Support NeoGAF

[zero_suit]

man, things are going to get sooo crazy when all 3 have more price drops

Wii at $150?
360 at $129
PS3 at $199

Crazy? We'll be well into next generation before that happens. Also, price drops are the last card Nintendo plays, so that won't happen anytime soon.

 

[Subitai]

It will be interesting to see if the new control set ups MS and Sony are releasing will have the kind of boost in sales comparable to a price drop or key title around and during those holiday periods.

 

[bozeman]

I was goggling the full NPD numbers that aren't supposed to be posted here and came across some site (forgot what it was) that said they were no longer going to be reporting the NPD numbers. They gave their primary reason as the NPD report doesn't include sales made at Wal-Mart. Can anyone confirm this? Just taking a guess, I'd think Wal-Mart is at least the 2nd biggest seller of games and hardware and it honestly wouldn't surprise me if Wal-Mart was the #1 seller of new games and systems.

 

[duk]

Crazy? We'll be well into next generation before that happens. Also, price drops are the last card Nintendo plays, so that won't happen anytime soon.

u never know, this and next fall will make it or break it for ps3, they will have to relaunch or drastically cut price in 2010-2011

 

[Grampa Simpson]

Crazy? We'll be well into next generation before that happens. Also, price drops are the last card Nintendo plays, so that won't happen anytime soon.

How did this misconception start? Nintendo was all over price drops with the Gamecube. It's just that market forces aren't inspiring Nintendo to do so. We'll see a price drop from them when it makes business sense.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

Except that you posted this in response to charlequin's comment, where he stated that Nintendo didn't really have a chance at capturing the shooter or sandbox markets - and yet you list all shooter or sandbox titles for your examples?

Whoops I misread charle's post.

 

[D.Lo]

u never know, this and next fall will make it or break it for ps3, they will have to relaunch or drastically cut price in 2010-2011

How can anything be 'make or break for the PS3 now? What could 'make' possibly mean?

It seems to me Sony is hanging in there hoping to limp out the generation and be better prepared for a re-boot next gen. In that sense, it could be said it's 'make or break' for the whole Playstation business I suppose.

 

[laserbeam]

u never know, this and next fall will make it or break it for ps3, they will have to relaunch or drastically cut price in 2010-2011

Sony is still losing money on the PS3. They are not gonna do a massive cut and make their loses quadruple all of a sudden. If anything they might cut to break even with the slim but they will not lose a penny on the slim

 

[Pureauthor]

I was goggling the full NPD numbers that aren't supposed to be posted here and came across some site (forgot what it was) that said they were no longer going to be reporting the NPD numbers. They gave their primary reason as the NPD report doesn't include sales made at Wal-Mart. Can anyone confirm this? Just taking a guess, I'd think Wal-Mart is at least the 2nd biggest seller of games and hardware and it honestly wouldn't surprise me if Wal-Mart was the #1 seller of new games and systems.

No, NPD doesn't receive current Wal-Mart numbers.

Yes, NPD extrapolates and estimates Wal-Mart numbers based on the years when they did receive Wal-Mart numbers.

Also, the owner of the site is being stupid.

 

[Chumly]

I was goggling the full NPD numbers that aren't supposed to be posted here and came across some site (forgot what it was) that said they were no longer going to be reporting the NPD numbers. They gave their primary reason as the NPD report doesn't include sales made at Wal-Mart. Can anyone confirm this? Just taking a guess, I'd think Wal-Mart is at least the 2nd biggest seller of games and hardware and it honestly wouldn't surprise me if Wal-Mart was the #1 seller of new games and systems.

I tried to google what you were talking about and got this

LINNNNNNNNNNK

The other big reason is that NPD’s are becoming less and less a true representation of the real sales landscape. Hell, they don’t include Wal-Mart, the biggest retailer in North America. You can bet your ass a lot of games and systems get sold there.

Basically they have no fucking idea what they are talking about. NPD always estimates for all retailers it doesnt get direct data from. As I always say when this gets brought up there is a very simple reason why ALL publishers/console makers/news outlets use NPD (Hint: Its because its accurate).

 

[Oblivion]

Honest question...

Do you really believe that Nintendo could have bought or influenced a few exclusive "huge" franchises at the start of this gen? Because I don't think that was ever a possibility - even if Nintendo had wanted to go that route.

