Quantcast
Nintendo's Evolution from Gamecube to Switch (...was pre-mediated imho)

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Nintendo's Evolution from Gamecube to Switch (...was pre-mediated imho)

Tagged games:

Mandalore76 said:

I knew you in particular would disagree with my hypothesis!  :P  

Anyways, regarding the Wii not being a continuation of the GameCube is not entirely true.  While they play very differently, the Wii concept was still originally going to be a GameCube peripheral.  I've heard as a knock against the Wii's power that internally the Wii is "2 Gamecube's strapped together".  And then there is the fact that when you open the top of the Wii, you find a GameCube smiling back at you:

The Wii was very much an extension of the GameCube.  They just managed to hide it enough, so that it wouldn't have a tainted perception associated with it from the start.  It could have been called GameCube 2.  Then Wii U could have been GameCube 3, or would they have mucked it up anyway and called it GameCube U?  *shudders*

Nintendo did say that Revolution would be an entirely new proposal that will use GC architecture at its core, so backwards compatibility is about the only thing where Wii was a continuation of the GameCube. There's also a huge difference between a peripheral and a standard controller; had the GC been a success, Wii would have never happened.

When you have a roadmap, it's about refinement and smooth transitions from one product to the next. In the line GC - Wii - Wii U - Switch, there are significant changes every time. GC failure led to a greatly different approach. Wii success encouraged Nintendo to go back to their original plans by slapping Wii branding on the continuation of the GC. Wii U failure made Nintendo do something different. This isn't a history of small changes each generation leading to greatly different outcomes; it's a history of huge changes having huge impact.

mZuzek said:

Agreed, though the thread was a good read.

I think the Wii U was always originally supposed to be like the Switch, but because it was too expensive and harsh on battery life at the time, they nerfed to what we know now. So in that way, maybe they've had this roadmap planned since the early 2010's, though that doesn't mean they expected the Wii U to fail, never mind as hard as it did - but I feel in no way they've been planning this for over 15 years.

Wii U was supposed to have separate Gamepads being sold in order to replicate the GC-GBA connectivity where each player has their own screen, so no, Wii U is not a nerfed version of Switch. People tend to believe that it is because of off-TV play, but off-TV play is merely an additional feature of the main purpose of the controller. Because the Gamepad was so expensive, Nintendo planned to launch separately sold Gamepads later, but the installed base grew at such a dismal rate that this plan was canned; Nintendo already had too much trouble to convince the market that having one Gamepad is a good thing.

It's something that many people forgot or never knew about to begin with, but Wii U was supposed to have more than two screens in its final envisioned state. Asymmetrical multiplayer and additional information on a second screen in single-player were the core concept of Wii U, matching up with the ideas of the GC-GBA connectivity. These things aren't even present on Switch.



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

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

Around the Network

I sort of agree with the overall sentiment, but premeditated isn't quite the right choice of words.

Nintendo has a number of ideas that either didn't work or were half implemented, and they tend to come back to them fairly regularly.

The DS microphone for instance was a concept that debuted on Nintendo, and was later part of the Gamecube.

Nintendo had been working on motion controls since at least as early as the Gameboy Color (tilt and tumble), and they were also part of Wario Ware before the Wii was created. Amiibos are conceptually very similar to the e-Reader GBA. 3DS from Virtual Boy, etc etc.

So, I don't think it's so much that they had this long term plan in mind. They just always had the idea in the back of their mind, and once the appropriate technology comes along to make a previous failure work, they bring it back.



I think what eventually lead to Switch, was the feedback with the off-TV play on Wii U - that and how differently people play in different parts of the world.



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.

JWeinCom said:
I sort of agree with the overall sentiment, but premeditated isn't quite the right choice of words.

Nintendo has a number of ideas that either didn't work or were half implemented, and they tend to come back to them fairly regularly.

The DS microphone for instance was a concept that debuted on Nintendo, and was later part of the Gamecube.

Nintendo had been working on motion controls since at least as early as the Gameboy Color (tilt and tumble), and they were also part of Wario Ware before the Wii was created. Amiibos are conceptually very similar to the e-Reader GBA. 3DS from Virtual Boy, etc etc.

So, I don't think it's so much that they had this long term plan in mind. They just always had the idea in the back of their mind, and once the appropriate technology comes along to make a previous failure work, they bring it back.

Nintendo does have a tendency to test their next big thing with the previous hardware and they constantly look for new technology that could be used in games - but I don't think they're interested in bringing back their previous failures; it's quite the opposite.

In a way, 3DS makes a lot of sense, as when 3DS was out, it was at the high of the recent 3D-craze (if you can call it that), so it was supposed ride the 3D wave.  First motion controls on a Nintedo videogame, was on the NES with the power glove. 



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.

bdbdbd said:
JWeinCom said:
I sort of agree with the overall sentiment, but premeditated isn't quite the right choice of words.

Nintendo has a number of ideas that either didn't work or were half implemented, and they tend to come back to them fairly regularly.

The DS microphone for instance was a concept that debuted on Nintendo, and was later part of the Gamecube.

Nintendo had been working on motion controls since at least as early as the Gameboy Color (tilt and tumble), and they were also part of Wario Ware before the Wii was created. Amiibos are conceptually very similar to the e-Reader GBA. 3DS from Virtual Boy, etc etc.

