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

Forums - Nintendo - Should Nintendo create more studios?

 

Should Nintendo Create More Studios?

Yes, they need more to ke... 198 72.53%
 
No, they have plenty as is 20 7.33%
 
They should try harder to... 41 15.02%
 
I have no opinion 14 5.13%
 
Total:273
Toddifer on 09 June 2013
DucksUnlimited said:
Can't believe so many people are saying yes. Nintendo has a lot of talented first party studios. Nintendo just rushed the Wii U and underestimated development time. That's why we have the drought that we do.

So many people seem to have this mentality of "the more first party games the better." From a business perspective it's simply not the case. Nintendo has enough studios for several big first party releases a year. These releases already have to compete with third party games. Making Nintendo's first party offerings compete with each other in addition to third parties is not a good idea.

I honestly don't think they rushed Wii U. The last Wii title we got was Mario Party 9 which came out last February, and development of that couldn't have been too difficult. I think they didn't anticipate the difficulty in transitioning to HD. They previewed Wii U in 2011, so they had to have stuff already in the works by then.



Bah!

Around the Network
noname2200 on 09 June 2013
DucksUnlimited said:
KungKras said:
DucksUnlimited said:

Yes. And the vast majority of popular games (i.e. games that interest people) are third party.


Except for, you know, almost all the best-selling games of the previous generation.

I didn't say that the most popular games are third party. i said most games that are popular are third party.

 

Naum said:
And give 3rd parties even more sh*t to complain about?

Wise man once said: "Fuck 'em."



Toddifer on 09 June 2013
TheLastStarFighter said:
People saying that Nintendo should spend its money on expanding studios should know that Nintendo has already done just that. Retro moved into a much larger building this past year and now has about double+ the employees it had just a few years ago. There's also a new, much larger head quarters in Kyoto and EAD's staff has been rapidly ramped up. MonolithSoft, too, has greatly expanded, opening a second studio in Kyoto in 2011 that can work directly with Nintendo EAD. Nintendo has done a massive expansion over the last 3 years, we just aren't seeing the results of it yet. Games take time to make.

That said, I wouldn't mind a new studio or two, especially in the west. Over the last number of consoles Nintendo saw weak third party support in a number of areas. #1 was RPG's, but that's been very well addressed now by Monolith. The two main shortcomings I see right now are western 1st/3rd person shooters/adventure games and sports. I think either through a new studio or further expansion of Retro Nintendo should make a few mature adventure/shooter type games. Another studio should be developed to make realistic sports. There was a time when the NES launched with Nintendo-made Baseball, Football and so on, and we have even seen licensed games in the past like Ken Griffey Jr Baseball, NHL hockey and NCAA basketball. 1st parties once made all kinds of top sports games, it baffles me that almost everyone has left the sector for EA to dominate. They are so easy to make and take in so much money. Since EA is blacklisting WiiU and 2k has weak interest, if I were Nintendo I would jump all over this. They already make good sports games, just need to ditch the Mario element for a few.

So I'd make two western studios. One to make new unique western ip shooter/adventure games and one to make realistic licensed sports.

I guess the concern here is if Nintendo decides to expand into these genres, what would be left for third parties to bring to the table?



Bah!

TheLastStarFighter on 09 June 2013
Toddifer said:
TheLastStarFighter said:
People saying that Nintendo should spend its money on expanding studios should know that Nintendo has already done just that. Retro moved into a much larger building this past year and now has about double+ the employees it had just a few years ago. There's also a new, much larger head quarters in Kyoto and EAD's staff has been rapidly ramped up. MonolithSoft, too, has greatly expanded, opening a second studio in Kyoto in 2011 that can work directly with Nintendo EAD. Nintendo has done a massive expansion over the last 3 years, we just aren't seeing the results of it yet. Games take time to make.

That said, I wouldn't mind a new studio or two, especially in the west. Over the last number of consoles Nintendo saw weak third party support in a number of areas. #1 was RPG's, but that's been very well addressed now by Monolith. The two main shortcomings I see right now are western 1st/3rd person shooters/adventure games and sports. I think either through a new studio or further expansion of Retro Nintendo should make a few mature adventure/shooter type games. Another studio should be developed to make realistic sports. There was a time when the NES launched with Nintendo-made Baseball, Football and so on, and we have even seen licensed games in the past like Ken Griffey Jr Baseball, NHL hockey and NCAA basketball. 1st parties once made all kinds of top sports games, it baffles me that almost everyone has left the sector for EA to dominate. They are so easy to make and take in so much money. Since EA is blacklisting WiiU and 2k has weak interest, if I were Nintendo I would jump all over this. They already make good sports games, just need to ditch the Mario element for a few.

