Post by: UncleBob on January 27, 2008, 03:19:43 AM
I have it on good authority that one of the largest sellers of Video Games and Video Game Accessories looked into getting special edition "Wii-White" WaveBirds for the release of Smash Bros. Brawl and were shot down by Nintendo, stating that the WaveBird molds had all been destroyed. This retailer ended up with crappy Pelican Wii-White-ish wireless GameCube controllers though.
This same retailer also tried to get some "Player's Choice" two packs of some of the best selling GameCube titles. Seriously, copies of Pikmin 2 are going on eBay for $50... why the heck wouldn't Nintendo go back and republish some of the harder to find GameCube titles for the Wii? Any of the Mario Sports titles would be great sellers, and Nintendo could sell them in two packs for $50 or something and make some money.
Then, in addition, Nintendo won't let Publishers re-release GameCube titles with packaging that refers to the Wii. And I'm not even talking about super-awesome packaging like what MookyJooky from CAG came up with:
I'm talking about just slapping a sticker or something on the package and calling it a day. Nope. No Wii on GameCube game packaging.
This greatly limits the ability of publishers to sell their older GameCube stock to retailers. Which is sad, because a big chunk of the GameCube library is better than a big chunk of the Wii library at this point.
Then, the was rumors that one publisher was looking into releasing GameCube games that, when played in the Wii, you'd get special content. Apparently Nintendo put the hammer down on that idea real quick.
Seriously, why even bother to make the Wii backwards compatible if you're not going to allow people to do anything with the feature?
Post by: Ceric on January 27, 2008, 04:00:39 AM
Post by: UncleBob on January 27, 2008, 04:26:59 AM
Post by: NWR_insanolord on January 27, 2008, 04:42:10 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: UncleBob
You know, that does make me wonder... if Nintendo did gut the GameCube components out of the Wii, would they be able to make 'em faster?
I'm sure if it would have that effect they would have done it by now. Besides, I think the only Cube-specific parts in the Wii are the controller and memory card ports, and since quite a few Wii games allow for GameCube controllers and Smash Bros. accesses the Cube memory card and backwards compatibility is still a nice feature despite Nintendo's best efforts to ruin it, I doubt they'll drop it.
Post by: darknight06 on January 27, 2008, 06:08:46 AM
Post by: stevey on January 27, 2008, 06:15:30 AM
Reason 2:That what they get for not sticking to Nintendo's side for the cube
Post by: LuigiHann on January 27, 2008, 06:25:15 AM
Post by: darknight06 on January 27, 2008, 08:46:54 AM
Post by: bustin98 on January 27, 2008, 08:52:25 AM
I think wavebirds could be one of the top accessories for the Wii.
Post by: Kairon on January 27, 2008, 09:29:05 AM
Post by: Mario on January 27, 2008, 12:15:40 PM
Post by: Infernal Monkey on January 27, 2008, 12:24:56 PM
Post by: Mikintosh on January 27, 2008, 12:43:14 PM
And I don't see how failing to make new controllers and new printings of games for a dead system of whom only a few people *still* need new controllers or new games for puts them at fault. If Pikmin 2 had sold better, there'd be more copies lying around, and the eBay price wouldn't be so high. And who needs new Wavebirds 7 years later?
That said, why would they take out the controller ports? SSB Brawl is going to be the flagship game for the system, and its director said the best way to play it is with the Gamecube controller, not to mention it put those ports in specifically to appeal to its base?
I also submit as evidence that the "disc loading" animation the Wii Menu is of both a Wii disc and a Gamecube disc; if they were phasing out the old system from everything, they could've changed that graphic with a patch by now.
Post by: matt oz on January 27, 2008, 01:04:35 PM
I had to pay $30 on ebay for a damaged complete copy of Fire Emblem a few weeks ago. All because I wanted to replay it before getting into the Wii version. I searched everywhere for the best price, but the game had a limited run, is out of print, and ebay was the only place to find a game that was barely two years old. (I had a close call at a Gamestop where they had the case for the game on their shelf, but didn't have any actual copies of it. So close!)
I get that they're trying to erase the Gamecube from consumers' memories and everything, but look at it this way: anyone who gives a crap that the Gamecube was a relative failure already knows that the Wii is made by the same company. All the non-gamers buying the Wii probably never heard of the Gamecbue. So what difference does it make if Nintendo wants to capitalize on the GC/Wii backwards compatibility? Are they afraid of confusing all the old people?
Post by: Shecky on January 27, 2008, 03:15:37 PM
Post by: UncleBob on January 27, 2008, 03:33:15 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: darknight06
I think the better question is why wouldn't they? It called reimaging your brand.
If they wanted to kill the GameCube, they shouldn't have made the Wii backwards compatible.
As per the Thrustmaster linked to above, I've got one and it's great. Not quite a WaveBird, but still worth the cash.
Post by: BranDonk Kong on January 27, 2008, 03:37:34 PM
Post by: Shecky on January 27, 2008, 03:41:57 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Brandogg
The DS plays GBA games, but they don't keep shipping old GBA games...let's also not forget that the Gamecube is dead. No one's selling Xbox games, and the 360 plays (some of ) them. I've seen the Wavebird (new) at stores many times recently around my area (Brevard County, FL).
Those stores have names? Are they major chains? Or smaller shops?
Post by: DAaaMan64 on January 27, 2008, 06:07:18 PM
Post by: Infernal Monkey on January 27, 2008, 06:52:14 PM
Post by: Mario on January 27, 2008, 08:02:50 PM
Post by: SixthAngel on January 27, 2008, 08:51:22 PM
Backwards compatibility isn't an attempt to keep releasing new old games, it is so people can keep playing their existing games and gives new adopters a larger library immediately. Making new wavebirds would require starting the production lines for the controllers once again, which means opening a closed factory or converting a factory back to wavebird production. It doesn't make much sense to do so a very few people can buy a controller (that is already available) just to play Brawl.
The Gamecube was also Nintendo's worst performing system on several levels. It sold less (Wii already outsold it) and it didn't have the all time classics that other systems had. Mario Sunshine will be forgotten by many and Windwaker, even though I liked it, will not be remembered as fondly as its predecessors either. Even if the N64 sold less then its competition it had groundbreaking games like Mario 64 and OoT and Gamecube never reached those levels. There is really little reason to keep the Gamecube name alive.
Post by: 18 Days on January 27, 2008, 09:48:47 PM
And yes, that price is fair dinkum. Welcome to Australia.
Post by: UncleBob on January 28, 2008, 01:17:29 AM
Anywhoo, people keep throwing out the XBox as an example of Backwards Compatibility, why not look at the PS2? Granted, good, new PS2 titles are few and far between, but we're still seeing quite a few Greatest Hits titles re-released (and re-re-released). Look at the things like the GTA Trilogy, Hitman Trilogy, etc. I can still go to the local stores and find 1st party PS2 controllers and memory cards. All this and the PS3 is barely backwards compatible.
As per the DS/GBA comment above - We saw brand new GBA titles being released up 'till last year. 1.5-2 years after the DS was released. Hell, the GBA Player's Choice wasn't even started until after the DS was released. Granted, there were like 12 GBA Player's Choice titles - but at least it was *something*.
Anywhoo, I don't expect Nintendo to keep the GameCube on life support... It just seems silly to push GameCube controllers for Brawl, then not want to re-release them for Brawl. Or to hoard up good (and popular) titles that they could re-release and get some money for. As for shelf space, I think many retailers are ready to expand the Nintendo shelf space, especially if it means selling more Nintendo stuff (and thus getting more shipments of Wii.) Besides, perhaps a good helping of GameCube AAA titles is what the Wii needs to help some of these people who are "bored" with their Wii and complain about all the garbage titles the Wii has.
Post by: Kairon on January 28, 2008, 04:11:57 AM
Yeah, I definitely see shelf space as something that should be prioritized for the Wii and DS over the GameCube. The Wii has to sell software, period, and to distract from that would be counter-productive for Nintendo, whether or not the hardware supports GC controllers. I agree with Sixth Angel.
Besides, Iwata dislikes the idea of old games being budget-ized and encouraging consumers to not pick up games when they come out, and this perception may even extend to Gamecube titles.
