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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Why is it hard to believe that third parties are biased against Nintendo?

Well, at least Sega is not biased against Nintendo. That's something, right?



                
       ---Member of the official Squeezol Fanclub---

Around the Network

Maybe some do, I'm more against some of the outrageous claims for why they're biased against Nintendo. I think most of it comes down to them believing that they do better with Sony and MS and that isn't talking just money wise.



I think biases that determine if a game goes on this platform or another can really only proliferate at the indie, self-publishing level.

EA, Ubisoft, Activision, WB and the like are corporations. Any platform they can sell well on, they'll develop for. Even if the development is like pulling teeth.

Within the companies, you probably have biased developers and development leads. But I think most are self-objective enough to port their games to a platform not of their preference if the business case is there (or their boss tells them too).

Whatever 3rd party support Nintendo has now is probably owed to the belief that having 3 console competitors is good for publisher royalties. If you have just one console-maker running the show, publisher royalties could go down as the console market becomes monopolistic.



I predict NX launches in 2017 - not 2016

I am He-Man and I approve this thread.

PS: I have the power.



RolStoppable said:

Definition of bias:

1. A preference or inclination, especially one that inhibits impartial judgment.
2. An unfair act or policy stemming from prejudice.

The fall of Square-Enix has much to do with this. On one day the company suddenly decided that what it was successfully doing for two decades wasn't going to work anymore, so their output changed. The JRPGs the company became known for were pushed to the side in order to pursue the new things. Meanwhile, smaller companies like Atlus and Gust kept putting out their JRPGS and saw stable or increasing sales. Not only was there no evidence for Square-Enix to justify their change, but there was plenty of evidence that disproved the reason for their change. Apparently the company woke up from their delusions that classic JRPGs have no market anymore, but only after years of bad financials. The executives in charge stubbornly stuck to their course, unwilling to accept all evidence that showed they were wrong. It has to be seen what comes out of this, but admitting that there was a real problem these past few years is probably the most positive news about Square-Enix since the seventh generation started.

Another example of bias is the industry-wide belief that entire genres do not sell anymore. Survival horror is one prominent example, challenging games like Dark Souls are another. Such decisions aren't made based on actual data, but very narrow-minded views of the video games market. And everytime a game succeeds, it's written off as an anomaly to uphold the narrative that the executives in charge know what they are doing and can keep doing what they are doing.

Then there's the notion that singleplayer-only games are not viable anymore. For people on VGC, this is an absolutely mindboggling statement, because it's so easy to point out numerous million-selling singleplayer games of the last few years. But once again, despite obvious evidence to the contrary, the majority of the video game industry sticks to their guns. A biased perception of the market is clouding their judgment, so the nonsense doesn't stop, but rather gets worse. The hivemind of the industry dictates that there can only ever be one thing that is the future and until that bubble bursts, there won't be a serious re-evalution of the way the companies are doing business.

Biased decisions are a very real thing in the video game industry. They happen all the time.

wtf? Do you know why they treat Nintendo like if it doesn't exist? Because Nintendo built the Wii U without asking them. Sony and Microsoft asked the devs what they wanted and they said x86-64 architecture please, and so they did. Nintendo just build the Wii U with powerPC architecture again, with very old hardware and did what they wanted without asking no one or thinking in the others.

Next time, they better ask the devs what they want because without the devs they are nothing (by themselves they can't maintain a console, and thats the reason why Wii U is selling 1/3 of what gamecube did in the same period of time).

Sorry for my english



Around the Network
bubblegamer said:
Because the whole definition of bias playing a role, where money is the only driving force, in the business making decisions of corporations is utterly unrealistic.


^



Because Nintendo is a competitor on Nintendo owned consoles. A very fierce competitor in fact.

It's a catch-22. Nintendo needs to release titles constantly for their systems to sell, which interferes with 3rd party releases.

If Nintendo eases off the throttle, theirs no guarantee that 3rd parties will fill the void (Rayma Legends comes to mind)



spemanig said:
bubblegamer said:
Because the whole definition of bias playing a role, where money is the only driving force, in the business making decisions of corporations is utterly unrealistic.


^


It might be shocking to many people but corprations are actually run by human beings, with motivations and feelings too! I KNOW! SHOCKING!

 

While usually, corprations will try to maximize profit at all time, there is precedent for personal feelings getting in the way of decision making. Hell, the original Playstation was released out of pride rather than careful financial analysis.



EA isn't biased against Nintendo. They just hate them.



burning_phoneix said:
spemanig said:
bubblegamer said:
Because the whole definition of bias playing a role, where money is the only driving force, in the business making decisions of corporations is utterly unrealistic.


^


It might be shocking to many people but corprations are actually run by human beings, with motivations and feelings too! I KNOW! SHOCKING!

 

While usually, corprations will try to maximize profit at all time, there is precedent for personal feelings getting in the way of decision making. Hell, the original Playstation was released out of pride rather than careful financial analysis.

And this happens EVERY time AND to EVERY corporation? I see. Must be nice to belive things that suit your part of view.