RolStoppable said:
Getting third parties on board would be much more efficient for Nintendo than making such games themselves. Not only do third parties already have established and thus strong IPs aimed at the segment you speak of, but it also allows Nintendo to make more of the types of games that third parties are neglecting, thus serving the people outside of this segment you speak of and increasing the general appeal of the system. Nintendo made and had games like Goldeneye 007, Perfect Dark, Eternal Darkness, Metroid Prime and Resident Evil exclusivity during the N64 and GC eras. It didn't really help, because Nintendo's problem was that the majority of good third party games were not on their platform. Therefore Nintendo making or funding a game like Bayonetta 2 or Shadow of the Colossus here or there isn't going to raise the general appeal of the console by much. Getting proper CoD and AC games (and continuing to do so) is significantly more important for the appeal of the console. Ergo, there's no need for Nintendo to copy Sony. |
I haven't read a post like this of yours in a while. /bromance
Okay, the objective of the exercise is to show how Nintendo can optimize HW sales. You point out, and correctly so, that though Nintendo had these games during the Cube era, but it didn't result in sales. I'll explain that by saying that since the 3rd party exclusives and multiplats weren't adequate, that edge was lost. That leads us to believe that the edge I'm referring to is only to be taken advantage of when the more pivotal piece of the puzzle is supplied: 3rd party support.
However, having said that, there is another other key factor that make this a little less straightforward.
We know that 1st party developers are meant to lead the pack when it comes to offering content to a segment. As could be seen on the PS2, and by the nature of the first games to be launched on the PS3 (AC was to be a PS3 exclusive I believe), it only seems true that 3rd party developers feed off of the image (marketing) and content provided by the manufacturer (in this occurrence Sony). However, there seem to be exceptions to this rule, as Nintendo has been able to snag Japanese talent to cater to this segment without leading the pack. This is an oddity more than a rule, but Nintendo managed it by ensuring a healthy ecosystem on its platforms. For example, Resident Evil Revelations is one such case that Nintendo secured via aggressive pricing for the 3DS. MH was won by promising financial backing and partnership in the distribution of the games on the two most popular product lines of the day (DS & Wii). So normally, this is led by example, but we have seen powerful exceptions to this with Nintendo. However the 360 has Gears and other more shooter/sci-fi games, thanks to the posterchild that is Halo. Also, on the Wii, the system was flooded with casual titles due to publishers following Nintendo's lead in that segment. So the exception we see here with games from Capcom and now bayonetta, DQ, and such are the exception rather than the norm.
Imho, all the pieces need to fit together to attain godlike status in the industry. So to me 96M is not enough.
Then, there is the fact that I know that Nintendo is capable of making such games, and I like their games, and so personally in my taste (this is a matter of taste) I believe that Nintendo should copy them. As for sales, I know there are many others like me who are very vocal and who have shunned their Wii's due to this failure in 1st party offerings for the segment, and are reluctant to support Nintendo in the future.
Lastly, I want to mention that when people shot for a 360 versus a PS3, the reason they would choose the PS3 is for its exclusives, which are in majority 1st party.
When you say that Nintendo should rely on 3rd parties, do you mean for exclusives like Bayonetta 2 or do you mean for multiplats or both?
Essay Pro