Anyone else see a rather disturbing pattern?

I'm beginning to see a rather disturbing pattern involving Nintendo and Third-Party Developers since the Nintendo 64. This pattern is Nintendo Turning-Off Third-Party Developers (resulting in lacking Third-Party Support).

Nintendo 64: Instead of using Discs (like Sony for the Playstation), Nintendo used Cartriges (which resulted in higher manufacturing costs and longer times to get the mass production of the games to end). Result: Most Third-Party developed for Sony's Playstation (leaving Nintendo with little Third-Party Support).

Gamecube: While Nintendo now used Discs (well Mini-Discs), they completely ignored Online-Multiplayer for the Gamecube (Online Multiplayer was very popular during that generation). Result: Lacking (yet somewhat better than the Nintendo 64) Third-Party Support and rather long droughts for games.

Wii: While Nintendo used Regular-Sized Discs and Online, the Online was somewhat lacking (with not so many Online Multiplayer games) and Nintendo decided to use slightly upgraded Gamecube engines (Last Gen Graphics for the most part). Result: No Multiplat games (which are subjectively amongst the best games of this gen yet)and a TON of shovelware (with a few gems here and there).

Could this pattern possibly continue for Nintendo's next console? Or am I being a bit of a Over-Thinker? Discuss.

Nintendo's pattern is being able to get away with mediocrity.ZumaJones07

[QUOTE="ZumaJones07"]Nintendo's pattern is being able to get away with mediocrity.gmc2u_64

Edit* I figured I needed to highlight the"most"in the quote.

[QUOTE="ZumaJones07"]Nintendo's pattern is being able to get away with mediocrity.gmc2u_64

Nintendo shouldn't be worried. They have a strong fan base that will follow them through thick and thin. If anything, nintendo took more risk than any other company by making the Wii. Obviously it payed off, and they deserve every penny of it.

The pattern is this: Nintendo were competing along the lines of hardware specs, and it didnt work (N64, GC). They made a few huge mistakes that lost them third party support. Unfortunately, they saw the only way of solving their problem in the Blue Ocean strategy - target casuals as well as the hardcore, not just ignore them or treat them like morons like everyone else does. Also, they had to make the console accessible to developers, in other words cheap to make games for, and cheap dev kits. Lower cost tech means greater profit, bringingmore developers onside. The announcement of Dragon Quest X among other exclusives to the Wii are examples of this, espesially since many of them have never been opn a Nintendo console before now.

Its been said many times now - If Nintendo had competed along the lines of the 360 and PS3, they would be totally stuffed. The Gamecube was 'hardcore' - but that still sold like crap and had poor support. So they had to take drastic measures. From a business point of view, it worked. From a gaming point of view, the jury is still out - but the third party support is at least improving, probably because more sales = more games. The Gamecube had terrible support because devs figured nobody would buy their games on the Gamecube, mainly because of low sales. The family friendly image alsoput devs off, which really didnt make sense given that the Gamecube was a landmark in attempting to remove the 'kiddy' tag. Every Resident Evil at the time was released for it, the first two mature titles published by Nintendo too - Geist and Eternal Darkness.

The problem is that once you lose that support, its damn near impossible to satisfy them enough to bring them back. They still make excuses like 'only Nintendo games succeed on Nintendo platforms'

I agree with the point that alot of the best games this gen turned out to be the multi-plat (PS3 & 360) games :?-Skatman-

Nintendo shouldn't be worried. They have a strong fan base that will follow them through thick and thin. If anything, nintendo took more risk than any other company by making the Wii. Obviously it payed off, and they deserve every penny of it.

StephenBassford

[QUOTE="-Skatman-"]I agree with the point that alot of the best games this gen turned out to be the multi-plat (PS3 & 360) games :?Ovirew

[QUOTE="gmc2u_64"]

[QUOTE="ZumaJones07"]Nintendo's pattern is being able to get away with mediocrity.Ovirew

[QUOTE="ZumaJones07"]Nintendo's pattern is being able to get away with mediocrity.gmc2u_64

[QUOTE="Ovirew"][QUOTE="gmc2u_64"] I don't get what you're saying. Are you saying that most of Nintendo's games (or something like that) are mediocre?

ZumaJones07

The pattern is this: Nintendo were competing along the lines of hardware specs, and it didnt work (N64, GC). They made a few huge mistakes that lost them third party support. Unfortunately, they saw the only way of solving their problem in the Blue Ocean strategy - target casuals as well as the hardcore, not just ignore them or treat them like morons like everyone else does. Also, they had to make the console accessible to developers, in other words cheap to make games for, and cheap dev kits. Lower cost tech means greater profit, bringingmore developers onside. The announcement of Dragon Quest X among other exclusives to the Wii are examples of this, espesially since many of them have never been opn a Nintendo console before now.

