Challenge: N64 defeats PS1

With a POD of 1994, is it possible for the N64 to out sell the PS1?

In the OTL the PS1 sold 102.49 million consoles, to the N64's 32.93 million. The N64 still made money, but the PS1 dethroned Nintendo during the era.

How could the N64 have defeated the PS1?
 
Seems to me that its really just a question of using CDs. Really this could be a pretty late change, based on your POD I'd have to assume that it would be a crash program based on Sony's initial success. Something involving buying and integrating component from the CD-i or 3DO could fit the bill (both a big stretch in terms of corporate culture, but there are some interesting possibilities there), but realistically there wouldn't be THAT dramatic a hardware change in switching the N64, and 2 years would probably be enough to get something together in house. A very early DVD implementation is also possible, but probably not without delaying the launch to at least Christmas 97 and still requiring Panasonic cooperation.

All in all the most likely scenario would probably be Nintendo simply reacting to the surprisingly robust PlayStation launch by switching the N64 to using CDs, developing it internally and getting the box out for Christmas 1996 as OTL. This is possibly stretching likelihood, but is certainly possible. If they are aggressive about porting PlayStation titles and ease up on developers they could pull ahead very quickly with all the momentum from the SNES era, though more likley IMO Nintendo's restrictiveness on devs (though definitely lightened from the NES era) will mean that the PlayStation still gets considerably more titles overall, and that while Nintendo finishes ahead it won't be by all that much, and "victory" won't be all that clear until the end of the cycle when the N64's hardware advantages can be best brought to bear. If, as is more likely the revised N64 gets delayed until 1997 I have a feeling they wouldn't be able to make up the lost time, and will be harmed even further by delaying the replacement in the hope that the N64 will be able to compete with the PS2 (you might even see the 64DD being a DVD expansion, but it would probably have about the same impact it did OTL).

Nintendo being what they are however I have a hard time seeing any of this. Most likely would be that the N64 releases as is, and is followed by a CD expansion in the vein of the original Sony/Nintendo cooperative PlayStation for the SNES. It would probably have some impressive titles, especially first party (and when combined with the memory expansion), but we all know how things go with console expansions.

I don't know how well it would end up placing Nintendo realistically, but my inclination in terms of writing a timeline (speaking more in terms of storytelling that works and is plausible than most likely outcome) would be to have Nintendo get involved in the 3DO console after the Sony deal falls apart, certainly releasing a 3DO expansion for the SNES and significantly changing the face of the project (I'm thinking perhaps something along the lines of allowing other companies to produce CD only devices but going to some lengths to give advantages to the in house, cartridge capable, SNES-CD systems). The follow up would be an all Nintendo, possibly DVD based, Nintendo 64 released as a contemporary of the Dreamcast. The biggest problem here is ultimately that Nintendo would very likely get a reputation for expensive consoles (the exact opposite of how they have traditionally operated), but I think they might be surprised how far they could get by reducing software prices (though how far they would, with a likely even more significant than OTL loss on the hardware is a big question). That said, the big advantage they'd find is that a somewhat upgraded N64 with DVDs released around 1998 could be competitive well into the Xbox era, so the end result might be that while not maintaining the clear dominance of earlier generations they also don't get OTL's reputation for technologically limited systems (having none of the bottlenecks all of N64, GameCube and Wii got saddled with) and breaking down the clear five year console generation cycles much earlier than OTL.
 
Last edited:
Make new and innovative games for the N64? Nintendo has a way of sticking to it's guns and much of it's marketing strategy relies on nostalgia. While this has proven successful, it does limit it's audience somewhat and does hinder expansion into other markets.
 
Make new and innovative games for the N64? Nintendo has a way of sticking to it's guns and much of it's marketing strategy relies on nostalgia. While this has proven successful, it does limit it's audience somewhat and does hinder expansion into other markets.

That was a lot less true in the mid 90s than now of course, at least in terms of nostalgia. This is the era of GoldenEye and Mario 64, among other things. The really tough thing really is getting around how much easier it was for external developers on PlayStation, and I have to agree that new hardware alone isn't enough.
 
