Support NeoGAF

[Maztorre]

Another stuff about Nintendo console is that developpers have to deal about fighting at the same place as Nintendo software. How would a new Third Party Competitive TPS on Wii U when there is already Splatoon available ? How can anyone make a plateformer 2D with New Super Mario Bros in front of it. Even Donkey Kong suffer from that !

It's a lot harder than it seems and there is no solution for that for Nintendo.

This argument was always nonsense. Nintendo's systems have frequently suffered software droughts, to the point where a 3rd party would have ample space to release games in these genres. The truth is that the major 3rd party publishers have completely moved away from the genres and demographics Nintendo pursues. In the case of Splatoon, a major 3rd party would never directly target an all-ages audience for a third-person shooter the way Nintendo have with Splatoon. And even if they were targeting the same demographic, so what? I don't see 3rd parties suffering on Sony platforms due to the existence of Uncharted, Infamous, etc, and those are series that directly target the same genres and demographics of EA/Activision/Ubisoft.

The truth is that Sony and MS have made platforms that cater directly to the demographics that major AAA 3rd parties want. 3rd parties don't target Nintendo platforms because they would have to put in the work to create that marketplace on Nintendo platforms, and they see that as unnecessary risk when they can reach enough console/PC users on the platforms they do support. Nintendo will need to prove this market exists before major 3rd parties will give serious support.

Nintendo's real 3rd party support will come from Japanese/mid-tier Western publishers and indies, before the likes of EA/Acti show up. With the recent success of Japanese publishers in the West via Steam, and the "second wave" of larger indie titles coming from crowdfunding projects and growing indie studios, Nintendo would have a pretty good base of 3rd party titles to put on their system. They'll need to start from there, the same way a platform like Steam has had to constantly prove the existence of certain customer groups before major support comes down the line. Nobody doubts that Nintendo targets family audiences really well, but no major 3rd parties outside of mobile dev/toys-to-life invest in that demographic anymore.

 

[MoogleWizard]

I buy Nintendo hardware for Nintendo games. So yes.

 

[LoveCake]

Would you buy their next console as a nod for at least trying?



Voting with your wallet. If the people who at present demand they make a powerful console don't support then what reason does Nintendo have to ever go that route again?

Nope, I did this when getting a WiiU at launch, maybe will a buy a NX a few years after release once the dust has settled and I know what I will be getting for my money, Nintendo have lost my trust now and it's going to take a lot to win it back.

 

[AzaK]

people who needs excuses to not buy nintendo hardware

Excuses? More like valid reasons.

Anyone who wants their console purchase to not gather dust every 6 months between new releases...

Exactly.

 

[Jzero]

I only buy Nintendo for Zelda anyway. PC for the rest. Wii U has been the only one I've skipped so far.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

The GCN had outstanding hardware. And it was still the worst place to play many 3rd party games due to the controller, memory cards, surround sound, and small discs. As always with Nintendo, I'd like to see what caveats they throw our way before blindly supporting their hardware.

 

[Mr Waluigi]

Sorry, are you saying third party support has dried up, in part, due to the profile and success of the likes of Mario and Zelda, and third parties finding it hard to compete with those franchises?

Yes, especially during holiday seasons.
Nintendo consoles' main attractiveness is Nintendo games, so third parties have a difficult time having their games make a hit on the same console. I remember a Ubisoft representative complaining about this when asked about ZombiU (but it was years ago so I must be wrong, but I don't feel that my point is nonsense either)
It's even worse on a console like the Wii U, where most owners are Nintendo fans in the first place so there is little interest toward other games.

