Gamecube: Failure or Not?

[feilong801]

More good points Steerforth. This is turning into a much better thread than I thought.

 

It's fun to speculate about what Nintendo was thinking in the mid-90's. What a weird era for the company. I think they do a better job of revealing their intentions than they did in the post-SNES era.

 

Curiously, the guy (from what limited understanding I have about the inner workings on the company) who was sort of given the blame for the failure of the Virtual Boy, Gunpei Yokoi, had the right idea. Don't try to have the most powerful system. Have the most innovative instead.

 

Basically, Nintendo has tried to find great uses for stock, off the shelf parts, whereas Microsoft and Sony tend to create their own propietary systems with cutting edge power.

 

Where Nintendo went wrong with the N64 was that they mistakenly thought carts were that example of "cheap adbundant technology." They were in 1990. But by the time of the N64, CD manufacturing was in full swing and of course we know it is cheaper and has more storage. So you had a fairly expensive system with games that cost 70 bucks.

 

The Cube continued this weird trend with the propietary mini DVDs (or whatever they are). They only really got it right with the Wii, and hence they are having success.

 

Getting back to the topic at hand, I think at least the 'Cube might have established the Nintendo name as the "choice" for families, which has helped them with their current ambitions.

 

-Rob

[Atarifever1]

[QUOTE=Steerforth]

      I think one thing the N64 "beats" GC on is for origional games. There is no question that Nintendo layed the groundwork for many 3-d games with Mario 64 and Zelda OoT. Goldeneye by Rare is also a benchmark game. Don't you feel, in retrospect, that Nintendo did not live up to their own innovative standards in the GC era, but focused more on fine tuning already established game mechanics with more impressive visuals? 

       Pikmin is an exception, similar to some games but really creative and different. Windwaker is a beautiful game, it really took guts to go the graphic style they took, but essentialy it owns all that it is to Orcarina of Time. Mario Sunshine is a fine game, but the waterpack took away more than it added, and people wanted more of M64 and didn't quite get it. My point is, there were great games for both systems, but N64 had far more "legacy" games.

      I'm not saying you have to bury everything that has worked for you in the past, but Nintendo has always been on the cutting edge of gaming. When you look at all the obstacles N64 had against it,  in terms of how much more expensive their format was, and not having the advantage of CG movies, especially for advertising, it is AMAZING it did as well as it did. And the only reason it did was because of its great, groundbreaking games that could not be ignored.

[/QUOTE]
Well, you do have a point that the N64 was more innovative/original, but that also happened to be during a complete switch in gaming and the way we play games.  The age range was changing and we were moving into three dimensions.  To fault the Gamecube because it is not as radical a departure from the generation before as the N64 was, is like faulting the SNES for not being a radical departure from the NES. 

Also, with regards to risky or original titles, as you pointed out, Nintendo was pretty risky with Windwaker, making one of the most beautiful (if slow) games I have ever played.   They also have the Konga games (some of my favorite games this generation).  They also made Odama, which sadly didn't work, but which can't be regarded as unoriginal.  Also, like you said, Pikmin was a highly original title.  Regarding moving established franchises to 3D, the Metroid series was moved, quite successfully, to 3D this generation.  As well, the stuff Nintendo published this generation was very innovative, like Geist, Chibi Robo, and Battalion Wars.  Also, as much of a failure as connectivity was this generation, you can't say it wasn't at least an attempt at innovation.  Anyone who has played Pacman Vs. can tell you the potential it could have had had Nintendo found a more robust and simple way of doing it.  The fact that Sony is doing something similar with the PSP and PS3, and that Nintendo is doing it with the DS and Wii, proves that it will likely not be an innovation that doesn't catch on. 
I think, given the market the Gamecube entered compared to the one the N64 entered, that Nintendo took as many risks as there were to take.

[Superjay]

[QUOTE=Atarifever][QUOTE=Michael D]

Kind of a failure.

