Just as long as the GCN controller still becomes a thing. Whether it's the launch controller or an accessory to the 'Cube-mote', a world without the GCN controller isn't a universe I'd wanna be part of.

Can this alternate universe also have the prototype GCN controller end up the final model? I always thought it looked better. Button color could be the same as the actual launch controller, either color scheme works.

The Wii wouldn't just get "more third party support" it would basically get all of the PS2's third party support (same way the XBox 360 did vs the PS3) as well. 

High Wii sales with better than PS2 hardware would mean basically all developers would get told by the business suits that they have to make a port of any hit game on the Wii. MGS2, MGS3, Kingdom Hearts, GTA San Andreas, etc. etc.

The only studio that maybe Sony could exert pressure on would be Squaresoft, and even Squaresoft likely would've gone multiplat a gen earlier as soon as that Final Fantasy: Spirits Within movie flopped in 2001, leaving the company in a real bad financial spot. If the Wii was there and selling gangbusters, they likely jump ship to multiplat too.

Sony wouldn't sniff 150 mill, I don't even think they'd get far beyond 100 mill. Their 1st/2nd party in those days wasn't that strong, this is pre Uncharted, pre Last of Us, pre Spider-Man/Marvel deal. Gran Turismo was a big deal but the rest of their 1st/2nd party really wasn't. You're not getting to 150 riding on Jak & Daxster and SOCOM tier games. 

I actually wouldn't be that surprised if the Wii in this scenario just straight up outsells the PS2. Especially if they had Zelda: Twilight Princess and Mario Galaxy a gen earlier (those were really the successors to Zelda: OoT and Mario 64 that the public wanted). 

There's some things OP didn't tackle that might put a bit of a snag in those 3rd party points, like what is the 2001 Wii's physical media type? Same as the GCN or 2006 Wii? It's something to consider, but for the sake of ease, let's just say it's the 2006 Wii's, so there's no reason for 3rd parties to have any problem with it back then.

Also to consider, how much would SNY moneyhat games for PS2 with Wii as the competition instead of the GCN? It would've been more difficult for SNY, and they wouldn't have been able to lock down near as much, but we're all aware of how they operate when it comes to this. Even if I were to assume devs and pubs wouldn't make those deals with SNY or Nin (aside from a rare few maybe), PS2 still get's all those 3rd party games in that case. It's not like it's the opposite where only Wii has all the big 3rd party titles and PS2 doesn't.

I think you're underestimating or not understanding the point I made about not underestimating the momentum SNY had due to PS1.

PS1 put SNY on the map, and in a big way. PS2 being handled so well just cemented that brand recognition from launch and throughout 6th gen. There was already plenty of brand loyalty at that point, and SNY had turned up the hype meter to 11 back then for PS2. It was a train you could simply attempt to slow down, and you weren't going to overtake it, even with this alternate reality.

Another pretty big part of that momentum was also Back Compat. For the first time, gamers didn't need to just jump into an entire new gen and rely on the brands to have large libraries of next gen quality software lineups ready. SNY could in a way, just transfer gamers from 5th gen to 6th gen. This was a huge deal and a very smart strategic move by SNY. Not only that but new gamers to the PS ecosystem, could future proof themselves by getting a PS2 asap, but didn't have to wait for games, and didn't have to spend top dollar on the newest next gen games. Newcomers had a choice of thousands of PS1 games, which most of, were all dirt cheap by that point, new or used.

Nin's brand strength wouldn't have been as strong due to N64's continued downward sales trend, hurting 2001 Wii's potential, as well as lack of Back Compat. 2006 Wii had Back Compat, and was going up against a 3rd console cursed faltering SNY.

PS2 would not have hit 160M, and I agree, wouldn't have hit 150M either. This is where the total 6th gen sales come into play. If you think total sales stay the same, then that's one outlook, which would require me to rethink my numbers, but I strongly believe that a 2001 Wii would've increased sales substantially in this alternate timeline, leading to the numbers I ended up with.

PS2 - 140M

Wii - 80M

XB - 20M

I hear you. Love the Cube controller and not a fan of motion controls.

For this scenario, let's assume the 2001 Wii uses the same optical media as the 2006 Wii, as I'm pretty sure there was nothing about it that was technologically impossible a few years earlier.

Think you are massively underestimating the butterfly effect you're creating, this isn't even like changing a few little things, this would dramatically turn that whole generation on its ear. 

Sony just didn't have the 1st/2nd party studios to carry itself to those sales without a large disparity in 3rd party exclusives. Gran Turismo is popular sure, but Jak & Daxster and the like ain't getting you to 140 mill when the Wii has all the same games.

And the optical media would naturally have been DVD, the GameCube was DVD too, Nintendo just chose to make some dumb tweaks to it. 