Well, at least Nintendo seems to be aware of this and tries to grab the attention of indie developers instead.

edit: I'm not saying it's the sole reason though. The main issue is that with Nintendo releasing their own very high-profile games on their own console, third-parties don't get the spotlight they want to be able to sell units at all. Made even worse when the userbase either barely plays games (Wii) or only cares about Nintendo franchises (Wii U). Made even worse when the hardware is sub-par compared to what the competition offers (Wii U, but mostly Wii).
Nintendo wanted to attract "core" gamers with the Wii U but failed on two sides:
- they took much longer than expected to finish developing HD games, so the release of big first-party titles has been very sparse (now they're trying to soften the hit by releasing a bunch of spin-offs on Wii U and 3DS)
- third-party relationships failed terribly (with Ubisoft porting ZombiU to other consoles after all, EA's unprecedented partnership, and SEGA giving Sonic Boom to Nintendo, among others) for the reasons mentionned above - the userbase that differs too much from the PS4 and Xbox One (and that is too small to bother with), and Nintendo's own games overshadowing everything else anyway

 

[ChetWilson]

As long as Nintendo is dishing out 6 AAA ("Mario Kart 8 level-of-quality") games a year, consistently every year for the life of the console, I'm ok with whatever else they do.

To do that, I think they need to invest more in their software teams/budgets. As far as 3rd party goes, I'd loosen license fees/structures.

 

[gofreak]

There's multiple things you need to do to make a platform attractive to third parties as a primary or core target. Hardware is only one element. I think it's arguable that Nintendo has never shown themselves able or willing to steward a platform effectively for third party business in the home space, at least not in a 'post-PlayStation' context where the business changed completely. Nintendo will have to demonstrate a number of changes and initiatives in order to attract my sympathy for their efforts on this front - I'm not even sure what all of these should be at this point, but I know hardware config alone isn't enough.

I don't even know if Nintendo wants to play in this context.

 

[Sorc3r3r]

Nah.

As usual for me, the Nintendo tax I'm willing to pay to play their exclusives is 199 whatever, was true for the GC, the Wii and the Wii U.

Without 3rd party support their console is just a whim of mine that i don't want to feed it more than 199 euro .

 

[shaowebb]

The way things are going all they have to promise developers is a decent controller and hardware specs that wont change and they'll be the most appealing. Its already confirmed its the easiest system to develop for in several gens.

 

[Celine]

There's multiple things you need to do to make a platform attractive to third parties as a primary or core target. Hardware is only one element. I think it's arguable that Nintendo has never shown themselves able or willing to steward a platform effectively for third party business in the home space, at least not in a 'post-PlayStation' context where the business changed completely. Nintendo will have to demonstrate a number of changes and initiatives in order to attract my sympathy for their efforts on this front - I'm not even sure what all of these should be at this point, but I know hardware config alone isn't enough.

I don't even know if Nintendo wants to play in this context.

Agree on everything but with one exception.
Wii actually got big support from third-party because for the first time in forever Nintendo released a home console that met one precise and important third-party need at the time that was not met elsewhere which was the need for publishers who wanted to release at retail small/medium production games.
Therefore this "big support from third party" on Wii materialized mostly in the form of small/medium budget game releases (usually family friendly games or niche games).

I feel however that the Wii case was a casualty, Nintendo's plan to keep down development costs and lessen risks involved to release a motion based console accidentally coincided with the need of third-party for smaller/medium games.
I'd also wager that Nintendo was never really proactive toward third-parties, not even during the NES/SNES eras when they had the bulk of the support.

 

[Fbh]

As most recent Nintendo Home consoles, Exclusives are basically the only reason I'll be buying it (after a price drop or if I see a good deal).

IMO, if they wanted to compete in the third party market they should have launched closer to the Ps4/X1. As it is right now I'm a Ps4 owner looking to build a PC in the near future so I don't have a very strong need for yet another platform to play third party stuff on.

I will buy a NX if the Nintendo games on it look good and/or if they get more exclusive deals with Platinum. If it'll have the next Mass Effect or be able to play the next Battlefield isn't very relevant to me

 

[wonderful103]

Agree on everything but with one exception.
Wii actually got big support from third-party because for the first time in forever Nintendo released a home console that met one precise and important third-party need at the time that was not met elsewhere which was the need for publishers who wanted to release at retail small/medium production games.
Therefore this "big support from third party" materialized mostly in the form of small/medium budget game releases (usually family friendly games or niche games).

I feel however that the Wii case was a casualty, Nintendo wanted to keep down development costs and the risks involved to release a motion based console just accidentally coincided with the need of third-party for smaller/medium games.
I'd also wager that Nintendo was never really proactive toward third-parties, not even during the NES/SNES eras.

