Silicon Knights and Nintendo split

But not for, Atari, Interplay, Eidos, Lucasart, Vivendi Unversal, and that's only thoses which stated publicly that theirs GC games were not making money.

You give a console terrible support and you won't make much money.. it shouldn't be a hard lesson to learn for those 5 companies.

Although as a side note I very much doubt none of those companies games made money on GC. Rogue Leader, Lucal Arts only top GC game, sold millions of copies. TimeSplitters 2 from Eidos also sold well on GC, I'm sure plenty of others did too.
 
IF sony lost as much money as Ms now, do you really think we would have a ps2 ??

If it meant sony would reach where it is now with PS2, then I'd see no reason to "not" stay in the console market despite loosing money. Sega stayed with making consoles for years while loosing money, didn't they?

Anyway, Sony entering the console market when they did was was pretty lucky if you ask me. Sega was faltering, Nitnendo couldn't use CD technology with their new console, and a bunch of other event sort of paved a path for Sony to enter teh market with little risk. Not only tha tnintendo released thier console later then sony and sega, so that didnt help thier cause.
 
Teasy said:
Although as a side note I very much doubt none of those companies games made money on GC. Rogue Leader, Lucal Arts only top GC game, sold millions of copies. TimeSplitters 2 from Eidos also sold well on GC, I'm sure plenty of others did too.

:D I was talking about the overall teasy.
If those company were doing (enough) money on the Cube , they wouldn't pull out from that market. For the quality of the support from thoses publishers, let say that it's a vicious circle, bad sales = not a great support = worse sales = worse support etc...
 
If those company were doing (enough) money on the Cube , they wouldn't pull out from that market. For the quality of the support from thoses publishers, let say that it's a vicious circle, bad sales = not a great support = worse sales = worse support etc...

Looking at the support from the publishers you mentioned, even from the very start, I think its more a case of:

Bad support = bad sales = worse support = worse sales.
 
Teasy said:
Looking at the support from the publishers you mentioned, even from the very start, I think its more a case of:

Bad support = bad sales = worse support = worse sales.

Hmm, chicken and egg syndrome? Perhaps they weren't too enthusiastic about sales on the GC beforehand so they didn't give that much "support"? In other words you give as much "support" as needed to hit your projected revenue for each platform (discounting multi platform titles that share "support").

Have you seen them give more "support" to other platforms (notably XBox)?
 
Have you seen them give more "support" to other platforms (notably XBox)?

Yeah the disparity between GC support and XBox support from the publishers in question is far larger then the average (*the average being XBox getting around 50% more support).

Below is the number of games each of those companies have published for GC and XBox.

Lucasart:

XBox = 12

GC = 6

XBox support from LucasArts is 100% better then for GC

Atari:

XBox = 29

GC = 12

XBox support from Atari is 142% better then for GC.

Interplay:

XBox = 5

GC = 2

XBox support from Interplay is 150% better then for GC

Eidos:

XBox = 13

GC = 5

XBox support from Eidos is 160% better then for GC

I can't find Vivendi's game list for each console, so I'm not sure on them...

Also when you look at the actual quality of games released by these companies on GC and XBox the disparity gets even worse. Not only that but a lot of the games from these publishers were released very late on GC when compared to XBox.

I don't think its any suprise that these publishers have had big problems on GC. I'm not under any illusions that 3rd parties have a harder time on GC then on XBox. You can see that they do, for whatever reason, because XBox on average has 50% more games released then GC. But the publishers above have clearly had bigger problems then most. Looking at the games they've released for GC I don't think its suprising in the slightest.

* I got the average of 50% more support for XBox simply by looking at total games released and scheduled to be released on XBox vs GC.
 
Hence why I don't see Namco as being much of a problem, as its GC-to-Xbox support is fairly even, weighed somewhat in GC's favor. Now these last publishers are where real disparities can be seen. Of course all but Atari are smaller and have less impact, so in studying GC support in terms of "eastern" versus "western" publishers we're better off looking at the likes of EA, Activision, Ubisoft, Take-Two... There's been a lot of fluctuation of late, but they're still the much bigger performers.
 
Teasy said:
I can't find Vivendi's game list for each console, so I'm not sure on them...

Vivendi released on the same timeframe (wich means before they quit supporting the GC) 7 GC Games, and around 16 Xbox Games (same thing for the PS2).

VU GC Published Games said:
Crash Bandicoot®: The Wrath of Cortex Action/Adventure

Crashâ„¢ Nitro Kart Action/Adventure

The Hobbitâ„¢ Action/Adventure

The Hulkâ„¢ Action/Adventure

Metal Armsâ„¢: Glitch In The System Action/Adventure

The Simpsons Hit & Runâ„¢ Action/Adventure

Spyroâ„¢: Enter the Dragonfly Action/Adventure
 
Actually, I did some research a little while back and based on currently released games (according to Gamerankings) the Xbox only has 20% or so more 3rd party games than the Gamecube. If you count all games then Xbox has even less % more because believe it or not MS has more first party games than Nintendo.
 
Bohdy said:
Actually, I did some research a little while back and based on currently released games (according to Gamerankings) the Xbox only has 20% or so more 3rd party games than the Gamecube. If you count all games then Xbox has even less % more because believe it or not MS has more first party games than Nintendo.

Measuring in volume I would say that's an obvious given, since the Cube's library is small, whereas the XBoxs is large. I also wouldn't call that a negative - Cube fans should hope Nin pushed out more Cube games - why wouldn't they, since they're in general the best games on the system.

Your +20% stat is interesting.. but measure it again in a year, since developers are leaving the cube, and the XBox is getting more and more third party support every day, even late in the system's life (in saying that, I'm assuming there's 1 year left in it).
 
PARANOiA said:
Bohdy said:
Actually, I did some research a little while back and based on currently released games (according to Gamerankings) the Xbox only has 20% or so more 3rd party games than the Gamecube. If you count all games then Xbox has even less % more because believe it or not MS has more first party games than Nintendo.

Measuring in volume I would say that's an obvious given, since the Cube's library is small, whereas the XBoxs is large. I also wouldn't call that a negative - Cube fans should hope Nin pushed out more Cube games - why wouldn't they, since they're in general the best games on the system.

Your +20% stat is interesting.. but measure it again in a year, since developers are leaving the cube, and the XBox is getting more and more third party support every day, even late in the system's life (in saying that, I'm assuming there's 1 year left in it).

I hope nintendo doesn't push games out that quickly, unless they're taking away dev resources from the GBA, nintendo games suffer in quality just as much as everyone else's(if not more so) from rushing the release date.
 
Back
Top