Depends largely on the games and timing. If Gamecube had been lauched a year earlier, it likely had been atleast twice as successful. It had good third party support at lauch, but by time it lauched, there really wasn't any competition as the winner was already clear, so the support dried up instantly. GC had the worst 1st party games on a Nintendo console ever, so looking at games perspective (no 3rd party, sub-par 1st party), it would definately fail.
S.T.A.G.E. said:
|
So, the two of you are saying the same thing and arguing over who's right?
Secondly, don't you think you're cherry picking here a little, as I'd recall Nintendo publishing games like Brain Training and the Wii series, with the target group being adults. If you really want to "satisfy the people who enjoy their games, whether it be adults or kids", you really need to have a product that satisfy said people. So far Nintendo seems to have been the most successful doing it (which is proven by sales).
| osed125 said: Having a 150m userbase to a (max) of 90m is bad no matter how you look at it. Especially considering during that gen Sony had the exact same competition as this gen (Nintendo and MS), it wasn't like a "lone wolf" or anything. |
And the most alarming thing for PS-brand is, that they lost a huge amount of people expected to stick with the brand, along with multiple console ownerships, MS and Nintendo were able to improve their brand.
| S.T.A.G.E. said: Nintendo has never made an adult focused console, ever. They might have had mature games on the console, but never have they made a console with adults in mind. In fact adults were the main people who never took videogames seriously when Nintendo was on top. |
You know, saying that adults didn't take videogames seriously when Nintendo was on top, without saying they didn't do it before and haven't done ever since, makes your argument hold only rhetorical value.
Ei Kiinasti.
Eikä Japanisti.
Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.
Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.







