It's not good. I said as much. But it's not Nintendo on their death throws as many in this topic seem to imply.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Lets talk about Nintendo going 3rd party (from an economics perspective)
- Thread starter MercuryLS
- Start date
It's not good. I said as much. But it's not Nintendo on their death throws as many in this topic seem to imply.
ShockingAlberto
Member
My argument is one of software, though. People keep saying Nintendo would be a successful publisher by putting their software on other consoles, but people like Hideki Konno have multiple responsibilities on OS design, hardware design, and games like Mario Kart. Are they going to keep him on board to make Mario Kart PS4? Is he going to be satisfied just doing that and not leave to make his own studio? How much downsizing will they have to do? How much of their talent do they keep?
Father_Brain
Banned
This, this, this.
HeHasRisen
Banned
I think Nintendo should (and they will) give it another shot with another console considering the Wii sold +100 million and made them tons of money.
The problem with the Wii U was that it wasn't innovative and accessible enough. They forgot what made the Wii so successful and appealing. The Wii U gamepad isn't innovative nor appealing to say the least (seriously what was Nintendo thinking?).
I think Nintendo 'gets it' now. It's not about hardware power as it is about offering a novel, compelling. fun way to play video games that one can't find anywhere else. I am 100% certain Nintendo's going all out in terms of innovation for their next console. What they are cooking up in their R&D I don't know but I'm sure they want it be accessible, fun, and a hit as the Wii remote was.
If Nintendo's next console fails then maybe going 3rd party can be a real viable option.
The problem with the Wii U was that it wasn't innovative and accessible enough. They forgot what made the Wii so successful and appealing. The Wii U gamepad isn't innovative nor appealing to say the least (seriously what was Nintendo thinking?).
I think Nintendo 'gets it' now. It's not about hardware power as it is about offering a novel, compelling. fun way to play video games that one can't find anywhere else. I am 100% certain Nintendo's going all out in terms of innovation for their next console. What they are cooking up in their R&D I don't know but I'm sure they want it be accessible, fun, and a hit as the Wii remote was.
If Nintendo's next console fails then maybe going 3rd party can be a real viable option.
You know what else was shared with the family back then? TELEVISIONS.
As for not being a casual gaming device.... Freecell says hi. PC was certainly closer to the idea of a "casual gaming device" (in spite of the fact that "casual gaming" wasn't really a THING until the 2000s) than the machine you dumped $30-50 per game for.
There are perfectly valid arguments that are being brought up to counteract, but apparently you'd rather be flippant. K.
Aside from being portable, that is basically how people were describing the growing PC gaming market for years. Hell, people were saying it offered that AND a better audio-visual experience for games. Consoles survived by offering something that PCs never had: standardized input methods, a more accessible experience for multiplayer and (since it was important at the time and still is for most Nintendo fans) Japanese developer support. PC gaming found a way to co-exist and, even despite the console's advantages shrinking to a point where it could be over-taken, the PC gaming master-race still pleasantly co-exists with us console-playing heathens.
Smartphones are the "it" thing right now, and yes, they play games, and yes, that market makes some serious bank. But we're in the middle of them being the "it" discussion topic, so naturally everyone thinks it will crush gaming under heel. But it's not an all-or-nothing principle, and thinking that way makes us no better than the publishers who are putting all their eggs in that basket, as well.
Like with PC gaming and how it didn't kill consoles, mobile gaming will level off and co-exist, hopefully before people go so apeshit stupid with it that we end up with a market crash.
I re-iterate: Smartphones aren't about to kill dedicated hardware, nor shrink them to irrelevance. I've been to this dog and pony show plenty of times before.
The two situations are nothing alike. Handhelds have already undergone a massive contraction, and it shows no signs of abating. PCs never did that to consoles.
This seems intelligent.
I disagree or at least think it's so unlikely that the other possibilities that are likely are the ones that deserve attention, but that was a good summation of the argument to me.
The pessimism for me always seems loaded, and loaded with hate towards Nintendo for not following orthodox business practice.
TheRedSnifit
Member
Thing is, for a discussion to work you need evidence, and neither you nor anybody else has presented any. That's why this thread is nothing but ten pages of hypotheticals and anecdotes. That's why these threads never get anywhere. Why should I accept your particular brand of crazy if you can't support it?
