Your reaction if Nintendo went third party?

[VG_Addict]

Are we seriously still trying to say Nintendo would make more money going third party? Because that seems to rest on the assumption that PS/XBOX/PC owners would be interested in their games. Let's face it, Nintendo doesn't cater to the same people as they do. Sure there may be a bunch of people on forums who say they would buy them on other consoles/PC, but they don't even come close to making up the majority of gamers.

Because they WOULD make more money by going third party. The only question is how much specifically. It is nearly impossible to lose money by widening your audience, especially in cases like these where the only change required to reach more people is remove a single arbitrary hardware requirement. Even if not a single additional person purchased their games after removing the hardware requirement, Nintendo would still experience a net income increase because they are apparently selling their current console at a loss.

Except Nintendo has consistently made a profit on their hardware. Hell, I think Nintendo made a $99 million profit in their Q3 earnings.

And any profit they make going third party would be short term gains at best.

OK, let's play business. Could someone tell me how Nintendo could make more money on just software than they could making profits on hardware AND software? What all does Nintendo make a profit on with their hardware?

 

[VG_Addict]

Are we seriously still trying to say Nintendo would make more money going third party? Because that seems to rest on the assumption that PS/XBOX/PC owners would be interested in their games. Let's face it, Nintendo doesn't cater to the same people as they do. Sure there may be a bunch of people on forums who say they would buy them on other consoles/PC, but they don't even come close to making up the majority of gamers.

Because they WOULD make more money by going third party. The only question is how much specifically. It is nearly impossible to lose money by widening your audience, especially in cases like these where the only change required to reach more people is remove a single arbitrary hardware requirement. Even if not a single additional person purchased their games after removing the hardware requirement, Nintendo would still experience a net income increase because they are apparently selling their current console at a loss.

Nintendo has a networth of over 60+ billion just by making consoles and first party games,would going third party really help them make more money?Because I doubt most of the people who are screaming for them to go third party would be enough top offset any costs of doing so.

Also, people seem to think Nintendo going third party is as simple as just dropping the home console business and putting games on other consoles.

 

[Artaneius]

I wouldn't really care, the only nintendo games I still play are on emulators... If they went third party, I'm sure they would make a lot more money. Everyone always talks about how fun their games are, but no one wants to pay money for a game console that just has good exclusives or can't do anything else. Gaming consoles and PC's are more like media centers now than a gaming machine. Nintendo needs to start realizing that this isn't the 80s anymore.

 

[Fdzzaigl]

Any step toward making things more universal is a good one.

The only Nintendo console (or any console for that matter) I ever had was the original Game Boy Color. I don't see why they would continue with their consoles when all of their games can easily be played on tablets or smartphones (which is exactly what people are already doing tbh).

 

[Ishigami]

My reaction would look like this:

Though I would actually have to buy glasses to do so.

In any case I would be able to consider playing a Nintendo game since the GameCube.
That said there is no guarantee that I will because quite honestly I don?t really care about their franchises to begin with.
That?s why I have no Nintendo console atm.

 

[EvilRoy]

Are we seriously still trying to say Nintendo would make more money going third party? Because that seems to rest on the assumption that PS/XBOX/PC owners would be interested in their games. Let's face it, Nintendo doesn't cater to the same people as they do. Sure there may be a bunch of people on forums who say they would buy them on other consoles/PC, but they don't even come close to making up the majority of gamers.

Because they WOULD make more money by going third party. The only question is how much specifically. It is nearly impossible to lose money by widening your audience, especially in cases like these where the only change required to reach more people is remove a single arbitrary hardware requirement. Even if not a single additional person purchased their games after removing the hardware requirement, Nintendo would still experience a net income increase because they are apparently selling their current console at a loss.

Except Nintendo has consistently made a profit on their hardware. Hell, I think Nintendo made a $99 million profit in their Q3 earnings.

Except that hardware profit isn't coming from the WiiU. Nintendo has stated multiple times in the past that they are selling the WiiU at a loss, even before the delux edition price drop.

And any profit they make going third party would be short term gains at best.

Conjecture, somewhat baseless.

