|
A lot of these policies were products of the NES era, were strictly for the US market, were implemented as a backlash against the market conditions that destroyed the American video game market in 1983, and most of them were rolled back by the time the SNES hit the market, such as the five game limit. More policies still were rolled back or ended as the 16-bit generation went on. Konami disbanded Ultra Games in 1991 because they no longer needed to go through a shell corporation to release more than 5 games a year. And within a few years, publishers and developers were complaining about Sony's licensing restrictions.
The fact that they were rolled back doesn't erase the damage done nor the unsatisfaction that devs had with it. They had to do a lot of work around to go to Sega and they did because they weren't satisfied with what they had under Nintend. What licensing restrictions they were complaining under Sony? Haven't seem it, would like to read.
Sega also had multiple failed consoles. Sega NEVER had a successful console in Japan. The Mega Drive came in third to the Super Famicom and PC Engine in the 16-bit era in Japan. The Saturn ran neck-and-neck with the N64. The Master System didn't even really register in Japan. And console add-ons have likewise never successful save for cheap ones like the Super Game Boy. The Saturn was an underpowered train wreck of a console that was technically incapable of 3-D, developers had to manipulate sprites to create 3-D on it. There's an interview with the producers of Panzer Dragoon Saga that explains all that.
Not sure what you want on the multiple failed consoles, Nintendo had their share as well. Virtuaboy, N64, GC, WiiU....
Ease of development is a huge thing. Game developers would rather spend time and money fleshing out a game rather than fighting with a console's architecture just to make it do what you want.
From what we know Sony consoles until PS4 wasn't exactly an easy development marvel as well, still didn't prevent games from releasing. So not sure the point.
Why would developers jump ship from Nintendo to a company that had a long track record of failure? Sony offered them the space they wanted without Sega's baggage or the Saturn's bizarre architecture.
They had already jumped ship during Genesis, and some more on Saturn. But sure Sony offered something better so they gone in more intensity there.
You underestimate just how huge of a value proposition CD-ROMs were. They offered 80 times the storage of a cartridge at pennies on the dollar. Furthermore, you could use as many discs as you needed for a single game with minimal increase in manufacturing costs. I guarantee you that far outweighs any hurt fee-fees over Nintendo's policies. Had Nintendo had CD-ROMs, their track record of dominance in video games would have made them the clear first choice, especially with the loyal backing of Square and Enix.
Sony had sold 100M PS1 and was set to do more than that on PS2, didn't prevent a lot of games to launch on Xbox and even some exclusives on GC. So dominating the market don't assure anything (even more when change of gen is coming).
Square did everything they could to stay with N64 and only left when it became clear that the N64 didn't have what they wanted for FFVII, namely the storage necessary to contain a huge game and the cinematic FMV scenes. FMV is extremely space-intensive. They specifically cited storage space as the issue. They weren't "under the lash" at all. Nintendo actually treated them very well given their role in the success of the Super Famicom.
They listed as the major reason, not the sole reason. Interviews were given in this thread. And they treated Square and Enix so well that they listened to 0 of the requests and FF or DQ weren't the sole games that both companies forfeit on N64 were they?
Xbox was an American console. Japan is notoriously nationalistic when it comes to cars and electronics, save for outliers like the iPhone. Japanese developers knew this and didn't waste their money on developing for it. The Gamecube did far better than the Xbox in Japan and got far more Japanese games.
Not sure what the sales of Xbox have to do here, but ok.
NES had no effective competitors in the market. SNES had two major competitors and still smoked both of them. Plus they had the Game Boy, which crushed every competitor it ever had.
Then Master System done fantastic as a console that didn't exist. SNES didn't smoke anyone, it won against Genesis by very thin margins. If that is smoking a competitor I would like to see the superlative you would use to describe what PS1, PS2 and PS4 have done to Nintendo HW.
Incentives only go so far. Microsoft moneyhatted quite a few Japanese games early in the 360's life to try and boost the system in Japan. After a few games actually turned into financial failures despite Microsoft's money, the developers in question moved them to Wii or PS3, which were more popular, in order to salvage the situation. We almost lost the Tales series for good because of Microsoft moneyhatting Vesperia on 360.
Sure. Still don't know why do you think that a moneyhat wouldn't have changed FFVII to PS1 even if N64 had a CD-ROM. SE put FF XIII on X360 even though PS was the platform it appeared and sold most from several releases. And even after seeing how little Xbox sold FF they still launched FFXIII-2 and Lightning Returns, FF XIV and FFXV.
|