OG_Original Gamer
Member
If they were to go third-party and some how able to keep they're talent, I release every game a couple days to a week before an EA game release. And if Nintendo is expected to do gangbusters on non Nintendo hardware, threads would be so entertaining.
Astral Dog
Member
You said Nintendo would get special treatment from Microsoft/Sony, but why? why would they let Nintendo have all the profits selling their games on those systems? why would they help Nintendo with funding and marketing niche games? they dont seem to care for those games, Are Nintendo games going to sell enough to make up for their possible loss in hardware and software if they make another "succesful" console? What happens if their talent starts leaking? What would they need to downsize? how many employees are they going to fire? Are they really going to find succes making games for iOS ? (but maybe they should try this)
I can see Nintendo being a succesful third party for a few years, but long term this could affect them in a very bad way, they could have many losses transitioning to a third party developer, and i am not only talking about financial losses, of course they have to consider this option, and it does have its benefits, maybe im wrong, but right now it does not seem to be a good idea.
I don't know if you've noticed, but lots of healthy industries without any competitors have also undergone a massive contraction.
Smartphone games aren't stealing handheld sales, the evidence to suggest as much is anecdotal, they are just growing while the dedicated hardware market is shrinking for other very real reasons. Two separate things, correlation does not imply causation.
Comparing computers with smartphones doesn't make much sense.
Actually, consoles did undergo a massive contraction around the time PC gaming became popular... One of the reasons for the North American Video Game Crash in 1983 was because the personal computer, namely the Commodore 64, now had a cheap enough price that people could buy one instead of a video game console. Outside of North America, Europe was all in on computers like the ZX Spectrum and the Commodore 64 at the time, and Japan had only just released the MSX and the Famicom, and the former was just as much a computer as the Commodore 64. The console market contracted in part because of the personal computer, but that was back in the 1980s and consoles ended up bouncing back. Handhelds can bounce back if only because they will continue to be the only way to play a game on the go that needs more finite controls since mobile games are forced to be developed with the touch screen in mind.
If Nintendo were ever put into a position in which it was forced to drop out of console development, it would simply refocus its employees towards its handhelds and some other possible areas outside of strict game development (like QoL). It would never go 3rd party. It's too complicated of a transition for a culture as compounded and stable as Nintendo's.
How come we always have this topic? Could we try something new, like, "If Sony or MS were to bow out of the games industry, what would Nintendo (and others) do in the power vacuum?"
It's arguable that one of those two will leave before Nintendo will, though it's not an especially great argument either.
How come we always have this topic? Could we try something new, like, "If Sony or MS were to bow out of the games industry, what would Nintendo (and others) do in the power vacuum?"
It's arguable that one of those two will leave before Nintendo will, though it's not an especially great argument either.
timetokill
Banned
They don't have to fire anyone! Everyone can make games on the glorious PS4. Even the hardware guys. Especially the hardware guys.
Based Cerny will surely give them a sweetheart deal on the royalty rate, and when EA or Activision comes knocking asking for a similar sweetheart deal he will just say, "Come on guys, it's Nintendo" and they'll all nod their heads and agree and wonder what they were thinking, of course it's Nintendo and they deserve a better deal than they are getting.
Plus as an added incentive Sony will bow out of the handheld hardware race and Iwata will wipe his brow, thinking, whew, we dodged a bullet there.
Miyamoto will work on the best 3D Mario of all time, saying to the press "Thankfully Sony has a great internet service which allows me to work on the games I've always wanted to work on. When I first created Mario, I thought that maybe 16x16 pixels were enough, but now I know that I truly needed 8GB GDDR5 RAM to render Mario in the way I imagined in my mind." Iwata will do an "Iwata Asks" where every designer and engineer says they cried with joy when they were freed from the shackles of working on "shit hardware." Iwata will say, "But you designed the hardware, didn't you?" and they will nod and say, "I am ashamed to say so, but yes. We were really holding ourselves back!" and Iwata will laugh.
