vivster said:
BraveNewWorld said:
vivster said:
I don't know why people are so opposed to this. It seems like a financially responsible option.
You make money on the games, not the consoles. No one can dispute that Nintendo titles would sell more on multiple platforms. And why would the quality of the games suffer? The devs are the same and they are able to work with even stronger hardware.
The only thing against this direction is Nintendo's (and their fanboy's) pride. |
Except it's not. Nintendo is built like a company that produces and makes games for one set of systems. If they were to go third party they'd have to make massive changes to the way they do business and their infrastructure. This chart shows Sega's woes. In 2004 Sammy bought majority stock in Sega.
All these different branches and studios...
EAD
SPD
IRD
SDD
NST
NTD
NERD
NSD
1-UP Studio
Creatures Inc.
Monolith Soft
Nd Cube
Retro Studios
Game Freak
create games exclusively for Nintendo systems. All of these studios would have to expand and learn to create for PS4, Vita, Xbox One, PC, MAC, iOS, and Android. That's not financially responsible and, like Sega, would set them back years. Like Sega, Nintendo will only go 3rd party as a necessity.
|
Nintendo is not Sega. It has enough original IPs to carry the business whereas Sega has nothing. Sega was an incompetent company when it was having hardware as well.
Those Studios you mentioned wouldn't have to "expand" if they built their games on other consoles from the start. Nintendo's money is not special. They will get that from other companies as well.
And that whole bullcrap about "Nintendo games are tailored to special hardware". No it is not. It's just hardware. Stop pretending Nintendo's hardware is made of fairy dust. I have yet to see a Nintendo exclusive that wouldn't be as enjoyable on different hardware.
|
yes, finally somebody wants to admit it. This is coming from a guy who read the damn Sonic comices
