Would it?I doubt that myself.Going multiplatform would lead to
1.Massively increased game budgets due to having to develop for multiple platforms at once
2.Developing for multiple platforms at once would require more staff leading to higher overheads
2.Having to pay a licencing fee for every game to Sony,MS,Valve etc
All that with absolutely no guarantee of increased sales.Think about it.Who buys Nintendo games?Nintendo fans.If they went multiplatform then there would more than likely be around the same number of fans buying the games as there is now so whats the incentive
OT:The words "gamer entitlement" have been thrown around a lot lately but this is a perfect example of it
"I want to play Nintendo games but I don't want to buy a Nintendo console.Therefore they should cater to my desires and release all their games on the system I own"
I bought a Wii but got rid of it because it was a babies toy. I only played Zelda on it. I would love to play a Mario game but i'm not wasting space under my tv with an under-powered console.
Because they're under the delusion that they'd still get Nintendo games of the same quality and variety. They're under the delusion that they'd ever see Starfox or F-Zero again. That they'd ever see Fire Emblem or Golden Sun or Sin and Punsihment. Hell, even Metroid isn't a guarantee.
You think there's a lot of Mario now? Wait'll there's nothing else.
Being a part of the NINTENDO DEFENSE FORCE! I am now going to poke the logic in all of these arguements.
Desert Punk said:
The Wii and WiiU are substandard gaming machines, and a number of people would like to see them just quit making shitty console hardware and focus on making games for the other platforms. Handhelds being the obvious exception.
Right, because, as we all know, the PS1 and PS2 were the hardware kings of the industry! ... Wait, what's that? The PS1 was substandard compared to the Nintendo 64, and the PS2 was substandard compared to the Gamecube and Xbox, and the only reason it did so well was because 3rd companies actually tried to make good games with what they had? You don't say...
I actually answered that further along in my post:
For some reason or another, they simply kept screwing over the Wii, and as a result, people stopped buying 3rd Party games on the Wii. Meanwhile, the third best selling game on the WiiU is a game made by a 3rd party that decided to put all of the love and attention on it they could, ZombiU. Also, the best third party, multi-platform game on the Wii is Guitar Hero 3, a game that is almost exactly the same as Guitar Hero 3 on the 360 or the PS3.
I have no idea why they didn't try to take advantage of how successful the Wii was, although I think it's because of the Mandatory Motion Controls and the general dislike third parties have with Nintendo (Ever since the N64 days).
Worgen said:
I disagree, Nintendo has some of the most valuable IPs around and I think the idea of them going multiplatform would bump the stock price to new heights.
I have to disagree. The fact that Nintendo's stocks are shakey from the poor first year of the 3DS, coupled with the poor WiiU sales, proves that Hardware is very important to stock brokers involving the Nintendo. If Nintendo goes third party, expect their stocks to plummet, and plummet hard.
I disagree, I think while if nindendo did go software only their stocks would take a hit, I don't think it would be much of one and it wouldn't last long. RIght now the biggest hurtle to nintendo games is that they are limited to nintendo systems, without that limit they could be breaking cod numbers easily. I still don't want to see Nintendo have to leave the console makers market but my point is that if they did they would probably be even more successful.
People want to be "right" about Nintendo being DOOOOOOMED all these years and not have to actually lose one of the companies that doesn't engage in anti-consumer practices or boringly safe game design.
That want Nintendo to be "punished" (for... reasons). But not too badly.
At least some. Most have the obvious reason: want the games, but not the console. Just add layers of "they BETRAYED hardcores" to make it sound like more than that.
As for the whole "they made an underpowered console" thing, that's just hardcore gamer's love of revisionist history at work, conveniently ignoring that the last 3 generations have not been won by the most powerful machine.
I disagree, I think while if nindendo did go software only their stocks would take a hit, I don't think it would be much of one and it wouldn't last long. RIght now the biggest hurtle to nintendo games is that they are limited to nintendo systems, without that limit they could be breaking cod numbers easily. I still don't want to see Nintendo have to leave the console makers market but my point is that if they did they would probably be even more successful.
This might be true but them by that same logic Sony, MS and basically every publisher ever would make more money by putting their games on every console. And correct me if I'm wrong but I believe that Mario was still 2nd best seller overall last gen, next to CoD, despite being only on nintendo consoles. My point being that, love it or hate it, Nintendo made a TON of money off the wii and its games.
Again I could be wrong but didn't Sony and MS LOSE money on the PS360? I'd be more beneficial for them to have their games on Wii U than the other way around.
