Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Interesting Quote About the GameCube's Design

zorg1000 said:
Soundwave said:


Casuals aren't buying another console in the smartphone era either. They got their fill of waggling around in front of a TV last time. Nintendo's decision to make smartphone games is basically admitting that they know they can no longer draw this crowd, so they are going to them on iPhone/Android.

So that leaves Nintendo with basically their standard fan base and the remaining kids who still want a dedicated game handheld (which is a shrinking crowd). 

Well ur basing that off of pretty much nothing, Nintendo made a console that doesn't appeal to casuals this generation, that however doesn't mean casuals are no longer willing to buy consoles.

To say the Wii U isn't aimed at casuals I think is a bit of a lark. It's branded the Wii. A casual brand. All the TV marketing was for the casual/family demographic. Half of Nintendo's first year titles were party/mini-games. The lead title for the system was Nintendo Land, a game aimed specifically at casuals. It uses a toucscreen controller similar to other popular casual gaming devices like the DS and iPad. 

To say this system was aimed at hardcore players is a laugh. The PLAYSTATION 4 is aimed at, marketed to, and built for core gamers. 

Wii U was aimed largely at casuals with a few concessions thrown in to hardcore players (here's clickable analog sticks and a port of a crappy Ninja Gaiden game and the same Call of Duty you can already play on the your PS3/XBox!). 

Nintendo just failed this time out because that's the nature of the "gimmick controller" beast ... sometimes it hits, but the Wii U showed the dark side of that approach ... if your controller idea doesn't take off, then you're basically screwed. It's not even like they divorced the Wiimote from the Wii U. You can't even play the pack-in title (Nintendo Land) without Wiimotes, as the game basically requires Wiimotes for any kind of multiplayer. The system was clearly designed to be sold to the existing Wii audience. Heck in Japan the Wiimote still comes bundled with the Wii U, yet this is the lowest selling market for the system. 



Around the Network

I think Nintendo needs to focus on games that attract western customers at the popularity level of Halo or Uncharted. If they create a fanbase that likes those types of games, third parties will be more attracted to their system. Their current fanbase just don't buy anything outside the usual Nintendo style games, and even their more western style IPs like Metroid have problems reaching the sale levels they should have. Or they can just tell the third parties to go F themselves.



“Simple minds have always confused great honesty with great rudeness.” - Sherlock Holmes, Elementary (2013).

"Did you guys expected some actual rational fact-based reasoning? ...you should already know I'm all about BS and fraudulence." - FunFan, VGchartz (2016)

foxtail said:
Shadow1980 said:

The GameCube had decent third-party support, but it fell way short of the PS2 in that regard, and even the Xbox had better third-party suport than the GC. The likely culprit? The little guy on the left here:

With less than one-third the capacity of even a single-sided single-layer DVD (1.5GB vs. 4.7GB), the GC's proprietary miniDVD format didn't do the system any favors. Now, I know there's all the "Well, they could have just split the game across multiple discs" talk, and sure, there's been plenty of multi-disc games before and after, but A) they weren't exactly common, B) some games probably couldn't get split across multiple discs as they take place in a single contiguous environment (think GTA), and C) I honestly doubt that anybody really wanted to split their games across multiple discs and usually only did so when it was necessary (even CD's 700MB capacity was not enough for many PS1 games; it was just a hell of sight better than the 64MB that the biggest N64 carts could hold, plus CDs cost a lot less to make). Not only is it extra work to split just one port up into multiple discs, but it also incurs greater expense (you're talking about an extra dollar or two per copy in manufacturing costs, which does add up). While a handful of publishers felt it was worth it for at least some titles, many major third-party games that came to PS2 and Xbox were no-shows on the GameCube, and the non-standard format is the only plausible explanation why.

The Xbox 360 had over 50 games which were multiple disc and it didn't seem to be a problem.

The X360 was an HD system stuck using DVDs while the PS3 was using high capacity Blu-rays.

Before they updated in 2011, X360 discs were locked at 6.8GB max due to a portion of the disc being reserved for security.

Super Smash Bros. Brawl on the Wii was 7.4GB, that SD Wii game was bigger than a lot of single disc 360 games which were HD.

As for the Gamecube ports , the discs were a problem for larger open world games,

but most other games could be ported with multiple discs if they really wanted to.  

The problem that generation was that most the better 3rd party games were payed exclusives and payed to stay off the other systems.

Also the original Xbox had some good 3rd party support, especially from the West, but it ended up doing just as poorly as the Gamecube in terms of system sales compared against the PS2.

FYI some Wii games are double layered which that means they have bigger size than other usually because: The game has so many voice acting (Xenoblade), The game has so many cutscene (Brawl), or the game is a compilation of multiple games (Prime Trilogy). 



A handheld gamer only (for now).

zorg1000 said:
So Gamecube & Wii U both had the intention of reclaiming "hardcore" gamers by way of 3rd party support and are Nintendo's worst selling consoles, maybe it would be wise to give up on them.


Pretty much this.



