By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Innovation to be Nintendo's Downfall?

Munkeh111 said:
miz1q2w3e said:
Munkeh111 said:
Demotruk said:

True, however there are two issues with that:

1) Nintendo have proven that their first parties can be far more successful than most of the rest of the industry, even if it is less games it is less but more appealing games.

2) Third parties percieve Nintendo as an enemy or too much competition, and thus Nintendo's efforts to court them are doomed from the start (unless they compromise their own games, which is shooting themselves in the foot though that seems to be exactly what they're doing on 3DS...)

1) I agree with that mostly EXCEPT, it is fewer games not less. And just because that is how it is now, doesn't mean it is going to stay like that. Somebody could come up with a CoD popular game for the Wii, Mario won't be king for ever

2) Well possibly, but I think the 3rd parties should have enough confidence in their own games to compete, they definitely can't JUST rely on themselves to make all the games for the Wii

If if someone happened to make a game/series that had CoD-like popularity for a Nintendo console, it wouldn't outsell a 2D mario game on it. Look at CoD's single platform sales VS mario's single platform sales (around 10mil VS over 20mil)

It would take something much much bigger than CoD for that

But I do agree that having 3rd party support is better than not having it (who in their right mind would argue otherwise??) and there are massively successful 3rd party games out there

No, why look at CoD's single platform sales? That makes no sense, and remember, CoD games have sold about 20m for the last 4 years

You don't think Mario would sell more if it was multiplatform?



Click this button, you know you want to!  [Subscribe]

Watch me on YouTube!

