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

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

Aielyn said:
OttoniBastos said:
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.

Yes, and this is why Call of Duty 3 sold better on Wii than on PS3, right? Because clearly Nintendo consoles can't sell third party titles.

Third party games sell poorly on Nintendo consoles because third parties treat the Nintendo console versions as lesser to begin with. They put less money into the Nintendo system development, they put less money into advertising if it's an exclusive or don't bother to even list the Nintendo system in the ad if it's multiplatform. Case-in-point, pretty much every single Call of Duty since World at War, where most of them weren't even confirmed for release on the Wii (or Wii U) until days before release, at which point it was just a "Oh, and it's also releasing on Wii", no video, no quality screenshots, etc.

In the rare cases where third parties put some effort into selling games on Nintendo consoles, the games do exceptionally well. Resident Evil 4 for Wii sold over 2 million copies. Shaun White Snowboarding sold far better on Wii than on other systems. Red Steel, despite the glitchiness and overall weakness, still easily sold over 1 million copies. Monster Hunter did very well on Wii. No More Heroes was Suda 51's best-selling game of all time, enough to justify making a sequel (another first for him).

Meanwhile, pretty much all of the big-selling "mature" titles from Gen 7 weren't even released on Wii to begin with, with many of the remainder being late, inferior ports and/or completely ignored in terms of advertising/marketing.

But please, keep telling us that only Nintendo games sell on Nintendo hardware. Because we just love how the same old, tired, disproven talking points get used over and over again to attack Nintendo fans. Just like the whole "Wii was for teh cazualz", "Gamecube was for kidz", etc crap that went round over and over again with NO justification and lots of FUD.

still using that tired COD3 argument. That game is what? a decade old or more? how about you use some RECENT examples? How about you talk about whats going on in the current gen? Cause by your logic we might as well go to teh N64 and GC days but that would make your argument moot



Around the Network
RolStoppable said:

1. Third parties are biased against Nintendo

"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

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.

I think your analysis is fair but short quite sighted.

1.

The visible bias against Nintendo is BECAUSE THEY DON'T design their systems with 3rd parties in mind. Even sony suffered from this somewhat with the PS3 through difficult architecture many ports were inferior and the 360 was designated as lead platform. Obviously when you had a commercial flop like the Wii U coupled with hardware disaligned with your developers vision its easy to give the platform a miss.

Just to break it down, the bias exist in 2 parts as far as im aware:

Percepton of Audience: You can't underestimate the extent to which hardware shapes the audience a system draws initially. Obviously turning up at E3 and trying sell a system which is only marginally more powerfu then last gen systems sets you apart from the core gamers who play these viseral, realistic and graphic games. The same gamers for whom graphics is important and love M rated content. Infact it somewhat distances you from the entire userbase of PS3/360... If those same gamers that you make games for are the audience  who is being ignored, surely that immediately makes the platform in question low on your priority. Power aside, the same applies to your online infrastructure; Nintendo isn't going to attract people who care about online experience, if they themselves don't care about online experiences. Theres a reason why COD sold 10x better on ps3 verus the wii despite the wii having the bigger userbase; if you were interested in that kind of game you would likely have invested in a HD system with a better online environment... 

Compromise: This is a lessor issue but i don't think many devs are interested in compromising to fit the wii U's power restraints. If the system had a huge userbase, I'm sure many would change their tune. But the likes of Bethesda, Bioware, rockstar, Square Enix probably wouldn't with their flagship titles.

Both things are solvable. Make a console with the modern core market in mind. Nintendo do not, hence why there are refered to as out of touch. 

2.

Multiplatform titles aren't in demand on Nintendo platforms because they more often then not, superior on microsoft and sonys platform- normally a fault of Nintendo's hardware. Even if FFXV came out on the Wii U, I think most fans would want to experience it on the PS4.

The fact that data shows that most multiplatform titles fail on Nintendo hardware is probably why 3 of Nintendo's last 4 home consoles have either flopped or underperformed. Its a problem. Nintendo need to address it, not just shrug it off.

3.

Invalid. Microsoft went from selling 20m one generation to selling 80m and still counting. They couldn't have done that without 3rd party support. The Xbox One is underperforming as you clearly illustrated because of numerous mistakes on microsoft behalf as well as a lack of compelling exclusives. Once next gen exclusives arrive and 360 owners are forced to buy either the PS4/XO, it sales will most likely become more competetive... Even if they don't the system has still sold at a faster rate then the Wii U, not to mention all the money they make from strong 3rd party sales (royalty money). 

