Skewed Support: The Big Three

[SoulBlazer]

It's pretty deperessing when I look at the list of games I plan to buy in the next six months. :(

I like all three systems. I play all of them and they all have good games. But if I have a choice between buying games, I'll get the XBox version first, then the GC one, and finally the PS2. But I'm being forced to consider more tne more PS2 games because, sad to say, it's getting most of the games, despite being the weakest as far as specs got for the three systems.

The GC situation is just sad. After I get Mega Man Collection for it at the end of the month, I can't see ANY GC games I plan to buy in the next six months.

With the XBox, at least I plan to get the three EA football games in August, as well as Fable and KOTOR II when they finally come out.

But most of the stuff I'm looking forward to is PS2 only, and I really dislike the loading times, the weak sound support on my system, and the fact my system could still blow up on me at any minute. :eek 2:

Anyone else feeling like they are in the same boat?

[ubersaurus]

I've got a big enough back log of games that I want to get for all 3 systems that I haven't really noticed. But when I think about, alot of the upcoming games coming out that I want, are on the Xbox. It's quite a turn from last year, when it was mostly Gamecube, and some PS2. Nearly all the PS2 games I wanted already came out, and I own. After all, I got the system really just for Rez, Space Channel 5 part 2, and R-Type Final.

What are these PS2 specific games coming out that you're looking at? I can't think of too many that aren't coming out on the Xbox too, except for like, their mascot platformers and a few RPGs.

[ManekiNeko]

I get really angry when I see the ads for new games, because they almost inevitably won't be released for the GameCube. "Red Dead Revolver... now for the XBox, PC, and PS2." Huh, I guess bringing the industry back to LIFE after the crash of 1984 isn't enough justification to release the game on a Nintendo system, huh, Rockstar? You're telling me you'll support the Dreamcast, but you won't make a single game for the GameCube? It really burns me.

My anger is evenly split between the companies who think they're too good for the GameCube and Nintendo itself, which isn't fighting hard enough to get these big name games on its system. Back in the N64 days, Nintendo forced retailers to buy a Virtual Boy for every Nintendo 64 they purchased. We're just not seeing those kinds of aggressive sales tactics from Nintendo anymore, even though they could easily use the Game Boy Advance as leverage in their dealing with third parties ("You want Max Payne on GBA? Give us the game on the GameCube first.").

JR

[Flack]

Huh, I guess bringing the industry back to LIFE after the crash of 1984 isn't enough justification to release the game on a Nintendo system, huh, Rockstar?

That would be like the worst business logic ever.

Face it, Nintendo is interested in pushing games like Mario Party and Metroid -- 20 year old kid-friendly franchises. They seem bound and determined to test the market the hard way every console generation.

[Half Japanese]

Maybe I just suck at games, but I just don't see Metroid as being all that kid-friendly. Meta Ridley from Prime would have many kids with their head in their hands crying (too hard for them in other words). That said, hardball tactics don't work so well when you're in 3rd place. That's like a midget picking a fight. It is a little sad that the roster has thinned out (although it's pretty early to say that it's run it's course) for the Gamecube, but great games are almost always great no matter what system they're played on.

[Richter]

The GC situation is just sad. After I get Mega Man Collection for it at the end of the month, I can't see ANY GC games I plan to buy in the next six months.Doesnt the GC Tales game come out mid-July?

[Drexel923]

Actually I'll be getting a nice steady supply of Gamecube games from now till the rest of the year:

June - Mega Man AC
July - Tales of Symphonia
August - Pikmin 2
Fall / Winter Season - Metroid Prime 2, RE4, and others

For Xbox and PS2, I probably won't by a new game until late fall or winter season.

[petewhitley]

Huh, I guess bringing the industry back to LIFE after the crash of 1984 isn't enough justification to release the game on a Nintendo system, huh, Rockstar?... Back in the N64 days, Nintendo forced retailers to buy a Virtual Boy for every Nintendo 64 they purchased. We're just not seeing those kinds of aggressive sales tactics from Nintendo anymore, even though they could easily use the Game Boy Advance as leverage in their dealing with third parties ("You want Max Payne on GBA? Give us the game on the GameCube first.").

JR

Yikes. Those kinds of business tactics would put us in line for another crash. I for one am glad the Nintendo monoploy has ended. Hopefully they'll pull their head out of their ass and quit living off of past glories before they're a has-been in this industry. I don't blame any publisher for not putting out games for the "Cube. It's solid 3rd place amongst home consoles.

