Support NeoGAF

[j^aws]

i'm going to quote myself here because it's somewhat relevant. i've also been retyping the same thing a lot lately and i'm done outright doing it again in different ways (at least this month), so i apologize.

"you know, it would make more sense if sony was to make games for the 3ds, which is less expensive to develop for and has a far larger userbase. they don't, and no one seems to be clamoring for god of war or littlebigplanet for the machine, despite knowing full well that the 3ds would be absolutely capable of such things, given its stature versus the psp. such a move would also unite all the handheld developers under one dedicated gaming platform too- eliminating any need to ever pick up a second handheld. if we follow the logic that it would be nice to see nintendo drop out of the console hardware race, it would be even nicer if sony dropped out of the handheld hardware race.

they don't, and for a variety of reasons. sony would be restricted by every rule nintendo set up. sony would need to figure out how to work within the programs nintendo makes and uses, in order to provide screenshots for the eshop, nintendo's website, and also any sort of digital manual that is mandated. they would need to have it approved by every major nintendo region, affecting their game production schedule. they would also have to adhere to nintendo's rules regarding production (a game basically enters a queue and a certain amount is printed, and this may take a couple weeks).

this is before we talk royalties and paying for the costs for the game cards and whether or not the media is more expensive than something they would produce themselves. as a first-party, sony controls the medium. they are in charge of making the game cases, the game cards, and the labels. they have their own contacts to get the quality as good as possible for an affordable price. perhaps nintendo would charge them more. perhaps nintendo has a deal that isn't available to a third-party. these are minor costs but the affect the production of each game. and of course, royalties must be considered when talking about any third-party project. the first-party company will always eat up a nice chunk of the profit.

but say all that's fine and sony should go ahead and just make games for the 3ds. there's no littlebigplanet fanbase on the system. there's no fanfare for any sony games on the system. littlebigplanet may do well, but the fanbase has historically been on sony systems, and there's no indication there will be enough of them to make the switch to the 3ds. and then games like god of war and uncharted would be even more unusual. given sales of similar games on the system, they probably wouldn't sell well at all. at the end of the day, sony would probably be best served posting their biggest franchises on the machine and crossing their fingers that it works. there's less room for experimentation. little deviants and tearaway probably wouldn't get made when it's far more worth it taking a risk on a more controlled platform (such as the ps4).

and all this talk ignores that the ps4 is there. why would you need to buy a sony system if their games are on something else? why would sony put so much extra time on top of what they're already doing now, and invest more money for less return on games when they could simply work on ps4 titles exclusively?

go ahead and switch it for nintendo and the wii u and it's pretty much the same thing. sony has their own restrictions and programs, and so does microsoft (who actually did support nintendo's handheld line for many years, something that seemed to stem out of microsoft's legendary mismanagement of rare)."

The premise for Nintendo going 3rd party doesn't apply to Sony, i.e. relatively weak hardware, but with exceptional software.

 

[EatChildren]

I don't necessarily want Nintendo to be a software only company, but I think the belief they'd sudden collapse and produce poor quality games is a belief rooted in nonsense and hysteria, from fans with a deep rooted and nonsensical loyalty to Nintendo the company and simply refuse to even humour the possibility of Nintendo focusing exclusively on software (ironic, all things considered). Nintendo is immensely functional as both a video game publisher and developer, and would retain just as much control and freedom over their projects while third party as they do with their own hardware. It's like some people believe Nintendo limiting themselves to software would turn them into EA overnight. They're a company already bound to shareholders. And a company that already does arguably ignore them and do their own thing, for better or worse. This would not change, and with the strength and brand recognition of their IPs I don't see any scenario where third party Nintendo wouldn't see tremendous sales success on borderline any platform under the sun.

What does concern me (and caused some nonsense knee jerk defensiveness on twitter) is Nintendo's relevancy in the home console space with their current hardware vision. I like Nintendo doing their own thing, but unsuccessful Nintendo is bad for every single party involved. It's bad for Nintendo, for obvious financial reasons. It pressures them to produce content faster, and more focused on sales. And this in turn has the potential to hurt the fanbase. Panic Nintendo sucks. Comfortable Nintendo is giving me two Mario Galaxy games and greenlighting shit like Sin & Punishment 2 and Xenoblade.

What I don't want is Nintendo to stick to their own home consoles for no other reason than stubbornness, when that stubbornness may be detrimental to growth of the company as a software producer and developer. My love for Nintendo hardware is not necessarily because of the hardware itself, but the software. That's what I love about Nintendo. They need to re-approach their position in the console space for their next system, and do so in drastic ways. If that doesn't mean becoming a third party publisher, and again I don't necessarily want or expect that to happen, it does mean they need to totally reassess what they're doing for hardware and work harder to ensure relevancy. Nintendo is a relevant software producer, but for the current generation they are an irrelevant hardware producer. The latter needs to change because the former will be affected by it.

 

[Hcoregamer00]

Going third party on consoles is a viable option imo.

You can argue how much NSMBW, Mario Kart Wii, Wii Fit etc sold, but they were on the Wii, and Nintendo can't bank on having another console with that popularity, ever.