When it comes time to decide which games to make, Nintendo will say, "Sure, I know Mario would sell millions, but Sony really needs help getting this console into a wider audience. Let's try out this wacky 'Friend Collecting' game, and really push to that audience. It will help out Good Guy Sony a bunch, and if it fails, well, at least we tried. The #1 thing is that we support the PS4 as though it were our own hardware."
Nintendo will sell a billion copies of the next Zelda game, with a gruff bearded Link leading a young Zelda (mocapped by Ellen Page) out of a ruined Hyrule and into a new land. Metroid will score only an 85 on Metacritic but will sell 10 million copies, with a seemingly endless parade of people coming out and saying they always wanted to play Metroid but never had the chance because it was on Nintendo hardware.
Nintendo will make more games than ever, in all kinds, including all your favorite long dormant IPs like F-Zero and StarTropics and Ice Climbers. Itoi will come back to work on Mother 4 because he always secretly wanted to make a game on better hardware, as he believes a great story can only be told on the best hardware that can be packaged into a $399 retail console.
regardless of the economics of the situation...i can tell you that i would buy Nintendo software on my PS4 without hesitation...i wont however, be buying a Wii U, after my Wii literally collected dust for nearly an entire generation...
idk how representative i am of gamers...but they would certainly get software buys from me at least with new Mario and Zelda games...
also thinking about having access to a Nintendo digital section of the PS Store with the massive catalog of old titles being rendered in ridiculous resolutions on the PS4...and possible new (old) IP's like an F-Zero game pushing the PS4's hardware in 1080p/60!...yup...id be completely on board with Nintendo going third party...
idk how representative i am of gamers...but they would certainly get software buys from me at least with new Mario and Zelda games...
also thinking about having access to a Nintendo digital section of the PS Store with the massive catalog of old titles being rendered in ridiculous resolutions on the PS4...and possible new (old) IP's like an F-Zero game pushing the PS4's hardware in 1080p/60!...yup...id be completely on board with Nintendo going third party...
No, I haven't noticed. Which healthy industry without any competitors is undergoing a massive contraction? And what makes an industry in that condition healthy?
I think the console crash was mostly a self-inflicted wound. Having something like 12 different platforms, all awash in shovelware, was never going to work. Competition from low-end computers didn't help, but consoles were screwed either way.
ArtHands
Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
They didn't render those old titles in HD on the Wii U. What makes you think that will happen in your scenario?
None of this would happen if Nintendo were to go 3rd party.
daninthemix
Member
Hypothetically, from an economics perspective how much money would Nintendo have made from a multiformat Super Mario 3D World on PS3, PS4, Xbox 360, Xbox One and Steam?
It's got to be ginormous, right?
But then I wonder if the problem would be diminishing returns - once people realise that Nintendo IP can be had anywhere, it starts to lose its value and later sales tail off by comparison.
It's got to be ginormous, right?
But then I wonder if the problem would be diminishing returns - once people realise that Nintendo IP can be had anywhere, it starts to lose its value and later sales tail off by comparison.
You could apply that logic to any exclusive IP.
Wow, you supersized that serving of sarcasm.
You want a honest opinion? Obsession.
At times I find it extremely scary how many times this particular topic pops up on the internet. It's not just GAF, but on enthousiast boards around the globe this discussion gets started every now and then with the exact same arguments. And it always ends with arguments like "Nintendo is a dinosaur, it can't possibly addapt to these modern times, they need to realise they can't release hardware like others do or but they can earn a lot of cash on other systems." And my favourite observation in all of those threads is the fact is that they should go to Sony. Very few mention Microsoft.
But the few who try to seriously discuss the topic always seem so sure about the fact that Nintendo won't change their current business practices and are absolutely certain that the future won't hold succesful hardware systems for them anymore. That belief (ever since the Gamecube and calling the Wii a anomaly) has grown into obsession.
Timetokill's post made me laugh, but honestly at times I kinda feel the same way when I see folks posting about third party Nintendo in these threads.
Consudering how poorly games like Mario sell on other platforms, it's hard to say. Obviously it would do well. But well enough to offset the increased cost from royalties and higher R&D? Doubtful.
Also that post is beautiful, timetokill.