OK, let's play business. Could someone tell me how Nintendo could make more money on just software than they could making profits on hardware AND software? What all does Nintendo make a profit on with their hardware?

Well, since the WiiU is sold at a loss based on a report from August 2013 and has had a price drop hence, not producing hardware that loses you money would pretty much instantly increase the amount of money made on combined hardware and software.

 

[Folksoul]

I'd be worried as hell if I was Microsoft. If Nintendo goes third party, its to Sony. No other option. They will keep their brand as local as possible.

 

[VG_Addict]

Are we seriously still trying to say Nintendo would make more money going third party? Because that seems to rest on the assumption that PS/XBOX/PC owners would be interested in their games. Let's face it, Nintendo doesn't cater to the same people as they do. Sure there may be a bunch of people on forums who say they would buy them on other consoles/PC, but they don't even come close to making up the majority of gamers.

Because they WOULD make more money by going third party. The only question is how much specifically. It is nearly impossible to lose money by widening your audience, especially in cases like these where the only change required to reach more people is remove a single arbitrary hardware requirement. Even if not a single additional person purchased their games after removing the hardware requirement, Nintendo would still experience a net income increase because they are apparently selling their current console at a loss.

Except Nintendo has consistently made a profit on their hardware. Hell, I think Nintendo made a $99 million profit in their Q3 earnings.

Except that hardware profit isn't coming from the WiiU. Nintendo has stated multiple times in the past that they are selling the WiiU at a loss, even before the delux edition price drop.

And any profit they make going third party would be short term gains at best.

Conjecture, somewhat baseless.

OK, let's play business. Could someone tell me how Nintendo could make more money on just software than they could making profits on hardware AND software? What all does Nintendo make a profit on with their hardware?

Well, since the WiiU is sold at a loss based on a report from August 2013 and has had a price drop hence, not producing hardware that loses you money would pretty much instantly increase the amount of money made on combined hardware and software.

So, because Nintendo has ONE console they're selling at a loss, and is the first time they've ever done so, they should give up on home consoles?

 

[Evonisia]

I'd still play games on my Xbox 360, One and PC but with the added benefit of playing Nintendo games on them.

I'd be sad that Nintendo was gone, however.

 

[EvilRoy]

Are we seriously still trying to say Nintendo would make more money going third party? Because that seems to rest on the assumption that PS/XBOX/PC owners would be interested in their games. Let's face it, Nintendo doesn't cater to the same people as they do. Sure there may be a bunch of people on forums who say they would buy them on other consoles/PC, but they don't even come close to making up the majority of gamers.

Because they WOULD make more money by going third party. The only question is how much specifically. It is nearly impossible to lose money by widening your audience, especially in cases like these where the only change required to reach more people is remove a single arbitrary hardware requirement. Even if not a single additional person purchased their games after removing the hardware requirement, Nintendo would still experience a net income increase because they are apparently selling their current console at a loss.

Nintendo has a networth of over 60+ billion just by making consoles and first party games,would going third party really help them make more money?Because I doubt most of the people who are screaming for them to go third party would be enough top offset any costs of doing so.

Actually, I'm more worried about their stock price. The problem with net worth is that it only really expresses how hard it would be to kill a company, rather than what kind of profitability it has. Much of that value is locked up in physical or intellectual assets, sometimes companies even have substantial stock holdings in other companies and the value of those stocks would be included as well. That 60 billion net value isn't actually functional worth unless Nintendo starts selling HQ buildings, auctioning intellectual property, or dropping investments. Certainly this is a good way to avoid bankruptcy (although it is by no means a guarentee of safety - think THQ), and it does indicate past success but doesn't necessarily have any relation to how profitable the company currently is.

 

[Robert Marrs]

Given nintendos current plan of "give people no reason to buy our console" i think it would make me happy. I want to play nintendos games but I won't buy a console just to do it. They would probably make more money if they decided to go with just game development. I can't see this happening unless they end up going under though. Just give me a reason to buy your stupid console nintendo!

