By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
HappySqurriel on 27 August 2012
Edit Thread
richardhutnik said:
Galaki said:

Is it because Nintendo games can't sell on other platforms?


Look at what happened to Atari, Intellivision, Sega, NEC and 3DO.  They are a smaller player than even Capcom and Konami at this point, and less relevant.  Without controlling the platform, Nintendo would get lost in the shuffle.  By controlling the platform, they are able to put in what features they want to have there.  Moment you lose the platform, you don't get nearly the same level of media focus.  You end up spreading your development across multiple platforms.  And with Nintendo, that would mean they would likely have to outsource their development to other platforms, and the likes of Miyamoto wouldn't have the same level of supervision.

Same would happen with Sony and Microsoft.  Strip them of controlling the platform, and their stuff would get lost.  The having a coverage level on part with EA and Activision due to controlling the platform, would be lost.  Halo and you name whatever titles they have, would not be as relevant.

Reality is, if you want to be a player, you DO NOT lose a platform in a videogame market you control.


For Nintendo the biggest advantage of being a console manufacturer is that they can produce the hardware that is needed to create the experiences they want ... Before Nintendo moves forward with any particular hardware strategy it (probably) needs significant support from their internal developers and modifications are probably made as needed. Using the Wii as an example, it was Retro Studios that argued the nunchuck was essential to western games that made Nintendo pack it in with the system.