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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Can we agree Nintendo should go third party, now?

Tagged games:

 

So?

Shaddup, you Pony! 676 36.13%
 
Switch > PC/PS4/XBO 376 20.10%
 
I can buy them all, anyway 99 5.29%
 
Nintendon't need more 29 1.55%
 
Keep only doing handhelds 81 4.33%
 
Maybe one more gen... 78 4.17%
 
Sounds good! 277 14.80%
 
I have always wanted it... 90 4.81%
 
Don't care about Nintendo 125 6.68%
 
Sonic > Mario 40 2.14%
 
Total:1,871
Ck1x said:
TheBlackNaruto said:

Okay but NONE of that explains your last statement that because it doesn't say Sony on the box that it hurts some peoples feelings though. That's what I was asking. And you stated the Switch was the most powerful dedicated gaming device ever created. And that was my first time ever seeing that so I was curious how you came to that conclusion. But are you meaning just mobile?

Also no goalposts have been moved people have been saying that about Nin going 3rd party since long before the Switch. So nothing has changed there, me personally I am not a huge fan on Nin games outside of 2 or 3 games  so it doesn't really bother me either way if they go 3rd party or not. It just seems odd when these topics come up and a person give thier opinion and some points that people attack them instead of debating things with them.

Heck in this thread alone I have seen people talk about being hurt because they can't play  the games on their console of choice. The well tell your console of choice to make better games.  The Sony and MS only care about graphics amd don't care about gameplay and innovation narrative smh. It is odd just to attack someone fot having  a different opinion.  Heck Sony and MS seem to take WAY more chances  than Nin imo of course. MS always gets crap for pumping out the same stuff Halo/Gears/Forza/Fable. Or Sony with Uncharted/Gran Turismo/God of war but Nin can make 50 iterations of Mario, 20 Pokemon games, 10 Zelda games and it is amazing. I just don't get that. I loved Pikmin when it came out because it was something new and it felt like they were finally taking a chance to me. I don't know it is just to each his/her own based on their tastes 

You just summed up this whole ridiculous port begging theme for me... If most people on other systems feel that Nintendo has just been rehashing the same franchises, then why would anyone want them to go 3rd party? Let their rehashed games stay on their underpowered hardware and everyone wins!

You make it sound as though the people for Nintendo going 3rd party have come in and dropped some amazing thoughts and facts on why it makes sense for them to do such a thing. There's nothing to debate when people provide nothing to back up such a claim or opinion.

Actually no I didn't sum up anything I asked a question. Because it is a legitamite question. Why is it that Sony and MS get talked about for it but Nin doesn't? It is just odd. And who said MOST people feel as if Nin has been rehashing the same franchises? Does me asking that question suggest that or something? And actually some people in this very thread have made some very good points and gave some good reasons on why they felt they should go 3rd party. And others have gave very good points and reasons on why they felt the shounldn't. Not agreeing with them doesn't mean they are not thought out points.

 



The absence of evidence is NOT the evidence of absence...

PSN: StlUzumaki23

Around the Network
TheBlackNaruto said:
Ck1x said:

You just summed up this whole ridiculous port begging theme for me... If most people on other systems feel that Nintendo has just been rehashing the same franchises, then why would anyone want them to go 3rd party? Let their rehashed games stay on their underpowered hardware and everyone wins!

You make it sound as though the people for Nintendo going 3rd party have come in and dropped some amazing thoughts and facts on why it makes sense for them to do such a thing. There's nothing to debate when people provide nothing to back up such a claim or opinion.

Actually no I didn't sum up anything I asked a question. Because it is a legitamite question. Why is it that Sony and MS get talked about for it but Nin doesn't? It is just odd. And who said MOST people feel as if Nin has been rehashing the same franchises? Does me asking that question suggest that or something? And actually some people in this very thread have made some very good points and gave some good reasons on why they felt they should go 3rd party. And others have gave very good points and reasons on why they felt the shounldn't. Not agreeing with them doesn't mean they are not thought out points.