As a gamer, it would be in my best interest to see Nintendo going 3rd party. Less consoles for me to buy, same games I ever got.
Actually we all would win.
We'd get Nintendo quality games on superior systems that weren't plagued by backwards online services.
Just the thought of Smash on ps4 makes me giddy.
As a gamer, I see absolutely 0 consequences on this move.
Actually we all would win.
We'd get Nintendo quality games on superior systems that weren't plagued by backwards online services.
Just the thought of Smash on ps4 makes me giddy.
As a gamer, I see absolutely 0 consequences on this move.
ArkhamFantasy
Member
A couple of years ago i would have been right here with you. Comparing the Pro's and Con's of Nintendo going third party looks good on paper, but some of the con's are very scary and realistically could very well happen.
Pro's
-Don't have to buy Nintendo's hardware
-Nintendo's developers would have superior hardware to work with (and wouldn't have to worry about making 3D or motion controlled games to sell that hardware)
-Nintendo's developers would have superior online networks to work with.
-Nintendo's games wouldn't be region locked, Nintendo's digital games would be on proper account systems.
-Nintendo's games would likely be a big boost to Playstation and Xbox.
Con's
-Possibility of a transition to mobile shovelware
-Nintendo's software sales would likely decline going up against third party software.
-Nintendo has more control and freedom with their own hardware.
The con that i bolded scares me enough to just buy their hardware, the thought of Zelda, X, Mario, Fire Emblem, etc becoming shovelware mobile games.....
With that being said, I dont see Nintendo going third party. I believe their first party developers and IPs are strong enough to carry them through this rough patch that they are going through and i am interested in seeing how they respond to the failure of the Wii U. I do think they should focus on one single platform because their first party isn't big enough to carry two platforms by themselves.
Possibility. It's possible that tomorrow microsoft will drop the xbox one. Likely? Absolutely not.
Nintendo software sales wouldn't decline... at all. People interested in their games are the ones buying their systems. These people will follow Nintendo everywhere. In turn, Nintendo will be open to an entire new group of potential consumers. This one is not even up to debate.
Nintendo does have more control on their hardware. This is the only con I agree.
I agree. The PC:console relationship != smartphone:handheld relationship.
But I also agree with Terrell that there will always be a demand for Nintendo's next handheld.
The question is: once we have full smartphone market saturation, will that demand will be high enough to support Nintendo's current business model and attract 3rd party developers? Only time will tell.
Why do people think the Nintendo devs are trapped? They helped design the machine, they wanted motion controls. They wanted the gamepad. They are tired of the same rote experiences we have every generation. It's why they standardized the analog stick and rumble pack. That want new ways to interact with the games as well.
And it's ridiculous to think that they are craving to go to some other company just to work on hardware that's a step back in design.
Well, it would be hard for their software sales to decline given the current state of their software sales (on consoles) but I don't think the average Xbox/PS gamer is as interested in Nintendo's IP as people seem to think.
LegendofLex
Member
That's not strictly true.
The difference, of course, is that not controlling the ecosystem meant this game was lost in a sea of other Atari games. It also meant that Nintendo had to compete on a platform where their brand image wasn't dominant. Kind of like games on Xbox/PS. Most people don't know about the ones that aren't realistic FPS/don't have massive marketing campaigns.
You wouldn't win, we'd all lose. Nintendo games wouldn't be as diverse or high quality if they went 3rd party. Because it wouldn't make sense, economically - the 3rd party business model is completely different. Their games are what they are because they're designed to sell systems. The software itself doesn't have to sell amazing numbers if it at least drives the installed base a little.
That and working conditions at Nintendo are very good, we aren't talking about an EA grist mill here.
I like how two of the pros are based on the erroneous idea that developers at Nintendo are trapped and hate working on "weaker" hardware, two are good for a consumer and the other is better for Sony & Microsoft, yet none of the pros you listed actually show any benefit for Nintendo themselves.
Look at Mario Kart 8 etc. They do wonders with the technology, and it's about the games, not about the tech. You can throw numbers all you want at a consumer, but that doesn't make a good game, making a good game does.
I guess that numbers wouldn't back the going third party route, unless you resort to the good old fallacy of exclusion.
