Topic: Gamecube Versions vs. Xbox/PS2

[Arbok]

Sorry for the semi-vague title, but it’s the best I could come up with to relate to my question, which is related to games which have hit multiple systems. Anyway, I was wondering which games have sold the best on the Gamecube in the U.S., either compared to both the PS2 and Xbox versions or just one, and how often is the Gamecube version ported over later than the others.

For example, I’m pretty sure that the Gamecube versions of both “Sonic Heroes” and “Soul Calibur II” outsold both their Xbox and PS2 counterparts in America.

Thanks for your time.

[Rich]

I think Godzilla: Destroy all monsters Melee sold better and same with the ground based star wars game, I don't remember what its called. Thats all i can thin of off the top of my head sorry.

[KDR_11k]

In the Pitfall review GSI said the GC version is the best out of the bunch, but that game probably doesn't sell well on any platform...

[Infernal Monkey]

Quote
Originally posted by: Rich
I think Godzilla: Destroy all monsters Melee sold better and same with the ground based star wars game, I don't remember what its called.

Clone Wars?
Oh, and Godzilla had a head start on GameCube, by over a year.

Usually all three systems will get the game at the same time (although less and less games are making a GameCube release), but there are idiots like Eidos who'll release the GameCube version of a game six months later than the PS2/Xbox. Hitman 2 and er, that Legacy of Kain spin-off game... It's no wonder they sold like four week old breadrolls.

[AMac2002]

I'm pretty sure burnout did better on the GC.

[Arbok]

Ah yes, right of course, G: DAMM must have passed over my mind when I made this... so are:

Soul Calibur II
Sonic Heroes
Godzilla: Destroy All Monsters Melee
Star Wars: Clone Wars

the only  titles which have sold better on the GCN? Kind of dishearting...

[Ymeegod]

The orginal Burnout sold a bit better on the GC than the Xbox but no where nears the sales of the PS2 I think.

Not sure if you can count SH yet since there's only one months of figures so far and the GC had two weeks head start too.  

Oh.  You can add TMNT to that list of GC games.  :0

[MysticalMatt517]

In my experience I've found that many multi-platform games suck. Not all, but many of them do. There are exceptions like Prince of Persia, Splinter Cell, Max Payne, and Tony Hawk but overall I have low expectations when I look at a multiplatform game. The reason is simple - the developers typically write a game for the lowest common denominator (the PS2) because it's easier to add a couple extra textures for the more powerful systems than it is to dumb it down for the Playstation 2. Like I said, there are exceptions but this is what generally seems to happen.

I bought a GameCube not so I could play general run of the mill crap, but so that I could play the genius games that can only be found on it. Games like Metroid Prime, Animal Crossing, and Super Smash Brothers Melee. Recently I threw in the Zelda collectors disc that came with my GC and started playing Ocarina of Time for the first time (I never owned a N64). I was amazed at how good the game was and have become hopelessly addicted to it. You don't get stuff of this quality from run of the mill pop-culture games.

If you look at any casual gamers collection you will most likely find a similar set of games. Everyone mindlessly goes out and buys Tony Hawk, Madden, GTA, and a few other heavily marketed games that may or may not be good. Granted, these games are all descent but the point is they don't think about what they're buying, they just get it because that's what everybody else is getting.

So what I'm really trying to say is that I think multiplatform games don't do well on the GC because we simply expect better games. We care about what we play and we want it to be good. We're spoiled by the amount of effort, genius, and talent placed behind games made by the big N. How are games designed for the sole reason of making a fast buck supposed to compete with that? We simply expect more.  

[Ian Sane]

"In my experience I've found that many multi-platform games suck. Not all, but many of them do."

I agree with you and your post got me thinking about a once popular game series: Turok.  The first three Turok games were N64 exclusives so they made good use of the N64 hardware and although I wouldn't call them classics they were regarded as good games and worth checking out.  Turok Evolution however was widely considered to be total horsesh!t and the game is found in bargin bins all over the place.  Unlike the previous titles that game was a multiplatform title and sure enough it was buggy and just plain BAD.  Now the lowest common denomintator issue probably came into play in that situation but I think another issue was also to blame.