Solution:

In short, Nintendo should make a system which can appeal to the mass of video game buying public (powerfull, not too expensive) as well as their core- naturally appealling to most 3rd parties and the games they craft. Their 1st party games have more pulling power then anything sony has and probably microsoft too. The biggest issue is the childish image they've been assigned in the last decade.

They will never achieve sales of 20m+  just looking at their niche fans who chatter about rumours of a new star fox every year. They can try the blue ocean approach but next time they need a better gimmick then the gamepad. The safest thing they can do is pay attention to what 3rd parties and gamers want. 



mii-gamer said:
NightDragon83 said:

As long as Nintendo refuses to elevate 3rd party titles to the same level as theirs and promote them equally, they will continue to suffer poor 3rd party support, and 3rd parties will rightly be biased against them. And anyone who says Nintendo games like DK Tropical Freeze, MK 8 and Mario 3D World for example are above and beyond top 3rd party AAA titles, well, that's a perfect example of why Nintendo's console sales are in the crapper these days and why 3rd parties ignore Nintendo.

Explain these:

http://www.joystiq.com/2013/02/08/wii-u-zombiu-bundle-coming-to-north-america-feb-17/

http://nintendoenthusiast.com/news/nintendo-launches-3-new-wii-u-hardware-bundles-holiday-season-europe/

http://www.nintendo.com/whatsnew/detail/yKutRcLvK7rK24DfVIQTB23J8o33gONl

http://www.ubergizmo.com/2013/02/monster-hunter-3-ultimate-wii-u-and-3ds-xl-bundles-revealed/

Furthermore Nintendo has been supporting their 3ds partners well - level 5, square, capcom, atlus etc have received great support from Nintendo.

This is business, and it comes down to whether it is beneficial. I don't see how lifting games such as a gimped mass effect 3, a late to the party need for speeds and multiplats that are on consoles with 80 million users will be a win-win situation for nintendo. Even the likes of Watch_dog Wii U are being mishandled - is it too much to ask for a trailer with in game footage of the game running on the Wii U?


Honestly this doesnt mean anything. At all Japan will always support portables because that is there main platforms. No other place in the world is like that. And besides, we are talking WIi U here not 3ds its always odd that people pull it out to prove something. Now with that being said why hasnt that good 3ds supported translated into at least decent Wii U support? Hell the Japanese studios are actually worse than western ones when it comes ot supporting the Wii U. SE had ONE game Wii U so far. and that was a port game from there western studios Level5 nothing, Atlus nothing, Capcom, two three ports.



I do not care that much about exclusives from third parties, other than Monster Hunter. That proved to be huge for Nintendo. Sega games on the other hand proved to be a waste of time.

But games like gta, cod, etc should not be hard to get and Nintendo should do some woo'ing to get. People just do not want to miss out. Grass is always greener on the other side type of issue. Just get some big multiplates and many will be happy. CoD is a good start. Cross plateform play would be nice though.



    The NINTENDO PACT 2015[2016  Vgchartz Wii U Achievement League! - Sign up now!                      My T.E.C.H'aracter

It's simple. Is there a bias? Maybe. but lets be adults and look at the big picture. Sony and MS have gone above and beyond to get 3rd party support. Now for better or worse they SOny especially have changed the way relationships are done. Since PS1 era. Now whether people like it or not its up to Nintendo to match those efforts and try to get that support. IF they want it. Its like an auction. YOu dont go to the house unless you are willing ot bid. If you arent you take whatever toys you have and stay the hell home. I think thats what Ninty has to do, either stay home or go big there cant be any inbetween. Put yourselfin the publisher shoes. who would you rather deal with the company that is trying to court your favor or the indifferent one? Instead of looking ot what the 3rd party publishers are doing wrong. Look to Ninty. its not that they are doing bad they are doing nothing, while theother two are doing almost everyhing. So cant you really blame them.

as for point tow laughtable again letting WIi cloud your judgement. I cant wait for the end of the gen when the software sales are more akin to GC ones i wonder if people will still use the sales=quality argument. Hell we dont have to wait if the Ninty games were so vital the system wold be doing bettter.