It wasn't accidental. Their executives spoke of the need to have a market for small/mid sized titles at the time. The mid tier has nearly evaporated from consoles outside of the handheld ones. It's nowhere near the fertile ground that steam currently offers for such titles

 

[FalsettoVibe]

Probably wouldn't buy.

 

[Celine]

It wasn't accidental. Their executives spoke of the need to have a market for small/mid sized titles at the time. The mid tier has nearly evaporated from consoles outside of the handheld ones. It's nowhere near the fertile ground that steam currently offers for such titles

I think it was accidental (that Nintendo did something to help/attract third-party support) in the sense that it was mainly done to favour Nintendo bottom line but was ultimately also beneficial to third-parties.
What I mean is that Nintendo never really cared for third-parties and were always far more interested to strengthened their own position which is evident by the ratio between first-party software sales and total software sales on their consoles:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=963700

Of course I'm also sure Nintendo management understood the importance of mid-production (many Nintendo games, while very polished, can be categorized as such).

 

[airmangataosenai]

A silly hypothetical as we all know they're just going to cheap out like they have done every single time over the past decade. You people need to learn: fire is hot.

 

[wonderful103]

I think it was accidental (that Nintendo did something to help/attract third-party support) in the sense that it was mainly done to favour Nintendo bottom line but was ultimately also beneficial to third-parties.
What I mean is that Nintendo never really cared for third-parties and were always far more interested to strengthened their own position which is evident by the ratio between first-party software sales and total software sales on their consoles:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=963700

Of course I'm also sure Nintendo management understood the importance of mid-production (many Nintendo games, while very polished, can be categorized as such).

There is a post less than a page ago that states approximately 350 out of the 900 million pieces of software sold on wii were first party.

 

[MindGamingMantis]

Wii sold 900 million units of software, only 350 million of which were Nintendo titles. They did quite well for some 3rd parties, particularly Ubisoft. It's why they went to the trouble of making Wii-specific projects, even with the extra architectural challenge. It's why every major publisher initially supported the Wii U during the launch window, including EA, Activision, and especially Ubisoft, even if they were sloppy ports or "launch window" type games (eg that Rabbids game). When it was apparent the system was tanking, that's when they pulled out.

The narrative that Nintendo can never have 3rd party games only holds true for the Wii U and that because the system was a failure of monumental proportions. Even the Wii had enough support to be notable. The main hurdle to Western support is in fact the hardware. Companies like Epic were the main detractor at U launch, due to technical issues with the hardware (ie underpowered, non-standard).

References:
https://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/en/sales/hard_soft/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_Wii_video_games
https://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/en/sales/software/wii.html

Given even a moderate install base and hardware of adequate power, it's not going to be a tough sell to get major publishers and developers on board.

The Wii is irrelevant. It was a machine that sold shovelware and a ton of first party software. In terms of 3rd party, I'm talking about games that are on the other consoles as well. I'm referring strictly to the Wii U's track record and its vicious cycle.

 

[LifeBrandRobot]

Who here is going to use NX as their main platform? It mean buying all multiplatform games on NX, not PC, PS4 or XB1. If it doesn't come with a standard controller or cloud saves there is zero chance I will do that even if its more powerful than my PS4. It will once again be my side console, buying maybe 3 or 4 exclusives a year for it and that's it.

 

[Stevey]

lol no, what an absurd idea.

 

[wonderful103]

The Wii is irrelevant. It was a machine that sold shovelware and a ton of first party software. In terms of 3rd party, I'm talking about games that are on the other consoles as well. I'm referring strictly to the Wii U's track record and its vicious cycle.

Every market leading console except the ps4 has sold tons of shovel ware. The ps4 has very little because the overall market has shrunk and gotten far more insular over the past generation, and no longer includes meaningful amounts of the demographics that would purchase what you and I call shovel ware. It speaks more to the health of the overall market now than it does to classify what the wii was or wasn't

 

[specdot]

You still get amazing 1st party games from them so it'd be far from charity.

This is what people who buy Nintendo consoles have been doing since the GameCube.

