As much I do believe those were by far the most popular games and genres during NES/SNES era, still hard to believe the lack of those games were the reason for N64/GC downfall. PS1 top sellers were not 2D platforms, so while there was a huge demand for that genre the size of console market showed market was ready to accept alternative games, games Nintendo 64 didn't get because Nintendo falsely believe their 1st party was all that matters

The point that I need to point out it NES/SNES players didn't skipped 64 and Game Cube and dropped gaming waiting for the day when they would play 2D Mario and Donkey Kong again. They skipped Nintendo and bought another console instead (Sony, mostly)

Now I need to empathize while 3rd party is really important (and the reason for N64 and GC failure, as Sony just made a much better job with 3rd parties so no point buying a Nitendo), but I also don't think 3rd party support is the reason behind a console success

Nintendo success from DS-sucess onward comes from hardware-software integrate experience alternative to the old and formulaic experience Sony and Microsoft was oferring, hence 8 out of 10 of best of Wii best sellers were all games know for the use of motion controls. Wii U hardware-software experience wasn't as good, with abysmal 3rd party supprt and first party wasn't the best either, so sales dropped like rocks. It was pretty much a worse a Game Cube, as Game Cude at least got some 3rd party support

Microsoft tried the same hardware-software experience strategy with kinect and shipped over 35 million copies of it in short time, but without quality games using the technology it just become useless pretty fast. Why does it matter? Well, because even if Xbox was born to bring PC games to home consoles they were still able to put their fingers in other market segment. As long the company is efficient and release quality products (and of course, know how to market it) people will pay for it

In this sense, it's not like customers expect a specific kind of games from Nintendo, it's just Nintendo constantly failed (and now they aren't even trying anymore) to build a good enough 3rd party support and to release more PC/cinematic games like Sony or Microsoft (or even PCs), so customers who wants this kind of games goes from those platforms. Meanwhile Nintendo is much stronger doing everything else. Among top 10 of Switch you will find a life simulator, a racing game, a multiplayer shooter, a party game, an RPG, an open world adventure game, a 2D platform, a 3D platforming, a fighting game. It's just too diverse comparing to PS4 (9 action adventures) or even XBONE (6 shooters)

So in all, it's not like "3rd party don't matter for Nintendo" as you make sound the real truth is 3rd party matters to anyone, but as Nintendo lose this market for Sony and MS they found another way to become a bigger market player.

Haven't read the thread yet, but it comes down to timing and software. Nintendo was 18 months behind the PS2 in Japan, 13 months behind in North America, and 18 months behind in Europe. Unless you are doing something very different, or the first out of the gate stumbles badly, that is just way too far behind. If they could have released within a couple of months, I think they sell a lot more units and get much better software support from 3rd parties. In terms of software, there was no big launch title. I like Luigi's Mansion, but that is just not a killer app. Melee was great, and came out pretty quick. Sunshine was a pretty non-traditional follow up to 64 with FLUDD. Wind Waker was a pretty non-traditional follow up with the ocean. Plus that game missed the 2nd Christmas in North America and Europe. Mario Kart came out 2 years after launch. Nintendo needs to come with the heavy hitters early and often.

As far as graphics go, it's true, Gamecube was superior to the PS2, and you couldn't do games like Roque Squadron II on the PS2 without significant downgrades.

But PS3/360 were far superior graphically to the Wii, yet they were beaten in sales by it. Likewise, systems like the Gameboy, DS, and 3DS all outsold more powerful competitors.

To the average consumer, games matter more than graphics, and in the 6th gen PS2 simply had more games that the average consumer wanted to play than Gamecube did.

I see this point and it actually makes sense (I'm myself a kid who learned about Mario and Zelda from 3D games) and I can understand the absence of SNES players on N64 userbase

But still 3rd party in all is important and gamers didn't "jump" 2 generations from SNES to Wii, they bought PS1 and then PS2 exactly because of their extensive 3rd party library

GC is my number 1. It didn't fail!

