Forums - Sales Discussion - Why Nintendo shouldn't suck up to third parties

Everyone who isn't in strong denial knows that the Wii U is a piece of trash. Just like there are various explanations for Nintendo's struggles, there are also various suggestions for what Nintendo's way forward should be, if they ever want to be successful again. One of those suggestions is that Nintendo has to suck up to third parties and make a console that is everything that third parties demand. This advice is voiced by Nintendo fans and detractors alike; while the motivations of these groupgs are fundamentally different, they are equally wrong. And here's why:

1. Third parties are biased against Nintendo

There's the belief that third parties would include every platform on Earth into the mix as long as the platform in question offers their demanded specifications. A prerequisite for this belief is the assumption that no third party would pull the line "We do not believe that there is an audience for our games." and forego giving support to Nintendo. This is an unsolvable problem for Nintendo, because the only realistic solutions would be to either pay off third parties for ports (thus ruining profitability) or build an audience for such games themselves which would lead into another commonly used excuse ("Only Nintendo games sell on Nintendo systems."), because consumers' expectations for quality and polish would be raised to levels that third parties are unable/unwilling to match.

2. People buy Nintendo systems in order to play the best games

There's no sales data (neither current or historic) that suggests that multiplatform games are in high demand on Nintendo platforms. Any list of best-selling games will have first party software at the top, followed by exclusive third party games, followed by multiplats. Therefore it's preposterous to suggest that Nintendo should build their console around the games with the least demand; the result would be an expensive system that compromises the values that consumers are looking for.

3. Xbox One

Since the preceding reasons still allow some wiggle room for the people who say that sucking up to third parties is the way to go, let's raise the stakes. Microsoft is an excellent practical example for how futile the pursuit of multiplatform games is. Keep in mind that consumers do buy Xboxes for multiplatform games, unlike Nintendo consoles.

With the Xbox One we have a system that gets all of the multiplatform support and yet it's still tanking hard. Who believes that the Xbox One could have beat the PS4 on a global level, if it launched at the same price, had no Kinect, was equally powerful and had none of the DRM nightmare before its launch? Continental Europe and Japan would have still picked the PS4 in much higher numbers than Microsoft's box. After all, the Xbox 360 failed to make significant inroads in the seventh generation despite having all the multiplatform games (and usually slightly better) and a clear price advantage. Therefore it's not outrageous to say that even a 100 Euro price advantage wouldn't threaten PlayStation. It's clearly an uphill battle for Microsoft and about the only reason why the 360 was competitive at all was the tremendous blunder that Sony committed with the PS3.

With this in mind, let's look at Nintendo again. Whereas Microsoft has only to deal with Sony, Nintendo has to deal with Microsoft and Sony when it comes to the battle of being the multiplatform console of choice. Let's say Sony and Microsoft put out $400 systems, that would basically mean that Nintendo has to sell an equally powerful machine at $200 in order to have a slight chance to succeed in selling their console. That, of course, is financial suicide. Alternatively, Nintendo could hope that both, Sony and Microsoft, launch PS3-like disasters. But any strategy that requires your opponents to commit huge mistakes isn't a good one. Now let's see who harps in on the first two points and ignores the third.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

Around the Network

Hmmm. Nintendo does have a problem getting 3rd parties. Most people that buy Nintendo consoles are just buying them for Nintendo games and either don't care about 3rd party games anyway or have other consoles/pc that they would rather play 3rd party games on. This isn't really working for Nintendo at the moment though, if they want really high sales figures they need for their console to have enough 3rd party support for it to be a primary console for non-Nintendo fans, if they manage that then 3rd party games will sell much better and they won't have a problem getting them anymore.

I disagree with point number 2. IMO Sony, Microsoft and numerous 3rd parties make better games than Nintendo.. Just look at sales figures and you'll see the majority of gamers agree with me.

3rd point is just harsh. Xbox One isn't winning but it's not doing bad. It is above where the 360 was in the same time frame and now there have been price cuts and with some good games coming later this year it will certainly pick up. Also, the upcoming COD (a 3rd party game) will probably be a very good system seller despite being multiplat.



Bet Shiken that COD would outsell Battlefield in 2018. http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8749702

I wouldn't want Nintendo so suck up to third parties. The reason why is because third parties are such aceholes towards Nintendo. I mean, dammit, third parties if you're going to go in on Nintendo, do it with all the gusto you can muster. It seems when third parties join in the Nintendo band wagon, they're doing it out of lip service and all their triple A stuff is actually going towards the other two main consoles. Looking at you EA, you Ubi, you Activision, etc. When third parties get involve, they give Nintendo just the stuff they know are going to fail, or at least it seems that way.