 

[Maiar_m]

Pricing will make or break the deal, but Nintendo's software output is the only one supporting offline multiplayer well enough and has so far been enough to justify the purchase (second hand though)

 

[zelas]

Why do people always assume everyone just has one issue with nintendo's consoles? Yes they need to provide competitive hardware. But I want a modern online infrastructure, an ethernet port, third party supporty, no gimmicks, and more games that cater specifically to older audiences rather than "family." They've put themselves in anbig hole, one change isnt going to suddenly put them on the same level as their competition. People should give them money when they feel their needs have been addressed completely, not merely because nintendo is making an honest effort.

 

[Piers]

Wouldn't third-parties always have some distrust towards Nintendo consoles due to having to compete against their own franchises for sales and relevancy?

 

[LordRaptor]

3rd parties don't target Nintendo platforms because they would have to put in the work to create that marketplace on Nintendo platforms

the same way a platform like Steam has had to constantly prove the existence of certain customer groups before major support comes down the line.

The 'work' Steam put in was offering games for sale. That's it. That's as it should be.

Its up to third parties to build an audience.
Its up to third parties to not charge a high price for a port that is months late, or that is plagued with technical issues, or that skips DLC on that platform, or that skips a sequel to a game that sold well because Sony or MS bribe them.
Because they hurt their own sales now, and they hurt their consumer trust in future sales in the long term.
That's not "Oh, Steam user demographics, they only buy Valve games anyway, how can we compete?". That's "Oh shit, if we treat a customer base badly they don't buy our products no matter how much whitespace we replace with video advertising on IGN?"

 

[zoukka]

Wouldn't third-parties always have some distrust towards Nintendo consoles due to having to compete against their own franchises for sales and relevancy?

How is this different from other consoles?

 

[Pancakes R Us]

Let's be honest, the audience that Nintendo attracts these days are far from what western third party publishers want. Until Nintendo proves that they can cultivate such an audience that western third parties want, it'll mostly be just Nintendo, Japanese publishers, & indies for the NX Platform. Right now's the time for Nintendo to begin their road to recovery, start to get the attention of core gamers, & eventually win back the trust of western publishers. Making the NX Console more powerful than the competition can help, but it won't be a magic fix for Nintendo's situation. Until then, we just have to live with the main 3 sources of games mentioned earlier. The sooner we accept this, the better.

Totally agreed with this post. Nintendo could make a system with 10x the power of PS4 and most third parties that are seeing success on PS4/X1/PC still wouldn't be interested because the audience is (nearly) completely different.

 

[InspectorSpaceman]

I know that I will eventually buy a Nintendo machine for the 1st party games. If they have compelling 3rd parties then I will get it. Same reason I'd get any other console. Never understood the platform superiority complex some people have.

 

[Fantastapotamus]

Nintendo's hardware was never the reason why I didn't care about the Wii U. Software trumps Hardware every single time

 

[-hadouken]

In this day and age, powerful hardware simply isn't enough to get me onboard - Nintendo need a proper, fully functional network and the online playerbase to go with it. Sadly I just don't see that happening.

 

[Wensih]

I bought a Wii U, so that should tell you what I think about 3rd party games on a Nintendo console. Even if they manage to get 3rd parties to develop for the platform I'll just buy the software on the PS4 or PC, which I feel is the sentiment of a lot of multiplatform owners. I have zero expectations that third parties will have an incentive to try to release on NX. My purchase, which will probably come towards the end of the NX life cycle because I just bought a Wii U, is dependent on NX exclusives and Nintendo's output.

 

[FLAguy954]

Who honestly gives a fuck about third parties on Nintendo systems at this point?

Lmao, have you seen Nintendo's console hardware sale trends since the Nintendo 64? We have objective proof that they are becoming increasingly irrelevant without third party support.

 

[Teletraan1]

The only thing that interests me from all the rumours is if I could play what were once considered portable games on my home console on my TV from my comfy couch. If I had the ability to play 3DS games on my Wii U I would have bought at least 20 more games. I detest the ergonomics of handhelds but would love to play the games on my TV. Huge JRPG fan who can't stand the home that a lot of these games got. Plus I just want to play Pokemon on my TV. My pockets don't disappear when I am at home.

