Is it not Nintendo's duty to expand their audience and create an environment where these 3rd party games can sell well?

Well that addressed 1 of my points.

How about the fact that games on Nintendo console have (at least since the early days of the Wii and DS), performed terribly in preorders charts and then gone on to sell well?

As to why 1st party goes through droughts and floods, there's a very obvious explanation for that.

Sony has many game development studios, they are actually bigger than Nintendos. They have some developers that Sony will not rush. Polyphony is a great example. Poly develop games at the speed they want. Sony also has developers like Media Molecule and Guerilla Games who are more flexible with release dates, and they are more willing to collaborate with 3rd parties for their development. 

Now, imagine if Sony were made up of lots of Polyphonys, and no MM or GG. They would release fewer games, and they would be released in more of a drought/flood fashion. That is where Nintendo is.

Nintendo isn't the victim of a unfair circumstance, or of a unfair prejudice. They are the victim of a situation that they have caused, and one they have the power to change. The lack of third party support has everything to do with the platform being nothing less then unprofitable for the majority of third party developers. If there was real money to be made there. Then that is where they would be, and if they hadn't bled cash for years trying. More of them would be up for the challenge. In the final analysis it is all on Nintendo for letting their platform become a barren wasteland.

During the last generation a number of third party developers extended the olive branch. They gave the brand another chance, and they gave the loyalists another chance. Those efforts almost universally resulted in disasters for their respective developers. They got burned, and that is after having been burned during the previous two generations. Can you really lay the blame on them for doing something so simple as taking the hint. Nintendo is to blame, but so are the fans for not encouraging third party support, and isn't as if you guys had to buy awful games to show your support. A lot of third party developers put forward really solid efforts. Sometimes in periods where the console wasn't even getting first party games, and they still didn't sell like they ought have.

It isn't Nintendo that is the victim here. It is the third parties who had the audacity to try to make friends of their player base, and got spat on for their efforts. Ultimately that means that Nintendo has relationships to mend. Thanks not only to their own failures, but the failures of their fans. That isn't something that is out of their control. They have a lot more control over this situation then most of you seem to think they do.

Nintendo dictates its own licensing fees. For both games and development kits. They could encourage more third party development by doing something so simple as cutting those fees, or dropping them entirely for some developers. Especially for smaller third party studios who are looking for a audience and a niche. Nintendo also has substantial marketing muscle, and frankly they need to start throwing that behind third party developers. You don't see Sony or Microsoft having a problem with advertising third party games, and getting the gaming market really interested in them now do you. Nintendo also has more then enough bank to fund some third party development.

Look Nintendo knows it has a problem. They have said so themselves many times over. They have a bad relationship with third parties. What they need to do is stop thinking only of themselves, and only of their games, and start doing things to make other developers more successful. Nintendo is actually doing about the worst thing possible. They have created a audience that is conditioned only to buying games from them, and everyone else might as well be damned. Basically all they are doing right now it paying lip service, and trying to get by without actually doing anything about it. They say it is a problem, but it is plain that they don't think they really have a problem.

It is a shame really, and it will probably be the death of them. They really need a supporting team to keep their platform relevant if not alive moving forward. Oh I think Nintendo is finally going to get the idea into their heads that it is a problem they have to throw serious effort into solving, but I also think they will get there too late, and like the boy who cried wolf. Third parties aren't going to believe that they are sincere. By the way if you want to stop reading threads like these then deep down you know what you need to do. Go buy some third party exclusives.

I for one am kind of disappointed in the Nintendo player base according to the sales posted on this site. The Wii has some good games on it that were they on another platform would do much better in the sales department. Explain to me why Pandora's Tower has sales of less then a third of Too Human's when that game scores poorer on a smaller install base. You guys do know the Wii U is backwards compatible and all. With a lack of games so why aren't some of you picking this game up. Reward the publisher who had the gall to bring this to the North American marketplace.

Yeah see the problem is......most 3rd party games that Nintendo platforms get aren't very good.

I ain't going to buy me a bad game.

@Otakumegane

Translation: Only games made by Nintendo are any good.

Truth: Third party games can be good too.

Reality: There are more then a few good third party games, but it doesn't matter Nintendo fans wont buy them.

Stupidity: They complain about waiting for games. When there are okay, decent, or good games to be had.

Insanity: The Wii U drought is actually less severe then the PS3 drought.

Irony: I am the first one in this thread to bring that up?

Seriously: How am I the first one to bring that up?

Buy plenty of 3rd party for my handhelds because they actually put the effort into them.

But the likes of Western devs don't make that effort on Nintendo consoles.

Nintendo did a FAR FAR better job then Sony/MS at expanding their audience with Wii/DS but it availed most 3rd parties little.

Nintendo also does not depend primarily on 3rd party software to sell their systems (until MS and to a lesser extend Sony), they always depend primarily on their own software to sell their systems.  So they will always create (or attempt to) an environment which is best suited to the success of their franchises.   Since their IPs do not mess with 3rd Party's IP this is not a successful environment for traditional 3rd party fare, but when they innovate (like Petz, Just Dance, EA Sport Active) they can find great success within the Nintendo environment.

Honestly, what is the purpose of using a pre-order chart? I've been a gamer for years and this year was the first time I used a pre-order (for Fire Emblem Awakening) in my 20 years of gaming outside of preordering consoles with games bundled in.

Outside of the most hardcore friends and those that want hot ticket games early as possible like the new Madden, Halo or Call of Duty not many people I know actually do pre order on the regular. You go to a store and buy the game or order it online or thanks to digital sales buy it.

@mutantclown

You don't need to get so hyped up there pal. You're gonna have a heart attack or something. Calm down, it's just a nerdy conversation after all.


And since you don't want to count merely "PUBLISHED?" (in your own hyperventilating words), fine. Nintendo DEVELOPED a hell of a lot of games themselves, certainly on par with what Sega developed.

But since you seem to be some bitter throwback to the SNES vs. Genesis era, I'll slightly humor you.

Yes, I DID know that Sega made arcade games (DID YOU KNOW THAT? lol get a fuckin grip already). Nintendo made arcade games too, but at some point their home console business became FAR more lucrative than Sega's was, so they focused soley on that. They also used to make toys, but they settled down on that when video games took off. They still to this day make the product they started with over 100 years ago: playing cards. What's your point? Sega HAD, if you want to put it like that, to keep making arcade games, because their home console business outside of the Genesis, was not enough to carry them. And they continue to make arcade games (in Japan) today, because the company that bought them, Sammy, is mostly a coin-op company.

As for HOME console (and portable) games, Nintendo STILL developed dozens of games (THEMSELVES) for the NES, SNES, Game Boy, N64, GBA, GC, DS, and Wii.

I'm just not really certain what your overall point is. Nintendo has been very prolific on every console they ever put out (save the Virtual Boy, which was a flop, their only one, compared to Sega, who while I like them as a company, if you're going to be testy about it, they had several in a row). Both were great companies, but Nintendo runs their BUSINESS side of things a hell of a lot better obviously, because Sega is the one that went out of the console business, not them. Part of that might also be the fact that, while Sega did in fact make a lot of GREAT classic games, not a single one of them, to my knowledge, is even in the Top 30 when it comes to highest selling games of all time. Would you like to know how many of the Top 30 are Nintendo games?


Most of them. So what was your point again?

Bloody hell, spurge. I thought you could've done better... ~_^