BraLoD said:
I don't think they need it, so I agree they are fine either way, but I think they should. I agree, some franchises would now face competition, but the boost in people able ti buy their games should more than outweight it in the big picture, it won't be "the only one I can get" anymore but will be a brand famous company game that now have 5x the amount of possible consumers to gice it a try. |
If Nintendo would go third party, they wouldn't have to make games to feed their own hardware anymore. So expect everything getting axed apart from Mario (only Jump&Runs & Kart), Smash, Zelda, possibly Splatoon, Fire Emblem, Pokemon and Yokai Watch (and for the latter 3, Nintendo already decided they would only sell on mobile devices, and since the competition doesn't make handhelds, so that would mean Smartphones only for them). Everything else is history, no more Metroid, F-Zero (They are already reluctant to produce them because of bad sales and low profits), Paper Mario, Pikmin, Kirby, Xenoblade and so on.
Just look at Sega how it went for them. Anything that wasn't Sonic is basically forgotten and rotting in their IP attic. I really doubt it would be any different with Nintendo. Just a new Mario every year and maybe some other game in between sometimes, that's about it if Nintendo goes 3rd party.
Last but not least, Nintendo repeatedly said they consider themselves as a toy company, meaning that they would leave gaming entirely if they couldn't sell any hardware anymore.
So no, there's no way I could agree to that