I said big-budget.

It doesn't matter if they were first or last, they have already reached out to indies (as this discussion is about the present), and what the hell are you talking about with the rest? They have an application process that is stringent but nothing else, and apparently not stringent enough given the crap that people put out on eShop anyway.

It doesn’t matter whether they were first or last?! If they were the last; that shows that they made the least effort, and that’s my entire point! It seems that you’re saying that the past has no bearing on the present, which is grossly inaccurate; if Nintendo have a 25-30 year long history of not caring to reach out to 3^rd party developers, independent or otherwise, how is that not going to affect their current and sustainable (which was Iwata’s wish) relationship with developers and publishers?
Your last sentence here seems to imply that Nintendo’s own policy is having no effect; making it senseless and simply yet another obstacle for developers.
Read up on Dan Adelman’s troubles with getting Nintendo to change their policies and embrace independents; you might find it educational.

All companies have an application process, just go to GAF or other dev forums about the dev kits and look at how it works.

I don’t need to go to GAF and see how it works; I already know. Nintendo are still charging for their dev kits; Sony are loaning out the dev kit for free as well as the free licenses for Unity and they have even paid for independent showcases of games at TGS.
And Nintendo’s application process is less streamlined than others’, Steam being the best solution for most.

You can apply for a devkit and get cleared for one.

And still pay for it. And it’s not like Nintendo are reaching out to these people (which is part of my core point); they need to come and find out on their own, Nintendo have made practically zero effort to spread the news of the possibilities of getting your games out on e-shop, the same was true for Wiiware.

http://www.polygon.com/2014/8/4/5967795/nintendo-adelman-quit

“This is a company that kept its head of indie relations off Twitter. By force.” Refusing their head of Indie game development relations to communicate on the fastest growing and most influential social network system in modern times which is a fantastic tool for relations and outreach, removing the individual from the equation and presenting a wholly corporate creature instead is clearly not the way to go for ideal conditions on the Indie scene.

You seem to be talking about Nintendo as circa 2000 when indie or not, you needed to meet all sorts of absurd conditions and earnings weren't even earned without a certain sell-through, not Nintendo as circa 2014. They have been on board with indie development for a while now, we have indie devs who work to put stuff on their platforms, and indie devs who talk about the successes they've found. If this were Nintendo circa 2000, such discussion wouldn't even exist because indies wouldn't be developing for them... because the rules were horrible.

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/08/outspoken-indie-game-chief-leaves-nintendo/

Is that so? In early 2013, this guy: Dan Adelman, who has been Nintendo’s Indie relations main man, got into yet another fight with the management of the company and cited that they needed to change their “ridiculously outdated” policy of requiring their independent license recipients to have an official office outside their own home. This was a little over a year ago; no “circa 2000”. There’s also the “Binding of Isaac” incident, where Nintendo decided against releasing this popular Indie title due to the religious content, they were more or less the only ones who refused it.
They have also refused to portray gay relationships in the Tomodachi Life universe; they are showing an extremely conservative and old-fashioned mindset through and through and would rather resort to censorship than offering and portraying breadth.

You think Shin'en, Yacht Club, Wayforward, and otherwise, just work one these Nintendo platforms out of a personal self-loathing?

Great, more polarizing.

The rules now are far, far different from what they used to be. Nintendo has reached out and adjusted to things like indie.

That’s precisely what they haven’t done; most Indies don’t even know about Nintendo’s efforts simply because Nintendo doesn’t reach out to anyone, they sit in their grotto and wait for others to contact them, again showing a great lack of interest and investment in getting actual support for the Wii U. One of the exceptions is Frozenbyte with their Trine 2; that was actually Nintendo contacting them and not the other way around (yay!).

The only thing they don't do, is bend over backwards to accomodate AAA. (It honestly seems like you're talking with very dated talking points that are entirely non-applicable nowadays.)

No, no and no. Nintendo are still making very poor efforts to actually contact these developers; they are sitting on their (by now muddy) throne and waiting for them to ask for an audience. This company is world famous for a long-running history of poor efforts to build or mend relations with any developer and publisher.

As for your PS, my point is that the majority of developers do not have to customize their efforts. WiiU supports just about every engine and has the power to play any indie game or AA game. The only short coming they've had for a while was that the OG3DS was archaic in terms of engine support and gave indies and other developers trouble, that is being updated with the N3DS. 

