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

Forums - Nintendo - BrokenGamezHD responds to Bethesda Bonus Round statements about Nintendo

S.T.A.G.E. on 08 September 2013
cbarroso09 said:
Nintendo did considered the words of the best and most reliable, successful with more IPs than any other company, NINTENDO ITSELF. So successful that they have launched their own hardware with little to no support from other publishers for the last 30 years.
I have nothing else to say.


This makes zero sense. Nintendo has lacked  major third party support since 1996 and it was primarily their fault as to why they lost it. Nintendo had third party support on par with Sony and Microsoft from the late 80's to the mid 90's and did not give creative freedom to third parties. They had to build their games around Nintendo's hardware. Because of this and Nintendo's marketshare Sega was at a disadvantage with the Sega Genesis. Nintendo only gave devs notice of their console and they basically got to see the final version, they did not give them periodical dev kits like Sony and Microsoft did. If Nintendo had given third parties periodical viewings of their hardware through its phases you would've seen a much more powerful Nintendo console for the next gen, because that would mean they would've been listening to exactly what Epic, EA and Ubisoft have been telling Sony and Microsoft and that is that they needed a highly capable new platform that has at least 8GB of ram.



Around the Network
cbarroso09 on 08 September 2013
S.T.A.G.E. said:
cbarroso09 said:
Nintendo did considered the words of the best and most reliable, successful with more IPs than any other company, NINTENDO ITSELF. So successful that they have launched their own hardware with little to no support from other publishers for the last 30 years.
I have nothing else to say.


This makes zero sense. Nintendo has lacked  major third party support since 1996 and it was primarily their fault as to why they lost it. Nintendo had third party support on par with Sony and Microsoft from the late 80's to the mid 90's and did not give creative freedom to third parties. They had to build their games around Nintendo's hardware. Because of this and Nintendo's marketshare Sega was at a disadvantage with the Sega Genesis. Nintendo only gave devs notice of their console and they basically got to see the final version, they did not give them periodical dev kits like Sony and Microsoft did. If Nintendo had given third parties periodical viewings of their hardware through its phases you would've seen a much more powerful Nintendo console for the next gen, because that would mean they would've been listening to exactly what Epic, EA and Ubisoft have been telling Sony and Microsoft and that is that they needed a highly capable new platform that has at least 8GB of ram.


you lack vision beyond what your eyes can see. Don't worry, you are not the only one.



Cobretti2 on 08 September 2013
S.T.A.G.E. said:
cbarroso09 said:
Nintendo did considered the words of the best and most reliable, successful with more IPs than any other company, NINTENDO ITSELF. So successful that they have launched their own hardware with little to no support from other publishers for the last 30 years.
I have nothing else to say.


This makes zero sense. Nintendo has lacked  major third party support since 1996 and it was primarily their fault as to why they lost it. Nintendo had third party support on par with Sony and Microsoft from the late 80's to the mid 90's and did not give creative freedom to third parties. They had to build their games around Nintendo's hardware. Because of this and Nintendo's marketshare Sega was at a disadvantage with the Sega Genesis. Nintendo only gave devs notice of their console and they basically got to see the final version, they did not give them periodical dev kits like Sony and Microsoft did. If Nintendo had given third parties periodical viewings of their hardware through its phases you would've seen a much more powerful Nintendo console for the next gen, because that would mean they would've been listening to exactly what Epic, EA and Ubisoft have been telling Sony and Microsoft and that is that they needed a highly capable new platform that has at least 8GB of ram.


The only one I recall asking for 8gb of ram was EPIC.

Also as I stated before why was EA all over Nintendo at E3 prasing hwo wonderful and powerful the system was if they cared so much about this 8gb? Were they trolling Nintendo with false prasie to ditch them last minute?



 

 

Mythmaker1 on 08 September 2013
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Mythmaker1 said:
Nintendo's strategy has worked well for them in the past. While the inclusion of third-parties can certainly help them, if they were so inclined, it's not really necessary if they manage their business properly.

Nintendo's problem is that they haven't been managing themselves properly, and without third-parties to pick up the slack, it's been rough for them.