Post by: Chozo Ghost on January 28, 2008, 08:34:14 AM
In my post, I said I think the reason Nintendo is pulling the plug on Gamecube games and accessories (like the Wave Bird) is simply because they plan on re-releasing (or should I say Wii-releasing?) these in the future for the Wii with upgraded features and in new packaging and so forth. This will make more money for Nintendo, and it will also help distance them from the GC which they are probably ashamed of and what many people view as a failed console.
So yeah, eventually we will probably see AAA GC titles like Windwaker and Sunshine and Melee be Wii-made for the Wii with bonus features and support for the Wii-mote. If that's the plan, then it makes zero sense to keep selling GC games and accessories. Oh, and as for the Wave Bird... give it time and we'll probably see something similar, but it will be called the "Wii Bird".
Post by: Infernal Monkey on January 28, 2008, 07:51:16 PM
Do you know how many memory card 59's I have sitting around? My walls are made out of them. If I want to play a game I have to knock down my house to search for the right memory card. Just make GC games save to the Wii's gigantic hard drive already, USE MAGIC NINTENDO DO IT.
Post by: Chozo Ghost on January 28, 2008, 08:10:21 PM
They aren't alone in that either, because look at how Sony removed the emotion chip from the PS3 to save money, and how MS has abandoned Xbox compatibility in the 360. From their perspective, these old consoles are dead and don't generate profit for them anymore, so why continue to support them?
Post by: Plugabugz on January 28, 2008, 09:07:23 PM
And nothing else.
Post by: Chozo Ghost on January 28, 2008, 11:08:56 PM
Post by: Plugabugz on January 29, 2008, 12:09:48 AM
If it's a marketable opportunity then why not.
Post by: Ceric on January 29, 2008, 03:55:06 AM
Post by: vudu on January 29, 2008, 08:56:11 AM
QuoteHaha. I believe you mean Out of Stock. I guess there really is a market for them.
Originally posted by: 18 Days
48 Platinum Wavebirds left
Post by: Ian Sane on January 30, 2008, 05:57:54 AM
That is so dead on. Pikmin 2 is going to become one of those legendary games that always make all these "greatest games of all time" lists that practically no one has ever played. Star Controll II, NiGHTS, Pikmin 2.
Though I always felt that game was the best title on the Cube and always got a raw deal because it didn't have Mario, Link or Samus in it and those seem to be the only Cube titles that ever got any respect. So it becomes the next Gunstar Heroes it'll be remembered and that's what it deserves.
Sony has managed to use backwards compatibility quite successfully. PS1 games sold for a couple years after the PS2 was released and PS2 games are still quite plentiful. Now there's obviously a big difference in that those were successful consoles and the Cube was not. But I think the real reason Nintendo is sh!tting on the Cube is because of their old misery ways. Rentals are bad, used game sales are bad, demos are bad. You know why? Because in theory we won't buy new games. That's why Nintendo took longer to release Player's Choice titles on the Cube than the competition did. That's why some games were $30 when ALL "hits" games for the PS2 and Xbox were $20. Can't have discounted games eating into full priced games sales. Nintendo traditionally has poor relationships with third party developers, retailers and the media. Why? Because those people make money from Nintendo's products and you can tell that bothers them. That's why they've always sucked at giving consumers options. Now Nintendo has always made a quality product and they're very good in regards to maintaining that. But they've always treated us like marks. They always want to make a grab for that last penny. They're the Scrooge of videogames.
So if I can buy a new Wavebird I won't buy a new remote & classic controller. If I can buy cheap Cube games I might not buy so many Wii games. It's old misery Nintendo. It's always been their key flaw. They will have their ups and down but in the end it will eventually be what kills them if they never fix it.
Post by: darknight06 on January 30, 2008, 07:52:49 AM
I do have to ask, why don't you have a 360 or a PS2 at least? Or do you? I mean for someone like you I honestly can't see why you'd stick with just one if you're as hardcore as you say you are.
Post by: Kairon on January 30, 2008, 08:37:10 AM
And you know what? In this day and age of Sega gone bankrupt, mergers, acquisitions, and billion dollar losses all around, I think I have to admire Nintendo's conservative fiscal responsibility. There's a lot of flash over substance out there, and Nintendo seems to have spared themselves some of that meaningless illusion.
Post by: NWR_insanolord on January 30, 2008, 09:07:32 AM
Post by: DAaaMan64 on January 30, 2008, 09:14:00 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
I think I have to admire Nintendo's conservative fiscal responsibility.
I respect it as well. On the other end of that, I do believe that the attitude that produces the fiscal conservativeness is the same one that disappoints us with various things.
At least Nintendo is still around :P
Post by: darknight06 on January 30, 2008, 09:21:48 AM
To be honest with you, I didn't care for either game. Then again, I didn't care much for the GC or the N64 eras either. And that includes the PS1/2 and XBox.
Post by: UltimatePartyBear on January 30, 2008, 11:02:00 AM
Post by: Chozo Ghost on January 30, 2008, 11:04:23 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"So if I can buy a new Wavebird I won't buy a new remote & classic controller. If I can buy cheap Cube games I might not buy so many Wii games. It's old misery Nintendo. It's always been their key flaw. They will have their ups and down but in the end it will eventually be what kills them if they never fix it.
Actually, I think that's really what has kept them alive all these years (including during the dark days of the GC era). If they weren't so miserly and profit-oriented the GC would not have been profitable, and they'd have thrown money away trying to boost their marketshare. Yes, GC compatibility does help bolster Wii marketshare, but in and of itself it doesn't profit Nintendo if you play used GC games on it. Considering profit potential in every decision they make isn't being greedy; I call it being scrupulous. What you claim will eventually kill Nintendo is actually what has saved them from sharing the same fate as Sega and Atari.
Also remember that the first and only priority of a business is to generate profit. Some companies are willing to bleed money in the short term to gain marketshare, but their long term goal is to profit. Like it or not, it is a simple fact that Nintendo isn't profiting much from old GC games and accessories. But I think there was some quote a year or so ago from Miyamoto where he hinted that we may see GC games being remade for the Wii. I'm not sure if he was the one who actually said it and I don't know where I read it, but I think it makes sense. Nintendo wants the supply of GC stuff to dry up so that the demand will be high for these ports in the future.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 30, 2008, 11:43:50 AM
I agree with this but at the same time this what created the dark days in the first place. Using cartridges on the N64 was ultimately what caused their downfall. And while Nintenod has listed many reasons for using cartridges I'm pretty sure the fact that they completely controlled the manufacturing of them was the deciding factor. Nintendo doesn't own the compact disc so that option was never any good in their mind. There's also stuff like secret microcode they didn't reveal to give themselves an edge over third parties. They lost the third parties and that's what screwed them over for 10 years. Why did they screw them over? Because of their misery view that third parties are their competition.
It's kind of like their greatest strength and greatest weakness.
Post by: darknight06 on January 30, 2008, 01:28:14 PM
As for the N64 cartridges were only a small part of the issue. Saturn had CDs and yet they didn't light the world on fire either. Most PS1 games could not have been that big if for no other reason than the fact it only had 2MB of RAM to load anything on that disc into, all the storage in the world doesn't get around that. Several games if you're just looking at the graphics and basic sounds did not go over 40MB (aside from the awful videos Mega Man X4 could've easily been on N64 storage wise). If storage size was a real issue the DS would be getting raped by the PSP which we know isn't happening. Most DS games are in the range of 8 to 16MB at the most which is the majority of N64 cartridge sizes. It was primarily their royalties and programming difficulties of the consoles in both Sega and Nintendo's case. Everybody wanted to get away from Nintendo mainly due to that as well content control (Duke Nukem 64 had no strip joints, saved women instead of kill them, etc.) which they sure as heck lifted during the GC era. (BMX XXX uncensored on GC, censored on PS2) During the 16 bit era, most developers had originally jumped over to Sega hoping for them to be a salvation until they figured out that Sega as far as royalties were concerned WANTED to be Nintendo. Part of the reason Sony became third party to these companies in the first place during SNES/Genesis was to study the industry at the time. They figured out about the royalties and to an extent corrected them for their Playstation brand. That and Sony literally opened up the floodgates and didn't stop much of anyone from making a game on the system (unless it was 2D...) which lead to one of the biggest libraries in history. Having the system easy to program for didn't hurt either.
