Pemalite said:
oniyide said:
That stuff is great, but it doesnt mean anything if no one wants to make games for it, which they didnt and now here we are. The benefits didnt outweigh the costs.
|
Well. Mobile has obviously been a bright spot for carts, to say no one wants to make games for carts isn't an accurate assumption.
Nintendo obviously agrees considering the Switch will also use carts.
oniyide said:
Naw, a major platform maker selling sub 25mil for a mainstream system is not okay. GC did like 9mil more than WiiU thats in the same ballpark of a bomb.
|
We will have to agree to disagree. :P
The difference with the Wii U and Gamecube is that the Wii U's processing technology isn't going to be repurposed.
Which is why the Wii could play Gamecube games, which saved on R&D, making the financial position of the Gamecube a little more enviable as those costs got recouped in the generation that came after.
Plus the Gamecube had a game attachment rate of 9.59 verses the Wii U's 5.01, which makes the gamecube a far more profitable machine for every console sold.
|
Didnt say anything about not wanting to make games for carts. I said they didnt want to make games for N64 which they mostly didnt.
They only used GC technology for WIi because the Wii was going to be an add-on to GC in the first place. And yeah i would say GC was more profitable than wii u but thats nothing to be proud of.