The Wii U sales aren't really the exception, the N64 and Gamecube weren't exactly lighting up the charts, and it wouldn't be surprising if games such as Melee would have sold more on the PS2.

Putting Smash Bros, Mario Kart, 3D Mario, Zelda etc on the PS5, while still having their own handheld console would be a decent option for them I think.

I said it before and I will say it again.

Nintendo's failure with the Wii U was its inability to give the console a constant stream of games across a wide variety of genres. This is due to the transition to high definition gaming that most 3rd party developers have to deal with when the PS3 and the X360 was released.

When given the option of supporting rivals with expensive development versus a cheaper portable console environment that they still own and get licensing fees from, nine times out of ten the games will be exclusive the environment that they own. If Nintendo does make games for other home consoles, it will only be "safe" franchises that are guaranteed to sell. The crazy, fun and experimental games will not be released on those consoles.

This hypothetical third party Nintendo for consoles will still treat the Portable Consoles like kings and the rival home consoles will get scraps.

 

[onipex]

As far as allocating internal resources, it wasn't until the Nintendo DS that Nintendo started putting some of their better designers and programmers exclusively on hand held projects. For a long time, even those big successful Game Boy Advance titles, were being developed by their lower budget and under staffed groups.

I thought think they have to put more resources into their handheld until the DS. My point was more that most of their profit was coming from their handhelds sometime around that era. I could be wrong as I'm going from memory.

I think the Nintendo 64 may go down as their last great enthusiast system. While it only sold in the mid 30-millions, it was a prosperous haven for first-party software and peripherals. It was a smaller but dedicated userbase that bought a million copies of NBA Courtside and 1080 Snowboarding. Nintendo wouldn't have sold 200k copies of either on the Wii's more than triple userbase.

Not sure about that. I think Nintendo sports games would have done well on the Wii. There wasn't much real competition and the userbase took well to most games made by Nintendo.

 

[Barzul]

going 3rd party would be justified if they can sell 30 million Mario Kart copies again in the console they go to.

there's no way to know if their software sales would increase by releasing on a competitor's console. seeing how dudebros have shunned nintendo games always, that massive fanbase wouldn't make much of a difference to them.

I'd buy Zelda and Mario on Xbox or PC.

 

[Chindogg]

Nintendo's still making some sort of profit despite problems. Sony just had to sell a building to make it in the black and Microsoft has a fairly large faction of shareholders who wants to sell the Xbox division.

Right now I wouldn't be worried about Nintendo's position as a hardware maker. I'd worry about the other two.

 

[Zalman]

The funny thing is that Nintendo is probably in better shape than Sony or Microsoft's game division.

Definitely, but they have the toughest road ahead out of all three.

 

[ArcaneFreeze]

People complain "All Nintendo does is make Mario and Zelda." Everyone here "I'd only buy Mario and Zelda if it were on Xbox/Playstation."

If Nintendo we're relegated to third party software only all anyone would ever get is Mario and Zelda, which according to a lot of people here on GAF they're tired of it.

People only want Nintendo to go third party for two maybe three of their franchises. I'd bet anything that if Nintendo gave up only Mario/Zelda/Metroid to another platform and kept everything else no one would complain for them to go third party anymore cause most people wouldn't care for their other franchises. Its obvious why staying in the hardware department is more beneficial.

 

[AniHawk]

Sony's handheld arm of SCEWWS group is insignificant, and they don't appear to be laying any significant stake in mobile and are doubling down on big budget console experiences after the failures of the Vita.

I don't see how releasing software for another platform holder is as much of a hurdle as you're suggesting. Yeah, they have to integrate their product into the release cycle rules and regulations of the platform holder, but this isn't a big deal for a first party group as massive as Nintendo's.

the problem in nintendo's case would be that they'd ignore hardware that does sell and sells a lot of their software. you're right that nintendo's software arm is far superior when it comes to finding an audience. they're not going to make games that are costlier and carry another steep learning curve instead of putting those same people on a handheld where they can be divided into more and smaller teams, and take less time to bring about the level of polish that's usually expected from them.

And of course royalties are a factor, but taking a 15% hit on 10 million sales is preferable to taking no hit at all on 1-2 million in sales.

And Nintendo is so entrenched into videogame history that there really isn't any concern that there will not be an active audience for them on PC, Consoles, Phones/Tablets that aren't made by Nintendo.

the problem with the numbers you're suggesting is more than just being unknown- it's magic. it's fiction. sorry, but is there anything to suggest the fanbase that sony and microsoft are building are secretly pining for nintendo games? it comes across as wishful thinking at best.

For those against Nintendo going software only, you basically believe that: 1) hardware profitability will return significantly, 2) Hardware sales will increase to a degree where Nintendo software can in turn sell substantially like they used to, or 3) third party royalties will become more of a factor and the casual market will return.

that's not the case at all. the idea is that nintendo should be profitable to sustain itself year after year. what you're suggesting seems to be that most people against this idea expect nintendo to dominate the industry like they did in the nes/snes/gb and wii/ds days. that's not it.