I hope the hardware is up to par just so that Nintendo can do 1080p60. I don't expect third parties to jump onboard if there is any kind of outlier gimmicks with the console no matter how powerful it is. Devs have been complaining about making a new performance profile for PSNeo games, how do you think they would react to having to put in special control schemes and actually support these gimmicks. I completely expect them to do the same old shit where they release new versions of old games that can be found on other systems for half the price and wonder why the NX version didn't sell.

 

[Celine]

There is a post less than a page ago that states approximately 350 out of the 900 million pieces of software sold on wii were first party.

And?
I never said third-party sold (overall) badly on Wii.

As a side note I don't need posts to tell me how much Nintendo first-party software sold on their consoles for obvious reasons.

 

[Wensih]

Lmao, have you seen Nintendo's console hardware sale trends since the Nintendo 64? We have objective proof that they are becoming increasingly irrelevant without third party support.

The gamecube had a lot of thid party multiplatform titles though. I think they're becoming increasingly irrelevant either way.

 

[Mithos]

Who honestly gives a fuck about third parties on Nintendo systems at this point?

I do (my current Wii U games).

 

[kinggroin]

Yep. This sites infatuation with Nintendo is baffling.

This site?


Cmon really? THIS site? Infatuated?

 

[Bjoern the Smexy]

I would not buy their console just because they tried.
I'd buy their console because it says "Nintendo" on it.

 

[Haganeren]

This argument was always nonsense. Nintendo's systems have frequently suffered software droughts, to the point where a 3rd party would have ample space to release games in these genres.

Not totally. It's a matter of Nintendo's behaviour because contrary of Sony and Microsoft, it's VITAL for them to sell software. It means that they will always take their game as a priority. Of course all Nintendo console suffered software droughts but generally it's either at the beginning where no Third Party have game ready because they are giving devkits so damn late and at the end where nobody want to go into a dying console.

In the middle ? Mario Kart, Smash Bros, Mario and other games have all the support from Nintendo Marketing. Sony was, at the very beginning particulary receptive of all kind of project and can even put some in front even if it's not their game. They don't care as much as Nintendo.

This is why i think third party don't like to compete against Nintendo. They take the better spot for release with their own game which will always be the priority for them. All you said in the rest of the message are only the consequence for me, not the cause.

 

[Jinketsu]

This site?


Cmon really? THIS site? Infatuated?

Maybe he's baffled by the lack thereof?

 

[bachikarn]

I think Nintendo would use the extra power in awesome ways, so I'd buy it for that.

 

[Ninja Dom]

A lot of you are forgetting.

The Wii U launched in 2012 and it had almost all the major third parties on board.

There was FIFA, there was COD, there was Assassin's Creed, there was Tekken Tag, there was Skylanders, there was Warriors Orochi, there was a Batman Arkham game and there was Mass Effect.

Plus we had a few exclusives (Zombi U) and Nintendo's games.

These third parties left and generally never came back. The mindset with gamers and publishers is that Nintendo home consoles are a platform for Nintendo made games only. That mindset won't change with NX, no matter what Nintendo does or doesn't do.

 

[MacTag]

Not totally. It's a matter of Nintendo's behaviour because contrary of Sony and Microsoft, it's VITAL for them to sell software. It means that they will always take their game as a priority. Of course all Nintendo console suffered software droughts but generally it's either at the beginning where no Third Party have game ready because they are giving devkits so damn late and at the end where nobody want to go into a dying console.

In the middle ? Mario Kart, Smash Bros, Mario and other games have all the support from Nintendo Marketing. Sony was, at the very beginning particulary receptive of all kind of project and can even put some in front even if it's not their game. They don't care as much as Nintendo.

This is why i think third party don't like to compete against Nintendo. They take the better spot for release with their own game which will always be the priority for them. All you said in the rest of the message are only the consequence for me, not the cause.

That's not entirely the case. Nintendo also targets marketing for 3rd parties and we see successful examples of this with the sizable global pushes for Monster Hunter and Dragon Quest or even on the lower end with Shovel Knight.

