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

Forums - Nintendo - Platinum is considering being a Second Party for Nintendo.

Maynard_Tool on 29 August 2013

Reading a few comments here.... Is too much, people canreally take it too far in my opinion



03/10/09 HUGE day in my life:

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=63437&page=1

Around the Network
lehamsy on 29 August 2013

Second Party? Nintendo what are you thinking about? You should had bought them long ago. This are the kind of studios Nintendo needs to have another kind of games in their platforms. 



mushroomboy5 on 29 August 2013
JEMC said:
mushroomboy5 said:
Im sure if platinum had a 'retro' type relationship with nintendo, big things would ensue.
I'd say nintendo judge pg more for the quality of their games and their reputation rather than their sales record...and presumably their potential to work with some nintendo ips (don't forget platinum also made the viewtiful joe games and the original okami, when they were clover, both of which were pretty nintedoish, so its stupid to say they only make mature/non nintendo style games)

I said they have a reputation of making original IPs AND violent/mature games. And they do

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platinum_Games#Games_developed

+MadWorld_ original IP, violent/mature

+Infinite Space_original IP. Space Sim/RPG

+Bayonetta_ original IP, violent/mature

+Vanquish_ original IP, violent/mature

+Anarchy Reigns_ unofficial sequel to MadWorld. Violent/mature.

+Metal Gear Rising: Revengance_ hired by Konami. Violent/mature

+The Wonderful 101_ original IP. "Kiddy" appearance

+Bayonetta 2_ sequel. Violent/mature

 

One think is what they did at Clover, and another is what they have done as Platinum.


Wasn't directed at you or anyone in particular (a few people in this thread have suggested platinum only make mature games)...i was Merely attempting to demonstrate that the concept of platinum  developing 'less mature' games (the type some would tend to associate with Nintendo  ie of 'kiddie' or cartoonie appearance) wouldn't be against their principles or against their ideology as game developers. 

Was really just saying Nintendo buying out platinum isn't as ludicrous a proposition as it might appear to some on the surface, esp if you know the company's history.



outlawauron on 29 August 2013
Aielyn said:
Max King of the Wild said:
It sold less than 150k in 6 months. The only way it would have crwaled to that is a fire sale. In which case my point still stands

It sold less than 150k in the US in 6 months. That means little. VGChartz places the first nine months at 215k, which would suggest just 5000 a week on average over the holiday period. Does this honestly sound unreasonable to you?

Now add on European data - that's another 120k in the first nine months. Concluding that it only sold the numbers it sold because of a "fire sale" is the equivalent of concluding that the only reason the PS2 managed to sell so well was people buying multiple units because they kept breaking, or claiming that Xbox 360 sales were inflated due to people buying new systems when their older ones RRoD'd. While there might be a kernel of truth (lower price sold more copies), the overall claim is ludicrously false.

The point is that those sales were only reached after it had extreme price drops (it was $20 less than 3 months after release and dropped further as time went on). The game flopped and there's no way to really spin it.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

happydolphin on 29 August 2013
iamdeath said:

LOL yes, the amount of times you post on an internet forum means a lot and is indicitive of intelligence. WOW, heard it all. Sorry, totally irrelevant and a pretty pathetic point really. 

Hmm... you're right. Maybe not. Some people might just be lost causes.



Around the Network
forest-spirit on 29 August 2013
Xxain said:
They already are. Anytime a 3rd party developers IP is owned by another company they are a 2nd party developer.

I didnt read it but does he mean something different?


I think he wants Platinum's relationship with Nintendo to be more like Monolith's.



outlawauron on 29 August 2013
forest-spirit said:
Xxain said:
They already are. Anytime a 3rd party developers IP is owned by another company they are a 2nd party developer.

I didnt read it but does he mean something different?


I think he wants Platinum's relationship with Nintendo to be more like Monolith's.

But that isn't 2nd party, that's first party. Nintendo owns Monolith.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

Pavolink on 29 August 2013

Could this make possible a sequel of Okami in a homeconsole?



Proud to be the first cool Nintendo fan ever

Number ONE Zelda fan in the Universe

DKCTF didn't move consoles

Prediction: No Zelda HD for Wii U, quietly moved to the succesor

Predictions for Nintendo NX and Mobile


forest-spirit on 29 August 2013
ryuzaki57 said:
Is this guy serious? How can he see his future with Nintendo when he's just made the bomba of the year?

They have to unveil projects for other consoles ASAP. They have people waiting for their games outside the Nintendo world. Why can't they understand that!? It hurts so much to read things like that...


That's easy to say. Platinum could have a hundred projects planned for Playstation/Xbox but that doesn't mean squat unless a publisher is willing to fund them. If you really want Platinum on other consoles then perhaps you should start writing to SEGA, Konami, Sony or MS. Complaining about their relationship with Nintendo won't change anything.



Xxain on 29 August 2013
forest-spirit said:
Xxain said:
They already are. Anytime a 3rd party developers IP is owned by another company they are a 2nd party developer.

I didnt read it but does he mean something different?


I think he wants Platinum's relationship with Nintendo to be more like Monolith's.


Monolith is a first party developer. I think you meant to say like Insomniac and SONY. A 2nd party developer is a 3rd party developer that makes IP's for another developer/publisher. In this relationship the IP's are owned not the actual developer.