Topic: *Big Surprise* 3rd Parties Failed the Cube at E3

[ruby_onix]

GameSpot has a list of the games at E3, and the platforms that they're for, and it really illustrates how much of a cold shoulder the industry is giving the GameCube.

I made a rough count of the "third party" games at E3 (not counting the GameBoy, NDS, NGage, or PSP, of course). It's not exact, but here's basically how it breaks down.

The number of 3rd party GameCube exclusives: 5
(Want me to name them all? "Amazing Island" from Sega. "Baten Kaitos" from Namco. "Resident Evil 4" from Capcom. "Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines" from Atari. And "WWE Day of Reckoning from THQ".)

The number of multiplatform games that include the GameCube: 56

The number of multiplatform games that exclude the GameCube (meaning PS2/XBox games): 66. If you want to include the PC as a console, the number shoots up to 85.

Wanna look at how the PS2 and XBox fared?

Number of 3rd party PS2 exclusives: 70
Number of times the PS2 was excluded (meaning GCN/XBox games): 2
Or if you toss in the XBox-PC ports: 16

Number of 3rd party XBox exclusives: 20
Number of times the XBox was excluded (meaning GCN/PS2 games): 11
Or if you toss in the PS2-PC ports: 17


I don't even feel like blaming Nintendo for this. They've had a damn fine show with just their own games, and the exclusive games they managed to arm-twist out of third parties, so I don't really see any excluse for this kind of lackluster attitude the GameCube's been getting since day one.

Third parties = Teh Suxxzors. They can all rot on the NGage for all I care.  

[Draygaia]

Its partially a lot of GCNer's fault too.  A lot of them stick to the idea that they're just going to crap the port and if it isn't a port its going to be crappy anyways because they automatically think before it happens 3rd party is going to take a dump on GCNers anways.  Prince of Persia, Beyond Good and Evil, Def Jam Vendetta, True Crime, etc just proves them wrong.  They've gotten good scores and I played them and I have to disagree with a lot of people.  I have been forums where one thread talks about a game like Beyond Good and Evil and they auto-trash away.

I also blame Nintendo partially in a way.  They've done so much for us in gaming entertainment that I think they should focus much more time getting companies to make their hit sellers on the GCN and actually well made, maybe even exclusive.  Also lack of online support but I think I'll count on the DS for that.  Its free.

3rd parties
-they wonder why their CRAPPY ports don't sell
-by now they should know that when you multiplatform its obvious that the PS2 and xbox versions will sell more.  They should put more exlclusives on the GCN something they expect might happen for once.

[Bill Aurion]

Thank God the only 3rd party titles I want(ToS and RE4) are coming to the Cube...(exclusive, no less)

[Ian Sane]

That really sucks.  Only getting a quarter of the amount of exclusives the Xbox has doesn't make sense.  The Cube userbase is obviously much more than a quarter of the Xbox's.  I guess third parties feel that there can only be two consoles at a time.  Why they chose the Xbox over the Cube doesn't make much sense though.  Well I guess it does now but it's been like this from the beginning.  A lot of third parties decided what consoles to support before the consoles launched.  Why they chose the newcomber over the veteran doesn't really make sense particularly when the newcomber has a history of monopolizing tactics.

Anyhoo it doesn't really matter because we've got Zelda.  That's the game that's going to sell Cubes.  GTA3 and Halo have shown that one game alone can trigger massive sales.  Combined with the cheap console price I think Zelda has the potential to be the Cube's Donkey Kong Country, the game that ultimately decides what place the console finishes in the console wars.  If Zelda doesn't sell Cubes to mainstream gamers NOTHING will and Nintendo might as well officially become niche developers.

As regards to multiplatform games I've always associated them with low quality since the 16 bit era.  Although there are exceptions most of the best games of all time were, at least for a period of time, exclusive to one system.  Back in the day if a game was being made for the SNES and Genesis at the same time there was a really good chance it would suck.  Earthworm Jim and Mortal Kombat II would be exceptions but most of time the exclusives were always the really good stuff.  It even happened with the N64.  How many games that were available on both the N64 and the PSX were really worth buying?  Very few.

