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

Forums - Sales Discussion - Nintendo means bad news for 3rd parties!

I think your definition of "dumbed down" is wrong. Lacking quality? Sure, but it has the same content except online play. And for being the lower scored version, it has sold more than the PS3 version that had online play. (I'm still shocked by that, since I rented the game and beat it pretty fast.) Honestly, n00b, I think you're trolling and I'll avoid commenting next time.



Around the Network

"The DS numbers are HEAVILY biased thanks to 1.8M copies of pokemon going out the door. There is/was still plenty of money to be made on the DS.. I mean it WAS pokemon after all. Likewise, the number one selling console game in the month was a Mario platformer on Wii.... again, this will heavily skew numbers on that system especially at 350K and with few new releases (and 0 f***ing quality releases) on the system during the month.

You'll see similar type percentages from first parties on the XBox come September. This type of reporting is nothing more than flagrantly sensationalistic."---borghe

I agree wholeheartedly with the above statement, after Halo 2 launches we'll see how well 3rd parties perform on the 360. It's the exact same situation here. Since when has a new Mario title failed to perform market-wise on either the Nintendo handheld, or console side for that matter? Tiger Woods is at what, 200k in its 2nd week on the NPD? Zelda continuing to sell well? I'm shocked, as this is unprecedented. (TP has outlasted GoW, & both were released during last year's huge Nov. holiday period. 10th in overall sales currently is extremely impressive for a game 6 months old) Even PM:TTYD on the GC did 500k+ ltd. on a system not nearly 1/10th as popular. (TTYD which launched on October 11th of '04, when the installed userbase was 7.8million+) I'm not compairing a ww established brand franchise such as Zelda to a brand new IP, but Halo was also a brand new IP last gen & we saw how that sold.

 



"The things we touch have no permanence."

Shane said:

The only reason this was in Nintendo's best interest is because they figured third parties wouldn't support them anyway, so they may as well cash in on the cheap hardware and first party software benefits of dumbing down the system. Whether it is actually the right move now is debateable.


At this point I would say that it isn't debateable at all. Looking at Japan Nintendo doesn't need 3rd parties to win this war. We don't have a gamecube scenario here were Nintendo desperate needed exclusive games to get some new momentum. We have a scenario were, in japan, the only consol that is selling well is Wii. If you want to get the japanese market, you (as a 3rd party devloper) needs Nintendo more than Nintendo needs you.

Shane said:

I agree 360 won't be able to support third parties alone. There's also PS3.

There were we back to the old PS360 alliance that would save "HD-gaming". I have more faith in that 360 would support 3rd parties alone than PS3 would be able to help. As it looks now I would say that sony should be happy if PS3 reaches 7 millions WW before 31 december 2008.

Shane said:

Despite Nintendo's more than 2:1 lead, third party games still sell better on PS3. Wii does currently have more games due to continued focus on PS2, but they're games that will sell worse, something the publishers are expecting.

Well last time this site had monthly charts is also had total software sales for each plattform. At that time 3rd parties on Wii had sold more games in USA than the total software sales on PS3. How it looks now I don't have time to check. Japan doesn't look that good yet, but neither does PS3 software (nor xbox360) and those had better names and bigger budgetts.

EDIT:

Sorry I was wrong here: (looking at those games avvailible in the last week top 200)

  • PS3 total software sales = 3,857 millions on 24 games an avarage software sale of 161k.
  • Wii 3rd party software sales = 3,204 millions on 19 games an avarage software sale of 169k.

Removing Resistance, Motorstorm and F1 published by Sony gives us: 2849 on 21 titles an avarage 3 rd party software sale of 135k.

Disclaimer: I don't know if I have missed any game that hasn't charted for last week for any plattform. (I do miss daragon ball for Wii)

Shane said:

I keep repeating myself because it's true, but people can't get it through their heads because they actually believe a) third party games will sell on Wii and b) Wii will miraculously receive the next Final Fantasy exclusively. In Japan, 82.5% of all Wii games sold since the system launched have been published by Nintendo, and as I posted in another thread, the average third party Wii sales are 35% lower than the average third party PS3 sales, despite the race currently being a blowout in Wii's favor. The US isn't quite that bad, but as the article we're discussing right now shows, it's still heavily dominated by Nintendo. Furthermore, while Microsoft and Sony retain major titles (both exclusive and non-exclusive) like FF, MGS, GTA, and Gears of War, in addition to expanding their first and second party efforts (largely at Nintendo's expense), there has not been a single announcement for Wii that's really worth talking about unless it's been made from Nintendo. Playground? Rygar? Cooking Mama? Spinoff du jour (because the original isn't technologically possible)? Wake me when it's over. Nintendo will continue to create top quality software internally, but anyone expecting third parties to make a concentrated effort on anything but milking Wii while they can and to the extent that they can is going to end up disappointed.

