By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Why is it so hard for Nintendo to release games for it's systems?

Osc89 on 04 May 2013
RolStoppable said:
Prejudice by third parties. A lot of them will not even bother with Nintendo systems while they will keep putting games on other platforms, even if they suffered losses.

Since you already brought up Japan and the COMG chart, in 2012 you could clearly see that many third parties were sticking to the PSP and holding out in hopes for the Vita to pick up, rather than switching to the 3DS which has been by far the hottest system in Japan in recent times. The 3DS may have a huge lead over the PSV in Japan, but that still doesn't mean that the 3DS will end up with more game releases than the PSV in the coming years. And that's something Nintendo can't really do anything about; all they can do is continue to release first party games and grow the installed base and hope that third parties drop their prejudices eventually.

Mr. spurgeonryan, have you ever felt that you can't please certain VGC members, no matter what you do? That's pretty much how the relationship between Nintendo and third parties works.


That doesn't seem likely. Third parties will go wherever the profit is, they won't lose money out of spite



PSN: Osc89

NNID: Oscar89

Around the Network
mutantclown on 04 May 2013

Sega was infinitely poorer than Nintendo and in deep financial troubles, and that never stopped them from releasing more games of their own for their own systems, and new, fresh IPs too than Nintendo's ever done for any of theirs.



Xxain on 04 May 2013

There is also the issue that Nintendo supports both a handheld and a console. Sony only a console.



Salnax on 04 May 2013
DevilRising said:
Salnax said:
Nintendo is not that big a company, yet they have to support two platforms. Their small size is only highlighted by a lack of third party support. If they only needed to support a single platform, their average of about 20 games a year would be plenty.


To be fair, Nintendo actually is a pretty huge company. If by "not that big" you mean they aren't the mega-conglomerate that Sony and MS are, you'd be right. But Sony and MS' games divisions are relatively small compared to the decades-old operation Nintendo has going on. The "Big N" actually has far more development teams under it's umbrella than Sony and MS do combined, but as you say, they have to provide not only retail content for Wii U and 3DS, but also digital eShop content for those platforms as well.

 

Wii U will be getting PLENTY of games.  So this mundane rehash of a thread topic really needs to go away. E3 will be here soon enough, and then people can finally shut up.

Last time I checked, Nintendo had about 5,000 employees. Admittedly, this isn't exactly tiny, but compare it to other gaming companies. Ubisoft has 7,000, Konami has 6,000, EA has 9,000, etc. And sure, not everybody in those companies is making games all the time, but I imagine that a good chunk of Nintendo also has to work on hardware.

My point it, Nintendo is barely a big enough company to supply two platforms with a large number of quality releases. Sure, they do release plenty of good games for both handhelds and consoles eventually, but they're too small to prevent droughts like the current one.

If Nintendo wants to have a situation where they can truly support themselves, without relying on thrid parties for their dubious support, they either need to have a console/handheld combination, so they can focus on a single platform, or they need another half a dozen studios to make games for them.

 

I'm saying this as a Nintendo fan. I love them and their games and philosophies. I just realize that they're small enough so that the lack of 3rd party support hurts them a lot.



Love and tolerate.

the_dengle on 04 May 2013

^ The same picture, minus games releasing after May. Two of them are different versions of the same game. And then there were 7.

So, here is your answer:

1, COMG favors Sony. It's not a matter of bias, but demographics. COMG just gets more Sony customers.
2, Nintendo doesn't put their games up for pre-order until just a few weeks before release. If they were as frivolous as Square-Enix, you'd probably see Pokémon X & Y up there already, among other games.
3, 3DS and Wii U are still the new kids on the block. Development hasn't entirely shifted to next gen yet; right now, as you can see, PS3 is still where it's at, because it's still going strong and it has a 9 million install base in Japan (which 3DS has only recently passed).

Maybe towards the end of this year going into next year, we'll see more 3DS/Wii U games, or maybe not.



Around the Network
cunger on 04 May 2013

Nintendo wouldn't settle to "just get games out"..  They will release games when they are finished and are good enough to be meaningfull and not a day sooner.



carlos3189 on 04 May 2013
mutantclown said:

Sega was infinitely poorer than Nintendo and in deep financial troubles, and that never stopped them from releasing more games of their own for their own systems, and new, fresh IPs too than Nintendo's ever done for any of theirs.


I'll, seiously, never understand why people  say this... Just for the Wii, Nintendo gave us all the Wii brand of games (yes people, these games are new IPs...), we also had Endless Ocean, Xenoblade, The Last Story, Pandora's Tower, ExciteTruck/Bots, Another Code, Disaster and many reboots like Punch Out!!! 



cunger on 04 May 2013
carlos3189 said:
mutantclown said:

Sega was infinitely poorer than Nintendo and in deep financial troubles, and that never stopped them from releasing more games of their own for their own systems, and new, fresh IPs too than Nintendo's ever done for any of theirs.


I'll, seiously, never understand why people  say this... Just for the Wii, Nintendo gave us all the Wii brand of games (yes people, these games are new IPs...), we also had Endless Ocean, Xenoblade, The Last Story, Pandora's Tower, ExciteTruck/Bots, Another Code, Disaster and many reboots like Punch Out!!! 


For some reason people won't accept a new IP from Nintendo unless it's made at Nintendo's headquarters.  Nintendo own Monolith but for some reason people don't give Nintendo credit for those new IP's the way that Sony receives credit for Naughty Dog games even though Naughty Dog used to be independant before Sony purchased them. And then theirs Resistance which nobody would make a case for not being a new Sony IP even though it was made by a company Sony doesn't even own. The Double standard out there is nuts.



cbarroso09 on 04 May 2013

Quality over quantity. Just Mario Kart Wii keep selling more than a bunch of mediocre new Sony first party titles.



DevilRising on 05 May 2013
mutantclown said:

Sega was infinitely poorer than Nintendo and in deep financial troubles, and that never stopped them from releasing more games of their own for their own systems, and new, fresh IPs too than Nintendo's ever done for any of theirs.


Ummmmm.......what?

 

A) Sega HAD to make a lot of games, because they had a lot less 3rd party support.

 

B) What the hell are you talking about? Nintendo themselves had LESS development teams than they do now, back in the NES and SNES eras, yet still put out dozens of games for each console. As a matter of fact, for the NES they published around 40 games on that one system. They published over 30 titles for the SNES. Close to 40 for N64. Over 30 for GC. Just over 50 titles for Wii.

 

See the trend there? And that is not counting the enormous amount of portable games they've been publishing since the original Game Boy.

 

 

So yes, Sega made a good deal of games. But so has Nintendo, always. There is literally no such thing as "Sega made way more games for their own console than Nintendo ever has". In fact that statement, I'm sorry, is complete BS.