I don't think any of these are likely, which means the alternative is a more viable business solution that will get Nintendo back on the path of robust growth.

the options once they go third-party are extremely limited. unless you're valve and start building a platform over the span of ten years, it's extremely unlikely that a third-party goes first-party anymore. if they screw up as a first-party, they can come back again next time, maybe try to build some sort of service instead, partner with some non-gaming entity, or just support one hardware device (this is kinda what did sega in). once you fail as a third-party, you go bankrupt and your assets get sold off.

I don't necessarily want Nintendo to be a software only company, but I think the belief they'd sudden collapse and produce poor quality games is a belief rooted in nonsense and hysteria, from fans with a deep rooted and nonsensical loyalty to Nintendo the company and simply refuse to even humour the possibility of Nintendo focusing exclusively on software (ironic, all things considered). Nintendo is immensely functional as both a video game publisher and developer, and would retain just as much control and freedom over their projects while third party as they do with their own hardware. It's like some people believe Nintendo limiting themselves to software would turn them into EA overnight. They're a company already bound to shareholders. And a company that already does arguably ignore them and do their own thing, for better or worse. This would not change, and with the strength and brand recognition of their IPs I don't see any scenario where third party Nintendo wouldn't see tremendous sales success on borderline any platform under the sun.

What does concern me (and caused some nonsense knee jerk defensiveness on twitter) is Nintendo's relevancy in the home console space with their current hardware vision. I like Nintendo doing their own thing, but unsuccessful Nintendo is bad for every single party involved. It's bad for Nintendo, for obvious financial reasons. It pressures them to produce content faster, and more focused on sales. And this in turn has the potential to hurt the fanbase. Panic Nintendo sucks. Comfortable Nintendo is giving me two Mario Galaxy games and greenlighting shit like Sin & Punishment 2 and Xenoblade.

no offense, but i think the nonsense is the belief that a third-party nintendo would be a comfortable one. there was a very brief moment in the last ten years where ea released dead space, mirror's edge, burnout paradise, and boom blox. dead space very quickly came down with sequilitis, mirror's edge might get a sequel in 2015, the burnout series is now done, and boom blox had a quick sequel and hasn't been heard from since. that was one year. i can't think of any other year where ea had the same creative boom.

nintendo would focus on what sells. they already do it with their own hardware, and you see it with decisions like yoshi and donkey kong and 2d mario and 3d mario and mario kart, but would wonderful 101 be greenlit? if it did, would they have let kamiya talk them into using superheroes instead of nintendo characters? would they even consider working with treasure again when the return on their investment could go towards bigger products?

What I don't want is Nintendo to stick to their own home consoles for no other reason than stubbornness, when that stubbornness may be detrimental to growth of the company as a software producer and developer. My love for Nintendo hardware is not necessarily because of the hardware itself, but the software. That's what I love about Nintendo. They need to re-approach their position in the console space for their next system, and do so in drastic ways. If that doesn't mean becoming a third party publisher, and again I don't necessarily want or expect that to happen, it does mean they need to totally reassess what they're doing for hardware and work harder to ensure relevancy. Nintendo is a relevant software producer, but for the current generation they are an irrelevant hardware producer. The latter needs to change because the former will be affected by it.

the software doesn't exist in a vacuum though. they build the systems they are comfortable working on with features they believe to be beneficial to the software they make. they know hardware in and out, and it helps with their ease of development, allowing more time to pore over details in the design process and spend less time in getting it functional. it's the same reason the last of us can look and work so well on the ps3 while other games can be jank as hell (or more recently, just compare nintendo's own efforts against third-party releases on the wii u).

 

[Amir0x]

I think next-generation will actually be the do-or-die gen for Nintendo. And I don't mean it in the "oh they're DOOOMED" sense strictly - I am too experienced in this industry to know such early proclamations are futile - but it will be a pivotal generation.

With gaming dedicated handheld hardware clearly losing pull over audiences worldwide, Nintendo's critical space where they've always maintained an advantage will soon be a rapidly diminished space with a rapidly shrinking consumer base. Additionally, if their NEXT console is also a failure like Wii U, the warning signs will be as clear as the clearest blue sky... something would clearly be fundamentally wrong with Nintendo's ability to connect to the market with their hardware anymore. And if that starts happening, the investments they make in new systems will start to be a strain on their war chest, until eventually they will have to make hard choices about their future.

I know people hate touching this sort of language because of the history of trolls saying this sort of thing to be dismissive, but I do believe people have to start seriously considering a strategy that can take Nintendo off this course. Nintendo has to be BOLD and reevaluate their entire approach soon. They cannot just keep pumping out games with Link, Mario and Samus or Donkey Kong or whatever and think that's satisfactory. People are getting tired of playing these same characters and worlds all the time. Nintendo needs to really try to branch out into more genres, concepts, invent new worlds and characters with as big of a push as Mario and Zelda. They need to swing for the fences right now. With great risk comes great reward potentially. I'd rather they spark that fire and try than to just start petering out like this pathetically

 

[ArcaneFreeze]

Also I'd like to say most, not all just most, of the people saying "Oh Nintendo should go third party for their own benefit" are completely bullshitting. Its obvious people just want them out of the hardware business regardless of what it does to them.

 

[Zinthar]

Nintendo's still making some sort of profit despite problems. Sony just had to sell a building to make it in the black and Microsoft has a fairly large faction of shareholders who wants to sell the Xbox division.