Honestly, I think their problem is they've been going through a rough transition. Unlike Microsoft and Sony, they're still very much a toy company at heart, and I think that the change has percolated down to development, but hasn't quite managed to work its way up to management yet.


Nintendo has always profited, but hut this gen they are taking a loss and for all the wrong reasons. They need third parties more than ever this generation. Their first party better be top notch. Nintendo wants to profit off of the COD's, Assassins Creeds and games of that ilk that have high sales on the Nintendo platform. They cannot understand that they drove their consumers away from third party, not third party. They revenue Sony and Microsoft get from third party is very high compared to Nintendo. Nintendo needs the high numbers for the major stable third party games, which they barely ever get. The Wii was very sporadic and mostly low in profit.

Like I said, Nintendo can manage their business without having to rely on third parties to profit. It's always preferrable to have it than not, but Nintendo, especially, is good on profiting from their own hardware. They simply need proper planning and a good sense of where the market is to avoid taking a loss.



I believe in honesty, civility, generosity, practicality, and impartiality.

S.T.A.G.E. on 08 September 2013
Mythmaker1 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Mythmaker1 said:
Nintendo's strategy has worked well for them in the past. While the inclusion of third-parties can certainly help them, if they were so inclined, it's not really necessary if they manage their business properly.

Nintendo's problem is that they haven't been managing themselves properly, and without third-parties to pick up the slack, it's been rough for them.

Honestly, I think their problem is they've been going through a rough transition. Unlike Microsoft and Sony, they're still very much a toy company at heart, and I think that the change has percolated down to development, but hasn't quite managed to work its way up to management yet.


Nintendo has always profited, but hut this gen they are taking a loss and for all the wrong reasons. They need third parties more than ever this generation. Their first party better be top notch. Nintendo wants to profit off of the COD's, Assassins Creeds and games of that ilk that have high sales on the Nintendo platform. They cannot understand that they drove their consumers away from third party, not third party. They revenue Sony and Microsoft get from third party is very high compared to Nintendo. Nintendo needs the high numbers for the major stable third party games, which they barely ever get. The Wii was very sporadic and mostly low in profit.

Like I said, Nintendo can manage their business without having to rely on third parties to profit. It's always preferrable to have it than not, but Nintendo, especially, is good on profiting from their own hardware. They simply need proper planning and a good sense of where the market is to avoid taking a loss.


No one said Nintendo wont profit off of the hardware and first party. Third party profit is very important and Nintendo wants a piece of it and it's shown. They want the hardcore gamers who dont always game Nintendo to come back and really not have to look elsewhere for third party titles. The problem is they aren't giving an effort to make that happen. You're giving them all the excuses in the world to be lazy and be in third place.



Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 08 September 2013
Cobretti2 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
cbarroso09 said:
Nintendo did considered the words of the best and most reliable, successful with more IPs than any other company, NINTENDO ITSELF. So successful that they have launched their own hardware with little to no support from other publishers for the last 30 years.
I have nothing else to say.


This makes zero sense. Nintendo has lacked  major third party support since 1996 and it was primarily their fault as to why they lost it. Nintendo had third party support on par with Sony and Microsoft from the late 80's to the mid 90's and did not give creative freedom to third parties. They had to build their games around Nintendo's hardware. Because of this and Nintendo's marketshare Sega was at a disadvantage with the Sega Genesis. Nintendo only gave devs notice of their console and they basically got to see the final version, they did not give them periodical dev kits like Sony and Microsoft did. If Nintendo had given third parties periodical viewings of their hardware through its phases you would've seen a much more powerful Nintendo console for the next gen, because that would mean they would've been listening to exactly what Epic, EA and Ubisoft have been telling Sony and Microsoft and that is that they needed a highly capable new platform that has at least 8GB of ram.


The only one I recall asking for 8gb of ram was EPIC.

Also as I stated before why was EA all over Nintendo at E3 prasing hwo wonderful and powerful the system was if they cared so much about this 8gb? Were they trolling Nintendo with false prasie to ditch them last minute?


