Is it time for Nintendo to go 3rd party?

  • 63 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for ryno1179
#1 Posted by Ryno1179 (182 posts) -

I know that this has been a debate for awhile but I was thinking about it and it might be the perfect time for them to reach a broader audience. I have been a Nintendo fan since the days of the NES and used to be against Nintendo making games for anything other then a Nintendo console but times have changed now. If Nintendo were to become just a software developer for both MS and Sony then they would get the gamers that don't want to buy a Nintendo console to play their games (Which is a lot of people) and they would get the Nintendo fans as well because they would buy either an Xbox or a Playstation. They would save money on R&D by no longer having to invest in making new hardware (Which has been lacking the last 2 generations anyway).

I myself am not impressed with the Wiiu and I bought mine at launch. They have lost all 3rd party support and now just 2 years in and they already announce they are working on a new system. Unfortunately for them I will not buy a Nintendo system at launch ever again. This new one will have to be mind blowing and knowing Nintendo it's just going to have some kind of controller gimmick and be underpowered.

So my question is why shouldn't they become just a software developer? At this point it seems like only the diehard fans are going to buy their products and moving into cell phones may bring in some new revenue but honestly what gamer plays cell phone games?

Avatar image for hrt_rulz01
#2 Posted by hrt_rulz01 (15604 posts) -

Even though I'm not the biggest Ninty fan, I don't want to see them stop making consoles... Less competition is never good.

Avatar image for so_hai
#3 Posted by so_hai (3485 posts) -

Why is it under-powered? Are the games not running properly, frame-rate problems, excessive loading, etc.?

They sell too much hardware to just throw that money away - if you were a shareholder, you would never suggest they do this.

Avatar image for ryno1179
#4 Posted by Ryno1179 (182 posts) -

@so_hai: It is underpowered when compared to their competitions machines. Plus Nintendo had a year leap over the other two and were outsold in a years time. Nintendo is not competitive anymore.

Avatar image for so_hai
#5 Posted by so_hai (3485 posts) -

@ryno1179: But you must have known that it was 'underpowered' when you bought it at launch. So why is this now a problem?

Avatar image for ryno1179
#6 Posted by Ryno1179 (182 posts) -

@so_hai said:

@ryno1179: But you must have known that it was 'underpowered' when you bought it at launch. So why is this now a problem?

I guess I was giving Nintendo the benefit of the doubt. They managed to catch lightning in a bottle with the Wii and I was kinda hoping they would do that again but now I realize for sure that Nintendo has no idea about gaming anymore. Sure they still make great games but their policy's and consoles suck. They really should make their games for other systems so everybody can enjoy them without having to adhere to their crap.

Avatar image for iandizion713
#7 Edited by iandizion713 (16025 posts) -

We go through this shat every single time with yall. Yall buy a Wii U and then complain about what it isnt and never has been. Stop living in the past. Nintendo makes the best games in the world. Wii U has awesome games, only reason no one is buying it is cause they either bought 3DS first and waiting on Wii U, dont have the money yet/waiting for cheaper price, or they just dont like Nintendo. This is nothing new, haters have always hated on Nintendo. Only reason Wii U is not selling like the Wii did is cause they dont have Guitar Hero, Rockband, Party Games, Casual games, etc. Casuals do not buy the same Nintendo games we love.

My favorite Wii games sold like garbage, Kirby's Epic Yarn was epic and barely made it to 2 million and its still at Wal-Mart trying. Kirby's Return to Dreamland sold 1.6 million. Were the fack were those 100 million Wii customers when we needed them most. You want to know the reason Wii U dont have epic games? Cause haters dont buy epic games. Fack the haters. We dont need them, and us Nintendo fans never will, we will continue to support Nintendo and buy the games we love with or without.

Avatar image for Bigboi500
#8 Posted by Bigboi500 (35550 posts) -

Nope.

Avatar image for juboner
#9 Posted by juboner (1183 posts) -

If this next console does not do well then maybe they should stick with portable systems. They wont go 3rd party this easily and they should not.