As far as bringing back GC games on the Wii, to be honest with you I hope not. The Wii needs NEW, FRESH content, let GC and it's games go for a good while before revisiting them.
Post by: King of Twitch on January 30, 2008, 04:06:54 PM
The back compat is a great space saving feature for gamecube loyalists and those that want to have the breadth of Nintendo's library at their fingertip. If they're worried about the dreaded manufacturing costs of cube controller/mem card ports they can look at the inflated price of the wii or VC games, or the sales charts, to sleep easier.
Post by: ShyGuy on January 30, 2008, 04:39:46 PM
Got stuck with not enough Pikmin, need to restart.
Post by: IceCold on January 30, 2008, 05:19:14 PM
But yeah, Pikmin 2 is just incredible. I love the game to death.
EDIT: And I know many people will disagree with me on this front, but I liked the Cube better than the SNES.
Post by: bustin98 on January 30, 2008, 05:34:56 PM
And I liked the N64 better than the Cube or SNES.
Post by: NWR_insanolord on January 30, 2008, 05:44:44 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: bustin98
I'll disagree with putting Metroid Prime and Resident Evil 4 on the third level.
And I liked the N64 better than the Cube or SNES.
I agree with everything in this post.
Post by: Kairon on January 30, 2008, 06:35:28 PM
Also, I consider myself a Miyamoto fanboi, but for some reason I found Pikmin 2 vastly disappointing, and Pikmin 1 far more magical...
Post by: NWR_insanolord on January 30, 2008, 07:50:30 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
The N64 was the best time of my life.
Also, I consider myself a Miyamoto fanboi, but for some reason I found Pikmin 2 vastly disappointing, and Pikmin 1 far more magical...
Three of my all-time top five games were on the N64, it is definitely number one on my list (though the Wii seems to be starting to make a run at that). And Kairon, you made the same comments about Pikmin 2 in this same topic 10 hours apart.
Post by: Mario on January 30, 2008, 08:13:16 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Chozo Ghost
But it wasn't like the GC had the largest game library of all time...
It does on my shelf. I'd put RE4, SSBM, Pikmin 2, Jungle Beat, Wind Waker and Killer 7 as the top tier. That's one huge tier but I don't like picking favourites.
Post by: Kairon on January 30, 2008, 08:48:40 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: insanolordAnd Kairon, you made the same comments about Pikmin 2 in this same topic 10 hours apart.
Whoops.
Post by: Mario on January 30, 2008, 09:10:45 PM
Post by: Infernal Monkey on January 30, 2008, 09:21:28 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: darknight06
Everybody says the dark days started during the N64 era, but I'd actually say it all started during the SNES era. They never really won it by that much, not to mention that they never really started recovering from that time until recently. Worst of all, their profits started eroding at this point. Their install base was decreasing which meant less profits than the NES by far.
Quote
They never really won it by that much
Well yes but they were up against a system that'd been out for like two years. Factor in the whole Master System being more popular than the NES in PAL regions and doom doom doom wow it's another NWR thread!
Post by: Ian Sane on January 31, 2008, 04:10:34 AM
Well they still won and it wasn't dark days for SNES owners. We had third party support comparible to the PS2. If a game was announced that wasn't made by Sega you just assumed it would be on the SNES and once in a while you got a surprise exclusive annoucement for the Genesis. That would be the equivalent of Resident Evil 0 being a Cube exclusive - annoying to PS2 owners but ultimately not that big of a deal. If Nintendo was having any problems it wasn't affecting us.
The N64 however had the opposite third party situation. You assumed any game not made by Nintendo or Rare was NOT going to be on the N64. On the N64 you got like 4 must-play games a year and like nothing else. Those are the beginning of the dark days.
I will give Nintendo credit though. While the SNES is my favourite console Nintendo's personal output was the best on the N64. Damn near every game they released was a potential GOTY. There just wasn't much else. The SNES wins on having more classic games due to having amazing third party support to go along with amazing first party support.
Post by: Chozo Ghost on January 31, 2008, 03:03:12 PM
But Ian is right - the SNES had the 3rd party support the PS2 had last gen. The NES had nearly a monopoly on marketshare, but for some reason I didn't like the NES as well. The reason for that is partly from the limitations of the hardware, and probably also from the lack of any meaningful competition. A console without any competition is going to get overloaded with shovelware. But on the other hand, a console with too much competition will end up like the GC with a very small library of games. I think the SNES struck the perfect balance, and I've not yet seen a console which comes close. The N64 was even better with quality of games, but they had too much competition and that hurt the quantity of games. 5-10 AAA games is great, but you need a library of hundreds in order to get marketshare. But yeah, those N64 classics will always be remembered and acclaimed, whereas the PS1 library has already been mostly forgotten.
Post by: vherub on January 31, 2008, 08:47:11 AM
In addition to generating confusion, there is little desire to tarnish the wii brand.
Perhaps the true reason is to establish better 3rd party relations. Cheaper reissues of gc games don't take sales away from 1st party mario and zeldas, they take sales from third party kororinpas and no more heroes.
Post by: Kairon on January 31, 2008, 08:56:39 AM
*holds a torch for Parappa, Jumping Flash, Tail of the Sun, and Robo Pit*
Post by: darknight06 on January 31, 2008, 01:00:36 PM
Post by: Mario on February 02, 2008, 02:08:21 AM
Post by: ShyGuy on February 02, 2008, 03:33:37 AM
Post by: IceCold on February 02, 2008, 08:44:39 AM
QuoteAre you not a Nintendo fan?
Originally posted by: darknight06
N64 was a better console than the GC but that's not even saying all that much. At least the west somewhat cared for it. Either way they both blew, I remember giving up of them both of them around 2 1/2 years in. N64 got too western oriented for my liking and the GC had next to nothing because even then most of Nintendo's titles on there I didn't have the first care for and third parties pretended like it didn't exist or threw the worst forms of everything they had on there. SNES was OK, but that drought they had during that one period of time. They recovered, but for me things were never quite the same. The game security on a platform was gone now. Screwjobs on both sides became rampant.
Post by: Athrun Zala on February 02, 2008, 02:48:27 PM
Quoteactually, most DS games are in the 32-64MB range, with quite a few being 128MB in size... and at least one being 256MB (ASH)
Originally posted by: darknight06
Most DS games are in the range of 8 to 16MB at the most which is the majority of N64 cartridge sizes.
Post by: darknight06 on February 02, 2008, 04:15:40 PM
Post by: Louieturkey on February 03, 2008, 08:53:07 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: UncleBob
Anywhoo, people keep throwing out the XBox as an example of Backwards Compatibility, why not look at the PS2? Granted, good, new PS2 titles are few and far between, but we're still seeing quite a few Greatest Hits titles re-released (and re-re-released). Look at the things like the GTA Trilogy, Hitman Trilogy, etc. I can still go to the local stores and find 1st party PS2 controllers and memory cards. All this and the PS3 is barely backwards compatible.
Well, to get this back on topic and off the "What's your favorite Nintendo console?" subthread, I wanna say that the PS2 is not a good example to compare it to the Wii and GC bc. The PS2 is still selling more consoles than the PS3 at this point and so naturally there is still a growing market for the system. So companies are still making games for it. The same thing happened with the PS1 where it was still being sold three years into the life of the PS2 and is the reason software was being made for it. And in the same line, GBA games were still being made after the DS came out because (especially in the US) GBA systems were still being sold, so companies were making games for it.
I see it being as long as the original hardware is still being sold, games will be made for the system or repackaged for the system because there is a still growing market for games for the system. When the hardware stops selling, the games usually stop selling (or at least stop selling enough to make a profit).
Nintendo hides GC compatibility because it would over complicate the Wii and the Wii is built completely around ease of use and still fun to play. Advertising this feature would confuse the majority of Wii owners (namely mothers and grandparents).
Post by: Maverick on February 03, 2008, 11:10:59 AM
Post by: UncleBob on February 03, 2008, 11:45:44 AM
Post by: Chozo Ghost on February 03, 2008, 12:20:54 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: UncleBob
I have to say I think it's more complicated for the Wii to have these weird ports and slots for strange accessories I can't find in stores...