Right now I wouldn't be worried about Nintendo's position as a hardware maker. I'd worry about the other two.

That's not true -- Nintendo lost $187 million on $1.17 billion in revenue in the six months ending September 2013.

Sony's issue is the deep losses it's taking in its consumer electronics division. The Playstation division is typically profitable, and would surely continue to exist even if they had dump the unprofitable parts of the company. The major losses they ate in the PS3's early years aren't occurring with PS4.

And the faction of shareholders who wanted Microsoft to dump the Xbox division has died down now. The division is profitable, and is going to be an essential piece of any hope Microsoft has of competing in the mobile business.

Nintendo is definitely in the most precarious position among the three home console makers. Losses on the Wii U are more than offsetting the profits they're making on 3DS, and it's not clear whether the Wii U will even approach Gamecube-like sales during the generation.

 

[Freezie KO]

would wonderful 101 be greenlit? if it did, would they have let kamiya talk them into using superheroes instead of nintendo characters?

You have this story backwards. Kamiya pitched Minami's Nintendo All-Stars idea and Yamagami from Nintendo didn't want it. Nintendo may not have wanted it because they didn't want to give up control of the branding, but nonetheless, they were the ones who went for an original IP.

Now, this does nothing one way or the other for your larger point. But just clarifying.

http://iwataasks.nintendo.com/interviews/#/wiiu/thewonderful101/1/0

 

[ItAintEasyBeinCheesy]

I imagine if they did they would be able to go for 2 gens selling software and peripherals and be so profitable they could get into the console business again any time they wanted and take to all IP's back to their system.

 

[Cipherr]

The premise for Nintendo going 3rd party doesn't apply to Sony, i.e. relatively weak hardware, but with exceptional software.

Yes it does apply. because the hardware is not selling. How strong it is means jack shit. Noone buys it. If the WiiU were super powerful but still had its current sales, that would be no better. In fact it would be worse because it would be losing more money. So let Sony put that exceptional Vita software somewhere where it might have a chance right?


Goddamn Ani thats pretty damn slick. Going to piss a lot of people off with that.

And as expected, it goes largely ignored

lol

Just like it will here.

Yeah, to be honest, ignoring it is likely what will happen. Its right on the nose though....

 

[JoeM86]

Do we really need a "Nintendo should go third party" thread every other day? The same points get trotted out continually and it's essentially port begging -_-

That's not true -- Nintendo lost $187 million on $1.17 billion in revenue in the six months ending September 2013.

Sony's issue is the deep losses it's taking in its consumer electronics division. The Playstation division is typically profitable, and would surely continue to exist even if they had dump the unprofitable parts of the company. The major losses they ate in the PS3's early years aren't occurring with PS4.

And the faction of shareholders who wanted Microsoft to dump the Xbox division has died down now. The division is profitable, and is going to be an essential piece of any hope Microsoft has of competing in the mobile business.

Nintendo is definitely in the most precarious position among the three home console makers. Losses on the Wii U are more than offsetting the profits they're making on 3DS, and it's not clear whether the Wii U will even approach Gamecube-like sales during the generation.

No it's true. They still had an operating loss but have been back in the black overall for a short while. It's not the ideal situation, but it's evidence of things starting to turn around.

Plus, a good chunk of their loss is due to their new R&D building which is due to finish very soon if memory serves

 

[AniHawk]

You have this story backwards. Kamiya pitched Minami's Nintendo All-Stars idea and Yamagami from Nintendo didn't want it. Nintendo may not have wanted it because they didn't want to give up control of the branding, but nonetheless, they were the ones who went for an original IP.

Now, this does nothing one way or the other for your larger point. But just clarifying.

http://iwataasks.nintendo.com/interviews/#/wiiu/thewonderful101/1/0

ah interesting. guess that's what i get for skimming. thanks for the clarification.

 

[BlazeBreak]

I think what's being lost in the entire Wii U situation/Nintendo doomsday talk is that haven't Nintendo consoles been underperforming sales-wise since the N64? The runaway success of the Wii was the exception to the rule. Nintendo's had monstrously popular handhelds and have always "succeeded" with recent consoles because they don't sell them for a loss and make bank on their library of first-party titles.

The Wii U's problems stem from poor marketing decisions, such as the console's name, and not really knowing whether they should continue to chase the (now departed) casual crowd. As others have also pointed out, Nintendo's in a much better place financially than Sony. I don't see the Wii U being a net loss for Nintendo. Even if it remains a relative "failure", they'll wind up making money. First-party franchises will continue to slowly draw a larger install base to the console.

 

[megamerican]

One console dud does not mean Nintendo needs to abandon hardware. That same mentality would have shitcanned the Wii before it even came out given the GC's performance.

 

[remnant]

The premise for Nintendo going 3rd party doesn't apply to Sony, i.e. relatively weak hardware, but with exceptional software.

The comparison works perfectly. The only difference between the two is the idea of dancing on nintendo grave is a lot more popular right now that it is to start criticizing Sony.

 

[theprodigy]

The premise for Nintendo going 3rd party doesn't apply to Sony, i.e. relatively weak hardware, but with exceptional software.

and this is completely meaningless from a business perspective

 

[Freezie KO]

ah interesting. guess that's what i get for skimming. thanks for the clarification.