KojiKnight
Member
Developers aren't always happy to have "superior" hardware since it comes with two big things everyone seems to forget...
Much more in terms of costs to develop games and much stricter control on creativity (brought on by point A).
There is a reason why the most innovative games tend to be indie titles... Because they aren't held down by budgets and businessmen looking to make the most money possible from their investment.
OG_Original Gamer
Member
I'm more worried about them losing talent than anything if they were to go third-party.
There were a variety of factors which led to the console crash, most of which are actually shared with mobile games of today.
That's not strictly true.
The difference, of course, is that not controlling the ecosystem meant this game was lost in a sea of other Atari games. It also meant that Nintendo had to compete on a platform where their brand image wasn't dominant. Kind of like games on Xbox/PS. Most people don't know about the ones that aren't realistic FPS/don't have massive marketing campaigns.
In addition, I believe the Atari versions of Donkey Kong, Donkey Kong Jr., and Mario Bros. were actually made by Atari after Nintendo gave Atari permission to make home conversions of those particular games. The CD-i and PC Educational games were likewise created by outside developers after being given the rights to use Nintendo properties. In the view of Nintendo's development teams, they have never touched any hardware that was not made by Nintendo's hardware division. Even their arcade games were made on Nintendo's own hardware.
Looking at Nintendo's past, they are listless when they feel they are in an unsuccessful market, creating new and wildly variant divisions within their company until they find a new successful venture. The period between Nintendo, the Playing Card Manufacturer and Nintendo, the Video Game Manufacturer was a period where they went all out on experimenting in different industries, until they hit pay dirt with Donkey Kong. In regards to the whole QoL thing, Iwata even mentioned the listless period of Nintendo between being a Playing Card Company and a Video Game Company as a reason to go into it. The whole QoL thing is Nintendo admitting that video games can no longer be their focus if they want be a successful company much as Nintendo admitted that playing cards could no longer be their focus if they wanted to be a successful company. For Nintendo, they'd rather leave Playing Cards and Video Games behind than let another company decide their fate.
Why should I have to buy a ps4 to play uncharted 4? There are literally 0 consequences to me being able to play it in a higher resolution and a better framerate on my PC and all that without having to pay for online. Imagine the huge amount of people who would buy that on steam. It makes zero sense for Sony and ms not to release their titles there! And omg just think how awesome it would be to play killzone multiplayer without half-res ghosting and a control method that isn't shit for fps games. Win win for everybody!
chadderbox77
Member
I get that Nintendo loves to make a profit on each console sold, but I really hope that for the next console, just this once, they use some of that money they have socked away and deliver a graphical power house that can compete or blow away the other two. Ditch the gimmicks and just wow us. Just this once.
ArkhamFantasy
Member
You are under the assumption that developers are forced to max out the graphical capabilities of the PS4, there is no such rule. Look at Natural Doctorine, it looks like a PS2 game in HD, look at all the indie games, they look like SNES games, nobody cares.
If Mario Kart 8 were on PS4 the only difference is that it would run at a higher resolution, Nintendo would still have 100% control over the creative design of their game, the only difference is that the PS4/Xbox One could handle what they wanted to easier than the Wii U could. Just because it's a PS4 game doesn't mean it would be any more expensive or more difficult to develop.
Nintendo knows they cant compete with Playstation and Xbox's power so they told their console designers to make their systems different from those platforms,they didnt have a choice. You say they were super excited about the Gamepad? What are they doing with the gamepad that is so innovative? Mario Kart 8 uses it for a horn IIRC, Pikmin 3 uses it for a map, The Wonderful 101 is the most innovative user for the gamepad (that i've seen) and that wasn't even made by a Nintendo developer.
And if the design is all that matters, why make the Wii U? Why not just make the tablet for the Wii? Because the main reason they wanted the Wii U is for the extra horsepower, not for having a map in your hands.
With that being said, i still believe Nintendo should stay in the hardware race, but i believe my pro's and con's list is accurate.
They really don't care that there are no consequences for you. They want to sell consoles and Uncharted 4 is potentially a game that will sell consoles from which Sony will collect royalties from the other games bought by someone who initially bought the console for Uncharted. So really, they have absolutely no incentive to let you play Uncharted 4 on PC and the reasons it would be better for you are precisely why they won't do that.