If older generations are so easily confused that they can't understand the backwards compatibility, maybe they're also too confused to notice the panel that opens up for those features.
Post by: darknight06 on February 03, 2008, 02:11:24 PM
Post by: EasyCure on February 04, 2008, 03:51:08 AM
the virtual boy is the one they disowned for coming out of the closet; they act as if it never existed and that is just wrong, because the VB is FABULOUS!
end of thread.
ps. each of the 3 gamestops in my area has at least 4 NEW platinum GC controllers available, at regular price. sadly no wave birds (i knew i should of bought one...). im thinking about picking at least one up just in case for brawl. I have 3 1st party GC pads, 2 of which are retired (sticks are worn out and the a/b buttons are stuck or unresponsive) and 1 of those MegMan Anniversary controllers.
Post by: Ian Sane on February 04, 2008, 04:13:46 AM
Well I never felt that "pushing left makes your character go left" was confusing and yet my Dad sure as hell never figured it out but he got Wii Bowling instantly. I never understood how some of the kids in my class were confused by the most basic arithmetic but they were. Apparently the most important lesson in life is to never underestimate how stupid people can be.
Post by: Chozo Ghost on February 04, 2008, 05:03:54 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"I keep hearing the 'it's confusing' thing. Are all of your mothers and grandparents really that challenged? How is 'You can also play games released for the Nintendo GameCube on the Wii!' confusing?"
Well I never felt that "pushing left makes your character go left" was confusing and yet my Dad sure as hell never figured it out but he got Wii Bowling instantly. I never understood how some of the kids in my class were confused by the most basic arithmetic but they were. Apparently the most important lesson in life is to never underestimate how stupid people can be.
I'm not sure it is a question of stupidity; there are plenty of very intelligent people who lack all common sense. Not having grown up with video games makes you less able to learn how to play them, but of course the great thing with the Wii controls is they work so much like real life bowling or tennis that it is a no-brainer how to play. But I can kinda see how GC controllers and other standard controllers can be a bit confusing, and even though I have played them all my life sometimes in the heat of action I'll forget which button combinations I need to be pressing.
Post by: Crimm on May 30, 2008, 11:37:30 PM
I did the first thing somebody should do with used hardware: alcohol wipes x4
Post by: NWR_insanolord on May 31, 2008, 12:04:47 AM
Post by: Crimm on May 31, 2008, 02:11:57 AM
Post by: NWR_insanolord on May 31, 2008, 09:13:34 AM
Post by: Bartman3010 on May 31, 2008, 12:39:18 PM
I thought the Gamecube would've been a strong LAN-enabled system, but only three games ever supported the feature. Ironically all three games were racing games. Then they never bothered with such a feature ever again. Not even for any First Person Shooter games, it would've really helped the Timesplitters games definately. Their library had a similar problem the Nintendo 64 had, a good number of Nintendo's games were 4 player multiplayer games and a number of them were RACING titles. Wave Race, 1080, Mario Kart, Kirby F-Zero... They also didnt bother controlling the amount of Mario spinoffs that made it to the system. There was Mario Sunshine which people found 'okay' at best. Then there was Paper Mario 2 which i consider weaker (Not the weakest) Paper Mario game simply because it borrowed too many mechanics from the first game. (Partners had similar or the same abilities, combat was essentially the same) the rest range from sports, to DDR, to racing. Not exactly system seller material there.
Gamecube to Game Boy Advance connectivity was something they were advertising around the beginning of the GBA's life. It was soon around Pac-Man VS. that they really tried to hammer it down. Animal Crossing was the biggest of them all. Sporting not only the isolated island feature or sending NES games to the GBA, there was the e-Reader that let you get pieces of furniture, T-shirt designs and more. But that was it, all third parties could really do was unlock extra levels, basically forcing consumers to shell out cash for more content through these unimaginative ways. Not to mention that cord was really finicky, barely nudging the cord causes it to disconnect. The GCN to GBA cable and the e-Reader was also a small part of what Nintendo tried to expand the GCN life with: Perhiperals. The only way to play AND enjoy Donkey Kong Jungle Beat were to purchase a pair of Bongos. You could buy the game by itself for $40, which is really stupid. Since bongos cost about $30.
Its worth nothing that their blue water strategy did come in around the time Reggie came along advertising the idea of people coming together, playing games and enjoying the experience together. Nintendo had game catalog books at certain retailers and had pictures of people huddled at the TV together playing the Gamecube. But they still didnt really have the game that could help promote the idea.
This is partially why the Wii is a refinement. The Wii remote can be placed into cheap sometimes in-expensive plastic molds, you can connect the DS without any extra wires, though nobody is really jumping on this wagon still. Which provides an easy way to play that anybody can come in, which makes their advertising successful. They actually have some games that they can advertise as the party system without having to rely on their own properties that could alienate their hardcore userbase. So Super Paper Mario, even though based on an RPG series, is a platformer thats very easy to get into.
The only problem with the Wii is obviously the third party support. They feel that the only thing that sells on Wii are party games. But since most developers just churn out a product without actually putting any real effort into it, it just flounders. They basically offer the same thing Nintendo already did, like boxing or skiing and its worse because Nintendo already pulled the idea off. Nintendo also has a better idea how their hardware works, so 3rd party developers can usually get it wrong and basically not work properly, like in Monkey Ball. So they want to emphasize how to play games by saying (Well you have to stand like this and keep one leg up, otherwise it doesnt work.)
Post by: animecyberrat on May 31, 2008, 02:29:00 PM
Quote
Ironically all three games were racing games.
Phantasy Star Online was a racing game?
Post by: Crimm on May 31, 2008, 03:03:36 PM
Post by: Bartman3010 on May 31, 2008, 03:48:35 PM
QuoteIronically all three games were racing games.
Phantasy Star Online was a racing game?
No, but it wasnt a Local-Area-Network game either.
Post by: animecyberrat on May 31, 2008, 06:06:20 PM
Post by: Crimm on May 31, 2008, 10:46:50 PM
Ok what does that have to do with anything?
I thought the Gamecube would've been a strong LAN-enabled system, but only three games ever supported the feature. Ironically all three games were racing games.
PSO wasn't LAN it was Interent.
Post by: animecyberrat on May 31, 2008, 11:14:33 PM
Post by: ATimson on June 01, 2008, 12:22:47 AM
Ok I thought he was just complaining about the network adapter in general saying they only made 3 games that support the device.No, they only made 5 that support the device...
Post by: animecyberrat on June 01, 2008, 12:23:49 AM
To clarify I thought you were saying there were ONLY 3 games that used the LAN adapter and they were all racing games.
Post by: Galford on June 03, 2008, 10:15:08 PM
It wasn't the cube's fault that Nintendo had it's head up it's arse during it's lifetime. It was a good system, well designed, lots of horsepower, but it's creators were cheap as hell.
I'm sure many here know the cube had printouts on the motherboard for 48 megs of memory instead of 24 we got and the GPU was suppose to run at 200MHz, not 167. These things were changed because Nintendo was didn't want to lose a cent on the cube, but it also gimped it's lifespan a bit in terms of horsepower. On-line was a joke for the cube and still is today.
Nintendo is doing what it has always done, except with the Wii it's working.
People are laughing at Sony and MS for spending billions for on-line, but they are laying the foundation for use in future generations.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on June 04, 2008, 12:30:30 AM
Post by: Chozo Ghost on June 04, 2008, 09:58:49 AM
It's kinds simple why Nintendo hates the cube, it didn't sell.
It wasn't the cube's fault that Nintendo had it's head up it's arse during it's lifetime. It was a good system, well designed, lots of horsepower, but it's creators were cheap as hell.
I'm sure many here know the cube had printouts on the motherboard for 48 megs of memory instead of 24 we got and the GPU was suppose to run at 200MHz, not 167. These things were changed because Nintendo was didn't want to lose a cent on the cube, but it also gimped it's lifespan a bit in terms of horsepower. On-line was a joke for the cube and still is today.
Nintendo is doing what it has always done, except with the Wii it's working.
People are laughing at Sony and MS for spending billions for on-line, but they are laying the foundation for use in future generations.