No worries. Who can keep track of all this Nintendo drama anyways?

 

[Alex]

The less needless hardware I have to buy the better, but I like Nintendo enough to support them through it so whatever. I would be quite happy if they could just focus down on one device though, a hybrid handheld/console with a dock/controller solution would be lovely.

 

[AniHawk]

I know people hate touching this sort of language because of the history of trolls saying this sort of thing to be dismissive, but I do believe people have to start seriously considering a strategy that can take Nintendo off this course. Nintendo has to be BOLD and reevaluate their entire approach soon. They cannot just keep pumping out games with Link, Mario and Samus or Donkey Kong or whatever and think that's satisfactory. People are getting tired of playing these same characters and worlds all the time. Nintendo needs to really try to branch out into more genres, concepts, invent new worlds and characters with as big of a push as Mario and Zelda. They need to swing for the fences right now. With great risk comes great reward potentially. I'd rather they spark that fire and try than to just start petering out like this pathetically

that's what the ds and wii both were. they seriously lost the plot with the 3ds and wii u.

 

[Zinthar]

Do we really need a "Nintendo should go third party" thread every other day? The same points get trotted out continually and it's essentially port begging -_-



No it's true. They still had an operating loss but have been back in the black overall for a short while. It's not the ideal situation, but it's evidence of things starting to turn around.

Plus, a good chunk of their loss is due to their new R&D building which is due to finish very soon if memory serves

http://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/pdf/2013/131030e.pdf

Typically when one says "in the black", they're referring to operating profit, which represent the present health of the company's core business. Were you referring to the gain they posted from fortuitous forex conditions? That's a volatile factor and is purely a function of the weak yen.

If you're referring to the present quarter that they'll report earnings for next month, then you're probably right that they'll post a small profit -- but then they're likely to drop back to a loss in the subsequent quarter one we're out of the holiday season. I wouldn't be too confident that Nintendo will actually meet their earnings guidance for the quarter, though, as sales of the Wii U were even weaker than had been expected when those projections were made. The current "whisper number" on the Street has Nintendo coming up short of the consensus estimate.

 

[Nocturno999]

I haven't bought a Wii nor a Wii U but it will be a sad day for gaming if Nintendo goes 3rd party.

 

[wsippel]

Going third party on consoles is a viable option imo.

Sure, after a massive company reorganization with tons of layoffs. As a third party, there's no longer a place for Monolith, IntSys and all of SPD, and EAD isn't prepared for yearly or bi-yearly installments of Zelda, Mario Kart and Mario - the only Nintendo franchises that would survive such a move. F-Zero and Metroid still wouldn't sell, and there's no longer a point producing boutique and niche software to strengthen their portfolio.

 

[AniHawk]

Sure, after a massive company reorganization with tons of layoffs. As a third party, there's no longer a place for Monolith, IntSys and all of SPD, and EAD isn't prepared for yearly or bi-yearly installments of Zelda, Mario Kart and Mario - the only Nintendo franchises that would survive such a move. F-Zero and Metroid still wouldn't sell, and there's no longer a point producing boutique and niche software to strengthen their portfolio.

i think some people have this expectation that nintendo could go third-party on consoles and still make handhelds. that in particular comes across as extreme shortsightedness or wishful thinking. it makes more logical sense that they make hardware or don't at all.

 

[SpecialAgentZ]

I haven't bought a Wii nor a Wii U but it will be a sad day for gaming if Nintendo goes 3rd party.

If this day ever comes, it will be the day I will stop buying consoles and stick with PC only.

 

[ArcaneFreeze]

I know people hate touching this sort of language because of the history of trolls saying this sort of thing to be dismissive, but I do believe people have to start seriously considering a strategy that can take Nintendo off this course. Nintendo has to be BOLD and reevaluate their entire approach soon. They cannot just keep pumping out games with Link, Mario and Samus or Donkey Kong or whatever and think that's satisfactory. People are getting tired of playing these same characters and worlds all the time. Nintendo needs to really try to branch out into more genres, concepts, invent new worlds and characters with as big of a push as Mario and Zelda. They need to swing for the fences right now. With great risk comes great reward potentially. I'd rather they spark that fire and try than to just start petering out like this pathetically

Yet if they were to go third party this is all people would ask for/buy. Actually cut out the last two cause going buy this thread all people want are Mario and Zelda. You say that they can't just keep pumping these games out yet this is EXACTLY what would continue to happen if they went third party.

 

[JoeM86]

Yet if they were to go third party this is all people would ask for/buy. Actually cut out the last two cause going buy this thread all people want are Mario and Zelda. You say that they can't just keep pumping these games out yet this is EXACTLY what would continue to happen if they went third party.

It wouldn't just continue to happen, it would escalate.

Typically, we get one "New Super Mario", one 3D Mario, one Mario Kart etc. per console. Throw Nintendo into being a third party and they'd start being at least once every two years, maybe even yearly.

 

[Warewolf]

I would love for Nintendo to continue their relationship with Sega. Eventually they'd love each other so much they'll create a console together and pump out surefire classics like Sonic Lost World.

