Support NeoGAF

[Stumpokapow]

Hey chumps if we're going to continue the "is nintendo doing enough to support third parties?" argument every week, you guys should check out this thread which gives a good idea of the kind of third party efforts Sony is doing for Sega.

Now, we're talking Sega in America, so maybe the 8th-10th biggest publisher, and here's Sony's slate:
- Quarterly summits between Sega and Sony.
- Sony is going to assess Sega IP for their motion controller. Note, this is a motion controller that's not finalized, and Sony is going to do prototyping and try to fit Sega IP in--not the other way around. CF sending people a completed prototype and a barebones SDK and letting them figure it out themselves.
- Sony is offering game balance and design guidance to Sega on Alpha Protocol.
- Sony, noting movie games are underselling, is offering Sega advice about retailer relations to get favourable treatment at Wal-Mart. They're also offering Sega Blu-Ray movie / video game bundles for their movie games.
- Collectors editions of key games
- Sony support for marketing ramp-ups for key games.
- Sony offering goodwill if SEGA is willing to invest in HOME.
- Sony wants DLC or on-disc bonus characters in Sonic Racing.
- Sony offers to put up Japanese import games with minimal translation.
- Sony promises marketing support in exchange for timed exclusivity.
- Sony offers hardware bundles for PSP, including for Valkyria.
- Sony will give E3 booth space if Sega can do PSP-PS3 connectivity for any product.
- Sony wants to sell PS2 games on PSN, will comarket anything if Sega puts the PS3 controller in the ad.
- Sony will offer marketing support for downloadable Dreamcast games.

So this is the kind of moneyhats Sony offers to a mid-tier publisher in the US with no particularly commercially big products coming up at one meeting, of which there will be at least four a year.

I don't personally feel like raising the discussion of what Nintendo does/doesn't do or should/shouldn't do this week, I just think the document gives enormous context to what other platform holders are willing to do.

 

[LiquidMetal14]

I wonder if, after we heard so often that the PS2 and the PS3 were very hard to develop for, that Sony will make their next system more developer-friendly. They were able to get away with it on the PS2, and a little bit on the PS3, but it's been biting their ass for the most part in recent years.

I do think they may make it easier BUT they have been doing a lot of middle ware and tools like EDGE. This CELL architecture is the way to go for them though.

 

[Sadist]

Sure, there aren't as many as he's describing, but I know a couple at my work. I avoid talking videogames with them because they look like they're on the verge of tears whenever Sony's not winning something, or whenever they see other people at work joyfully chatting about enjoying a game of Wii Sports or something.

It is creepy.

That is disturbing :lol

That leaked document from the Sony-Sega NA meeting says it all, I guess.

 

[Fredescu]

My analogy has nothing to do with accusing individual developers of "selling out" (or whatever) and instead solely refers to a broad lack of respect for certain platform and development choices.

You're not saying it's happening, you're saying that people on message boards wished it was happening. Fair enough.

Spoiler

Your pre-edit was probably warranted.

Do you agree that it would be insipid for people to talk about newly successful independent filmmakers or people with quirky, niche hits recently under their belt as if "that's all well and good, but maybe with a few more years in the industry they can make real movies the way Michael Bay does"?

Specifically Michael Bay? Yes. It's usually not that simple though. No one wants 5th Cell to develop Gears of War 3.

Do you see the parallel to this argument in the frequently stated idea that it's nice that a company can succeed on DS/PSP/XBLA/PSN/WiiWare/budget-games/etc. but maybe in a few years they can make a real game that sells for $60 on HD consoles?

Sure, you've weighted it in the negative by using Michael Bay as an example though. I'm sure there are tonnes of quirky indie games that would benefit from larger budgets. I'm also sure that a number of small developers would like to strike a big budget deal with a publisher. The Jeff Minters of the world on the other hand are probably repulsed by the idea. The "real game" language is stupid, but I wonder if you're taking the comments of some young video game fans to heart. The general idea that some companies might start small and work their way up in terms of budget sizes is not in and of itself idiotic.

 

[Nuclear Muffin]

Hey chumps if we're going to continue the "is nintendo doing enough to support third parties?" argument every week, you guys should check out this thread which gives a good idea of the kind of third party efforts Sony is doing for Sega.

Now, we're talking Sega in America, so maybe the 8th-10th biggest publisher, and here's Sony's slate:
- Quarterly summits between Sega and Sony.
- Sony is going to assess Sega IP for their motion controller. Note, this is a motion controller that's not finalized, and Sony is going to do prototyping and try to fit Sega IP in--not the other way around. CF sending people a completed prototype and a barebones SDK and letting them figure it out themselves.
- Sony is offering game balance and design guidance to Sega on Alpha Protocol.
- Sony, noting movie games are underselling, is offering Sega advice about retailer relations to get favourable treatment at Wal-Mart. They're also offering Sega Blu-Ray movie / video game bundles for their movie games.
- Collectors editions of key games
- Sony support for marketing ramp-ups for key games.
- Sony offering goodwill if SEGA is willing to invest in HOME.
- Sony wants DLC or on-disc bonus characters in Sonic Racing.
- Sony offers to put up Japanese import games with minimal translation.
- Sony promises marketing support in exchange for timed exclusivity.
- Sony offers hardware bundles for PSP, including for Valkyria.
- Sony will give E3 booth space if Sega can do PSP-PS3 connectivity for any product.
- Sony wants to sell PS2 games on PSN, will comarket anything if Sega puts the PS3 controller in the ad.
- Sony will offer marketing support for downloadable Dreamcast games.