[Jasoco]

I have plenty of Cube lined up for the future. Not just new releases either. But games I seriously will be getting.

Donkey Konga
Pikmin 2
Viewtiful Joe (Have not played it at all yet. I am hoping to get it cheap.)
Super Monkey Ball and SMB2 (No. Never played them either!)
Four Swords looks interesting...

As for Xbox, I will be DOOM 3-ing and HALO 2-ing as well as Serious Sam 2-ing. Also when possible and cheap, Red Dead Revolver. That's enough for me.

But the PS2.. nope.. can't think of a fucking thing that I want. Seriously. Until PS2's are really cheap and all the games are in the $20 range, I won't buy them. My brother can spend what he wants for his, but I do not see the PS2 as a system. I just see it as an annoyance that needs to go away and stop corrupting the Video Gaming genre with its poorly made, million selling consoles. And even though I would love to try out Sly Cooper and the Jak games, I can wait. </RANT>

[Push Upstairs]

Yikes. Those kinds of business tactics would put us in line for another crash. I for one am glad the Nintendo monoploy has ended. Hopefully they'll pull their head out of their ass and quit living off of past glories before they're a has-been in this industry. I don't blame any publisher for not putting out games for the "Cube. It's solid 3rd place amongst home consoles.

I don't blame developers either.

As for myself...i started losing my faith in Nintendo when they started miliking the handheld market with 85 different revisions of the Gameboy. Lost more faith after reading the story behind the "Nintendo Monopoly" and lost the last of it when Nintendo started re-issuing 10,15,20 yr old games time and time again.

I don't really think Nintendo tries anymore...and thier constant porting of older titles to boost sales really makes me think they are spending more time looking to the past instead of looking to the future.

I know this is a "retro" site and that people here thrive on things that are old..but i cannot understand or justify spending $15-20 for "Super Mario Brothers". Why someone would spent that money on the most dirt common and plentiful game instead of an actual "NEW" title is beyond me.

[-hellvin-]

The way it works for me is: I just buy what I think I will enjoy. Don't worry about supprting one more than the other, just buy whatever you think you will enjoy. I'm sure there has to be something maybe you've missed for the gc that is coming out soon that would be enjoyable. I myself still gotta check out the megaman collection when I get the chance.

[Ed Oscuro]

Back in the N64 days, Nintendo forced retailers to buy a Virtual Boy for every Nintendo 64 they purchased.


"You want Max Payne on GBA? Give us the game on the GameCube first."
How you can say these two things one after the other is a bit mysifying. It's true that the GameCube is no Virtual Boy, but Flack's right - trying to force a product to become popular gives retailers and even developers a reason to try to pull away from working with that sort of company. It's not the same as the days when the NES was the only game in town, you know.

What's more, that sort of approach conveniently (dangerously) moves the focus away from making the hardware and the marketing right in the first place, and into trying to blame the software developers. Could you imagine it?


"Oh look, our yellow highlighter pen mascot's most valiant efforts coupled with our Bitchin' hardware engine for supreme 4D effects have been undermined by those commie turncoats over at Sodavox again! Let's go blame the Game & Martini store and tell them that for every S00perPopular 800XL they order they'll have to stock 20 FacistVisions.
At this point I think the folks over at the store tells the console manufacturer that s/he doesn't care how many Highlighter Guy Mascot plushies they get or how big the red hats they're wearing are, and they'll start trying to do whatever they can - even break the contract, do everything but commit outright fraud - to keep poorly selling systems off their shelves.

It's one thing to say that game companies should know more about the roots of their craft (I'd like to propose that the less one knows about the history of game design, the more likely one is to simply buy into the old, crappy game designs one's been exposed to as a player and professional - hmm, Santayana anyone?) but another thing to offhandedly suggest that we should all enshrine the past glories of Nintendo and their simplistic 8 bit software of old.

It's all well and good to say you dislike Tommy T. with a passion, but I don't see how your method of distancing yourself by going off on tangents about the illustrious history of gaming is a step in the right direction towards becoming a real industry pro, something you've hinted at wanting to be able to do. Just a thought.

[Jasoco]

I don't really think Nintendo tries anymore...and thier constant porting of older titles to boost sales really makes me think they are spending more time looking to the past instead of looking to the future.Have you even LOOKED at some of the games Nintendo has released in the past few years? And you still think they don't try anymore? :hmm:

[Push Upstairs]

Have you even LOOKED at some of the games Nintendo has released in the past few years? And you still think they don't try anymore? :hmm:

As far as the GBA games (which is what i was mostly talking about)...I have looked. I looked at thier output and was amazed to see SNES ports being dusted off, given some minor additions and sold at NEW prices.

