Quantcast
Enough of the Nintendo Conspiracy Theory

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Enough of the Nintendo Conspiracy Theory

MDMAlliance said:
pokoko said:
What bothers me is that everything is fed into the "third-parties are trying to sink Nintendo" machine, even when there is a perfectly rational explanation at hand for a particular situation. Logic tells us that most businesses operate with profits as their top priority, not secret grudges that span generations and several different CEOs.

For example, I've been hearing people mention that late ports of games already released on the PS3/360 but with a higher price tag on the Wii U is evidence of this. Really? Does that mean that these same companies where trying to oust Sony when the same thing happened to them?

It's really starting to sound crazy.


I agree with what you're saying for the most part, but some decisions we see being made versus the statements some companies don't make sense and contradict each other.  I mean, maybe it's possible that a corporation as a whole may be able to hold a grudge in the same way how political leaders do.  

But obviously there isn't any solid proof so it's conjecture for now.

Nintendo is to Obamacare

3rd parties are to Republicans

Republicans hate Obamacare, regardless of logic.



Around the Network

The Grand Third Party Conspiracy Theory will last as long as Nintendo gets poor third party support, as it's used as an explanation for why that is. So I don't think the hardcore will ever fully stop believing in it, no matter how many times a more plausible explanation presents itself



If there was proof, then it wouldn't be a conspiracy theory. :( And one enjoys a good conspiracy theory.



3DS Friend Code: 0645 - 5827 - 5788
WayForward Kickstarter is best kickstarter: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1236620800/shantae-half-genie-hero

pokoko said:
What bothers me is that everything is fed into the "third-parties are trying to sink Nintendo" machine, even when there is a perfectly rational explanation at hand for a particular situation. Logic tells us that most businesses operate with profits as their top priority, not secret grudges that span generations and several different CEOs.

For example, I've been hearing people mention that late ports of games already released on the PS3/360 but with a higher price tag on the Wii U is evidence of this. Really? Does that mean that these same companies where trying to oust Sony when the same thing happened to them?

It's really starting to sound crazy.

I agree mostly. What people fail to see is, that Nintendo has great 3rd-party-support - from japanese developers. Let's look at Atlus for instance: while Vita-fans are happy with Persona 4 Golden (and they should, it is together with Soul Sacrifice and Gravity Rush among the top-games of the platform), the 3DS gets SMT IV, Etrian Odyssey IV, SMT: Devil Survivors Overclocked, SMT: Soul Hackers, EO: Millenium Girl. If you look at this, you could get the impression Atlus tries to sink the Vita. Same with other japanese devs, I think Nintendo-fans cannot complain about support from Capcom, Sega or Namco.

Some gamers simply tend to ignore japanese devs (while others do the same with western devs). So IF you ignore japanese devs and IF you ignore handhelds, you might get the impression Nintendo gets bad 3rd-party support. But even that is not true. While western devs are not very aggressive for bringing out games for Nintendo-platforms, it isn't nothing as if they do nothing. Look at Ubisoft, WB or Activision, they do support even the struggling WiiU well. Only EA is missing (the effort of Ubisoft and Activision show that the simple ports turn profit even at the low sales, so EA does that for other reasons).

So, in reality, no conspiracy is at work here, Nintendo gets 3rd-party-support.



3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018

Predictions: Switch / Switch vs. XB1 in the US / Three Houses first quarter

is not a conspiracy when its public to everyone



Around the Network
Mnementh said:

Some gamers simply tend to ignore japanese devs (while others do the same with western devs). So IF you ignore japanese devs and IF you ignore handhelds, you might get the impression Nintendo gets bad 3rd-party support. But even that is not true. While western devs are not very aggressive for bringing out games for Nintendo-platforms, it isn't nothing as if they do nothing. Look at Ubisoft, WB or Activision, they do support even the struggling WiiU well. Only EA is missing (the effort of Ubisoft and Activision show that the simple ports turn profit even at the low sales, so EA does that for other reasons).

So, in reality, no conspiracy is at work here, Nintendo gets 3rd-party-support.

That's true.  Nintendo has a lot of communication with Sega, Capcom, Atlus, and others.  We know that for a fact.  Nintendo works with Japanese developers.  They go around and they talk with the biggest of the western developers, like Activision, Ubisoft, and even EA.  They hammer out partnerships with all of those.

However, the area where I think Nintendo deserves criticism is for where they don't put in the extra effort.  Bethesda and Gearbox both recently said that Nintendo doesn't really communicate with them.  Microsoft and Sony do, but not Nintendo.  Now, neither one is an Activision, but they're both pretty big and both have had hit franchises this gen.  If both of those have little contact with Nintendo then what about all the other mid-level developers and publishers?  I doubt it's an isolated situation.  Simply stated, you can't expect support if you're not proactive about securing it.

