• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

The Xbox and Gamecube were very close in the US, did the Xbox have the better games? Or did Nintendo destroy consumer confidence?

Banjo64

cumsessed
I always just put it down to patriotism to be honest. US company makes US product with US marketing. If one of the big three was UK based and tapped in to UK culture/nostalgia it’d probably appeal to me more than the others. Can’t lie though, the OG Xbox was horrible compared to the Game Cube, in terms of games and form factor.
 

SmokedMeat

Gamer™
Nintendo had the stigma of being the “kiddie” platform. While the Cube had some killer games, it lacked the third party support of the others - which carried over from N64’s abysmal support. Outside of Nintendo’s games there wasn’t much reason to buy one.

Xbox had more “mature” themed games, some strong third party exclusives, a few first party gems, and was the most powerful of the three.
 

BlackTron

Member
"clique they claim"... Autocorrect.... Reference to a Tupac song, poor one at that lol


EDIT:
Translated: fuck those fellows, the things they like and the people who hold them in good regards

My own preferential thing is innately superior, and the people who respect that are upstanding citizens.

Best regards,

Fuck n64 and GameCube controller gang

You can always tell when someone hasn't used a GC controller to play an actual game.

The secret to it is very subtle, but gets easier to spot with experience.
 

Thaedolus

Gold Member
GameCube is still the best console from that generation IMO…I always thought the games looked better than PS2 or Xbox and I’m a Nintendo fan boi through and through. Could’ve used a proper dual stick controller but what they came up with was still fine, and the wavebird was dope.
 
This is such an easy answer; Xbox's library in America catered to the developing tastes of the time, generally speaking. Not just in having more mature games, but in specific genres like FPS, WRPGs, racing games etc.

It's a moot point to try deciding if one's library was better than the other's because that type of judgement is almost always subjective, and in terms of technical measures there were graphically intense games on each system some that in several ways bested the PS2 versions on a technical level (Splinter Cell for Xbox, RE4 for Gamecube).

While the Gamecube was more dissimilar to PS2 than Xbox, at least on the surface, when you actually peered at them a bit deeper it's likely the Gamecube had more in common with the PS2 than Xbox in terms of Western support and what Japanese games got ported over and that could have negatively impacted it. Xbox got a lot of unique Western support in games like Morrowind, Jade Empire, Indiana Jones, Riddick, DOOM 3, and KOTOR that simply weren't on PS2 and didn't really have equivalents there. So I think a lot of PC people in America who were beginning to migrate to console at the very least went with an Xbox in addition to a PS2 due to those reasons.

OTOH, a lot of the big games Gamecube had that gen, had counters of comparable quality on PS2. Sunshine? Well you've got Jak & Daxter, Sly Cooper, and other 3D platformers on PS2. RE Remake, Zero, and 4? Well PS2's got Silent Hill, Fatal Frame, and goodness knows what other survival-horror games. Metroid Prime? PS2's got Killzone, BLACK, TimeSplitters (I know some of these were multiplat but they were strongly associated with PS2 so them being multiplat did not do Gamecube or Xbox many favors), etc.

Nintendo's own software brand did very well that gen (even if several games from them underperformed compared to internal expectations), but they lacked the Western 3P support long-term, particularly in the form of exclusives, to help drive Gamecube in NA and Europe the way the N64 benefited from during its era. There's really not much else to it. Sure the $99 price cut might've been seen as a sign of weakness but they only took that option because Western sales were already lagging behind PS2 and even Xbox, and the gap was already growing. The price cut was Nintendo's way of trying to stop the bleeding, it didn't work.

Xbox sold 20% more than GameCube, that's not close.

Also kinda this. Maybe very early on they were close but I'd define "close" as within some margin of error percentile, I'm talking 3% - 4%. Maybe 10% max.

But Halo was a massive launch title for OG Xbox at the time and the Gamecube really had nothing to counter it, so whatever gap was there between both systems in NA at the start grew in Xbox's favor relatively quickly, I'd imagine.
 
Last edited:

cireza

Member
I enjoyed both consoles. I feel that GC missed on too many third parties though. And that controller was absolute shit for fighting games.

Overall Xbox felt more turned towards the future while GC was definitely anchored in the past. I kept my Xbox after all these years but eventually parted with my GC and have no regrets.
 
