The GameCube isn't performing as well at retail as we would all like to see. This is despite a slew of absolute top-quality games so far this year- from Resident Evil 0, Super Monkey Ball 2, Metroid Prime, Burnout 2 to Phantasy Star Online, and now the glorious Wind Waker, one can't really argue that the quality of the software is lacking so far this year. So what is it? The upturn in the Xbox' fortunes has certainly been a significant factor in this. But, many questions have to be asked- it is evident that the main (and perhaps the sole) reason why the Xbox has suddenly come into favour with the European public is Microsoft's impressive cost-cutting and cheap package deals- with the Xbox now equal in price to the GameCube, the only significant draw the GC now has are its exclusive games- many, if not most of which simply don't appeal to the average casual gamer.

Pikmin is a prime example of this. The Xbox, on the other hand, has a good quota of 'trendy' games, good third-party support, and the promise of a magnificent online service- combine all that with a decent DVD player and an incredibly low price point and you've got more than enough reasons why the console is considerably outselling Nintendo's box of joy in recent months.

Now, don't get me wrong- not for one minute would I be swayed by Microsoft's green slab of plastic- my 'allegiance' lies firmly with Nintendo (not for petty fanboy reasons, but for proper, hard, concrete ones which I will explain) ; but I am a realist. And the reality must be discussed.

On this very site's forums and comments pages I see cries of despair about the disappointing sales figures, lagging behind the other 'big two'- I see anguish about the mass markets consistent failure to recognize Nintendo's brilliance and unparalled genius. I too share in these feelings- but, friends, we have a challenge: to look beyond these sales figures, and, crucially, shallow consumerism.

Friends, readers- I propose we rethink our whole opinion of 'popular' 'successful' and 'cool'. Why, you may ask?

Allow me to explain. The video-game charts have gone the way of the music charts- they act simply as indicators of popular culture rather than as a measure of quality - why else would we see travesties such as the latest identikit FIFA game at the top of the charts? Game quality has, increasingly, little to do with it; what is seen to be 'cool' a lot more.

And no matter how much you may protest at this opinion, its validity cannot be denied- popular culture isn't about playing 'cute', 'kiddy' games, no matter how insightful, artistic or beautiful they might be. Games like Pikmin are scorned at by the average casual gamer- I subject myself to regular abuse simply by owning the game. Surely that proves the point. With the explosive popularity of games in recent years, games companies have, somewhat naturally, decided to develop what they feel are going to be successful at retail. Fine. If that's the state of the market these days- simply developing games to make money full stop- I'm quite happy to leave the mass market behind.

Now, there are a million and one counter arguments to this. Chief among these, perhaps, is saying that Nintendo are also in it for the money. True. Far from being a philanthropic concern, Nintendo have been aggressively protecting their wealth, and have, some would stay stingily, adopted policies which will keep this intact. Hell, Ninty were punished by the E.U only last year for keeping prices in some parts of the E.U 'artificially high'. Believe me, Nintendo were at fault, and punished- as they should have been. But the difference with Nintendo is this: Money isn't where it ends. A genuine love of games pervades every one of their titles. Proper innovation and a determination to be different have been at the core of Nintendo's videogame principles since they began making them all those years ago. Much of this links in with my previous article in January this year, which discussed style over substance in games. But I digress.

The definition of 'successful' in games terms is a game that sells huge quantities of copies. Surely, though, this definition is rendered totally invalid if sales solely reflect popular culture? Perhaps, 'successful' should now be defined as 'a game that most strongly appeals to the national casual gamer consciousness'? We, though, as Nintendo fans, have to look beyond this very narrow-minded view on things, where sales are king. The value and contribution of a game to the industry is of true importance. Looking beyond simple popularity isn't easy, I grant you that, but nevertheless it is our responsibility to do this.

Here, then, is what we must redefine 'successful' as: 'A title which makes a real and proper contribution to videogames.' The boom in the games industry has diluted game quality- game can now be sold based on easily recognisable 'hooks' such as official licenses and photo-realistic graphics. Snagging the rights for the videogame tie-in to the latest Hollywood blockbuster is becoming akin to getting a license to print money- developing the actual game is rapidly becoming a tiresome afterthought. Unfortunately for all of us, the mass-market laps this up. Notice how those two aforementioned selling points are both completely irrelevant to the actual game? In a sensible society (which I'm quite sure we don't live in) the actual quality of the gameplay would be the game's key feature. Not so in reality, folks.

If Nintendo are to be market leaders in the games industry, society must lose its worryingly close relationship, nay, obsession with image and celebrity, trendyness and other meaningless tangible things. Why? Because Nintendo have little interest in such matters. Nintendo's image 'problems' stem, solely, from its refusal to become wrapped up in society's hollow values. For that, they are punished- which is a crying shame, and another reason why the games lovers of the world must show solidarity with Nintendo's way of doing things- if we believe in how they do things, of course.

Our society rewards those that conform to it- Nintendo, to a large extent, don't.