And it makes perfect sense too.  An exclusive game is going to be optimized for the console's hardware and controller, and it's going to be designed to best suit the interests of the userbase.  Mario Kart for example would not sell as well on the Xbox because the Xbox fanbase doesn't like those types of games.  By that same token something like Morrowind would probably sell like crap with the Cube userbase.  A multiplatform game is going to go for the lowest common denominator in terms of graphics and sound and will base it's controller on the market leader's design thus automatically ensuring that the port is going to be underwhelming for at least one userbase.  And in order to be marketable the game has to be generic and generic games are kind of dull.  Thus it makes sense why these games don't sell as well particularly on the Cube as the Nintendo fanbase has been "trained" by Nintendo to be more interested in innovative games.

The ideal approach is to make only exclusives and in the case of a big hit (ie: GTA big, not Cel Damage "big") release delayed ports.  The exclusives will make better use the hardware and can be marketed to which userbase best suits them.  Then if one of those games becomes a huge hit and has a lot of buzz going it's ported (not in a lazy fashion) to the other platforms to cash in.  Tony Hawk's Pro Skater and Resident Evil both did this very effectively.  Ironically Sega, whose strategy has been criticized, has the best idea.  The problem is they suck at it, releasing games on the Xbox that appeal to the XBox userbase the LEAST of the three options and failing to port some of their bigger hits (Soccer Slam gets ported, Virtua Fighter 4 doesn't?).

[akdaman1]

I believe that the lack of exclusives is that everything is being held off to Spaceworld. I say Spaceworld will happen this year simply because too many titles were missing at E3.

Games and items such as Mario 128 and the new GCN perihepal were all missing, Silicon Knights new game and an explantation on what happened, Fire Emblem and Squares new GCN game, Konamis exclusive and Buzz ( Miyamotos DS game ) are all yet to be revealed. A chance to show off a new trailer for Zelda?

All this would be perfect for Spaceworld. Also companys like Namco and N-space can show off updated versions of thier game. Also N-space can reveal Hope.

[Termin8Anakin]

If it was helf for Spaceworld, then there would have been LESS Nintendo-only software, and more 3rd party software here at E3.
Considering Spaceworld is Nintendo, they would have more Nintendo-only software there.

And clearly, if there IS a Spaceworld this year, then what's being shwon now at E3 isn't all of it.

The thing with Nintendo players is that there is such a great amount of HIGH quality first-party software that it makes it hard for the 3rd parties to compete. Pretty much anything on a Nintendo console is going to be compared to their games. So Prince of Persia would be compared to Zelda, Crash Nitro Kart to Mario Kart, Spyro to Mario.....
So why bother buying a questionable 3rd aprty game when you can buy a NIntendo game, ASSURED that its going to be great?

[jasonditz]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
That really sucks.  Only getting a quarter of the amount of exclusives the Xbox has doesn't make sense.  The Cube userbase is obviously much more than a quarter of the Xbox's.  I guess third parties feel that there can only be two consoles at a time.  Why they chose the Xbox over the Cube doesn't make much sense though.  Well I guess it does now but it's been like this from the beginning.  A lot of third parties decided what consoles to support before the consoles launched.  Why they chose the newcomber over the veteran doesn't really make sense particularly when the newcomber has a history of monopolizing tactics.

The Cube userbase also gets a vast number of high quality 1st and 2nd party titles, all of which are exclusive. The 3rd party exclusives aren't just competing against each other, they're competing against the 1st and 2nd parties.

[mouse_clicker]

Quote
The Cube userbase also gets a vast number of high quality 1st and 2nd party titles, all of which are exclusive. The 3rd party exclusives aren't just competing against each other, they're competing against the 1st and 2nd parties.

