Why Nintendo should stay first party

[Cream147]

thx1139 said:

Cream147 said:
Why Nintendo should stay first party? From a former Sega and especially Sonic fan, this is pretty obvious. We can trace the decline of Sega as a publisher of good games back to when they quit the hardware business and became third party. We can trace the exact game where Sonic started going off the rails to the first main non-remake Sonic game developed for non-Sega consoles i.e. Sonic Heroes. If Nintendo go the same way it will be far more tragic, as they have a number of franchises whose quality it would be awful to see compromised.

It's not just coincidence this, either. First party games are so often superior, and there are many reasons to this. Focus on optimisation for a single console, having cooperation between software developers and hardware developers for a fuller understanding of the hardware, a company having more to lose if they're developing games to try and sell their own console etc. etc.

And that's not to mention the fact that Nintendo are the only ones making interesting hardware, rather than glorified PCs. Take them out and that's pretty much it for me and gaming. I'll become a retro gamer, with a small amount of PC gaming on the side. Sony and Microsoft offer me nothing.

I would say your history on Sega decline is a little off.  The decline of Sega started with a failed console. The Saturn failed and then Sega tried hardware again with the Dreamcast, but even before it launched it was a very hard sell against the PS2 which was still a year off.  So you rapidly see Nintendo speeding down this same path.  Will Nintendo have another failed console and put themselves in a path where becoming a 3rd party goes from a smart business decision to a required act of desparation.

I havent seen one reason in this thread that is a real reason why Nintendo should stay 1st party. The closest is that they dont have the software development discipline to make quality software for more than 1 platform.   The claim is that unless they stay 1st party they would be in danger of making crappy software (as if Nintendo hasnt made crappy software in the past).

I don't mean financial decline. We're gamers right? Not business investors. Sure, the Saturn was a backwards step in quality, but the Dreamcast was a great console, even if it didn't sell well. From the moment Sega went third party, that's when the quality of their games took an absolute turn for the worst - as best illustrated best by the Sonic series.

And no one's denying that Nintendo have published bad software, but the general quality of their software and in particular their core franchises is exceptional. The Zelda franchise has I believe 17 main entries and every single one of them is a good game. That's what you call pedigree. Year on year they release more quality games than any other publisher - it would be a really interesting argument to see someone deny that. That quality would end if they went third party, and THAT is why they must stay first party.

As I said before, if Nintendo leave the hardware business, then I'll have bought my last console, at least until something actually interesting comes along.