Last edited:

levyjl1988

Member
I owned a Gamecube only, one of my friends would own a PS2, and my other friend an Xbox. On Birthdays and parties, they would come over and would have three video game consoles to play with. We would go to Blockbuster to rent some games and order some Pizza Hut or Pizza Pizza.
Those were good times.
 

SpiceRacz

Member
I think Halo pushed a lot of consoles for Microsoft and had more 3rd party options. Whereas GameCube sold less consoles, yet had a higher attach rate. I also recall Nintendo having sizeable gaps between some of their first party stuff, much like N64. Nintendo also lost market share that generation, but I remember reading they were still more profitable than Sony and Microsoft.
 
Conclusion #2 makes little sense. $99 is impulse buy territory.
It is impulse buy territory if in less than two full years from launch the same product had already cut the price twice before and reached $99 while the other two competitors were still at $199 with strong sales? Or is that more of a "skeptical" buy where the value of the product is question to be worthless or not?

Add in rumors of Nintendo maybe thinking of pulling a Dreamcast at the time and that price cut doesn't seem as advantageous outside some parents and core Nintendo fans.

But in hindsight the design of the PS2 and the DVD drive were too perfect I think it was about the same price as most high end DVD players at the time.

People say this a lot but in the US this wasn't really the case, in November one month after PS2 launch iirc you could get DVD players from major brands, including one from Sony, ranging from $99-$200. The PS2 launched at $299. This also may go for a couple other countries.

Now for a lot of other countries yeah it was a good deal, especially as it dropped in price but in the US this is commonly repeated but isn't the case.

Every time there's a thread like this it shocks me to hear people don't like the GCN controller. It's sooo good. Sure, maybe it's lacking a few buttons, and yeah, it was made for Miyamoto, but it feels incredible in your hands. The Duke is absolute trash.

Microsoft came out with the S pretty quickly. Although if you had big American hands the Duke was decent.

Pikmin, Animal Crossing and Luigi's Mansion would all get their real starts on GC, and that was the last time Nintendo created multiple new franchises in a single gen.

Did you forget about the Wii? They created quite a few new IP there.

PS2, obviously,

I always find it fascinating how people can't discuss these two without bringing up the PS2.

They were very close because they both sold basically nothing. PS2 was all that mattered.

This doesn't even make sense.

I always just put it down to patriotism to be honest. US company makes US product with US marketing.
Is that why The Jaguar outsold the PS1?
 
My perception of Gamecube was so off during it's run. I didn't pay attention to port comparisons or sales numbers and I absolutely loved it. Felt like a healthy ecosystem with tons of games, great graphics and impactful exclusive games. I also hear n64 was kind of a bust which makes even less sense to me. Everyone I knew owned an n64 and was obsessed with it.
 
Xbox was a bit of fresh air back in time, and it was heavily moddable, it helped a lot.
Also, Nintendo looked dated because of N64 still using cartridge and delayed launch, GameCube was not enough to bring back consumers confidence despite some awesome games. Only the Wii bring Nintendo to the front despite being only a 1.5 GameCube.
 
Last edited:
I had all 3 consoles and the gamecube was my favorite. But back then as a broke kid, a modded PS2 shat on everything, later on a modded xbox was also unreal. Nothing beat getting burned dvd games for $2-3 bucks when you're in high school.
 

RoadHazard

Gold Member
It is impulse buy territory if in less than two full years from launch the same product had already cut the price twice before and reached $99 while the other two competitors were still at $199 with strong sales? Or is that more of a "skeptical" buy where the value of the product is question to be worthless or not?

Add in rumors of Nintendo maybe thinking of pulling a Dreamcast at the time and that price cut doesn't seem as advantageous outside some parents and core Nintendo fans.



People say this a lot but in the US this wasn't really the case, in November one month after PS2 launch iirc you could get DVD players from major brands, including one from Sony, ranging from $99-$200. The PS2 launched at $299. This also may go for a couple other countries.

Now for a lot of other countries yeah it was a good deal, especially as it dropped in price but in the US this is commonly repeated but isn't the case.



Microsoft came out with the S pretty quickly. Although if you had big American hands the Duke was decent.



Did you forget about the Wii? They created quite a few new IP there.



I always find it fascinating how people can't discuss these two without bringing up the PS2.



This doesn't even make sense.


Is that why The Jaguar outsold the PS1?

