By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Seece said:
Bofferbrauer said:
Seece said:
Namiirei said:

Oh well, i will just post this here :

http://www.gamekult.com/actu/et-pourtant-nintendo-gagne-de-largent-A139985.html

 

Sorry if i prefer to trust one of the biggest french gaming site than you.

lol you're trusting a french gaming website over official Nintendo figures.

If that's what you wanna do feel free. I'll use the facts tho.

http://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/pdf/2003/031113e.pdf

Here you go. Final slide.

Seece, the actual Numbers are the same than yours. What changes is the launch alignement. You are comparing Q9 GC with Q8 Wii U (like ryuzaki57's chart does, hence the additional quartal for the Gamecube on that one), while Gamekult compares Q8 GC with Q8 Wii U. As you can see on the chart, the gap narrows during Q8 due to this alignement.

Yes because Gamecube launched in Japan a few months earlier, that's not an excuse to push back WW Q's to make WiiU look better. At best for a more accurate picture Japan should be analsyed on its own. But NA/EU/Others is the same amount of time.

Just wanted to point the sole difference in the argument of both of you out. Not saying any of them was more correct than the other

Btw, why using Q2 as starting point for the GC? Because it's when it started in the US? Why not use Q4 then, as the GC only launched in Pal territories during May 2002 and only then had real global sales?