Nintendo going 3rd party would be... | |||
| The end of all! | 163 | 44.66% | |
| A wash compared to where they are at now | 71 | 19.45% | |
| A smarter business move financially speaking | 45 | 12.33% | |
| The happiest day of Sony ... | 86 | 23.56% | |
| Total: | 365 | ||
| Jon-Erich said: When people ask this question, I often think of Sega. If anyone remembers, Sega did not want to go third party. They had to. They had no choice. I think Isao Okawa understood the consequences of Sega going third party, even though he knew it would have to happen eventually. Nintendo is not in that situation and most likely won't be In that situation for a long time. Culturally, Sega was no more. Without their own hardware, they lost the competitive edge they once had. People left and all Sega is now is just a name. I think Satoru Iwata understands this better than just about any stock owner. |
I don't get why this is so hard to understand. Going third party didn't kill Sega. Trying to compete in the hardware space is what killed Sega. The company has recovered wonderfully since going third party.
Purple said:
Having a larger market to sell to would actually encourage Nintendo to produce those games. Currently Nintendo has to focus 100% on their biggest franchises as they rely on popular software to make huge profits to cover the losses incurred by selling the console. Look at the Wii U's current lineup, it's incredibly safe bar The Wonderful 101 and you can be sure Nintendo won't be making a mistake like funding that game again. If they were third party they'd be safer making new titles as they can sell to a huge market and they won't be relying on games to sell their undesirable hardware. The Sega situation is in no way comparable. They were a company that went almost bankrupt and then went third party. Of course their output declined, they had to cut most of their devs as they ran out of money persisting with a failing hardware division. Nintendo going third party sooner rather than later would avoid this exact scenario.
|
Nintendo puts the effort into their games in order to sell their hardware, and vice versa. If the need to make quality games in order to push their hardware is gone, I feel the game quality would suffer immensely, as a large part of the incentive is gone. Furthermore, hardware brings in a lot more profit than a$50-$60 game. The entirity of Nintendo's survival as a company hinging completly on something as small as video game software would be disasterous for them. They would implode as a company, unless they underwent a MAJOR downsizing.
Also, I don't get why Nintendo hardware gets this bad stigma.. It's not only far cheaper (in price, NOT in quality), but it's far more durable (doesn't break on you 33% of the time like the PS2 or old Xbox 360), interface is more seemless, and comes with free online. Also, unlike the Wii, Nintendo how has hardware that is at least "good enough" in terms of horsepower. Just what the hell do people feel is wrong with their hardware?
Nintendo is not going third party people. EVER. Best to make peace with this fact now rather than later. Honestly, Sony is far more likely to go third party than Nintendo.
| Metallicube said: Nintendo puts the effort into their games in order to sell their hardware, and vice versa. If the need to make quality games in order to push their hardware is gone, I feel the game quality would suffer immensely, as a large part of the incentive is gone. Furthermore, hardware brings in a lot more profit than a$50-$60 game. The entirity of Nintendo's survival as a company hinging completly on something as small as video game software would be disasterous for them. They would implode as a company, unless they underwent a MAJOR downsizing. Also, I don't get why Nintendo hardware gets this bad stigma.. It's not only far cheaper (in price, NOT in quality), but it's far more durable (doesn't break on you 33% of the time like the PS2 or old Xbox 360), interface is more seemless, and comes with free online. Also, unlike the Wii, Nintendo how has hardware that is at least "good enough" in terms of horsepower. Just what the hell do people feel is wrong with their hardware? Nintendo is not going third party people. EVER. Best to make peace with this fact now rather than later. Honestly, Sony is far more likely to go third party than Nintendo. |
If Nintendo relied on software to make them money the quality would remain high or they'd lose their sole source of income. Why would no longer making hardware (done by a completely unrelated divsion) lead to EAD just giving up and deciding to release trash. That's illogical.
People have rewritten history so extensively making out like the Dreamcast was some gaming Mecca. Sega's output since going third party is better and they've been able to invest heavily in new popular devs. I think it says a lot that Sega were in a financial position to purchase Atlus but Nintendo, despite so desperately needing more games for their own system, weren't.
The hardware is unappealing to the market. I personally don't mind it and it's good that you like it too, but that doesn't help Nintendo's bottom line. There are plenty of threads on what is wrong with the Wii U.
Nintendo is a publicly owned company and have a legal obligation to be profitable. If Nintendo's performance in the console space doesn't improve in the next five years they will go third party.
No, not by a long shot.
1: They would lose the licensing/publishing royalty from developers/publishers on a platform entirely their own.