As already said, the implementation of CDs would be a huge boost and probably keep the N64 around longer than it eventually was. I'd also say that Nintendo would have to embrace more mature gaming. The system had some mature titles, of course, but not near the level of PSX. Because of that, as teens grew up, they abandoned the system for more adult games.

Even the M-rated games often toned down the violence. I should say, though, that Duke Nukem 64 was pretty awesome, even if it was a watered down version of Duke Nukem 3D.

But in the end, it was geared more toward kids and younger teens, at least that's my perception, whereas PSX did a good job targeting high schoolers and early-20 somethings with games like Resident Evil, Tomb Raider, Silent Hill and Twisted Metal.

I think Microsoft has proven it's possible to go head-to-head with Sony and win - as the XBOX 360 has consistently outsold PS3. Had Nintendo gone with CDs and more diverse gaming, I think the system very well could have outsold Playstation and set up for a new console wars between Sony & Nintendo instead of Sony & Microsoft. Granted, the Wii has sold exceptionally well, but that was such a different type of unit at its launch, it's not a surprise it surged.
 
A quickfix would be for Nintendo to do the one thing it has refused to do and what I ultimately believe caused Nintendo to drop to the 3rd spot in gaming behind PS3 and XBox.

Nintendo's two biggest franchises are Mario and Pokemon. Mario got all kinds of great games from the 64, while Pokemon remained on hand helds. If Nintendo puts out a Pokemon RPG (different from the hand held version) with gameplay similar to other RPGs like Final Fantasy or Breath of Fire (i.e. moving around in the environment full of Pokemon that are availabe for capture) then Nintendo will overshadow the PS1.

The way I look at Nintendo right now is that the company focus seems to be towards casual gamers and gameplay as opposed to serious gamers. I honestly cannot, as a gamer, take Nintendo seriously. The Wii while innovative for its era is a true icon of how poorly nintendo ports over major games like Modern Warfare. Nintendo needs to drop the cartoonish approach to gameplay and become a serious company again. I honestly think Nintendo's focus on handheld gameplay has kept it from once again reaching the top of the video game world and this trend seems likely to continue.
 
Let's see:
Of course Nintendo has to implement a CD Rom drive for its N64. But while we're at improving the N64, why not have it 8MB RAM from the very beginning? Other than that, the N64 was pretty decent in terms of hardware.
Nintendo should also be more embracing towards M-rated games. Even though M-rated games didn't become real "killer apps" until the 2000s, it could lay a good foundation for the future.
But even with the improved N64, there is still a tie between Nintendo and Sony, as the PS1 was just that damn good. But I could see the GameCube winning over the PS2. Just let the GameCube use real DVDs, and Capcom stick to their exclusivity agreement with Nintendo. Given the additional success of the ATL GameCube, publishers like SEGA become Nintendo-only producers, while games like Grand Theft Auto or Metal Gear Solid also get proper GameCube ports. Thus, Nintendo could barely edge out Sony, but only for their exclusive content from Capcom, SEGA or of course Nintendo themselves.
Nintendo decides to gor for a much more conventional console in the next generation, which has HD graphics and comes with a Blu-Ray drive, but not the stupid gimmicks TTLs Wii had. Nintendo does a much better job at selling and marketing their console, and demotes Sony to 3rd place. Simply because Nintendo is the better Blu-Ray console.
 
The PS1 is Nintendo's fault in the first place. They contracted Sony to do a CD add-on for the SNES, similar to the Sega-CD. Sony did so, but after they made the prototype, Nintendo discontinued the project due to rights over games and the format and carried on with cartridges. Sony being left with half a console decided to continue development and produced the PS1. Had Nintendo either carried on without arguing over the rights or renegotiated the contract, the Playstation would never have existed and Nintendo would likely still be the market leader. Possibly Sega would still be in the console business also, though not sure how this affects the XBox at all.
 
The PS1 is Nintendo's fault in the first place. They contracted Sony to do a CD add-on for the SNES, similar to the Sega-CD. Sony did so, but after they made the prototype, Nintendo discontinued the project due to rights over games and the format and carried on with cartridges. Sony being left with half a console decided to continue development and produced the PS1. Had Nintendo either carried on without arguing over the rights or renegotiated the contract, the Playstation would never have existed and Nintendo would likely still be the market leader. Possibly Sega would still be in the console business also, though not sure how this affects the XBox at all.