Apophis2036
Banned
Sony and MS would both be extremely interested if they got wind that Nintendo were thinking about giving up on home hardware and just making games. Having Mario games alone as exclusives on their system would make it far, far more appealing compared to their competition for families and young kids.
Now in return for this exclusivity, effectively making Nintendo a second party developer all sorts of "sweeteners" would be added to the contract. Nintendo could also put several clauses in place which would stop Sony/MS from interfering in development and software development choices.
IMO Sony and MS would forgo their $15 fee on every Nintendo game sold in order to secure their games as exclusives for their console as they would make the lost revenue back in hardware / XBLG - PSN+ subs bought by Nintendo fans who wouldn't normally buy their system.
And that's the risk you take. Personally I don't see Nintendo every having another successful home console until they match Sony and MS's hardware specs day and date and provide full third party support and online / account based parity. I don't see that ever happening which means they are left releasing gimmick based consoles relying on catching lightning in a bottle again. It's a terrible business strategy.
Astral Dog
Member
That never made sense to me, the majority of Nintendo developers and partners make games on their systems, honestly, i think they arent that limited with the Wii U tech, and instead they have more problems with team size time, budget and resources to créate HD games, the Wii U is by far the most powerful system most of their devs have worked on, (excluding third parties and partners making exclusive games, of course)
Of course there are also benefits with working on more powerful hardware, and they could do a good work, but still, going from making Wii/3DS games to Xbox One/PS4 like graphics and competing with Sony/Microsoft first party sounds insane.
lwilliams3
Member
You may be missing the point of the person you're replying to. Most of NIntendo's developers are likely not feeling that they are missing out on not being on more powerful HD console to such an extent. Until recently, they were even having trouble figuring out what to do with the all the graphical abilities that Wii U has.
Nintendo decision for the Wii U was obviously based on steering away from the competition and looking for "blue oceans." Nintendo had the funding to focus more on power if they wish, but it was decided to compromise power for the GamePad to take a nice chunk of the development costs. Nintendo made a similar decision when developing the Wii. It is just that Nintendo didn't find an "ocean" for the Wii U.
Now replace the word sony with Nintendo and the word uncharted with Mario kart, and the word PC with ps4 etc etc
I don't think team size and budget is an issue anymore. Look at Mario Kart 8. They started work on it in early 2012 if memory serves. Relatively quick turnaround for a game on modern platforms (yeah CoD, AC etc. are annual, but development is 3 years with teams of around 1,000) with a team of only like 100 or so.
They had a bit of a stumble at first, as evidence by the Pikmin 3 delays, but they've sorted that by now.
Besides, I never got that anyway. The assets they used on their Wii games are suitable for HD display. That's why Galaxy etc. look so spectacular when they're rendered in HD using Dolphin. The issue was more likely optimisation to get a stable framerate etc. and we know they've got that sorted out.
JordanN
Banned
I doubt this.
There's nothing monumental between PS4/XBO/PC developers and PS3/360/Wii U developers.
Games will get more expensive sure, when you design bigger worlds and need to hire VFX artists to do particle effects not seen before. But apart from that, next gen only has advantages over last gen.
There's a reason developers have had nothing but praise for the 8GB of ram. They were being handicapped by the PS3/360 levels of power. I even saw an Indie developer talk about they needed the full benefit of 8GB to make their games (they created a ton of animations that needed to be stored in memory).
A Nintendo developer going to the PS4/XBO should be nothing but relief. That what they had on Wii U is made better and faster on the other next gen systems.
Jordann, development costs for the ps4 are going to be higher than development costs for ps3. Art alone will dictate that, even when you don't factor in anything else. This isn't going to be the first generation where costs go down.
Better hardware is always going to be better. For example, the 5gb total that devs currently work with on the new consoles is certainly lower than what's available on modern gaming pcs. The very nature of consoles is that there are limitations to work within.
Better hardware is always going to be better. For example, the 5gb total that devs currently work with on the new consoles is certainly lower than what's available on modern gaming pcs. The very nature of consoles is that there are limitations to work within.
Similar threads
- Poll