I'm sorry, 4 seperate Mario games, ported SNES Zelda game, and this "retro" line they have out now doesnt costitute as "trying"...thats recycling. (yay for Mother Earth!)

As the Gamecube....well of the francises i actually liked Metroid Prime seems to be the only one thats anywhere near interesting.


And i am not spouting this off as some fanboy for another system. I can count the games i'd like to own on on XBOX and PS2 (combined) on one hand.

[AB Positive]

All the games coming soon that I'm looking forward to are either 2D fighter rereleases (online) for Xbox Live or Killer 7. That's it. This generation has very little interest for me.


-AG

[calthaer]

As far as the GameCube:
There are plenty of unique games at decent prices that have me interested. Just picked up Billy Hatcher for $20, and there's the Sonic Mega Collection for $20 that I want to pick up soon...Four Swords just came out and looks good, but there's no way I'll pay $50 for it - but when the price comes down on that, I'll pick that up, too.

PS2:
There's very little I'm interested in for this system. I picked it up largely to play all those great PS1 games, but when it comes to PS2 stuff...I mean Maximo is great, but I've been fairly disappointed when it comes to "wow" titles. Those that are great - like Sly Cooper - get overlooked by the ubiquitous-but-undefinable "mass-market gamer" and so I doubt I'll ever see a sequel for them.

Xbox:
I don't have one, and don't think I need one. KOTOR is $20 for the PC now, and Halo will probably get down to that price sooner or later. Maybe Fable will make me change my tune, but right now a decent PC makes an Xbox redundant, IMO.

I'm only buying GCN and GBA stuff right now - and mostly GBA.

[Jasoco]

PS2:
Those that are great - like Sly Cooper - get overlooked by the ubiquitous-but-undefinable "mass-market gamer" and so I doubt I'll ever see a sequel for them.Remove all doubt. Sly Cooper 2 is in development.

[Daria]

Have you even LOOKED at some of the games Nintendo has released in the past few years? And you still think they don't try anymore? :hmm:

As far as the GBA games (which is what i was mostly talking about)...I have looked. I looked at thier output and was amazed to see SNES ports being dusted off, given some minor additions and sold at NEW prices.

I'm sorry, 4 seperate Mario games, ported SNES Zelda game, and this "retro" line they have out now doesnt costitute as "trying"...thats recycling. (yay for Mother Earth!)

On the other hand hand there's Mario Vs. Donkey Kong, Wario Ware, Metroid Fusion, Metroid Zero, Wario Land 4, Mario & Luigi and the upcomming Kirby title.

Sure the GBA has it's fair share of nintendo ports, but for everyone of them there's a brand new game for an old franchise. If you don't like ports don't buy them, Nintendo's not twisting your arm.

But to say they don't even try any more is pretty naive.

[petewhitley]

On the other hand hand there's Mario Vs. Donkey Kong, Wario Ware, Metroid Fusion, Metroid Zero, Wario Land 4, Mario & Luigi and the upcomming Kirby title.

Sure the GBA has it's fair share of nintendo ports, but for everyone of them there's a brand new game for an old franchise. If you don't like ports don't buy them, Nintendo's not twisting your arm.

But to say they don't even try any more is pretty naive.

It's telling however that all of the titles you mentioned are recycling the same characters that have been around since the SNES days or earlier. Even in their "trying" Nintendo hasn't created too many compelling new chracters or franchises, which is unfortunate because Nintendo is becoming locked into this niche of producing titles aimed squarely at kids and retro-gamers. What it seems they aren't trying to do is to appeal to the Sony demographic that has revitalized the gaming industry in recent years. I say this not out of spite for the big N (they've given me many glorious years of excellent gaming), but out of love for a company that seems to be rapidly becoming obsolete in this industry. There is a place and time for nostalgia, but let it not be at the expense of innovation.

[Jasoco]

Pikmin

[petewhitley]

Nintendo hasn't created too many compelling new chracters or franchises

Pikmin

Please note "too many". Yes, Pikmin is apparently a new franchise for Nintendo. Yipee.