So I'd make two western studios. One to make new unique western ip shooter/adventure games and one to make realistic licensed sports.

I guess the concern here is if Nintendo decides to expand into these genres, what would be left for third parties to bring to the table?


Third parties aren't bringing sports anyway, so nothing lost but weakness adressed and money made.  If Nintendo makes one really awesome adventure shooter, it shouldn't hurt 3rd parties in this sector any more than Halo or Uncharted do on other platforms.  If anything, it should encourage the genre.  As it stands, lovers of these games can get a better fix on PS4 or XBOne, even if AC, WatchDogs and COD come to Wii U as well, because there's no 1st party presence.  Zelda needs to deliver here, Retro needs to, and another studio would be great.



NintendoPie on 09 June 2013

All Nintendo really has to do is hire more people to run their already large (enough) amount of studios. Nintendo, as of now, is a relatively small company that won't be able to keep up with every single game drought. This is why they just need more people, so something like that can happen. More studios isn't a necessary option, really. (Although it won't hurt.)



Around the Network
NintendoPie on 09 June 2013
Naum said:
And give 3rd parties even more sh*t to complain about?

It's not like third parties are helping in much regard right now, when Nintendo has no games. So what is the difference?



teigaga on 09 June 2013
Toddifer said:
Metrium said:
I don't think they need more studios, I think they need to find a way to speed up development.

Take for example Naughty Dog that made this generation 3UC games and TLoU. That's 4games. Meanwhile Retro Studio did MP3 and DKCR that should'nt take nearly as much time and effort as a UC game. Same thing with Santa Monica, GoW:A launched a few month ago and there is already rumors that they will unveil something at E3 this year (rumors so we will have to wait if true. If true it will seriously strengthen my point). Now back to Nintendo, we are STILL waiting for Pikmin 3. Why did this game take so long and WHY could'nt they manage to make it for the launch window?! Skyward Sword was great, one of my favorite game of all time imo, but while playing it I could'nt see a single reason on why did this game take over 5years to make, they had to seriously had trouble to master that motion control cause that is the only explanation possible.


A solid point - do you think the transition to HD development for Wii U slowed them down, since it was new for them? I think it put them at a disadvantage since Wii wasn't HD so when it came time for Wii U they were behind the learning curve, so to speak...

The thing is they were slow with the wii even when they were making games with much fewer assets compared to Naughty Dog or other sony 1st party studios.

They need to expand their current teams but they still need to open more studios to diversify the type of games they release. Sony's got a brilliant balance of devs who make different kinds of games. In one year they release the realistic/Cinematic blockbusters like Beyond, Killzone Shadowfall, The Last of Us, God of war and GT6, whilst also putting out games on the complete opposite side of the spectrum like Sly Cooper, Guacamelee, Pupeteer, Tearaway and Knack. Nintendo's problem is that 90% of their games fall on the same side. 



teigaga on 09 June 2013
Toddifer said:
Metrium said:
I don't think they need more studios, I think they need to find a way to speed up development.

Take for example Naughty Dog that made this generation 3UC games and TLoU. That's 4games. Meanwhile Retro Studio did MP3 and DKCR that should'nt take nearly as much time and effort as a UC game. Same thing with Santa Monica, GoW:A launched a few month ago and there is already rumors that they will unveil something at E3 this year (rumors so we will have to wait if true. If true it will seriously strengthen my point). Now back to Nintendo, we are STILL waiting for Pikmin 3. Why did this game take so long and WHY could'nt they manage to make it for the launch window?! Skyward Sword was great, one of my favorite game of all time imo, but while playing it I could'nt see a single reason on why did this game take over 5years to make, they had to seriously had trouble to master that motion control cause that is the only explanation possible.


A solid point - do you think the transition to HD development for Wii U slowed them down, since it was new for them? I think it put them at a disadvantage since Wii wasn't HD so when it came time for Wii U they were behind the learning curve, so to speak...

The thing is they were slow with the wii even when they were making games with much fewer assets compared to Naughty Dog or other sony 1st party studios.