Microsoft probably would ahve eventually created the Xbox to chalalenge the exisitng console market. Depending on where Nintendo has gone in terms of it's games (ie. if it has eveolved it's gaming market beyond that of the casual gamer) Xbox is going to dominate the market.
 
The way I look at Nintendo right now is that the company focus seems to be towards casual gamers and gameplay as opposed to serious gamers. I honestly cannot, as a gamer, take Nintendo seriously. The Wii while innovative for its era is a true icon of how poorly nintendo ports over major games like Modern Warfare. Nintendo needs to drop the cartoonish approach to gameplay and become a serious company again. I honestly think Nintendo's focus on handheld gameplay has kept it from once again reaching the top of the video game world and this trend seems likely to continue.

Microsoft probably would ahve eventually created the Xbox to chalalenge the exisitng console market. Depending on where Nintendo has gone in terms of it's games (ie. if it has eveolved it's gaming market beyond that of the casual gamer) Xbox is going to dominate the market.

:rolleyes:

I'm kind of sick of the attitude that games need to be angsty, violent, and brown to be taken seriously, and for that matter I have been for a very long time. Nintendo first party titles are almost consistently top-notch, and especially if you are a supposed "Serious gamer" I would think you would realize that's what matters. Honestly, I think the whole aforementioned "Angsty, violent, and brown" mindset is a casual gamer's one, specifically an FPS playing/"Teabagging" frat boy one. And what does a "Cartoonish approach to gameplay" even mean? And I fail to see how games like the more recent Metroid and Zelda entries aren't "Mature".

Plus it's projecting backwards a bit; into the 1990s, Nintendo was gaming, save in Europe, and had plenty of mature titles like GoldenEye, Perfect Dark, and Conker's Bad Fur Day.

For extra slight crippling, try and reconcile Square and Nintendo, or something.

Square split from Nintendo because they felt they simply could not fit Final Fantasy VII onto a cartridge, so stopping that basically requires Nintendo going with CDs.
 
Well, for starters, we need some medium larger than cartridges, something worthy of the graphics hardware and CPU. It doesn't quite need to be as big as a CD-ROM, but until Metroid: Prime, they were never larger than the average NEO-GEO (Introduced 1990) game. The Minidisc format (Later the basis of the PSP's UMD), at 320 MB would have been perfect.

Since that would still not be a big enough format for Red Box audio if we also wanted graphics and gameplay worthy of the hardware, It will need sound hardware worthy of the rest of the system. I would reccomend Another Ricoh PCM sound chip, but with additive synthesis included too. True, this means you actually havet o program in the sound effects and music as chip tunes, but at the same time, it's much denser coding than Red Box audio too.

Those two things and keeping Square and Electronic Arts sweet and the Playstation will be just as much of a footnote in the overall console landscape as Intilevision and ColecoVision.
 
The way I look at Nintendo right now is that the company focus seems to be towards casual gamers and gameplay as opposed to serious gamers. I honestly cannot, as a gamer, take Nintendo seriously. The Wii while innovative for its era is a true icon of how poorly nintendo ports over major games like Modern Warfare. Nintendo needs to drop the cartoonish approach to gameplay and become a serious company again. I honestly think Nintendo's focus on handheld gameplay has kept it from once again reaching the top of the video game world and this trend seems likely to continue.

Firstly I agree with Æsir, there's nothing terribly mature about games like Gears of War, MW3 etc. They're unchallenging cartoonish gore fests; they're Itchy & Scratchy without the sense of humour.

Also despite you not liking Nintendo's modern output, it is incredibly successful, they're billions in turnover speaks for itself.

Got to go with Nintendo being less cocky about their mid-90s dominance and pushing through with CDs. No Sony keeps them going but I doubt Nintendo will have a monopoly past the millennium, someone is going to meet demand for an 'other' - its 7up syndrome.
 
You know, Nintendo *theoretically* doesn't have to abaondon cartridges to beat Sony's PS1. You just need to poison the PS1 a bit, or alter tech discovery slightly.