Do Americans actually have larger hands than Europeans, or is this just some kind of myth that people use to justify that massive behemoth of a controller?
 

SkylineRKR

Member
Cube was good but I felt frustrated that so many multiplats didn't come out on it or they were kinda butchered. Cube was the system that never had a GTA game at all, no Burnout past 2. MS had Ninja Gaiden, PS2 had DMC. Xbox had DoA, PS2 had Tekken and VF. etc. Cube also had no Street Fighter Anniversary which I played a ton. Also no single Silent Hill game. No MGS 2 and 3, only the Twin Snakes which I just didn't like nearly as much as 2 and 3.

I started with Xbox, which was extremely good I thought. I immensely enjoyed Halo, DoA 3, PGR, Rallisport, JSRF, Otogi etc. Then I had a Cube mainly for RE and some Nintendo games but third parties started to back off. The few third party games I played on it felt worse in general, they had bad sound mixing for instance.

I ended up using the PS2 the most by far. It was for me the winner. PS2 had everything. Tekken 4,5, FFX, XII, DMC trilogy, GTA trilogy, Onimusha trilogy, Ace Combat trilogy, Gran Turismo 3, 4, Silent Hill 2, 3, VF4, MGS2 and 3 and a good twilight period with Persona, Valkyrie Profile 2 etc... And the ones that were ported to Xbox appeared first here.


Fuck the GameCube controller and the click they claim

Cube didn't come equipped with game.
 
Last edited:

Bragr

Member
The Gamecube is what taught Nintendo that they can't go head to head with Xbox and Playstation in terms of power and third-party support, that's why they went a different direction with the Wii.

The Gamecube itself was great, with some classic Nintendo games, but Nintendo struggled with the N64 and the Gamecube sales-wise, they needed to do something different. Something Sega never pulled off. Create a market for themselves that can survive outside of the Playstation and Xbox sphere.
 

StormCell

Member
I was super bitter during the GCN era because every important third party game was some budgeted version with less features. The Capcom deal that gave us Resident Evil 4, Viewtiful Joe, and the others was one of the rare moments we were actually vindicated. I never owned an original Xbox but I doubt their player base dealt with this.
No, not only did the Xbox consumer not have to deal with this, they often got bonus features. If you bought the WWF wrestling game on Xbox rather than PS2 or GameCube, you got the ability to load your own music for custom intros! If you bought a baseball game for Xbox, you more than likely got features like creating/loading/saving custom teams with custom logos and a stadium builder! lol Of course, GameCube versions of sports titles might not have even included a full franchise mode because standard memory card was too small and/or had to buy a 3rd party special memory card to handle a full save...

Yes, Nintendo made a lot of bad decisions.
 

Dane

Member
This is such an easy answer; Xbox's library in America catered to the developing tastes of the time, generally speaking. Not just in having more mature games, but in specific genres like FPS, WRPGs, racing games etc.

It's a moot point to try deciding if one's library was better than the other's because that type of judgement is almost always subjective, and in terms of technical measures there were graphically intense games on each system some that in several ways bested the PS2 versions on a technical level (Splinter Cell for Xbox, RE4 for Gamecube).

While the Gamecube was more dissimilar to PS2 than Xbox, at least on the surface, when you actually peered at them a bit deeper it's likely the Gamecube had more in common with the PS2 than Xbox in terms of Western support and what Japanese games got ported over and that could have negatively impacted it. Xbox got a lot of unique Western support in games like Morrowind, Jade Empire, Indiana Jones, Riddick, DOOM 3, and KOTOR that simply weren't on PS2 and didn't really have equivalents there. So I think a lot of PC people in America who were beginning to migrate to console at the very least went with an Xbox in addition to a PS2 due to those reasons.

OTOH, a lot of the big games Gamecube had that gen, had counters of comparable quality on PS2. Sunshine? Well you've got Jak & Daxter, Sly Cooper, and other 3D platformers on PS2. RE Remake, Zero, and 4? Well PS2's got Silent Hill, Fatal Frame, and goodness knows what other survival-horror games. Metroid Prime? PS2's got Killzone, BLACK, TimeSplitters (I know some of these were multiplat but they were strongly associated with PS2 so them being multiplat did not do Gamecube or Xbox many favors), etc.