http://www.youtube.com/user/TheRadishBros

~~~~ Mario Kart 8 drove far past my expectations! Never again will I doubt the wheels of a Monster Franchise! :0 ~~~~

Around the Network
Munkeh111 said:
miz1q2w3e said:
Munkeh111 said:
Demotruk said:

True, however there are two issues with that:

1) Nintendo have proven that their first parties can be far more successful than most of the rest of the industry, even if it is less games it is less but more appealing games.

2) Third parties percieve Nintendo as an enemy or too much competition, and thus Nintendo's efforts to court them are doomed from the start (unless they compromise their own games, which is shooting themselves in the foot though that seems to be exactly what they're doing on 3DS...)

1) I agree with that mostly EXCEPT, it is fewer games not less. And just because that is how it is now, doesn't mean it is going to stay like that. Somebody could come up with a CoD popular game for the Wii, Mario won't be king for ever

2) Well possibly, but I think the 3rd parties should have enough confidence in their own games to compete, they definitely can't JUST rely on themselves to make all the games for the Wii

If if someone happened to make a game/series that had CoD-like popularity for a Nintendo console, it wouldn't outsell a 2D mario game on it. Look at CoD's single platform sales VS mario's single platform sales (around 10mil VS over 20mil)

It would take something much much bigger than CoD for that

But I do agree that having 3rd party support is better than not having it (who in their right mind would argue otherwise??) and there are massively successful 3rd party games out there

No, why look at CoD's single platform sales? That makes no sense, and remember, CoD games have sold about 20m for the last 4 years


Because it very likely wouldn't be exclusive. It's hard enough for Nintendo to get third parties to develop top tier games on their platforms, let alone top tier exclusives.



A game I'm developing with some friends:

www.xnagg.com/zombieasteroids/publish.htm

It is largely a technical exercise but feedback is appreciated.

radishhead said:
Munkeh111 said:
miz1q2w3e said:
Munkeh111 said:
Demotruk said:

True, however there are two issues with that:

1) Nintendo have proven that their first parties can be far more successful than most of the rest of the industry, even if it is less games it is less but more appealing games.

2) Third parties percieve Nintendo as an enemy or too much competition, and thus Nintendo's efforts to court them are doomed from the start (unless they compromise their own games, which is shooting themselves in the foot though that seems to be exactly what they're doing on 3DS...)

1) I agree with that mostly EXCEPT, it is fewer games not less. And just because that is how it is now, doesn't mean it is going to stay like that. Somebody could come up with a CoD popular game for the Wii, Mario won't be king for ever

2) Well possibly, but I think the 3rd parties should have enough confidence in their own games to compete, they definitely can't JUST rely on themselves to make all the games for the Wii

If if someone happened to make a game/series that had CoD-like popularity for a Nintendo console, it wouldn't outsell a 2D mario game on it. Look at CoD's single platform sales VS mario's single platform sales (around 10mil VS over 20mil)

It would take something much much bigger than CoD for that

But I do agree that having 3rd party support is better than not having it (who in their right mind would argue otherwise??) and there are massively successful 3rd party games out there

No, why look at CoD's single platform sales? That makes no sense, and remember, CoD games have sold about 20m for the last 4 years

You don't think Mario would sell more if it was multiplatform?

Why? Because it would have a larger install base? But the Wii already has a larger install base



Nintendo is trying to be so unique by having gimmicky hardware ,  I understand the idea of finding fresh new ways of playing games too, but they might be taking them a little too far.



 Next Gen 

11/20/09 04:25 makingmusic476 Warning Other (Your avatar is borderline NSFW. Please keep it for as long as possible.)
okr said:

No offense, but I don't understand why it's always Nintendo fans who post threads like this. What are some of you guys afraid of?

Nintendo is by far the world's most successful console/handheld manufacturer and at the same time the most successful videogame publisher.

They sold more than 230 million Wii/DS systems so far, if I'm not mistaken that's more than 100 million more gaming devices sold than Sony since the start of the last gen for these two companies, i.e. the launch of DS/PSP.

As publishers, Nintendo sold - according to VGC data - around 650 million games on Wii/DS, Sony around 125 million games on PS3/PSP, Microsoft around 100 million games on 360.

Even if we'd detract ~100 million bundled Nintendo games from these figures, they'd still be ~400 million copies in front of Sony.

Nintendo is probably the most profitable company in this industry. I see no reason why this should change soon.

I could be wrong but I suspect a lot of these "negative" threads are created by people who haven’t been paying attention to the console cycle for particularly long. Because Nintendo has broken with conventional thinking many times with the design of their consoles, there is always a lot of pent up curiosity on what they’re planning on doing next; which inspires a lot of rumours to be created. The vast majority of these rumours are completely unrelated to what Nintendo eventually releases.

Even rumours that (in hindsight) appear to be caused by legitimate leaks have suffered heavily from the "telephone game" and the concept that is presented to people on websites only seems to vaguely resemble the final product.

 

