RolStoppable said: Nintendo is setting up themselves to get owned big time with the Wii U. The name of the console suggests that it is the successor to the Wii, but in reality it is a follow-up to the Gamecube. And knowing that, it's going to mimick the "success" of the Gamecube. Remember how things played out at the end of the Nintendo 64 era. The conventional wisdom was that Nintendo had to greatly appeal to third parties, if they ever wanted a chance to be relevant in the home console market again. So they put out the Gamecube, a system that was easy to port to. And Nintendo got plenty of ports, but only for a while. Then third parties started to abandon the system and made the usual excuses. Most amusingly was Acclaim who blamed their poor financial results repeatedly on the Gamecube and once they had ceased to support Nintendo's system, it didn't take long until they went bankrupt with their PS2 and Xbox games. Not hard to see that Acclaim's problem wasn't the Gamecube, but rather Acclaim themselves. Anyway, my point is that the Wii U is in the same boat as the Gamecube, attempting to fight a battle that Nintendo can only lose. |
Gamecube mainly failed due to marketshare, and Nintendo having weak first party games.
Non-DVD compatibility was also a factor in the early-mid 2000s.
Just look at the software difference:
| Wii |
GC |
|
27 games above 3m
17* games above 5m (Donkey Kong is guaranteed)
8 games above 10 million |
5 games above 3m
3 games above 5m
|
Nintendo had no type of gimmick with the Gamecube. There was no online, no new innovative controller, no interactive interface, no DVD,...just GC-GBA connectivity....which a whopping 4 games supported.
Nothing stood out for the Gamecube in comparison to the competition. It literally introduced nothing new to gaming except the Wavebird, period.
Leatherhat on July 6th, 2012 3pm. Vita sales:"3 mil for COD 2 mil for AC. Maybe more. " thehusbo on July 6th, 2012 5pm. Vita sales:"5 mil for COD 2.2 mil for AC."