 

The fact that you feel Nintendo doesn't get criticism from using the same franchises over again tells me all that I need to know, thanks!



Lawlight said:
Vertigo-X said:

Oh, ho! You sound like a Nintendo supporter! ;)

(edit) Also, Naum's right: given the power of a good gaming PC, just imagine what Sony's first party devs could do if they weren't constricted by PS4's weak hardware! Sony should definitely go 3rd party.

New idea for a thread! "Can we agre Sony should go third party, now?"

What would the devs do with more power that they cannot do now? You haven't given a good reason for Sony to go third party. Also, you're not saying going 3rd party - you're saying Sony should go PC exclusive which makes no sense.

Ah, music to my ears; you're making my point for me. A pity you can't see that.



The BuShA owns all!

It wouldn't hurt Nintendo to push games of their many IPs on other platforms, assuming they can maintain the same level of quality assurance their games are known for.

I suspect the OP is more of a plea for Nintendo to release current versions of its premiere titles published for Nintendo's own hardware platforms in parallel with PC versions, possibly Playstation and Xbox versions, depending upon whatever platform the OP prefers.

These kinds of arguments and bargaining smack of the same type of claims the Nintendo super fans made back when the Wii ruled the hardware charts. In their minds, third party developers were obligated to lead develop or port all their games for the Wii or go out of business/do a disservice to their share holders because the hardware installed base and sales rates for the Wii were exploding. The Wii was envisioned in their minds as a toaster oven or microwave that every household would eventually have.

In the end, no.

While Nintendo certainly could develop generic ports of their games that run on other platforms, they have made a point since the Wii of incorporating aspects of their hardware platforms into the games themselves, at times more effectively than others.

Nintendo played heavily with the dual screen format originally with the DS, then the 3DS and then less effectively with the Wii U, depending upon individual opinion. Independent screen was great for households and the controller doubled as a useful TV remote, but clearly these features didn't translate into enviable sales.

The 3D effect was all but just a visual experiment that was proven to have little to no bearing on actual game play (2DS confirmed this), but legitimate attempts were made to add a new dimension of play into the games for those who didn't get cross-eyed staring at stereoscopic images.

The Wii introduced motion control that was incorporated into most of Nintendo's games that wouldn't always translate effectively into generic input devices, even while it's still fair to say that much of the motion control incorporated into many games was substituting controller shaking for wild button mashing. Many of the games on the other hand, were not of the flail control variety.

Nintendo hasn't demonstrated all of the ways in which the hardware of the Switch can be incorporated into their own games (only hinted at in demo reels), but it would be an underassessment to state that the Switch is a generic tablet with removable motion control input devices standard that could easily be done on say an Nvidia Shield or iPad.

So traditional style games could be ported to PC (used as a generic stand in for Not Nintendo Hardware), but it's safe to say that the next iteration of Nintendo games will be tailored for what the Switch brings to the table. These additions would be lost in the ports.

Alternately, Nintendo could develop generic style traditional input versions of their games for PC or mobile (they have already licensed out mobiles Nintendo games) that weren't the same games published for the Switch, but this would likely be done through licensing their IPs to be developed by a third party, which is something that wouldn't necessarily be in their best interests. Nintendo likely wouldn't want to divert their own development teams to such projects, and it certainly wouldn't mean that PC gamers could buy the next iteration of Metroid, Zelda, Smash Bros or Mario Kart seen on the Switch for their PCs.

So that's more or less where I see this argument standing. Should Nintendo license their IPs to allow hand selected third party developers produce games using Nintendo's properties? They already are for mobile. But this OP does seem to be more of a "I want to play Nintendo games on my gaming PC" type of post.



greenmedic88 said:
The 3D effect was all but just a visual experiment that was proven to have little to no bearing on actual game play (2DS confirmed this), but legitimate attempts were made to add a new dimension of play into the games for those who didn't get cross-eyed staring at stereoscopic images.