And I know it would be good business not to burn bridges with third parties, but sometimes I wish Nintendo could just say; suck a D and go F yourselves.



Well if there not going to then maybe your next thread should be why Nintendo should not make hardware and be 3rd party them selves.

If no 3rd party games are a for gone conclusion then there is no point to a platform that missing majority of games in the market each year. Might as well take the few great game they got and spread them out on an ocean of platforms of their choosing.

If they don't directly compete with MS and Sony then whats the point exactly ? struggling by on 15/20 million console sales a gen ?



3rd partys are vital to the existence of a console. You just need important multi platform games like Far Cry 4, No Man's Sky, Skyrim and GTA to be relevant to the market.

3rd party's are not biased against Nintendo. They just had to learn by loosing a lot of money, that it is much harder to make any profit with the tiny user base and very strong 1st party competition.

Thankfully, the design is close to the Xbox 360 so ports are easy to make once you find ways to compensate the weaker CPU with the stronger GPU.

Nintendo needs to find creative ways ways to get all important 3rd partys full on board, even if it means reducing or even cutting license fees to reduce development risk or investing in 3rdd party publishers by buying a portion of the shares.



Around the Network

Just in case someone decides to question point #1:

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=174711&page=1



RolStoppable said:

[kupomogli] New Nintendo systems have few third party games.

2. People buy Nintendo systems in order to play the best games

 

Statement seems a little contradictory to me.  Imo, most of the best games are third party, not Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft.  If you were to buy systems to play the best games, then you'd probably buy a system with good third party support. 

Except for the Vita and Wii U(which I don't own a Wii U yet, but I'm interested in very few third parties since I own them on other consoles) on every console I own, i own at minimum three times more quality third party titles than first party titles.  This includes Nintendo consoles.  There's also more great third party titles than great first party titles.



RolStoppable said:
1. Third parties are biased against Nintendo

There's the belief that third parties would include every platform on Earth into the mix as long as the platform in question offers their demanded specifications. A prerequisite for this belief is the assumption that no third party would pull the line "We do not believe that there is an audience for our games." and forego giving support to Nintendo. This is an unsolvable problem for Nintendo, because the only realistic solutions would be to either pay off third parties for ports (thus ruining profitability) or build an audience for such games themselves which would lead into another commonly used excuse ("Only Nintendo games sell on Nintendo systems."), because consumers' expectations for quality and polish would be raised to levels that third parties are unable/unwilling to match.

This is precisely why I want to see Nintendo partner with certain specific studios to bring their level of quality to genres and styles of games that are currently popular on the other platforms. I honestly think that a WWII FPS shooter with a Nintendo spin would actually be a massively popular title. If you think I just mean an "army shooter", think again - I mean WWII shooter, the genre that was popular 7-8 years ago and fell out of favour, with the "modern shooter" taking its place.

Publishers proclaim that they can't compete with Nintendo when they barely compete in the same genres? Let's see what happens when Nintendo decides to show them how it's done in the genres that are their bread and butter.



Yeah another "nintendo have the best games,third parties are peasants" thread.

1# - Third parties are not biased against nintendo.They just know what everybody already knows.Nintendo consoles sells nintendo games(or at least nintendo-like games).Games like rayman and skylanders sell great because they are colorful/cartoonish platformers like some of nintendo softwares.

2# - Best games? for you? or this is some kind of universal truth?! Believe you or not,there is a lot of people waiting for The Witcher 3,Arkham knight,Kingdom Hearts 3 and Destiny(games that are not coming for WiiU) as much as you probably waits ZeldaU.Been an exclusive or been a nintendo game doesn't make a game better than others.This is pure elitism.

3# - Xbox one is not selling that well but at least multiplatform sells great on that machine(it's not the same situation of WiiU).The OG Xbox sold a little more than gamecube but the attach rate was amazing.The reason why xbox one is selling bad is a combination of bad PR + strong competition.Plus,look at PS4! right now the third party games are making much more inpact on that console HW sales that any exclusive that nintendo released on WiiU.PS4 still won may NPD and probably will won june NPD again.



Nintendo tried to partner with EA, and that turned out to be dog shit.

I like what they are doing now with the collaboration titles, win-win situations for both companies