To have a few "huge" franchises brought exclusively to the Wii for the purposes of establishing inertia early on, work would have had to have started on those games before the Wii even released. The Wii was the successor to the Gamecube. A system which 3rd-parties had completely abandoned some time before anyone even knew what the Wii was. The Wii was assumed by 3rd-parties to be a continuation of the Gamecube in terms of marketshare this gen. In my view, there was no amount of influence that Nintendo could have possibly exerted that would have convinced 3rd-parties to bring their top franchises and developers to work exclusively on the Wii. And buying the games outright would have been insanely expensive for Nintendo, because the 3rd-parties had absolutely no faith that the Wii would perform any better than the Gamecube. Even with outrageous moneyhats, I still suspect that 3rd-parties would have said thanks, but no thanks. We'd rather not bring our new Grand Theft Auto, or Resident Evil, or Elder Scrolls game as a Wii exclusive - but maybe we'll be willing to give you some new property like Red Steel.

Microsoft had several advantages with the 360 that Nintendo didn't have with the Wii. The XBox finished its life in a very strong position, proving itself to be a very viable system for FPS, sports, etc. 3rd-party software support was growing stronger and stronger as the 360 launch neared. Plus, the 360 was the only next-gen system on the market for a year - so 3rd-parties were willing to listen to Microsoft's influence, and were willing to accept reasonably priced moneyhats. Neither would have been the case with the Wii.

So that leaves the current market. Could Nintendo buy or influence a few "huge" exclusive Wii franchises now? In the west, I still don't think so. The 3rd-parties have now established their top franchises and developers on the HD systems. No amount of influence will get them to switch these "huge" franchises to a Wii-exclusive status at this point. And again, the moneyhats required to get 3rd-parties to even contemplate the idea would be absolutely insane.

In Japan, it is a different story. There is no viable HD alternative in Japan at this point, and because of that, Nintendo has had some success luring some "huge" franchises over to Wii exlusivity. Dragon Quest, Monster Hunter, Tales of, etc.

But in the west, the 3rd-parties have already established these "huge" franchises on the HD platform. Getting them to switch them mid-gen just isn't something that Nintendo has any control over. And getting them to bring these "huge" franchises to the Wii at the start of this gen just was never a possibility - no matter how much Nintendo may have wanted that to happen, or how much influence they were willing to exert.

I just think that you are discounting just how poorly the 3rd-parties thought of the Gamecube, and just how bad of a position Nintendo was in as the start of this gen approached. I really don't think Nintendo had nearly the number of effective options available to them as you suggest. The only real option that they had was to build such an immense userbase that the 3rd-parties couldn't help but take notice of the Wii. And they pulled that option off as successfully as anyone could have ever imagined.

As you pointed out with your "first-into-the-pool problem" comment - that immense userbase didn't work.

I'm not trying to suggest that there aren't numerous smaller things that Nintendo could have done differently or better with respect to 3rd-party relations - but I don't think any of it would have helped to lure "huge" franchise exclusives to the Wii. Third-parties just didn't want to have anything at all to do with the Wii early on. They believed it to be the Gamecube part 2, and they were going to stay away. Especially with their top developers and franchises.

Thank you, this is essentially the point I was trying to get at, but you did a better job of putting into words.

 

[EDarkness]

Except that they can.

Nintendo has won tons of money with the Wii. And that industry is moved by the money. If they really wanted to move the hardcores to the Wii, they will do it.

Going to NIS and saying: "Ok, I want Disgaea 4 for Wii. Completly creative freedom. I know that It won't sell much, but I will support any loss if your game is over 80 in MetaCritics. Each point over that value will be 100k $"

Then, going to all the small japanese companies that made good enought Wii games, but that can't afford to translate and distribute their games to US, and saying: "Ok, I'll pay the translation and I'll distribute the game to US and probably Europe, keeping a low percentage of the benefits. Win-Win for that companies, 0 cost and the possibility of get fame out of Japan".

Then, going to all the indy scene and giving really good conditions for development in WiiWare. No more "I'll keep all the money of the first X sells", that discourage a lot of people, that fear that if the game don't sell much, they win 0$ for all the effort.

Taking risks as distributing or even producing M games, like Madworld. Getting small teams that works well with the Wii hardware but don't have enought game design experience, like the people of Conduit.

