Can we agree Nintendo should go third party, now?

[nemo37]

ArchangelMadzz said:

nemo37 said:

I would not mind as much if Nintendo still made systems like Gamecube (which were basically the same as the competition), but they make hardware right now that the other platform companies simply do not. Dedicated portable systems, for example, is one such type of hardware that only Nintendo really makes now, and it is how I primarly game (my main gaming sessions are on my commute or in bed at home). If Nintendo went third-party, then the only option left for gamers like me is to go mobile (and not one I would take up, based on past experience with mobile games), which I cringe at considering the quality of most games on mobile devices do not even begin to approach the most average games on portables like 3DS, Vita, and Switch. Portability is why I am personally rooting for Switch to be successful (ideally to a point where Nintendo supports it with new entries to the majority of their franchises along with re-releases and emulation from past systems, it gets great indies, and some third-party gems). My point is a bit selfish as well, but the Switch really is a dream handheld for me, so I would hate for Nintendo to abandon it and develop major projects only on stationary systems, which I would have little time to enjoy. 

The middle ground would then be Nintendo going third party and keeping handhelds alive. 

 

They make a killing with their handhelds, Pokémon etc. 

And they'd make a killing third party. Zelda would've sold over 5 mil probably if it released on ps/Xbox/pc. 

I would agree with your sentiments in the ideal world where the handheld and stationary systems could survive without exclusivity. However, a question that arises is whether or not people would purchase their handhelds if the games were avilable on PC/Xbox/PS. I cannot see the Switch selling well if Zelda was released on non-Nintendo platforms (like you said though, Zelda itself would have probably sold better but then again such an arguement could be made for most console-exclusives). Of course, another option is to split developement (like Nintendo has done with its portables and home consoles) where certain games come to handheld while others come to the stationary systems; but this again creates a situation where people need to purchase a seperate system to enjoy the full library of games (not to mention Nintendo running into software drought issues again due to split developement). 

The most ideal scenerio would be for Sony and MS to also release systems like the Switch, so that all three major platform makers have viable portable gaming devices. This would mean that the dedicated game experience could be easily shifted from one portable system to another, should one of the platform makers decide to go third-party. Maybe if Switch does well (which I strongly hope it does, albeit I think it will require a price drop to maintain long-term momentum), it will convince Sony to have another go at portables (I certainly would not mind having a Vita successor).