And that, essentially, though not exclusively, is why Nintendo will never become what we perceive to be top dogs. Again, our perception of what it means to be 'top' must be re-examined- if 'top' refers exclusively to 'most successful'- I think then we live in a woefully shallow society. 'Best' should refer to the games company that make the games of the highest quality, making the biggest contribution to the advancement of games, not from a technical viewpoint, but from a position of genuinely improving videogames to the benefit of the industry. This is how things should be; of course, for the most part, they aren't. But, I appeal to you- If enough of us truly believe in the ideals I have outlined- maybe society will be changed for the better. Don't allow the corrupting influence of our society affect your judgement!

In the movie box-office charts, you'll find that big budget blockbusters dominate the upper echelons of the top 20. Small, low-profile and low-budget films don't get a look in. But, I ask you, does that mean they aren't better movies than the ones that succeed? Of course not. Nintendo will never follow the crowd- and this is why they'll never 'dominate the industry' in the conventional sense.

You know something? Nintendo dominate the industry in a way much deeper than pound, dollar or yen signs do. Ask any games programmer what their top three all-time games are- in all likelihood a Zelda or Mario game will be there. Almost any action adventure or 3D platformer or racing game, for any console is compared against the yardstick of a Nintendo game. Nintendo have helped shape the industry like no other company has. And for that we should all be thankful. Nintendo's games have given all on this site such unrestrained happiness over the years- the innocence and joy of all their games, combined with generally innovative play mechanics are wonderful in themselves: but what's even better is that you know that Nintendo are doing it all to make you feel this way.

As I mentioned explicitly earlier, Nintendo aren't a not-for profit organization or philanthropic concern- but I want to impress upon you all, they're the only console manufacturer who really care about gaming. Look- I accept that the Xbox and PS2 have their share of rather good games- but on the whole I find an unforgivably large portion of them to be rather forgettable experiences; devoid of a certain spark, if you will. And the advent of the 'videogame blockbuster' (read: product placement excersizes) such as The Getaway makes me despair in the intentions of Sony and Microsoft. I don't want to begin another tirade about The Getaway- It is a typical, no better or worse than much of the output of modern developers. You see, it illustrates one point rather well: While Nintendo spent several years bringing Mario into 3D for the beginning of the true 3D revolution in gaming- honing with great precision every gameplay element- concocting new, genuinely innovative gameplay ideas which were never thought of before, Team Soho spent an insane number of years ensuring that every pebble in the whole of London was accurately represented in their title. You tell me which represents proper advancement of gaming.

Perhaps there is a place for Team Soho's ambitious work- but I'm convinced its not gaming. Of course, The Getaway isn't all that bad- especially compared with the countless 'retro updates' which 'grace' almost every week's release list. Or the newest 2K3 version of last year's American sports title. But what it doesn't represent is the advancement of gaming- That's true greatness; something achieved only by a select few developers.

Nintendo, then, are suffering at the hands of our shallow society. Isn't it great, then, that the company has such a dedicated fan base (C-E provides a prime example)? And isn't it heart-warming to know that there are many of us who know a great game really is? Here's what it is: Its not necessarily a game developed by Nintendo (it would be folly to say that it is) � but it is a game that exudes quality; that tries to rise above the rest; that doesn't pander to simply whats popular in society, but what should be popular; that the sole reason for its existence isn't to line corporate pockets- but also to delight gamesplayers. Thank heavens there still are companies in the world who still adhere to this proper definition of videogame greatness: Nintendo, undoubtedly, are one of those.

This isn't either a biased article or unreasonable 'fanboyism'- and I'm deadly serious about that. I'm not blinded at all by my love of Nintendo. It just so happens that Nintendo have been the shining star of games development for years now- and I suppose my ultimate wish would be for the mass market to understand the company. At the moment, that understanding, in the main, isn't there. Furthermore, I'm open to appreciating quality games from all comers. The problem is, I'm not seeing enough true quality in most of today's output from so many developers, all over the world- on all three major consoles.

And one last thing: for Nintendo to overtake the other two console behemoths, the company would have to change their whole philosophy of games: I ask you- do you really want to see that happen? I certainly don't. Nintendo will survive, don't you worry- they're in good financial health- the colossal success story that is the Game Boy will keep the good ship Nintendo afloat, no matter what the GameCube's fate is. And lets not think for one minute that the GameCube isn't reasonably successful. Its selling quite well worldwide- not as much as we'd like to see, but that, I hope, is becoming almost irrelevant.

So, I'm asking you all to look beyond the limitations of our culture- to appreciate proper gaming- even where others do not. This doesn't just go for Nintendo games- as Nintendo fans, its our inherent responsibility to recognize, appreciate and applaud great games when we see it- on any console.

It's for gaming's own good that we do this.

-Mark Cullinane.

It's vitally important that these issues are discussed on the site's discussion forums and comment boxes. The question is, what do you think? Am I right on this one? Email me at [email protected] to tell me what you think. If you want to discuss anything with me, add me to your MSN list at [email protected] . Alternatively, post your comments below.