Looking at Japan that might be true, but the intresting part is that you still haven't asked yourself what is the quality of these titles? PS3 have some big names, Wii has showelware which is competing against Nintendos AA titles. DS has shown that 3rd parties can sell on Nintendo plattforms, they might not sell as much as Nintendo but they do sell and the pie seems to get larger in Japan because of the DS.

Now back to this "the hardware is to weak to get the main game, Wii will only get spinoffs": Dragon Quest? Yes that game that suddently moved to DS. If Wii is to weak to hold main series what is the DS?. It is also intresting that you brings up Gears of War, a new franshise for this gen. Explain for me why not a new franshise from a 3rd party cant sell well on Wii when Red Steel has shipped almost 1 million copies WW, and yes that is what matters for publishers.

The bottom line is this you can sell well on Nintendo plattforms as the DS has shown, if you make some good quality games. If you say that AA teams can't compete with Nintendos best you should ask yourself why not everybody buys a Wii now, because clearly 3rd parties can't make as good games as Nintendo.



 

 

Buy it and pray to the gods of Sigs: Naznatips!

Btw, PM:TTYD 1st month totals: 189,703

GC installed userbase at that time: 7.5million+

This really puts things into perspective, doesn't it?



"The things we touch have no permanence."

Shane, I think the problem is you're looking at this from a traditional point of view. With the 32/64 bit era, a status quo was established, and nobody challenged it in the last gen. If you assume the Xbox was the spiritual successor to the Saturn (sorry, Dreamcast), all of the basic premises can be said about the Saturn/PS1/N64 as can be said about Xbox/PS2/GCN. It was just a continuation. An evolution. It was interesting to watch each of the three companies grow (and sad to see one die), but you were still working with the same basic set of rules. This generation, the rules have changed. Nintendo is currently proving themselves to third parties. The only one that bit was Ubisoft, who are probably going to end the month of May with two different million-seller games which are exclusive to Wii. Can any third parties say that with Sony? (serious question, not a dig)



Around the Network

Not only is there less food in Nintendo's ocean, but that whale will have no problem eating any of the fish that are swimming in its territory.

Nobody's denying that Nintendo makes great games.

Motorstorm and Resistance are interesting points. Why do teams like Insomniac, Evolution, Epic, Factor 5, and Bioware turn to Microsoft and Sony rather than Nintendo? Because Nintendo would rather promote its own internal software, or at least something like Mario Goes Fishing, rather than that of an outsider. You think Gears of War would have been nearly as big on Wii as 360? Or that it would have even been given the green light to begin with?

Rogue Squadron didn't sell as well as it would have on PS2. RE4 didn't sell as it did on Sony's systems and turned out to be one of the worst mistakes Capcom ever made, something they eventually realized (too late) and decided to port it to the PS2 and now have killed the developer that started the whole mess.

People are buying Wii Play in droves. This title is crappier than anything the third parties are making. Why are people buying it? It was made by Nintendo.

Ubisoft didn't put their money on Wii. They came out with a couple launch games (a look at the Gamecube launch schedule shows they did the same thing then), but they still know their big money is on 360, followed by PS3. Something like Rayman, much like Sonic, may fit more appropriately with Nintendo's userbase than it will with Microsoft's. However, it doesn't come close to measuring up to Clancy. Granted, we will see a Clancy on Wii here or there, but it won't come close to the 20 or so we'll see on the other platforms. Clancy, by itself, is more important than every single title Ubisoft will release on the Wii throughout its lifespan.

Nintendo can only get so far without third parties, even in Japan. As big as Nintendo's franchises, new and old, are, the Japanese will continue to want games from Square, Enix, Konami, Koei, Capcom, etc. I'd dig deeper into the figures if I felt the numbers on this site outside Japan were reliable, or that I could draw any real conclusions based on them. Only 19 third party games on Wii obviously means something's missing right there, as there were that many on launch day.

DQ's never been about being technologically advanced, but it moving to DS only helps out Wii in the sense that it's not on PS3.

Yeah, the success of remakes, Love and Berry, and Tamogotchi really proves the quality argument.



Shane, you're insulting the bud before the flower's had a chance to bloom. You can't compare RE4 on GCN to RE4 on PS2 because PS2 had three times the install base. It had nothing to do with Nintendo's competition. In fact, you really can't compare Nintendo's previous consoles to Wii. That's what I was trying to tell you. Last gen, Nintendo bent over backwards to get 3rd party support, and succeeded to a very small extent. A couple FF spinoffs, some Namco RPGs, a bit of Capcom love... but the mainline support was for Sony. Nintendo hasn't had major 3rd party support since the SNES. You're making assertions based on ten years of history that have no bearings on the future. The question is "IF 3rd parties throw support behind Nintendo, will they succeed?" and you're pointing to a past where they didn't. The times, they are a-changin'



fishamaphone said:
Shane, you're insulting the bud before the flower's had a chance to bloom. You can't compare RE4 on GCN to RE4 on PS2 because PS2 had three times the install base. It had nothing to do with Nintendo's competition. In fact, you really can't compare Nintendo's previous consoles to Wii. That's what I was trying to tell you. Last gen, Nintendo bent over backwards to get 3rd party support, and succeeded to a very small extent. A couple FF spinoffs, some Namco RPGs, a bit of Capcom love... but the mainline support was for Sony. Nintendo hasn't had major 3rd party support since the SNES. You're making assertions based on ten years of history that have no bearings on the future. The question is "IF 3rd parties throw support behind Nintendo, will they succeed?" and you're pointing to a past where they didn't. The times, they are a-changin'

 They did succeed though, by GC standards. Shane has used -- in fact he has to use, since it's the only statistic that supports his argument -- a per-system sales figure to show that PS3 third party titles are outselling Wii third party titles on a per system basis. 

