Alternate history: N64 goes with CDs instead of cartridges

[DonFerrari]

d21lewis said:

DonFerrari said:

I'm pretty sure you know about the policies from Nintendo on NES and SNES but a quicklink for you https://books.google.com/books?id=XiM0ntMybNwC&pg=PA110&lpg=PA110&dq=the+draconian+policies+of+nintendo&source=bl&ots=1YvtCgsvLl&sig=ACfU3U1N4c0c-tOfQR9wqrK2-4L66X1m9g&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi4vv3H7oLkAhUoo1kKHdjPAjUQ6AEwBXoECAcQAQ#v=onepage&q=the%20draconian%20policies%20of%20nintendo&f=false

https://nerdtrek.com/nintendos-restrictive-licensing-history/

So several of those devs were ready to jump ship. CD-ROM is a reason for it? Sure, but Sega CD had a CD, Saturn had a CD and that didn't made Nintendo lose. It was an effect of Sony involvement.

We always go the way of all the success of Sony is the result of competitors doing bad, no merits to Sony.

Xbox had better HW and DVD and didn't get many of the games PS2 received.

Momentum per Momentum, NES came from SNES and sold much lower than the other due to Genesis (and it wasn't due to CD as well), N64 came from SNES. So the least momentum piece would be PS1 and it still won.

Depending on the incentive games will release on platform with limitations, RE4 released on PS2 even though promissed not to because of the limitations as an example, and the Switch ports are another.

PS1 was so dominant that in the year 2000, Playstation WAS video games. The Dreamcast was dead before it even arrived because of PS2 hype. Even with a lackluster library, the PS2 was flying off of shelves until the Great games began to arrive in late 2001. I tried to get a PS2 on launch day. Even had a friend who worked at Walmart. He came back empty handed. I couldn't get a PS2 until like March 2001 and even then I had to drive like 70 miles.

PSM magazine had an article back then saying that the console war was over before GameCube and Xbox sold their first console. They had stats and everything. The year's headstart pretty much sealed the deal. It didn't matter if the kiddie looking GameCube was more powerful (and didn't even play DVDs). It didn't matter if the unproven Microsoft Xbox was more powerful. PS2 had the legacy of the PS1 and enough key features and support to nullify anything the competition had to offer.

PS1 was where Xbox was at launch. It was unproven and gamers weren't open to change. PS1 had the advantage of Sega being pretty much unreliable and Nintendo 64 having multiple delays. The choice to stick with cartridges was just the nail in the coffin.

And yes, tons of other consoles used CDs but up until the 5th gen, the advantages were still being worked out. It was more or less music and cutscenes at the expense of speed and reliability. That's another reason why Nintendo stuck with carts. Discs were fragile and gamers were perceived to be mostly kids (Though I think the average gamer at the time was 30).

Gaming was ready to grow up. Disc based technology was mature enough. 3D tech was at a point where believeable worlds could be created. Saturn was still stronger in the 2D department as Sega didn't focus on 3D like the competion did (Sony actually turned down certain 2D games because they felt 3D was the future).  It was just a perfect storm and PlayStation was the only real option. 

*Edit* Did I even reply to the right person!? 🤷‍♂️

Replying to me is always right =]

But I get why you are in doubt on it, because I agree with what you listed.

And it is funny that all around we have people still thinking PS1 and PS2 sold well due to piracy. Devs wouldn't support the system if they couldn't sell they software on it. Looking at a system that sold almost 1B SW on a little over 100M HW and saying it sold well due to piracy is lunacy.