Oh my lord. Sega taking the reigns on hardware with a Nintendo UI and 1st party software. Praise the gods.

 

[Amir0x]

Yet if they were to go third party this is all people would ask for/buy. Actually cut out the last two cause going buy this thread all people want are Mario and Zelda. You say that they can't just keep pumping these games out yet this is EXACTLY what would continue to happen if they went third party.

i don't want them to go third party, i just want them to smarten up so they don't have to ever do that

that's what the ds and wii both were. they seriously lost the plot with the 3ds and wii u.

I think part of the problem was two fold...

1. They spent an entire generation behind, and thus did not get the training in developing HD games efficiently and effectively as many other Japanese devs painfully had to do for all gen. That is still hurting them now on Wii U.

2. They failed to establish many sufficiently new and exciting hardcore IPs for Wii, other than something like Xenoblade, which also only came to the states after pulling several teeth. Thus, they still have to go about the business of starting to be just as creative and bold for hardcore gamers as they were for casuals that gen. They focused pretty decisively on one side during that period, and the rest of us got good games occasionally, but in established franchises mostly. Since Wii U is a more traditional system and hardcore gamers always adopt first, they should have had a few really big marketed hardcore titles that were completely new to entice those gamers and say "we can't get this anywhere else." As it is, most people know they can get their Nintendo game experience superior on 3DS right now, and the Wii U itself - whilst finally getting some good games now - is as routine and predictable as it gets.

There's so many factors in what went wrong with Wii U of course, but I still think the strategic blunder of starting to really milk their core IPs at the exclusion of anything else other than just placing Mario in yet another new sport or idea is starting to now hurt them. They're starting to damage their franchises value with this abuse.

Nintendo is still one of the most talented developers on Earth, so it kills me they're not trying to be as bold and surprising as they occasionally were during Gamecube, with hits like Pikmin, Odama, Chibi Robo. And even when they did return to franchises like Metroid, they did it in a new and radical way. I don't know why they seem so incapable of this sort of alternative brilliance this day, but it seems when they do experiment, it's usually in some cheap eshop game that nobody sees and thus those brands tend not to grow. They do not invest big scale like they should be, to start trying to make new hardcore IPs as big as Zelda and Mario.

*sigh*, such a frustration with Nintendo right now

 

[Truespeed]

I have to admit the very thought of Nintendo exiting the hardware business and creating software for the PlayStation would inCreDible.

 

[Inflammable Slinky]

Yo for real, what happened to n64 nintendo? Sure they lost alot of 3rd parties, but Howard Lincoln n crew cleaned up stateside with developers and shit.

Japan is becoming the most irrelevant part of the gaming world, and the big N needs to pull a Sony and refocus the company on the western market

 

[-Plasma Reus-]

Nintendo makes good hardware. No need to go software only.
Nintendo should just wait it out, or stop Wii U production and focus on the next generation.
And this time, Nintendo shouldn't be so hasty to abandon its core audience for a peripheral audience.

 

[Ewing33hi]

I would like to see nintendo games on other platforms. It doesn't have to be new games. Even if they just ported some old classic games to mobile devices, psn, and xbl I'd be happy. I'd love to play classic mario on my iPhone and I'm sure I'm not alone in that. If its a couple games they put out that way, I'm sure they could maintain their console business and make a pretty penny on the side by people wanting an authentic kick of retro gaming on their non nintendo devices. Plus it would give them a new way to milk those old IPs

 

[ZombiePlatypus]

All the declarations that Nintendo should go 3rd party are basically port-begging.

I hope Nintendo never stops making hardware. Even if they get zero 3rd party support, they provide an amazing complete experience by creating both hardware and the software.

 

[Soul_Pie]

Nintendo as a purely software company seems to be a popular idea right now because at this point there is such an enormous gulf between the appeal and quality of the hardware and the appeal and quality of the software. I feel like this gulf has never been bigger than it is now, speaking entirely anecdotally of course. People love Nintendo games, but they don't necessarily love Nintendo consoles.

I mean, the WiiU environment just seems so unhealthy. Third parties have all but given up, Nintendo struggled for most of this year to gain any momentum software wise, the bulky controller is ensuring that the console itself is costly, and consumers don't see the value in it anyway so they don't want to pay that much for the console. Every delay for every game seems to put more pressure on Nintendo as a company, because these games are not just expected to sell well but also sell the console. It just doesn't seem like a situation that can go on for much longer.

I think people would be less likely to make these calls if Nintendo were actually taking drastic action, but it's been a year now and it seems like they have no idea as to how they're going to go about salvaging the console. They're still trying to get the word out to people that this is a brand new console, but they're working under the assumption that people actually give a shit that there's a successor to the Wii out.

 

[Ewing33hi]

With the wii doing so well last gen and 3ds still doing well I think this talk is very premature. Sure wii u isn't doing great, but it's hardly time to throw in the towel. Maybe if Nintendo gets to the point where they lose their shirts it might be reasonable to really entertain these ideas, but I don't see that happening any time soon.

 

[guggnichso]

then surely another Japanese company would try snapping them up. It's a company I imagine the Japanese would want to keep ownership within the country and Sony would have the most to gain from a buyout of Nintendo.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but judging from the financial situation of both companies, couldn't Nintendo just get a relatively small credit and buy Sony if they wanted to?

