Gaming's worst marketing/business decisions?

[Miyamotoo]

DonFerrari said:

Miyamotoo said:

Price of full DVD player does matter because back then had high price, and I assume Nintendo wanted more affordable console.

Even with all those tools majority of games couldn't fit on max size of 64MB. Even with great sales, good relationship, interest...huge majority of gamers couldn't fit even if developers wanted. GC had around 50% worse sales than N64 had, but regardles GC had much better 3rd party suport.

 

If you relly want to know what are IMO Gaming's worst marketing/business decisions, this what I wrote:

-Sega- Releasing too many hardware in small amount of time.
-Nintendo- Staying with N64 cartridges (even back than that rely wasn't bad decision because every disk based console failed until PS1). Wii U revealing, marketing, naming, pricing, game pad, launch titles...bloody mess.
-Sony- PS3 $600 launch price, very complicated CPU. Vita, price, price of cards, 1st party content.
-MS- XB1, inital plans about DRM and block of used games, releasing console with higher price with less power than PS4.

I refuse to talk further on the price of the DVD player unless you show the price of either drive to be installed by gaming companies. Sony were able to use it and not price PS2 outside of GC price bracket and I already showed you that even though Bluray drive (which was much much more expensive than DVD drive) costed no more than 1/6 of the price of a BR player of the time, so I can't say that because there were BR players selling for over 1k that the drive costed 1k.

What are your evidences for not fitting? You were already shown that they were able to fit RE2 with all it's cutscenes on N64 and it took 2 CDs on PS1.

You listed the cartridge as their big fail, but insist on giving then a concession and refuses to recognize their bad relationship with developers from NES torwards today.

OK, you refuse to talk, but some clear facts: back than DVD player like that in PS2 had pretty high price, PS2 definitely had much higher price because of full DVD player, GC almost whole life span had around 100$ cheaper price than PS2, definitely mini dvd that plays only GC games had much less price than full DVD player that played almost every media, and that affected on lower price of GC. Not to mentione that PS2 also like PS3 sold at loose, while GC was profatible even with $100 price.

You could fit some of PS1 games on N64, but not only developers would need to cut lots a thing from PS1 version of games but scaling some PS1 game from few hundreds MB to only 64MB was very complicated, expensive and requires lots a time, so huge majority of devolpers refues to do that becuse they thought it wasnt profitable. So like I wrote, reason why N64 had bad 3rd party suport and actualy is Nintendo console with smallest number of relased games (ask yourself why that is case when N64 isnt nearly worst selling Nintendo console), is very obvious very small size of N64 catriidges (max 64MB) for 3rd partys that were relased games on CD.

Its important to have good 3rd party suport, espacily today when 3rd parties are stronger than ever before, so its important to have also good 3rd party relationship, but not great 3rd party relationship didnt prevent Wii to become best selling Nintendo console ever, and thats why I didnt mentione bad relationship with developers like one of worst Nintendo marketing/business decisions.