They don’t need to customize? The Gamepad, like the Kinect, is being ignored by most, it is such a central part of the console and yet so few have bothered to make proper use of it. Entirely different chipsets as well, and not to mention the tiny hard drives of the Basic SKU (which was, wisely, scrapped this year) making digital distribution, aka; the go-to means for all Indie and independent distribution today, a pain in the proverbial behind. And they’re making amends with the N3DS? Why wasn’t the first 3DS offering these possibilities from the beginning, or the other two revisions? Again; you’re making a very poor showing of a Nintendo actively pursuing independents besides a few very recent changes, they are way, way behind on this scene and that’s my point (which you kind enough to prove right here).

You're getting caught up on AAA developers and saying Nintendo has to compromise for the majority... but the majority do not need to be compromised for as they already have everything they need, only AAA-mega studios demand compromises and... make demands to begin with. They want specific hardware with specific specs to fuel their specific games; PPC is not some mysterious architecture for game development and the eShop, while wonky, is a perfectly functional digitial distribution method (its just lacking account features for the end-user).

“A perfectly functional digital distribution method” is not what these people need; they need a great digital distribution method since DD is the bread and butter of these companies and developers. Services such as Steam with their brilliant model (now that’s Indie done right) and no personal account feature for the end user on the Wii U and e-shop still is another grand show of disinterest on Nintendo’s part to follow market movements and meet the needs of a modern audience and developer, regardless of size.

AAA studios simply desire minimal effort for maximum return, they'd be happy if every console were identical because then their development costs drop significantly. Heck, they'd be happier with just one console monopoly.

Yes, they probably would, but you’re still trying to make me out as a dimwit with no sense of nuance in insisting that I’m talking solely AAA development here, which simply isn’t the case. I did not bring up the AAA conundrum; you did, and you insist on keeping it up.

Nintendo has, probably, some of the best developer relationships in the industry. I think you are confusing developers with publishers.

I think that you’re the one who is confused here; I think there is not a single individual on vgchartz that would agree with you that Nintendo have “some of the best developer relationships in the industry”, not even “probably”. In fact; that is by far their biggest problem.
Nintendo are showing no developer incentives at all; for multiplatform there are the obstacles in varying chipsets and storage issues for mandatory installs and updates and digital distribution (rely on end user to pick up external storage for core console functionality? That’s such a fair policy…), not to mention abyssmal software sales compared to other versions. For exclusives you have the simple fact that the Wii U is the slowest moving home console in about two decades and the games that do find their way there have some pretty loathsome figures to show for it.

http://www.destructoid.com/zombiu-257720.phtml

ZombiU didn’t even break even and such performances are not exactly making developers excited to work with Nintendo; there is a reason why they have poor support and it is not some grand conspiracy, like some claim.

PSN, Steam and XBLA have been widely successful in providing good sales possibilities for Indie titles; Nintendo are still half a decade behind, if not more, on their online solutions and like I’ve mentioned; online is the bread and butter of indies.

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/sony-covering-the-cost-for-indie-devs-to-showcase-games-at-tgs/1100-6419932/

An example if Indie relations done right.

Nintendo has, seemingly, told AAA publishers to fuck right off. You find me a report, a single one, where a developer that has worked with or for Nintendo has said they are terrible. Find me one, then I will link you the most recent PG+ interview on how it was working with Nintendo. 

Again with the amazing polarizing! Where have I stated that Nintendo are “horrible to work with?” and how is that in any way relevant to anything else we’re discussing. I’m not saying that Nintendo are the guy screaming “Screw you, asshole!” but that they are the dude who shrugs and goes “Whatever” at all times. They are simply showing a lack of interest in gaining and maintaining developer trust and cooperation, through quirky hardware solutions, poor distribution options, poor outreach to independents and abject refusal towards some as well as relatively stringent licensing policies that aren’t even serving their intended purpose, even counting their latest efforts; they are way behind in this regard and should have started their initiative a long time ago and not today.

http://thenextweb.com/asia/2013/07/24/nintendo-is-turning-down-every-game-pitch-from-indie-developers-in-japan-for-its-wii-u-console/

Nintendo refusing any and all pitches from Japanese Indies; how is that reaching out and embracing independents?