 

It certainly goes without saying that Gamecube suffered the same issues as N64, and some cases, they were even worse.  Lack of third party support (barely better than N64), not enough adult oriented games (and the ones that came out didn't sell well) lack of RPGs (and again, the ones that came out sold badly), a limited amount of disc storage space (which resulted in many games having to come out on 2-discs), and inferior ports (like the Splinter Cells), to name a few.

 

 

[/QUOTE]
There is nothing they did worse with the Cube than the N64.  Nothing.  And there are many things they did better.  Most notably, it is far, far, far, from "barely better"  than the  64 with regards to third party support.  Where are the N64's responses to Viewtiful Joe 1 and 2, Resident Evil 4, 4 Splinter Cells', 3 Prince of Persias, a couple Need for Speeds, Spinx and the Cursed Mummy, Soul Calibur 2, Sonic Adventure, Crazy Taxi, Crystal Chronicals, Skies of Arcadia, 2 Baiten Kaitos games, 2 Rogue Squadren games, etc.  The Cube walks all over the N64 with regards to third party support.  It's the opposite of "barely better"; it's vastly superior.  If the N64 had goten the third party support the Cube did, the Cube would have easily sold twice as many units.  The N64 can be blamed for the poor sales of the Cube right up until 2005.  Maybe if they'd had a decent library the generation before, someone would have chanced buying a Nintendo console this generation. 
[/QUOTE]

I agree with most of what your saying but I think the N64 is better than the cube because it has 4 of my favorite games of all time on it while none are for the cube. The four that are my favorite are Mario 64 (best platformer ever), WWF No Mercy(best wrestling game ever), Zelda Ocarina of time(Best Zelda game ever for me), and Goldeneye(best multiplayer spltscreen not ever second best to Halo).

[Steerforth]

About cartridges - Is there a huge difference between making a GBA or DS game now than there was for the N64 back then? I assume that it is much cheaper to make carts for the DS than the N64, but I have no idea why that would be.I know the DS is not as powerful as the N64, and maybe that makes a difference on what you have to put in the carts, and the cost? Just curious. 

[Atarifever1]

[QUOTE=Superjay]
I agree with most of what your saying but I think the N64 is better than the cube because it has 4 of my favorite games of all time on it while none are for the cube. The four that are my favorite are Mario 64 (best platformer ever), WWF No Mercy(best wrestling game ever), Zelda Ocarina of time(Best Zelda game ever for me), and Goldeneye(best multiplayer spltscreen not ever second best to Halo).
[/QUOTE]

Well, that could be the difference maker there.  See many of my favorite games are on the Cube.  Also, OoT and Majora's Mask are on the Cube, along with the original, Zelda 2, Four Swords, Windwaker, and Twilight Princess.  Add on the Gameboy player and every Zelda title ever made is on the Cube.  OoT and Majora's Mask alone have a hard time competing with that, superior controls on the N64 or not.

I won't disagree on No Mercy at all.  Wrestling games were the only games I played at all last generation, and were it not for them I would never have even bothered renting a system.  Still, difficult CPU oppoents or not, Day of Reckoning 1 and 2 are some solid Cube Wrestling games.

I think there are far more quality titles on the Cube than on the N64 overall though.  As I've said before, in any one year up to 2005, I think there are probably more great 3rd party titles alone on the Cube than on the N64, first and third party, in total.  Throw in Nintendo made stuff, and it isn't even that close.

 

[JustLikeHeaven1]

To me the Gamecube was just as much of a failure as the xbox last gen.  Both systems were utterly destroyed by Sony and it wasn't even close.  If the xbox wasn't created by a company with such deep pockets there might not have even been a second system.

 

Yet Nintendo screwed itself in a few different ways.  First it had the mini-disc format...DVDs were the future and this was a crucial mistake.  The PS2 was able to play DVDs and this made it very appealing to alot of people...not just gamers.  Secondly the PS2 had pretty much 100% backwards compatibility with the PS1.  This made people say, "Wow, I can still play all my old games on this new system."  The final straw that broke the camel's back was the small library of games.  Sure the Cube had decent 3rd party support, but it wasn't exclusive 3rd party stuff.  Sony has always had the most exclusive content for their systems and it works.  I'm sorry but its quantity not quality that makes systems popular.  The more games for the system the better.  It doesn't matter how much crap you have to wade through...there will be more average to above average games that people will take risks on.  Plus there are more "diamonds in the rough" that gamers can find.