So this is the kind of moneyhats Sony offers to a mid-tier publisher in the US with no particularly commercially big products coming up at one meeting, of which there will be at least four a year.

I don't personally feel like raising the discussion of what Nintendo does/doesn't do or should/shouldn't do this week, I just think the document gives enormous context to what other platform holders are willing to do.

True, but we don't actually know what (If anything) Nintendo are doing to support 3rd parties so we can't really compare the two.

That being said, I would still guess that Nintendo (Especially NOJ) aren't nearly as supportive to 3rd party devs.

 

[[Nintex]]

Well Nintendo did farm out the entire Mario universe for Sega's olympic sports game so I think Sega is still quite happy when it comes to Nintendo related things.

 

[AniHawk]

True, but we don't actually know what (If anything) Nintendo are doing to support 3rd parties so we can't really compare the two.

That being said, I would still guess that Nintendo (Especially NOJ) aren't nearly as supportive to 3rd party devs.

Nintendo's always seemed more interested in smaller third party developers, at least since the success of Pokemon. n-Space, Retro, and Monolithsoft in particular to name a few recent ones. Occasionally weird stuff happens, like they wind up supporting the European release of Icarian with a soundtrack givaway.

They were really close with Japanese companies last gen though. Namco's support has waned a bit since then, but Sega and Capcom have remained close, and Konami and SE are giving more support than before as well.

 

[Cosmonaut X]

True, but we don't actually know what (If anything) Nintendo are doing to support 3rd parties so we can't really compare the two.

I think that it's fair to say that - due in part to their size and lack of resources in comparison to a monster like Sony, but perhaps mainly due to their own culture - Nintendo aren't doing anywhere near as much.

They do seem to do limited co-marketing, although they don't indulge in the kind of crazy "different branding every ad break" competition that MS and Sony seem to and they certainly don't (can't?) offer the kind of ad support that the other two players do. They also seem to be providing technical support to the larger players, like EA and Ubisoft, as well as early access to technology in development, like M+ and the Remote itself, and seem to be willing to provide further support when approached - they certainly don't have the same kind of outreach as Sony or MS in this regard (except for major titles like MH3 where they basically let Capcom design a new controller) and that again seems to be down to their business culture.

That being said, I would still guess that Nintendo (Especially NOJ) aren't nearly as supportive to 3rd party devs.

Why "especially NOJ", given that it seems to be there that most of the big third-party agreements are made and that it was NCL apparently co-marketing MH3, doing deals with Tecmo for Fatal Frame etc. and collaborating with Capcom on hardware design? NoE seem to be doing well with marketing and some limited publishing deals with third-parties, and NoA seem to have negotiated the LucasArts VC deal lol ) but it's nothing compared to what NCL seem to get up to.

 

[Dragon]

Sure, there aren't as many as he's describing, but I know a couple at my work. I avoid talking videogames with them because they look like they're on the verge of tears whenever Sony's not winning something, or whenever they see other people at work joyfully chatting about enjoying a game of Wii Sports or something.

It is creepy.

So you answer hyperbole with more hyperbole? :lol

Dood!

 

[gkryhewy]

Well Nintendo did farm out the entire Mario universe for Sega's olympic sports game so I think Sega is still quite happy when it comes to Nintendo related things.

Does not compare to goodwill in exchange for HOME support.

 

[poppabk]

I don't think that's necessarily a valid comparison. Narbacular Drop turned into Portal with AAA backing. I don't think it's valid to say that visionary developers lose their vision because they have a higher pixel budget. Which developers made the transition from innovative SD games to run of the mill HD games? I wouldn't be suprised if there is a couple, but I doubt it's the norm.

Portal is still a "budget" game. It uses an old engine, lacks any kind of blockbuster elements, is short, and no doubt had a budget way lower than a game like COD4, Bioshock or RE5.
Now imagine if the team behind Portal were given 20 million and UE3 and told to make a game that will sell at least 1 million copies in its first month.

 

[Nuclear Muffin]

I think that it's fair to say that - due in part to their size and lack of resources in comparison to a monster like Sony, but perhaps mainly due to their own culture - Nintendo aren't doing anywhere near as much.

They do seem to do limited co-marketing, although they don't indulge in the kind of crazy "different branding every ad break" competition that MS and Sony seem to and they certainly don't (can't?) offer the kind of ad support that the other two players do. They also seem to be providing technical support to the larger players, like EA and Ubisoft, as well as early access to technology in development, like M+ and the Remote itself, and seem to be willing to provide further support when approached - they certainly don't have the same kind of outreach as Sony or MS in this regard (except for major titles like MH3 where they basically let Capcom design a new controller) and that again seems to be down to their business culture.



Why "especially NOJ", given that it seems to be there that most of the big third-party agreements are made and that it was NCL apparently co-marketing MH3, doing deals with Tecmo for Fatal Frame etc. and collaborating with Capcom on hardware design? NoE seem to be doing well with marketing and some limited publishing deals with third-parties, and NoA seem to have negotiated the LucasArts VC deal lol ) but it's nothing compared to what NCL seem to get up to.

Yeah but we at least know that NOA reaches out to Western 3rd parties both large and small (GTA Chinatown Wars, Wii Ware deals and promotions etc) while NOJ seems to only deal mainly with the largest publishers like Square Enix and Capcom.