Avatar image for superbuuman
#10 Edited by superbuuman (6087 posts) -

No, less competition is never good. Sure I may rant negatively about Nintendo..still want a console from them. They may not be up to date with online gaming stuff...but stuff like DLCs they are doing it right/better. :P

Avatar image for xcazx
#11 Posted by xCaZx (82 posts) -

I don't really understand the gripes about the system being underpowered. Did you buy it thinking that it was going to go toe to toe with the X1 or PS4?

I love my Wii U and have had way more fun on it than I have with my PS4..that literally does nothing but collect dust.

I am not trying to say you don't have the right to complain about what you perceive as a problem. I personally didn't buy the Wii U for it to be some powerhouse machine..I have a PC that fills that role. I enjoy the Nintendo games...which are just good plain fun and its something I can enjoy with friends and family. I guess for me it just fills a different role in my household.

Avatar image for lamprey263
#12 Posted by lamprey263 (35012 posts) -

Yes, the only reason I see it being worth it to keep making consoles is that the console maker can profit off the hardware and make money from third parties who publish games for the system. Well, third parties aren't supporting Nintendo's console, nor are fans of Nintendo hardware supporting third party games when they're there (at least not for it to be worth it for those third parties). Nintendo can still profit from sale of first party games, but given a smaller userbase that's harder to do.

I think they'd stand to make a lot more money publishing their games on other platforms. I think their games are still popular, just not popular enough for everybody to spend that much on a system just to play their games. If however those same games were available to a much larger userbase of gamers on Xbox 360/One, PS3/PS4, and PC, man that next Mario Kart game or Legend of Zelda or Super Mario Bros game might stand to really make a pretty penny for Nintendo. Though, development costs might increase. Nintendo, taking on a publisher role, might have to figure out a solution for multiplatform development and/or start having to carefully coordinate with other studios.

I'm somewhat disappointed by the NX announcement myself. I figure Nintendo is making some right calls there but overall I think it'll end up being a losing battle. On the handheld end I think they're stronger, stronger than Sony is anyways. I think they should stop with home consoles and make their console games for Sony/MS/PC but still produce handheld systems with their own unique games and open for third parties to publish on.

Avatar image for YearoftheSnake5
#13 Posted by YearoftheSnake5 (9116 posts) -

This would make more sense in SW.

Avatar image for bundleofnumbers
#14 Posted by bundleofnumbers (103 posts) -

No

Avatar image for trevorzyla
#15 Posted by TrevorZyla (76 posts) -

I don't see Nintendo ever going third party, and if they do, this console generation or even next console generation seems way too early for them.

Avatar image for Jaysonguy
#16 Posted by Jaysonguy (39454 posts) -

@so_hai said:

Are the games not running properly, frame-rate problems, excessive loading, etc.?

Yes they're not running properly, frame rate problems all over the place, and loading times that are lengthy at best.

The longer this gen goes on for Nintendo the worse these problems are becoming for devs.

At first it was just third party who had trouble, now it's first party.

Avatar image for Madmangamer364
#17 Posted by Madmangamer364 (3716 posts) -
@ryno1179 said:

I know that this has been a debate for awhile but I was thinking about it and it might be the perfect time for them to reach a broader audience. I have been a Nintendo fan since the days of the NES and used to be against Nintendo making games for anything other then a Nintendo console but times have changed now. If Nintendo were to become just a software developer for both MS and Sony then they would get the gamers that don't want to buy a Nintendo console to play their games (Which is a lot of people) and they would get the Nintendo fans as well because they would buy either an Xbox or a Playstation. They would save money on R&D by no longer having to invest in making new hardware (Which has been lacking the last 2 generations anyway).

I myself am not impressed with the Wiiu and I bought mine at launch. They have lost all 3rd party support and now just 2 years in and they already announce they are working on a new system. Unfortunately for them I will not buy a Nintendo system at launch ever again. This new one will have to be mind blowing and knowing Nintendo it's just going to have some kind of controller gimmick and be underpowered.

So my question is why shouldn't they become just a software developer? At this point it seems like only the diehard fans are going to buy their products and moving into cell phones may bring in some new revenue but honestly what gamer plays cell phone games?

