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

Forums - Nintendo - The Failure Of The GameCube Really Is Where It All Went Wrong

NightDragon83 on 30 September 2016
Soundwave said:
NightDragon83 said:

GC's release date wasn't an issue at all... Nintendo had plenty of software to release for the N64 in 2000 and wasn't going to try to rush the console out the door just to match the PS2's NA launch in fall 2000.  As mentioned previously, the biggest obstacles the GC faced were it's "kiddy" image thanks to the purple lunchbox design, and Nintendo's failure to appeal to the older / mass audiences with things like DVD playback functionality and groudbreaking mature games like GTAIII which singlehandedly won the generation for Sony.

Also, the marketing for the GC's entire life cycle was abysmal.  You hardly saw any TV commercials for GC or its games compared to the bombardment of PS2 ads, even the Xbox had plenty of advertising as Halo was everywhere and Halo 2 was a mega event.  The GC had a very good software library overall, but it sorely lacked that killer app like a Halo or GTA that moved tons of consoles and reached huge audiences.
XBOX would've pretty much been dead in the water launching a full year behind both PS2 and GCN. They should've just turned the cheaper N64 into a kids Pokémon machine in 2000 and switched projects like Perfect Dark and Majoras Mask to GCN launch games IMO. Those were wasted on the N64, PD basically couldn't even run without the expansion pack. They had that Pikachu N64 anyway. Banjo, Mackey Speedway, Pokémon spin offs for N64, Perfect Dark, Conker, Sin & Punishment, Zelda MM for GameCube launch. No purple, no orange, silver or black GCN only at first. Full sized DVD with the option to add DVD playback via a remote control accessorie. November 2000 launch. Bye bye Xbox, hello second place at least.

I don't follow the logic here... the Xbox still would have had roughly the same amout of success if the GC had launched a year earlier, because the GC had little to no effect on Xbox sales in the first place.  Halo and Xbox Live are what moved OG Xbox consoles, and both of these would still happen regardless of when the GC launched.  Xbox appealed to an entirely different segment of the gaming market than the GC did, so you can't blame Xbox for the GC's poor sales.  If the Xbox never existed, I'd wager most Xbox owners would've purchased a PS2 instead of a GC anyway, so it's not like the GC would've gained ground on the PS2.

Sure, GC probably would have sold more in total had it been released a year earlier, but no way would all those N64 games be ready for a 2000 launch or early 2001 release.  Plus, it still would've been close to a year before the GC started seeing "real" next-gen quality titles like Rogue Squadron II, Pikmin and SSB Melee, so you'd basically have nothing but N64 ports with slightly better graphics for the first year of the GC's life (think Dreamcast-quality graphics for 3rd party titles that also saw cross-gen releases on PS1/N64).

It took Rare nearly 2 years for example to take an original N64 game like Dinosaur Planet and rework it into Starfox Adventures for the GC, so games like MM, PD, Conker, and Banjo Tooie would've never been ready for a 2000 launch on GC.  Same thing with Eternal Darkness, also originally an N64 title scheduled for release sometime in 2000 but saw numerous delays before finally being redeveloped for the GC and launching in mid 2002.



On 2/24/13, MB1025 said:
You know I was always wondering why no one ever used the dollar sign for $ony, but then I realized they have no money so it would be pointless.

Around the Network
Azzanation on 30 September 2016
vivster said:
bigtakilla said:

But the obvious thing here is that Nintendo have release to very high critical acclaim even without being on the best console specs available. 

 

I mean, do you honestly believe other game developers would just close down shop if all consoles released were only just as powerful as Wii U? Hint: they wouldn't. If so then I'd say they are failures as game companies if flash is all they have to offer, and sone amazing 3rd party 3ds games prove my point. Power isn't the end all be all, It's just an excuse to allow companies to release hardware twice a gen and pressure the "power is king" minded to fork over the cash. 

No, power is the reason why they can deliver all kinds of experiences and not just cater to a specific kind of fan. Power does not make games worse, it just gives developers more freedom. What they do with their freedom is their choice.

Believe it or not but even Nintendo developers would welcome it if they had more freedom to develop their games instead of being so restricted on extremely closed platforms.

They do not produce great games because of how restricted the platform is but in spite. Now imagine what they could produce if they're freed from the shackles.

Power doesnt always lead to better products. If you give too much freedom to developers they can lose focus on what makes games good. Imagination can be lost in exchange of power. Look at Mario Galaxies on the Wii, it didnt need the Wii Mote to play, but the game was probably created due to the idea of motion thanks to the new innovations which breeds newer ideas. Zelda OOT on the N64 was created due to the Analog sticks, if Nintendo just created a more powerful SNES than Mario 64 and Zelda OOT etc would have not been created. I am not saying lets all have underpowerered systems. My point is that what Nintendo does is amazing and there 1st party games still outsell PS4s and XB1s best 1st party lineup. Nintendo are proof that you dont need over expensive machines and power to creat amazing games. I am looking forward to the NX because i cant wait to see what is there next big idea, i couldnt care less how powerful it is because i know Nintendo games deliever.



NoirSon on 30 September 2016

The failure of the GC set Nintendo back, that is obvious, because of its initial color, design and software medium choice it opened the door for Microsoft and Sony to solidify themselves larger fanbases in the console market then they would have had, if the GC was better received.

That being said, it isn't where Nintendo started to go wrong and the current issues the Wii U had are more on Nintendo making bad choices at that moment, as while the Wii started to fall off toward the end, it still was a decent brand before the Wii U and its abysmal launch and later failure to capitalize on recapturing the initial Wii audience or growing beyond what they had with hardcore Nintendo faithful. That is all on Nintendo not being able to read the industry outside of (and to a large degree within) Japan.



Jumpin on 01 October 2016

The main issue with the GameCube is that it just wasn't an attractive platform. No one wanted one. When people were saying the Wii U was going to be the GameCube 2, they were right. The Wii U isn't attractive ether.

The N64 is where Nintendo started to go wrong, the cartridges and flimsy controller. The GameCube was just worse, it had nothing special going for it, and it had no special games like Goldeneye, Mario 64, or Ocarina of Time.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Soundwave on 03 October 2016
Jumpin said:
The main issue with the GameCube is that it just wasn't an attractive platform. No one wanted one. When people were saying the Wii U was going to be the GameCube 2, they were right. The Wii U isn't attractive ether.

The N64 is where Nintendo started to go wrong, the cartridges and flimsy controller. The GameCube was just worse, it had nothing special going for it, and it had no special games like Goldeneye, Mario 64, or Ocarina of Time.

Yeah, no GoldenEye type killer app was a giant problem. 

Zelda: Twilight Princess and Resident Evil 4 would come, but way too late in the console cycle (2005 and 2006 respectively) and even then they did not have the multiplayer appeal of GoldenEye. 

By then it was too late.