Nintendo's own software brand did very well that gen (even if several games from them underperformed compared to internal expectations), but they lacked the Western 3P support long-term, particularly in the form of exclusives, to help drive Gamecube in NA and Europe the way the N64 benefited from during its era. There's really not much else to it. Sure the $99 price cut might've been seen as a sign of weakness but they only took that option because Western sales were already lagging behind PS2 and even Xbox, and the gap was already growing. The price cut was Nintendo's way of trying to stop the bleeding, it didn't work.



Also kinda this. Maybe very early on they were close but I'd define "close" as within some margin of error percentile, I'm talking 3% - 4%. Maybe 10% max.

But Halo was a massive launch title for OG Xbox at the time and the Gamecube really had nothing to counter it, so whatever gap was there between both systems in NA at the start grew in Xbox's favor relatively quickly, I'd imagine.
Nintendo did that deep cut because the Gamecube was stockpiling to the point of the production being paused for most of 2003 (it had like 80k units on the first quarter) as it had a feat of doing a worse end of the years sales in the previous year than in the first fiscal half, it did help the console to keep going and not do WiiU tier numbers.

They were doing well at least because they had the GBA and then DS to do numbers, and their exclusives since the dawn of times have massive attach ratios that only Halo 2 did similar outside.
 
I initially bought a GameCube, being a huge fan of Zelda, Metroid, Mario, and Mario Kart games. I was underwhelmed by all of Nintendo's first party offerings though on the GameCube. I think the problem was that the N64 games set the bar so ridiculously high that there was no way the GameCube was going to be able to match the games. Mario Kart double dash compared Mario Kart 64? Disappointed. Wind waker compared to OoT and MM? Disappointed. Metroid Prime was the only game that delivered on expectations for me. My most played and enjoyed games on the GameCube ended up being Super Monkey Ball and SSX Tricky. Wave Race was a bust. Star Fox Adventures was a bust. The only other game I enjoyed was the resident evil remake.

At some point in time I was finally introduced to Halo CE and the rest was history. Throughout the entire OG Xbox life, I only owned 3 games lol: Halo CE, Halo 2, and Elder Scrolls Morrowind. I never needed anything else for it. Transferred a bunch of music to the Xbox hard drive and never looked back.

I know that my game preferences played a major part in my opinions, but I don't have the fond memories of the GameCube that everyone else seems to have.

The duke controller was awful but the smaller S controller was fine. Everyone loves the GameCube controller. While it was comfortable to hold I absolutely hated the button layout. I hated the clicky bumpers and I hated the lack of 2 normal sticks.
 
Last edited:
I always find it fascinating how people can't discuss these two without bringing up the PS2.
Gee, I wonder why. The question is phrased, "the Xbox outsold the GameCube, what made it so successful?". When, in reality, both were failures BECAUSE of the dominance of PS2.

GameCube 22 million
Xbox 24 million
PlayStation 2 155 million
 
Last edited:
I enjoyed both consoles. I feel that GC missed on too many third parties though. And that controller was absolute shit for fighting games.

Overall Xbox felt more turned towards the future while GC was definitely anchored in the past. I kept my Xbox after all these years but eventually parted with my GC and have no regrets.
Ah forgot about the fighting games.

I remember trying to play the MK games on it, and Capcom Vs. SNK and it was not pleasant. Also that goes for the Mega Man X games too, that collectionw as wasted.

but I remember reading they were still more profitable than Sony and Microsoft.
Actually Nintendo was losing money.


RE Remake, Zero, and 4? Well PS2's got Silent Hill, Fatal Frame, and goodness knows what other survival-horror games.
Actually PS3 got RE4, though I heard it was noticeably worse, but I only touched the GC version so not sure how valid that claim is.

Xbox sold 20% more than GameCube, that's not close.

The sales gap was literally one class killer app away from catching the Xbox if the Gamecube ever found one. In the US we saw this with the Wii and 360 where the later got some late console drivers that gathered interest in the console (and then Kinect later) which had Xbox come back and pass the Wii covering a gap of over something like 55, 65%? This was less than 3 million units apart.
This is why I don’t understand GC stans.
who?
 

SkylineRKR

Member
The Cube controller was bad I thought. It worked for Nintendo's own games but its probably another design where they absolutely ignored third parties. Its D-pad was a joke, its bumpers were whatever and the right stick was dumb.

The Duke was fine for me, even the size. Just the button placement was shit. The D-pad was shit but it didn't destroy my thumb at least. So for me, S was mainly superior because of the more logical button layout.

Xbox only sold 24 million but you have to consider they had barely any presence in Japan which was still a huge console market at the time and they discontinued it almost immediately in 2005. I liked it more than GC. The console offered simply more of what I enjoyed, and also online play.
 
Gee, I wonder why. The question is phrased, "the Xbox outsold the GameCube, what made it so successful?". When, in reality, both were failures BECAUSE of the dominance of PS2.

GameCube 21.75 million
Xbox 24 million
PlayStation 2 155 million
Has nothing to do with the topic or the questions posed in the OP. Sorry, but it is possible to mentally separate the PS2 from a topic not involving it. Here you aren't even on topic, just going on a sales rant involving a console that's not the focus of the thread.
 
Nintendo did that deep cut because the Gamecube was stockpiling to the point of the production being paused for most of 2003 (it had like 80k units on the first quarter) as it had a feat of doing a worse end of the years sales in the previous year than in the first fiscal half, it did help the console to keep going and not do WiiU tier numbers.

They were doing well at least because they had the GBA and then DS to do numbers, and their exclusives since the dawn of times have massive attach ratios that only Halo 2 did similar outside.

Oh I forgot about the stockpile of GCs in the distribution chain and them actually ceasing production. That was wild, I don't think Nintendo's ever had a similar situation pop up but it goes to show how badly the Gamecube was doing at the time sales-wise.

I think I got my GC in 2002 or 2003, it was before the $99 price drop and probably after my fat PS2 died :/.

Actually PS3 got RE4, though I heard it was noticeably worse, but I only touched the GC version so not sure how valid that claim is.

Must've meant PS2 there and got 3 by mistake, but yeah you're right, PS2 got RE4. They even announced it before the GC version came out and that really hurt its sales on GC. But PS2 version looks visually worst in many aspects such as textures, muddier colors, simpler geometry on some models etc. Some of that is probably due to it being a port and one where the platform in question was not the priority.

I say that because the announcement of RE4 for PS2 was a surprise to a lot of fans and even some people in the press, I'm guessing Capcom didn't start it until sometime very late 2003 or early 2004.
 

SkylineRKR

Member
Those days were crazy. I remember picking up a used Cube again for RE4. The console cost me 50 bucks with a copy of RE4 that was actually priced the same lol. For about 100 I had a Cube + RE4.
 
Last edited:

boomcrab

Member
Oh man gamecube was such a great console. I know xbox had some great titles and the online stuff but I just loved that little purple guy.
 

anothertech

Member
"Last night I dreamed that the number two was the most valued number in the world. The vice president had all the power. Athletes fought for silver medals. Women were considered the best gender. And stadiums of fans shouted “We’re number two!’."

 
Has nothing to do with the topic or the questions posed in the OP. Sorry, but it is possible to mentally separate the PS2 from a topic not involving it. Here you aren't even on topic, just going on a sales rant involving a console that's not the focus of the thread.
The subject is literally about WHY these two consoles performed the way they did sales-wise. It literally cannot be intelligently discussed without including the PS2 in the conversation.
 
Last edited:

Dorago

Member
I had an Xbox but I was totally focused on Halo and didn't have any other games for it. I had 8 controllers, 2 TVs, a LAN splitter, two Ethernet cables (which were $50 at the time), and two copies of Halo. One thing I didn't have was a lot of money and what I just described took up my entire budget. I don't recall having any other games for it though I do remember a friend play Ninja Gaiden on my second Halo box.

I got Gamecube used after the Wii came out and had a great time with it. Mario Sunshine, Metroid Prime 1 & 2, Wind Waker, Ocarina of Time port, Tales Of Symphonia, and Super Monkey Ball are the ones that I remember off the top of my head. I also had the GBA player attachment and the Link Cable for Metroid Prime 2 to Metroid Fusion. This all came to a crashing halt though when the laser unit on my GC gave out and I could no longer play the games.

So more total hours spent on Xbox (I played Halo 8 hours a day for over a year) but many more games on GC.
 

SpiceRacz

Member
Ah forgot about the fighting games.

I remember trying to play the MK games on it, and Capcom Vs. SNK and it was not pleasant. Also that goes for the Mega Man X games too, that collectionw as wasted.


Actually Nintendo was losing money.




Actually PS3 got RE4, though I heard it was noticeably worse, but I only touched the GC version so not sure how valid that claim is.