The problem I have with your theory is this: I don't think Nintendo would necessarily be reaching a truly broader audience by migrating their games to other platforms. Instead, what Nintendo would likely be doing is swapping one group of dedicated consumers for another that, albeit probably larger at this point, are even less proven to be very receptive to Nintendo's key offerings. Are players who primarily play online first-person shooters going to be thrilled to play a single player Super Mario game? Are die-hard Nintendo fans going to shell out $400+ to play their favorite Nintendo games once in a blue-moon on a non-Nintendo system that doesn't cater to their preferences the same? Questions like this have to be answered favorably in order for your idea of Nintendo being a third party developer to actually work.

The reason creating hardware for Nintendo has made sense is because the company has historically generated significant revenue from the hardware, even with a declining userbase for each new platform. Then, there was the Wii's breakout success, which was a major boon for the company in both hardware and software sales. Nintendo won't be able to replicate such success as a third party publisher, and it's uncertain if the company would be able to produce the same quality of software when dealing with hardware that's not its own. Sega has struggled heavily with its software strategy since the Dreamcast days, and it wouldn't surprise me that even with Nintendo's resume, it followed that suit.

Frankly, Nintendo isn't at the point where becoming software-only is the clear-cut best way to go, and as long as there's a chance of becoming Nintendo creating a mass market success again, the company should probably go for it. The one disadvantage is that with the ever-rising costs of hardware and software development, the pressure for Nintendo to create a successful console becomes greater each time, but that's no greater a risk than the company putting its eggs in another company's basket when its hardware policies become a game of Russian Roulette every five or so years.

Avatar image for ryno1179
#18 Posted by Ryno1179 (182 posts) -

@Madmangamer364 said:
@ryno1179 said:

I know that this has been a debate for awhile but I was thinking about it and it might be the perfect time for them to reach a broader audience. I have been a Nintendo fan since the days of the NES and used to be against Nintendo making games for anything other then a Nintendo console but times have changed now. If Nintendo were to become just a software developer for both MS and Sony then they would get the gamers that don't want to buy a Nintendo console to play their games (Which is a lot of people) and they would get the Nintendo fans as well because they would buy either an Xbox or a Playstation. They would save money on R&D by no longer having to invest in making new hardware (Which has been lacking the last 2 generations anyway).

I myself am not impressed with the Wiiu and I bought mine at launch. They have lost all 3rd party support and now just 2 years in and they already announce they are working on a new system. Unfortunately for them I will not buy a Nintendo system at launch ever again. This new one will have to be mind blowing and knowing Nintendo it's just going to have some kind of controller gimmick and be underpowered.

So my question is why shouldn't they become just a software developer? At this point it seems like only the diehard fans are going to buy their products and moving into cell phones may bring in some new revenue but honestly what gamer plays cell phone games?

The problem I have with your theory is this: I don't think Nintendo would necessarily be reaching a truly broader audience by migrating their games to other platforms. Instead, what Nintendo would likely be doing is swapping one group of dedicated consumers for another that, albeit probably larger at this point, are even less proven to be very receptive to Nintendo's key offerings. Are players who primarily play online first-person shooters going to be thrilled to play a single player Super Mario game? Are die-hard Nintendo fans going to shell out $400+ to play their favorite Nintendo games once in a blue-moon on a non-Nintendo system that doesn't cater to their preferences the same? Questions like this have to be answered favorably in order for your idea of Nintendo being a third party developer to actually work.

The reason creating hardware for Nintendo has made sense is because the company has historically generated significant revenue from the hardware, even with a declining userbase for each new platform. Then, there was the Wii's breakout success, which was a major boon for the company in both hardware and software sales. Nintendo won't be able to replicate such success as a third party publisher, and it's uncertain if the company would be able to produce the same quality of software when dealing with hardware that's not its own. Sega has struggled heavily with its software strategy since the Dreamcast days, and it wouldn't surprise me that even with Nintendo's resume, it followed that suit.

Frankly, Nintendo isn't at the point where becoming software-only is the clear-cut best way to go, and as long as there's a chance of becoming Nintendo creating a mass market success again, the company should probably go for it. The one disadvantage is that with the ever-rising costs of hardware and software development, the pressure for Nintendo to create a successful console becomes greater each time, but that's no greater a risk than the company putting its eggs in another company's basket when its hardware policies become a game of Russian Roulette every five or so years.

Actually I used to work in gaming retail for the last 12 years and there were a lot of consumers that wanted to play Nintendo games and didn't want to shell out the money for a Nintendo system to play them. If a gamer is going to pay $350 (Wiiu launch price) why wouldn't they pay $400 to be able to play all their favorite Nintendo games plus every other game that is released. Nintendo would only benefit from going 3rd party because if you think Mario Kart and Smash Bros sold a lot of copies on the Wiiu imagine how many would have sold if it was on Xbox One and PS4.

Nintendo is not SEGA so I don't understand the logic of their game quality all of a sudden declining because they are not working with some lame gimmicky controller. Like you even mentioned their fan base is in decline, so how many more people are willing to buy another Nintendo console? I'm not and I have been a fan since the NES days and bought each one on launch day.

Avatar image for Solaryellow
#19 Posted by Solaryellow (4061 posts) -

@iandizion713 said:

Stop living in the past. Nintendo makes the best games in the world. Wii U has awesome games, only reason no one is buying it is cause they either bought 3DS first and waiting on Wii U, dont have the money yet/waiting for cheaper price, or they just dont like Nintendo. This is nothing new, haters have always hated on Nintendo. Only reason Wii U is not selling like the Wii did is cause they dont have Guitar Hero, Rockband, Party Games, Casual games, etc. Casuals do not buy the same Nintendo games we love.

First off, Nintendo needs to stop living in the past. This company doesn't act like a console developer in the year 2015. Saying they don't have the money is bunk. In excess of 30 million people had the money to purchase the more expensive competition. The Wii U is not selling because we are still being treated like children. You can't talk to people during games, online MP is absent in games where it would work perfectly, big named third party games are not available, apps and use beyond games are practically zero, etc..,

Avatar image for iandizion713
#20 Edited by iandizion713 (16025 posts) -

@Solaryellow: And yet they still have some of the best games without all those gimmicks. I play Mario Kart vs the whole world without facing a language barrier. Kids and adults can safely enjoy the games on or off-line. 3rd party not coming to Nintendo is not their fault, even when Wii was the best selling console they still hide their good games from Nintendo fans. Why make a game on Nintendo when you can go to a console that has no games?

Avatar image for Jaysonguy
#21 Edited by Jaysonguy (39454 posts) -

@iandizion713 said:

3rd party not coming to Nintendo is not their fault

it's 100% their fault, go learn about the company before you start talking

Avatar image for Solaryellow
#22 Posted by Solaryellow (4061 posts) -

@iandizion713

The "best games" position is a red herring. Of course Nintendo makes great games but that is an opinion that can't be proven right or wrong and really has nothing to do with the discussion. The bottom line is that many people are choosing to spend the higher coin on the competition. Simple implementation in today's games (voice chat, online mp, etc..,) is not being utilized as we'd all expect from a console in 2015. Practically non existent third party support is the fault of Nintendo. This problem has gone way back to the GCN and stayed relatively flat through subsequent systems. If this was the first console suffering from such an affliction I'd agree the fault should not be on the shoulders of Nintendo. Unfortunately that isn't the case since it goes some fourteen years back.

Avatar image for iandizion713
#23 Edited by iandizion713 (16025 posts) -

@Solaryellow: So why was Wii such a success in your opinion? What made it sell so good?

Avatar image for pimphand_gamer
#24 Posted by PimpHand_Gamer (2609 posts) -

They need to keep positioning the release of their new consoles at about the 3rd year after MS and Sony, this keeps them in the middle of those lifespans with the ability to bring in some fresh hardware without risking being too close to another launch from the other 2.

@iandizion713 said:

@Solaryellow: So why was Wii such a success in your opinion? What made it sell so good?

Simplicity, marketed towards the entire family and the uniqueness of being physically active. Let's face it, the workout games and aerobic stepper helped sell a lot of systems in a short time span.

Avatar image for iandizion713
#25 Edited by iandizion713 (16025 posts) -

@pimphand_gamer: True, Wii games werent really any more special for me as Wii U ones are. I have enjoyed my Wii U games more then my Wii games. Only thing Wii U is missing are those odd party/fitness games. Nintendo told us they wanted to go more hardcore and im glad they did. I think my favorite Wii U games will sell as good or better then Wii ones.

Avatar image for Megavideogamer
#26 Posted by Megavideogamer (6368 posts) -

If Nintendo next console the Nintendo NX. Fails and flops badly after it's release. Then Nintendo should go third party. Nintendo is also teaming up with DeNa to make games for Smartphones. But this will be the real reason that Nintendo goes third party. The plan is that these future smartphone games will inspire people to buy the Nintendo Handheld and Home system versions of these mobile games.

Nintendo has made the fatal mistake of the super casual Blue Ocean Non gamer people will be inspired to go out and buy the Nintendo NX and the next Nintendo portable gaming system. As well as the New 3DS and the Wii U. Both of these should be fading once the NX hit's store shelves in 2017/2018. The people who play games on Smartphones and tablets are Not Ever, Going to even consider buying a Nintendo Handheld gaming system on top of there $500.00 iPhone 7 or 8 (whatever the number is at in 2017/18) or Samsung Galaxy 7/8. Same with iPad and android tablets.

Nintendo's move to mobile is destined to fail. The Blue Ocean casual people are not true gamers and are Never going to buy a Nintendo Handheld/Home system in addition to their iPhone and iPad. or Android counterparts. iPhones/iPads/Android etc are expensive. But People do not see the real cost of the latest iPhone/tablet/iPad/Smartphone. Those are really $500.00/$600.00 devices. There is no chance that the Blue Ocean Smartphone people who are content playing Flappy Bird and Candy Crush and all of those Free to play Throw a way games are going to spend another $300.00 or so for a Nintendo product.

Nintendo has 1 last chance to prove themselves in the Home console market. As for the Portable/handheld gaming market which Nintendo has ruled since 1989-2015 going into mobile gaming has meant that they have just shot themselves in the head. This will prove to be the real reason Nintendo goes 3rd Party and eventually Dies. In 15 more years Nintendo will be Extinct. By 2030 The Big N will be no more.

Going 3rd party will not work out for Nintendo.

Avatar image for jcrame10
#27 Posted by jcrame10 (4155 posts) -

@Jaysonguy: i still dont understand why they never patched that glitch and long loading time in in the loading screens for DKC: Tropical Freeze.

Avatar image for jcrame10
#28 Posted by jcrame10 (4155 posts) -

@iandizion713: online multiplayer and voice chat is a gimmick? lol

Maybe third parties would have put their games on Wii if the Wii was able to handle the games. You really think the Wii, which does SD not HD, could have handled games the size of Infamous or GTA or Skyrim or Fallout or Demon's Souls.....there's nothing on Wii (and currently, nothing on Wii U, we will see with X and Zelda), that is the size of those games.

Avatar image for iandizion713
#29 Edited by iandizion713 (16025 posts) -

@jcrame10: on certain games, yes, it is a gimmick. Also, yes, Wii could have handled games, just like it handled Black Ops etc. Wouldnt have been same graphic quality, but would have still worked. Same way PC games get downgraded to Xbox and Playstation.

Avatar image for jcrame10
#30 Posted by jcrame10 (4155 posts) -

@iandizion713: the Wii could literally never run a game the same calibre of GTA4 or Skyrim

Avatar image for iandizion713
#31 Edited by iandizion713 (16025 posts) -

@jcrame10: What about GTA San Andreas or Morrowind or even Oblivion? Could they run on the Wii?

Avatar image for Collie_Lover
#32 Posted by Collie_Lover (952 posts) -

@ryno1179:

I am completely skeptical of anyone that says they are a Nintendo fan, but thinks Nintendo controllers are gimmicks. That is a particularly venomous insult to Nintendo and/or their consoles. If you were previously a Nintendo fan, what has really changed is you. Your tastes have changed, and you don't want to play Nintendo games on Nintendo consoles anymore. Fine. What are gamers who want to play games with Wii Remotes and Gamepads to do if all of the consoles are identical with traditional controllers only? Anyone that wants this is being selfish insisting that everyone must game the same way. What Wii U games have you played? You seem to be more interested in 3rd party games than Nintendo games. Why not just play your 3rd party games on the PC twins instead of wishing Nintendo would quit making consoles? (sarcasm) I have a good idea...why not just have one console maker and be at the mercy of whatever price they want to charge ($700) for the console, and have $100 video games?

Avatar image for Shmiity
#33 Posted by Shmiity (6099 posts) -

I no longer give a **** about Nintendo Home consoles. I won't be buying the next one. Please go third party. I wouldnt buy a Ubisoft console to play Ubisoft games, why do I keep buying Nintendo consoles for Nintendo games? Im done doing that.

Avatar image for iandizion713
#34 Posted by iandizion713 (16025 posts) -

@Shmiity: I agree, why would you buy a Nintendo console to play 3rd Party when their is PC, Xbox, and PS4 that can play 3rd Party.

Avatar image for so_hai
#35 Edited by so_hai (3485 posts) -

@Jaysonguy said:

@so_hai said:

Are the games not running properly, frame-rate problems, excessive loading, etc.?

Yes they're not running properly, frame rate problems all over the place, and loading times that are lengthy at best.

The longer this gen goes on for Nintendo the worse these problems are becoming for devs.

At first it was just third party who had trouble, now it's first party.

Can anyone else out there confirm this? It's the first I've heard of this happening since the unit's release.

Avatar image for superbuuman
#36 Edited by superbuuman (6087 posts) -

@so_hai said:

@Jaysonguy said:

@so_hai said:

Are the games not running properly, frame-rate problems, excessive loading, etc.?

Yes they're not running properly, frame rate problems all over the place, and loading times that are lengthy at best.

The longer this gen goes on for Nintendo the worse these problems are becoming for devs.

At first it was just third party who had trouble, now it's first party.

Can anyone else out there confirm this? It's the first I've heard of this happening since the unit's release.

Could be referring to Xenoblade X?..the devs did suggest to get the digital version (install on HDD) ...rather than disc version because of long load times (how long dunno, if its as long as Lego City or longer that'd be bad)..they have solution for disc but no idea what it was....would have thought it'd be to install portion of it HDD like PS3? :P

Here

Avatar image for magmadragoonx4
#37 Posted by magmadragoonx4 (580 posts) -

Dreamcast life was about this long and about twice as many sold.

Avatar image for iandizion713
#38 Posted by iandizion713 (16025 posts) -

@magmadragoonx4: Dreamcast sold 10.6 million.

Avatar image for iandizion713
#39 Edited by iandizion713 (16025 posts) -

@so_hai: Only thing i can confirm is some complained about loading time when returning to Wii U menu, but these problems were fixed in an update pretty quick. Tropical Freeze had a kinda long load screen after completing the first level and people started spreading rumors it was like that for every level, but it was false.

Avatar image for so_hai
#40 Edited by so_hai (3485 posts) -

@iandizion713: Thanks -- I suspected that these complaints were over-stated by people with an axe to grind.

Avatar image for YearoftheSnake5
#41 Posted by YearoftheSnake5 (9116 posts) -

@so_hai said:

Can anyone else out there confirm this? It's the first I've heard of this happening since the unit's release.

Many 3rd party games have framerate issues. Mass Effect 3, Deus Ex: HR, Assassin's Creed IV, Batman: Arkham City, ZombiU, and others all have framerate problems. I have encountered very rare framerate drops in Wind Waker HD and Super Mario 3D World, too. Load times vary between games and I don't see anything consistent in that arena. However, the OS load times are absolutely inexcusable. There is no reason, none, as to why the system can't bring up fairly simple menus faster than it can. I shouldn't have to wait in the ballpark of 10 sec for the settings menu to load. The OS doesn't seem very well designed.

Avatar image for Solaryellow
#42 Posted by Solaryellow (4061 posts) -

@iandizion713

You sound like someone who works at Nintendo with all of the excuses being made for this console. I'd find myself in complete agreement if you stated the Wii U wasn't doing well because either people don't like Nintendo products or gamers are not finding value in the product. Saying people don't have the money is completely shattered when you look at how many consoles the competition sold AFTER the Wii U was released.

For all extensive purposes the Wii U is a great system....for a Nintendo system that is. Compared to the others though, it is highly lacking. Opinion on games is completely subjective but I happen to agree Nintendo makes some fabulous games. In terms of software, Nintendo could successfully polish a turd and make it into something wonderful.

Why did the Wii sell? It was a cheap shot-in-the-dark that appealed to people who normally wouldn't sit behind a gaming console. Although it sold very well, it died off relatively fast. Some of that had to do with saturation, some had to do with competition and some had to do with Nintendo ending support early. Nintendo alienated its core support and now it is desperately trying to get it back at all costs but people seem to be holding a grudge. What Nintendo does is tell you, the gamer, what you want in a system. People are asking for more social interaction, more connectivity, more third party games yet Nintendo still does what it wants. If the shot callers thought they could produce a game (that would sell millions) where you were a snowman riding a unicorn who had to catch cheerios on the unicorn's horn, all while being controlled by two spoons, they would do it. You don't see them doing anything when it comes to quality third party games though. Nearly all of the great third party games I've played in the past few years completely detoured Nintendo. That's a shame.

Avatar image for Sphensen
#43 Posted by Sphensen (1168 posts) -

I like Nintendo for being different and hate them for not being like the rest

Avatar image for YearoftheSnake5
#44 Posted by YearoftheSnake5 (9116 posts) -

@Solaryellow said:

@iandizion713

You don't see them doing anything when it comes to quality third party games though. Nearly all of the great third party games I've played in the past few years completely detoured Nintendo. That's a shame.

Indeed, and it's 100% Nintendo's fault. They made an underpowered box with a unique architecture that isn't port friendly. Developers look to build their project and deploy on as many platforms as they can with as few changes as possible. Not because they're lazy, but out of financial necessity. The Wii U isn't built for that sort of thing.

Avatar image for Collie_Lover
#45 Posted by Collie_Lover (952 posts) -

@YearoftheSnake5:

Can I politely say that the belief, "3rd party developers can't make games for the Wii U because it is underpowered" just doesn't make sense to me when they can still make games for the underpowered PS3 and Xbox 360? Maybe your right about unique architecture that isn't port friendly. I don't know, I am not knowledgeable about programming. Maybe other third party developers should talk to Ubisoft because they are smart enough to make games for multiple consoles.

Avatar image for Madmangamer364
#46 Posted by Madmangamer364 (3716 posts) -

@ryno1179 said:

Actually I used to work in gaming retail for the last 12 years and there were a lot of consumers that wanted to play Nintendo games and didn't want to shell out the money for a Nintendo system to play them. If a gamer is going to pay $350 (Wiiu launch price) why wouldn't they pay $400 to be able to play all their favorite Nintendo games plus every other game that is released. Nintendo would only benefit from going 3rd party because if you think Mario Kart and Smash Bros sold a lot of copies on the Wiiu imagine how many would have sold if it was on Xbox One and PS4.

Nintendo is not SEGA so I don't understand the logic of their game quality all of a sudden declining because they are not working with some lame gimmicky controller. Like you even mentioned their fan base is in decline, so how many more people are willing to buy another Nintendo console? I'm not and I have been a fan since the NES days and bought each one on launch day.

If you've worked at gaming retail for the last 12, you should have noticed two things that creates conflict with what you're saying:

1. Not a lot of people paid $350 for the Wii U. It was only selling at that price for about a year, and not particularly well at that. Heck, most people also found paying $250 for the 3DS to be too much for their blood, so it's still far from a certainty that Nintendo fans will want to pay $400+ for a non-Nintendo platform. By the way, I don't consider the Mario Kart and Smash Bros. installments on the Wii U to be that successful at all when considering the history of those two franchises, and even if they WERE on the Xbox One and PS4, I strongly doubt they would have been as successful as the prior DS/Wii games were at the end of the day.

2. Nintendo hardware, when done right, can still be more than relevant on the market. Given that Nintendo sold over 250 million units of hardware through the DS and Wii, it's proof that Nintendo can still offer something very compelling to consumers with their systems, not just the games. The benefits are greater for Nintendo if it can sell its own hardware along with the games that complement their visions, not being confined to the different animals that are the other consoles and their markets.

I never said anything about a gimmicky controller, but that doesn't mean I don't think Nintendo's game quality and direction would be at a risk of being compromised if it went third party all of a sudden. For starters, the company would be trying to deal with two different console architectures that it hasn't worked with from the ground-up for the first time. Scheduling would probably be a bigger factor, making sure two versions of the same game are released at once and at the same quality. There's also the matter of Nintendo not instantly having the attention of a console's entire installed base, which is almost always the case on Nintendo platforms, and that means working a way around all of the massively-hyped AAA games on the market in order to ensure the success of its own games. There are a number of things -freedoms, if you will- Nintendo would have to give on being a third party publishers, and if there's one thing gaming publishers and developers don't seem to like nowadays, it's having less freedom.

Avatar image for YearoftheSnake5
#47 Edited by YearoftheSnake5 (9116 posts) -

@Collie_Lover said:

Can I politely say that the belief, "3rd party developers can't make games for the Wii U because it is underpowered" just doesn't make sense to me when they can still make games for the underpowered PS3 and Xbox 360? Maybe your right about unique architecture that isn't port friendly. I don't know, I am not knowledgeable about programming. Maybe other third party developers should talk to Ubisoft because they are smart enough to make games for multiple consoles.

It's underpowered enough to make porting games more complicated than it should. The Metro Last Light developer came and flat-out said that the system has a "slow, horrible CPU". Metro was released on last, and current gen systems, but not Wii U. More recently, we have Resident Evil Revelations 2, which didn't come to Wii U because of the extra work it would have took to port it over

The audience isn't really there for many of those types of games anyway. Nintendo has built a box that caters so exclusively to its audience that outputting something other than its core franchises tends to result in failure. Look to Bayonetta 2 on this. Despite being a phenomenal game, sales were absolutely abysmal. The product quality was top notch, but the audience wasn't there to buy the game. 3rd parties notice this and aren't about to spend the money trying to make their games work on a system that they'll never see a return on.

3rd party developers have had questionable offerings since day 1. Releasing a gimped product makes no sense and leaves me wondering why they bothered at all. In the end, this comes down to Nintendo too. They should have been more proactive in approaching 3rd parties, giving them what they want, and creating an environment where they can easily realize their projects without having to jump through flaming hoops. If the Wii U has proven anything, it's that Nintendo needs 3rd parties. They need that broad audience.

Avatar image for MirkoS77
#48 Edited by MirkoS77 (12914 posts) -

Will never happen. Ever. Nintendo is proud, elitist and arrogant to a fault. They view the other two console makers as inferior and far beneath them. It would be unthinkable for them to lower themselves to such status, at least with this current leadership. They would view such an action as dishonorable and a concession of defeat. It's largely a cultural thing.

I'm fully convinced they'd sooner choose to go under and take all their properties with them. I believe they've even said so.

Avatar image for nintendoboy16
#49 Posted by nintendoboy16 (34372 posts) -

Even if it was "the time," they're better off pulling out of the industry. Sorry, but the way things are going, it seems the industry may no longer have a place for them. Add the fact that the audiences for Nintendo games AREN'T there on PS/XBOX/PC, plus Ninty risks a downfall.

Avatar image for MirkoS77
#50 Posted by MirkoS77 (12914 posts) -

@nintendoboy16 said:

Even if it was "the time," they're better off pulling out of the industry. Sorry, but the way things are going, it seems the industry may no longer have a place for them. Add the fact that the audiences for Nintendo games AREN'T there on PS/XBOX/PC, plus Ninty risks a downfall.

I don't know about that. I'm sure there are many PS/One owners out there who want Nintendo games but can't justify the system's cost just to be able to play them. In addition, if Nintendo no longer produced systems, where do you think their players would migrate to? They'd follow the games. Nintendo's then lost nothing.