For example, have Sony make more mistakes, like requiring harsher terms to 3rd party developers, or demand that games come in a "proprietary" type of disk case at the start which has a later-discovered-habit of scratching a ring into a CD and making games unplayable. Earn it bad press early on.

Similarlly, a faster development in chip tech could lead to cartridges holding much more data than expected, similar to the quick movements in flash memory of the last several years. This would allow Nintendo to appease a fair number of developers in terms of system capabilities.

Heck, combine the two, and the ads with a "crappy" ps1 disc and a "sturdy" N64 cart being compared practically write themselves.
 
Last edited:
Firstly I agree with Æsir, there's nothing terribly mature about games like Gears of War, MW3 etc. They're unchallenging cartoonish gore fests; they're Itchy & Scratchy without the sense of humour.

Also despite you not liking Nintendo's modern output, it is incredibly successful, they're billions in turnover speaks for itself.

Got to go with Nintendo being less cocky about their mid-90s dominance and pushing through with CDs. No Sony keeps them going but I doubt Nintendo will have a monopoly past the millennium, someone is going to meet demand for an 'other' - its 7up syndrome.

Unchallenging gore-fests perhaps, but still entertaining. Don't get me wrong as much as I love blowing stuff in in Call of Duty, I will sit there gleefully grinning like a loon playing Mario Party 8 on the Wii.

I think given the lack of the PlayStation as competition, Nintendo might end up embracing more cross-platform titles, something that was sadly lacking until the GameCube really. Also, they might end up still fighting in the Console Wars. They've self-declared that they aren't interested in having pissing contests over who's processor is faster or who can squeeze more pixels out of the GPU. While the Xbox might still be developed, I don't think it would have as big a market share than a combined Sony/Nintendo console would. Also, Sega might hold out longer than before, with no PS2 to annihilate the Dreamcast, it could make another console viable.
 
Unchallenging gore-fests perhaps, but still entertaining. Don't get me wrong as much as I love blowing stuff in in Call of Duty, I will sit there gleefully grinning like a loon playing Mario Party 8 on the Wii.

I think given the lack of the PlayStation as competition, Nintendo might end up embracing more cross-platform titles, something that was sadly lacking until the GameCube really. Also, they might end up still fighting in the Console Wars. They've self-declared that they aren't interested in having pissing contests over who's processor is faster or who can squeeze more pixels out of the GPU. While the Xbox might still be developed, I don't think it would have as big a market share than a combined Sony/Nintendo console would. Also, Sega might hold out longer than before, with no PS2 to annihilate the Dreamcast, it could make another console viable.

My best guess is that if the Sony/Nintendo version of the PlayStation were to launch is that Sega would do dramatically better with the Saturn, that they would stay in the market. The Dreamcast though might be dramtically different or delayed a few years. The big question IMO is how Nintendo/Sony ends up reacting to Saturn. The SNES based PlayStation definitely has some life in it, but its not a PS as we know it, its not an N64 and WILL have a tough time competing against Saturn.

I could imagine Nintendo reacting in a few different ways, though I suppose a CD based 64 is still probably most likely. I wonder if you might not get a very similar Nintendo/Sony break as OTL around the time that Nintedo makes it clear they aren't interested in Sony being a partner on the N64? If that is the case I could almost see a PS2 parallel launching as the first independent Sony console. Things could get very interesting if you were to have all of a super GameCube, super Dreamcast, PS2 and Xbox hitting the market within a few months of each other. Sega probably hangs on a bit better, but I suspect the end result is much the same; I guess they might get another handheld and/or a post Dreamcast system out the door, but I can't see them having the resources to push it properly. Maybe they manage to make a transition into set top boxes...

I have a hard time seeing Xbox doing all that well in this scenario, but on the other hand Microsoft wasn't ever expecting a profit on the project, and I don't see them abandoning the line either - the success of that brand always did come down to what happened with the 360 much more than the first gen box.

The Sony Nintendo fight in that generation though would be VERY interesting,
but almost impossible to predict, coming down to hardware details and business relationships that have a lot to do with how exactly the split happened.
 
Top