The sales gap was literally one class killer app away from catching the Xbox if the Gamecube ever found one. In the US we saw this with the Wii and 360 where the later got some late console drivers that gathered interest in the console (and then Kinect later) which had Xbox come back and pass the Wii covering a gap of over something like 55, 65%? This was less than 3 million units apart.

who?

I think when all was said done, they were more profitable that generation, mostly due to the GBA.
 
Xbox had Halo. Halo changed the industry.

Gamecube had some amazing games, some of the best in their franchises still to this day. But what Halo did for fps, and the Xbox being able to easily be brought to peoples house for lan parties really just elevated MP gaming to a whole new level.
 

DrNeroCF

Member
People bought Xbox for Halo, GameCube for Melee, don’t think it’s much more complicated than that.

For the Xbox, it was the first time in console gaming when there was more incentive to buy a console and game your friends already had. Especially in college, the more Xboxes on the LAN, the better. Before that it really was, everyone would go to this friend’s house to play Street Fighter, Mortal Kombat, NBA Jam, Goldeneye, Mario Kart, Soul Calibur, SSX, TimeSplitters 2, Super Monkey Ball… or heck even the battle mode in Mario 3 on All Stars or Warlords on Atari with 4 paddle controllers. And before that it was taking turns playing whatever games and systems you didn’t have.

Man threads like this make me feel old…
 
Last edited:

Guerilla Munch

Neo Member
I had all 3 systems and Gamecube and Xbox always felt way more powerful than PS2. Nothing on PS2 came close to Rogue Leader, Wind Waker, Halo 2, and DOA3.

Gamecube still feels like the only next gen Nintendo system.
 

acm2000

Member
The sales gap was literally one class killer app away from catching the Xbox if the Gamecube ever found one. In the US we saw this with the Wii and 360 where the later got some late console drivers that gathered interest in the console (and then Kinect later) which had Xbox come back and pass the Wii covering a gap of over something like 55, 65%? This was less than 3 million units apart.
and xbox was literally one more killer app away from totally destroying gamecube, but what good is that nonsense as neither ever happened, the sales are done and set in the annals of history, 20% is not close.
 

BryceNobody

Member
honestly i used to consider the PS2 as the GOAT back when i got mine (i'm not an OG either, i got mine in 2021) but these days i just find more problems with it, from the subpar emulation to the awful third party ports to the interlaced display for most games.
every PS2 exclusive feels like it's being held back on PS2, like there's a better version available but it just doesn't exist because it's only on that one platform. that's never an issue on gamecube because the games are better emulated and are also just more well designed for the console, and in the case of Xbox the console versions are great and the PC versions even better.
PS2’s first party library is great and carried a decent amount of quality 3rd party titles, but people forget just how much terrible shovelware was stuffed into that console’s lifecycle. Everyone remembers the good games while almost always forgetting the nauseating amount of crap produced.

The ratio of quality games/garbage for the PS2 library is like 30% to 70%. For GameCube though, that ratio felt a little closer… say, 45% to 55% (thanks in part to a smaller library).
 
Last edited:

Dane

Member
Oh I forgot about the stockpile of GCs in the distribution chain and them actually ceasing production. That was wild, I don't think Nintendo's ever had a similar situation pop up but it goes to show how badly the Gamecube was doing at the time sales-wise.

I think I got my GC in 2002 or 2003, it was before the $99 price drop and probably after my fat PS2 died :/.



Must've meant PS2 there and got 3 by mistake, but yeah you're right, PS2 got RE4. They even announced it before the GC version came out and that really hurt its sales on GC. But PS2 version looks visually worst in many aspects such as textures, muddier colors, simpler geometry on some models etc. Some of that is probably due to it being a port and one where the platform in question was not the priority.

I say that because the announcement of RE4 for PS2 was a surprise to a lot of fans and even some people in the press, I'm guessing Capcom didn't start it until sometime very late 2003 or early 2004.
Capcom Five was a flop: By early 2004 they started to port the titles to PS2 with Viewtiful Joe and the sequel would be on it just a few weeks after the Gamecube version. Killer 7 was meant to be released after the GC version but then due to delays, Capcom decided to have the finished game on the drawer for six months so the PS2 team could complete its port and release together. RE4 was announced shortly before the original release and became infamous because of Mikami's promise to cut his head off if it was released on another platform.
 