 

[asagami_]

That's not entirely the case. Nintendo also targets marketing for 3rd parties and we see successful examples of this with the sizable global pushes for Monster Hunter and Dragon Quest or even on the lower end with Shovel Knight.

And a lot of japanese companys (this most true on the 3DS, though). The only ones who don't support Nintendo "only if have a powerful hardware" are the western 3rd parties, specially the big ones.

 

[thepenguin55]

Would you buy their next console as a nod for at least trying?

I would argue that we already got that console and it was called the WiiU. Having said that, I was one of the crazies who actually bought 3rd party games on WiiU. I own ZombiU, Tekken Tag 2, Darksiders 2, Fist of the North Star 2 and I previously owned Injustice, AC3, Mass Effect 3, All-Stars Racing: Transformed, Arkham City: Armored Edition, Lego City Undercover, Ninja Gaiden 3: Razor's Edge, and there's probably some other games that I'm forgetting but you get my point. Honestly, the biggest problem with a lot of the WiiU games from WB, Ubisoft, EA and Activision is that they would often kneecap their own WiiU games by not putting out all of the DLC for their games.

 

[axisofweevils]

Buy a Nintendo console for Nintendo games and the exclusives. Anything else is a nice bonus. I bought Third Parties on Wii U and would do the same on NX, as long as it has the same content as PS4/XB1 versions.

Example of a third party game I wouldn't buy: Mass Effect 3 -- more expensive than the trilogy on other consoles, without any DLC.

 

[Fox Mulder]

No, I buy Nintendo hardware for Nintendo games. A powerful console with no third party support just has a higher barrier to entry.

 

[Maztorre]

The 'work' Steam put in was offering games for sale. That's it. That's as it should be.

Its up to third parties to build an audience.
Its up to third parties to not charge a high price for a port that is months late, or that is plagued with technical issues, or that skips DLC on that platform, or that skips a sequel to a game that sold well because Sony or MS bribe them.
Because they hurt their own sales now, and they hurt their consumer trust in future sales in the long term.
That's not "Oh, Steam user demographics, they only buy Valve games anyway, how can we compete?". That's "Oh shit, if we treat a customer base badly they don't buy our products no matter how much whitespace we replace with video advertising on IGN?"

I totally get where you're coming from, and I agree that the major 3rd parties are both risk-averse and often shortsighted to the point of near-sabotage when it comes to Nintendo platforms. The thing is, there is an easy and obvious justification for bringing all kinds of different titles to Steam that doesn't quite exist with Nintendo's recent platforms.

The whole reason there was so much customer demand for Steam versions of previously console- or Japan-only titles was that there were obvious benefits in terms of game performance, ability to mod/inject code into older titles, and the potential for long-tail sales on what is easily the biggest customer base of any platform.

On the other hand, if you're a AAA publisher, where's the market justification for selling late ports of winter 2016's PS4/PC/Xbone titles on the NX next March? Let's be real, anyone who is interested in open world/TPS/FPS games already owns one of these other platforms, and that is seemingly all that the AAA publishers are putting money into these days. So who has been waiting for NX to come out so they can play EA/Take2/Acti/Ubi's offerings? The answer is nobody - AAA publishers have laser-focused the console market around a limited demographic to the point where only 1 platform holder is having sustainable success, and the other is weighing up their very existence as a "console" platform.

I think the only way the major 3rd parties support NX seriously is either Nintendo selling huge amounts of hardware on the back of successful mass-market software again (like the Wii) to the point where 3rd parties can't ignore that market, or the AAA market stagnating to the point where the major publishers make real investments to broaden their appeal outside of 18-40 year old males. Both of these are doubtful initially, so Nintendo's best bet is to keep cultivating their own IP towards Disney-like status (ie. building the existing cultural status of their characters using movies, TV, tie-in apps, etc to pull people towards their hardware) and working with genuinely interested partners like Namco, Sega, Capcom and smaller Western studios who see the gap in the market. I think a lot of mobile and PC devs in the West would be perfectly suited to Nintendo hardware since they are creating titles that fit the same market Nintendo is trying for.