How Nintendo could get all the third party support in the world.

[bdbdbd]

Cerebralbore101 said:

Let's face it. Nintendo hasn't had the best third party support since the SNES. Why? What happened?

Wii: Graphically underpowered. Third party devs would rather sell to the combined PC + 360 + PS3 owners than take a chance making their game for a single system. Wii sold well, but active user base was very low. Very little third party support.

N64: Carts were expensive and couldn't hold as much memory. Cutting edge graphics. Low sales compared to PS1. Nintendo pissed devs off with tyranical bussiness practices from the NES/SNES days. Very little third party support.

Gamecube: Tiny Disks were a pain to make games for. Sales of the console were low. Best third party support after NES, and SNES.

NES/SNES: Graphically competitive. Good sales. Easy to develop for.  Fantastic third party support.

So what does Nintendo have to do to get good third party support? Simple. Make a system that is graphically competitive, sells well, and is easy and cheap to make games for.

Oh the last part had me cracking up. If we use the definion in your post, there's never been such a system from any manufacturer. Basically the high-end PC's come close, because they have so much power to waste on sloppy programming, and still manage to remain competitive compared to anything else.

SNES lost lots of 3rd party support to Megadrive, and, frankly, it wasn't that easy to program because of the many processors the system had. Making games for small discs is just as easy as making games for large discs. You just need more discs (that cost cents per copy).