 

[Stumpokapow]

Portal is still a "budget" game. It uses an old engine, lacks any kind of blockbuster elements, is short, and no doubt had a budget way lower than a game like COD4, Bioshock or RE5.

... Bioshock uses an engine that's older than Portal.

 

[Deku]

True, but we don't actually know what (If anything) Nintendo are doing to support 3rd parties so we can't really compare the two.

That being said, I would still guess that Nintendo (Especially NOJ) aren't nearly as supportive to 3rd party devs.

Nintendo's Mario Club gives feedback to 3rd parties on how to improve games.

The rest of the stuff stumpy listed are just co-marketing junk that can be turned on and off depending on the hardware manufacturer's priorities.

the list is really reaching to include 'the promise' of E3 booth space, considering 3rd parties with unique titles a manufacturers wants to feature generally gets E3 booth space from all 3 manufacturers.

And a request for exclusive content for Sonic Racers. lol. Really... how does that help Sega exactly. Seems like they're actually asking for stuff there.

 

[poppabk]

... Bioshock uses an engine that's older than Portal.

http://360.*****.com/article.php?artid=7461&pg=3

AMN: Speaking of the graphics engine, it's running on Unreal 2.5 right?

Ken: No, we've moved to Unreal 3, we've done a lot of modifications on top of it, all the water effects we've added, and we've added a lot of features like water....again we don't build features just to have them, we build them to have an emotional resonance....
AMN: When did the change happen, the switch to UE3 happen?

Ken: A few months ago, I mean, technically, I think you misunderstand me on how this works, basically, we translated systems over and ported more systems over, but Unreal 3 has a lot of elements that 2.5 has, there's a lot of marketing there, but we had a lot of benefits to that and we're not using all of it, we're using our own things, but we have a lot of benefits too.

 

[Laguna]

Hey chumps if we're going to continue the "is nintendo doing enough to support third parties?" argument every week, you guys should check out this thread which gives a good idea of the kind of third party efforts Sony is doing for Sega.

Now, we're talking Sega in America, so maybe the 8th-10th biggest publisher, and here's Sony's slate:
- Quarterly summits between Sega and Sony.
- Sony is going to assess Sega IP for their motion controller. Note, this is a motion controller that's not finalized, and Sony is going to do prototyping and try to fit Sega IP in--not the other way around. CF sending people a completed prototype and a barebones SDK and letting them figure it out themselves.
- Sony is offering game balance and design guidance to Sega on Alpha Protocol.
- Sony, noting movie games are underselling, is offering Sega advice about retailer relations to get favourable treatment at Wal-Mart. They're also offering Sega Blu-Ray movie / video game bundles for their movie games.
- Collectors editions of key games
- Sony support for marketing ramp-ups for key games.
- Sony offering goodwill if SEGA is willing to invest in HOME.
- Sony wants DLC or on-disc bonus characters in Sonic Racing.
- Sony offers to put up Japanese import games with minimal translation.
- Sony promises marketing support in exchange for timed exclusivity.
- Sony offers hardware bundles for PSP, including for Valkyria.
- Sony will give E3 booth space if Sega can do PSP-PS3 connectivity for any product.
- Sony wants to sell PS2 games on PSN, will comarket anything if Sega puts the PS3 controller in the ad.
- Sony will offer marketing support for downloadable Dreamcast games.

So this is the kind of moneyhats Sony offers to a mid-tier publisher in the US with no particularly commercially big products coming up at one meeting, of which there will be at least four a year.

I don't personally feel like raising the discussion of what Nintendo does/doesn't do or should/shouldn't do this week, I just think the document gives enormous context to what other platform holders are willing to do.

This shows you only one thing, how desperate they really are. Or have you forgotten their attitude before billions went into the drain?

 

[Johann]

... Bioshock uses an engine that's older than Portal.

Bioshock was upgraded to UE3 somewhere along in development or at least heavily incorporated UE3 features. It also used a lot of proprietary software that was tailor made for the game. This became a huge problem when the game was ported to the PS3. 2K dog piled developers on that port since it was a huge pain to get the game up and running on the system. In particular, Digital Extremes was contracted due to their experience with the PS3 and Unreal Engine. I always thought that was funny considering Dark Sector's engine ran a lot better than UE3 games on the PS3 at that time.

 

[Yoboman]

I wonder if, after we heard so often that the PS2 and the PS3 were very hard to develop for, that Sony will make their next system more developer-friendly. They were able to get away with it on the PS2, and a little bit on the PS3, but it's been biting their ass for the most part in recent years.

Most definitely. They are a more global development team now, who are giving a lot of support to the development community seemingly. Just for the lack of lingual barriers now it should be easier

But I think with out Kutaragi at the helm, who seemed to design hardware and vision first - worry about tools later

 

[JGS]

True, but we don't actually know what (If anything) Nintendo are doing to support 3rd parties so we can't really compare the two.

That being said, I would still guess that Nintendo (Especially NOJ) aren't nearly as supportive to 3rd party devs.

I was thinking Nintendo did many of these things except the collectors' editions. They even gave out a program to making motion controller programming easier. Now whether companies are using it is a differnt story.

Also, it's probably been said, but Nintendo is a far bigger competitor to developers than Sony is.

 

[Stumpokapow]

They even gave out a program to making motion controller programming easier.

That's called an SDK and all consoles have them. Both Microsoft and Sony do substantially more tech assistance. Sony licences PhyreEngine to developers. While Nintendo has its SPD teams, which are responsible for liaising with 3rd parties, they seem to basically do more oversight of third-party developed, first-party published titles than actual dev assistance for 3rd parties.