 

[EvilRoy]

Are we seriously still trying to say Nintendo would make more money going third party? Because that seems to rest on the assumption that PS/XBOX/PC owners would be interested in their games. Let's face it, Nintendo doesn't cater to the same people as they do. Sure there may be a bunch of people on forums who say they would buy them on other consoles/PC, but they don't even come close to making up the majority of gamers.

Because they WOULD make more money by going third party. The only question is how much specifically. It is nearly impossible to lose money by widening your audience, especially in cases like these where the only change required to reach more people is remove a single arbitrary hardware requirement. Even if not a single additional person purchased their games after removing the hardware requirement, Nintendo would still experience a net income increase because they are apparently selling their current console at a loss.

Except Nintendo has consistently made a profit on their hardware. Hell, I think Nintendo made a $99 million profit in their Q3 earnings.

Except that hardware profit isn't coming from the WiiU. Nintendo has stated multiple times in the past that they are selling the WiiU at a loss, even before the delux edition price drop.

And any profit they make going third party would be short term gains at best.

Conjecture, somewhat baseless.

OK, let's play business. Could someone tell me how Nintendo could make more money on just software than they could making profits on hardware AND software? What all does Nintendo make a profit on with their hardware?

Well, since the WiiU is sold at a loss based on a report from August 2013 and has had a price drop hence, not producing hardware that loses you money would pretty much instantly increase the amount of money made on combined hardware and software.

So, because Nintendo has ONE console they're selling at a loss, and is the first time they've ever done so, they should give up on home consoles?

Well to start with the assertion that the gamecube was sold for a profit is somewhat questionable and has never been officially confirmed or denied to the best of my knowledge. Despite the runaway success of the Wii, Nintendo has been on a gentle downward incline for some time now. At times it becomes necessary to act proactively, and the long standing indication is that Nintendo will have to make changes sooner rather than later to avoid the shame and pain that comes with last minute desperation measures.

Will it be easy fast or painless? Of course not. But you know what takes effort, time and pain? Pulling a rotten tooth.

 

[Xman490]

I would exit console gaming forever, then.

The number of non-Nintendo exclusives are shrinking. I have a decent enough gaming computer which, mixed with the fact that I don't give two shits about gaming on the highest graphical settings, would end up being my main source of gaming hobby.

Exactly. The PS4/XbOne exclusives don't seem particularly interesting. Nintendo mixes up their first-party game formulas every iteration or two. Meanwhile, PC gaming satisfies the biggest software draws of the newest consoles.

Want a superhero game like inFamous? Get Saints Row IV and/or Prototype 2.
Want a thrilling adventure like Uncharted? Get the Tomb Raider reboot.
Want a simple, silly zombie game like Dead Rising 3? Get Dead Rising 2.
Want a a first-person alien shooter like Halo? Get Half-Life 2. (Okay, this last one isn't quite so accurate, but you get my point.)

 

[COMaestro]

I would be a little sad to think that Nintendo would no longer be making consoles, as they have been since I was in third or fourth grade and I've owned a number of them. That being said, though, I might actually purchase some of their games. I picked up a Wii last gen and I've got maybe 10 games for it, some of which were for my wife and weren't really things I was interested in, and a couple of them I regretted purchasing because the games were terrible. All but Lego Indiana Jones were exclusive to the Wii, most have the word "Mario" or "Bros" in the title, and all of them are sitting collecting dust along with the system itself. I'm really only keeping it as I am hoping my kids will enjoy it when they get a little older, otherwise I'd trade it in for store credit somewhere.

Well, maybe not. I need something to play Eternal Darkness on whenever I get the urge.

Either way, I'm not going to make that mistake again with the WiiU. I don't care about Smash Bros, I've got Mario Kart on the Wii if I want to race around, as the Mario Kart games are the only racing style games I really care for, and I've got one of the Mario Party's on the Wii if I want to get a group of us together to play that type of game, so I don't care about Nintendo Land. Any third party releases for the WiiU are also on other systems, and I likely already owned them for that system before it was even released on the WiiU. The only thing that would really interest me at this point from Nintendo's first party library would be entries in Zelda or Metroid, and so far there's no news on either. And even then, I'm not dropping hundreds of dollars on a console in order to play two games.