 

I also think that the gamecube controller could have had a normal button layout and still been fine.  The triggers were great, but the Z button was useless.  People complain about the C stick, but I never had a problem with it.

 

It may sound like I hate the Cube, but I really don't.  It was the first system I bought last gen and I really enjoyed (still play it to this day).  The 1st party stuff was incredible and in the end I bought over 30 games for the system.  Plus there is tons of games that I have yet to get, but am still in the process of collecting.  I need to acquire, Pikmin 2, Super Paper Mario, Metroid Prime 2, Super Mario Sunshine, Baten Kaitos 1 & 2, Killer 7, Mario Kart, Mario Tennis, Super Monkey Ball 2 and a few more. 

 

When I bought my Gamecube it cost $229.  If I paid $1 for every hour of gameplay that I got out of the sytem it would be well over $229.  So in that sense it was a success for me.  Do I regret purchasing this system.  No, not really.  I have wasted countless hours playing it and the time just keeps adding up.  Its also a fun system to collect for and I am really enjoying going back and getting all the titles I missed out on.

[Funkmaster V]

[QUOTE=JustLikeHeaven]

To me the Gamecube was just as much of a failure as the xbox last gen.  Both systems were utterly destroyed by Sony and it wasn't even close.  If the xbox wasn't created by a company with such deep pockets there might not have even been a second system.

 

Yet Nintendo screwed itself in a few different ways.  First it had the mini-disc format...DVDs were the future and this was a crucial mistake.  The PS2 was able to play DVDs and this made it very appealing to alot of people...not just gamers.  Secondly the PS2 had pretty much 100% backwards compatibility with the PS1.  This made people say, "Wow, I can still play all my old games on this new system."  The final straw that broke the camel's back was the small library of games.  Sure the Cube had decent 3rd party support, but it wasn't exclusive 3rd party stuff.  Sony has always had the most exclusive content for their systems and it works.  I'm sorry but its quantity not quality that makes systems popular.  The more games for the system the better.  It doesn't matter how much crap you have to wade through...there will be more average to above average games that people will take risks on.  Plus there are more "diamonds in the rough" that gamers can find.

 

I also think that the gamecube controller could have had a normal button layout and still been fine.  The triggers were great, but the Z button was useless.  People complain about the C stick, but I never had a problem with it.

 

It may sound like I hate the Cube, but I really don't.  It was the first system I bought last gen and I really enjoyed (still play it to this day).  The 1st party stuff was incredible and in the end I bought over 30 games for the system.  Plus there is tons of games that I have yet to get, but am still in the process of collecting.  I need to acquire, Pikmin 2, Super Paper Mario, Metroid Prime 2, Super Mario Sunshine, Baten Kaitos 1 & 2, Killer 7, Mario Kart, Mario Tennis, Super Monkey Ball 2 and a few more. 

 

When I bought my Gamecube it cost $229.  If I paid $1 for every hour of gameplay that I got out of the sytem it would be well over $229.  So in that sense it was a success for me.  Do I regret purchasing this system.  No, not really.  I have wasted countless hours playing it and the time just keeps adding up.  Its also a fun system to collect for and I am really enjoying going back and getting all the titles I missed out on.

[/QUOTE]

 

See, I think that means you don't think it was a failure. It's a good system. So was the Xbox. Of course, the PS2 was the most successful. Being third place doesn't mean you fail. They still got paid. They could have pulled a Turbographix/ Dreamcast/ Saturn and folded prematurily. Was it perfect? Hell no... not by a long shot. Was it disappointing? Yes it was. Did it fail? No... it did OK. In the end, I have a Cube and about 35 great games for it. That's all I have time for out of one system anyway.