[Jasoco]

Nintendo hasn't created too many compelling new chracters or franchises

Pikmin

Please note "too many". Yes, Pikmin is apparently a new franchise for Nintendo. Yipee.Oh, but there are a lot of Pikmin. Lots of them. And they're tiny. Like ants. Lots of tiny ant-like Pikmin.

[Daria]

Nintendo hasn't created too many compelling new chracters or franchises

Pikmin

Please note "too many". Yes, Pikmin is apparently a new franchise for Nintendo. Yipee.

There's also Fire Emblem which may be old for Japan but new to us.

[YoshiM]

I get really angry when I see the ads for new games, because they almost inevitably won't be released for the GameCube. "Red Dead Revolver... now for the XBox, PC, and PS2." Huh, I guess bringing the industry back to LIFE after the crash of 1984 isn't enough justification to release the game on a Nintendo system, huh, Rockstar? You're telling me you'll support the Dreamcast, but you won't make a single game for the GameCube? It really burns me.

My anger is evenly split between the companies who think they're too good for the GameCube and Nintendo itself, which isn't fighting hard enough to get these big name games on its system. Back in the N64 days, Nintendo forced retailers to buy a Virtual Boy for every Nintendo 64 they purchased. We're just not seeing those kinds of aggressive sales tactics from Nintendo anymore, even though they could easily use the Game Boy Advance as leverage in their dealing with third parties ("You want Max Payne on GBA? Give us the game on the GameCube first.").

JR

You should KNOW it's all about the Benjamins. On the third party side if the games they make aren't projected to make it worth the conversion, they won't do it. Period. That's just business. Sucks if you are a single console owner but it's a situation that's been around since pretty much ever.

I do agree, Nintendo doesn't seem to be all that charged to get new titles nor does it seem to feel bad that companies are jumping ship and that beng a Bad Thing. They seem to think, "oh, X company doesn't want to develop for us? Oh well, we'll survive" Problem with that mentality is that, no matter how sucky or insignificant the developer/publisher is, it still makes your platform less desireable. They gotta be proactive in keeping licensees 'cause you can only milk your franchises for so long (or so one would think, even though Poke'mon and Mario games continue to fly off shelves). As for the companies thinking they are "too good", you are partially right. If companies like Rockstar and such feel that a game like Red Dead Revolver won't be a big seller on the Cube, why bother releasing it? It's a waste of development time, it's a waste of money that may not be recouped. So perhaps not "too good" but "not really something the average Gamecube owner would buy."

[Captain Wrong]

Back in the N64 days, Nintendo forced retailers to buy a Virtual Boy for every Nintendo 64 they purchased.


"You want Max Payne on GBA? Give us the game on the GameCube first."
How you can say these two things one after the other is a bit mysifying. It's true that the GameCube is no Virtual Boy, but Flack's right - trying to force a product to become popular gives retailers and even developers a reason to try to pull away from working with that sort of company. It's not the same as the days when the NES was the only game in town, you know.

What's more, that sort of approach conveniently (dangerously) moves the focus away from making the hardware and the marketing right in the first place, and into trying to blame the software developers. Could you imagine it?

It's one thing to say that game companies should know more about the roots of their craft (I'd like to propose that the less one knows about the history of game design, the more likely one is to simply buy into the old, crappy game designs one's been exposed to as a player and professional - hmm, Santayana anyone?) but another thing to offhandedly suggest that we should all enshrine the past glories of Nintendo and their simplistic 8 bit software of old.

It's all well and good to say you dislike Tommy T. with a passion, but I don't see how your method of distancing yourself by going off on tangents about the illustrious history of gaming is a step in the right direction towards becoming a real industry pro, something you've hinted at wanting to be able to do. Just a thought.

*golf clap*

Nicely done.

It's funny how everyone I've know who is really in the industry doesn't really give a toss about specific platforms. They just want to make the best games they can and hopefully make enough money to make the next one. Nostalgia and loyality have NOTHING to do with it, they just want the hardware to be powerful, easy to program, and popular enough to give them a return on their investement.

The other thing is, all the people I've met do know the roots of their craft. I've been in offices filled with 8 and 16 bit systems and had some good retrogaming conversations with these people. Just because these are the people who make 3D games, doesn't mean they don't love 2D and just because they may like games you personally don't like doesn't mean they don't know the past.

Anyway, to get to the topic at hand, it's pretty funny that the crux of this thread has been people not seeing games on their favorite system not games coming out for a system they don't own. All I see here is people grumbling because they have to buy a game for PS2 not that they can't play that game at all because they don't have that system.