The margins between success and failure are thinner I think than people realize, if you change  that many things, a generation is no longer nothing like the one. 

For the record too I think the N64 would've demolished the PS1 if Nintendo had compromised and allowed CDs (even if it meant the cartridge port staying, the Saturn had both after all). Mario 64 and Zelda: OoT and GoldenEye, but also likely Final Fantasy and Metal Gear Solid and all the Resident Evil games? Game over. 

GCN used mini DVD which was physically smaller and only held 1/3 the data vs a standard DVD. It would be worthy to take into consideration, other than that I just went with Wii's standard DVD size disc, which OP also seems to think was the right call.

SNY's first party wasn't super large or super strong back then, but it wasn't nothing either. MS had enough big 3rd party games and that really didn't do squat for them. Now XB was still brand new, and didn't have Nin's brand strength, but just because you can get 3rd party games doesn't guarantee massive success either, even if you're a go to brand. PS3 had plenty of 3rd party support and yet Wii still beat it in 7th gen. That's the difference between doing pretty much 'everything' right with PS2 and 'everything' wrong with PS3, which leads SNY to PS4.

I'm fully aware that many things would change. You're the one who seems to think overall total 6th gen sales would remain the same for some reason. That's why I have PS2 down 20M and Nin is up 60M. 2001 Wii no doubt sells way more than GCN did with motion controls, and brings in many more consumers into the console gaming market. Yet still having GCN level hardware, I don't see 2001 Wii reaching its 101M. If it was full 2006 Wii hardware, just in 2001, then maybe it hits 101M, just like it actually did in gen 7.

I'd say if N64 had optical media, whether that meant both cartridge and optical, or just optical, I could see N64 gaining way more sales and PS1 losing sales. To the point where it would've been a much closer gen.

I'd also say, based on the 2001 Wii timeline, that Wii U still launches, around 2006/2007, and hilariously does better because of how terrible things go with PS3. SNY may have even pushed for motion controls in this scenario because of how well 2001 Wii does, just making their problems even worse than they already were with PS3. I'd say one way or another, Wii U sells 2X-3X as many units in this timeline during 7th gen.

The question then would become, what does Nin do between Wii U 2006/2007 and SW1 2017?

I'm unconvinced PS2 would surpass Wii in sales in this scenario.
Why? The content, feature, brand, appeal, competitive, and longevity advantages the PS2 enjoyed would all be gone.

Starting with competitive and longevity. Part of the reason PS2 did as well as it did was the extraordinarily long runway it had more or less competition free, it could soar a lot higher and further than its contemporaries; the NES also kept selling highly after the beginning of the next generation, selling higher than any console until the PSX and GBC/Pokemon era of Gameboy. The Gamecube and Xbox were just imitation brands of PS2 and weren't real competition. The PS2 was the genuine article, that's what most people are going to be looking at. Without that obstacle free runway where the PS2 is entrenching itself as the console to get, it's hard to justify the PS2 as taking off even close to what it achieved. So already, we have a much lower number of potential purchases because the length of time it will be selling for will be reduced by years.

Feature and brand advantage: The PS2 also had some novel features inside it, notably DVD playback. But the Wii would have trounced it. On top of that, the PS2 lacked the compelling features of the Xbox 360 and PS3, which was the extreme processing power, meaning that consideration in the Wii vs 360 vs PS3 generation would have been erased, giving the Wii a larger advantage in the PS2 generation than it had during the actual Wii generation. There were also digital features, such as digital distribution of software, communications, online play, the channels which had both information and interactive centers → having access to features like "Nintendo Week" would have been a big deal for marketing. The Wii was also a major hub for video-playback, mainly Netflix, which wasn't around at the time of its launch. Should there be an alternative to that, the Wii would make PS2's most novel feature obsolescent. And this is on top of the motion controls, which, at the time were the advantage arcades had over home consoles, at least, not for a decent price (extra peripherals required) or with great support - often, only a few games took advantage of motion and pointer/light gun features, but the Wii had that built into its base hardware with most new games and its OS taking advantage. Communication support (WiiConnect24) would have included the Miis, which were an even more appealing thing at the time with games like The Sims using such features to help it become a top game. And while Sony was entering its second generation, and the N64 & Gamecube generation weren't particularly popular, there was still a strong nostalgia bias toward NES and SNES, which would allow Nintendo to heavily leverage in ways they failed to on the Gamecube.