2: Nintendo having been forced to become so self-sufficient has made them an expert in creating a software/hardware synergy, their hardware depends on the software and the software depends on the hardware. Something like Wii Sports would not have been possible without a great deal of tailoring to the Wii-mote and would likely never have become such a break-out hit on a foreign platform environment.
3: Nintendo would be subject to hardware solutions, online components, marketing ploys and controller focus that would be strange to them.
4: Besides the Wii U, they usually make a lot of money on the hardware and the peripherals, you won't get to 14 billion dollars in the bank simply as a 3rd party publisher/developer, not in today's market.
5: Nintendo rely on a much higher level of market control than the others, they would essentially abandon all their advantages and lose most of their power and influence.
No way they will benefit from becoming 3rd party. It's unrealistic and horribly minsconstrued as a good option, or an option at all to their current business setup.
Purple said:
If Nintendo relied on software to make them money the quality would remain high or they'd lose their sole source of income. Why would no longer making hardware (done by a completely unrelated divsion) lead to EAD just giving up and deciding to release trash. That's illogical. People have rewritten history so extensively making out like the Dreamcast was some gaming Mecca. Sega's output since going third party is better and they've been able to invest heavily in new popular devs. I think it says a lot that Sega were in a financial position to purchase Atlus but Nintendo, despite so desperately needing more games for their own system, weren't. The hardware is unappealing to the market. I personally don't mind it and it's good that you like it too, but that doesn't help Nintendo's bottom line. There are plenty of threads on what is wrong with the Wii U. Nintendo is a publicly owned company and have a legal obligation to be profitable. If Nintendo's performance in the console space doesn't improve in the next five years they will go third party. |
If Nintendo's performance in the console space doesn't improve in the next five years, they will not go third party. Instead, they will do the same thing they did after their LAST hardware failure known as the Gamecube; they will be forced to go back to their arcade roots again and release another Wii-type console, and probably have another hit on their hands (no, the Wii U is NOT the next Wii, it's a successor to Wii in name only). Problem is lately they've become stubborn and insisted on regressing back to their niche style gamecube games with the Wii U. THAT is why the hardware is selling poorly. It has little to do with the hardware itself. At the end of the day, people buy consoles to play their GAMES, not to stare at the pretty glossy finish of the hardware or look at their purdy graphics.. The reason Nintendo hardware is suffering right now is because the game quality has been suffering. End of story.. And Nintendo has the power to fix that, if only they'd get their heads out of their asses and start doing it..
The bottom line is this, if it made business sense for Nintendo to go third party, they would have done it already. They are not stupid. There is obviously a very good reason they chose not to, and to continue to. And I would wager they NEVER will.
in the home console market? definitely, they would make a mint from their games still just have them sold on XBO/PS4/PC instead of their own console, given Wii U sales right now that would probably be a pretty effective move for them but I imagine they will stick with the Wii U for the short term, if it doesn't improve sales and falls way behind PS4/XBO before too long then it may well be something they think about for the next gen.
handheld market they would be insane to do it though, the 3DS has that cornered and they have the brand recognition and lack of competition to really hold that down for a long time yet, mobile gaming is on the up but it really can't compete for the quality of the games you can get on 3DS or handheld consoles, they should really just try to keep that market cornered, and then switch to 3rd party software for the home console market for the next gen there.
JoeTheBro said:
Well I'm a developer. |
That's awesome!
"Games are a trigger for adults to again become primitive, primal, as a way of thinking and remembering. An adult is a child who has more ethics and morals, that's all. When I am a child, creating, I am not creating a game. I am in the game. The game is not for children, it is for me. It is for an adult who still has a character of a child."
Shigeru Miyamoto
NO!
"Every day I look in the mirror and ask myself: "If today were the last day of my life, would I want to do what I am about to do today?". If the answer is no for too many days in a row, I know I need to change something"
Steve Jobs
Final-Fan said:
Your question is commonly posed by trolls and people with axes to grind, but I will presume you are honestly curious yet ignorant. Joe the Bro has given a pretty good answer. If you missed it, here's the short version: Not only does Nintendo profit on its hardware, but it also gets significant cuts of the sales of other publishers' games on their consoles, while keeping the cut they would have had to give Sony or MS if Nintendo published on their consoles. The increased audience isn't worth it. |
Seeing as how I am an avid Nintendo supporter I am definitely not trying to troll anyone. And how does having a thirst for knowledge make one ignorant? I asked the question as humbly as I could.
"Games are a trigger for adults to again become primitive, primal, as a way of thinking and remembering. An adult is a child who has more ethics and morals, that's all. When I am a child, creating, I am not creating a game. I am in the game. The game is not for children, it is for me. It is for an adult who still has a character of a child."
Shigeru Miyamoto
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
Currently Online 