I think you and Rol are both partly right.  Third party games were definitely important on the SNES, but not quite as important on the NES.  This is because Nintendo's resources on the SNES were split between it and the Gameboy.  The NES had a lot more first party games than the SNES did.  Nintendo first party games were still the most important ones on the SNES, but third party games picked up a lot of the slack.  When those third party games later went to the PS1 that was a heavy blow to Nintendo.  They also significantly changed the gameplay on their biggest franchises Mario and Zelda, and they didn't have anything like a DKC or 2D Metroid game either.  That made a nasty 1-2 punch.  Nintendo first party changed and third party games left.

Switch is more like the NES though in that all of Nintendo's resources are back on one system.  Third party companies are choosing to support it simply because it is too successful to be ignored.  For the first 3 years most third party games have been either indies or ports.  Now Switch has big exclusive third party games like Monster Hunter Rise coming.  Nintendo first party did the heavy lifting for the first several years, but now more third party games are coming on board too simply because of Switch's success.

It's also due to the market being more limited with fewer studios and development being more restricted (remember in America NES was released after console gaming crash), fewer quality titles came out from 3rd party during NES/Master System era

Nobody knew what the fuck a "third party game" was in the NES era, lol. That wasn't a thing. All games were just "Nintendo games" and even all video games were just called "Nintendo" even if you were playing a Tiger handheld or something.

But if you're saying the NES wasn't heavily fuelled by 3rd party content, you're crazy, Ninja Turtles, Megaman 2, Contra, Castlevania, Tecmo Bowl, Ninja Gaiden, Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest, Metal Gear, all being exclusive was a huge, huge reason the NES routed the Sega Master System. It was like the VHS versus Beta debate ... VHS had way more selection, the NES was VHS, Sega was Beta. The modern idea of "Nintendo games" really doesn't come into view until the N64 really when Nintendo lost most of their developer support and the idea of a "Nintendo console" became mainly just Nintendo games.

Nintendo themselves didn't even release that many NES games, from 1988, 1989, 1990, and 1991, they published 13 NES titles, that's 13 games over 48 months, that's actually very low, even the Wii U had a steadier release of Nintendo games than that. It didn't matter because the NES had not only all the 3rd party support, but all of it basically exclusive.

Back to the GameCube, another HUGE blow to the system Nintendo losing the GoldenEye/FPS console of choice banner they held in the N64/PSOne era. The N64 was massively popular on college campuses and dorms and a lot of that stemmed from GoldenEye being really the forefather of Call of Duty. I knew many PSOne owners that still felt they had to have an N64 too and a lot of people would say "I like Playstation better, but I gotta have GoldenEye".

Losing 007 + Rare + MS getting Halo and stealing that FPS console crown hurt the GameCube badly. GoldenEye I think really sold as many N64s as Mario 64 did in North America and Europe. It would be in the top 10 TRST (the NPD back in the day) best selling games month after month after month after month.

In hindsight not locking up the 007/Bond license when it was dirt cheap and telling Rare they're working on a Bond sequel was a mistake. You don't let designers just do whatever the fuck they feel like, this isn't after school computer club, this is a business. I knew many, many people that owned both the N64 + Playstation, but PS2 + GameCube ownership was really, really rare. No GoldenEye tier title really had a lot to do with that. Smash Melee was alright but it was more something for "Nintendo hardcore" types, GoldenEye had far broader appeal.

The N64 had some of the greatest 3-D experiences ever made, they were even more mind blowing at the time of their release. This is the reason why it sold as well as it did despite its total lack of 3rd party support, and the absence of some of the most popular genres of the time such as JRPGs, and Fighting games.

Nintendo dug the N64's grave when they decided to go cartridge instead of CD, and drove away its third party support. The system however had some of the most revolutionary games ever made, and to deny this, is to deny facts.

I think it mainly failed because they tried to compete directly but still made it too difficult on 3rd parties. Had they supported the dual analog standard and met the standard for storage space on the disk I believe they would had faired much better.