Around the Network
RolStoppable said:
Richard_Feynman said:
Player2 said:

Just in case someone decides to question point #1:

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

That has nothing to do with point 1. How much do you think Dark Souls II would sell on Wii U? Who would buy it? Exactly. The statement in your link is absolutely justifiable and has nothing to do with 3rd parties being "biased against Nintendo". 

Get a grip on reality.

It has everything to do with point 1. It proves that Nintendo wouldn't get all multiplatform games, even if their system was equal to others. Just look at the Wii U:

1) Electronic Arts never intended to put Dead Space 3 on it.
2) Square-Enix never intended to put Tomb Raider on it.
3) Take Two never intended to put Bioshock Infinite on it.
4) Konami never intended to put Castlevania: Lords of Shadow 2 on it.

That's already four publishers off the top of my head that denied ports before the Wii U went on sale, meaning that Wii U sales had zero influence on those decisions.


I disagree with everything you say including the very essence of this thread.

" Nintendo wouldn't get all multiplatform games, even if their system was equal to others"

How could you possibly know this? The Wii and Wii U are/were both a generation behind. The Gamecube was "equal" and got great 3rd party support even though it sold terribly.

"It has everything to do with point 1"

No it doesn't. Who plays Dark Souls? It is common knowledge that the demographic that plays these kind of games have (largely) long abandoned Nintendo consoles. No one would buy Dark Souls on Wii U - I don't see how you could offer even a shred of evidence to the opposite.

"That's already four publishers off the top of my head that denied ports before the Wii U went on sale"

Why support the Wii U when 3rd party games were a waste of time on the phenomenally successful Wii? Clearly the relevant publishers made the correct business decisions in all of those cases. As a counter example, Mass Effect 3 was released on Wii U. Do you on any level suppose that the reception it received warrants the appearance of Mass Effect 4 on Wii U? Of course not. Why do you think that is?

"meaning that Wii U sales had zero influence on those decisions."

As a publisher, you make a call and later you may change your decision.

You seem to insinuate in point 1 of the OP that the decisions made by 3rd party publishers are not purely business decisions, but are based on some sort of 'bias' against Nintendo. You delude yourself into thinking that your argument is a good one, when in fact it clearly isn't.

"because consumers' expectations for quality and polish would be raised to levels that third parties are unable/unwilling to match."

Really? You think Nintendo is the very best of the best game developer in the world and no-one else can match them? That is utter nonsense; anyone who plays PC and Sony and MS and Nintendo will tell you.

Should I list the 3rd party games that do things that Nintendo have never even tried? Do you think there is a single Nintendo title that is even in the same category as Witcher 3 in terms of content and scope? 

My guess is this conversation is pointless. I just don't find these rants of yours as amazing as anyone else.

 




pokoko said:
4). They are seemingly incompetent at working cooperatively with western studios. People say they shouldn't do it but the real issue is that they CAN'T do it. If they COULD, the same people blaming third-parties now would be all for it. It's not about sucking up, it's about forging business partnerships that create a mutually beneficial environment. You know, like almost every other company in every other industry does? Yeah, like that.

Seriously, how many people are angry about third party Japanese games? How many people are yelling that Nintendo should stop "sucking up" and kick Youkai Watch or Bravely Default to the curb? Hmm, no? Those seem to be okay? My hypocrisy sense is tingling.

This whole batch of third party hate reminds me of when my cousin was a kid. He was really self-centered, even for a child. All his toys were awesome but if you had something he didn't have, he'd pout and call it "stupid". When he'd come over, that's all I heard. I remember getting in trouble for hitting him with a cardboard box because he was so annoying.

The whole crux of the matter is that NoA fails at establishing competent developer relationships. Stop rationalizing that.

Your every word was poetry.



"You should be banned. Youre clearly flaming the president and even his brother who you know nothing about. Dont be such a partisan hack"

spurgeonryan said:
I do not care that much about exclusives from third parties, other than Monster Hunter. That proved to be huge for Nintendo. Sega games on the other hand proved to be a waste of time.

But games like gta, cod, etc should not be hard to get and Nintendo should do some woo'ing to get. People just do not want to miss out. Grass is always greener on the other side type of issue. Just get some big multiplates and many will be happy. CoD is a good start. Cross plateform play would be nice though.


is it? have you seen the sales. IT might as well not bet there at all.



