Quantcast
Nintendo and Third Party... Who is really to blame?

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Nintendo and Third Party... Who is really to blame?

Nintendo has had a bad history with third parties since there was a real competitor (Playstation). At that point, its Draconian contracts and its reliance on older technology became too much.

If you look at the top-selling games for each system, its been 80% Nintendo, 20% third-party for Nintendo consoles since the Gamecube generation (if not before). It was the inverse for the competing systems.

Most recently, this has been exacerbated by increasing hardware differences, making ports more difficult and less profitable (than compared to systems with similar architecture). The use of Nintendo products as a secondary console lessened the market for third-party multiplats. Finally, the demographic of those who have only a Nintendo console usually is not interested in the M-rated multiplats.

In a few cases, the publisher bears almost all blame as it almost tried to fail (e.g., EA). But other times the fault is mixed with some good games and some problem ones (e.g., Ubisoft, WBI), And some have just had to make business decisions (e.g., Activision).

Personally, I just enjoy the games and hope for more good ones.



      


I am Mario.


I like to jump around, and would lead a fairly serene and aimless existence if it weren't for my friends always getting into trouble. I love to help out, even when it puts me at risk. I seem to make friends with people who just can't stay out of trouble.

Wii Friend Code: 1624 6601 1126 1492

NNID: Mike_INTV

Around the Network

Here's an interesting question though ...

What would happen if you gave Nintendo the PS4 chipset and you forced Sony to make the Wii U their chipset.

Odds are (grudingly or not), Nintendo would get most of the third party games that Sony currently has.

With such a high powered console and relative ease of porting from PC/XBox One, developers simply could not afford to ignore it.

Whereas Sony, as much as third parties "like" Sony ... eventually support for a Wii U like Sony console would fizzle out after a couple of years as developers transitioned more over to the next-gen hardware.

It's business. Not personal. Nintendo makes weird business and design decisions that don't suit third parties. Given the choice of two other options that are far more predictable, third parties will chose that route.



Soundwave said:
Here's an interesting question though ...

What would happen if you gave Nintendo the PS4 chipset and you forced Sony to make the Wii U their chipset.

Odds are (grudingly or not), Nintendo would get most of the third party games that Sony currently has.

With such a high powered console and relative ease of porting from PC/XBox One, developers simply could not afford to ignore it.

Whereas Sony, as much as third parties "like" Sony ... eventually support for a Wii U like Sony console would fizzle out after a couple of years as developers transitioned more over to the next-gen hardware.

It's business. Not personal. Nintendo makes weird business and design decisions that don't suit third parties. Given the choice of two other options that are far more predictable, third parties will chose that route.

In that scenario, third parties would still avoid nintendo and support sony. The proof is that developers simply cannot afford to ignore the wii u right now but do so anyway.



Tagging this for later. Kinda late for me. Good night.



Materia-Blade said:
Soundwave said:
Here's an interesting question though ...

What would happen if you gave Nintendo the PS4 chipset and you forced Sony to make the Wii U their chipset.

Odds are (grudingly or not), Nintendo would get most of the third party games that Sony currently has.

With such a high powered console and relative ease of porting from PC/XBox One, developers simply could not afford to ignore it.

Whereas Sony, as much as third parties "like" Sony ... eventually support for a Wii U like Sony console would fizzle out after a couple of years as developers transitioned more over to the next-gen hardware.

It's business. Not personal. Nintendo makes weird business and design decisions that don't suit third parties. Given the choice of two other options that are far more predictable, third parties will chose that route.

In that scenario, third parties would still avoid nintendo and support sony. The proof is that developers simply cannot afford to ignore the wii u right now but do so anyway.

They wouldn't be able to easily port XB1/PC games to the "Sony Wii U" though, that would be a huge pain in the ass. 

Nintendo would get a lot of third party support by default if they had Sony's hardware. Too late for this generation (probably too late in general) though obviously. 



Around the Network

I'm to blame of not buying 3rd parties. I am to blame to refuse to buy a broken game. I'm to blame for complaining of having a broken BF4 over my PC (The coo called us trolls for not accepting the game the way it is). I have a wii u and a PC and both I do not buy anything from EA, Ubi or Activision since last year. 



Soundwave said:

They wouldn't be able to easily port XB1/PC games to the "Sony Wii U" though, that would be a huge pain in the ass. 

Nintendo would get a lot of third party support by default if they had Sony's hardware. Too late for this generation (probably too late in general) though obviously. 

All information we have right now says otherwise.



mike_intellivision said:
Nintendo has had a bad history with third parties since there was a real competitor (Playstation). At that point, its Draconian contracts and its reliance on older technology became too much.

If you look at the top-selling games for each system, its been 80% Nintendo, 20% third-party for Nintendo consoles since the Gamecube generation (if not before). It was the inverse for the competing systems.

Most recently, this has been exacerbated by increasing hardware differences, making ports more difficult and less profitable (than compared to systems with similar architecture). The use of Nintendo products as a secondary console lessened the market for third-party multiplats. Finally, the demographic of those who have only a Nintendo console usually is not interested in the M-rated multiplats.

In a few cases, the publisher bears almost all blame as it almost tried to fail (e.g., EA). But other times the fault is mixed with some good games and some problem ones (e.g., Ubisoft, WBI), And some have just had to make business decisions (e.g., Activision).

Personally, I just enjoy the games and hope for more good ones.

Very nice post. Thanks for posting it.

(Support the VGCz LIKE button campaign)



@Twitter | Switch | Steam

You say tomato, I say tomato 

tag "¡Viva la Ñ!" - WRUR

All THREE are to blame.

Nintendo for not actively seeking third party support.
Third parties for not supporting Nintendo consoles AND even making gimped versions of said games.
Gamers for not buying the games.

But that being said third parties expecting their games to sell millions upon launch is ludicrous! Sales arent all or nothing, but are instead are steady stream of sales, with each new release building upon the sales.



Australian Gamer (add me if you like)               
NNID: Maraccuda              
PS Network: Maraccuda           

 

Soundwave said:
Here's an interesting question though ...

What would happen if you gave Nintendo the PS4 chipset and you forced Sony to make the Wii U their chipset.

Odds are (grudingly or not), Nintendo would get most of the third party games that Sony currently has.

With such a high powered console and relative ease of porting from PC/XBox One, developers simply could not afford to ignore it.

Whereas Sony, as much as third parties "like" Sony ... eventually support for a Wii U like Sony console would fizzle out after a couple of years as developers transitioned more over to the next-gen hardware.

It's business. Not personal. Nintendo makes weird business and design decisions that don't suit third parties. Given the choice of two other options that are far more predictable, third parties will chose that route.

Actually, third parties go to where the money is. If that high powered Nintendo console sold less than the low powered Sony console then third parties would put games on the Sony console.

Look at the Wii last gen. The weakest of the 3 consoles yet still got FIFAs, CODs, Godfather, Transformers, Splinter Cell, a Dead Space game, among others simply because of its install base.



Australian Gamer (add me if you like)               
NNID: Maraccuda              
PS Network: Maraccuda