But the Gamecube was profitable. If Nintendo had beefed the GC's performance up with double the RAM and a faster processor and built in online capabilities, then it still might not have sold anymore than it did (and would have made them lose money to boot). Even as gimped as it was, it still outperformed the PS2. Isn't that enough?
Post by: Tanookisuit on June 04, 2008, 10:30:14 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on June 04, 2008, 06:37:21 PM
Quote
I thought the Gamecube would've been a strong LAN-enabled system
Nobody wanted LAN. Yeah LAN support is assumed for an online game (except an MMORPG) but the Cube was supposed to be ONLINE. THAT'S what people wanted, that's what the market was ready for, that's what Nintendo LIED about. Mario Kart's LAN support was less of a feature and more of a reminder of Nintendo's behind-the-times lack of online support. It was the equivalent of calling Double Dragon for the NES "two player" because it had alternating two player. F*ck it. LAN was Nintendo rubbing our face in the sh!t they took in our salad.
Quote
Gamecube to Game Boy Advance connectivity was something they were advertising around the beginning of the GBA's life. It was soon around Pac-Man VS. that they really tried to hammer it down.
In retrospect connectivity was just an idea to make people buy both the GBA and the Cube. And the cables of course. I think Pac-Man Vs. really shows that beyond that they really had no ideas for actual games in mind. Their big connectivity game that they was the main focus of an E3 presentation was such a blob of nothing that they couldn't even sell it as a standalone product in stores. If that's the BEST you can come up with then just give up.
Though Four Swords Adventures was awesome and probably should have been what they really tried to sell connectivity with. The only problem is that it was multiplayer focused so you needed FOUR GBAs and FOUR CABLES. That's as hardcore of a requirement as if Rock Band required you to buy each instrument seperately. Even the common "oh everyone had a GBA" arguement didn't work because of those stupid cables. Nintendo's dumb obsession with selling accessories screwed that up. If those cables came with every GBA then it would have been a whole different ball game. Crystal Chronicles had the same problem though it also had a "sucks donkey nuts" factor going against it as well. So in retrospect Nintendo's connectivity "killer apps" consisted of:
- a mini-game that couldn't be sold as a standalone product
- two multiplayer focused games that required over $400 of equipment to play
Well sh!t how did such a remarkable idea not take off with that lineup?
And to add salt to the wound both of the multiplayer games feature concepts that could have been executed with ONLINE PLAY. The only reason you needed all those GBAs was because Nintendo said so.
Post by: UncleBob on June 04, 2008, 08:29:32 PM
Nobody wanted LAN. Yeah LAN support is assumed for an online game (except an MMORPG) but the Cube was supposed to be ONLINE. THAT'S what people wanted, that's what the market was ready for, that's what Nintendo LIED about.
Really? That's what the market wanted? Because I'm pretty sure the PlayStation2 won last generation and it had a pretty crappy online plan as well.
Post by: Morari on June 04, 2008, 08:39:37 PM
LAN support would be a great addition to any game, because split-screen play sucks. I'd really like to see some Wii games have LAN support, especially considering the ease of built-in wireless.
Post by: blackfootsteps on June 04, 2008, 09:14:37 PM
Post by: Mario on June 04, 2008, 10:14:01 PM
Post by: UncleBob on June 04, 2008, 11:21:51 PM
I swear I remember pre-launch that Nintendo said many Wii games would feature LAN modes and even single disc multiplayer similar to DS download play. Perhaps I am crazy.
Dr. Mario sorta-has a single "cart" download play feature...
Post by: Galford on June 04, 2008, 11:27:27 PM
Ridge Racer had a LAN mode that if you hooked up two TVs and two PSXs you could play head to head in two player. Needless to say it didn't last long as later models of the PSX dropped the LAN port.
Yes the PS2 had crappy on-line, but itt was still better then the Gamecube.
In fact there are still some PS2 on-line games still played today such as Tribes and Everquest Adventure. I believe Sony even gave the PS3 an update so it could play certain PS2 titles on-line. Even some of the PS2 Rachet titles had online support.
To be fair to Nintendo, GBA connectivity was a cool idea but it was poorly executed and it didn't get much chance to shine before the it was killed.
Post by: Morari on June 05, 2008, 12:01:09 AM
I swear I remember pre-launch that Nintendo said many Wii games would feature LAN modes and even single disc multiplayer similar to DS download play. Perhaps I am crazy.
That would be awesome. That is what console gaming needs, right alongside online multiplayer. I remember in the old days, almost every PC game had a "spawn install", where you could basically install a multiplayer only version of the title so as to enjoy with friends. Of course, nowadays they want you to buy a copy for every machine in your house, lest you become a dirty pirate in their eyes. Using the one copy that you bought to play with friends and family on your home network is illegal. Well you know what gaming industry? Arrrgh! ;)
Post by: animecyberrat on June 05, 2008, 01:27:08 AM
GC on the other hand, even if PS2 online was not as good as Xbox Live, it was still leaps and bounds better than what GameCube had to offer. Also it was a major let down when multi platforms games would come to the cube, missing said online features that made their counterparts so great.
Post by: Bartman3010 on June 05, 2008, 11:35:51 AM
Nobody wanted LAN. Yeah LAN support is assumed for an online game (except an MMORPG) but the Cube was supposed to be ONLINE. THAT'S what people wanted, that's what the market was ready for, that's what Nintendo LIED about.
But it would've helped the Gamecube at least a little. Plus it would've given Nintendo a reason to continue to put out the darn thing in the first place. Hell, there IS a reason why the system has a handle on it. The Gamecube is more portable than the Xbox, making it easy to set up. But Microsoft was able to break the bank with Halo. Halo was popular because of the multiplayer, and the fact that the Xbox had LAN capabilities made it way more popular. You realize that people didnt get Halo 2 until 2004. Halo 1 came out in 2001. Besides the somewhat casual appeal, Microsoft got the upper hand in the beginning, and just made the kill with Halo 2. It took awhile before Microsoft got to make the day with Xbox Live, and even further down the line for Halo 2 to come out.
Halo is the reason people bought an Xbox, and LAN was a huge component to the game before Halo 2 could blow the original out of the water with online play. If only Nintendo could have the same deal with several other titles. I could really go for some cooperative Pikmin 2 over LAN, which was one of the plans that they never finished.
Post by: Ian Sane on June 05, 2008, 01:02:50 PM
Quote
Really? That's what the market wanted? Because I'm pretty sure the PlayStation2 won last generation and it had a pretty crappy online plan as well.
Crappy online is better than no online at all. The time to go online was last gen. The PS2 might not have had as much of an online presence as the Xbox but it at least looked like a token effort and that makes a huge difference. Sony looked like a company willing to try to match their competitor. They also promised online and delivered. At the very least online multiplatform games typically kept their online features on the PS2. The PS2 had quite a lot of online games. Easily over ten times what the Cube had. Hell there are more online PS2 Madden games than online Cube games period.
In comparison Nintendo made no effort at all. That looks horrible. To make no effort gives the impression you don't care about pleasing your customers and with the Gamecube Nintendo should have been doing the opposite. Hell, they actually LIED to us. They said the Cube would be online. They kept talking about vague plans that would be revealed at a later date and when it finally came time to reveal those plans it turned out there was no plan at all. The plan was "we're not doing it". They even sabotaged things so third parties couldn't go online. They offered no assistance to any developers wanting to make online Cube games. No documentation, no development kit, nothing. Not going online when you told people you would is bad enough but preventing others from going online? Come on! What the hell?
It was never about online. It was about a company not giving a f*ck. That's why the Cube was a flop.
Post by: UncleBob on June 05, 2008, 01:12:53 PM
Didn't MicroSoft lose quite a bit of money on the original XBox as a whole?
If the GameCube was a flop, the XBox has to be considered a bigger flop...
And it had the best online plan of all.
Post by: vudu on June 05, 2008, 02:47:50 PM
Post by: Kairon on June 05, 2008, 04:48:52 PM
Didn't the 'Cube actually outsell the XBox worldwide?
Didn't MicroSoft lose quite a bit of money on the original XBox as a whole?
If the GameCube was a flop, the XBox has to be considered a bigger flop...
And it had the best online plan of all.
Well, technically the XBox outsold the GC worldwide by about 2 or 3 million units I believe.