Talking with all the big third parties, like EA, Activision and Ubi, and saying: Ok, I'll discount the 75% of the royalties that you pay for develop for Wii (that is like the 20 or 30% of the final price of the game) if your game get's more than 80 in Metacritics. And if the first reviews are over 85, I'll promote your game with X$ in TV and magazine ads.

And also, the other obvious things, more freedom and suppor for the online, better and cheaper devkits, etc.

If Nintendo really wants to move the hardore to the Wii, they have enought money to do it, and even without sacrificing a great part of their benefits. It will be slow, but the hardcore will have to surrender to the evidence of the catalog.

I hope that Reggie is not reading this post, I'll hate if Sony and MS gets bankrupted by my fault.

That's pretty crazy. Nintendo can't force anyone to do anything even with what you're suggesting. You're saying they bankroll a bunch of companies in order to get games on their system and then use Metacritic (heh, heh) to determine overall quality? You don't see the potential pitfalls of this?

If it was my company I'd take the money and run. Hold my hand out in order to get some cash, do some shoddy game, then invest in working on a system I actually want to work on. Or maybe I could check with Microsoft to see if they'll match Nintendo's offer. Either way, they couldn't force my company to put my best foot forward.

What you're suggesting is basically throwing money at the problem and I don't see that as a solution. I honestly believe that the reason why the PS2 was so successful was because the development community believed in it and worked to make great games. I remember back before the PS2 was even released Fromsoft (I believe it was them) was advertising a game in Famitsu. The DC was trying to gain its stride, but the dev community wasn't having any of that. They fought hard against that system. How as Sega going to fight against something like that? I think the Wii is in a similar situation. The dev community just isn't behind the idea and really don't want to be. All the userbase in the world won't change that. Back in the day Xbox and Gamecube guys were always complaining about why the PS2 was getting all the exclusives and was the lead platform even though it had a lower spec. We were told it had to do with userbase, but we're seeing that's not true. Attitude is most important I think.

Sorry if I diverged a bit. Just got home from work and I'll probably come back later and touch this up a bit.

 

[Sadist]

I know the differences between the PSP and the Wii. But I'm explaining that a company can attract the third parties if they want. Sony has done it (for the PSP), one of the reasons of the PSP Go leaks was that dozens of companies, even small ones, had received PSP Go prototypes and all kind of support months before the E3 announcement. And there are more titles that are not yet announced (for example, Saint's Row was leaked due the declaration of a metal band that licensed some songs for the game, obviously there are many other projects kept in secret).

I agree completly with you. But EDarkness said that Nintendo can't force the third party to work on wii, so they don't have any responsability in this. But they can. Simply, they don't need it, because they are selling to the expanded market, so they won't do it.

And here lies the problem: Nintendo can, but they won't. That was kind of my point and even with the currect software flow Nintendo is happy I guess. But, I do agree with your suggestions. Funny you mention Saints Row PSP, maybe that's the canceled Wii version. Next you know, Red Faction will turn up on PSP! :lol (Also a canceled Wii version)

Sorry for my late answer: when I posted my last comment here it was 3.30 in the morning and I was only a few hours back from a U2 concert

*There are exceptions. I think Nintendo could've gotten Namco to skip 360 altogether for Tales, as a particularly big example off the top of my head.

This should have happened. Tales of Symphonia on Gamecube was the best selling Tales game ever and I still don't understand why Nintendo didn't secure the series from the start. You already got ToS DotNW of course (well, except for us Europeans) but the Wii could have gotten Vesperia. It turned out okay for Nintendo because mid-gen N-B announced Tales of Graces.

That's pretty crazy. Nintendo can't force anyone to do anything even with what you're suggesting. You're saying they bankroll a bunch of companies in order to get games on their system and then use Metacritic (heh, heh) to determine overall quality? You don't see the potential pitfalls of this?

I think it's not forcing, its reaching out. If you go with these kind of plans to 3rd parties, they actually want to listen. That's a good thing. Maybe the Metacritic isn't such a great idea, I generaly agree with his suggestion. Reaching out.

 

[freddy]

PlayStation 2 152.7K
PlayStation 3 164.7K
PSP 163.5K
Xbox 360 240.6K
Wii 361.7K
Nintendo DS 766.5K

The numbers.


Pages upon pages of discussion on what Nintendo is doing wrong. :lol

 

[Sleeker]

you people are so interesting

 

[EDarkness]

I think it's not forcing, its reaching out. If you go with these kind of plans to 3rd parties, they actually want to listen. That's a good thing. Maybe the Metacritic isn't such a great idea, I generaly agree with his suggestion. Reaching out.

