I believe that it is a tradition from the Yamauchi era where Nintendo must not create too violent games (+16/18 ratings).

So yeah, their policy is what is stopping them.

creampie said: 1. True hardcore games dont sell very much 2. True hardcore games are based on complex gameplay mechanics 3. True hardcore games are long lasting 4. True hardcore games are not realistic

I'm not sure why you included point 1 in there. 20 out of the 21 best selling games of all time were published by Nintendo

5. Nintendo is the exception to point 1
:)

Hardcore Mario has already been made by Ron Jeremy. Nintendo could never reach such awesomeness, they'll better not even try!   

to be fair, when 3rd parties actually put in the effort with a "core" kind of title they have had decent results. I mean both goldeneye and Epic mickey were decent 3rd party efforts that were built from the ground up and catered for the Wii hardware. Both have sold very well, and before people say Epic Mickey is for kids...it isnt, its quite a dark game.:)

Oh i forgot Monster hunter too...

Cod games, Sonic games, RE4, Red steel...all of them sold pretty well tbh

They made the Prime series, that kicked ass.
They made Metroid: Other M, which sucked.

BTW, you should have "Nintendo is d00med" as an option in the poll for good measure :P

Cobretti2 said: oniyide said: @Aielyn GE was released a whole year later at a higher price and Nba Jam was released later than the WIi version. If your gonna compare at least dont leave out info GoldenEye did poorly overall on everything, I just wish they did the crazy idea I was proposing with the original n64 game slightly revamped. When they annouced rumors it might come but  not guranteree as there was licining issues between microsoft and nintendo, I proposed a comprimise between the two companies which would allow a cross platform online battle. XBLA would get goldeneye (iinstead of a disc release and size limited) and Wii would get goldeneye on disc.In theory I was hoping they be on par with each over visually (dumbed down on 360 to match). Then have a dedicated server where gamers from 360 and wii could connect to and compete against each other. dual analog vs wii remote. The fans of the series would have loved this and would purely on the faboy inside them want to prove which form on controls was superior. It would have generated buzz and more would have sold on both systems,

It wasnt a fair compraison, late ports of games do worse 99 percent of the time. It proves nothing.

MS has the rights to teh orginal GE, let that go. MS would NEVER do anything like that.

Aielyn said: Jay520 said: But the point is 3rd parties clearly weren't going to make the first move. So why didn't Nintendo make that Grand Theft Auto type games? Or that Call of Duty? Would this not have proved to 3rd parties that 'core' games sell on Nintendo consoles. Given that third parties complained about not being able to compete with Nintendo's first-party franchises, it seems to me that it wouldn't have made much difference. Basically, third parties weren't willing to come to the table anyway, and they just sought excuses for it. 1. Resident Evil 4 2. Call of Duty 3 3. Goldeneye 007 4. NBA Jam 5. Silent Hill. 6. Blazing Angels So if third-parties wouldn't even pay attention to their own core games released on the system, why would they be more likely to put their games on the Wii when they have to compete with first-party titles, given that first-party strength was their main complaint? No, third-parties had a series of excuses that they used, none of which were really valid.

I though the main deterrent for 3rd parties was the simple fact that there had yet to be a realistic, violent game which could sell on the Wii.

1. This is a good example, but I'd say this is the only good one. But you'd be naive to think that one 6th gen remake that sold over 2m is enough to convince the majority of 3rd parties that a platform is viable. Also keep in mind that the game was pretty big on the gamecube so it already had a history with Nintendo fans. Most 3rd parties don't have this privilege so it's understandable why they'd be hesitant about releasing their game on the Wii which is probably unknown to nintendo owners.

2. You should check your numbers. CoD3 sold only 0.3m on the Wii & over 1m on the PS3 & over 2m on the X360. EDIT: Nevermind, I was on the wrong site. Regardless, this is the only title that sold moderately big that wasn't an IP already popularized on past Nintendo systems.

3. You realize that Goldeneye released on the year a year before the other two consoles. And like RE4 on the GC, it has the name of one of the biggest games from the N64, so it's already known to a lot of Nintendo owners. Most 3rd parties don't have this privilege so this game isn't enough to convince 3rd parties that their games will have a chance at success.

4. This game only sold 340k on the Wii. Not enough to convince 3rd parties.

5. Silent Hill again, was a faily low seller as well. Yeah, it outsold the PS360 iteration, but it still only managed a 500k seller.

6. A decent example, still, only 800k.

You mentioned a bunch of sub-1mil sellers with the occasional 1m seller & 2m sellers. Do you really believe this enough to convince the major 3rd parties that they should bother with the Wii? I don't think so. That's why I go back to my frst point: Nintendo should have released their own releastic style game and had it be successful. And I don't mean 'just successful' by just making it over the profit point. I mean some big games that could really entice 3rd parties. I know Nintendo has the talent / money to do it & I know Nintendo wants 3rd party.

You've proven to me that 3rd parties are stubborn, but they're no where near impossible. A bunch of 300k-800k of course isn't going to prove anything. And if my games where only selling that much, I'd be experimenting with new plans. The 1m sellers you mentioned were Goldeneye & Resident Evil, two IPs with a history on Nintendo consoles. This gives them an advantage that most 3rd parties don't have. The only one that wasn't was Call of Duty, which still only did a bit over 2m.

I think if Nintendo had made some 3, 4, maybe even 5 million selling realistic, violent games, the Wii would have seen a lot more 3rd party support.