 

[Deku]

Stumpy, the list you made still doesn't really make your point. Regardless of how you want to angle it.

A cursory glance reveals a bunch of stuff Sony is asking in return for support. So it's not even unconditional 3rd party support as you seem to imply, and on your specific point that this is somehow a 'best practice' I have my doubts.

Naturally, we'd need Sega to leak its minutes with Nintendo and Microsoft to compare, but the stuff listed, are peanuts. There's a lot of quid pro quo and not much else.

 

[spwolf]

This shows you only one thing, how desperate they really are. Or have you forgotten their attitude before billions went into the drain?

how sad :lol

 

[N3al]

All lugia has is a type advantage. Atleast Ho-Oh looks like a legendary not some wierd anime reject. Are those hands or wings, make up your mind.

erm.. He's talking about Arcanine.

 

[spwolf]

I wonder if, after we heard so often that the PS2 and the PS3 were very hard to develop for, that Sony will make their next system more developer-friendly. They were able to get away with it on the PS2, and a little bit on the PS3, but it's been biting their ass for the most part in recent years.

better tools and samples that they are doing already not for next system. Most of "hard to develop" comes from architecture different from PC's, unlike 360 that is almost the same, so it is much easier for devs to transition.

 

[swerve]

Yeah, err, that's not a developer support conversation, it's a marketing conversation.

A business transaction, and very little to do with anything important to a developer. But lots of things which make publishers eyes go wide and sets their minds whirring at the possibilities.

I mean, who *wouldn't* want to make a game with The Guildmaster from Fable racing Sonic and Joanna Dark? A product of such caliber would surely fill any developer with such pride in their work.

 

[Laguna]

how sad :lol

For some people it is. Sony begging Sega for support out of desperation. That´s Awesome, especially for Sega fans

 

[markatisu]

That's called an SDK and all consoles have them. Both Microsoft and Sony do substantially more tech assistance. Sony licences PhyreEngine to developers. While Nintendo has its SPD teams, which are responsible for liaising with 3rd parties, they seem to basically do more oversight of third-party developed, first-party published titles than actual dev assistance for 3rd parties.

Not sure that is true as of M+

EA, Ubisoft and SEGA have all said that Nintendo has almost bent over backwards to help them implement M+ in their games when they were having problems

Thats far more than your statement would give them credit for

 

[donny2112]

So this is the kind of moneyhats Sony offers to a mid-tier publisher in the US with no particularly commercially big products coming up at one meeting, of which there will be at least four a year.

I don't personally feel like raising the discussion of what Nintendo does/doesn't do or should/shouldn't do this week, I just think the document gives enormous context to what other platform holders are willing to do.

To add a bit more maliciousness to the meeting, SEGA has been one of the few consistent supporters of Nintendo's hardware even from the GCN days. Instead of looking at it as some "random" mid-tier developer, try looking at it as "pulling away a Nintendo console supporter."

Do-do-doooo.

Spoiler

 

[HK-47]

To add a bit more maliciousness to the meeting, SEGA has been one of the few consistent supporters of Nintendo's hardware even from the GCN days. Instead of looking at it as some "random" mid-tier developer, try looking at it as "pulling away a Nintendo console supporter."

Do-do-doooo.

Spoiler

Oh you.

 

[Bizzyb]

Hey chumps if we're going to continue the "is nintendo doing enough to support third parties?" argument every week, you guys should check out this thread which gives a good idea of the kind of third party efforts Sony is doing for Sega.

Now, we're talking Sega in America, so maybe the 8th-10th biggest publisher, and here's Sony's slate:
- Quarterly summits between Sega and Sony.
- Sony is going to assess Sega IP for their motion controller. Note, this is a motion controller that's not finalized, and Sony is going to do prototyping and try to fit Sega IP in--not the other way around. CF sending people a completed prototype and a barebones SDK and letting them figure it out themselves.
- Sony is offering game balance and design guidance to Sega on Alpha Protocol.
- Sony, noting movie games are underselling, is offering Sega advice about retailer relations to get favourable treatment at Wal-Mart. They're also offering Sega Blu-Ray movie / video game bundles for their movie games.
- Collectors editions of key games
- Sony support for marketing ramp-ups for key games.
- Sony offering goodwill if SEGA is willing to invest in HOME.
- Sony wants DLC or on-disc bonus characters in Sonic Racing.
- Sony offers to put up Japanese import games with minimal translation.
- Sony promises marketing support in exchange for timed exclusivity.
- Sony offers hardware bundles for PSP, including for Valkyria.
- Sony will give E3 booth space if Sega can do PSP-PS3 connectivity for any product.
- Sony wants to sell PS2 games on PSN, will comarket anything if Sega puts the PS3 controller in the ad.
- Sony will offer marketing support for downloadable Dreamcast games.

So this is the kind of moneyhats Sony offers to a mid-tier publisher in the US with no particularly commercially big products coming up at one meeting, of which there will be at least four a year.

I don't personally feel like raising the discussion of what Nintendo does/doesn't do or should/shouldn't do this week, I just think the document gives enormous context to what other platform holders are willing to do.

This kind of "support" makes it sound like Sony is just trying to grease SEGA up for any kind of impending buyout. Could you imagine if Sony bought out SEGA?? I know how far fetched that sounds but you gotta admit it would be one hell of a deal for Sony and a crushing blow towards Nintendo. I doubt Sony would be desperate enough to make such a move though.

