm saying is Nintendo is stupid for letting that happen. N64 had all the hall marks of an incredibly successful system and still even managed to sell relatively well basically all off 1st party content. Even the odds on that third party content and Sony quickly IMO becomes a dog that's all bark and no bite to back it up. Take away the Final Fantasy games and that's a huge blow to begin with. 

You like Wipeout better, that's your opinion, IMO F-Zero X is probably the best hovercraft racing game period. Others have come close and have techno music, yeah nice, but for the control of F-Zero and requirement of fast twitch reflexes and having to ride a track like a beautiful woman, mmm hmmm, F-Zero X ;). 

Well can't argue with this )

Hopefully the success of the Switch will bring a new F-Zero. It would only bolster its library even more. But allas, Oddisey will be the one that will sell me on the device



Around the Network

1. Consoles don't win generations based on the USA alone.

2. Narrowing the PS1's success down to Final Fantasy VII doesn't make sense, because there was a wave of games coming in 1997 and all through 2000.

3. The choice of storage medium doesn't prevent another company from moneyhatting which Sony most certainly did. Simply put, the PS1 would have been the only console to get Final Fantasy VII anyway. And no, past success on a company's previous consoles do not mean anything as Microsoft proved by buying (ultimately timed) exclusivity for JRPG series like Tales and Star Ocean on the Xbox 360.



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

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

RolStoppable said:
1. Consoles don't win generations based on the USA alone.

2. Narrowing the PS1's success down to Final Fantasy VII doesn't make sense, because there was a wave of games coming in 1997 and all through 2000.

3. The choice of storage medium doesn't prevent another company from moneyhatting which Sony most certainly did. Simply put, the PS1 would have been the only console to get Final Fantasy VII anyway. And no, past success on a company's previous consoles do not mean anything as Microsoft proved by buying (ultimately timed) exclusivity for JRPG series like Tales and Star Ocean on the Xbox 360.

1. Nintendo would've destroyed Sony in Japan with FF7 and DQ7 (which actually was originally announced for N64! Yamauchi himself announced this at Shoshinkai 1995). Remember Sony wasn't even able to beat the Sega Saturn in Japan until Final Fantasy VII showed up. They would've been beaten like a red headed step child, likely all the way down into third place in Japan (yes remove the RPG exclusives and break Konami/Capcom exclusivity and they tumble below the Sega Saturn in Japan IMO). 

2. No, but look at that chart, it's hard to deny FF7 coincidentally releases right before PS sales explode. Before that it's sales were I mean lets be real, in 1996 it went through several months where it sold along the lines of the Wii U. Yes, even with Resident Evil and Tomb Raider and WipeOut. Worse than Wii U. It took *two* full years for the Playstation to really start selling worth a lick even in the US. 

3. Sony could money-hat, but if the N64 had actual support it's market adoption, which was already red hot from its record breaking first year would have only accelerated. And which company would then want to limit themselves exclusively to the smaller Playstation audience? Maybe Namco because they apparently hated Nintendo back then, but Capcom, Konami? Nope and nope. Even the Tomb Raider people probably eventually would've told Sony to go pound sand. Exclusivity deals don't happen generally speaking if you don't have the overwhelming userbase advantage to go with it, and Sony does not get said advantage if the N64 has a steady flow of games due to the CD format. 



It's always the same side having a problem with acceptance and trying to revise history.

Let's take a look at the facts...

- By the end of the SNES era, Nintendo still had very good support from Capcom, Square, Konami, Enix, etc.
- Excepting Square, all these companies were supporting the Saturn and other systems.
- Including Square, these companies support was strangely absent from the N64.
- The N64 sold amazingly in it's first year, far better than the Saturn, so clearly system sales weren't a problem for multiplats.
- The N64 hardware capabilities matched or exceeded the Saturn, so clearly hardware wasn't a problem for multiplats. Except...
- The N64 didn't use CDs as its game media.

The evidence is clear. No matter how much people want to glorify their overheating SNES-CD and spin things in its favor, the truth is that it didn't won that gen on its own merits, but because of a single fatal mistake from its closest competitor. And that is the truth.



“Simple minds have always confused great honesty with great rudeness.” - Sherlock Holmes, Elementary (2013).

"Did you guys expected some actual rational fact-based reasoning? ...you should already know I'm all about BS and fraudulence." - FunFan, VGchartz (2016)

From a gameplay perspective though (ignoring what "made sense" business-wise) I am glad Nintendo stuck with cartridges. CD drives and by extend the PlayStation one were terrible back them. Playing the fast and smooth N64 after sitting through an afternoon of loading screens and read errors was always a godsend.



S.Peelman said:
From a gameplay perspective though (ignoring what "made sense" business-wise) I am glad Nintendo stuck with cartridges. CD drives and by extend the PlayStation one were terrible back them. Playing the fast and smooth N64 after sitting through an afternoon of loading screens and read errors was always a godsend.

Could've kept the cartridge slot, there's no rule that says you can't have both. Saturn did. Hell they could've just ditched the RAM expansion slot and let the cartridge slot act as a RAM expansion slot when using CD games. This is exactly what the Saturn did. 

You also easily could've done things like cartridge games that offload all music/voice acting to a 5 cent CD disc ... thus not using up valuable and expensive cartridge space, allowing for more space for game data too even if you wanted to make a cartridge game. This would've been a huge addition to the N64 too since it lacked a dedicated sound chip.