Vor said:

FYI some Wii games are double layered 

As were practically every Xbox 360 game. This doesn't affect his point. The XB360 had the best third party support last generation, and it also had HUGE limitations in disc capacity. Most RPG's required something like four-discs to contain all of their content, and many multiplats suffered from compression on the 360 vs. PS3. 

He was opposing the argument that the Gamecube's mini-disc was the main reason why third party games were less frequent on Gamecube, and that is blatantly false. 

@OP

Nintendo's problems with third parties had to do with liscensing and control over content. It's been their problem since the SNES era. As soon as viable competition came,  they abandoned Nintendo because it gave them more freedoms in the development of their games. Now third parties expect to be pandered to and given every resource possible to subsidize the cost of development. Nintendo being a fiscally conservative company doesn't play those games unless they can get a benefit from it without a huge risk. 



Around the Network
sc94597 said:
Vor said:

FYI some Wii games are double layered 

As were practically every Xbox 360 game. This doesn't affect his point. The XB360 had the best third party support last generation, and it also had HUGE limitations in disc capacity. Most RPG's required something like four-discs to contain all of their content, and many multiplats suffered from compression on the 360 vs. PS3. 

He was opposing the argument that the Gamecube's mini-disc was the main reason why third party games were less frequent on Gamecube, and that is blatantly false. 

@OP

Nintendo's problems with third parties had to do with liscensing and control over content. It's been their problem since the SNES era. As soon as viable competition came,  they abandoned Nintendo because it gave them more freedoms in the development of their games. Now third parties expect to be pandered to and given every resource possible to subsidize the cost of development. Nintendo being a fiscally conservative company doesn't play those games unless they can get a benefit from it without a huge risk. 

Look at the post I'm quoted. Compare double layered games to single layered games isn't fair IMO.



A handheld gamer only (for now).

JRPGfan said:
zorg1000 said:
So Gamecube & Wii U both had the intention of reclaiming "hardcore" gamers by way of 3rd party support and are Nintendo's worst selling consoles, maybe it would be wise to give up on them.

O_o' how can this statement be true? .. its hard to think they where actually trying to get 3rd party back with it.

Regardless of how successful they were, that was their goal. The first Wii U focused E3 contained Nintendo parading third-parties on stage, announcing Assasin's Creed, Mass Effect, Call of Duty, etc, etc. They chose to remain with the PowerPC architecture so that 360 and PS3 ports were easy to do. 

They had a fallen out with third-parties because they didn't give them special treatment over their competition, like EA with Origin, and Japanese third-parties always begging for publishing deals (Square-Enix, we're looking at you.) 

Nintendo is at its best when it ignores third parties and does what it must do with or without them. The N64, SNES, and Wii are some of their most iconic consoles, and that is because they were able to gather exclusive experiences that just couldn't be found elsewhere. That is the Nintendo its fans want it to be. Nintendo fans like Nintendo games, regardless of what other people care about. We like our Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Smash Bros, Mario Kart, Xenoblade, Fire Emblem, etc, etc regardless of what fans of other consoles like. Nintendo's problem this generation wasn't that it didn't have third-parties, as they haven't had third parties since the SNES, and even then it was a tense situation. Their problem this generation was that they didn't come out and create the games that their fans buy their consoles for and tried to get the games that their fans didn't have. Zelda U should've been a priority, not Assassin's Creed and Mass Effect ports. People play those games on other platforms. 



Vor said:
sc94597 said:
Vor said:

FYI some Wii games are double layered 

As were practically every Xbox 360 game. This doesn't affect his point. The XB360 had the best third party support last generation, and it also had HUGE limitations in disc capacity. Most RPG's required something like four-discs to contain all of their content, and many multiplats suffered from compression on the 360 vs. PS3. 

He was opposing the argument that the Gamecube's mini-disc was the main reason why third party games were less frequent on Gamecube, and that is blatantly false. 

@OP

Nintendo's problems with third parties had to do with liscensing and control over content. It's been their problem since the SNES era. As soon as viable competition came,  they abandoned Nintendo because it gave them more freedoms in the development of their games. Now third parties expect to be pandered to and given every resource possible to subsidize the cost of development. Nintendo being a fiscally conservative company doesn't play those games unless they can get a benefit from it without a huge risk. 

Look at the post I'm quoted. Compare double layered games to single layered games isn't fair IMO.

He wasn't. He was comparing double-layered (Wii) games to double-layered (360) games. 6.8 GB is not single-layered (4.7 GB is.)  His use of "single disc" was not the same thing as "single layered." 



sc94597 said:

He wasn't. He was comparing double-layered (Wii) games to double-layered (360) games. 6.8 GB is not single-layered (4.7 GB is.)  His use of "single disc" was not the same thing as "single layered." 


Nevermind. Misunderstood. Sorry for that :D



A handheld gamer only (for now).

d21lewis said:
To bad they made it look like a little girl's travel bag.

That handle was a last minute addition. I took mine off. And the system can be assembled normally. The problem with the console without the handle. You can't grab it. So you picking it up with one hand is not an option. Unless you have larger hands. The cube design kind of forced the handle. WHich screwed the look.