 

Funk

[P]

[QUOTE=Atarifever][QUOTE=Steerforth]<p style="margin: 0px;">      I think one thing the N64 "beats" GC on is for origional games. There is no question that Nintendo layed the groundwork for many 3-d games with Mario 64 and Zelda OoT. Goldeneye by Rare is also a benchmark game. Don't you feel, in retrospect, that Nintendo did not live up to their own innovative standards in the GC era, but focused more on fine tuning already established game mechanics with more impressive visuals? </p> <p style="margin: 0px;">       Pikmin is an exception, similar to some games but really creative and different. Windwaker is a beautiful game, it really took guts to go the graphic style they took, but essentialy it owns all that it is to Orcarina of Time. Mario Sunshine is a fine game, but the waterpack took away more than it added, and people wanted more of M64 and didn't quite get it. My point is, there were great games for both systems, but N64 had far more "legacy" games.</p> <p style="margin: 0px;">      I'm not saying you have to bury everything that has worked for you in the past, but Nintendo has always been on the cutting edge of gaming. When you look at all the obstacles N64 had against it,  in terms of how much more expensive their format was, and not having the advantage of CG movies, especially for advertising, it is AMAZING it did as well as it did. And the only reason it did was because of its great, groundbreaking games that could not be ignored. </p> [/QUOTE]<br>Well, you do have a point that the N64 was more innovative/original, but that also happened to be during a complete switch in gaming and the way we play games.  The age range was changing and we were moving into three dimensions.  To fault the Gamecube because it is not as radical a departure from the generation before as the N64 was, is like faulting the SNES for not being a radical departure from the NES.  <br><br>Also, with regards to risky or original titles, as you pointed out, Nintendo was pretty risky with Windwaker, making one of the most beautiful (if slow) games I have ever played.   They also have the Konga games (some of my favorite games this generation).  They also made Odama, which sadly didn't work, but which can't be regarded as unoriginal.  Also, like you said, Pikmin was a highly original title.  Regarding moving established franchises to 3D, the Metroid series was moved, quite successfully, to 3D this generation.  As well, the stuff Nintendo published this generation was very innovative, like Geist, Chibi Robo, and Battalion Wars.  Also, as much of a failure as connectivity was this generation, you can't say it wasn't at least an attempt at innovation.  Anyone who has played Pacman Vs. can tell you the potential it could have had had Nintendo found a more robust and simple way of doing it.  The fact that Sony is doing something similar with the PSP and PS3, and that Nintendo is doing it with the DS and Wii, proves that it will likely not be an innovation that doesn't catch on.  <br>I think, given the market the Gamecube entered compared to the one the N64 entered, that Nintendo took as many risks as there were to take.<br>[/QUOTE]

[Paul Campbell]

[QUOTE=Atarifever]
Well, you do have a point that the N64 was more innovative/original, but that also happened to be during a complete switch in gaming and the way we play games.  The age range was changing and we were moving into three dimensions.  To fault the Gamecube because it is not as radical a departure from the generation before as the N64 was, is like faulting the SNES for not being a radical departure from the NES. 
[/QUOTE]

Very good point.  

I don't think it was a failure, but I don't think it was a success.  For me personally, it was a success because I was never left with nothing to do until a new game came out.  This may be because I don't have the time to beat games as fast as other people, or it may be because alot of GC games had high replay value.  Either way, I always had something to do.

I think the last generation was possibly the best ever.   I don't have time to list the reasons why right now, but besides the 16 bit era, I can't think of a better time in video games.

[Steerforth]

Atari Fever -

 

    I'll admit, I kinda forgot about conectivity. I had Pacman VS, that was a cool game. I also played a little 4 swords (1 player) and that was very enjoyable. The only problem was, I didn't know anyone else who had a GBA at that time, so it was  fruit out of reach for me. Obviously, that was my loss. We have 2 DS's in the family now, so I'll hope for a Wii version. I remember the media really pounded Nintendo on connectivity, because they wanted online so bad. Ideas and games are seldom judged by what they are , but by what THOSE WHO KNOW BETTER want them to be!

 

     Also, to be fair, the N64 had pretty good momentum from the SNES, but was  not able to give the Cube much of a push at all at the end of its life. The Wii created its own momentum, hopefuly it does not fizzle and pop too soon!