How do you know Nintendo hasn't been reaching out to developers. They seemed more than willing to help HVS do what they did and my guess they will do the same for anyone else actually willing to do things on their system. Reaching out is great, but if people don't care about what they're talking about or don't believe in the product, then all the reaching in the world won't do anything. See the issue here is that there are lots of companies that simply don't want to work on the Wii for any reason. Userbase or no.

 

[legend166]

PlayStation 2 152.7K
PlayStation 3 164.7K
PSP 163.5K
Xbox 360 240.6K
Wii 361.7K
Nintendo DS 766.5K

The numbers.


Pages upon pages of discussion on what Nintendo is doing wrong. :lol

That's a pretty good point.

 

[DangerousDave]

PlayStation 2 152.7K
PlayStation 3 164.7K
PSP 163.5K
Xbox 360 240.6K
Wii 361.7K
Nintendo DS 766.5K

The numbers.


Pages upon pages of discussion on what Nintendo is doing wrong. :lol

That's not the point. Nobody here negates the evidence that Nintendo is doing a lot of money with the wii.

But the fact that the average wii hardcore game get's less than 100k in wii should be a worrying fact for anyone in this forum without Nintendo shares.

 

[Sadist]

How do you know Nintendo hasn't been reaching out to developers. They seemed more than willing to help HVS do what they did and my guess they will do the same for anyone else actually willing to do things on their system. Reaching out is great, but if people don't care about what they're talking about or don't believe in the product, then all the reaching in the world won't do anything. See the issue here is that there are lots of companies that simply don't want to work on the Wii for any reason. Userbase or no.

It's true that reaching out won't help out if developers/publishers aren't interested, but the way you put it sounds like a very one-sided problem. I think both parties are at fault here. I mean, how many times didn't we hear from Valve and Newell that they want to do something with the Wii. But they don't have a clue what they want. Bioware also said this last week, even Id Software stated this several times. All having the same argument: "We want to do something for Wii, but we don't know what"

If I were Nintendo, talk to these guys. Maybe they already did, but this is the chance to strengthen third party relations. Talk about what they are thinking about. How they feel about Wii development, what kind of games they feel would suit the console.

PlayStation 2 152.7K
PlayStation 3 164.7K
PSP 163.5K
Xbox 360 240.6K
Wii 361.7K
Nintendo DS 766.5K

The numbers.

Pages upon pages of discussion on what Nintendo is doing wrong. :lol

Hardware wise they are the king. Could use more heavy hitters in the 3rd Party software department.

 

[DangerousDave]

See the issue here is that there are lots of companies that simply don't want to work on the Wii for any reason. Userbase or no.

Usually companies are not fanboys. If the companies don't want to make hardcore games for Wii is because the evidence shows that they will loose money. And if there are not hardcore games for wii, the wii will be still considered an outsider for a lot of hardcore games. And then, the wii hardcore userbase will be so few that the hardcore games for wii won't sell. It's a circular loop.

 

[HiResDes]

That's not the point. Nobody here negates the evidence that Nintendo is doing a lot of money with the wii.

But the fact that the average wii hardcore game get's less than 100k in wii should be a worrying fact for anyone in this forum without Nintendo shares.

While I agree with you, don' t use the word hardcore, people get over sensitive and rightly so because its not exactly correct...Traditional sounds more reasonable to Wii enthusiasts

 

[Vagabundo]

Sony has bowed out this gen now. They are going to want to focus on profitablity with the market share that they have now.

They will release slims and upgrades, but they are not going to drastically cut price. That ship has sailed. They will be happy with consistent sales even if they are third place and will refocus for the battle for next generation.

I'm disappointed with Nintendo, they should have reinvested some of their profits into money-hatting AAA games from western devs; with the perception of the industry currently as it is, it will take a lot to shift inertia to their system.

 

[DangerousDave]

Traditional, then.

 

[wrowa]

How did this misconception start? Nintendo was all over price drops with the Gamecube. It's just that market forces aren't inspiring Nintendo to do so. We'll see a price drop from them when it makes business sense.