It's just absurd for people to continue to say what a piece of shit the PS2 is and yet they still like and buy the games for it. Obviously the system can't be that bad if you're finding games to play on it. If you really hate the PS2, then stop supporting it. But don't cry when everyone in the industry continues to put out games for it.

My point is, you play the games, not the system. If you're miffed that a game is coming out for a system you don't own, I can relate to that. But if you're just cryassing because a game is coming out for the system you own but not the one you like, well, sorry about your luck fanboy.

[Jasoco]

My point is, you play the games, not the system. If you're miffed that a game is coming out for a system you don't own, I can relate to that. But if you're just cryassing because a game is coming out for the system you own but not the one you like, well, sorry about your luck fanboy.I just had to quote this. It says it all.

Captain Wrong is right. 8-)

[Daria]

On the other hand hand there's Mario Vs. Donkey Kong, Wario Ware, Metroid Fusion, Metroid Zero, Wario Land 4, Mario & Luigi and the upcomming Kirby title.

Sure the GBA has it's fair share of nintendo ports, but for everyone of them there's a brand new game for an old franchise. If you don't like ports don't buy them, Nintendo's not twisting your arm.

But to say they don't even try any more is pretty naive.

It's telling however that all of the titles you mentioned are recycling the same characters that have been around since the SNES days or earlier. Even in their "trying" Nintendo hasn't created too many compelling new chracters or franchises, which is unfortunate because Nintendo is becoming locked into this niche of producing titles aimed squarely at kids and retro-gamers. What it seems they aren't trying to do is to appeal to the Sony demographic that has revitalized the gaming industry in recent years. I say this not out of spite for the big N (they've given me many glorious years of excellent gaming), but out of love for a company that seems to be rapidly becoming obsolete in this industry. There is a place and time for nostalgia, but let it not be at the expense of innovation.

I was too lazy to say this yesterday but making new games out of an old franchise doesn't automatically mean Nintendo's not being innovative. Wind Waker, Metroid Prime, Mario Vs. Donkey Kong, Zelda Four Swords and especially Wario Ware all deviated from their usual gameplay patterns. They were innovative while taking advantage of product recognition at the same time. I don't call that milking a series, I call it stratedgy.

Instead of reinventing the wheel, Nintendo takes character icons they know that sell and focus instead on changing the gameplay. Would Mario 2 have really sold as well with the original Doki Doki Panic characters? Would it have changed the experience of playing the game? I think Nintendo's being pretty smart. The only thing really hurting them is their lack of third party support. But while the Gamecube may be in third, it's still holding it's own because of the selling power of Nintendo Lincense games.

[Aussie2B]

Back in the N64 days, Nintendo forced retailers to buy a Virtual Boy for every Nintendo 64 they purchased. We're just not seeing those kinds of aggressive sales tactics from Nintendo anymore, even though they could easily use the Game Boy Advance as leverage in their dealing with third parties ("You want Max Payne on GBA? Give us the game on the GameCube first.").

Where does that information come from? Do you realize how many N64 consoles sold in its first week? I HIGHLY doubt there were an equal number of Virtual Boy consoles at retailers. In fact, I highly doubt that there were that many Virtual Boy consoles ever made, period. Not to mention the Virtual Boy died very shortly after the N64 debuted, so even if it's true, the point would be kind of moot.

You make an interesting point, nonetheless. Why can't they pressure companies like Rockstar by telling them to put out a GameCube game if they want to release GBA games? Other people have said this would be a bad tactic that would only ultimately scare off publishers, BUT they fail to point out that Nintendo has not only done this recently but also did it successfully. Despite the long sour relationship Nintendo and Square had, Nintendo still got the upperhand by convincing Square to create a GameCube game in order to publish all the GBA games they were making. While some thought of Crystal Chronicles as a flop due to the childish nature of it and the GBA connectivity, I imagine it still sold quite decently. Perhaps Square decided to spite Nintendo a little by not making a standard Final Fantasy for GameCube, but regardless, Nintendo got a GameCube out of them.

[SoulBlazer]

I never said that I don't like the PS2 and the games. I'm just saying it's the worst of the three systems, and my least favorite, and my last choice for buying games. I don't like it when I have to buy a game for it cause I'd rather give my GC and XBox more playing time.

