By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
curl-6 on 22 August 2019
Edit Thread
The_Liquid_Laser said:
curl-6 said:

360 would appeal more to PS gamers by maintaining more of the "hardcore"/"grownup"/"cool" image they sought. Coming off the Gamecube, Nintendo's image in this department was poor. And again, you could get a 360 for the same price as a Gamecube 2.

Hardware sales lead to more games; they feed into each other but the former must come first, and I doubt Gamecube 2 would sell enough to get even close to as many games as PS3 or 360.

A cool image does not sell hardware.  Cool games do, but a cool image does not.  The Genesis had the coolest image of any console and it still lost to the SNES, which had a kiddie image.

At this point we are talking in circles about game library though.  I think the Wii HD would have gotten most of the multiplats that the PS3 and XBox360 had.  You don't.  It's kind of pointless arguing beyond that, because this is a hypothetical scenario and we'll never find out who is right.

DonFerrari said:
curl-6 said:

Yeah that is a fair point, though I think you get probably get 360 level performance at a profit for $300-$350 by end of 2006. I kinda feel it'd be unfair to change the OP at this point.

No problem as I don't think WiiHD costing 50 or even 100 more than X360 would be the key point of it doing worse or not than what you predicted anyway. Just pointed out because Liquid was so damn sure WiiHD would have price advantage against it. MS is much more willing to eat loss on HW than Nintendo.

I would probably prefer a WiiHD than what we had, but for Nintendo I believe Wii was a much better ideia, only if WiiU had done a better job =[

I think "Gamecube 2" is a better description of this theoretical console than "Wii HD". The Wii after all was largely defined by its motion controls and blue ocean approach whereas what we're talking about here, a standard HD console from Nintendo, would be more like a traditional successor to Gamecube.