You are not biased if you look at your numbers. Ubisoft for example lost a lot of money by supporting Wii-U this far. It would be wise for them to entirely cease Wii-U support since they loose money with a dead system because nobody buys their games which cannot compete with Nintendos strong brands.
Zero999 said:
repeating the bolded will not make it true. |
You must not have heard of truth through repetition. It's very real.
This has been talked to death. Most Nintendo gamers have other systems, there is a lot less (only owning one)console loyalty. So to get people to buy for that system you have to make your port of games for that system as good or better than the ones they own. That usually means more resources towards that platform. You put the majority of resources towards the platform with the biggest userbases. That results in shoddy ports of games on the smallest platform(new Nintendo system). That results in bad sales because gamers are going to pick the best(or not the worst) version of a game. Which results in less(and eventually no) resources towards that platform in the future.
Now if Nintendo released a current gen system 2x as powerful as PS4 it wouldnt matter. People would still stick to their loyalty and buy PS4/X1 because they dont like Nintendo franchises. The userbase would warrant more resources to the PS4/X1 versions and Nintendo would still get the worst version of games.
I honestly think Nintendo is past the point of no return. They dont have the rabid fanbase that other consoles have. They are forever stuck in the kiddie zone, no matter what they try to do they cant get out of it, no matter how false the statement is.
Getting an XBOX One for me is like being in a bad relationship but staying together because we have kids. XBone we have 20000+ achievement points, 2+ years of XBL Gold and 20000+ MS points. I think its best we stay together if only for the MS points.
Nintendo Treehouse is what happens when a publisher is confident and proud of its games and doesn't need to show CGI lies for five minutes.
-Jim Sterling
st0pnsw0p said:
And why does that happen, if demographics has nothing to do with it? Random chance? If that were the case, the FFXIII games would have sold more on PS3 some of the time and sometimes more on the 360, but that's not the case. All three games sold more than twice as much on PS3 as they did on 360. All the Call of Dutys and Battlefields sold more on 360 than on PS3. All the Skylanders sold better on Wii than on any other system. Resident Evil 5 and 6 sold better on PS3. All the retail Sonic games, except All-Stars Racing Transformed, sold better on PS3 than on 360. All 9 the NFS games released on both 360 and PS3 except two did better on PS3 than on 360. How can you possibly explain all of these without using demographics? |
saying: "nintendo's demographic doesn't buy third party games/ is too different from the other consoles audiences" is the myth part. got it now?
Everyone can agree more or less than Nintendo's own games sell best on their hardware. Many would argue that Nintendo's own games are The reason to buy any Nintendo hardware.
As a result, 3rd party games on Nintendo platforms are secondary at best with very few exceptions. As a result, the vast majority of 3rd party games have a more limited market than they might on other hardware platforms, or at the very least, the games can be expected to sell fewer units than they would on other platforms.
In short, it's generally more profitable for 3rd party developers to focus on other platforms where they aren't competing with the primary reason most of the installed user base is playing on a Nintendo platform.
Is it biased when they regularly and deliberately divert more effort and resources to other platforms? By definition, of course. But it doesn't take a stretch of reason to see it has more to do with seeking an optimal ROI than some sort of personal, emotional grudge. That's generally how biased consumer minds work, not the companies that develop and publish games as an investment looking for the maximum returns.
Keegs79 said:
Now you said 300 made sold over 500,000? Wrong. It was 262. http://www.vgchartz.com/platform/2/wii/ The market was huge for the Wii. Of course it was going to have third party games that sold but it doesn't mean its going to be successful. What third party games sold well? No surprise, casual games. Games that the Wii was targeted to in the first place. That is the spin! That was the one hit wonder with the Wii that made Nintendo successful. They can't capitalize on it because the Wii U isn't attracting the casual market and major AAA titles from third parties didn't even sale all that well. Those casual games don't have huge budgets so of course those are likely profitable but Nintendo's own Wii Music sold 3 million |
308 games sold at least 500k. 253 of those were third party.
don't make me laugh with this pointless "casual" term. as I said 253 third party games sols at least 500k units and close to 100 are million sellers. among those you will find all kinds of games and genres, p.e.r.i.o.d. by comparing to other consoles, we see that third party games sell less on nintendo than others, but less =/= little, it's still a lot of sales.
JazzB1987 said:
|
In this world that we live in, EVERYTHING drops in price after time, EVERYTHING. Unless its a collectors piece.
Its the nature of itself. Bigger and better comes out, the newest edition comes out, black and white moves to color, 20 inch turnes to 42 inch, DVD turnes to Blu-Ray, NES moves to Gamecube...........
There is no reason for Nintendo to still charge full price for say Mario Kart Wii. NONE. Other than they think that consumers will still buy it, in which case the consumer is indeed part of the problem itself.
And gamers are not stupid. We gamers buy games, and we buy games all the time, so if your racing game comes out in January priced at $60, you better believe that we who want to play the game will go out and pick it up, but here is the catch, next year you are likely to release another racing game. More tracks, better tech, hopefully better gameplay, better graphics. You Set them both side by side on the store shelf priced at $60 each. Why in the world would any self respecting gamer pay $60 for the last years edition ?
Your logic is flawed. You are aiding Nintendo in lining their pockets, while they drain YOURS.
| Zero999 said: saying: "nintendo's demographic doesn't buy third party games/ is too different from the other consoles audiences" is the myth part. got it now? |
I assume you have a better explanation for why there aren't been as many successful 3rd party games on Nintendo consoles as there have been on competitor's consoles ever since the PS1 era.
st0pnsw0p said:
I assume you have a better explanation for why there aren't been as many successful 3rd party games on Nintendo consoles as there have been on competitor's consoles ever since the PS1 era. |
for starters, the number of 3rd party titles is higher on other platforms since then. that by itself already favours the number of sucessfull games on non nintendo systems.
and what's the relation of your statement with the discussion? less sucess than others =/= unsucessfull.
| greenmedic88 said: Everyone can agree more or less than Nintendo's own games sell best on their hardware. Many would argue that Nintendo's own games are The reason to buy any Nintendo hardware. As a result, 3rd party games on Nintendo platforms are secondary at best with very few exceptions. As a result, the vast majority of 3rd party games have a more limited market than they might on other hardware platforms, or at the very least, the games can be expected to sell fewer units than they would on other platforms. In short, it's generally more profitable for 3rd party developers to focus on other platforms where they aren't competing with the primary reason most of the installed user base is playing on a Nintendo platform. Is it biased when they regularly and deliberately divert more effort and resources to other platforms? By definition, of course. But it doesn't take a stretch of reason to see it has more to do with seeking an optimal ROI than some sort of personal, emotional grudge. That's generally how biased consumer minds work, not the companies that develop and publish games as an investment looking for the maximum returns. |
It hasn't always been that way, and it doesn't have to be that way. Sure, Nintendo's own games sell best on their platforms. But in the N64 days that didn't keep games like Turok, Star Wars Episode 1 Racer, or Kobe Bryant's NBA courtside from being successful.
We'll see a Nintendo platform with solid 3rd party someday in the future again.
I predict NX launches in 2017 - not 2016
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
