So... Why did the GameCube not do well?

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. Wii U
  3. So... Why did the GameCube not do well?

User Info: roadtosalvation

4 years ago#61
EazyERock posted...
the controller sucks

Actually no... I thought the same thing before I played Metroid Prime last month. I was proven wrong...

User Info: ajko000

4 years ago#62
It didn't? I think it had some of the best games to date.
Nothing to see here, but the post below me sure looks suspicious.

User Info: oxnerd

4 years ago#63
I loved the Gamecube, had my most favorite games of all time, Symphonia, Twilight, Smash, etc

User Info: Devil_wings00

4 years ago#64
It just didn't offer as much or anything different then the other two competing systems. Unless you really NEEDED nintendo first party titles the other two systems offered more. PS2 had a MASSIVE library of games and more exclusives by a long shot and the xbox offered a superior online experience and better visuals. The gamecube wasn't bad but it had nothing but a handful of nintendo exclusives to entice people.
3570k @ 4.6, GTX 580 @ 980/2106, ASUS Sabertooth z77, 8GB G.Skill Sniper 1600MHZ, 2 Mushkin Chronos in raid0, 1TB WD black.

User Info: Devil_wings00

4 years ago#65
DarkAdonis123 posted...
slyman19 posted...
Nothing from the PS2 library could even come close to the masterpiece that is known as REmake.

I'm a big RE fan and love REmake. In fact I still own and occasionally play REmake, but let's not be ridiculous.

lol ya fanboy alert. The PS2 library is 10,000 titles strong and has more great exclusive games then I could name. The PS2 also got all third party support as well so really the only thing you were missing was RE and a handful of nintendo games vs. hundreds of exclusives on the PS2. Honestly that gen wasn't even close with what console "won" the ps2 was the king.
3570k @ 4.6, GTX 580 @ 980/2106, ASUS Sabertooth z77, 8GB G.Skill Sniper 1600MHZ, 2 Mushkin Chronos in raid0, 1TB WD black.

User Info: silverbullt

4 years ago#66
Nintendo problems started during the N64 era, the GC was merely an extension of their previous gen problems. Like the N64, the GC was neither strong for the casuals or the hardcore, it was just average unless you loved Nintendo IPs(Not everyone cares about them!).
The PS2 and Xbox offered distinct advantages over the GC.

The Wii on the other hand offered a distinct casual focus that won people over. Nintendo did take a step back with the Wii U but it will be a couple of years until we can see the results from that.
XBOX360 - It only does everything.
Nintendo FIX the Wii U FFS:

User Info: Super_Jedi7

4 years ago#67
The gamecube is my favorite. I spent the most time with it.

User Info: Devil_wings00

4 years ago#68
Paladinrja posted...
softballumpire posted...
HeaderHog posted...
I can understand why the Wii U might not do well, (or not,) or why the Wii was hated (or loved)
But why the hell did the GameCube do badly?
It had some very good games for its time, good 3rd party support, and some killer launch items.
So, why didn't it do well?

couple of reason
small disk
kiddy imagine really did affect it
people don't like the square console.

Its hard to compete with ps2 and xbox.

Lol, wasn't hard at all. It was industry voted as best in every class (the industry was divided on the controller), apart from sales by the end of Gen 6. Every mag, every site.
Everyone was perplexed. Sony smear & fear campaign, coupled with GTA:SA & Sing star worked well. Neither Xbox nor PS2 had the quality of games the NGC had, nor the power to run them as the 'kiddy box' could.

I guess you live in a different universe then the rest of us lol The xbox was the most technically superior machine of the 3. The cube was in the middle and ps2 was the lowest but none of that crap matters. The ps2 had more exclusives, all third party games came to it and it was a great DVD player that you didn't need to pay extra for (xbox). Not to mention it was fully backwards compatible with ps1 which made the transition easy. Only thing you missed out on only owning a PS2 was a handful of GC exclusives and handful of xbox exclusives. The PS2 was just the best choice and most sound purchasing decision. In terms of quality the PS2 had more quality exclusive titles then the GC could ever hope for, The PS2 had close to a 6:1 ratio for exclusive games (almost 600 vs. 121). All those 121 were probably 100% quality though right? Give me a break. Yes the ps2 had a ton of shovel ware garbage to but that's because EVERYONE wanted to develop for it.
3570k @ 4.6, GTX 580 @ 980/2106, ASUS Sabertooth z77, 8GB G.Skill Sniper 1600MHZ, 2 Mushkin Chronos in raid0, 1TB WD black.

User Info: Atalalama

4 years ago#69
1st, it was designed to look like a toy, not a serious piece of hardware. That might have sufficed for some markets, but in America & Europeland it should have been redesigned (like the SNES & NES were)

2nd. the controller was designed for 1st party support only. A great big single button, and a bunch of little crap buttons. I don't even want to IMAGINE playing a Capcom fighter on it.

3rd, was 3rd party support. Sure, it started well enough (REmake & 0, x-platforms like Soul Calibur II (though the controller almost killed the fun) & Beyond Good & Evil)...but Nintendo was never know for treating their 3rd party devs well, and the devs went towards the PS2 due to...

4th, the GameCube couldn't play movies & music...but the PS2 DID. This led to higher sales on its own. At the time, DVD players weren't new per-se...but to have a DVD/Game system combo? It was a huge advantage (much like the PS3 & Blu-Ray) that Nintendo couldn't overcome. Not to mention...

5th, the GCN came hot off the heels of the N64. While technically a powerful system, it did NOT get a lot of 3rd party support due to the storage medium. No serious RPG's (well...almost no...Ogre Battle 64 was sweet - but no Enix/Square support killed it in Japan), no serious fighting games, many Super Me-Tooio 64 titles. The PS2, on the other hand, came off with a STRONG 3rd party support system after Playstation become a household word (much like Nintendo did in the mid-80's to mid-90's) with the PS1. While this can be combined with point #3 in part...point 3 detailed 3rd party support only, not the consumer mindset strength from the previous gen. which this point is dedicated to.

Storage media was NOT a huge factor. After all, a large amount of PS2 titles didn't take-up the entire DVD storage space - instead just taking up enough space for 1 or 2 GCN discs.

So, why did the X-Box fail? No dedicated Japanese support to start with, and Western devs were still mostly developing for the PC market at this time to end with.

User Info: silverbullt

4 years ago#70
The original Xbox had a 700mhz Pentium 3 processor and a nvidia gpu! It could literally run full PC games without any porting assuming they were DirectX libraries.
XBOX360 - It only does everything.
Nintendo FIX the Wii U FFS:
  1. Boards
  2. Wii U
  3. So... Why did the GameCube not do well?

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived