Support NeoGAF

[Rhazer Fusion]

If Nintendo went third-party, the industry would literally crash. They were responsible for 250 million pieces of sold hardware the previous gen and responsible for much of gaming's growth. Not to mention how many third-parties would go bankrupt trying to keep up with Nintendo games on every platform.

I am still not convinced that Nintendo games possibly excluding Mario and Zelda out of name recognition would sell that great on Microsoft and Sony consoles. 8 years ago, maybe it would be different. Based on the current state of the industry, I think the average gamer would rather play COD, Battlefield, Fifa or Madden over the next installment of Kirby or Metroid. I think Nintendo would be better off sticking to handlhelds if they ever left the console business.

 

[akidnamededdy]

I am still not convinced that Nintendo games possibly excluding Mario and Zelda out of name recognition would sell that great on Microsoft and Sony consoles. 8 years ago, maybe it would be different. Based on the current state of the industry, I think the average gamer would rather play COD, Battlefield, Fifa or Madden over the next installment of Kirby or Metroid. I think Nintendo would be better off sticking to handlhelds if they ever left the console business.

These games were available on the Wii, too, you know.

 

[Terribleness]

WiiU is the first nintendo console i wont buy.. lived that lie far too many times.

I would love them to go 3rd party though. Best software on top hardware sounds appealing. If you had a Nintendo j... it would best be rolled with investor, consumer and ownership bud... who can dispute that?

 

[MogCakes]

How???? Most of Nintendo's IPs would be great on mobile, and they could have them on PC, PS3, 360, Xbone, and PS4 and sell tons more.. It would reach a larger audience and games could be cheaper.

If there's something that can be said for Nintendo, it's that they're very stubborn. For better or worse they stick to their hardware. So for this guy (and others) to suggest that they go 3rd party is disrespecting their pride in the hardware they make. Pride plays a big part of business, and while it won't make them the most money, it does convey a solid image. That's the reason I don't call for them to go 3rd party even if it means they lose potential profit.

 

[JerryThePredator]

I don't see why not. Nintendo''s hardware/control schemes aren't providing any massive advantages over anyone else.

The Wii's and DS's did. Not expensive to manufacture as their competitors products, and sold more.

Nowadays, it's a different story.

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

this, people who say they love zelda/mario/pokemon yet wont even buy a Nintendo console to play them are talking outta their ass. Its more like they just love the idea of Nintendo losing this so called "console war" so they can just go on about how Nintendo is failing they don't even have exclusive anymore.. They love the idea of being able to play Nintendo games on their console, but don't be mistaking u dont love/appericate their franchise at all.

nothing stopping you from picking up a Wii U when it gets cheaper and the games get cheaper

Good point, but I don't think the people begging for Nintendo games coming to their favorite HD systems of choice are that much worst than the legion of pompous PC only gamers who constantly beg for console ports.

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

These games were available on the Wii, too, you know.

Yes, but they didn't appeal to the Nintendo demographic as much I think and to my knowledge, they didn't sell as godo as the Sony and Microsoft's versions. People who buy Sony and Microsoft consoles are typically into those franchises I listed. People who buy Nintendo systems are normally into Nintendo's first party offerings and a few select third party games. I just think that bringing Nintendo games to the competitor's consoles will not be as beneficial as everyone thinks. I don't think most of their games appeal to them. I could be wrong, but I have a feeling that I am not.

 

[Nightstick11]

I am still not convinced that Nintendo games possibly excluding Mario and Zelda out of name recognition would sell that great on Microsoft and Sony consoles. 8 years ago, maybe it would be different. Based on the current state of the industry, I think the average gamer would rather play COD, Battlefield, Fifa or Madden over the next installment of Kirby or Metroid. I think Nintendo would be better off sticking to handlhelds if they ever left the console business.

I disagree. If you look at the sheer breadth and variety of genres Nintendo publishes, and random new IPs created by them that ignite every generation, they are a nightmare to contend with.

Let's just do a rough scan if you were, say, a Sony third-party.

Right away, you can pull the plug on all platformers, kart racers, pet-sims, "cute" games, and probably mascot games in general.

If you wish to develop an adventure game you would have to plan your development schedule around Zelda.

Action game, well, Metroid isn't that big.

Good luck making an RPG or fighting game with Pokemon and Smash lying around. A third-party Nintendo would also probably push all its franchises including Paper Mario. Fire Emblem. Earthbound.

You would either be making genres Nintendo doesn't make, or forever planning your releases around THEIR software schedule.

This is assuming Nintendo doesn't go all aggro like Activision or EA and go around straight-up buying controlling stakes in Konami, Platinum, Namco, etc.

 

[AranhaHunter]

There's a reason why we don't share that opinion. If you're not buying a Nintendo console for their games now, you sure as hell won't support a "third party" Nintendo. That's like begging for all the titles that they make that are niche to disappear. Say goodbye to Fire Emblem, Sin and Punishment, and Xenoblade kids.

And yes, we got a Phillip CDI Zelda, you should look it up. Maybe you'll like it.

To each their own. I am done with Nintendo's HW offerings ever since the Wii and DS, I bought Nintendo HW first prior to that, including picking up a N64 and GC prior to picking up a PSX and PS2. I wouldn't mind buying their games if they came to my platform of choice if, for nothing else, nostalgia. It's not such a big deal that I would buy their HW though.

I did play the Zelda game that was originally on the cdi, i thought it was garbage to be honest. I just didn't remember what console it was on.

 

[Chrisness]

so what? Nintendo will still not go 3rd party.


Buy a Nintendo console if you want to play Nintendo games. That's the WHOLE POINT.

Long term they may if sales continue to fall.

 

[Mysterious]

This thread brought out all the crazies and arm chair analysts.

 

[Chrisness]

I was not aware that I had an iPhone, or a smartphone for that matter. Thanks for informing me of this! ^_^ BRB, looking for the iPhone that I apparently have. ~

If you don't think smartphones are eating the handheld gaming market, you're delusional.

 

[Chrisness]

So you're speaking out of your arse and stating it as fact

This whole thread is about future speculation... Nobody knows if the Wii U, Wii U 2, etc will succeed or fail.

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

Long term they may if sales continue to fall.

Until their hardware sells literally nothing, they have no reason to make such a drastic and potentially harmful move.

 

[Chrisness]

Until their hardware sells literally nothing, they have no reason to make such a drastic and potentially harmful move.

They might if their accountants show they'd make much more profit going 3rd party instead of making a Wii U 2.

 

[bdouble]

I agree and you can keep your hardware console and still be on evey playform. Just a shop and connextivity and social features but Nintendo doesnt do that.

 

[xXBetter Off DadXx]

Just aks yourself the question, are you bout dat eidos life?

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

They might if their accountants show they'd make much more profit going 3rd party instead of making a Wii U 2.

We'll see. You don't seem heavily knowledgeable about economics, to be honest. It's not just as simple as "Remove cost of hardware, quadruple software sales".

 

[RM8]

This is so dumb. Why would ANYONE buy a Nintendo system if they didn't have exclusives?

Does Nintendo make money from selling hardware? Absolutely. Can Nintendo price their SNES ROMs at $8 on THEIR store and those games become the best selling titles on the eShop? Absolutely. Basically, lol.

 

[abstract alien]

Part of Nintendo is the innovative hardware, as I'm sure has been stated a few times. Nintendo is about console as well as software, not just a bunch of IPs.

 

[Darmik]

They might if their accountants show they'd make much more profit going 3rd party instead of making a Wii U 2.

The chance of that happening is unlikely. It's not just consoles they'd lose money on, it's accessories and licensing.

Nobody should truly want Nintendo to go third party. We shouldn't want to be in a scenario where the only two current consoles of choice are near enough the same thing. It's good to have a cheaper and alternate method for consoles.

 

[InsaneZero]

They might if their accountants show they'd make much more profit going 3rd party instead of making a Wii U 2.

Instead of talking about hypotheticals, why not just bring up financial reports of third party publishers from this generation to conclusively back up your claim regarding Nintendo's potential profit growth? Surely a good number of them have on average higher net income through these years if you're so confident in your assertions.

 

[ElectricKaibutsu]

They might if their accountants show they'd make much more profit going 3rd party instead of making a Wii U 2.

The potential for making the most money is in owning your own platform. Look at the Wii and DS. Do you think Nintendo would have made all that money if they only sold a bunch of copies of Wii Sports and Brain Training?

 

[Watashiwa]

I wonder what Mario plays on his iPhone?

Dude what. Mario has a Galaxy.

 

[Barack Lesnar]

I disagree. If you look at the sheer breadth and variety of genres Nintendo publishes, and random new IPs created by them that ignite every generation, they are a nightmare to contend with.

Let's just do a rough scan if you were, say, a Sony third-party.

Right away, you can pull the plug on all platformers, kart racers, pet-sims, "cute" games, and probably mascot games in general.

If you wish to develop an adventure game you would have to plan your development schedule around Zelda.

Action game, well, Metroid isn't that big.

Good luck making an RPG or fighting game with Pokemon and Smash lying around. A third-party Nintendo would also probably push all its franchises including Paper Mario. Fire Emblem. Earthbound.

You would either be making genres Nintendo doesn't make, or forever planning your releases around THEIR software schedule.

This is assuming Nintendo doesn't go all aggro like Activision or EA and go around straight-up buying controlling stakes in Konami, Platinum, Namco, etc.

What...

- Pokemon and Smash Bros. existing doesn't mean other RPGs and fighters wouldn't sell millions. That's silly. Pokemon wouldn't cannibalize Skyrim or Fallout or ME sales. You can't be serious. Same deal with Smash Bros. hurting Street Fighter/Capcom fighters and Mortal Kombat.

- "Plan your development around Zelda"... they release a mainline Zelda game like every 4 years. What is there to plan?

- Platformers not named Mario or Donkey Kong aren't big-sellers anyway. It's a niche genre outside of those Nintendo IPs so how exactly would their existence in this scenario hurt the industry?

- Metroid. I don't understand what you said here, sounds like you conceded that point? Or did I read it wrong. Shooters/action games are a massive genre tho so it holds far more weight than, for example, platformers.

- Kart racers, yes MK would cannibalize those sales but there's barely any Kart racers in the first place so why does this matter? There's the Sonic racers and what else? who cares? This wouldn't hurt third-party devs in any way.

 

[DR2K]

...then they should get Nintendo consoles? Logic isn't that hard.

Nintendo makes bad outdated hardware.

 

[PrimeX]

Would never work, look what SEGA did to themselves.
The day I'll see Mario on mobiles and fb, I'll stop playing games. Hopefully will never happen.

 

[Zushin]

We should want Nintendo to continue making hardware. More competition is good for us. Hopefully Nintendo can turn the Wii U around.

 

[shouamabane]

I just want to be able to play every Nintendo game on my TV.

 

[Watashiwa]

Actually? Nintendo's biggest franchises probably WOULD cannibalize other game sales. Gaming is an expensive hobby on its face. Sixty dollars per, plus however much the console+controllers+memory winds up being. Most people who buy console games don't buy every game they're interested in at full price. Games are sold for full price when they first come out, and that's when the game makes most of its sales and thus most of its profits.

Now, consider Mario--if a new Mario game was coming out on your XBox, stamped with the Nintendo seal of quality (and if that still meant anything), had gotten good reviews and three of your friends were talking about it, would you get the Mario game? And would you get another game that month if the new Mario was $60?

You, personally, might not Heavy, but a lot of people would. Any console game released the same day as Mario would lose sales because people would buy Mario instead. I'd bet on the plumber against anything short of a new CoD, and I think a properly marketed Mario could take that too.

 

[exfatal]

This is so dumb. Why would ANYONE buy a Nintendo system if they didn't have exclusives?

Does Nintendo make money from selling hardware? Absolutely. Can Nintendo price their SNES ROMs at $8 on THEIR store and those games become the best selling titles on the eShop? Absolutely. Basically, lol.

Im laughing to myself cause this is soo true, havent played super metroid for super nintendo. finally get to play it. (lucky for 30cents) but getting to play old exclusive i missed out on is a god send. and damn did this game age well, still plays and looks great. getting Megaman X after i beat it. Nintendo knows how to make money off their systems and turn a profit with the software they release. Absolutely no reason for them to shoot themselves in the leg.

People who buy a Wii U can catch up on a handful n counting of Nintendo exclusive they probably never played before. That something you have to consider when buying a Wii U. Sony or Microsoft lack in that area.

 

[JerryThePredator]

Nintendo makes bad outdated hardware.

I guess the NES, SNES, N64, and GameCube never existed.

 

[mapachealocado]

Nintendo trying weird things helps diversify the market. The HD twins this generation were mostly the same thing and didn't really try anything new with the hardware. (Well, I guess they kinda did with Kinect and stuff)

Also, you play Nintendo games because they take advantage of their unique hardware in ways most developers don't even bother (and make it fun). If you put Mario in PS4/XBone it'll probably look great but will it be a worthy Nintendo experience?

They may be behind the times in online infrastructure and other things but they pay attention to many, many details and have insights that others ignore. Like how Nintendo Land forces people to talk/yell/laugh at each other and how that adds to the fun of local multiplayer games.

I love Nintendo though I agree that they suck at a lot of things. Even then, I wouldn't like to see them port their IPs to another platforms. As I said, it's an experience and it just wouldn't be the same.

 

[Penguin]

This whole thread is about future speculation... Nobody knows if the Wii U, Wii U 2, etc will succeed or fail.

1)You know you can multi-quote posts, right? Or at least edit the old ones to include responses

2)There's a difference between speculating that Nintendo games may sell better on other hardware, and saying there's a lot of Zelda fans who won't buy a Wii U for Zelda.. you're making an assumption with no real basis or ground to stand on.

And we've seen Zelda like games not do too hot like Okami, Darksiders and 3D Dot Heroes on other (more) consoles.

 

[Partition]

Would Sony/MS even want Nintendo's games on their consoles?

 

[Chie Satonaka]

Nintendo makes bad outdated hardware.

And those of us who aren't invested in the console wars tech arms race get to enjoy our Nintendo IPs while everyone else whines about not being able to play Mario on the iPhone.

Someone's winning, and it's not the people who aren't playing Nintendo games.

 

[Kageshinzo]

Nintendo makes bad outdated hardware.

Nintendo makes their games tailored to their hardware. Whether that hardware is outdated or bad is not the point; the point is whether those games they create using their hardware is better and more polished than the games churned out by other developers. Most of the time, they are.

 

[SanguineShark]

Dude what. Mario has a Galaxy.

I chuckled a little bit.

Don't know if I'll get a Nintendo console again, but I'd certainly like to keep supporting handhelds. Phone games just don't cut it for me, not with those controls and pay to win/microtransaction pricing structure.

 

[MisterHero]

Would Sony/MS even want Nintendo's games on their consoles?

MS wanted to buy Nintendo and Sony tried to weasel the rights to their games before entering the industry; I'd say yes.

It's just not happening though.

 

[ArcaneFreeze]

Even if Nintendo had the strongest console this generation people would still be clamoring for them to go to third party. People are afraid of the "family friendly" stigma that surrounds Nintendo, not the hardware. They refuse to buy Nintendo consoles because they dont want to be labeled as "kiddy" and this would remain true even with strong hardware(N64/Gamecube).

Nintendo had been doing its own thing for decades now and people hate it when something is "different" from the norm. People aren't gonna accept Nintendo until they conform to the standards that Sony and Microsoft are using. Funny thing is its those standards that have hurt Sony and MSoft and its Nintendo doing its own thing thats made them one of the most financially stable companies in the industry.

 

[DR2K]

Nintendo makes their games tailored to their hardware. Whether that hardware is outdated or bad is not the point; the point is whether those games they create using their hardware is better and more polished than the games churned out by other developers. Most of the time, they are.

Majority of their games can be done on other platforms with little to no difference. We put up with their terrible hardware because their software is so good.

 

[ColdBlooder]

Majority of their games can be done on other platforms with little to no difference. We put up with their terrible hardware because their software is so good.

Cause Nintendo dosent want to bleed money through a whole gen?

 

[ArcaneFreeze]

Majority of their games can be done on other platforms with little to no difference. We put up with their terrible hardware because their software is so good.

If they go third party the quality of their software will suffer. They'll be put up against all the deadlines and crap all other third parties go through and the quality assurance Nintendo puts into their titles would be gone. Ntm say good bye to everything other than Mario, Zelda, and Pokemon. Nintendo being first party allows them to control their own titles and release titles that while they may not be popular contain and audience within their community. Just look at Sega, they had plenty of wonderful IPs when it was just them, but ever since they went third party all they put out now is Sonic. Hell Shenmue's even faded into obscurity despite all the clamor for it because really Sega doesn't have much control over its output anymore.

 

[SpinningBirdKick]

Ian Livingstone ran Eidos into the ground, so I wouldn't take business advice from him.

 

[Kageshinzo]

Majority of their games can be done on other platforms with little to no difference. We put up with their terrible hardware because their software is so good.

And it is precisely because they have total control over their hardware that their software is so good.

 

[DR2K]

Cause Nintendo dosent want to bleed money through a whole gen?

It's their hardware and yen value that has been causing all their losses.

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

It's their hardware and yen value that has been causing all their losses.

Better to sell no hardware than less than you expected to, right?

 

[Soule]

I guess the NES, SNES, N64, and GameCube never existed.

You're going over a decade back to find evidence of them making decent hardware. That is not an indication of their current hardware strategy, the company today is a company that makes bad, outdated hardware. I agree with him and it's hard not to because it's pretty much fact (outside of 'bad' being subjective)

 

[Joni]

Re-reading the quotes I'm thinking: Why even release new games on those other platforms? Strengthening the IP is the goal, so why not do so with the 'Virtual Console'? Look at all the SNES/NES/GBA emulators on the PSP, iOS, Android. Why not try to take a piece of that cake? Sell Super Mario World for $5 on the Vita and the PS3, sell it for $2 on iOS and Android. You get one of your best games in the hands of an entire new public; and then you announce a shiny brand new Mario game exclusive to Wii U.

Ian Livingstone ran Eidos into the ground, so I wouldn't take business advice from him.

He has been with the company since the mid '90s and is the only Eidos board member that kept his position when SCi took over. And then he survived the merger with Square-Enix. I have a feeling they think better of him.

 

[mdtauk]

This from a company that took one of the greatest IPs ever, and just shat on it and shat out shit after shit! (Final Fantasy)

This and Eidos' Tomb Raider had to be saved by someone else (Crystal Dynamics)