Its been said many times now - If Nintendo had competed along the lines of the 360 and PS3, they would be totally stuffed. The Gamecube was 'hardcore' - but that still sold like crap and had poor support. So they had to take drastic measures. From a business point of view, it worked. From a gaming point of view, the jury is still out - but the third party support is at least improving, probably because more sales = more games. The Gamecube had terrible support because devs figured nobody would buy their games on the Gamecube, mainly because of low sales. The family friendly image alsoput devs off, which really didnt make sense given that the Gamecube was a landmark in attempting to remove the 'kiddy' tag. Every Resident Evil at the time was released for it, the first two mature titles published by Nintendo too - Geist and Eternal Darkness.

The problem is that once you lose that support, its damn near impossible to satisfy them enough to bring them back. They still make excuses like 'only Nintendo games succeed on Nintendo platforms'

Quofan

[QUOTE="gmc2u_64"]

[QUOTE="ZumaJones07"]Nintendo's pattern is being able to get away with mediocrity.Ovirew

Ahh, I agree with you, for the most part. But can you really blame them? The generations where they did take risks in software (N64 and GC) were two of the worst the company had to face. Now that the Wii is the success it is, of course they are only going to make "safe" software. This is why, after a while, I was so disappointed with Galaxy 2. As much as I am looking forward to playing the game, Nintendo has fallen back on Mario, Zelda and Metroid - safe franchises that always seem to adhere to the conventions of that particular series.

I want Nintendo to start taking some risks. You know, Wind Waker or Pikmin or Geist type risks. Punch-Out was a step in the right direction for me, reimaging a series thats been dead since the SNES. But it, too, played it safe. Please, give me Pikmin 3 with its own innovations. Give me an F-Zero, Starfox, Kirby. A Fire Emblem that isnt a GC port? Mario RPG? There is the often rumoured no-show Kid Icarus. Wave Race. Pilot Wings. a New Yoshi game. Donkey Kong needs revising quick. Chibi Robo.

They could take any one of these and do something phenominal with it, but they havent. The hardcore cried out for Mario, Metroid and Zelda, and unfortunalely Nintendo is in appeasement mode.

When it comes to processing power and online gaming they are behind. When it comes to almost every other aspect, they are the industry leader or on equal footing.

I agree with the point that alot of the best games this gen turned out to be the multi-plat (PS3 & 360) games :?-Skatman-

The thing is that Nintendo seems to get away with not offering everything the other guys do: DVD playback, music, game ID's, online components to games that would be good with it, etc. This way when they do something unexpected, it's ten times better. Before Galaxy came out everyone thought Wii was just GC 1.5.ZumaJones07

[QUOTE="ZumaJones07"]The thing is that Nintendo seems to get away with not offering everything the other guys do: DVD playback, music, game ID's, online components to games that would be good with it, etc. This way when they do something unexpected, it's ten times better. Before Galaxy came out everyone thought Wii was just GC 1.5.JordanElek

Nintendo can get away with what they do because they are innovative.

Aside from online gaming and instrument controllers (Guitar Hero/Rock Band), the motion controls for the Wii is one of the biggest leaps in video game history (I consider the Power Glove sort of a failed attempt).

GTAIV is a joke compared to the Godfather on Wii. Graphics? Who gives a ****. I get to actually swing my controller when I'm smacking some dude's skull with a baseball bat.

Rev

Well, I would say that Online-gaming is more popular this generation, but Nintendo likes to do things differently than it's competiters....

IT's a long text but hope it's worth reading.

I think the Wii is where they took the bigger risks, when microsoft and sony announced their consoles everyone pretty much assumed X360 and PS3 would rule the market and that Nintendo would FAIL. Microsoft and Sony representatives kept saying "next gen Nintendo will give up on hardware, only their fan-base will buy their console, we don't even count them as competition".

Then Nintendo showed the motion controls and everyone kept thinking: they're gonna FAIL. Sony said they didn't care about it but in fact they implemented the sixaxis controls as a last minute answer.

The Wii was a risky ideia, every analyst said it was going to be Nintendo's last console.

Now that the Wii is the success it is, of course they are only going to make "safe" software.

I think you're talking about 3rd parties. Nintendo games look much better than the 3rd party titles (haven't played Conduit yet). They are the ones who make last-gen-looking games (because it's cheaper to portgames they already had for the PS2). They were taken by surprise with the Wii's success and came for the quick money. They saw Wii Sports and simply copied it flooding the market with their collections of minigames.

BTW, back in the Xbox vs PS2 vs GC era, the PS2 (the best selling console of that gen) had the worst hardware and was also full of i'm-here-for-your-money games and noone complained.Shrek: Super Party, Petz: Catz 2, Nickelodeon Party Blast, Konami Kids Playground: Alphabet Circus, Crazy Frog Racer 2, Without Warning.... omg, i think i've seen the same games with different titles on the wii :P

Here's a disturbing pattern instead:

NES - the gamepad -> the competition starts using gamepads instead ofjoysticks and keyboards as the default game controller

N64 - analogue joystick and rumble in controllers -> the competition starts using them too

Wii - motion controls -> the competition have already announced their motion controls

Well, I would say that Online-gaming is more popular this generation, but Nintendo likes to do things differently than it's competiters....