Exactly- since 3rd parties only have eachother to compete with on the PS2 and XBox, those two consoles get many more games than the Gamecube. It's not Gamecube owners fault- as much as people like to paint hardcore Nintendo fans out to be arrogant and stuck up, we don't comprise the majority of Gamecube owners (if we did, Eternal Darkness would have sold incredibly well)- 3rd parties could fix their own problem of lack of interest if they would not only give us something to be interested in, but more things to be interested in, as well.

[ruby_onix]

What it seems that 3rd parties want, is for the hardware maker to "magically" sell a lot of hardware to a pile of idiots for absolutely no reason. Then the 3rd parties want to fill the void. It's how the PS2 steamroller got started.

When Nintendo makes a good game, and it pushes some hardware units, they complain "Yeah, but you made a good game on the system now. That's not good."

But that's just absurd, because things don't really work like that. I think I heard a figure once saying that Nintendo's first party games contribute to at most maybe a 10-15% drop in 3rd party game sales, compared to what the game sales "should be" at their hardware base level. "Average people" only ever really want to buy one or two of the "top notch" titles from Nintendo. The rest of their game purchases are somewhat random.

But for that extra little slice, they demand the logic-defying "self-fulfilling prophecy" that's been pulled off by Sony with the PS2.

And it doesn't even make sense, because in very short order, the PS2 got filled with some pretty great titles. MGS2 (and MGS3). Final Fantasy. Gran Turismo. Grand Theft Auto. Every sports title that comes out of EA. People want to compete with these games?!? Sure, Nintendo is hard to keep up with, but they're really only one great developer (maybe two).

And then you just look at the "scale" of it all. In America, the hardware installed bases are PS2: 30 million, XBox: 8 million, and GameCube: 7 million. The attach rate (games sold per-console) ain't bad either, with PS2: 8, XBox: 6.5, and GameCube: 6.

Then look at those E3 support numbers. Not only was there almost zero ("five", actually) "support" for the GameCube, but look at the "multiconsole" games. There were 120 "multiconsole" games at E3. The PS2 got snubbed twice. Not bad, considering everyone always says the PS2 is an outdated lemon. The XBox got snubbed 11 times. Not bad, considering how the XBox has sold squat in the region where most of these game-developers live. Now the GameCube, got snubbed 66 times! On games that were already being made as "multiconsole" games (not specialized system-exclusives, which there are a crapload of for other consoles anyways), more than 50% of developers chose not to even bother making a GameCube version at all.

That's just totally absurd. Developers are fighting each other tooth and nail for postion over each other at the bottom of a PS2 bargain bin. And they're selling their souls to Sony to do it. "Healthy competition? That's someone else's problem." Someone like Mikami makes it Capcom's job? "Frick no! Give us back that contract! Rip it up! Burn it! Write a new one for Sony! As we said, someone else's problem. Not ours. You can finish RE4 if you insist, but then let's get back to the clawing and biting."  

[Perfect Cell]

Its certainly something that must be rectified if Nintendo plans to succeed in the next generation. There is no way Nintendo can gain market share without as close as full support from Third parties as possible.

[Bill Aurion]

And unless Ninty starts making garbage titles, that just isn't going to happen...

[Perfect Cell]

Nintendo has made its shair of "garbage" titles... The Mario Party Series for one Im sick of those games... Somehow they sell enough to justify one after another...

I think one good way for Nintendo to have third parties is the divy of liscences... They just seem to not do this enough...  F-Zero, Star Fox, and the GB Zeldas... How bout Exitebike,Punch Out, ect ect... just lend them to third parties..

[Bill Aurion]

How about Mario Tennis to Camelot and Advance Wars to Kuju?

(And Mario Party to Hudson Soft, so it's not really a Ninty-developed game)

[Mario]

I love Mario Party, it's not garbage. They sell because people like them.

And about this whole third party thing, I really don't give a crap if we don't get generic joe gas station sim by generic developer #14 for GCN. "It simply doesn't matter".