Last edited:
The Cube controller was bad I thought. It worked for Nintendo's own games but its probably another design where they absolutely ignored third parties. Its D-pad was a joke, its bumpers were whatever and the right stick was dumb.

The Duke was fine for me, even the size. Just the button placement was shit. The D-pad was shit but it didn't destroy my thumb at least. So for me, S was mainly superior because of the more logical button layout.

Xbox only sold 24 million but you have to consider they had barely any presence in Japan which was still a huge console market at the time and they discontinued it almost immediately in 2005. I liked it more than GC. The console offered simply more of what I enjoyed, and also online play.

Actually Gamecube owes Xbox for putting out the 360 in 2005 or things may have been worse, but they didn't continue he Xbox in 2005, they just cut support down, it was discontinued in 2007, as shown in the OP article.

The subject is literally about WHY these two consoles performed the way they did sales-wise. It literally cannot be intelligently discussed without including the PS2 in the conversation.

That's not the subject at all, the subject is specifically how the Xbox inched ahead of the GameCube in NA, both consoles strongest market, I am pretty sure I know the topic to my own thread. It was not about why those two consoles sold badly compared to the PS2, it's about how one specific consoles was ahead by the other despite both of them selling similar amount of hardware and software until the gap up, and one being a larger brand name with a cheaper machine. Then it poses two questions.

I think when all was said done, they were more profitable that generation, mostly due to the GBA.
Which sales were also below forecasts, it prevented Nintendo from ending with a loss but I think people are overestimating how much profits the GBA added on. There's a reason why the PSPS announcement was considered a death blow at the time, and why people were saying that Nintendos best strategy was to try and save the Gamecube.

GBA sales of Pokemon games, while still strong sellers, were very low compared to where the franchise was before, and it led some to wonder if Pokemon was dying at the time, hysterical in hindsight.

and xbox was literally one more killer app away from totally destroying gamecube, but what good is that nonsense as neither ever happened, the sales are done and set in the annals of history, 20% is not close.
It's good in terms of emphasizing how small the gap was. it was a case of GameCube running into the Dreamcast problem of not finding something that worked. Considering the sales trends showed during that gen, that was a very close gap that only wasn't closed because Nintendo had nothing to respond with. Perception was also an issue, 3 price cuts in less than 2 full years.

Capcom Five was a flop: By early 2004 they started to port the titles to PS2 with Viewtiful Joe and the sequel would be on it just a few weeks after the Gamecube version. Killer 7 was meant to be released after the GC version but then due to delays, Capcom decided to have the finished game on the drawer for six months so the PS2 team could complete its port and release together. RE4 was announced shortly before the original release and became infamous because of Mikami's promise to cut his head off if it was released on another platform.
Well if not mistaken they didn't even release all 5 of the Capcom 5 did they?

Wasn't one or two missing?
 

MarkMe2525

Member
The subject is literally about WHY these two consoles performed the way they did sales-wise. It literally cannot be intelligently discussed without including the PS2 in the conversation.
Terrible misrepresentation of OP. The discussion is "literally" about the reasons a newcomer to the console space (Xbox) could outsell a Nintendo platform.

Now I'm sure the PS2 could be used in a manner to "intelligently discuss" the topic, but thinking that dropping the statement "both were failures... PS2 dominated them" is an intelligent addition to the conversation.... Well, just isn't that intelligent.
 
I liked Xbox and GC more than ps2. I think ps2 was a beast in sales and games, but the built in DVD player was what sold it more than anything imo.
Xbox was this new machine that could play PC games, but the brand was unknown. I feel its library is top 3 all time. Less games than ps2, but better imo.
I don’t really think the DVD player had as much impact as many people think. It obviously had a good impact but the thing has sold 150M and sure as hell isn’t because of the DVD player.

PlayStation was huge at the time. The PS1 hit it out of the park and it has some of the best games of all time on it.

Gran Turismo 3/4
MGS2/3
Silent Hill 2/3
Fatal Frame 1-3
GTA 3/VC/SA
R&C
Sly
Jak and Daxter

I could go on and on and on and while not all are exclusives they are basically all generally associated with PS2.
 
I don’t really think the DVD player had as much impact as many people think. It obviously had a good impact but the thing has sold 150M and sure as hell isn’t because of the DVD player.