And I have other reasons to -- on my current setup, I get the best results with a XBox, due to it's built in surrond sound support and S Video. I also don't need memory cards for it and it has the fastest loading. With my GameCube I get to use a GREAT controller, fast loading time, and maybe some GBA connection. I don't GET any of that with my PS2. :o

I don't mind the fact that my list has twice as many PS2 games as opposed to XBox/GC, but I was just saying I wish the situation was reversed.

[petewhitley]

I was too lazy to say this yesterday but making new games out of an old franchise doesn't automatically mean Nintendo's not being innovative. Wind Waker, Metroid Prime, Mario Vs. Donkey Kong, Zelda Four Swords and especially Wario Ware all deviated from their usual gameplay patterns. They were innovative while taking advantage of product recognition at the same time. I don't call that milking a series, I call it stratedgy ... I think Nintendo's being pretty smart. The only thing really hurting them is their lack of third party support. But while the Gamecube may be in third, it's still holding it's own because of the selling power of Nintendo Lincense games.

Yeah, I agree that Nintendo (and Miyamoto in particular) has been pretty good about adding unique gameplay twists to their stable of franchises. It's a strategy for sure, but I for one think the strategy is failing them. They're definitely holding their own at 3rd, a luxury they can afford in large part to their continued success with the GameBoy line of handhelds. Yet with serious challengers to the handheld market and a constantly dwindling share of the console market, I think the time has come for them to admit that the tastes of the gaming public at large are changing, and not in the direction of brightly colored plumbers or pillows with enormous mouths. I want Nintendo to keep those guys around for sure, but let's see some more moves into the "adult" market, the same market that has voted with their wallets for Sony and Microsoft. I want to see more companies devote themselves to Nintendo (see Capcom and the Resident Evil series), but if Nintendo doesn't make their platform attractive in terms of market share, it just ain't gonna happen.

[Aussie2B]

I think at this point it doesn't matter what comes out on Nintendo consoles; closed-minded people are STILL going to label Nintendo and everything that comes out on their consoles as "kiddy".

Just like I was saying to my boyfriend earlier today as he played Quake 2 on N64: People just LOVE to go on and on about the N64 being a "kiddy" system, but look at everything it had: 4 Turok games, 2 Quake games, Doom 64, Goldeneye, The World is Not Enough, 2 Duke Nukem games, Daikatana, Winback, Rainbow 6, Armorines, 2 Army Men: Sarge's Heroes games, Hexen, Perfect Dark, etc.

Those are JUST 1st/3rd person shooters. That's not even taking into consideration all the another mature themed games such as Resident Evil 2, Castlevania, Hybrid Heaven, etc. But do these games exist to the closed-minded people still spewing the "Nintendo is kiddy! OMG! They sux0rz!" garbage? Absolutely not. And as long as they continue to play their Vice City, The Suffering, and Manhunt while turning their nose up at the chance to play anything on a Nintendo system, they'll keep believing that the crap they say is correct. Likewise, the publishers will follow suit and release the "mature" games on other consoles, but there will always be plenty of adult content to choose from on Nintendo systems (and usually adult in a more mature way [such as a dark theme] than the pointless cursing, sex, and gore prevalent in PS2 games).

[brykasch]

Well yes most every game comes out for PS2 and XBOX, with basically no third party support for the big N. Been that way since people stopped buying anything non N produced. Even Resident Evil and VJ havent sold as well as planned. I think if Nintendo wants more third party developers to work with them they can make it worth their while maybe underwriting the conversion or what not. Then its not so much of a risk. Right now as far as games I am interested its neck and neck between ps2 and xbox. I buy my games in this order (xbox , gc, ps2) and now that ea is on with xbox its even easier. now if you are cheap ass then ps2 is they way to go as prices for ps2 games seem to fall much faster imho. but really in a 3 system battle usually only two get good support.

[petewhitley]

I think at this point it doesn't matter what comes out on Nintendo consoles; closed-minded people are STILL going to label Nintendo and everything that comes out on their consoles as "kiddy".

I don't think it's closed-minded to recognize that the installed user base of the Gamecube is skewed younger than that of the PS2 or the XBox. It's just the facts. Nintendo has positioned themselves at this point as the brand of choice for children, and that's not necessarily a bad thing, but it's not going to win them the console wars either...

[Aussie2B]

The installed user base and the actual content of the games are two entirely different things. The point I'm making is that older gamers aren't recognizing all the "adult" game options that are out there on Nintendo consoles. Even if someone absolutely refused to play anything not rated Teen or Mature on the GameCube, they'd STILL have a lot of good stuff to play.