By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo - WiiU will sell better than Gamecube.

pauluzzzz1981 on 26 June 2013
happydolphin said:
pauluzzzz1981 said:
Viper1 said:

It wasn't a success?  How do you even qualify that?

It was a market success - owned more than 50% of the market.
It was a commercial success - revived a dead industry.
It was a financial success - highly profitable.

It also established some of the most beloved IP's in video game history.
It established dozens of fundamental innovations still in use today.
It renewed investor confidence that had black balled the entire video game industry.
It also established the fundamental 3rd party licensing system used even today

The only factor you've stated that negates the 'success' was the fact the licensing prices were rather high and number of allowed liscense per year per publisher was low which I'd hardly call a negation.

I mean this in the kindest sense bu your definition of success could use some revision.

discussion ended half an hour ago. Point taken. We think differently. I like it here.

Problem is, he makes more sense and justifies his qualification of the NES as a success quite well.

But I still see some validity to your point. The easiest way to go about it is that the NES was mostly a short-lived success due to the bitterness of 3rd parties towards Nintendo, which bit Nintendo in the ass come the N64 generation and even affected them in the SNES generation.

Nevertheless, the statement Nintendo is only very succesfull in the handheldmarket. doesn't hold up in the face of the NES and the SNES, despite the bitterness it caused 3rd parties.

Thx. Thats my point. I'm glad with some validation.

And very succesfull in the sense that they have done it every generation. You now, being succesfull.



Around the Network
Viper1 on 26 June 2013
happydolphin said:
pauluzzzz1981 said:
Viper1 said:

It wasn't a success?  How do you even qualify that?

It was a market success - owned more than 50% of the market.
It was a commercial success - revived a dead industry.
It was a financial success - highly profitable.

It also established some of the most beloved IP's in video game history.
It established dozens of fundamental innovations still in use today.
It renewed investor confidence that had black balled the entire video game industry.
It also established the fundamental 3rd party licensing system used even today

The only factor you've stated that negates the 'success' was the fact the licensing prices were rather high and number of allowed liscense per year per publisher was low which I'd hardly call a negation.

I mean this in the kindest sense bu your definition of success could use some revision.

discussion ended half an hour ago. Point taken. We think differently. I like it here.

Problem is, he makes more sense and justifies his qualification of the NES as a success quite well.

But I still see some validity to your point. The easiest way to go about it is that the NES was mostly a short-lived success due to the bitterness of 3rd parties towards Nintendo, which bit Nintendo in the ass come the N64 generation and even affected them in the SNES generation.

Nevertheless, the statement Nintendo is only very succesfull in the handheldmarket. doesn't hold up in the face of the NES and the SNES, despite the bitterness it caused 3rd parties.

And both of those only caused problems with future consoles.  That doesn't remove the success they both achieved to begin with.  

It's like saying you scored 5 rushing touchdowns, rushed for 250 yards, had over 100 receiving yards and won the Super Bowl but you did have that fumble back in the first quarter so I guess that wasn't a successful game.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

Viper1 on 26 June 2013
pauluzzzz1981 said:
happydolphin said:

Problem is, he makes more sense and justifies his qualification of the NES as a success quite well.

But I still see some validity to your point. The easiest way to go about it is that the NES was mostly a short-lived success due to the bitterness of 3rd parties towards Nintendo, which bit Nintendo in the ass come the N64 generation and even affected them in the SNES generation.

Nevertheless, the statement Nintendo is only very succesfull in the handheldmarket. doesn't hold up in the face of the NES and the SNES, despite the bitterness it caused 3rd parties.

Thx. Thats my point. I'm glad with some validation.

And very succesfull in the sense that they have done it every generation. You now, being succesfull.

You mean except for the Virtual Boy, right?



The rEVOLution is not being televised

happydolphin on 26 June 2013
Viper1 said:

You mean except for the Virtual Boy, right?

Don't be silly, the Virtual Boy was never considered a handheld console.

His point is valid, he's saying that Nintendo has enjoyed a long-lasting success in the handheld space. Not so much on the home console front. 

Having said that, I do agree with you that his original post was mostly invalid:

pauluzzzz1981 said:
I think it will sell more than the gamecube. But not much more. Maybe 30-40 million range. Nintendo's only grand succes on the console market was the wii. All the other consoles sold well, but no ''wow what happened there'' degree. So this slow start is painful but in no way a surprise. We have to let go the expectation that consoles can sell 100 million copies. It was in my mind too. Nintendo is only very succesfull in the handheldmarket. Of course softwarewise also. So, yes it will sell more.


pauluzzzz1981 on 26 June 2013
Viper1 said:
pauluzzzz1981 said:
happydolphin said:

Problem is, he makes more sense and justifies his qualification of the NES as a success quite well.

But I still see some validity to your point. The easiest way to go about it is that the NES was mostly a short-lived success due to the bitterness of 3rd parties towards Nintendo, which bit Nintendo in the ass come the N64 generation and even affected them in the SNES generation.

Nevertheless, the statement Nintendo is only very succesfull in the handheldmarket. doesn't hold up in the face of the NES and the SNES, despite the bitterness it caused 3rd parties.

Thx. Thats my point. I'm glad with some validation.

And very succesfull in the sense that they have done it every generation. You now, being succesfull.

You mean except for the Virtual Boy, right?


LOL, the virtual boy. Those were the days. Did you ever play that thing? Wow, what an experience that was.