If visuals have no bearing on gameplay (and thus don't matter I guess?) what is the point of going third party? I thought the idea was to get Nintendo games pushing out better visuals and performance? 



Around the Network
specialk said:
greenmedic88 said:
The 3D effect was all but just a visual experiment that was proven to have little to no bearing on actual game play (2DS confirmed this), but legitimate attempts were made to add a new dimension of play into the games for those who didn't get cross-eyed staring at stereoscopic images.

If visuals have no bearing on gameplay (and thus don't matter I guess?) what is the point of going third party? I thought the idea was to get Nintendo games pushing out better visuals and performance? 

I don't want to call the 3DS a gimmick, while it's a valid claim for those who just turned it off, but in the end, you could turn it off and some people couldn't even use it for whatever reason. They had one eye, it gave them headaches, whatever. Personally, I liked it, even though it was pretty gimmicky. 

The only reason I see for Nintendo to get behind non Nintendo exclusives is if they simply want to expand their business model. They have been dabbling in the mobile space. But it would have nothing to do with saving consumers $299 so they don't have to buy a Switch (that Nintendo wants to sell consumers) or whatever piece of hardware Nintendo is currently selling. 

If someone is attempting to raise the argument that people just want to play current Nintendo games in 4K because they just bought a 4K display, that's not really Nintendo's concern. 



Seventizz said:

My rule is 3 games I want, and I buy the system. So far Mario Odyssey is the only title that appeals to me (I have Zelda on my WiiU). So far this gen, my Xbox One and PC suit my gaming needs - which kinda sucks as I usually buy all the relevant consoles in a generation.

 

That said, I welcome Nintendo going 3rd party.


nowadays  my rule for Nintendo is 10 games



God bless You.

My Total Sales prediction for PS4 by the end of 2021: 110m+

When PS4 will hit 100m consoles sold: Before Christmas 2019

There were three ravens sat on a tree / They were as blacke as they might be / The one of them said to his mate, Where shall we our breakfast take?


zorg1000 said:
0D0 said:

This question is common because

Nintendo is the 3rd among them

Nintendo has the smallest userbase

Nintendo consoles are weak and deprecated in graphics

Nintendo online features are poor

Wii U bombed

Nintendo isn't making enough profit since Wii U release

 

And now let's pay attention to Switch and wait :)

This is ignoring the side of their business that makes up 80% of their userbase, adding that to the mix negates your first two points.

If Nintendo should go 3rd party because of Wii U bombing than Sony should go 3rd party because of Vita failing.

Nintendo had 2-3 years of losses recently but the previous 25-30 years were profitable, if you are profitable as a hardware manufacturer for 5 generations you dont just jump ship after 1 generation of moderate losses. Even so, by that logic than Microsoft & Sony should have went 3rd party after the original Xbox & PS3 lost them billions.

Not liking their hardware or online services are legitimate reasons I suppose.

I don't agree that Nintendo should go third party, I was just replying why the question is so common. Many usually bring this topic up because of those reasons.



God bless You.

My Total Sales prediction for PS4 by the end of 2021: 110m+

When PS4 will hit 100m consoles sold: Before Christmas 2019

There were three ravens sat on a tree / They were as blacke as they might be / The one of them said to his mate, Where shall we our breakfast take?


Nettles said:
In four years they will announce they are going third party.

Mark it down, bump this post in four years.

I'd wait a few more years before this statement to be sure.



God bless You.

My Total Sales prediction for PS4 by the end of 2021: 110m+

When PS4 will hit 100m consoles sold: Before Christmas 2019

There were three ravens sat on a tree / They were as blacke as they might be / The one of them said to his mate, Where shall we our breakfast take?


0D0 said:
Nettles said:
In four years they will announce they are going third party.

Mark it down, bump this post in four years.

I'd wait a few more years before this statement to be sure.

I wait 4 years when the next console/hh comes out and say nintendo will go third party in 4 years. Bump my post in 8 years