Nintendo is under scrutiny by the gaming community by virtue of being the oldest of the big 3 and also because they are continually making 'odd' decisions with their hardware that many 'core' gamer seem to find weird. I prefer that though... I would rather see a new iteration of a console be different from its predecessor than have played GameCube2 in wii's place or something like that. I've been a console gamer for about 3 generations now and I'm already sick of seeing better graphics as being touted as a selling point for a next generation. It was justifiable before, when everything was still noticeably blocky, but now not so much. Last gen was HD enough for me. Let's see what else we can do but keep the traditional controllers an option.
RIght now the biggest hurtle to nintendo games is that they are limited to nintendo systems, without that limit they could be breaking cod numbers easily.
Mario Kart Wii - 33.75m
Wii Sports Resort - 31.67m
Wii Play - 28.73m
New Super Mario Bros Wii - 26.92m
Wii Fit - 22.75
Wii Fit Plus - 21.20m
New Super Mario Bros DS - 29.18m
Nintendogs - 24.52m
Mario Kart DS - 22.53m
Brain Age - 20.03m
That's 10 games on the Wii and DS that did CoD numbers.I didn't even bother to list the other 24 Wii,DS and 3DS titles that each sold between 5m and 18m copies.They seem to be doing ok without going multiplatform if you ask me
Edit:Changed 31 to 24.I mistakenly included several games not published by Nintendo
I disagree, I think while if nindendo did go software only their stocks would take a hit, I don't think it would be much of one and it wouldn't last long. RIght now the biggest hurtle to nintendo games is that they are limited to nintendo systems, without that limit they could be breaking cod numbers easily. I still don't want to see Nintendo have to leave the console makers market but my point is that if they did they would probably be even more successful.
This might be true but them by that same logic Sony, MS and basically every publisher ever would make more money by putting their games on every console. And correct me if I'm wrong but I believe that Mario was still 2nd best seller overall last gen, next to CoD, despite being only on nintendo consoles. My point being that, love it or hate it, Nintendo made a TON of money off the wii and its games.
Again I could be wrong but didn't Sony and MS LOSE money on the PS360? I'd be more beneficial for them to have their games on Wii U than the other way around.
Nintendo is under scrutiny by the gaming community by virtue of being the oldest of the big 3 and also because they are continually making 'odd' decisions with their hardware that many 'core' gamer seem to find weird. I prefer that though... I would rather see a new iteration of a console be different from its predecessor than have played GameCube2 in wii's place or something like that. I've been a console gamer for about 3 generations now and I'm already sick of seeing better graphics as being touted as a selling point for a next generation. It was justifiable before, when everything was still noticeably blocky, but now not so much. Last gen was HD enough for me. Let's see what else we can do but keep the traditional controllers an option.
Really the only thing exclusives give is a slightly lower dev cost since you only have to code for one piece of hardware, and the console maker pays for them. Other than that they exist to sell consoles. Out of all 3 Nintendo is really the only one who really develops a lot of titles themselves, sony and ms have some dev houses under their banner but most of them aren't really owned by the console maker.
RIght now the biggest hurtle to nintendo games is that they are limited to nintendo systems, without that limit they could be breaking cod numbers easily.
Mario Kart Wii - 33.75m
Wii Sports Resort - 31.67m
Wii Play - 28.73m
New Super Mario Bros Wii - 26.92m
Wii Fit - 22.75
Wii Fit Plus - 21.20m
New Super Mario Bros DS - 29.18m
Nintendogs - 24.52m
Mario Kart DS - 22.53m
Brain Age - 20.03m
That's 10 games on the Wii and DS that did CoD numbers.I didn't even bother to list the other 24 Wii,DS and 3DS titles that each sold between 5m and 18m copies.They seem to be doing ok without going multiplatform if you ask me
Edit:Changed 31 to 24.I mistakenly included several games not published by Nintendo
as much as nintendo games do things right, modding would cause those games to skyrocket, nintendo has such a hard time adding proper depth to games that mods would be able to do, not to mention all the tweaks games would get.
plus all the people that go insane over the 3D pokemon games people have tried to make FTP over the years on the computer, but nintendo shuts them down every time...-_-
fucking nintendo, there is a reason why big ass projects like those pop up.
as much as nintendo games do things right, modding would cause those games to skyrocket, nintendo has such a hard time adding proper depth to games that mods would be able to do, not to mention all the tweaks games would get.
plus all the people that go insane over the 3D pokemon games people have tried to make FTP over the years on the computer, but nintendo shuts them down every time...-_-
fucking nintendo, there is a reason why big ass projects like those pop up.
And yet, Nintendo hasn't shut down the extensive modding community for Super Smash Bros Brawl (Brawl+ and Brawl- in addition to all of the MUGEN-like character hacks), or the incredibly-obvious-they-even-emailed-Nintendo-to-use-it Mother 3 translation, or the translation patch for Fire Emblem: New Mystery of the Emblem. Fire Emblem in general has a thriving community of ROM hacks. There are online battle sims like ShoddyBattle for Pokemon that haven't been taken down either. I think Nintendo just opposes Pokemon MMOs and 3D games because they are just too similar to the actual games for Nintendo to be comfortable with them, but I've seen ROM hacks all over the place of Ruby/Sapphire/Emerald. Nintendo will never be as open to mods as Bethesda or pre-EA Bioware, but the company still attracts a certain number of enthusiasts.
That said, Nintendo has never really been aiming towards older, tech-savvy gamers, but have always aimed for being family-friendly. Kids do not pay attention to the "story" of Pokemon, nor do they care about the intricacies of the battle system. They only care that it's a portable adventure with lots of cool creatures that allows them to have material to socialize over with their friends. Many older parents have no idea how the Wii controller works, only that Wii Sports more or less copies their actions and makes the controls easy to grasp. A lot of people in the older generation have no idea how to control something using dual analog, and they don't know what to do with all those buttons. By comparison, the Wii controller is intuitive to someone who hasn't play videogames before because it's so simple by design. This particular market probably has no idea what a mod even is.
Now, I wouldn't mind if Nintendo did become more mod friendly, but their design philosophy revolves around an intimate understanding of their own console's capabilities.
Because I really can't justify a console purchase for Pikmin 3 and Pikmin 3 only... After I see the waste of money the Wii and its games were (for me because I rarely play them) I'm not making that mistake again.
To Answer The Thread Title: Because many people really like Nintendo's games but view their hardware as subpar. If Nintendo went multiplatform, those people wouldn't have to buy hardware which they don't want to play the games which they do want.
To Answer The OP: I don't exactly see where you're getting the "Their Games Would Be Better" argument, as I've never seen it mentioned. As for your counterarguments...please do some research. Not only would Sony/Microsoft/EA have no influence over Nintendo's games as Nintendo would mostly likely still be publishing its own games, but Sonic 2006 was given the green-light by Sega, original owners of the Sonic the Hedgehog license. I can understand your concern for worrying about your favorite games, but the conclusions you are jumping to are a bit astronomical.
On the (subjectively) bright side, Nintendo got so much yen from selling Wii units that they may as well be financially secure for the next 4-8 years. Nintendo is not going anywhere or changing its practices, at least in this new console cycle.
-So you never seen the "Nintendo games would look better on another console" argument? That was the only thing I saw when complaining about the Wii on gaming threads or gaming sites.
-God, making me do this.
Kikizo: I am not sure about the extent of your personal involvement in the new Sonic on Xbox 360 and PS3, but you must be aware of the issues the game has in terms of glitches, control problems and loading time. One thing a lot of customers have been asking is, how these issues can be in the final product, is there anything you can comment on in relation to this, for example the QA [testing] process of development?
Ogawa: The reason why we probably ended up with what we see today, involves a lot of reasons. One is that we did want to launch the title around Christmas, and we had the PS3 launch coming up, but we had to develop for Microsoft's 360 at the same time and the team had an awful lot of pressure on them. It was very hard for the team to try and see how we were going to come out with both versions together with just the one team. It was a big challenge.
And if you have noticed it or not, Microsoft is not a big fan of a long term investment. If Nintendo games do not make the numbers that CoD does in the first month, they would demand changes. So then the quality of Nintendo games would change and not for the better. I mean really, you believe sony and microsoft hardly do any colorful games anymore. It's all super serious, dark tones, and "mature" gaming now for them.
Because I really can't justify a console purchase for Pikmin 3 and Pikmin 3 only... After I see the waste of money the Wii and its games were (for me because I rarely play them) I'm not making that mistake again.
Don't get me wrong. I too see it as terrible to force a consumer to make a huge purchase for a single product. But at the end of the day that is what a major portion of people do as well. You know, Halo fans play Halo mostly and purchased an Xbox for that alone. Same for Metal Gear Solid once it was announced as a ps3 exclusive. Sure there are "other" games on those consoles, great games too by the way, but they just got so serious and "emotions"al. Like that is the only reason we play games...
To me what Nintendo does, genre wise, is a dying breed. Having a mostly adventure game. Having a platform game that doesn't make you do super thinking, having a child-ish racing game , an arcade flying sim. They have so many IP's under their umbrella that it could be ridiculous. Smash bro's. is proof of this. And you know, I wanna game without putting too much emotions in my face. T^T
Because every single console since the SNES has had a staggering lack of decent games to play. don't bother listing off your favorite N64, Gamecube and Wii titles...I'm well aware that these games exist and I won't argue that they aren't great games.
What I will argue is that there is no longer any need for them to be exclusive Nintendo console games.
i want nintendo to go multiplatform so i can play their damn games. i dont like consoles, i buy 1 that my friends like so i can occasionally play games with them, otherwise i stick to pc. if their games were available on other consoles or pc i would buy them.
dont get me wrong, i understand why they are not, but that is the whole reason why i want them on other platforms.
-So you never seen the "Nintendo games would look better on another console" argument? That was the only thing I saw when complaining about the Wii on gaming threads or gaming sites.
Yep, never heard it. It seems like a logical argument despite going against the main point of Nintendo games (gameplay triumphing over visual fidelity). Sorry to dissappoint you?
-God, making me do this.
Kikizo: I am not sure about the extent of your personal involvement in the new Sonic on Xbox 360 and PS3, but you must be aware of the issues the game has in terms of glitches, control problems and loading time. One thing a lot of customers have been asking is, how these issues can be in the final product, is there anything you can comment on in relation to this, for example the QA [testing] process of development?
Ogawa: The reason why we probably ended up with what we see today, involves a lot of reasons. One is that we did want to launch the title around Christmas, and we had the PS3 launch coming up, but we had to develop for Microsoft's 360 at the same time and the team had an awful lot of pressure on them. It was very hard for the team to try and see how we were going to come out with both versions together with just the one team. It was a big challenge.
Once again, I don't see your point. Sega could have easily decided to not develop Sonic 2006 for the Xbox 360, but Sega instead decided to go ahead and force that extra workload onto Sonic Team. Sega also gave the go-ahead to the unfinished project while having the opportunity to delay/cancel the game. And from what I recall, Sega did not make any binding contracts with Sony or Microsoft.
And if you have noticed it or not, Microsoft is not a big fan of a long term investment. If Nintendo games do not make the numbers that CoD does in the first month, they would demand changes. So then the quality of Nintendo games would change and not for the better. I mean really, you believe sony and microsoft hardly do any colorful games anymore. It's all super serious, dark tones, and "mature" gaming now for them.
Yes, Microsoft would demand changes of Nintendo's games.
...If Microsoft owned Nintendo. While Nintendo being bought by one of its once-competitors is a possibility, it's a worst-case scenario that I view as highly unlikely of happening. Nintendo knows how to publish video games and has done that literally thousands of times with its own games. Also, it would be more likely that Nintendo would be bought by Sony/a Japanese company, as it makes more sense for a Japanese company to buy another Japanese company.
-So you never seen the "Nintendo games would look better on another console" argument? That was the only thing I saw when complaining about the Wii on gaming threads or gaming sites.
Yep, never heard it. It seems like a logical argument despite going against the main point of Nintendo games (gameplay triumphing over visual fidelity). Sorry to dissappoint you?
Nintendo games would not be as fun to play on other consoles. Thinks about it; Sonic Adventure 2 is leaps and bounds over Sonic '06, is it not? If Nintendo went Multiplatform, I wouldn't be surprised if their quality suffered from it.
-God, making me do this.
Kikizo: I am not sure about the extent of your personal involvement in the new Sonic on Xbox 360 and PS3, but you must be aware of the issues the game has in terms of glitches, control problems and loading time. One thing a lot of customers have been asking is, how these issues can be in the final product, is there anything you can comment on in relation to this, for example the QA [testing] process of development?
Ogawa: The reason why we probably ended up with what we see today, involves a lot of reasons. One is that we did want to launch the title around Christmas, and we had the PS3 launch coming up, but we had to develop for Microsoft's 360 at the same time and the team had an awful lot of pressure on them. It was very hard for the team to try and see how we were going to come out with both versions together with just the one team. It was a big challenge.
Once again, I don't see your point. Sega could have easily decided to not develop Sonic 2006 for the Xbox 360, but Sega instead decided to go ahead and force that extra workload onto Sonic Team. Sega also gave the go-ahead to the unfinished project while having the opportunity to delay/cancel the game. And from what I recall, Sega did not make any binding contracts with Sony or Microsoft.
That's the problem: Multi-platform people have to survive making games on multiple platforms. It's not enough to make 1 game for 1 console if your a multi-platform company anymore (Unless your EA, Activision or Ubisoft). If they did not have a 360 version of Sonic 06, that would equal less money, money that is vital to a company like Sega. And if they delayed the game, that would also mean less money, so they went ahead and released the terrible Sonic 06. Which, of course, hurt them.
And if you have noticed it or not, Microsoft is not a big fan of a long term investment. If Nintendo games do not make the numbers that CoD does in the first month, they would demand changes. So then the quality of Nintendo games would change and not for the better. I mean really, you believe sony and microsoft hardly do any colorful games anymore. It's all super serious, dark tones, and "mature" gaming now for them.
Yes, Microsoft would demand changes of Nintendo's games.
...If Microsoft owned Nintendo. While Nintendo being bought by one of its once-competitors is a possibility, it's a worst-case scenario that I view as highly unlikely of happening. Nintendo knows how to publish video games and has done that literally thousands of times with its own games. Also, it would be more likely that Nintendo would be bought by Sony/a Japanese company, as it makes more sense for a Japanese company to buy another Japanese company.
Agree with this part. Also, it's more likely that Nintendo would buy Sony, seeing as they have more money in the bank then Sony has on them personally.
-So you never seen the "Nintendo games would look better on another console" argument? That was the only thing I saw when complaining about the Wii on gaming threads or gaming sites.
Yep, never heard it. It seems like a logical argument despite going against the main point of Nintendo games (gameplay triumphing over visual fidelity). Sorry to dissappoint you?
-God, making me do this.
Kikizo: I am not sure about the extent of your personal involvement in the new Sonic on Xbox 360 and PS3, but you must be aware of the issues the game has in terms of glitches, control problems and loading time. One thing a lot of customers have been asking is, how these issues can be in the final product, is there anything you can comment on in relation to this, for example the QA [testing] process of development?
Ogawa: The reason why we probably ended up with what we see today, involves a lot of reasons. One is that we did want to launch the title around Christmas, and we had the PS3 launch coming up, but we had to develop for Microsoft's 360 at the same time and the team had an awful lot of pressure on them. It was very hard for the team to try and see how we were going to come out with both versions together with just the one team. It was a big challenge.
Once again, I don't see your point. Sega could have easily decided to not develop Sonic 2006 for the Xbox 360, but Sega instead decided to go ahead and force that extra workload onto Sonic Team. Sega also gave the go-ahead to the unfinished project while having the opportunity to delay/cancel the game. And from what I recall, Sega did not make any binding contracts with Sony or Microsoft.
And if you have noticed it or not, Microsoft is not a big fan of a long term investment. If Nintendo games do not make the numbers that CoD does in the first month, they would demand changes. So then the quality of Nintendo games would change and not for the better. I mean really, you believe sony and microsoft hardly do any colorful games anymore. It's all super serious, dark tones, and "mature" gaming now for them.
Yes, Microsoft would demand changes of Nintendo's games.
...If Microsoft owned Nintendo. While Nintendo being bought by one of its once-competitors is a possibility, it's a worst-case scenario that I view as highly unlikely of happening. Nintendo knows how to publish video games and has done that literally thousands of times with its own games. Also, it would be more likely that Nintendo would be bought by Sony/a Japanese company, as it makes more sense for a Japanese company to buy another Japanese company.
My point being that "if" Nintendo goes 3rd party there is no guarantee of any kind or even evidence from other companies that Nintendo quality game would stay the same or even improve. Sega games did not improve when it went multiplatform. Insomniac games didn't improve when it went multi-platform. Bioware didn't improve when it went multi-platform. There is just evidence that companies are shutdown or lose quality most of the time.
Sure it can be bought out by Sony, but that is also assuming that Nintendo games would continue to go world wide. "If" gamers don't buy the console in west, the new owner would see it as the west not liking eastern games. Use it like evidence that western consumers don't like japanese games. -_-
Now give me evidence of Microsoft and Sony doing good will for the consumer recently? The consumer, not publishers or developers.
Edit: No, i'll go even further. Give me evidence, some evidence, that Microsoft or Sony would improve Nintendo games, remember colorful "kiddy" non-hardcore, on their respective console?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
, an arcade flying sim. They have so many IP's under their umbrella that it could be ridiculous. Smash bro's. is proof of this. And you know, I wanna game without putting too much emotions in my face. T^T