ChildOfGaming7

Nintendo's pattern is being able to get away from the mediocrity. I hope that they will not be appealing to 3rd party next gen. You know what it means to be appealing to 3rd party? It means 3 of the same consoles. I really don't like some certain other consoles this gen (i have a pc as a standard platform). If nintendo went that route as well with wii/ds this might have been the most boring gen evah!KungfuKitten

I'm beginning to see a rather disturbing pattern involving Nintendo and Third-Party Developers since the Nintendo 64. This pattern is Nintendo Turning-Off Third-Party Developers (resulting in lacking Third-Party Support).

Nintendo 64: Instead of using Discs (like Sony for the Playstation), Nintendo used Cartriges (which resulted in higher manufacturing costs and longer times to get the mass production of the games to end). Result: Most Third-Party developed for Sony's Playstation (leaving Nintendo with little Third-Party Support).

Gamecube: While Nintendo now used Discs (well Mini-Discs), they completely ignored Online-Multiplayer for the Gamecube (Online Multiplayer was very popular during that generation). Result: Lacking (yet somewhat better than the Nintendo 64) Third-Party Support and rather long droughts for games.

Wii: While Nintendo used Regular-Sized Discs and Online, the Online was somewhat lacking (with not so many Online Multiplayer games) and Nintendo decided to use slightly upgraded Gamecube engines (Last Gen Graphics for the most part). Result: No Multiplat games (which are subjectively amongst the best games of this gen yet)and a TON of shovelware (with a few gems here and there).

Could this pattern possibly continue for Nintendo's next console? Or am I being a bit of a Over-Thinker? Discuss.

Why will people still buy New Super Mario Bros. Wii even though it doesn't have online multiplayer?JordanElek

It's been more than two years, and we're still getting this, "lack of third-party support", jibber-jabber. If you want to play all the best third-party games, you shouldn't have bought a Wii.

lol WRONG, nintendos pattern is to be better then anyone eals

which they allready are o,o

and i still didnt see any of the other companys making better games then zelda OoT or Mario Galaxy...

[QUOTE="JordanElek"]Why will people still buy New Super Mario Bros. Wii even though it doesn't have online multiplayer?Ovirew

So for everything that Nintendo does "wrong," they do enough right to be very successful. I'd like to think they're smart enough to know when a feature (either in a console or a game) just isn't worth implementing. DVD playback, for example. That's entirely irrelevant to people today. Who doesn't have a DVD player? Seriously. As for online multiplayer, they claim they haven't been able to get it working well for NSMB Wii. They apparently feel that no online is better than barely functional online, that the frustration over no online wouldn't outweigh the frustration over bad online.

I don't think Nintendo has the mentality that "oh, we could put this in but let's not because people will buy it anyway." They have reasons for what they do, and they're usually pretty clear about what those are. Nintendo explained clearly before the Wii's release why they chose the hardware they did, they've explained why there's no HD capabilities, why there's no DVD player, etc. Sometimes they make the wrong decisions, sometimes they make the right ones, but they don't make those decisions flippantly.

Like I've said, I might've been over-thinking. But thanks for your opinions everybody!

[QUOTE="KungfuKitten"]Nintendo's pattern is being able to get away from the mediocrity. I hope that they will not be appealing to 3rd party next gen. You know what it means to be appealing to 3rd party? It means 3 of the same consoles. I really don't like some certain other consoles this gen (i have a pc as a standard platform). If nintendo went that route as well with wii/ds this might have been the most boring gen evah!gmc2u_64

Sorry Tell but nintendo just going do what makes them the most money.

I'm beginning to see a rather disturbing pattern involving Nintendo and Third-Party Developers since the Nintendo 64. This pattern is Nintendo Turning-Off Third-Party Developers (resulting in lacking Third-Party Support).

Nintendo 64: Instead of using Discs (like Sony for the Playstation), Nintendo used Cartriges (which resulted in higher manufacturing costs and longer times to get the mass production of the games to end). Result: Most Third-Party developed for Sony's Playstation (leaving Nintendo with little Third-Party Support).

Gamecube: While Nintendo now used Discs (well Mini-Discs), they completely ignored Online-Multiplayer for the Gamecube (Online Multiplayer was very popular during that generation). Result: Lacking (yet somewhat better than the Nintendo 64) Third-Party Support and rather long droughts for games.

Wii: While Nintendo used Regular-Sized Discs and Online, the Online was somewhat lacking (with not so many Online Multiplayer games) and Nintendo decided to use slightly upgraded Gamecube engines (Last Gen Graphics for the most part). Result: No Multiplat games (which are subjectively amongst the best games of this gen yet)and a TON of shovelware (with a few gems here and there).

Could this pattern possibly continue for Nintendo's next console? Or am I being a bit of a Over-Thinker? Discuss.

gmc2u_64

Gamecube: While Nintendo now used Discs (well Mini-Discs), they completely ignored Online-Multiplayer for the Gamecube (Online Multiplayer was very popular during that generation). Result: Lacking (yet somewhat better than the Nintendo 64) Third-Party Support and rather long droughts for games.

gmc2u_64