Content was more than just a wider brick and mortar retail library than Gamecube. It also had digital access to Nintendo, Sega, and NEC's catalogues, along with original digital games on WiiWare. These were generally a lot cheaper than retail games. Price of software was a major advantage PSX had over N64; so, rather than merely attempting to equalize it with the Gamecube (equal prices, but without even close to the volume of software), the Wii would have flipped the table on that. There is also the strong possibility that Nintendo wouldn't have necessarily lost Rare for such a cheap price, or had DMA rebel if they knew the Wii was on the horizon... possibly, this is up for debate. But can you imagine if Nintendo strengthened ties with DMA and got GTA3, GTA:VC, and GTA:SA exclusive? That's a whole other debate. I don't think Wii would exist with Yamauchi at the helm, and without Yamauchi at the helm, DMA would still be with Nintendo... in fact, get him out early enough, and Iwata in, and Square, Enix, Capcom, Konami, and others would have likely stuck around as well. That's a substantial advantage for Nintendo over Sony if all things fire correctly here, and still an advantage over Sony if they didn't.

And the appeal advantage, which really hammered Nintendo at the time of PS2 vs Gamecube. This decline in appeal began when Nintendo decided to use green blood in games, and while N64 was able to shake a lot of that off, the Gamecube buried them... The cube was seen as a children's console, given its purple colour, lunchbox form, and 80s Fisher-Price looking controller, and the flagship content (Mario with a squirt gun and Celda). Replace that with the Wii, which had a sleek and modern look that appealed to a much wider audience... ironically, despite not being explicitly aimed at children, the Wii did significantly better in that demographic than the cube did.

Overall, there are a lot of ways that Wii would trounce the PS2 should they have gone up side to side because the Wii would have likely been the dominant trendsetter for that era instead of the PS2. It might not have been as the PS2 was in the real timeline, but that lack of dominance would hurt the PS2 tremendously, more than just 20-30M. Even Nintendo fans often fail to recognize just how many more advantages the Wii had over the PS2 generation, and how profound an impact on gaming history the Wii would have had it released years earlier than it did.

If the Wii released in 2001 it would have been at least on par in price with PS2, not $100 cheaper.
You would still need a separate controller for those 3rd party games adding cost to the Wii. (But yeah maybe $249/$299 with dual analog controller)

It would not have BC with N64, just like the GC, while PS2 played all PS1 games. Sony had all the momentum coming off the PS1 (101 million vs 32 million N64)

3rd party publishers weren't happy with Nintendo coming off the N64, it would take time for the Wii to gain momentum and get that 3rd party support, still hampering initial sales while PS2 would still get an early lead and start with a big momentum, especially if PS2 still launched a year earlier than a 2001 Wii.



Wii would still face an uphill battle in 2001, while in 2006 the PS3 was deeply unpopular and double the price of the Wii for the 'cheap' model.

N64 hurt GC as much as the kiddie stigma, the Wii in 2001 would have faced the same issues. Wii in 2006 had full BC with GC adding momentum from the start just like Switch benefited from WiiU's library out of the gates.


For the Wii to be a runaway success in 2001, the N64 era would have had to be very different as well.

PS2 launch line-up was pretty strong
https://www.ign.com/articles/2000/10/28/the-ps2-launch-titles

GC was
https://gamerant.com/gamecube-launch-title-retrospective-luigis-mansion-super-monkey-ball/

So yeah, Twilight Princess would have to have been ready for 2001 as well as well as many other launch titles.


The Wii's success is very much a product of its time. Bigger TVs making the Wii pointer more manageable and more fun to play from further away, gamers more matured and more ready to play video games with their parents and grand parents, and of course the price difference with arrogant Sony focusing on Blu-Ray rather than games at the time.

The Wii in 2001 would definitely have done better than the GC, but PS2 would still be far ahead.

Things not highly detailed in the OP like, exact launch date, first party and third party launch titles, general first and third party titles throughout the gen, hardware design (aesthetics), launch hardware (bundles), media type, accessories, etc, etc, etc, all and many more could make a tiny if not massive difference in the outcome of this alternate history. * What hardware, software, marketing, exclusive deals, etc, from the original history stays, becomes less relevant, or doesn't exist, and/or what replaces it, certainly matters in terms of trying to pin down a likely outcome.

Without a much more detailed breakdown of the details, this leaves the door open to many interpretations of what may have played out. Which in a way, is interesting in of itself, but makes it far more difficult to come to any sort of consensus as to how things would've likely played out. I'm not sure if it's better to be more specific about these alternate histories or not, or just leave it more open and kind of a free for all, because it's unlikely that everyone is going to automatically agree with the OP's decisions on the details, whatever those may be, to begin with.

Personally I don't know which I prefer. More details with a goal of coming to consensus, or seeing everyone's differing views on what would make the most sense for those alternate details to be. I do know I'd miss seeing what other's would expect makes more sense in terms of the initial details, if the OP had everything strictly detailed and fully fleshed out.