If the N64 had a CD-ROM Drive, would've Nintendo won the generation in sales?

[bdbdbd]

The_Liquid_Laser said:

bdbdbd said:

@The_Liquid_Laser: You're missing one important point: N64 launched 1,5 years later than PSX. The publishers had already games out on PS before N64 was out.
Sony did where NEC failed; PC-Engine did well in Japan, where it had one year headstart before Megadrive released, but it's overseas release was delayed so much, that it was released outside of Japan later than Megadrive. Sony released it's system rather quickly worldwide, and did something where Nintendo and Sega had failed; gain foothold Europe. If you compare the sales numbers, in Europe PS outsold all the Nintendo and Sega home consoles combined, that were released before it. And for the other regions, you can count on all the Nintendo and Sega systems combined until NDS, and PS would still surpass them in sales.

When you compare SNES and N64, N64 lost 4 million in sales combined in NA and Europe.

It's really hard to see any scenario where Nintendo could have won the generation, because Sony won mostly in regions Nintendo did not want or could not sell games in. Even if N64 had all the big hitter 3rd party games, PS would still had ports for them, because of other regions that Sony was pushing it's sales and Nintendo was not. Sony could also sell it's consoles and games everywhere where they sold Sony's TV's, whereas Nintendo would need to establish business relations and retail channel - that they eventually did with NDS and Wii.

If N64 had reached the sales of NES in Nintendo's core markets, and Sony had lost total of 30 million in sales in these markets, Sony still had won, because eventually the 3rd party games had been ported on PS.

"N64 launched 1,5 years later than PSX. The publishers had already games out on PS before N64 was out. "

NEC did this and they did it better.  They released 3 full years ahead of the SNES.  Publishers already had games on the TG16 before SNES was out.  It didn't matter, because none of these games were killer apps.  Sony had the same situation.  They had some third party games, but they didn't have any killer apps until Final Fantasy 7.  This point you are trying to make doesn't matter, because it doesn't make Sony's strategy any better than NEC's.

"Sony released it's system rather quickly worldwide, and did something where Nintendo and Sega had failed; gain foothold Europe."

Sony was able to do well in Europe because it was so successful in Japan.  Having lots of games and profits in Japan is what let them expand into Europe.  If they never succeed in Japan, then they never get much of a foothold in Europe either.  PS1 peak fiscal year ended in March 1997 in Japan (the year FF7 released), but it peaked 1999 in the US and 2000 in Europe.  Europe's sales curve was delayed compared the US and especially Japan.  Sony expanded later, after it was already succeeding in the establsihed markets of Japan and US.  If it didn't succeed in the established markets, then it wouldn't have expanded into Europe as much as it did.  It takes profits to launch into a new territory and a good game library helps a lot too.  Sony had both, but only because it was getting the third party games that Nintendo lost by not going to CD-ROM.

The only big advantage that Sony had over NEC was that Nintendo majorly fumbled with the N64.  Sony played their cards right when this happened, but they never would have gotten this opportunity if Nintendo hadn't majorly fumbled in the first place by not using a CD-ROM.

As I said, NEC was successful in Japan, where it had it's headstart. Abroad it was not, because Sega had it's system out first, ending up taking the third parties - and this was where Sega failed with Saturn.

Doesn't matter if the sales were "delayed", because Sony still published these games and gave them a huge marketing push. This means, that Sony takes a larger share of the games sales (in theory, naturally depends on the contract), but they also print the discs and ship them to retailers at Sony's own cost - in this sense it should have not mattered for 3rd parties if the games had been on gold bars, because it had not been additional cost for the developers. This was much like the "Dreamteam" on N64 that worked in second party relation to Nintendo, with the difference that Nintendo's games releses were in Japan, North-America and limited markets in Europe, whereas Sony's releases were everywhere there was Sony TVs and Walkmans.