Hero-of-Time Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 As just revealed on the 2nd Annual NWR Live Podcast for Child's Play (http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/sitenews/28313) "Rick Powers" (a pseudonym) who was privy to Nintendo's inner workings during the GCN era, told a story in which DICE came to Nintendo with Battlefield, which was proposed as a Nintendo console exclusive. Though there was much excitement over the title within Nintendo, it never reached fruition because of the Gamecube's basically non-existent online infrastructure. Wow. A big loss this one...well not for me as I don't really care for the series but their's no denying that the series has some serious pull. What is surprising is that this happened in the Cube era. Nintendo should have learnt from this loss and put more time and effort in the Wii's online setup so this kind of thing didn't happen again. What did we get instead? Friend codes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 A poster on neogaf said DICE went to everyone and saying 'DICE wanted Battlefield 1942 to be exclusive' is a statement to anyone they would have signed with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hero-of-Time Posted November 20, 2011 Author Share Posted November 20, 2011 A poster on neogaf said DICE went to everyone and saying 'DICE wanted Battlefield 1942 to be exclusive' is a statement to anyone they would have signed with. If that is indeed true then it's still a missed oppertunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 *Imagines a Battlefield exclusive to Nintendo consoles* *Bursts into uncontrollable laughter* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_Link Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 *Imagines a Battlefield exclusive to Nintendo consoles* *Bursts into uncontrollable laughter* Does it sound like this... "trolololololololololol" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grazza Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Thing is, the latest Battlefield gained its stellar reputation because of its cutting-edge technical prowess. Considering Nintendo didn't go down this route with Wii, I doubt Battlefield would have had much pulling power beyond any other decent exclusive. Sorry to be boring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fierce_LiNk Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 As if this would have actually happened and stayed exclusive. Particularly during the GameCube era with the whole Capcom 5 farce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnas Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 True, the only reason the Battlefield is popular nowadays is because they were released in non-Nintendo consoles. So I wouldn't call it a missed opportunity. More like DICE dodged a bullet there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david.dakota Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 @Grazza we'll never know. Perhaps if Battlefield had launched in GC and been a runaway success, positioned as Nintendo's next Goldeneye it could have boosted the fortunes of our the system. Had Nintendo had more success with Gamecube they could have moved into the HD era sooner and maybe we couldve seen Battlefield 3 an exclusive Wii (HD) title with IR controls. Well done to Nintendo in dimension X. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hero-of-Time Posted November 20, 2011 Author Share Posted November 20, 2011 As if this would have actually happened and stayed exclusive. Particularly during the GameCube era with the whole Capcom 5 farce. That one still hurts to this day. @Grazza we'll never know. Perhaps if Battlefield had launched in GC and been a runaway success, positioned as Nintendo's next Goldeneye it could have boosted the fortunes of our the system. Had Nintendo had more success with Gamecube they could have moved into the HD era sooner and maybe we couldve seen Battlefield 3 an exclusive Wii (HD) title with IR controls. Well done to Nintendo in dimension X. I like the sound of this place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grazza Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 I like the sound of this place. The dimension where they continued the GameCube philosophy, rather than the actual GameCube. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hero-of-Time Posted November 20, 2011 Author Share Posted November 20, 2011 The dimension where they continued the GameCube philosophy, rather than the actual GameCube. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fierce_LiNk Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 The problem with the GameCube philosophy is that it just boils down to a technological arms race, over which system is the most powerful. As somebody who doesn't own a PS3 or 360, I find it quite difficult to distinguish between the two. Imagine if there were 3 identical systems on the mass market. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense. So, unless one of the three does something significantly different to the others, there's very little to differentiate between each one. Of course, it boils down to the games, and Nintendo has an advantage there as they will have stockpile of first party franchises. They can also afford to throw the "crowd pleaser" every once in a while, such as Galaxy 2 or DKC: Returns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grazza Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Hasn't the 3DS shown, though, that differentiation isn't all that important after all? In the end, it wasn't the gimmick that made it sell (even though it's a nice gimmick), it was the games. Nintendo tried power and then they tried novelty, but in the end their greatest strength was what we realised all along - their fantastic selection of 1st-party franchises. With better advertising and better versions of their "bridge" titles like Mario Bros and Mario Kart, can we be sure that a new GameCube-type console wouldn't sell? It doesn't need to be more powerful than the other consoles, just up there with them so it can get the multiformat games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fierce_LiNk Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Hasn't the 3DS shown, though, that differentiation isn't all that important after all? In the end, it wasn't the gimmick that made it sell (even though it's a nice gimmick), it was the games. Nintendo tried power and then they tried novelty, but in the end their greatest strength was what we realised all along - their fantastic selection of 1st-party franchises. With better advertising and better versions of their "bridge" titles like Mario Bros and Mario Kart, can we be sure that a new GameCube-type console wouldn't sell? It doesn't need to be more powerful than the other consoles, just up there with them so it can get the multiformat games. The games sell the console, the majority of the time. However, if the system has a unique feature, that will further help the sales. If you get the system out there, somehow, and make it appealing, then the third parties will follow along. You can't get those third parties unless there's something about the system that will attract them to it. There's been a loooooot of third party games for the Wii. A lot of fodder which we'll never touch, and that has largely been down to the remote. How many Wii Sports clones or party games have we seen? It wasn't as apparent on the GameCube. Nintendo will and have always supported their systems with games. But, look at the difference between the GC and Wii Sales. I do believe that if they had stuck with the GameCube philosophy of great hardware, they would've just got trounched again this generation. There also would have ultimately been some reason that third parties would favour the other two instead of Nintendo. Last time around it was the lack of disc space, this time it would've been the online functionality or that gamers just choose to buy Nintendo's own brand rather than third party stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolan Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 ....Right. Battlefield didn't even come to consoles until BF2 Modern Combat about 3 months after BF2 hit PCs. 1942 had many expansions and there were spin-offs as well. The whole series had pretty much been PC oriented, with BF2 still receiving lots of playtime and mod work. I find it odd that any console manufacturer turned down the series, and I'm not sure it would propel the console to popularity regardless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killer kirby Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 I have loved the Wii so much more than the Gamecube which I thought was impossible. best home system since the SNES. I mean the Wii is the only system where I get Monster Hunter, Xenoblade, Dragon Quest, Zelda and Mario. My 5 favorite things all on 1 system Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkjak Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 I told you about this in a previous post. The guy who was sent to the US and talked with Nintendo was my teacher. According to him, it wasn't really the lacking online infrastructure that was the reason for DICE's decision, but the fact that the CEO thought that the GC had too much of a child-image. Sad but true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts