Why should Nintendo go third party?

Recommended Videos

MrBaskerville

New member
Mar 15, 2011
871
0
0
I would assume that Nintendo would try to turn the ship around before they jumped ship after one bad year. I don't know why people assume that it's all doom and gloom, while they have yet to see what they intend to do and whether their strategy will be succesful or not. Will they be as big as Ps4 is going to be? Probably not, but they still have a chance to make the console profitable, and i'm sure they will try to do this before they cancel everything and turn into a multiplatform developer. It just doesn't seem sensible to close down on the 4-5 million that allready own the console so early, it's going to hurt the customers trust.
 

COMaestro

Vae Victis!
May 24, 2010
739
0
0
I don't see Nintendo going third party any time soon. However, if they do make another console and it flops like the WiiU is doing, then they'd best abandon the console market and go solely with handhelds. I love my Vita and play it more than anything else at the moment simply because it's so convenient, but I can't deny that the 3DS is blowing it out of the water when it comes to sales. There are also a number of properties that the 3DS has that aren't available elsewhere (Phoenix Wright, Professor Layton, Fire Emblem, new Shin Megami Tensei) that if Nintendo can keep hold of, in addition to their normal first party titles, will keep them in the lead on handhelds for a long time.

A lot of money goes into the R&D of a new console, and Nintendo has lost pretty much all of it on the WiiU since no one is buying it. I agree they need to continue supporting it as best they can or they will lose any consumer trust they still have. Meanwhile, if they plan to stay in the console business, they need to spend a lot of that money on the features that people want. They need a good network infrastructure for online play. They need a main user account that will have access to all purchases made on their stores that works across all their devices. They need to include a Blu-Ray player so people can watch their movies without needing a dedicated player in the living room (though really, this point may not matter for the next console, as it seems lots of people are moving away from physical media).

If they make some kind of special peripheral like the WiiU's GamePad, it should be optional, rather than coming with every device, unless it has an obvious benefit or use that every developer will want to incorporate. Right now, the GamePad is almost completely under-utilized except maybe for remote play. I have not seen a single game that uses the GamePad in a way that couldn't be done just as easily with an onscreen menu and it doesn't appear that any game in the pipe is focusing on using the Pad in an innovative way. As such, I believe the GamePad is a large part of the failure of the WiiU (in addition to poor advertising and lack of high demand titles), as it upped the cost of the console package considerably.

Finally, they need good titles ready to launch with the platform and excellent titles to follow every three months or so for at least a year. Not just their usual lineup either, but some new IP mixed in. Launch with a Mario Bros. and a couple of new IP's. Three months later, release more new IP games and Zelda. Three months later, Mario Kart. Round out the year with a new Smash Bros. In between you can have smaller titles like Pikmin, Luigi's Mansion, Paper Mario, etc. Plus, make it so the third party developers WANT to put games on your console. Cut them an amazing deal on licensing for the first year or something, but make sure those 3rd party games are available.

The WiiU did NOTHING with it's first party content. There's actually a good number of third party releases on the platform when you look, but they were almost all games that also came out on PS3/360 which people already had, many of which had been released MONTHS earlier on the other systems. The other exclusive titles were of the usual launch title quality. Nintendo needed to push their exclusives right away, and while they started okay, they didn't do it enough. They had New Super Mario Bros U and NintendoLand, which are still the top two selling games for the platform and that's it. Next big releases were 7 months later with New Luigi U and Pikmin 3!! Those should have been out in Feb-Mar 2013. Next big release was a Zelda remake in October and finally a real big seller with Super Mario 3D Land a full year after the console launched.

I'm not going to consider a Zelda HD remake as a highly anticipated title. In fact, the only game on that list that I consider highly anticipated is 3D Land, which is probably why it's the third best selling game for the WiiU, despite being one of the newest. They should have had one highly anticipated title out every three months. Instead it took a full year for one. I think the only anticipated title that even has a release date is the next Mario Kart. Even Bayonetta 2, which was a huge part of their initial advertising since it's going to be exclusive to the WiiU doesn't yet have a release date. All we have been told as far as Bayonetta and Smash Bros is 2014. Some future Zelda game? Metroid? Kirby? Kid Icarus? All their other titles? Nothing. Either no release date or no plan to make a game for it. They have a ton of unused IP that's molding in a closet somewhere that should have been helping to sell their platform.

God, after typing all that out, I'm just downright disgusted with Nintendo... They aren't even trying because they didn't think they'd need to after the success of the Wii. Well wake up! No one who picked up a Wii because of the innovative motion control cares to purchase a new console. They had their fill of it and don't see the need for a new console that does the same thing. Wii's were purchased by retirement homes and hospitals and even enterprise-scale businesses as it gave people an opportunity to come together and goof around while getting some exercise. They still have these systems and don't need to replace them. The lighting that was the Wii is not going to strike twice.
 

viranimus

Thread killer
Nov 20, 2009
4,951
0
0
I dont think it is a bad idea, provided they go about it the right way.

The reason for it is because outside of the Wii, which was a fluke that capitalized on a fad, Nintendo has been incredibly behind as a hardware producer. They lucked out with a "right fad at the right time" on motion controls, and it puttered away the same way Rhythm games with their fake instrument controllers. Honestly for all the "good" Nintendo has been over the last decade as it relates to main stream home console manufacture, they have really just been living on borrowed time and by the grace of their handheld dominance.

Their greatest strength has effectively always been their proprietary software anyway. Hardware, outside of the handhelds (which is likely to be a dying market with tablets & phones in the mix) is little more than an albatross around their necks and killing their profitability.

So if they would adopt a wide and open platform for their software, (say on PC, but to a lesser extent android) they could focus their efforts on where they have always shined and end up much more profitable for it.

In fact doing so might be sort of forward thinking considering that it seems as if consoles will possibly go the way of the dinosaur and from their bones will evolve "clients" that utilize PC hardware, instead of wasting money on producing costly hardware. This is something I could see MS and Sony gravitating toward. Having proprietary software that acts as a dashboard client, that allows them to sell games and other media all the while keeping their "product" being the service that these digital distributors WANT and have a hard time rationalizing because of the physical nature of their proprietary hardware. The console wars would effectively evolve into "client" wars as Nintendo, MS, Sony all effectively invade Steams playground.

So It actually not only makes sense, it would be in Nintendo s best interest and in fact allow them to get a leg up on what is likely going to happen in the industry anyway, Rather than what they have done for the last decade and making poor decisions that leave them sorely behind the curve and wanting.

Edit: Uhh Oh, first post on the top of a new page not speaking 100% positively about nintendo... /preparing for Quotageddon.
 

Phrozenflame500

New member
Dec 26, 2012
1,080
0
0
I don't think it's necessarily a bad idea, but it's necessary because Nintendo still has a huge amount of money in the bank and likely has a couple of failures left in it before it has to do something that drastic.

Nintendo's been known to develop hardware specifically suited to their games, so I doubt they have any internal motivation to go third-party.
 

CrystalShadow

don't upset the insane catgirl
Apr 11, 2009
3,829
0
0
McMarbles said:
IceForce said:
Making software available on more than one platform = Wider userbase and more customers
More customers = More money

Seems simple enough.
So where are the threads demanding that Microsoft and Sony go third party? Where are the threads demanding that Valve make stuff for consoles?

More customers = more money, after all.
Microsoft makes games?

Eh. All joking aside, I can't actually think of any first party games by either company that anyone cares about in the slightest.

Don't get me wrong, Microsoft and Sony have had interesting exclusives but an exclusive made by a 3rd party has little to do with actual first party titles.

Name one game made by either of those companies that wasn't the result of them buying out an existing independent development studio...

Quick, what's the most famous game 'made' by Microsoft? - If you said halo, then you've demonstrated precisely the point I'm getting at. (Halo being originally developed by Bungie, and being made by microsoft only in the sense that they bought bungie outright.)

That's not to say there are no games made by these companies whatsoever, but realistically, most of the things they are known for are the result of buying up other companies.

So asking for Sony or Microsoft to go 'third party' is really just more like asking them to let go of the companies they've bought up over the year.

I'd love to see Bungie do something independently from any involvement from Microsoft; I also used to be a huge fan of Rare before Microsoft got their claws on it.

For that matter, I quite liked psygnosis games back in the day, and would love them to release a game or two independently as well. (For those unclear on their history, Psygnosis was bought by Sony around about the mid 90's, and was renamed something like Sony dev 1 or something equally non-descript.)

That, I would say is the reason, more so than anything else...
 

Johnny Novgorod

Bebop Man
Legacy
Feb 9, 2012
20,127
4,813
118
VG_Addict said:
How has Nintendo not gone out of business for failing to get with the times, then?
Oh it's getting there. Not with a bang but a whimper, as Eliot would put it.
 

Nixou

New member
Jan 20, 2014
196
0
0
"Apple is a software company" (famously), it's also one of the richest companies in the world because it also exclusively owns the hardware that delivers the software (most of which it does not outright own).

And of course, there were a lot of "Apple should have started making software for PC, now they doooooomed" talks, back in the 90s, an epoch best summarized by this picture:

 

Soxafloppin

Coxa no longer floppin'
Jun 22, 2009
7,915
0
0
Do Nintendo sell the WiiU at a loss? like Sony and MS do? If so, it seems like a fair deal.

Also the GBC/GBA Pokemon games on Iphone and Android with trading and battling enabled between all versions, just sayin!