People who are not used to dealing with these rumours tend not to be able to trust Nintendo to only implement something that works well; and they freak out and assume it will be a disaster. Personally, I think if Nintendo uses touch pannels, projectors, cameras, RFID, laser light shows, or any other technology in their system it will (likely) be far cooler than we would initially imagine; and be a really slick implementation.



Around the Network
Munkeh111 said:
miz1q2w3e said:
Munkeh111 said:

1) I agree with that mostly EXCEPT, it is fewer games not less. And just because that is how it is now, doesn't mean it is going to stay like that. Somebody could come up with a CoD popular game for the Wii, Mario won't be king for ever

If if someone happened to make a game/series that had CoD-like popularity for a Nintendo console, it wouldn't outsell a 2D mario game on it. Look at CoD's single platform sales VS mario's single platform sales (around 10mil VS over 20mil)

It would take something much much bigger than CoD for that

No, why look at CoD's single platform sales? That makes no sense, and remember, CoD games have sold about 20m for the last 4 years

Think about it for a second... Get it now?

Nah? Fine I'll explain. CoD sells like 20mil (say 10 mil per console) right now - If a CoD-like game sold 20-30 mil on all three consoles then it would be 10mil per console whereas Mario would sell something like 20-25mil, thus remaining king of the console

CoD may have beat Halo and GT on their respective platforms but it'd take something much bigger than CoD to beat mario on Wii



psrock said:

Nintendo is trying to be so unique by having gimmicky hardware ,  I understand the idea of finding fresh new ways of playing games too, but they might be taking them a little too far.


i agree, i give it to them for innovating, but if that innovation is going to be given to you in a limited way where it doesnt bring much to the table, until years after, then dont do it.



Being in 3rd place never felt so good

miz1q2w3e said:
Munkeh111 said:
miz1q2w3e said:
Munkeh111 said:

1) I agree with that mostly EXCEPT, it is fewer games not less. And just because that is how it is now, doesn't mean it is going to stay like that. Somebody could come up with a CoD popular game for the Wii, Mario won't be king for ever

If if someone happened to make a game/series that had CoD-like popularity for a Nintendo console, it wouldn't outsell a 2D mario game on it. Look at CoD's single platform sales VS mario's single platform sales (around 10mil VS over 20mil)

It would take something much much bigger than CoD for that

No, why look at CoD's single platform sales? That makes no sense, and remember, CoD games have sold about 20m for the last 4 years

Think about it for a second... Get it now?

Nah? Fine I'll explain. CoD sells like 20mil (say 10 mil per console) right now - If a CoD-like game sold 20-30 mil on all three consoles then it would be 10mil per console whereas Mario would sell something like 20-25mil, thus remaining king of the console

CoD may have beat Halo and GT on their respective platforms but it'd take something much bigger than CoD to beat mario on Wii

No, Activision would sell 20-25m copies of the game, thus remaining king. If a CoD sized franchise sold 20-25m on one console it would win. Mario maybe to the king of exclusive console games, but not the king of console games



miz1q2w3e said:
Munkeh111 said:
miz1q2w3e said:
Munkeh111 said:

1) I agree with that mostly EXCEPT, it is fewer games not less. And just because that is how it is now, doesn't mean it is going to stay like that. Somebody could come up with a CoD popular game for the Wii, Mario won't be king for ever

If if someone happened to make a game/series that had CoD-like popularity for a Nintendo console, it wouldn't outsell a 2D mario game on it. Look at CoD's single platform sales VS mario's single platform sales (around 10mil VS over 20mil)

It would take something much much bigger than CoD for that

No, why look at CoD's single platform sales? That makes no sense, and remember, CoD games have sold about 20m for the last 4 years

Think about it for a second... Get it now?

Nah? Fine I'll explain. CoD sells like 20mil (say 10 mil per console) right now - If a CoD-like game sold 20-30 mil on all three consoles then it would be 10mil per console whereas Mario would sell something like 20-25mil, thus remaining king of the console

CoD may have beat Halo and GT on their respective platforms but it'd take something much bigger than CoD to beat mario on Wii


if cod didnt have much competition it could beat mario. other then the dance/carnival games ninty games sell on the wii(im talking about 1 million and yes their are exceptions like mh), and whats the cream of the cream of ninty games? mario kart and 2d mario. yes other games release including platformers but donkey kong, kirby, and 3d mario areant going to really compete with 2d mario.

if their werent a shit load of games better then cod on the hd consoles they would sell much much more. 



Being in 3rd place never felt so good

Munkeh111 said:
miz1q2w3e said:

CoD sells like 20mil (say 10 mil per console) right now - If a CoD-like game sold 20-30 mil on all three consoles then it would be 10mil per console whereas Mario would sell something like 20-25mil, thus remaining king of the console

No, Activision would sell 20-25m copies of the game, thus remaining king. If a CoD sized franchise sold 20-25m on one console it would win. Mario maybe to the king of exclusive console games, but not the king of console games

If a game sold that much on a single console it wouldn't be a CoD sized franchise, it'd be a mario sized one

But yeah, I get what you're trying to say, but let me say this: An exlusive selling over 20mil is much more impressive than a multiplat selling about the same amount, wouldn't you agree?