PlayStation was huge at the time. The PS1 hit it out of the park and it has some of the best games of all time on it.

Gran Turismo 3/4
MGS2/3
Silent Hill 2/3
Fatal Frame 1-3
GTA 3/VC/SA
R&C
Sly
Jak and Daxter

I could go on and on and on and while not all are exclusives they are basically all generally associated with PS2.

In several countries the PS2 was actually a pretty cheap DVD/CD player. But that's often misattributed to the US and a few higher welath countries as well, where DVD's were actually cheaper than the PS2 as early as November, a month after its launch. I can see in those countries where it was cheaper why DVD would have an impact.

Otherwise it had some big hits just within the first two years that sold almost 10 million consoles just under 2 years alone in the US. Jak and GTA 3 were the first big ones. FFX eventually caught on too.
 

bobone

Member
I loved the Gamecube and so did my friends. I know Halo was popular, but Smash Bros was on another level when it came to couch multiplayer.
I didnt pick up and Xbox till late in the generation. I had a PS2 but graphically that console was trash.
I remember seeing Splinter Cell on Xbox at my uncles house and being blown away.

I stuck with Nintendo+ PC in 2001. I remember having a very tough decision on GC or Xbox, and went with GC because of the promise of Resident Evil games and the obvious appeal of Nintendo exclusives back when they were good.

Never regretted it for a second. The Gamecube is my second favorite Nintendo console.
Man I miss those days.
 

Romulus

Member
I don’t really think the DVD player had as much impact as many people think. It obviously had a good impact but the thing has sold 150M and sure as hell isn’t because of the DVD player.

PlayStation was huge at the time. The PS1 hit it out of the park and it has some of the best games of all time on it.

Gran Turismo 3/4
MGS2/3
Silent Hill 2/3
Fatal Frame 1-3
GTA 3/VC/SA
R&C
Sly
Jak and Daxter

I could go on and on and on and while not all are exclusives they are basically all generally associated with PS2.


I think the idea of an all-in-one media player at the time was a thing. "Just a DVD player" is an underselling of its value because that's what media was at that time. DVD players were a huge deal, and having a console with one installed was a big secondary reason why many people got one, myself included.
And ps2 was already established too, it had almost 2 years of marketing and games before the other 2 consoles came out. I think the PS1 was a monster and much of the install base just carried over and it was just a landslide after that. Otherwise, I think the Xbox and GameCube had better games and were much better machines, much of that being because they were newer. Multiplatform were often far superior on Xbox, even heavy hitters like GTA. Many games didn't even get a PS2 version that were XBox, and that's despite the massive gap in install base, which tells you there was an equally big gap in hardware.
 
Last edited:

ReBurn

Gold Member
I'm gonna go with option n+1: Nintendo couldn't recover from the beating they took from Sony the prior generation and their result had nothing to do with Xbox. Nintendo had already lost most of their strongest third party support to Sony with the PS1 and were in a similar third party support situation against PS2 due the limited data storage on their teeny disc format. Because that and their later launch much of their potential customer base had already moved on to PS2, so it became a secondary system to pick up just to play Nintendo exclusive games. I bought it for Rogue Squadron II and Smash.

Xbox was kind of a cult phenomenon in the first couple of years because of Halo CE. Halo LAN parties were tons of fun and people spent days of unwashed dudebro bliss playing it spread throughout any space that would fit them. Then Xbox Live came along and kept it going. Later it became the system with the best versions of most third party games and became a solid secondary system in its own right. I bought it when the controller S came out and ended up loving it for games like JSRF, KOTOR and Jedi Outcast. The upgraded GTA games were also good.

So in my opinion neither premise in the OP was right. Both Xbox and Gamecube launched too late with too little customer confidence to be number 1. Xbox was too new and Nintendo no longer had the fan base they needed. Both were only ever going to do as well as second best. The differentiator came down to whether you liked the Xbox vibe or the Nintendo vibe. One didn't have objectively better games than the other. They were just targeted at different types of players.
 

Dane

Member
Actually Gamecube owes Xbox for putting out the 360 in 2005 or things may have been worse, but they didn't continue he Xbox in 2005, they just cut support down, it was discontinued in 2007, as shown in the OP article.
Indeed, reminder that even in 2006 the Xbox had more support than the Gamecube, especially with high profile games, despite being discontinued up to a year by that point.
 
Top Bottom