Correct, but EA and Ubisoft have been nagging at MS and Sony for better hardware publically. I believe it was Cliff Bleszinkski that made the statement that 8GB's or ram would suffice for next gen. EA was praising Nintendo because they made a console that was slightly more powerful than current gen consoles, not because it was truly next gen. If you paid attention to the conference the truest of praise was for the controller, not even really the graphics though because Nintendo didn't even take a step graphically towards next gen. EA stated that Battlefield 3 and 4 was made to be fully scalable with the Frostbite 3 engine. The Wii U should've recieved a ported version of part three before their deal fell through and of course that most likely had something to do with Origin.



Mythmaker1 on 08 September 2013
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Mythmaker1 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Mythmaker1 said:
Nintendo's strategy has worked well for them in the past. While the inclusion of third-parties can certainly help them, if they were so inclined, it's not really necessary if they manage their business properly.

Nintendo's problem is that they haven't been managing themselves properly, and without third-parties to pick up the slack, it's been rough for them.

Honestly, I think their problem is they've been going through a rough transition. Unlike Microsoft and Sony, they're still very much a toy company at heart, and I think that the change has percolated down to development, but hasn't quite managed to work its way up to management yet.


Nintendo has always profited, but hut this gen they are taking a loss and for all the wrong reasons. They need third parties more than ever this generation. Their first party better be top notch. Nintendo wants to profit off of the COD's, Assassins Creeds and games of that ilk that have high sales on the Nintendo platform. They cannot understand that they drove their consumers away from third party, not third party. They revenue Sony and Microsoft get from third party is very high compared to Nintendo. Nintendo needs the high numbers for the major stable third party games, which they barely ever get. The Wii was very sporadic and mostly low in profit.

Like I said, Nintendo can manage their business without having to rely on third parties to profit. It's always preferrable to have it than not, but Nintendo, especially, is good on profiting from their own hardware. They simply need proper planning and a good sense of where the market is to avoid taking a loss.


No one said Nintendo wont profit off of the hardware and first party. Third party profit is very important and Nintendo wants a piece of it and it's shown. They want the hardcore gamers who dont always game Nintendo to come back and really not have to look elsewhere for third party titles. The problem is they aren't giving an effort to make that happen. You're giving them all the excuses in the world to be lazy and be in third place.

I'm excusing nothing. Their current position is the result of bad decisions and poor planning.

If Nintendo wants third-party support, then they need to pursue it vigorously. They need to work with third-parties to bring games to their system and include them in the decision-making process to make the system more appealing to them.

However, if Nintendo doesn't want to do that, it's also a valid choice. They simply have to pursue that goal vigorously. Acquire more studios, bring in more people, and produce the games people want to play.

Right now, they're doing neither. They haven't developed the ability to do without third-parties, and they aren't doing enough to encourage the third-parties that they need.



I believe in honesty, civility, generosity, practicality, and impartiality.

Roma on 08 September 2013

here is my take: If Nintendo does what 3rd parties want they will not last for long!



    R.I.P Mr Iwata :'(

Scoobes on 08 September 2013

I think some people need to go back and listen to what the Bethesda guy said. He didn't say that Nintendo should listen to everything third parties should say. He said Nintendo should involve third-party developers in the console creation process.

Nintendo failed to communicate with third party developers their full plans with the WiiU. Whereas Sony and MS went to third parties, did their research, asked what they wanted and communicated their plans in advance, Nintendo simply didn't do this to anywhere near the same degree.




Get your Portable ID!

teigaga on 08 September 2013

I pretty much agree.

Nintendo hardware does not cater to what most 3rd parties want, so naturally they show a bias against nintendo. I have no problem with Nintendo taking a risk instead putting all their investment in a powerful box, but if they're going to do something different, they have to lead by example proving the technology they're trying to push. They really haven't done this for the Wii U.

Nintendo should have gone the power route instead and release the Gamepad as a peripheral once they had experiences worth the investment. I know they hold the believe that their audience wouldn't pay $400 for a system, but I don't think they truly understand their core audience, they're delude by the success they found with the wii. The Wii U was never going to replicate the wii's success, not with the gamepad as its main controller.