[Perfect Cell]

The Kuju Advance Wars, isnt acutally a direct Advance Wars games.. ITs more of an action type game... i think it reminds me of Pikmin really


You might like Mario Party, and thats fine but after a while they seem the same to me with the same mini games..

Crappy games sell well at times... The Matrix game for one and yes Third Parties do matter, maybe not the the Nintendo Hardcore faithfull but to gain access to that lucrative mainstream gamer market. those Generric developer games do matter.  

[Chongman]

     third parties are essentialy a numbers game, for the most part. When you walk into EB, what section impresses you the most? PS2 of course! Just because of the sheer number of games, its more impressive. Also, its like a random grab bag. For every, oh, 5-10 or so crappy, poor 3rd party games, you get one really nicely polished console seller. that's why nintendo needs em.

[Urkel]

I think the main problem with third parties is that they only think of the here and now, and not the big picture. They only care about userbase, and little else. They're not even thinking about what it would mean to have a Sony monopoly on the console market. If they thought Nintendo was mean when they were at the top, what makes them think Sony will be any different?

I also don't get why 3rd parties refuse to release a Cube version of a game, even when there is no 1st or 2nd party title to compete with it. I mean, why does the Cube get so few RPGs? Nintendo seldom makes those kinds of games, yet most RPG makers decided "Let's only release RPGs on the PS2, so that we'll have more competition with other RPGs". See, Namco gets it. Why are they making ToS and Baten Kaitos for the Cube, even though it has so few RPGs on it? Oh, right. It's because the Cube has so few RPGs that it makes perfect sense to make them for it. It's beyond me why most would rather compete directly with the likes of Final Fantasy and Dragon Warrior, and the million other smaller RPGs, when they could make a killing on the Cube with so little competition.

I'm really starting to get fed up with a lot of 3rd parties, especially with the ones that release shoddy ports. I find it extremely insulting when they do that, because they're essentially saying that if you don't own the most popular console, you don't deserve a good version of a game, or you're too dumb to tell the difference. Why are PS2 and Xbox owners the only ones that get ports with effort put into them? It's because they know they can't piss off their largest markets, and it doesn't matter how they treat us. They'll just sell however many copies they can to the uninformed gamer that thinks the version they're buying is as good as the one that came out on the PS2 six months ago. PS2 owners get the royal treatment while us Gamecube peasants get the royal screwjob. They're not even the least bit concerned of their name being dragged through the mud because of it, because they know they can just blame Nintendo and its "kiddy" userbase for it not selling.

I would even go so far as to say that Konami is the same as these other companies, though they do it in a slightly different way. Instead of releasing crappy ports on the Cube, they simply release games that are crappy to begin with for the Cube. The PS2, and to a lesser extent the Xbox, get all the good stuff, while those of us who had the audacity to dare choose the console that has a smaller userbase gets the bottom of the barrel. Mickey Mouse and other forgettable crap. Remember, Konami is supposedly a top-tier developer. So why does the Cube get so much crap from them? Again, they don't care how they treat the customers of the console with the smallest userbase. They can get away with it. Konami gets accolades for each good game they release on PS2 or Xbox, but manages to make Nintendo look bad for each sh*tty Disney sports game on the Cube. Just blame Nintendo for being such a kiddy company, which is why they didn't release something like Silent Hill instead, and it deflects the fact that they're making bad games for the system. Oh, but Konami will always make sure to release the good Castlevania/Metroid rip-off rehashes for the GBA. Can't afford to piss off a userbase that big.

Konami can just go to hell. Twin Snakes doesn't make up for anything. Did you know that they almost let all the voice actors go, because the voice actors wanted to be paid the same amount they got for MGS2, but Konami was only willing to pay the same amount they got for doing the original MGS (which was supposedly very little). Cheap bastards. Fortunately, David Hayter was willing to give up part of his paycheck to the others. God, just imagine Twin Snakes with C-list voice actors. Again, Konami makes sure that the PS2 Metal Gear game gets the royal treatment, while they're barely willing to even pay the damn voice actors for a game they hardly even made. Don't forget the fact that they didn't even advertise the damn game. Yeah, most people blame Nintendo for not doing that. Konami's the publisher, it's their responsibility! What's next, should Nintendo start wiping Konami's ass for them?