I mean, yes, the WiiU sells like shit and the 3DS - while being a success - doesn't reach DS numbers at the moment, but somehow there's this narrative here that Nintendo is a failure and Sony a success, while when looking at the financial side of things, Nintendo is still more than fine and Sony is basically broke.

 

[AniHawk]

i don't want them to go third party, i just want them to smarten up so they don't have to ever do that



I think part of the problem was two fold...

1. They spent an entire generation behind, and thus did not get the training in developing HD games efficiently and effectively as many other Japanese devs painfully had to do for all gen. That is still hurting them now on Wii U.

this is a huge one. i was floored when i saw they tore apart the three-man a link between worlds team in 2010 to focus on wii u launch titles. talk about being caught flat-footed.

2. They failed to establish many sufficiently new and exciting hardcore IPs for Wii, other than something like Xenoblade, which also only came to the states after pulling several teeth. Thus, they still have to go about the business of starting to be just as creative and bold for hardcore gamers as they were for casuals that gen. They focused pretty decisively on one side during that period, and the rest of us got good games occasionally, but in established franchises mostly.

there's a difference between making games and localizing them. if we're looking at problems in the us market... yeah, nintendo could have done a lot better in localizing european/japanese-only and japanese-only games they paid for over there. if we're looking at nintendo as a game publisher, they had a very wide selection of titles last generation across the ds and wii, and spanned multiple genres to reach a large audience. i don't think it's accurate to say nintendo only made xenoblade and the rest of the generation was wii sports and nintendogs. not when they revived older series like wario land, punch-out, and sin & punishment, or paid for new stuff like disaster, endless ocean, and elite beat agents/oeundan... on top of their more traditional offerings.

Since Wii U is a more traditional system and hardcore gamers always adopt first,they should have had a few really big marketed hardcore titles that were completely new to entice those gamers and say "we can't get this anywhere else." As it is, most people know they can get their Nintendo game experience superior on 3DS right now, and the Wii U itself - whilst finally getting some good games now - is as routine and predictable as it gets.

i think what nintendo thought happened was that they had locked down the new market. in reality, they hadn't catered to that market since 2010 at the latest (with wii party). the last new game ideas that were pushed by them were in wii sports resort and wii fit plus (and that one is kind of pushing it). this audience was looking for something new and exciting and they got it in udraw from thq, and also from microsoft with kinect. then nintendo made nintendogs again and put miis in a pilotwings game and thought that was good enough. and a year later they launched a really complex minigame compilation with weird names and foreign characters.

...in the meantime they thought they were reaching out to traditional gamers. the 3ds had a nice opening for third-party games. street fighter iv underperformed, metal gear solid 3 was delayed, and suddenly nintendo was scrambling to fix the problem by slashing the price and rushing mario kart 7 out the door. on the wii u side i think they believed that as long as they didn't rush things and just provided games on time, it would do well, but they still had the problem at launch where no one was buying third-party titles nor was the new audience interested in their wares.

so both systems wound up being jacks of all trades. the 3ds had something to appeal to a general audience (and let's be honest, 3d without glasses sounded rad as hell in 2010), but it was hampered by a poor battery life and expensive hardware and software. the wii u had a tablet to appeal towards a general audience and buttons for a traditional gaming audience, but the games were inaccessible to the new audience and the system was, like the wii, viewed inferior by the traditional audience.

There's so many factors in what went wrong with Wii U of course, but I still think the strategic blunder of starting to really milk their core IPs at the exclusion of anything else other than just placing Mario in yet another new sport or idea is starting to now hurt them. They're starting to damage their franchises value with this abuse.

Nintendo is still one of the most talented developers on Earth, so it kills me they're not trying to be as bold and surprising as they occasionally were during Gamecube, with hits like Pikmin, Odama, Chibi Robo. And even when they did return to franchises like Metroid, they did it in a new and radical way. I don't know why they seem so incapable of this sort of alternative brilliance this day, but it seems when they do experiment, it's usually in some cheap eshop game that nobody sees and thus those brands tend not to grow. They do not invest big scale like they should be, to start trying to make new hardcore IPs as big as Zelda and Mario.

*sigh*, such a frustration with Nintendo right now

i think that's all on you man. from where i'm standing i saw them fund pandora's tower, the last story, xenoblade, the wonderful 101 in the last three years. they also brought back kid icarus in a pretty radical way (although the land portions drove me nuts).

 

[Louis Cyphre]

As much as I would love Nintendo games on other more powerful platforms I dont think that is the answer. They just need a new playbook and stop using the same thought process that applied to the 80's.

 

[saunderez]

and this is completely meaningless from a business perspective

Oh yeah, because software that has proven to sell gangbusters when hardware adoption is high can sell just as well on the pitiful Wii U hardware sales. Yep totally meaningless from a business perspective.

If Nintendo can't sell hardware they won't sell games. And that's the situation right now on the Wii U.

 

[elhav]

I don't think it's a good idea. Even if Nintendo have a hard time right now, they can always turn things around the next generation. To bail ship is simply to panic, instead of trying to improve or correct their past mistakes.