Post by: UncleBob on June 05, 2008, 07:54:56 PM
So, let's see... Microsoft sold 2.3 Million more XBox units world-wide than Nintendo did GameCube units. Yet Microsoft lost millions in their Games Division while Nintendo made millions.
In the now-time, the Wii is outselling the competition by leaps and bounds... despite still not having a real on-line plan (although slightly better than the GameCube's...) in comparison to the kick-ass on-line of the 360 and the somewhat better than Wii's on-line of the PS3.
Meanwhile, the heads of both Sony's and Microsoft's gaming divisions have "stepped down". The two companies are reported to still be losing money. And Nintendo has so much money, Reggie wipes with Franklins.
Yeah, the general population really, really wants online.
Anyone have any numbers as to what percentage of Americans don't even have High-Speed Internet access?
Post by: ATimson on June 05, 2008, 10:39:00 PM
Yeah, the general population really, really wants online.I don't see anybody arguing that the general population wants online, just the general "gamer" population. Who are decidedly not who the Wii is courting, so it's not really worth Nintendo's while to put much effort into online for their sakes. If the DS hadn't already built the infrastructure, I'd wonder how much of the Wii's online capabilities would still be there...
Post by: Ian Sane on June 06, 2008, 02:35:10 PM
Quote
So, let's see... Microsoft sold 2.3 Million more XBox units world-wide than Nintendo did GameCube units. Yet Microsoft lost millions in their Games Division while Nintendo made millions.
The old profit arguement doesn't mean sh!t unless you're a stockholder. Nintendo making a profit didn't prevent third parties from bailing on the Cube. It didn't stop video stores from not having Cube games to rent. From the perspective of a console owner all that matters is what affects us and that's units sold. Even now with Nintendo being cool and popular again if I mention I own a Gamecube people look at me like I'm the Elephant Man. The Cube is incredibly unpopular. It's Nintendo's lowest selling console and, despite being profitable, it didn't meet their expectations. In other words: flop-a-roo.
But the Xbox lost money. Yeah but it was popular and MS got their foot in the door which was their plan all along. I agree that losing money is rather dumb but the Xbox 360 is ahead of the PS3. Xbox is a household name in videogaming. Years from now the Xbox will be remembered fondly but the Gamecube won't.
Quote
In the now-time, the Wii is outselling the competition by leaps and bounds... despite still not having a real on-line plan (although slightly better than the GameCube's...) in comparison to the kick-ass on-line of the 360 and the somewhat better than Wii's on-line of the PS3.
But the Wii IS online. And considering online mulitplayer is quite common on the Wii and it offers downloadable games with the VC and Wii Ware I would say it's far more than "slighty better" than the Cube's two online games. It isn't exceptional but it' s good enough. It meets the expectations people have about a videogame console. The Gamecube DIDN'T. Plus it isn't specifically about online. It's about not even attempting to match the competition. It's about promising something and not delivering on it. Nintendo is doing a better job now at giving people what they want, where with the Cube it was all about TELLING people what they wanted.
If online had nothing to do with then what did? The Cube finished in last place. That's a fact. We know it happened. Why? I suggest this or that and I get responses about how this didn't matter and that didn't matter. "The Xbox didn't make any money" isn't an explanation of why the Cube didn't even match the sales of the N64. I'm curious to know what those of you who think online didn't/doesn't matter think contributed to the Cube having the lowest sales of last generation. Don't say "it was profitable". I want to know why it sold the least units.
Post by: UncleBob on June 06, 2008, 03:01:20 PM
How many top game lists include GameCube titles on them?
The GameCube is still fondly remembered. Hell, if it wasn't for storage space, people would *love* to have GameCube games on the VC.
Does the number of units really matter overall? If the New Kids on the Block or Brittany Spears sold more albums than eveyone else in their time, but some other artist is still around and still selling out concerts while Brittany is gutter trash doing drugs or whatever, who "wins"?
There are more than a few reasons why the 'Cube didn't outsell the competiton... But the lack of on-line isn't even what I would consider the top 5.
Post by: Ian Sane on June 06, 2008, 04:32:48 PM
Quote
There are more than a few reasons why the 'Cube didn't outsell the competiton... But the lack of on-line isn't even what I would consider the top 5.
What are those reasons then? I wouldn't consider online the only reason but I would consider it a significant one.
Post by: UltimatePartyBear on June 06, 2008, 05:14:02 PM
Post by: animecyberrat on June 06, 2008, 06:08:15 PM
With Xbox you had a lot of flash, a lot of talk and a lot of fucking money, and money talks and therefore people listened. I don't think anyone can honestly predict why the GC did not sell as well as it should have, aside form FPSes, the GC had a better 3rd party line up all around and some of the best damn 1st party games of the last two generations. Halo was it for the first what two years of the Xbox life, and in that time GameCube was still struggling to pick up sales.
We look back on it in hindsight and think, no DVD player support, no HDD, no online, purple color, tiny memory cards, etc are stupid reasons for not selling and we think that in the end those things didn't matter, but in the days when GameCube was a commodity and not a memory, those were the exact reasons people cited for not wanting a GameCube or choosing an Xbox over the GC. They may be irrational reasons but if someone said that was why they picked one system over another, well then that is it that is all we have to go by.
I think a lot of it was just Nintendo had a bad reputation and did not do much to fix it, they made some great games, they made some fantastic games even, but they did makea lot of stupid decisions. Overall the world will never know for sure why the GC was not was as scucessful as it should have been, but we do know that some people cited it as not playing DVD's, well in the first year of it's life I honestly think that maybe was a deciding factor for early adapters of the competition, but in the end it did not affect overall sales. Some people cite the childish look and label it as just for kids, well in the end that is not true but a GameCube was a lot more kid friendly than Xbox and once it got under 100 bucks I am sure being kid friendly played a role it it's longevity, but overall I do not think it was deciding factor.
The discs were small, in the beggining coming from DC and PS1 people were getting tired of the long load times, Cube supporters touted the small discs and the answer because it reduced load times, in the end that did not have a big impact on sales, missing key features or having a gimped ported due to size constraints could have been an issue, if it was the case but I can not think of any specific examples of what GC games were gimped due to size limits. Even so it waqs something a fanboy would say and not really a deciding factor for the non-fanboys so not a very relevent excuse.
I think it came down to mostly Ps2 was so popular already because of Ps1 that a lot of people honestly thought owning a Ps2 was the "in thing" and owning a Cube was the "geek" thing that it maybe stupid but I honestly think for a lot of irrational fanboys and hormonal teenagers with low to no self esteem it sure as hell could have been an honest to god excuse to not buy a GC.
In conclusion, there is not one single reason why the GameCube did not do as well as it should have, but just a ton of irrational and stupid reasons that just made no sense but to those who were thinking them up. In the end GameCube was a fantastic system that will be remembered by some as one of the best damn gaming experiences of their lives, while others will remember it as the purple lunch box (purple is my favorite color so not a sales point for me but a plus anyways)
Post by: UncleBob on June 06, 2008, 08:57:57 PM
What are those reasons then? I wouldn't consider online the only reason but I would consider it a significant one.
Pretty much as was said - the majority of the GameCube's issues could be summed up under PR.
Beyond that, it was their inability to reach out to third parties. Face it - the difference between the XBox sales and the GameCube sales was pretty minimal... yet third parties dropped support for the Cube pretty quickly, but stuck with the XBox...
Why did games like Soul Caliber II outsell the XBox and PS2 versions, yet Soul Caliber 3 was a PlayStation 2 exclusive?
Why did Capcom screw over Nintendo with their five "exclusive" games? What did Nintendo do (or not do) that failed to keep them?
Post by: ATimson on June 06, 2008, 09:35:25 PM
Beyond that, it was their inability to reach out to third parties. Face it - the difference between the XBox sales and the GameCube sales was pretty minimal... yet third parties dropped support for the Cube pretty quickly, but stuck with the XBox...If I was going to develop a game for only one platform of the two (or possibly even of all three, PS2's install base asides), it would be the Xbox (or Xbox 360--especially since the PS3 doesn't have the install base advantage). The install bases may not be all that different between the Xbox/360 and GameCube/Wii, but the Xboxes have more power and features and are significantly easier to develop for than their Nintendo brethren.