...I think I went off on a bit of a tangent there.

[BrianSLA]

>> number of Gamecube exclusives: 5......... Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines <<

Better make that 4 exclusives. T3 Rise of the Machines came out last year for Xbox & PS2 around the time the actual movie released. That game sucked and got horrible reviews.  

[BrianSLA]

>> Only getting a quarter of the amount of exclusives the Xbox has doesn't make sense. The Cube userbase is obviously much more than a quarter of the Xbox's. I guess third parties feel that there can only be two consoles at a time.<<

It makes perfect sense when Gamecube owners don't buy their products or don't fit their sales demographic. Why waste money porting or creating an entirely new game that won't sell on the Gamecube? The Gamecube is for Nintendo fanatics and kiddie game fans. If the game is in some other genre you are A LOT better off making it a PS2 game and or Xbox game.

>> Why they chose the Xbox over the Cube doesn't make much sense though. Well I guess it does now but it's been like this from the beginning. <<

GTA 3 won't sell big on the Gamecube as it will on the Xbox. Pikimin won't sell on the Xbox as it did on the Gamecube. Games generally go where they sell big. If Gamecube owners bought games like crazy..... there would be a ton of games for the Cube. They don't sell, there aren't that many.

>>  A lot of third parties decided what consoles to support before the consoles launched. Why they chose the newcomber over the veteran doesn't really make sense particularly when the newcomber has a history of monopolizing tactics. <<

Game companies would be tripping over themselves if Gamecube owners bought games and lots of them. It is only money and profit for them. Microsoft has also shown it will seriously advertise and make other companies games major hits ( Splinter Cell, KOTOR, etc.). And those games also latter become cross platform to sell more units later.

>> Anyhoo it doesn't really matter because we've got Zelda. That's the game that's going to sell Cubes. GTA3 and Halo have shown that one game alone can trigger massive sales. Combined with the cheap console price I think Zelda has the potential to be the Cube's Donkey Kong Country, the game that ultimately decides what place the console finishes in the console wars. <<

Yeah you got Zelda. Big deal. Seriously. It won't sell as big as HALO 2. It is like Wind Waker and Metroid Prime.... I come to these boards and all I see is how those two great titles will be mega massive system sellers....... NOPE! I have been on these boards for a very long time and when Metroid Prime was coming out and going basically head to head versus Splinter Cell all you guys here said MP would beat down SC big time and I said it wouldn't. Guess who was right. Yes I do think the new BETTER LOOKING Zelda will sell some systems, maybe even a good amount of systems....... BUT it won't beat HALO 2 and how many Xboxes it sells. It won't even be a contest..... the Xbox will blow away the GC in sales by a wide margin.

>>  If Zelda doesn't sell Cubes to mainstream gamers NOTHING will and Nintendo might as well officially become niche developers. <<

Well I do think Zelda will sell Cubes...... it won't bring Nintendo into the #2 spot. This video game console generation is basically over. PS2 won by a landslide. Xbox came in second. Nintendo put on a ok show. This generation's game consoles are on the dying end of their lifespans..... no game or games are going to make people go out and buy in numbers older machines to change that. The next generation is close enough..... this generation is almost done.

As for the comment about Nintendo becoming niche developers....... they already are. They make great kiddie games / Nintendo type - style games. That isn't the mainstream gamer anymore.

[Mario]

Quote
GTA 3 won't sell big on the Gamecube as it will on the Xbox.

What makes you so sure of that? I'd think GTA3 would sell amazing on GameCube, better than what it did on Xbox.

Quote
This generation's game consoles are on the dying end of their lifespans..... no game or games are going to make people go out and buy in numbers older machines to change that. The next generation is close enough..... this generation is almost done.