 

[gofreak]

To add a bit more maliciousness to the meeting, SEGA has been one of the few consistent supporters of Nintendo's hardware even from the GCN days. Instead of looking at it as some "random" mid-tier developer, try looking at it as "pulling away a Nintendo console supporter."

Do-do-doooo.

Spoiler

Sega's been a good Playstation supporter, I don't think they need specific woo-ing. I mean they actually still give a decent amount of exclusive support to Playstation (Yakuza series, Valkyrie Chronicles for example). I would think Sony considers them quite a friendly and strong partner, crazy as that might have seemed to a gamer's mind 8 or 9 years ago.

 

[spwolf]

Sega's been a good Playstation supporter, I don't think they need specific woo-ing. I mean they actually still give a decent amount of exclusive support to Playstation (Yakuza series, Valkyrie Chronicles for example). I would think Sony considers them quite a friendly and strong partner, crazy as that might have seemed to a gamer's mind 8 or 9 years ago.

We, small software developer (one of 100,000) have had Microsoft contact us to see if we need any help with xxx. Probably out of desparation :lol

 

[charlequin]

you're saying that people on message boards wished it was happening.

People on message boards, people who write for specialty magazines and websites, many specific developers

No one wants 5th Cell to develop Gears of War 3.

5th Cell is actually a great example. Despite what I think would have to be called ludicrous success on the DS, they've announced already that they're abandoning DS development forever and moving exclusively to consoles. Why? As far as I can tell, exactly this factor I describe: the perception of more technologically demanding consoles as being inherently more respectable and worthwhile, with downloadable or handheld titles only worthwhile as a "leg up" to "real" development.

Sure, you've weighted it in the negative by using Michael Bay as an example though. I'm sure there are tonnes of quirky indie games that would benefit from larger budgets.

Really? Because certainly the indie and small-dev games I tend think of as having been particularly enjoyable (Braid, Cave Story, and N being probably my three offhand favorites) would rarely have done so.

I mean, there are certainly examples, but I think they're generally identifiable upfront. Narbacular Drop wasn't really an "indie game," it was a class project that wasn't actually in a releasable state; it was visibly a gameplay skeleton that needed more polish and effort in order to become a saleable game.

The general idea that some companies might start small and work their way up in terms of budget sizes is not in and of itself idiotic.

I think that, broadly speaking, the likelihood that a given development team will be equivalently skilled at both producing a "smaller scale" title and then a AA+ grade "large" title (once its team has been expanded literally to 4x or more the size by new hires) is quite low. I think it's far more sensible for a team that dreams of handling AAA "epics" to make games like Portal (i.e. two hours of ultra-high production values) rather than, I dunno, BC:R or Lock's Quest.

I think that it's fair to say that - due in part to their size and lack of resources in comparison to a monster like Sony

Due to their lack of resources? Compared to Sony?

I really can't even do more than :lol at that.

Or have you forgotten their attitude before billions went into the drain?

That third-parties are extremely important and that courting them is a key part of the console business, an attitude that Sony has been extremely consistent about throughout their entire time in said business?

Yes, this conversation is a marketing conversation and yes, it's a series of quid pro quos -- that is, in fact, the nature of publisher interaction with platform-holders. The point here is that in this brief conversation, one can see the outlines of a publisher-focused approach -- not "moneyhats," as people dismissively refer to them, but a custom relationship with a given publisher designed to encourage them, specifically, to develop for the system in question. There's a great deal of evidence that Nintendo's approach has been significantly more hands-off and less responsive, and this is the specific area I've been pointing to as a weakness and a specific cause of Wii's poor third-party support for some time.

 

[Die Squirrel Die]

To add a bit more maliciousness to the meeting, SEGA has been one of the few consistent supporters of Nintendo's hardware even from the GCN days. Instead of looking at it as some "random" mid-tier developer, try looking at it as "pulling away a Nintendo console supporter."

Do-do-doooo.

Spoiler

Yeah, as gofreak points out, this isn't exactly a Crystal Chronicles situation, Sony isn't trying to break Sega away from years of exclusive Nintendo support.

 

[Stumpokapow]

This kind of "support" makes it sound like Sony is just trying to grease SEGA up for any kind of impending buyout. Could you imagine if Sony bought out SEGA?? I know how far fetched that sounds but you gotta admit it would be one hell of a deal for Sony and a crushing blow towards Nintendo. I doubt Sony would be desperate enough to make such a move though.

I look at it more as the kind of courtesy Sony extends to literally every publisher.

If people think that this is exceptional, it really isn't. This is the way the boys play the game. That's why people complaining about OMG MICROSOFT MONEYHATS are hilarious--first of all, they miss the fact that everyone does it to a greater or lesser degree, and second of all they're so fixating on giant cartoon cheques with lots of zeros that they don't realize that this is the kind of thing that actually goes on.

 

[obonicus]

A cursory glance reveals a bunch of stuff Sony is asking in return for support. So it's not even unconditional 3rd party support as you seem to imply, and on your specific point that this is somehow a 'best practice' I have my doubts.

I don't think he said anything about unconditional support. In fact, isn't the whole point of Nintendo encouraging 3rd parties to make games on their platform conditional support? Is anyone in this thread saying that Nintendo should give 3rd parties bags of money, no strings attached?

 

[AceBandage]

Hey chumps if we're going to continue the "is nintendo doing enough to support third parties?" argument every week, you guys should check out this thread which gives a good idea of the kind of third party efforts Sony is doing for Sega.