“"The policy in question is the decision of Nintendo's department responsible for licensing activities in each region. The licensing department of Nintendo Co., Ltd is currently not accepting subject applications from individuals in Japan." Such amazing efforts to gain sustained developer relations.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Nintendo-Might-Ease-Restrictions-for-Indie-Developers-Soon-323563.shtml

“Nintendo circa 2000”, the above link is from early 2013; Nintendo are by far the least active in garnering support from small studios, past and present. You act as if easing some silly restrictions after three decades of giving the cold shoulder is somehow a sign of an amazing concern for the little man; it’s not, not even close.

http://indiegamerchick.com/2014/08/09/interview-with-dan-adelman-nintendos-former-indie-guy/

Interview with the mentioned Dan Adelman, he highlights a tough time at trying to make Nintendo change over the years and a lack of good systems in the Wiiware distribution model as his great challenges. And none of this is “Nintendo circa 2000”, Adelman joined Nintendo in 2005 and left this year.

http://www.vg247.com/2013/09/10/nintendo-trying-to-change-its-locked-gate-image-reach-out-to-indies/

Very, very recent (about a year old), talking about “locked gate image”, hardly the image of a company dedicated to and having some of the “best developer relationships in the industry”. I’m not saying that they’re not trying to change; I’m saying that it is too little too late (my whole point being that Nintendo are too far behind on modern market movements and yielding developer incentives) and on an unappealing platform with a tiny audience and market impact (the Wii U being the main culprit for their troubles).

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/ex-nintendo-indie-boss-now-working-on-playstation-/1100-6422626/

Dan Adelman now working on PC and PS4.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/207218/The_brick_wall_No_close_encounters_with_Nintendos_indie_exec.php

More Adelman bits: “Those of you who have been following this series will know it was meant to introduce you to the heads of all three platform holders' indie initiatives, getting into some of their personal quirks, so you might better understand how to relate to them.

And it would have, if Nintendo's corporate policy hadn't gotten in the way. Dan Adelman, the head of Nintendo's indie initiative, was not allowed to speak with us. This is the sort of corporate policy that perpetuates the stereotype that Nintendo doesn't work well with third parties, and is an emblem of Nintendo's reluctance to change and become more open as markets shift. As an indie developer, this is very troubling to me.”

Again; there is no real effort on Nintendo’s part here, they’re putting sticks in the spokes of their own wheels by not allowing their actual Indie mediators the coverage to explain and open their platform offerings in this case.
“Brick-walled” and “closed-gate” are not terms used to describe a company making the outmost efforts to make things smooth and easy for developers and others.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/207216/Close_encounters_with_console_indie_execs_part_1_PlayStations_Adam_Boyes.php

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/207217/Close_encounters_with_console_indie_execs_part_2_IDXboxs_Chris_Charla.php

Sony’s Chris Boyes and Microsoft’s Chris Carla are a lot more forthcoming here and backed by kinder, more modern and less stringent corporate policies, allowing for actual communication of the Indie platform offerings. Nintendo are lagging far behind, as in most issues regarding developer relations.

This is a great discussion you guys are having however it is not part of my thread topic. Please open another thread so we can continue there. Thank you.

Ehh, it's true that MS and Sony pay for pretty much every game nowadays (I believe even many indie games, sometimes maybe not with money but with "time on stage" or "videos on MS's or Sony's Youtube channel" which ensures some kind of exclusivity) but that is only to get some exclusivity deals like earlier release, earlier beta, extra costume or whatever. At least the retail games would also release on Xbox and PS if they wouldn't pay money to the developers.

I mean, even with MS and Sony paying, the games still release on the competitions console which already shows how big the support is for both. If even money can't get the game away from another console you can be sure that third party devs just love to support PS and Xbox with their games.

Well, since it moves around Nintendo's 3rd party relations and their lack of support; I feel that it is highly relevant to the topic. However, I will respect your wishes for the thread and I can see how it might funnel the general topic into and Indie debate.

Bayonetta

The real reason is that Nintendo doesn't pay 3rd parties money for games like Microsoft and Sony do.

Thanks 😊. Was serious about some one naking a new thread about this though. I think this is a very different beast to big budget 3rd party games. 

I think the thing that i wanted to get across. Was that nintendo doesn't  think its a worthy investment to focus on getting big multiplats on their system. Going by some of the comments by their critics in this very thread they are right. 

No one would buy their system for them even if they got the big names. Nintendo fans dont buy the games when they release for whatever reason.

In regards to what sony and microsoft do they may not out and out pay for games but they definitely share in promotional costs and such. 

I get the feeling that nintendo went into this gen thinking about the strategy with ubisoft and ea saw how much money they would be bleeding and backed out.  Which is a topic for another day. 

Want to continue it in a PM?

I was about to say nice cop-out, but I see that you continued to address the question later on in the thread.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=6736136

You're making me feel unwelcome to the party. That's not very nice.

Oh, and as a reminder, these were the original parameters:

"Can you name a big budget 3rd party title that released on a Nintendo system, was released at the same time as other systems with all of the same features, was advertised equally with the other versions, and still struggled (semi-relative to install base)?"

Therefore, Bayonetta is invalid. It is launching on the Wii U four years after the PS360 versions. If you meant Bayonetta 2, that is also invalid. There are no other versions to compare it to.