For shooters, they have Metroid Prime 1&2. For Platformers, they have Super Mario Sunshine, Paper Mario 2 and Viewtiful Joe. For RPG's (not a fan of the genre, so I haven't played many of these), Final Fantasy CC, Tales of Symphonia, Skies of Arcadia, and Harvest Moon. For fighting, they have Soul Calibur 2 and SSBM. For Horror games, they have Resident Evil 0, 1, and 4 (Yes, there are others RE games, but these were the best.) and Eternal Darkness. For adventure games, they have The Legend of Zelda: WW. For racing games, they have Mario Kart and F-Zero. For Strategy games, they have Battallion Wars, and the recently released Odama. For stealth games there was MGS:TTS.Vympel wrote: No, calling it a success on metrics that mean absolutely dick to the gamer (i.e. it turned a profit) in a discussion in this context is retarded. I've noticed that noone has really deigned to tackle the issue of it's craptastic selection of games across genres besides apologetics that while its selection may be shite in some areas, in other areas its alright. Well, shit, other consoles have kickass franchises in all areas. That's what I care about.
That's 20 exclusive games. Now I have played many of these, but not nearly all of them. And yet, I am more than content with my game library (not to mention the good multi-platform titles availiable.)
If that's what you go by, here's a tip: I own over 30 games for the Gamecube, and over 30 games for the N64. The ones I named were the best of the best (read: The ones I enjoyed most.), and most oft, the exclusive. Not to say that I didn't enjoy the rest. I enjoyed the vast majority of them. In fact, out of all of them, there were only a few that I didn't enjoy. Lots of the games I did enjoy were 3rd Party games available on more than one system, far from being "Abandoned in Droves" by third party developers.Vympel wrote:If you're a stockholder, sure. I'm not, so I don't give a shit. What I do care about is a wealth of good gaming, and Gamecube didn't provide that, irrespective of it having a handful of good games. Third party developers abandoned it in droves, a trend that started with N64, and the few good games they did churn out were not enough. I just need to compare my library of Gamecube to PS2 games to see that. I didn't buy a Gamecube with the expectation that I'd own less than ten games for the thing, and I doubt anyone else did either.
So by your pathetic standard, the N64 and Gamecube were more than successful for me. For you, it was not, meaning that your analysis that the Gamecube was a failure is based solely on your opinion, and can no way be applied to anyone but you. Since that can't even be debated, we debate it's success based on how well it did in the global market based off marketshare, affordability, profit, and chance of success.
It seems that you, on the other hand, would rather base a system on whether or not it's controller runs on batteries, how many games you decided to buy, and how "retarded" it looks. These claims have all been refuted, so in the end, our opinion means Jack Shit.