So this is the kind of moneyhats Sony offers to a mid-tier publisher in the US with no particularly commercially big products coming up at one meeting, of which there will be at least four a year.

I don't personally feel like raising the discussion of what Nintendo does/doesn't do or should/shouldn't do this week, I just think the document gives enormous context to what other platform holders are willing to do.

Off the top of my head, a few things Nintendo has done for third parties.

Helped to fund advertising for both DQ9 and MH3.
Lent Ubisoft part of Retro's staff to help with programming in Red Steel 2.
Paid for the localization of Tales of Symphonia.
Worked closely with High Voltage Software to get the most out of the Wii's online setup.
Worked closely with Vicarious Vision to allow them to do full DLC for the Guitar Hero games without having to dumb it down.


So, yeah, you can poo poo Nintendo's helpfulness to third parties, but the truth is, we don't really have a clue how much they do, and what we do know, you guys always completely dismiss.

 

[markatisu]

Off the top of my head, a few things Nintendo has done for third parties.

Helped to fund advertising for both DQ9 and MH3.
Lent Ubisoft part of Retro's staff to help with programming in Red Steel 2.
Paid for the localization of Tales of Symphonia.
Worked closely with High Voltage Software to get the most out of the Wii's online setup.
Worked closely with Vicarious Vision to allow them to do full DLC for the Guitar Hero games without having to dumb it down.


So, yeah, you can poo poo Nintendo's helpfulness to third parties, but the truth is, we don't really have a clue how much they do, and what we do know, you guys always completely dismiss.

That GH example is perfect, I remember when Rock Band 2 came out and did not have the music store available it was being blamed on the SD card but then Vicarious Visions said that all they had to do was talk to Nintendo about how to do it and then 2 months later magically the Rock Band 2 Music Store came online.

Reminds me of the High Voltage interview where they were asked how they were able to bypass friend codes when other developers were forced to use them and they said "we asked Nintendo" or the issue with EA an M+ in Grand Slam Tennis where they said something similar

It seems where as Sony and MS offer the help, Nintendo will help when asked but often nobody does (like in the case of MH3 CC where Capcom said we dont think the CC is adequate) . Kinda damned if you do or damned if you don't

 

[ElFly]

True, but we don't actually know what (If anything) Nintendo are doing to support 3rd parties so we can't really compare the two.

That being said, I would still guess that Nintendo (Especially NOJ) aren't nearly as supportive to 3rd party devs.

I'd post an image of the VT2009 bundle but I am lazy.

 

[Deku]

I look at it more as the kind of courtesy Sony extends to literally every publisher.

If people think that this is exceptional, it really isn't. This is the way the boys play the game. That's why people complaining about OMG MICROSOFT MONEYHATS are hilarious--first of all, they miss the fact that everyone does it to a greater or lesser degree, and second of all they're so fixating on giant cartoon cheques with lots of zeros that they don't realize that this is the kind of thing that actually goes on.

I'm still trying to figure out your angle. And you're certainly trying to merge two distinct threads into a synthesis world view, which are not immediately compatible.

With regards to your initial point , your list of co-marketing things aren't wholly satisfactory as being 'best practices' given how how much they are asking in return, most of which are done by everybody anyways. There's no shortage of bundles out there from all 3 manufactuers.

That's one thread we can debate and people do realize it goes on, bundles, and co-marketing has been going on for a long time.

As for the financial (moneyhat) thread of your argument, it's completely separate and your suggestion that it's somehow business as usual is egregious. This generation is particularly bad precisely because the economics has been skewed by too much money flowing from the manufacturers to subsidize projects which would never make a dime back. This has nothing to do with the list of co-marketing incentives a manufacturer like Sony may offer to an established publisher like Sega. To suggest otherwise is irresponsible.

 

[farnham]

isnt mario and sonic like the biggest sega franchise these days..?

 

[Stumpokapow]

Off the top of my head, a few things Nintendo has done for third parties.

Helped to fund advertising for both DQ9 and MH3.
Lent Ubisoft part of Retro's staff to help with programming in Red Steel 2.
Paid for the localization of Tales of Symphonia.

Yes, this is all great, although the Retro staff thing is actually quite common for all platform holders. Sony goes way further by actually allowing developers to use their internal tech, tools, and engine. I suspect MS does this quite a bit as well because of how Harmonix and others have stated that Live has the best infrastructure for deployment of experimental online functions (see Music store, RB2 launch exclusivity, RBN via XNA)

Worked closely with High Voltage Software to get the most out of the Wii's online setup.
Worked closely with Vicarious Vision to allow them to do full DLC for the Guitar Hero games without having to dumb it down.

"Helped compensate for critical deficiencies in the platform" is not really encouraging for developers. The storage solution for VC/WiiWare is not "helping developers" either.

So, yeah, you can poo poo Nintendo's helpfulness to third parties, but the truth is, we don't really have a clue how much they do, and what we do know, you guys always completely dismiss.

I didn't poo poo Nintendo's helpfulness. I also have no idea who "you guys" are.

This thread for the last month has been derailed by "has Nintendo screwed up?". With respect to third parties, the various opinions seem to be:
- Nintendo has got great third party relations. Any attempt to categorize third party developers as somehow favouring the PS3 or 360 is incorrect.
- Nintendo doesn't need third parties, fuck 'em.
- Nintendo does need third parties, it's not their fault third parties are idiots / fanboys / suicidal in terms of profits, fuck 'em.