Post by: UncleBob on June 06, 2008, 09:42:06 PM
Post by: Chozo Ghost on June 07, 2008, 02:33:31 AM
Crappy online is better than no online at all. The time to go online was last gen. The PS2 might not have had as much of an online presence as the Xbox but it at least looked like a token effort and that makes a huge difference. Sony looked like a company willing to try to match their competitor. They also promised online and delivered. At the very least online multiplatform games typically kept their online features on the PS2. The PS2 had quite a lot of online games. Easily over ten times what the Cube had. Hell there are more online PS2 Madden games than online Cube games period.
In comparison Nintendo made no effort at all. That looks horrible. To make no effort gives the impression you don't care about pleasing your customers and with the Gamecube Nintendo should have been doing the opposite. Hell, they actually LIED to us. They said the Cube would be online. They kept talking about vague plans that would be revealed at a later date and when it finally came time to reveal those plans it turned out there was no plan at all. The plan was "we're not doing it". They even sabotaged things so third parties couldn't go online. They offered no assistance to any developers wanting to make online Cube games. No documentation, no development kit, nothing. Not going online when you told people you would is bad enough but preventing others from going online? Come on! What the hell?
It was never about online. It was about a company not giving a f*ck. That's why the Cube was a flop.
Ian, you apparently forget that Nintendo did include Online support for the GC in the form of optional adapters for broadband or dialup. They provided an option for third parties to offer online support to their games if they so choose, so you can't say Nintendo didn't provide the support because they most certainly did... it's just no one chose to take advantage of it. Well, there was that one Sega game which did. So the GC did have 1 online game, and it had all the tools necessary for there to have been more, but 3rd parties have that nasty habit of screwing over Nintendo's consoles, so they just refused to take advantage of that capability. That wasn't Nintendo's fault, though.
And the fact that there was 1 online GC game does mean that the GC did in fact go online. 1 isn't alot I'll grant you that, but any number higher than zero means that Nintendo kept their promise of the GC going online.
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on June 07, 2008, 02:55:21 AM
Post by: Plugabugz on June 07, 2008, 05:27:35 AM
Post by: Morari on June 07, 2008, 09:02:40 AM
That's the first time I've heard the XBox was easier to develop for than the GameCube. I thought that was one of the 'Cubes strong points, was that it was so easy to develop for...
I thought that the Xbox was based around DirectX (duh) and Visual Studio? With the Xbox, you are essentially just coding for a PC with specific hardware. A lot of coders already have vast knowledge in working with that kind of platform, so while it may or may not be easier, it is probably more accessible.
Post by: UncleBob on June 07, 2008, 12:28:41 PM
Phantasy Star 1&2
Phantasy Star 1&2 Plus
Phantasy Star 3 CARD
Homeland (Jpn only)
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on June 07, 2008, 12:42:05 PM
That's the first time I've heard the XBox was easier to develop for than the GameCube. I thought that was one of the 'Cubes strong points, was that it was so easy to develop for...
I thought that the Xbox was based around DirectX (duh) and Visual Studio? With the Xbox, you are essentially just coding for a PC with specific hardware. A lot of coders already have vast knowledge in working with that kind of platform, so while it may or may not be easier, it is probably more accessible.
Well while the xbox is pretty much like a PC in the ways of a Windows 2000 Kernel, Direct X 8.1.
Post by: animecyberrat on June 07, 2008, 01:15:11 PM
Post by: ATimson on June 07, 2008, 02:01:18 PM
With the Xbox, you are essentially just coding for a PC with specific hardware. A lot of coders already have vast knowledge in working with that kind of platform, so while it may or may not be easier, it is probably more accessible.Exactly. :)
Post by: DAaaMan64 on June 07, 2008, 02:05:23 PM
And GameCube was a Macintosh, no wonder it flopped.
The killed the Macintosh name years ago.
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on June 07, 2008, 02:43:36 PM
And GameCube was a Macintosh, no wonder it flopped.
PowerPC based processor does not equal Mac a lot of Windows alternative computers used PPC architecture but the architecture got really popular with Mac until Apple went to intel for their chips. Hell Wii 360 and PS3 use modifications of the power pc architecture processor chipsets , Nintendo and MS use ATi and Sony uses Nvidia for graphics chips.
Did you remember how early 360 dev kits were G5 Macs (the tower macs before apple made the intel switch).
Post by: animecyberrat on June 07, 2008, 05:38:51 PM
Post by: Chozo Ghost on June 07, 2008, 09:26:25 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on June 07, 2008, 10:48:22 PM
Xbox is easier to develop for, indeed.
Post by: Ian Sane on June 09, 2008, 03:15:20 PM
Quote
Ian, you apparently forget that Nintendo did include Online support for the GC in the form of optional adapters for broadband or dialup. They provided an option for third parties to offer online support to their games if they so choose, so you can't say Nintendo didn't provide the support because they most certainly did... it's just no one chose to take advantage of it. Well, there was that one Sega game which did. So the GC did have 1 online game, and it had all the tools necessary for there to have been more, but 3rd parties have that nasty habit of screwing over Nintendo's consoles, so they just refused to take advantage of that capability. That wasn't Nintendo's fault, though.
I heard they didn't provide any documentation or anything. Sega had to figure it all out themselves. I don't have a source for this but I remember it being tossed around here a lot with NWR staff members supporting it. Yeah third parties COULD have used it but they were completely in it alone. Nintendo also didn't use the adapter themselves until a few years in. That's easy to confirm. I think there's a big difference between Sony having an open model and making their own online games and promoting online play as a good thing and Nintendo not releasing any online games, not promoting the feature and intentionally downplaying online play when asked "why the hell aren't you morons online, yet?" Why would a third party want to make an online game for the Cube when Nintendo themselves were pretty much sabotaging the whole feature? Nintendo was pretty much training the Cube userbase to dislike online gaming because the competition had it and they didn't. I think a lot of the concerns about third party games not selling on Nintendo consoles is also related to Nintendo "training" their fans to not care about third party support because on the N64 they didn't have any.
But judging from what everyone has pointed out PR really is to blame. I think the online thing is a symptom of that. Nintendo did a horrible job making people care about the Gamecube and that includes customers, third parties and the media. It's like they just expected everyone to like them without providing any incentive, and this was at a time where people had just been burned by the N64 and were iffy about giving Nintendo a chance. Promising online and then not delivering is largely a PR goof. Not providing any information to third parties about how to make an online Gamecube game can also be considered that. They weren't trying to make people care.
Post by: animecyberrat on June 09, 2008, 11:24:38 PM
Post by: Chozo Ghost on June 09, 2008, 11:41:29 PM
My theory is, that Nintendo really did intend for the GC to have a strong online capability, but the poor hardware sales and mediocre software sales postponed those plans indefinitely. Let's keep in mind the GC wasn't a major seller even in it's first year, before online console gaming was even a major issue. For some reason the Xbox kicked its ass in sales numbers, and Nintendo probably just threw in the online towel after that.
Post by: animecyberrat on June 09, 2008, 11:57:49 PM
Post by: Chozo Ghost on June 10, 2008, 06:09:15 AM
but that is not true at all, I have every Game Informer from the E3 GameCube was announced upto today, and the sales data shows that all the way into 2003 they GC and Xbox were neck in neck.
But also keep in mind that the PS2 was far ahead of both of them. The battle for 2nd place was pretty close, but the battle for 1st place was never even a contest, since Sony had like 90% of the market share or something. So if you ask me, both the GC and Xbox weren't very successful in terms of sales numbers. 20 some million each is nothing to the 100+ million of the PS2.
Post by: animecyberrat on June 10, 2008, 12:44:45 PM
Post by: D_Average on June 11, 2008, 04:13:37 PM
Post by: DAaaMan64 on June 11, 2008, 04:15:01 PM
Post by: animecyberrat on June 11, 2008, 04:30:50 PM
It's a crap game, screw teh fanbois
Post by: DAaaMan64 on June 11, 2008, 04:38:00 PM
but that game really is good. I had a lot of fun just running around Delfino Plaza jumping on on building and what-not
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on June 11, 2008, 04:38:44 PM
Post by: animecyberrat on June 11, 2008, 04:41:04 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on June 11, 2008, 04:41:40 PM
It was an awesome game, lots of fun, but not, I repeat NOT a Mario game.