Richard_Feynman said:
RolStoppable said:
Richard_Feynman said:
Player2 said:

Just in case someone decides to question point #1:

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

That has nothing to do with point 1. How much do you think Dark Souls II would sell on Wii U? Who would buy it? Exactly. The statement in your link is absolutely justifiable and has nothing to do with 3rd parties being "biased against Nintendo". 

Get a grip on reality.

It has everything to do with point 1. It proves that Nintendo wouldn't get all multiplatform games, even if their system was equal to others. Just look at the Wii U:

1) Electronic Arts never intended to put Dead Space 3 on it.
2) Square-Enix never intended to put Tomb Raider on it.
3) Take Two never intended to put Bioshock Infinite on it.
4) Konami never intended to put Castlevania: Lords of Shadow 2 on it.

That's already four publishers off the top of my head that denied ports before the Wii U went on sale, meaning that Wii U sales had zero influence on those decisions.


I disagree with everything you say including the very essence of this thread.

" Nintendo wouldn't get all multiplatform games, even if their system was equal to others"

How could you possibly know this? The Wii and Wii U are/were both a generation behind. The Gamecube was "equal" and got great 3rd party support even though it sold terribly.

"It has everything to do with point 1"

No it doesn't. Who plays Dark Souls? It is common knowledge that the demographic that plays these kind of games have (largely) long abandoned Nintendo consoles. No one would buy Dark Souls on Wii U - I don't see how you could offer even a shred of evidence to the opposite.

"That's already four publishers off the top of my head that denied ports before the Wii U went on sale"

Why support the Wii U when 3rd party games were a waste of time on the phenomenally successful Wii? Clearly the relevant publishers made the correct business decisions in all of those cases. As a counter example, Mass Effect 3 was released on Wii U. Do you on any level suppose that the reception it received warrants the appearance of Mass Effect 4 on Wii U? Of course not. Why do you think that is?

"meaning that Wii U sales had zero influence on those decisions."

As a publisher, you make a call and later you may change your decision.

You seem to insinuate in point 1 of the OP that the decisions made by 3rd party publishers are not purely business decisions, but are based on some sort of 'bias' against Nintendo. You delude yourself into thinking that your argument is a good one, when in fact it clearly isn't.

"because consumers' expectations for quality and polish would be raised to levels that third parties are unable/unwilling to match."

Really? You think Nintendo is the very best of the best game developer in the world and no-one else can match them? That is utter nonsense; anyone who plays PC and Sony and MS and Nintendo will tell you.

Should I list the 3rd party games that do things that Nintendo have never even tried? Do you think there is a single Nintendo title that is even in the same category as Witcher 3 in terms of content and scope? 

My guess is this conversation is pointless. I just don't find these rants of yours as amazing as anyone else.

 


1) The GameCube didn't get the third party support of Xbox, despite Xbox selling equally terribly.

2) Monster Hunter's sales on Wii/Wii U make a decent argument. The market for rigorous ARPGs is there.

3) Hindsight is 20/20, of course, but these publishers were acting with *foresight*. They decided, absent any sales, that Wii U did not deserve full third party support. If Wii U had come roaring out of the gate, these games still would not have been made.

4) Bias is all over this industry. I'd be almost as inclined to buy it as an argument than appeals to "rationality."

5) How many game-breaking bugs will Witcher 3 have, day one? Hell, check this out. http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2659901

The "ship now, patch later" mentality is what Rol is addressing specifically.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

oniyide said:
spurgeonryan said:
I do not care that much about exclusives from third parties, other than Monster Hunter. That proved to be huge for Nintendo. Sega games on the other hand proved to be a waste of time.

But games like gta, cod, etc should not be hard to get and Nintendo should do some woo'ing to get. People just do not want to miss out. Grass is always greener on the other side type of issue. Just get some big multiplates and many will be happy. CoD is a good start. Cross plateform play would be nice though.


is it? have you seen the sales. IT might as well not bet there at all.


Yep. Does not mean that more would not be happier as long as they got the main third party multiplates. One multi a month one go a long way in keeping many gamers happy. While they wait for the next Nintendo game. 

 

Myself? Don't care. Especially while I can still rent most new games on my 360 still if I want to try them.



    The NINTENDO PACT 2015[2016  Vgchartz Wii U Achievement League! - Sign up now!                      My T.E.C.H'aracter