- Nintendo does need third parties, it's sort of their fault third parties aren't developing for them and they should probably take action.
- Nintendo does need third parties, it's principally their fault/responsibility that third parties don't flock to them, and they need to adopt the kind of tactics the other platform holders use.

The first three opinions are stupid, frankly, and it doesn't make sense to discuss them. First, because they don't lend themselves to constructive discussion about the markets. Second, because the rather constant drum of all system owners asking for games from systems debunks this idea.

So operating under the assumption that there is a problem, Nintendo contributes to the problem, and they ought to do something to resolve the problem, the natural discussion takes to "What should they do?". We just got a leaked document that allows us to discuss what other platform holders do with 100% certainty, as opposed to simple hearsay.

My response to the idea that Nintendo is doing as much as other platform holders would be "If it's not Nintendo's platform management, what is it?" and all I can think is "NOMURA AM SONY FAN WONT LAT SQUAER MAKE GAM FOR SHITY CONSOL!!!" or some variant of it.

I'm still trying to figure out your angle. And you're certainly trying to merge two distinct threads into a synthesis world view, which are not immediately compatible.

No angle except the running theme of discussion recently has been "What is the reason that Nintendo's situation is as it is?" and this provides an excellent point of comparison when discussing the choice that Nintendo's comparatively poor third party situation has to do with platform management and publisher relations.

As for the financial (moneyhat) thread of your argument, it's completely separate and your suggestion that it's somehow business as usual is egregious. This generation is particularly bad precisely because the economics has been skewed by too much money flowing from the manufacturers to subsidize projects which would never make a dime back. This has nothing to do with the list of co-marketing incentives a manufacturer like Sony may offer to an established publisher like Sega. To suggest otherwise is irresponsible.

So you're basically arguing that MS does hand out comical gargantuan cheques in exchange for developer loyalty, as opposed to simply helping out publishers in this sort of way?

 

[AceBandage]

So operating under the assumption that there is a problem, Nintendo contributes to the problem, and they ought to do something to resolve the problem, the natural discussion takes to "What should they do?". We just got a leaked document that allows us to discuss what other platform holders do with 100% certainty, as opposed to simple hearsay.

My response to the idea that Nintendo is doing as much as other platform holders would be "If it's not Nintendo's platform management, what is it?" and all I can think is "NOMURA AM SONY FAN WONT LAT SQUAER MAKE GAM FOR SHITY CONSOL!!!" or some variant of it.

The problem is, we wouldn't know about the Sega thing if not for the leak. And we have no idea what Nintendo does in the background with regards to third parties.
I'm not saying Nintendo is perfect with third parties, but the way most people act, they don't do anything, which is what I was dispelling.

 

[Stumpokapow]

The problem is, we wouldn't know about the Sega thing if not for the leak. And we have no idea what Nintendo does in the background with regards to third parties.
I'm not saying Nintendo is perfect with third parties, but the way most people act, they don't do anything, which is what I was dispelling.

Oh, that's absolutely not the case. You can also add massive numbers of DS bundles, their entirely handling of MH3, co-marketing Madden in the states during the GameCube era (seriously!), and a laundry list of others.

Hell, it's impossible not to do anything by the sheer fact that a LotCheck and later product order fulfillment go through Nintendo and are going to involve some interfacing.

But I think it comes down to how much they do, how many things they do, and how they present them to third parties.

 

[AceBandage]

Oh, that's absolutely not the case. You can also add massive numbers of DS bundles, their entirely handling of MH3, co-marketing Madden in the states during the GameCube era (seriously!), and a laundry list of others.

Hell, it's impossible not to do anything by the sheer fact that a LotCheck and later product order fulfillment go through Nintendo and are going to involve some interfacing.

But I think it comes down to how much they do, how many things they do, and how they present them to third parties.

Which probably wouldn't be a problem if more third parties would just ask Nintendo for help.
Like, when Brawl was being made, Sakurai said he would of loved for Mega Man to be in it, but Capcom never came to him, despite Capcom saying they would have allowed it...
So, I guess it comes down to third parties being too stubborn to seek help from Nintendo, and Nintendo being too busy with their own company to just go around and offer it out freely.

 

[Deku]

No angle except the running theme of discussion recently has been "What is the reason that Nintendo's situation is as it is?" and this provides an excellent point of comparison when discussing the choice that Nintendo's comparatively poor third party situation has to do with platform management and publisher relations.

Nintendo's poor third party situation, (relative) to their competitors is a combination of factors and isn't always the 'common sense' reality. Their third party relations on handhelds is maketdly better in Japan where most of the serious handheld titles are being made. On the consoles, it can be seen as being latel to the party, and spurning the technologial inclinations of western devs, where most of the console games are being made (see a symmetry here?)

That said you're suggestion that Nintendo may not be doing enough is a fair point, but I don't think parading the list of co-marketing discussions gleamed from Sega is particularly helpful in this regard, for various reasons already stated. Sega has also worked closely with Nintendo and is not one of the 'problem third parties' people in these threads like to whine about.

So my point is, i don't think your list is particularly representative of the things Sony is doing right and Nintendo is doing wrong, and I also think the list itself is full of standard industry practices.

So you're basically arguing that MS does hand out comical gargantuan cheques in exchange for developer loyalty, as opposed to simply helping out publishers in this sort of way?

Nowhere did I single out Microsoft, but your jumping to that conclusion is telling.
I'm not sure what's so hard here to understand. The financial reality this generation is stark, and collectively, the losses are close to 10 billion dollars.