Around the Network
pauluzzzz1981 on 26 June 2013
happydolphin said:
Viper1 said:

You mean except for the Virtual Boy, right?

Don't be silly, the Virtual Boy was never considered a handheld console.

His point is valid, he's saying that Nintendo has enjoyed a long-lasting success in the handheld space. Not so much on the home console front. 

Having said that, I do agree with you that his original post was mostly invalid:

pauluzzzz1981 said:
I think it will sell more than the gamecube. But not much more. Maybe 30-40 million range. Nintendo's only grand succes on the console market was the wii. All the other consoles sold well, but no ''wow what happened there'' degree. So this slow start is painful but in no way a surprise. We have to let go the expectation that consoles can sell 100 million copies. It was in my mind too. Nintendo is only very succesfull in the handheldmarket. Of course softwarewise also. So, yes it will sell more.


Mostly invalid? Ouch. Haha. Nice discussion. Thx guys.



Arius Dion on 26 June 2013
happydolphin said:
Arius Dion said:

If I were a business man, coming off the success in the home console market with the Wii, I would not in turn then emulate my most failed console ever. I would not confuse or try to fuse handheld and home console markets. I would keep them seperate. So I'd have to disagree with your summation on that. 

Yes, games are what sell consoles..But the question then become what games? Gamecube+ games will not. As they did not in the past.

We will just have to agree to disagree on this one Happy. 

@Bold is where you are deeply mistaken. The U takes almost no cues from the cube, but largely emulates the 3DS in terms of software.

In terms of hardware, you can't possibly be equating the U to the cube, so I'll just ignore that. Having said that, instead of mimicking the Wii, which sold 90m units, Nintendo opted to mimic the DS (in terms of hardware), which yielded 150m units sold.

Tell me how that's a losing strategy.


LoL @ Pic. But as I've said, having a home console mimmick a handheld has shown to be as disatrous as a handheld trying to mimmick a home console (Vita) lol. If said strategy was so wise Wii U wouldn't be struggling as it is.



Bet between Slimbeast and Arius Dion about Wii sales 2009:


If the Wii sells less than 20 million in 2009 (as defined by VGC sales between week ending 3d Jan 2009 to week ending 4th Jan 2010) Slimebeast wins and get to control Arius Dion's sig for 1 month.

If the Wii sells more than 20 million in 2009 (as defined above) Arius Dion wins and gets to control Slimebeast's sig for 1 month.

happydolphin on 26 June 2013
pauluzzzz1981 said:
happydolphin said:
Viper1 said:

You mean except for the Virtual Boy, right?

Don't be silly, the Virtual Boy was never considered a handheld console.

His point is valid, he's saying that Nintendo has enjoyed a long-lasting success in the handheld space. Not so much on the home console front. 

Having said that, I do agree with you that his original post was mostly invalid:

pauluzzzz1981 said:
I think it will sell more than the gamecube. But not much more. Maybe 30-40 million range. Nintendo's only grand succes on the console market was the wii. All the other consoles sold well, but no ''wow what happened there'' degree. So this slow start is painful but in no way a surprise. We have to let go the expectation that consoles can sell 100 million copies. It was in my mind too. Nintendo is only very succesfull in the handheldmarket. Of course softwarewise also. So, yes it will sell more.


Mostly invalid? Ouch. Haha. Nice discussion. Thx guys.

Sorry, I tend to be harsh. The invalid part was

"Nintendo's only grand succes on the console market was the wii. All the other consoles sold well, but no 'wow what happened there' "

Take care.



happydolphin on 26 June 2013
Arius Dion said:

LoL @ Pic. But as I've said, having a home console mimmick a handheld has shown to be as disatrous as a handheld trying to mimmick a console (Vita) lol. If said strategy was so wise Wii U wouldn't be struggling as it is.

Causality. It's important.

The U is most likely not failing because it is following in the footsteps of its handheld bretheren. Rather, the U is most likely failing because it neither has the price nor the games, much like the 3DS at some point. Nothing that can't be fixed.

The Vita is disastrous because the market of the console that the Vita mimicked (the PS3) had no interest in handheld experience. The same can't be said about Nintendo, which has in the past shared much in common between the Gameboy and the NES, as well as between the SNES and the GBA.



Egann on 26 June 2013
happydolphin said:

The problem with that historical constant is that in two very important cases, the weakest system wasn't the cheapest (PSOne and PS2). Also, the PS2 demolished the Dreamcast, which violates the "weaker system sells" principle.

It seems that being the weakest system, even being the cheapest system is not what always makes you win (see the dreamcast). It's always a combination of games (sorry cube), price (sorry cube) and marketting (sorry dreamcast).

So if the U gets the 3DS type of games library and marketing, all it will need is the price that goes with the winning combination.

The PSOne and PS2 really were exceptional to sell at the prices they were sold at.


I said middle or low for a reason. The best conclusion I can come to is that the market "ideal" console is usually in the middle of the bell curve, but that marketing and the specifics of the generation can tweak the victor's specific placement. In the Playstation's case, Sony bet three times in a row on optical media technology and won the first two. Blu-Ray turned out to be kind of irrelevant against streaming media.

It's not like cost is the only factor behind power, either. Reputation is key, too. One of the key reasons developers are opting for the 3DS over the Vita is that Vita gamers expect high production values because it's the power system. Even though the 3DS is a rather powerful system, it has the low power reputation, so developers can take short-cuts.