Using the same system, Resident Evil 4 did quite well on Gamecube, considering it had 1/5 the system base. 



http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a324/Arkives/Disccopy.jpg%5B/IMG%5D">http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a324/Arkives/Disccopy.jpg%5B/IMG%5D">

Shane said:

Not only is there less food in Nintendo's ocean, but that whale will have no problem eating any of the fish that are swimming in its territory.

Nobody's denying that Nintendo makes great games.

Motorstorm and Resistance are interesting points. Why do teams like Insomniac, Evolution, Epic, Factor 5, and Bioware turn to Microsoft and Sony rather than Nintendo? Because Nintendo would rather promote its own internal software, or at least something like Mario Goes Fishing, rather than that of an outsider. You think Gears of War would have been nearly as big on Wii as 360? Or that it would have even been given the green light to begin with?

Rogue Squadron didn't sell as well as it would have on PS2. RE4 didn't sell as it did on Sony's systems and turned out to be one of the worst mistakes Capcom ever made, something they eventually realized (too late) and decided to port it to the PS2 and now have killed the developer that started the whole mess.

People are buying Wii Play in droves. This title is crappier than anything the third parties are making. Why are people buying it? It was made by Nintendo.

Ubisoft didn't put their money on Wii. They came out with a couple launch games (a look at the Gamecube launch schedule shows they did the same thing then), but they still know their big money is on 360, followed by PS3. Something like Rayman, much like Sonic, may fit more appropriately with Nintendo's userbase than it will with Microsoft's. However, it doesn't come close to measuring up to Clancy. Granted, we will see a Clancy on Wii here or there, but it won't come close to the 20 or so we'll see on the other platforms. Clancy, by itself, is more important than every single title Ubisoft will release on the Wii throughout its lifespan.

Nintendo can only get so far without third parties, even in Japan. As big as Nintendo's franchises, new and old, are, the Japanese will continue to want games from Square, Enix, Konami, Koei, Capcom, etc. I'd dig deeper into the figures if I felt the numbers on this site outside Japan were reliable, or that I could draw any real conclusions based on them. Only 19 third party games on Wii obviously means something's missing right there, as there were that many on launch day.

DQ's never been about being technologically advanced, but it moving to DS only helps out Wii in the sense that it's not on PS3.

Yeah, the success of remakes, Love and Berry, and Tamogotchi really proves the quality argument.


So many issues here.

 

First, Wii Play is selling because it has a Wiimote included, not because it's made by Nintendo. Most of the people I sell the game to have no idea that it's made by Nintendo, they just know that it's a game that costs 10 dollars more than a Wiimote individually.

 

As already pointed out, Resident Evil 4 actually sold better on the Gamecube than it did on the PS2 if you account for the huge disparity in install base. By your standards, Zelda: The Windwaker would have been a bigger game on the PS2, as well. Seriously, it would have.

 

And one last time -- third parties are already clearly shifting their focus to the Wii. Stop with the "Wii doesn't have many 3rd party games" argument, because it's patently false. There are more exclusive 3rd party titles planned for the Wii than there are for the PS3, and the gap is growing, not shrinking.

 

Given the small Gamecube userbase, the best question we can ask ourselves is: "Compared to the titles Nintendo released on the system, did Resident Evil 4 do well?" And the answer is: "Yes." While it didn't sell as well as Zelda: The Windwaker (which was also an excellent title, so not a bad thing), it sold better than Mario Party (several different versions), Metroid Prime, Pokemon (again, all different versions of the game), Paper Mario: TTYD, Star Fox Adventures, and others. So yes, solid third party software can compete in sales with solid Nintendo software. 

 

Really, this is just proves a simple concept: established franchises (Whether individual games are good or not) and quality, big name titles sell very well on any system. For Playstation, this has historically been some first party titles with a lot of third party ones; for the Nintendo systems, it has been (for ten years, at least) solid first party titles with just a few third party ones. But on both systems, one thing remains the same -- the good games and established franchises sell well. The end.

 



http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a324/Arkives/Disccopy.jpg%5B/IMG%5D">http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a324/Arkives/Disccopy.jpg%5B/IMG%5D">

To clarify, the sentence should have been "and you're pointing to a past where they didn't throw support behind Nintendo."