The checks may be comical and mythical to you, but it's quite apparent to everyone that what's happening today and this generation isn't business as usual, but a self destructive arms race and profligacy extending from massive hardware subsidies to large develop subsidies not related (again) to the list you produced, which are marketing, and not related to development, which you're trying to tie this whole thing to.

In short. Your point about co-marketing, we can have a discussion and disagree on.
But you tried to go through the backdoor in your argument by trying tie your reasonable point about co-marketing and paint everyone who'se been complaining about exploding budgets and skewed development economics as being in the wrong, because it's really what manufacturers should be doing to get 3rd party support. It's an entirely different beast altogether and shouldn't be included.

 

[TunaLover]

This generation is particularly bad precisely because the economics has been skewed by too much money flowing from the manufacturers to subsidize projects which would never make a dime back

I just bring this point back, I think it should be disscused more deeply, because it has to do with how bad the industry flow is, it´s turning in a e-penis competence instead bring real growth to the industry as whole. As you tie your mid-tier (even big third parties) to the desires to just one big entity, the console maker.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

"Helped compensate for critical deficiencies in the platform" is not really encouraging for developers.

Isn't that the whole point, though? You gave a list of all the things Sony's doing with Sega, but it's really about making a publisher want to ignore the critical deficiency of several dozen million PS3s.

 

[Tiktaalik]

Hey chumps if we're going to continue the "is nintendo doing enough to support third parties?" argument every week, you guys should check out this thread which gives a good idea of the kind of third party efforts Sony is doing for Sega.

Now, we're talking Sega in America, so maybe the 8th-10th biggest publisher, and here's Sony's slate:
- Quarterly summits between Sega and Sony.
- Sony is going to assess Sega IP for their motion controller. Note, this is a motion controller that's not finalized, and Sony is going to do prototyping and try to fit Sega IP in--not the other way around. CF sending people a completed prototype and a barebones SDK and letting them figure it out themselves.
- Sony is offering game balance and design guidance to Sega on Alpha Protocol.
- Sony, noting movie games are underselling, is offering Sega advice about retailer relations to get favourable treatment at Wal-Mart. They're also offering Sega Blu-Ray movie / video game bundles for their movie games.
- Collectors editions of key games
- Sony support for marketing ramp-ups for key games.
- Sony offering goodwill if SEGA is willing to invest in HOME.
- Sony wants DLC or on-disc bonus characters in Sonic Racing.
- Sony offers to put up Japanese import games with minimal translation.
- Sony promises marketing support in exchange for timed exclusivity.
- Sony offers hardware bundles for PSP, including for Valkyria.
- Sony will give E3 booth space if Sega can do PSP-PS3 connectivity for any product.
- Sony wants to sell PS2 games on PSN, will comarket anything if Sega puts the PS3 controller in the ad.
- Sony will offer marketing support for downloadable Dreamcast games.

So this is the kind of moneyhats Sony offers to a mid-tier publisher in the US with no particularly commercially big products coming up at one meeting, of which there will be at least four a year.

I don't personally feel like raising the discussion of what Nintendo does/doesn't do or should/shouldn't do this week, I just think the document gives enormous context to what other platform holders are willing to do.

Yeah that document is really interesting to me from that perspective. As well, what's interesting is that the publishers and platform holders obviously also work very closely (first name basis) with people at major retail partners on exclusives and bundles. I mean I guess it shouldn't be news to anyone, since Sega famously had horrible relations with retail which really hurt them, but sometimes one forgets how all interconnected this industry is.

 

[charlequin]

but the truth is, we don't really have a clue how much they do

Well, no, we do have "a clue," both from many past statements regarding the distance Nintendo tends to keep third parties at (publishers commenting on being blindsided by announcements like the Wiimote and WM+, discussions of lack of marketing support to many non-top-tier games, etc.) and from the fact that whatever they're doing wasn't working very well until, arguably, recently.

and what we do know, you guys always completely dismiss.

Who's "you guys"? I've been very upfront about saying that Nintendo's approach to both DQ (heavily supporting SE's independent decision to bring it to Nintendo platforms) and MH3 (courting it and then heavily supporting it in Japan once they had it) was great. The stuff with VV, Red Steel 2, etc. is also the sort of thing I'd like to see them do more of.

Also, I'd argue that at least in terms of visible results, Nintendo has done better with pushing third-parties with the DS (with third-party bundles or branded LE systems, co-marketing, etc.) than the Wii.

I don't think parading the list of co-marketing discussions gleamed from Sega is particularly helpful in this regard, for various reasons already stated.

But you haven't given any actual reasons, just broadly dismissed the concept of co-marketing altogether and then resorted to the "MS hands out Publishers Clearinghouse checks and that ruins the industry" idea.

The checks may be comical and mythical to you, but it's quite apparent to everyone that what's happening today and this generation isn't business as usual

It's also completely obvious that the current shape of the market is not in any meaningful way the result of distorted incentives from no-preconditions monetary handouts by platform holders. Companies aren't sticking to the sinking PS360 ship because they're getting cut checks that make up their losses on every title they release -- the quantity of day-and-date multiplatform games alone is enough of an indicator of that.

Seriously, the idea that the unsustainable business model of HD development (which I've consistently been one of the loudest drum-beaters about on GAF) is a result of a distorting effect from moneyhats, rather than bad decision-making in the face of a daunting and problematic set of platform-selection incentives, is insane. That's not really what you're trying to suggest here, is it?