Gamecube = Yamauchi
Wii = Iwata

“Also, while the price cut is said to surely increase demand, it must be clear from a variety of analysis so far that the effect cannot last very long. Accordingly, if we really do enact a price cut, it must be exactly when it can maximise the business. At least for now, I have no specific ideas about the price cut at all.”

http://www.edge-online.com/news/iwata-talks-price-cuts-new-games-online

"This is my personal thinking, but when the model's price-tag drops over time, manufacturers are telling consumers it's better to wait, and I've always thought that was a mistake."

http://kotaku.com/5075682/price-drops-nintendo-president-not-a-fan

 

[EDarkness]

It's true that reaching out won't help out if developers/publishers aren't interested, but the way you put it sounds like a very one-sided problem. I think both parties are at fault here. I mean, how many times didn't we hear from Valve and Newell that they want to do something with the Wii. But they don't have a clue what they want. Bioware also said this last week, even Id Software stated this several times. All having the same argument: "We want to do something for Wii, but we don't know what"

If I were Nintendo, talk to these guys. Maybe they already did, but this is the chance to strengthen third party relations. Talk about what they are thinking about. How they feel about Wii development, what kind of games they feel would suit the console.

I know it sounds one sided, but simply based on Nintendo's hand extending to HVS shows that they're more than willing to assist people who want to do interesting things on the system. I don't believe that Nintendo hasn't spoken to Valve and others about making games. We know that Bioware has something going on and so does Bethesda. Those are good signs that Nintendo is trying to do something and at least some companies are willing to play ball. Let's see where things are a year from now, but right now it's looking like companies simply don't want to work on the Wii. It's like the red headed stepchild of market leading consoles. Heh, heh.

 

[A Twisty Fluken]

But the fact that the average wii hardcore game get's less than 100k in wii should be a worrying fact for anyone in this forum without Nintendo shares.

Just as I have no real stake in whether Nintendo sells 1 Wii or 1 billion, I similarly have no stake in whether creatively decrepit third parties are able to move enough units of a mediocre FPS or not.

 

[Interfectum]

Just as I have no real stake in whether Nintendo sells 1 Wii or 1 billion, I similarly have no stake in whether creatively decrepit third parties are able to move enough units of a mediocre FPS or not.

Madworld is an FPS?

 

[dammitmattt]

Madworld is an FPS?

No, but it's equally mediocre. I'm saving my tears for an actual good third party game. Thankfully, my two favorites (Tiger Woods & Boom Blox) are actually doing okay.

 

[freddy]

My point is it's been discussed to death over the last two years. What I don't see discussion about is why Microsoft and Sony are doing so poorly despite having the heavy hitting 3rd party franchises.

What are they doing wrong and what can they do to catch up to the market leader. What are the third parties doing wrong that they can't sell 10 and 15 million sellers like Nintendo is doing on the Wii?

These discussions here are old and boring to read. I'd love if some of the intelligence shown in this thread could be directed at something new. I'd love to see some of your opinions on why the 3rd party blockbusters MS and Sony have acquired aren't selling enough systems.

Can Microsoft ever gain first place if they continue to follow innovation rather than initiate it? Something new please.

 

[AniHawk]

No, but it's equally mediocre.

Awesome.

EDIT: You mean the genre as a whole and not just The Conduit?

 

[legend166]

Usually companies are not fanboys. If the companies don't want to make hardcore games for Wii is because the evidence shows that they will loose money. And if there are not hardcore games for wii, the wii will be still considered an outsider for a lot of hardcore games. And then, the wii hardcore userbase will be so few that the hardcore games for wii won't sell. It's a circular loop.

I do not agree with this assumption.

 

[AniHawk]

I do not agree with this assumption.

Japanese companies aren't. They're more xenophobic than anything.

 

[EDarkness]

Japanese companies aren't.

Sad thing is...they are. At least in my experience.

 

[Christine]

Gamecube = Yamauchi
Wii = Iwata

No, Gamecube was Iwata's as well. His aversion to cutting the price isn't new, but the market forced his hand with the 'cube.

 

[AceBandage]

That's not the point. Nobody here negates the evidence that Nintendo is doing a lot of money with the wii.

But the fact that the average wii hardcore game get's less than 100k in wii should be a worrying fact for anyone in this forum without Nintendo shares.

What do you mean by average, though?
The games that would sell on the 360/PS3 sell on the Wii, the ones that wouldn't don't.
Yes, the Conduit is an FPS, which is the hot thing this generation, but it was still a low budget game from a no one developer.
Even a game like Haze, which had a large budget and a huge advertising campaign flopped badly on the PS3.