You can't know for sure what would happen if Nintendo goes third party. It might be good for some gamers,but it could be bad for Nintendo.

 

[BGBW]

Hey if Nintendo goes third party for Sony's console can Sony go third party for NIntendo's? Then I can play Last of Us with Joel dressed as Mario and Ellie as Luigi. That's the dream right there!

 

[HolyBaikal]

Nintendo should at least experiment with third party development for this first time in many, many years.
The last time they significantly did this was with the CD-i, but went badly because the games for the CD-i were very bad.

However, alongside consoles, SEGA supported the PC for years. I remember wanting the PC version of Sonic CD very badly as a child. As my dad had a work laptop that he let me use that was very powerful, and I didn't have any SEGA consoles.

Nintendo, however, hasn't really supported the PC since the third party Mario games like Mario is Missing on the PC. Unless you count Pokemon PC software.
We really don't know for certain how well Nintendo games would sell on third party systems unless Nintendo experimented with multiplatform support like SEGA did.

Instead of stopping making hardware entirely. Why not test the market and release a few titles for both other systems and their own?
This doesn't have to be an entirely one or the other thing. They can test other markets occassionally, while still focusing on their own hardware.

 

[Log4Girlz]

I don't necessarily want Nintendo to be a software only company, but I think the belief they'd sudden collapse and produce poor quality games is a belief rooted in nonsense and hysteria, from fans with a deep rooted and nonsensical loyalty to Nintendo the company and simply refuse to even humour the possibility of Nintendo focusing exclusively on software (ironic, all things considered). Nintendo is immensely functional as both a video game publisher and developer, and would retain just as much control and freedom over their projects while third party as they do with their own hardware. It's like some people believe Nintendo limiting themselves to software would turn them into EA overnight. They're a company already bound to shareholders. And a company that already does arguably ignore them and do their own thing, for better or worse. This would not change, and with the strength and brand recognition of their IPs I don't see any scenario where third party Nintendo wouldn't see tremendous sales success on borderline any platform under the sun.

What does concern me (and caused some nonsense knee jerk defensiveness on twitter) is Nintendo's relevancy in the home console space with their current hardware vision. I like Nintendo doing their own thing, but unsuccessful Nintendo is bad for every single party involved. It's bad for Nintendo, for obvious financial reasons. It pressures them to produce content faster, and more focused on sales. And this in turn has the potential to hurt the fanbase. Panic Nintendo sucks. Comfortable Nintendo is giving me two Mario Galaxy games and greenlighting shit like Sin & Punishment 2 and Xenoblade.

What I don't want is Nintendo to stick to their own home consoles for no other reason than stubbornness, when that stubbornness may be detrimental to growth of the company as a software producer and developer. My love for Nintendo hardware is not necessarily because of the hardware itself, but the software. That's what I love about Nintendo. They need to re-approach their position in the console space for their next system, and do so in drastic ways. If that doesn't mean becoming a third party publisher, and again I don't necessarily want or expect that to happen, it does mean they need to totally reassess what they're doing for hardware and work harder to ensure relevancy. Nintendo is a relevant software producer, but for the current generation they are an irrelevant hardware producer. The latter needs to change because the former will be affected by it.

Great post. I think Nintendo creating handhelds and focusing their console efforts on Xbone and PS4 would be wildly successful.

 

[MYE]

but I think the belief they'd sudden collapse and produce poor quality games is a belief rooted in nonsense and hysteria, from fans with a deep rooted and nonsensical loyalty to Nintendo the company

uh, really?

They wouldn't "collapse". But I'd be very damn confident in laying serious cash on the table, betting that they would steadily reduce themselves in terms of talent, variety, quantity and yes, quality in just a few years.
That nothing would change by removing hardware income and all the perks of being a platform holder from the equation, and gamers and Nintendo would reap nothing but wonderful, magical things from making PS4/Xone/PC games sounds to me straight out of a toddlers daydream.

 

[Saty]

Because:

1. I prefer games to be offered on multiple platforms as the developer sees fit instead of tying them down to push hardware. Content should adjust to the person's needs and wants, not the other way around. Thankfully, the world is slowly but surely moving into that mindset.

2. Nintendo is already losing money on the Wii U so they may need to cut down the fat.
3. They can switch the Wii U hardware team to their portable division. Also if the hybrid console idea materializes then they will be downsizing anyhow.

4. Attempts of innovation can be made per game rather than per console. The way it is now, Nintendo are betting an entire generation and entire console on some innovation
\gimmick that is 'baked in' the console. These attempts of innovation are largely untested, lack focus and aren't fully thought out of how to be used in future games. When things go bad, like with the Wii U, it becomes a ball and a chain wrapped around the console.

If Nintendo were to go 3rd party they could try to innovate per game and have each game completely designed to take advantage of that innovation instead of it being marginalized across a generation. The experiment didn't work? Then the loss is minimal and doesn't take down a whole console.

5. Why is the reason for them not to go 3rd party is a sole example 20 years ago in a totally different market? And were the quality of Nintendo's game suffer from the switch, the only bad light it will cast is upon them and the developers. There is no good justification why someone won't care about making as good games as before when the addressable market he has is x3 as big just because he doesn't have hardware to sell.