Funny I thought it had Mario in it. Guess I was wrong!
Post by: DAaaMan64 on June 11, 2008, 04:43:16 PM
Post by: animecyberrat on June 11, 2008, 04:46:04 PM
Post by: NWR_insanolord on June 11, 2008, 04:54:35 PM
No, it just isn't ok. If I had to explain it again it would only start up that old argument we had back the last time we had that argument. It would be more appropriate to say it should not have had Mario in it, because it was not very Mario-ish for being a "Mario" game. I think of it as "Mario Water Cannon Blast" a Mario Spin off, not a true Mario game.
It's a platformer, it stars Mario, therefore it's a true Mario game.
Post by: animecyberrat on June 11, 2008, 05:08:10 PM
Post by: NWR_insanolord on June 11, 2008, 05:14:41 PM
Post by: animecyberrat on June 11, 2008, 05:22:05 PM
Donkey Kong is a playformer, it stars Mario, but it is not a Mario Game.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on June 11, 2008, 05:25:00 PM
Post by: animecyberrat on June 11, 2008, 05:29:16 PM
It was fun running around jumping, as usual. It was not fun pointing the damn hose, trying to defeat enemies that all look like they belong in Rainbow Brite instead.
Post by: vudu on June 11, 2008, 05:43:32 PM
Post by: ShyGuy on June 11, 2008, 05:54:47 PM
Post by: animecyberrat on June 11, 2008, 06:06:48 PM
On the other hand, If Bowser was supposed to be in the game at all, or his kid even, shouldn't there have been more Koopa troops or something? There was more to it than that, look I am not saying it is a bad game just what I didn't like about it or why to me it wasn't a true Mario game. Some of the replies seams as silly to me as my reasons do you some of you.
Post by: NWR_insanolord on June 11, 2008, 07:14:57 PM
Wouldn't it be interesting to try something like Sunshine again on the Wi? Using the remote pointer to aim the water pack could be interesting. The same could be said of Luigi's Mansion and aiming the vacuum.
Post by: animecyberrat on June 11, 2008, 07:22:04 PM
Sunshine just didn't do it for me. I liked it but it just wasn't very Mario enough. I did like Luigi's Mansion but his games are always different than Mario's game so it was no big deal.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on June 11, 2008, 08:20:33 PM
Post by: animecyberrat on June 11, 2008, 09:06:49 PM
Post by: Chozo Ghost on June 11, 2008, 10:27:12 PM
Nintendo did similar things with Metroid Prime (making it an FPS), and with Zelda WW (making it a cartoon). The main reason the GC didn't do as well as it should have is probably because Nintendo kept changing the formulas for its core franchises and pissed off their fans in the process. Now, I personally didn't have a problem with the graphical style of Zelda WW (although apparently many people did), but I did have a problem with the alterations of equipping Mario with a permanent water cannon and making Metroid into an FPS. For me, those changes were unforgivable.
And to top that off, Sunshine was the only real Mario game for the GC. All the other "Mario" games were Party and Sports games or spin-offs. So for people who loved the platforming Mario games of other consoles, they were naturally dissappointed with the GC's offerings in that respect.
Post by: animecyberrat on June 11, 2008, 10:44:33 PM
Post by: Nick DiMola on June 12, 2008, 01:24:51 PM
The BEST thing Nintendo did with the Gamecube is shake up their mainline franchises. The Gamecube was like one big testing ground for Nintendo. Some of their tests proved successful, others did not; regardless, everything they offered was interesting, fresh and new. The only thing Nintendo did that bothered me was cop out with Wind Waker. The game should've been in dev for another whole year and it would've been leagues better. As it stands the game is a bit too short and it disappoints me every time I think about it because there was MASSIVE potential there and they barely scratched the surface of it. Even worse, Phantom Hourglass did almost nothing to further tap into that potential.
Post by: D_Average on June 12, 2008, 02:08:53 PM
Post by: Morari on June 12, 2008, 02:29:29 PM
Post by: D_Average on July 11, 2008, 02:53:27 PM
Instead, I went with Yoshi's Island for the GBA
Post by: ReverendNoahWhateley on July 12, 2008, 01:04:15 AM
Post by: NWR_insanolord on July 12, 2008, 01:52:06 AM
Post by: D_Average on July 26, 2008, 09:44:03 PM
Post by: Maverick on July 27, 2008, 04:45:24 AM
That happens a lot, where we point out flaws and analyze everything so much that it seems like we hate games that we actually love and are amazing, like recently with Brawl.
Is it okay not to love it because it's too god damned hard?
Post by: Ceric on July 27, 2008, 09:49:23 AM
Smack talk on Mario Sunshine = FAIL. The game is grossly underrated and IMO is infinitely more enjoyable than Galaxy which I played till I beat it 100% (241 stars) and I doubt I will play it again. Sunshine was more challenging, more like Mario 64 and more fun than Mario Galaxy was, hands down.
The BEST thing Nintendo did with the Gamecube is shake up their mainline franchises. The Gamecube was like one big testing ground for Nintendo. Some of their tests proved successful, others did not; regardless, everything they offered was interesting, fresh and new. The only thing Nintendo did that bothered me was cop out with Wind Waker. The game should've been in dev for another whole year and it would've been leagues better. As it stands the game is a bit too short and it disappoints me every time I think about it because there was MASSIVE potential there and they barely scratched the surface of it. Even worse, Phantom Hourglass did almost nothing to further tap into that potential.
I'm playing throuh Phantom Hourglass right now. I think it does two things that Wind waker could have severally benefitted from. The density of the game is better and sailing is not a chore really because there are things to do on the ocean. Beyond that I agree. I think the controls for Wind Wakers in the dungeons where for the most part more precise. This game didn't do anything to push the universe along. Though I haven't beaten it but if Ganon isn't the boss then I will say the the WW inspired entry in the series are the most progressive.
Post by: Tanookisuit on July 27, 2008, 12:02:40 PM
Post by: DAaaMan64 on August 29, 2008, 04:57:52 PM
Post by: Nick DiMola on August 29, 2008, 05:24:49 PM
Post by: DAaaMan64 on August 29, 2008, 05:43:00 PM
Post by: UncleBob on August 29, 2008, 07:52:36 PM
I'm out of money and I need GC component cables. Does anyone have any or know where I can find some?You can try this link (http://www.gamestop.com/Catalog/ProductDetails.aspx?product_id=32149).. Put your ZIP code in to search for them within a 100 mile radius. $4.99 is a steal. It's not common, but it's not impossible (I got a set this summer when we drove to visit a friend in another state).
While you're at it, check this link (http://www.gamestop.com/Catalog/ProductDetails.aspx?product_id=22490) and see if you can find me some used Broadband Adapters. :)
Post by: DAaaMan64 on August 29, 2008, 08:39:16 PM
Post by: UncleBob on August 29, 2008, 09:42:36 PM
I need three more to get my 8...
And if you run into any extra component cables, let me know too. ;)
Post by: DAaaMan64 on August 29, 2008, 11:25:11 PM
Post by: UncleBob on August 29, 2008, 11:32:27 PM
Post by: DAaaMan64 on September 02, 2008, 02:54:34 AM
Post by: Mario on September 02, 2008, 03:27:38 AM
Post by: DAaaMan64 on September 02, 2008, 03:30:52 AM
Yep, love em. Wave Race moreso. It's coming back in Wii Sports Resort.
Not acceptable, Wave Race and 1080 had this amazing way about their style and atmosphere. Even the music put you in the mood for it. I think it's NST's amazing work. At least 1080 is.
Post by: Mario on September 02, 2008, 05:17:01 AM
Post by: DAaaMan64 on September 02, 2008, 12:19:00 PM
Post by: UncleBob on September 15, 2008, 07:16:07 PM
Why must you kill my happiness, Nintendo? Why?
First Odama, then DK Barrel Blast (never did buy it) and now this... :(
Post by: BeautifulShy on September 15, 2008, 07:29:23 PM
Odama was a great game.
Post by: UncleBob on September 15, 2008, 07:38:12 PM
Post by: Mario on September 15, 2008, 09:44:48 PM
Post by: BeautifulShy on September 15, 2008, 09:55:44 PM