They need to expand their current teams but they still need to open more studios to diversify the type of games they release. Sony's got a brilliant balance of devs who make different kinds of games. In one year they release the realistic/Cinematic blockbusters like Beyond, Killzone Shadowfall, The Last of Us, God of war and GT6, whilst also putting out games on the complete opposite side of the spectrum like Sly Cooper, Guacamelee, Pupeteer, Tearaway and Knack. Nintendo's problem is that 90% of their games fall on the same side of the spectrum.



burninmylight on 09 June 2013
TheLastStarFighter said:
People saying that Nintendo should spend its money on expanding studios should know that Nintendo has already done just that. Retro moved into a much larger building this past year and now has about double+ the employees it had just a few years ago. There's also a new, much larger head quarters in Kyoto and EAD's staff has been rapidly ramped up. MonolithSoft, too, has greatly expanded, opening a second studio in Kyoto in 2011 that can work directly with Nintendo EAD. Nintendo has done a massive expansion over the last 3 years, we just aren't seeing the results of it yet. Games take time to make.

That said, I wouldn't mind a new studio or two, especially in the west. Over the last number of consoles Nintendo saw weak third party support in a number of areas. #1 was RPG's, but that's been very well addressed now by Monolith. The two main shortcomings I see right now are western 1st/3rd person shooters/adventure games and sports. I think either through a new studio or further expansion of Retro Nintendo should make a few mature adventure/shooter type games. Another studio should be developed to make realistic sports. There was a time when the NES launched with Nintendo-made Baseball, Football and so on, and we have even seen licensed games in the past like Ken Griffey Jr Baseball, NHL hockey and NCAA basketball. 1st parties once made all kinds of top sports games, it baffles me that almost everyone has left the sector for EA to dominate. They are so easy to make and take in so much money. Since EA is blacklisting WiiU and 2k has weak interest, if I were Nintendo I would jump all over this. They already make good sports games, just need to ditch the Mario element for a few.

So I'd make two western studios. One to make new unique western ip shooter/adventure games and one to make realistic licensed sports.

That second paragraph is exactly what I've been thinking with this topic and exactly what I was going to type with my next post. People are saying more studios or more first party games will make third parties more upset and strain relationships further, but what has Nintendo to lose at this point? What has being nice and unaggressive done for it lately?



burninmylight on 09 June 2013
DucksUnlimited said:
burninmylight said:
DucksUnlimited said:
Can't believe so many people are saying yes. Nintendo has a lot of talented first party studios. Nintendo just rushed the Wii U and underestimated development time. That's why we have the drought that we do.

So many people seem to have this mentality of "the more first party games the better." From a business perspective it's simply not the case. Nintendo has enough studios for several big first party releases a year. These releases already have to compete with third party games. Making Nintendo's first party offerings compete with each other in addition to third parties is not a good idea.


What about the droughts from the 3DS, the Wii, the DS, and the N64? This is not to diss Nintendo or the Wii U, it's more or less to say that anyone who's been gaming since the Clinton administration should expect an early drought with every single console ever.

I'm of the belief that yes, the more first party games, the better. Nintendo should stop worrying about trying to please overly fickle, sensitive and diva third parties and let the haughty ones worry about themselves. They'll come around regardless once they see a console flying off the shelves and that there's a market for their games, which is what Nintendo needs to help create.

Well, the Wii flew off the shelves, yet its third party support was still by far the worst of the big 3. the idea that they'll come around regardless isn't really true. The fact of the matter is that most people probably buy consoles mainly for third party games. First party games for the average consumer are there more as a way to help choose which console. But that doesn't help much if the console doesn't have much in the way of third party games. That's a huge part of why the N64 and Gamecube suffered. Introducing a large influx of first party studios is only going to drive out what remaining third party suport they have.

I wouldn't say the worst by far. The Wii got plenty of third party support, just not the kinds of games you, I and most others on this site typically would play (but I fully acknowledge what you mean and I agree).

But you have to go back and read the part I underlined. Nintendo has to help create the market for these kinds of games, because third parties sure as hell haven't and don't feel any obligation to do so. I said in another post that it needs to take a "rising tide" strategy of getting gamers on board in the first place by tapping into those markets itself, then third party publishers can come in and keep the momentum going when they see that the market is there. If I'm an outside publisher, I'd rather compete with Nintendo for a crowd that exists than trying to sell a game to one that doesn't. The Wii proved it had a market for third party platformers, racers and mini-game fests, despite Nintendo providing the creme of the crop for every single one of those genres (SMG, Mario Kart, WarioWare, Wii Play, and so on).