curl-6 said:
gmcmen said:
curl-6 said:
gmcmen said:
i'm not talking about powerful hardware, just something powerful enough to run 360 ports, the wii came out a year later, half the power of the 360 would have been good enough. the n64 was outsold by the playstaion,cause of some huge mistakes, they stuck with the cartride formate which i heard third party's hated and hardly got any third party support, the gamecube was just more of the same, how was the xbox able to make huge strides inthird party support and sales, even though the first xbox failed, nintedno could have done the samething.
|
Maintaining a low price point for the Wii from day one was paramount in order for it to reach lower income buyers. They had a working architecture in place with the Gamecube, it was cheaper to overclock that and add more memory than to invest in designing an all-new architecture. Even half the power of 360 with a programmable/multicore chipset wouldn't have been a cheap investment at the time, and with motion controls being a huge gamble already, raising the stakes wouldn't have been a smart move.
More power doesn't guarantee them third party support anyway; Wii U can run 360/PS3 ports yet missed out on many. Gamecube could run PS2/Xbox ports but missed out on many.
Hindsight is 20/20, but at the time Nintendo made the right decision under the circumstances. And it worked out well for them, generating billions of dollars in profits and making Wii one of the most successful consoles in history.
|
xbox and gamecube got the same amount of thirdparty support
|
There were many PS2/Xbox multiplats that skipped GCN.
|
i would most ps2 third party games skipped xbox/GC, some third party exclusives were funded by microsoft, some because the xbox hardware was extremely developer friendly, then nintendo did an horrible design on the console, how cool is a purple lunch box, but the gamecube got many resident evil exclusives games, and got a metal gear solid remake, third part wasn't great but it wasn't that far off from the xbox.
