yes nintendo should invite third party if they wnat to stay relevant home console wise...
Switch!!!
Here's another good read below on how Nintendo integrated CodeWarrior software into their SDK to assist 3rd party developers with ports. - http://www.gamespot.com/articles/metrowerks-provides-codewarrior-for-the-gamecube/1100-2678095/
Metrowerks provides CodeWarrior for the GameCubeMetrowerks' Brian Gildon speaks with us about the company's CodeWarrior development tools for the Nintendo GameCube. by Shahed Ahmed on January 24, 2001
Metrowerks has announced that it has reached an agreement with Nintendo to provide its CodeWarrior tools, including a compiler, debugger, and integrated development environment, to licensed GameCube developers. The company has been working with Nintendo essentially since the inception of the GameCube project, and the console's operating system, the SDK, and all of the libraries have been designed and written using CodeWarrior from an engineering standpoint. In terms of new development, the CodeWarrior toolset lets developers, particularly third parties interested in multiplatform development, write and compile the same code for multiple platforms within the same development environment. "When it came time to develop the operating system for the Nintendo GameCube, Metrowerks' CodeWarrior was our tool of choice," said Ramin Ravanpey, director of the software tools support group at Nintendo of America. "What that means for the GameCube developers is a set of tools providing unmatched integration with our operating system, enabling them to create high quality games and get them to market quickly." ... Gildon spoke further regarding Metrowerks' relationship with Nintendo and the ease of cross-platform development provided by the CodeWarrior development toolset. Our entire Q&A with Brian Gildon follows:
GameSpot: Is the CodeWarrior toolset for the GameCube already available to developers? Brian Gildon: We have the first development toolset for the GameCube. Nintendo has been primarily using it to develop the Dolphin operating system, which is the operating system that runs the machine. All of the internal parties within Nintendo, and the developers that are currently signed up with Nintendo, are using our tools as the development tools suite of choice right now. So, all of the initial titles from all of the vendors--you can kind of guess what those titles might be--are all being built using CodeWarrior. GS: Does that include third-party titles? BG: Yes, that is inclusive of first, second, and third parties from Nintendo's perspective. I will go as far as to say that some third parties that are already licensed by Nintendo are working on ports of games that they have written for other consoles or game titles that they have had sitting in the wings. They are using our tools now in some cases to port to the GameCube and get things moving. The great thing about this--although not directly related to Nintendo's interests per se--is that we have the capability of installing all of our other console tools with our GameCube tools. So developers, particularly third-party companies such as Electronic Arts and companies like that, can retarget any applications they have built for other consoles such as the PlayStation 2 toward development for the GameCube and vice versa. They can do this without having to change toolsets--they don' t even have to change applications. They can just tell it to build it for a different machine and it will do it. It is the only type of development software in the world that does this right now. GS: This must expedite ports from other consoles. BG: Absolutely. There are a couple of inherent advantages to doing this. One is that you eliminate the learning curve for developers, which cuts out the first initial development time. The second thing is that as long as they are writing standard C or C++ for most of the code, then all of that code is immediately portable. You don't run into any problems where you say, "Well, this compiler works different from this one, so things don't really compile right." ... |
Wow.... basically Nintendo did a 180 on their console design philosophy.
"the company's goal was to select a "simple RISC architecture" to help speed development of games by making it easier on software developers. IGN reported that the system was "designed from the get-go to attract third-party developers by offering more power at a cheaper price. Nintendo's design doc for the console specifies that cost is of utmost importance, followed by space.""
Nintendo... its time... to go back to your roots.
| Shadow1980 said: The GameCube had decent third-party support, but it fell way short of the PS2 in that regard, and even the Xbox had better third-party suport than the GC. The likely culprit? The little guy on the left here:
With less than one-third the capacity of even a single-sided single-layer DVD (1.5GB vs. 4.7GB), the GC's proprietary miniDVD format didn't do the system any favors. Now, I know there's all the "Well, they could have just split the game across multiple discs" talk, and sure, there's been plenty of multi-disc games before and after, but A) they weren't exactly common, B) some games probably couldn't get split across multiple discs as they take place in a single contiguous environment (think GTA), and C) I honestly doubt that anybody really wanted to split their games across multiple discs and usually only did so when it was necessary (even CD's 700MB capacity was not enough for many PS1 games; it was just a hell of sight better than the 64MB that the biggest N64 carts could hold, plus CDs cost a lot less to make). Not only is it extra work to split just one port up into multiple discs, but it also incurs greater expense (you're talking about an extra dollar or two per copy in manufacturing costs, which does add up). While a handful of publishers felt it was worth it for at least some titles, many major third-party games that came to PS2 and Xbox were no-shows on the GameCube, and the non-standard format is the only plausible explanation why. |
The other factor vvith that is it simply vvasn't a dvd player. If it had cheap, dvd player, and strongest console vvith 3rd party support, then I think Gamecube vvould be better off.
But other things come into play like marketing, and big money deals.
In my Oppinion the WiiU already was made to attract Third Parties. And this was the problem. It worked in the beginning. However for some reason most third parties thought that the WiiU buyers want the exactly same games like they could already buy on X360 and PS3 for less money. The only real try was made by Ubisoft with ZombiU. But one game just wasn't enough ...
Nintendos mistake was to make the WiiU like the Gamecube. And it got Gamecube like sales as a result ...
First of all, the GameCube did not have good third party support. It got better multiplatform support than the Nintendo 64 did but didn't get nearly as many exclusive third party games as the N64. Not to mention, third party support for the GameCube pretty much collapsed after mid-2003 whereas the N64 continued getting third party support throughout most of it's lifetime.
That being said, both Wii and Wii U pretty much built on what the GameCube was. The problem is the power wasn't there. Technology is part of the issue. Could Nintendo have released a $200-$250 console in 2006 that was on par with Xbox 360 and PS3? I don't think they could have. The Wii U is expensive because of the Gamepad, but even if there were not Gamepad, what could Nintendo have done to make it cheaper. With GameCube, the right technology was available at the right time. In fact, pretty much everything about GameCube was done right. The only problems were that they couldn't market it to an older audience, it looked too much like a kid's toy, and Nintendo would not commit to online.
Check out my art blog: http://jon-erich-art.blogspot.com
Oh the console's specs weren't what pissed off 3rd parties. It was everything else. The image, the lack of meaningful promotion, the small install base that resulted from that, and of course the minidisc format. That last one was a real screwup. Not only did it restrict file sizes but it also meant devs once again had to put up with a proprietary format that they had to acquire. The PS2 was weaker, but everything else was more convenient and attractive to 3rd parties. So yes, they should put effort into attracting 3rd parties but far more than with the GC. If they want them to play ball, the console as an ecosystem has to be compatible on some level with the goals of the third parties.
So Gamecube & Wii U both had the intention of reclaiming "hardcore" gamers by way of 3rd party support and are Nintendo's worst selling consoles, maybe it would be wise to give up on them.
When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.
I miss Nintendo
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