Two and a half years is a whole generation to you? This generation is nearing the halfway mark, the way I see it. Nintendo GameCube is already ahead of Xbox in worldwide sales, and I believe that if Nintendo play their cards right, they will take over Xbox in North America too. There are still millions and millions of potential GCN owners who don't have GCNs yet, and it's up to Nintendo to attract them.

[DrZoidberg]

Quote
It makes perfect sense when Gamecube owners don't buy their products or don't fit their sales demographic. Why waste money porting or creating an entirely new game that won't sell on the Gamecube? The Gamecube is for Nintendo fanatics and kiddie game fans. If the game is in some other genre you are A LOT better off making it a PS2 game and or Xbox game.

lol. I heard that GCN controllers give off electric shocks to anyone with a cool factor above 10%, so no-one cool plays gamecube because they get electricuted.

Quote
Yeah you got Zelda. Big deal. Seriously. It won't sell as big as HALO 2. It is like Wind Waker and Metroid Prime.... I come to these boards and all I see is how those two great titles will be mega massive system sellers....... NOPE! I have been on these boards for a very long time and when Metroid Prime was coming out and going basically head to head versus Splinter Cell all you guys here said MP would beat down SC big time and I said it wouldn't. Guess who was right. Yes I do think the new BETTER LOOKING Zelda will sell some systems, maybe even a good amount of systems....... BUT it won't beat HALO 2 and how many Xboxes it sells. It won't even be a contest..... the Xbox will blow away the GC in sales by a wide margin.

Halol 2 isn't coming out because it will cut into sales of Halol 1  

[The Omen]

Zelda and Halo 2 wont even be going head to head, will they?  Echoes might,but Metroid is a hard core gamers game, so I dont expect it to outsell Halo "hyped for 3 years" 2.  Nintendo does get the shaft with 3rd parties.  Have been since N64, so they just have to slowly lure them back.  Perhaps the Revolution will do the trick.  Can a console have wi-fi ?

[Bill Aurion]

Halo more like "Most overhyped game of century, plus the worst game in my collection" (Yes I do own it, so I can talk down to it all I want)

All sales can prove is which game was hyped the most, and means nothing when up against what game is better, so arguing about sales is pointless...My God, BrianSLA is starting one of those "My daddy can beat up your daddy" arguments, and guess what?  It's childish, so stop...

[Chongman]

halo....xbox killer app

ocarina of time....best. game. ever.




halo 2....xbox killer app

legend of zelda....best. game. ever.

[Ian Sane]

"Yeah you got Zelda. Big deal. Seriously. It won't sell as big as HALO 2."

I don't see how Halo 2 is going to be such a big system seller.  If you're interested in Halo 2 odds are you already bought an Xbox for Halo 1.  If you don't already own Halo I don't see why you would have any interest in the sequel.  Make no mistake, Halo 2 will sell really well but I don't think it will sell systems.  The first game already did that.

Zelda at least has the advantage in that a lot of people who bought Ocarina of Time didn't buy a Cube for Wind Waker.  Since the graphics turned off a lot of people I think it's fair to assume they'll come back now that the Zelda they were interested in is back.  Ocarina of Time sold a lot of systems so don't be surprised if the game that returns to that style does the same.

"I have been on these boards for a very long time and when Metroid Prime was coming out and going basically head to head versus Splinter Cell all you guys here said MP would beat down SC big time and I said it wouldn't. Guess who was right."

I've never quite understood why Metroid Prime didn't sell systems like it probably should have.  I mean that game had everything going for it.  It appealed to older gamers, was undeniably cool, and it absolutely rocked.  I think the reason SC did so well was because MS provided a huge incentive that Christmas for people to buy Xboxes with the JSRF double pack.  People bought that and then bought Splinter Cell because it was the big new Xbox game at the time.  Nintendo didn't provide any sort of deal for the Cube so there wasn't a big increase in Cube owners to buy MP.  I'll bet if they had done the $99 price drop then, Metroid Prime would have sold much better.