Honestly, I'm not sure where the blame should go.  Nintendo of America?  Top level Japanese management?  I don't know.  It just seems to me that they didn't do everything they could have, especially after talking about a renewed effort to target the core.



I like conspiracy theories.

The one about 3rd parties wanting Nintendo to sink, or at least finding excuses not to develop for their systems, is particularly curious, especially because some decisions do seem to imply there might be some truth to it.



Mnementh said:
pokoko said:
What bothers me is that everything is fed into the "third-parties are trying to sink Nintendo" machine, even when there is a perfectly rational explanation at hand for a particular situation. Logic tells us that most businesses operate with profits as their top priority, not secret grudges that span generations and several different CEOs.

For example, I've been hearing people mention that late ports of games already released on the PS3/360 but with a higher price tag on the Wii U is evidence of this. Really? Does that mean that these same companies where trying to oust Sony when the same thing happened to them?

It's really starting to sound crazy.

I agree mostly. What people fail to see is, that Nintendo has great 3rd-party-support - from japanese developers. Let's look at Atlus for instance: while Vita-fans are happy with Persona 4 Golden (and they should, it is together with Soul Sacrifice and Gravity Rush among the top-games of the platform), the 3DS gets SMT IV, Etrian Odyssey IV, SMT: Devil Survivors Overclocked, SMT: Soul Hackers, EO: Millenium Girl. If you look at this, you could get the impression Atlus tries to sink the Vita. Same with other japanese devs, I think Nintendo-fans cannot complain about support from Capcom, Sega or Namco.

Some gamers simply tend to ignore japanese devs (while others do the same with western devs). So IF you ignore japanese devs and IF you ignore handhelds, you might get the impression Nintendo gets bad 3rd-party support. But even that is not true. While western devs are not very aggressive for bringing out games for Nintendo-platforms, it isn't nothing as if they do nothing. Look at Ubisoft, WB or Activision, they do support even the struggling WiiU well. Only EA is missing (the effort of Ubisoft and Activision show that the simple ports turn profit even at the low sales, so EA does that for other reasons).

So, in reality, no conspiracy is at work here, Nintendo gets 3rd-party-support.


No nintendo really doesnt have great japanese 3rd party support. All those Japanese people decided to send themselves bankrupt and invest in the PS3 when they could have stayed with the Wii.

 

I think Nintendo of America, like Sega of America has a lot of useless flesh. As does Nintendo of UK.



pokoko said:
Mnementh said:

Some gamers simply tend to ignore japanese devs (while others do the same with western devs). So IF you ignore japanese devs and IF you ignore handhelds, you might get the impression Nintendo gets bad 3rd-party support. But even that is not true. While western devs are not very aggressive for bringing out games for Nintendo-platforms, it isn't nothing as if they do nothing. Look at Ubisoft, WB or Activision, they do support even the struggling WiiU well. Only EA is missing (the effort of Ubisoft and Activision show that the simple ports turn profit even at the low sales, so EA does that for other reasons).

So, in reality, no conspiracy is at work here, Nintendo gets 3rd-party-support.

That's true.  Nintendo has a lot of communication with Sega, Capcom, Atlus, and others.  We know that for a fact.  Nintendo works with Japanese developers.  They go around and they talk with the biggest of the western developers, like Activision, Ubisoft, and even EA.  They hammer out partnerships with all of those.

However, the area where I think Nintendo deserves criticism is for where they don't put in the extra effort.  Bethesda and Gearbox both recently said that Nintendo doesn't really communicate with them.  Microsoft and Sony do, but not Nintendo.  Now, neither one is an Activision, but they're both pretty big and both have had hit franchises this gen.  If both of those have little contact with Nintendo then what about all the other mid-level developers and publishers?  I doubt it's an isolated situation.  Simply stated, you can't expect support if you're not proactive about securing it.

Honestly, I'm not sure where the blame should go.  Nintendo of America?  Top level Japanese management?  I don't know.  It just seems to me that they didn't do everything they could have, especially after talking about a renewed effort to target the core.

Nintendo is a very Japan-centric company. While Sony has studios all over the world and MS has it's studios mostly in the West, Nintendo has nearly all dev capacity in Japan. Even more, all dev-capacity is more or less controlled directly by NoJ. Monolith, Retro, Gamefreak/Pokemon Company/Creatures and Intelligent are a bit more independent and I'm not sure about HAL. But these are all also japanese devs, with the exception of Retro. So it is only natural, that they have better contacts with japanese devs: no cultural barriers, same language and much less to travel to meet them.

So what is wrong or who is wrong? I think Nintendo should build more external studios and much more western dev-capabilities. I already said that here on VGC sometimes. That would also create better contacts to western devs, because the communication is easier.

Why they don't do that? I don't know, but I suspect NoJ wants to control game-development strongly. That works better if the devs are near and even better if they are inhouse. What at least half of the dev-capabilities are.



3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018

Predictions: Switch / Switch vs. XB1 in the US / Three Houses first quarter