Turok Evolution was a rushed title and that alone can often ruin a game but in this situation it was worse because they had to develop three games at the same time.  If a multiplatform title is to be released on all the console simultaneously it's going to require three times the work and that combined with the lowest common denominator issue can make for a pretty bad game.  Many times the three-at-once approach has resulted in a bad game across all formats or one good version with two poor versions.  There are exceptions like Soul Calibur II but that game is a rarity in terms of quality period let alone for a multiplatform release.  Splinter Cell was also quite good but in that case the Xbox version was designed first with the others coming a few months later.  True MS did pay for temporary exclusivity but that seperation of the three versions allowed for the team to concentrate on making the game the best it could be without worrying about making three versions at the same time.

Perhaps that's the strategy third parties should use.  The game should be made to be the best it can at first and then released on the other consoles later.  Now delayed ports on the Cube often don't sell very well but those are always bare bones ports.  If a delayed port is specifical designed to make use of the hardware it usually does fine.  Splinter Cell on the PS2 and Cube for example was not ignored.  In that situation the game receives more hype and gets better reviews and thus better sales.

If a game is designed to make full use of the Cube hardware is has a better potential to sell.  That's why Soul Calibur II sold well and that's why exclusives sell well.

[KDR_11k]

(Splinter Cell on the Cube was a PS2 port)

I don't know how people come up with Turok as a good game, I don't know console FPS standards, but by PC FPS standards the game is mediocre at best.

Either way, the Cube is often neglected by third parties making multiplatform games which shows in performance. I know I said it before, but I know someone who thought the Cube was weaker than the PS2 because he was playtester for bad multiplatform games. Of course, a company with such ethics usually doesn't bother with good gameplay, either, so it comes to no surprise that those ports are bad games.

BTW, 007:EON supposedly sold very good, even on the Cube. Not more than the other versions, but still.

[Arbok]

Ok, lets play within the stereotype here, what about some of the more "kid oriented" titles like: "Ty the Tasmanian Tiger," "Spyro: Enter the Dragonfly," and maybe the delayed port of "Scooby Doo" on the Gamecube?

PS: (and a little off topic) I also never liked Turok very much, beyond the first one for a short time before Goldeneye 007 was released and my expectations of the genre soared.

[Syl]

I'll happen to actually own a surprising amount of 3rd party multi-system games, (considering i own a total of nearly 40 cube games now, this is basicly expected)
THPS3, THPS4, SSX tricky, SSX 3, Burnout 2, Timesplitters 2, Prince of Persia, Metal Arms (amazing game if you haven't played it yet) Soul Caliber 2 and Star Wars: bounty hunter (which, honestly, isn't a good game) and as of last week, Beyond Good and Evil (great game, great game)
Now, each of those games has sold decently well on gamecube compared to the other systems, (likewise, I really don't think burnout, PoP, or metal arms sold well on any system.)

None of those games (with the exception of bounty hunter) are anywhere near bad titles, they are all far above average in my book.

however, that does mean that the other 30ish games i own ARE cube exclusive, (and about 1/3 of those are first party) which means that its pretty obvious that cube geared games are what i prefer.  However, just becuase something is multisystem, doesn't instantly make it bad.  If i was making a game, i'd most likely try to have it accessible on all systems, bigger market means a bigger profit hopefully.  Likewise, this is also why bad games tend to be marketed with cheap ports.

Overall, i had a very annoyingly large post over on the ocremix boards about why certain games don't sell well, among other thing nintendo related, mainly about how many 3rd parties are no longer producing for the gamecube because theyre games didn't sell.
overall, the entire thing boiled down to "Gamecube Owners aren't ****ty games target audience" and i hold true to that.

anyway, i don't want to drag this on much, but i would suggest grabbing the cube version of any given title myself, simply cause i like the controller better, unless another version has some mad extra's.