Nintendo going third party would benefit me and hundreds if not thousands of other gamers who would be willing to buy their games but not in addition to shelling out for their console. Whether this would make more money for Nintendo or not, I don't know, but since they won't do it anyway (at least not under their current leadership) the point is moot.

 

[VG_Addict]

Then how likely is it that Nintendo will drop out of the console race?

Remember, Nintendo makes their software with their hardware in mind.

Though, I think Nintendo just needs to try harder next gen, and make a console that's comparable to the PS5 and Nextbox, with good third party support and fixed online.

 

[VG_Addict]

Are we seriously still trying to say Nintendo would make more money going third party? Because that seems to rest on the assumption that PS/XBOX/PC owners would be interested in their games. Let's face it, Nintendo doesn't cater to the same people as they do. Sure there may be a bunch of people on forums who say they would buy them on other consoles/PC, but they don't even come close to making up the majority of gamers.

If Nintendo hardware didnt exist, then people who want to play Nintendo games would buy one of the consoles or a PC that Nintendo released games on. I doubt that people who want Nintendo games would not buy a console that had Nintendo games on it, because Nintendo didnt have their own hardware.

So not only would they have the normal millions of people that buy Nintendo, but the other millions of people that dont, would have the option to buy games that Nintendo makes. So there would definitely be more software sales.

Lets take the situation right now. Less than 6 Million Wii U have been sold. If Nintendo made its games for Xbone, PS4, and PC, then they would have much more than 6 million people that could potentially buy their games (making Nintendo more money).

Again, that assumes that people would buy those games.

No, I don't think it would make them more money. Doesn't it take a LOT of sales (I think roughly 10 million) for games to even break even?

I made this topic on other forums, and most people would be happy.

I guess the internet doesn't like Nintendo.

 

[Roxas1359]

Again, that assumes that people would buy those games.

No, I don't think it would make them more money. Doesn't it take a LOT of sales (I think roughly 10 million) for games to even break even?

I made this topic on other forums, and most people would be happy.

I guess the internet doesn't like Nintendo.

You're estimates are grossly wrong. It does not take 10 million sales for a game to break even at all. If you budget properly then you can post profits after the first 1 million or so. Hell Atlus makes profits all the time and I think they spend like the least amount of money on games in general. The only reason that some of the bigger AAA publishers says it takes like 6 million in a month to break even is because they didn't budget in the slightest and spent too much on things like marketing or other unnecessary details. I have no idea why people seem to think that if Nintendo were to somehow go third party that they'd suddenly go stupid and start acting like other AAA Publishers. They won't, and hell for the amount of flak Sega gets the fact that they still posted profits and it's holdings company was able to buy out all of Index Holdings shows how much money they have. Plus, Nintendo games never really go down in price, so if they were to go 3rd party they'd probably keep that.

And just because a few forums say that they'd be happy, doesn't mean the entire internet doesn't like Nintendo, and assuming that's the case because based off a few threads is terrible to even consider.

 

[VG_Addict]

Again, that assumes that people would buy those games.

No, I don't think it would make them more money. Doesn't it take a LOT of sales (I think roughly 10 million) for games to even break even?

I made this topic on other forums, and most people would be happy.

I guess the internet doesn't like Nintendo.

The internet is telling you that people DO like Nintendo, just most are not willing to buy the Wii U, to play them.

If it took 10 million sales of every piece of software, then there wouldn't be many people making video games. I would guess, that for Nintendo, is doesnt take that much because they keep their prices high for many years, a lot of other devs may need more sales because they dont price gouge people for long.

I would buy Nintendo hardware just for the games (obviously since I do own a Wii U) but I would much rather not have to.

Do you think they'd be more willing to buy a new console to play them if it were more powerful and had better third party support?

 

[Something Amyss]

"Meh."

I mean, there'd be one less obstacle to me buying their games (the hardware), but otherwise, I don't care.

 

[Something Amyss]

Do you think they'd be more willing to buy a new console to play them if it were more powerful and had better third party support?

Depends on what they did with it, but yes. In broad strokes, they probably would be.