 

[Version 3.0]

...is the only relevant part of this post. Yes, Nintendo's big games: Wii Fit. Wii Sports Resort. Mario Kart Wii.

...which one of these is being cannibalized by a story-rich jRPG or simulation racer or turn-based strategy-simulation title again?

For the record, my argument isn't that no one at Nintendo can possibly think that third-party games are a terrifying monster threat to their first-party sales (I can't read their mind nor account for their thought processes); it's that anyone at Nintendo who thinks that is a complete fucking dumbass.

(The fact that Nintendo continues to allow third-party development rather than jack up their licensing fees to $25 a pop or cut devs off altogether certainly suggests that the people actually making the call on this are smart enough to recognize that third-party development is a straight-up win for them, though, even if they don't consider actively chasing it to be worthwhile.)

Of course they're smart enough to take the free money. But it's also obvious from their actions over the years that Nintendo does not feel that popular franchises other than their own are worth much (if any) of their time or effort.

Also "complete fucking dumbass" is often quite an accurate description of Nintendo.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

PlayStation 2 152.7K
PlayStation 3 164.7K
PSP 163.5K
Xbox 360 240.6K
Wii 361.7K
Nintendo DS 766.5K

The numbers.


Pages upon pages of discussion on what Nintendo is doing wrong. :lol

Accept their console is rapidly declining over the past few months.

I know it sounds one sided, but simply based on Nintendo's hand extending to HVS shows that they're more than willing to assist people who want to do interesting things on the system. I don't believe that Nintendo hasn't spoken to Valve and others about making games. We know that Bioware has something going on and so does Bethesda. Those are good signs that Nintendo is trying to do something and at least some companies are willing to play ball. Let's see where things are a year from now, but right now it's looking like companies simply don't want to work on the Wii. It's like the red headed stepchild of market leading consoles. Heh, heh.

The aid Nintendo gives developers like HVS is small compared to the aid Microsoft and SONY give other third parties.

Also "complete fucking dumbass" is often quite an accurate description of Nintendo.

Needs to be quoted. They had/have potential to absolutely dominate this industry and squash Microsoft and SONY and are blowing it.

 

[_Angelus_]

man, things are going to get sooo crazy when all 3 have more price drops

Wii at $150?
360 at $129
PS3 at $199

:lol
If you find a PS3 for that amount in the next two years then thats a sure sign Sony is just clearing inventory for PS4 in a few years after that.

 

[Eteric Rice]

Hopefully Nintendo makes a more well rounded system next generation. One that has enough power for the bigger games, but won't force small developers to do the HD thing "fully."

They don't really need to match the 360's online or the PS3's media capabilities. They do need to have a competant online system, one that allows games like the ones we have today to actually work on their system.

Just a good, all around system is all I ask, really.

 

[freddy]

Accept their console is rapidly declining over the past few months.

Soo..what's your opinion on why third parties can't crack the Nintendo user base?

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

Hopefully Nintendo makes a more well rounded system next generation. One that has enough power for the bigger games, but won't force small developers to do the HD thing "fully."

They don't really need to match the 360's online or the PS3's media capabilities. They do need to have a competant online system, one that allows games like the ones we have today to actually work on their system.

Just a good, all around system is all I ask, really.

This is why I keep saying that I think the ideal power of the Wii would have been around a Taito Type X7.

Soo..what's your opinion on why third parties can't crack the Nintendo user base?

Some already have (EA for example).

 

[Grampa Simpson]

This is why I keep saying that I think the ideal power of the Wii would have been around a Taito Type X7.

This means nothing to 95% of this thread.

 

[Kozak]

Soo..what's your opinion on why third parties can't crack the Nintendo user base?

Nobody bothers. Apparently its easier to go over budget making a 360/Ps3 game and then pumping so much into advertising that you hardly get a return.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

Japanese companies aren't. They're more xenophobic than anything.

Itagaki, Kojima, Mikami, and Sakaguchi have all shown themselves to be huge system fanboys over the last 5 years, and several have made comments about rival hardware that would make Gabe Newell and Julian E from Factor 5 blush.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

This means nothing to 95% of this thread.

...and?

 

[charlequin]

How do you get there? You can't just draw a line on a map.