So, I don't think it's so much that they had this long term plan in mind. They just always had the idea in the back of their mind, and once the appropriate technology comes along to make a previous failure work, they bring it back.

Nintendo does have a tendency to test their next big thing with the previous hardware and they constantly look for new technology that could be used in games - but I don't think they're interested in bringing back their previous failures; it's quite the opposite.

In a way, 3DS makes a lot of sense, as when 3DS was out, it was at the high of the recent 3D-craze (if you can call it that), so it was supposed ride the 3D wave.  First motion controls on a Nintedo videogame, was on the NES with the power glove. 

It's not like they'd bring something back specifically because it failed, but there were sometimes ideas that were good ideas, but the technology wasn't right yet.



Around the Network

Great post. I have thought the same. Your last comments of the Wii U being purposely limited to buy time till Switch was ready is very interesting. I always thought of it as a test model. But it is probably all of the above. They knew the Nintendo die hard fanbase would keep it afloat and in some ways they were investing in their favorite company to allow them that time. It was still risky as all business decisions can be. Switch does feel like a realization or completion of an idea. The end of years of development and testing. I’m sure there are a lot more pieces to this puzzle and ideas than what we know too.



I'm not quite sure if the Switch was a target on a greater road map planned by Nintendo years ago, but Yoshiaki Koizumi did say he pulled in all the engineering teams and had a goal of putting the main aspects of a home console into a mobile platform. You have to figure all the guys on Gamecube, Wii, Wii-U, Gameboy and 2DS/3DS were part of that dialog.

And you can see Nintendo design DNA dating way back to Nintendo Entertainment system in the Switch.

As a company the most conventional product they have ever done was the SNES as a successor to the NES, and even then Nintendo was the only company at the time that was crazy enough to put 8 buttons on a controller.



Mandalore76 said:                               

With the Nintendo Switch, you can console game on your tv.  And when it is time to go out, you can remove the Switch from its dock and seamlessly continue anywhere you want without restriction.  The Switch is proof of concept of the Gameboy Advance connected to the Gamecube via link cable finally delivered into your hands in one package with a unified library.  This becomes even more evident when you consider the fact that "Pac-Man Vs." has even made it's return. 

 

 

 

I don't understand this paragraph. (maybe I misunderstood)

How is the Switch proof of concept of the Gameboy Advance connected to the Gamecube? you can't recreate that setup with a Switch as you don't have a second screen, like you do with that setup. The only console to recreate that would be the Wii U - it could also be said that the 2 screen setup for console has largely failed, or at least not taken off on any console that has attempted it. Wii U, Gamecube/boy, even Sony's attempt with Playstation and PSP/Vita.

The only place dual screen has succeeded from my (granted, limited) knowledge of the subject is in the handheld market with the DS and 3DS.



The best way to find out if you can trust somebody is to trust them.

Ernest Hemmingway

Utter nonsense.

There's no asyym gampelay link between Switch and Gamecube.

Screeen in console plus handle -> small form factor (Wii) -> no TV required (WiiU) -> mobile home console(docked Switch) -> 100% home console mobility (Switch) is the only line that can be drawn.

Ass gameplay is dead.



Nov 2016 - NES outsells PS1 (JP)

Don't Play Stationary 4 ever. Switch!

Brutalyst said:

Mandalore76 said:                               

With the Nintendo Switch, you can console game on your tv.  And when it is time to go out, you can remove the Switch from its dock and seamlessly continue anywhere you want without restriction.  The Switch is proof of concept of the Gameboy Advance connected to the Gamecube via link cable finally delivered into your hands in one package with a unified library.  This becomes even more evident when you consider the fact that "Pac-Man Vs." has even made it's return. 

 

 

 

I don't understand this paragraph. (maybe I misunderstood)

How is the Switch proof of concept of the Gameboy Advance connected to the Gamecube? you can't recreate that setup with a Switch as you don't have a second screen, like you do with that setup. The only console to recreate that would be the Wii U - it could also be said that the 2 screen setup for console has largely failed, or at least not taken off on any console that has attempted it. Wii U, Gamecube/boy, even Sony's attempt with Playstation and PSP/Vita.

The only place dual screen has succeeded from my (granted, limited) knowledge of the subject is in the handheld market with the DS and 3DS.

Nah, you understood it. Looks like the guy himself who wrote the paragraph did not understand the consept he wrote about. 

JWeinCom said:
bdbdbd said:

Nintendo does have a tendency to test their next big thing with the previous hardware and they constantly look for new technology that could be used in games - but I don't think they're interested in bringing back their previous failures; it's quite the opposite.

In a way, 3DS makes a lot of sense, as when 3DS was out, it was at the high of the recent 3D-craze (if you can call it that), so it was supposed ride the 3D wave.  First motion controls on a Nintedo videogame, was on the NES with the power glove. 

It's not like they'd bring something back specifically because it failed, but there were sometimes ideas that were good ideas, but the technology wasn't right yet.

You know, that paragraph sounds more like an excuse. Most often the problem isn't technology, but the product being bad. The thing is, that videogames industry isn't about tech, but games. Instead of tech business, it is entertanment business. And, I'm not saying here that Virtual Boy wasn't bad hardware. 



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.