How do I get where? The point is that no third party is going to be making software that targets exactly the same niche as Nintendo's first-party stuff well enough to actually beat it; most people will look to fill expanded market niches beyond what Nintendo's own first-party can provide, or to sell extra products to people who already bought the first-party games and want more. You can fill in survival-horror or lightgun or whatever you want in that post if my choice of genres offends you.

They gave their primary reason as the NPD report doesn't include sales made at Wal-Mart.

This is a true but misleading statement.

NPD provides numbers by using an elaborate polling methodology that takes sales data from many individual stores, uses a complex model to extrapolate sales data for the 90+% of stores that aren't polled, and presents the resulting data. Wal-Mart used to be one of the chains that they polled; it no longer is. However, these statistical models are already built to estimate most of the sales occurring based on the information they do have; now they are just estimating Wal-Mart's contribution rather than directly polling it.

So: it's true that Wal-Mart is not reporting numbers to NPD directly, but it's not true that the numbers we get in some way represent "all sales except those at Wal-Mart" thereby suggesting that there are magically unaccounted-for sales happening but not being reported.

If it was my company I'd take the money and run. Hold my hand out in order to get some cash, do some shoddy game, then invest in working on a system I actually want to work on. Or maybe I could check with Microsoft to see if they'll match Nintendo's offer. Either way, they couldn't force my company to put my best foot forward.

If you assume that all development companies have invested sole decision-making power in insane, frothing fanboys who would rather be caught dead than writing code for a Nintendo system and would therefore engage in drastically unprofessional behavior in order to "stick it" to Nintendo for daring to extend a hand of potential partnership then yes, it would not be a very effective strategy for Nintendo.

Pages upon pages of discussion on what Nintendo is doing wrong. :lol

Well, we already know what Sony is doing wrong (being stuck supporting a console whose launch and first year were botched beyond almost all imagining, not having generated an actual market for their handheld here the way they did in Japan, etc.) and what Microsoft is doing wrong (dealing with the fallout of screwing up their hardware, overcharging for everything, not having any software for people under 15, etc.)

That pretty much leaves what Nintendo (i.e. the company who actually had a good idea for how to approach this generation) is doing wrong as the most interesting thing to talk about. :lol

What I don't see discussion about is why Microsoft and Sony are doing so poorly despite having the heavy hitting 3rd party franchises.

Because the systems are still too expensive and have basically no meaningful appeal to the legions of less dedicated gamers who swelled the ranks of every previous generation's market leader.

See? Already soved the mystery!

 

[HiResDes]

What do you mean by average, though?
The games that would sell on the 360/PS3 sell on the Wii, the ones that wouldn't don't.
Yes, the Conduit is an FPS, which is the hot thing this generation, but it was still a low budget game from a no one developer.
Even a game like Haze, which had a large budget and a huge advertising campaign flopped badly on the PS3.

Because it was a mediocre game, I think he's referring to the really good titles, like say No More Heroes...Though that moved a decent amount of units.

 

[HiResDes]

Because the systems are still too expensive and have basically no meaningful appeal to the legions of less dedicated gamers who swelled the ranks of every previous generation's market leader.

See? Already soved the mystery!

This is the wrong answer, and a very wrong one at that...The cheapest 360 sku is 50 dollars less than the Wii, yet it isn't selling anywhere near Wii numbers. There is definitely something else at hand, IMO it is the resurgence of the Nintendo name and charm to popularity and of course motion controls.

 

[poppabk]

Because the systems are still too expensive and have basically no meaningful appeal to the legions of less dedicated gamers who swelled the ranks of every previous generation's market leader.

See? Already soved the mystery!

Ignoring the current pricing of the 360, the question still remains - why do they have no meaningful appeal to the legions of less dedicated gamers? The Wii has very few 3rd party successes that are exclusive, so it is unlikely to be the 3rd party software support. So it almost has to be the first party software.

 

[Kilrogg]

Ignoring the current pricing of the 360, the question still remains - why do they have no meaningful appeal to the legions of less dedicated gamers? The Wii has very few 3rd party successes that are exclusive, so it is unlikely to be the 3rd party software support. So it almost has to be the first party software.

Because the entirety of the developer community isn't able/willing to make games that appeal to the new consumers. I think it should have been clear by now, what with Nintendo leading in hardware sales, software sales, profit and, I believe, revenue that they're the only company out there who has a clue in that space.

In short: yes, first-party software.