It's really simple. It's stupid to give money to a company (third party dev) that will also put their product on a competitor's console. Nintendo is only interested in third party games that are negotiated to be exclusive.
I think it's just really unfair.
However, I do feel like to compensate this, Nintendo needs to try and save by publishing even more games, and do even more collaborations like they do now, but you know, more.
And create a Major European and another American studio.
Heck, get a small Brazilian studio too!
And I think they should increase their workforce in certain studios, such as Monolith Soft, Retro and Hal Laboratories. (Hal is as big as Monolith, or bigger, but they are slow. :/)
edit: And find a way of owining / haveing Capcom as 2nd party without also having a lot of thier dept.
st0pnsw0p said:
Uh, no. It doesn't imply anything except Rockstar doesn't think GTA V would sell enough on Wii U to warrant the work and costs involved in making the port. Do you seriously think they would give up the tens of millions of sales they got on PS3 or 360 on the off-chance that they could squeeze a bit more money out of MS or Sony? GTA V made over a billion dollars, so if the game hadn't released on either PS3 or 360, the would have missed their chance to get a significant portion of that money. Those sales are all the incentive MS and Sony need to get 3rd parties on their consoles. Look at Wii U, on the other hand. If you add up sales the 10 best-selling multiplats on the platfrm, you get just under 3 million. Wii U sales of many multiplats often make up a single-digit percentage of the game's total sales (2% for AC IV, even less for CoD: Ghosts, both of which are games with comparable audience to GTA V's and which came out on the same day on all consoles, something that won't happen with GTA V). |
But you said, MS and Sony don't have to pay. This isn't true at all. The implication is that Sony and MS made a deal or paid Rockstar for the right to have the game on their console. The PS4 and One versions just solidify this fact. You have no clear idea how the game industry works. These kind of deals go down all the time, don't be ignorant to that.
Multishanks said:
Hindsight is 20-20. Here is the thing Nintendo was never going to compete with Sony and Ms because they are not big enough to do so. So it was inevitable that things were going to end up this way. All thats left is for them to figure out there own market, which time will tell. If they dont then they dont. But trying to bankrupt the company by keeping up a bidding war with MS and Sony is certain death. |
But you can also say the same stuff to Nintendo's decision. They're waiting to find other ways to do things. And while they wait, they're losing money and consumer interest. They can die in the process of this. Just as much as the Sony MS way.
Ka-pi96 said:
There aren't really enough 3rd party games they can get to be exclusives though, besides that the big ones that would really be worth it would usually cost way way too much. What if... they didn't need to pay to get multiplats though? If they made a console that was really easy to port to then they would get plenty of multiplats. Even if multiplats haven't sold well on Nintendo consoles so far, if porting games was easy and cheap enough then publishers would do it because they would still be able to make profit even with the current low 3rd party sales. Failing that they don't have much choice but to pay for multiplats, unless they can prove they can sell and be profitable on their consoles anyway. But if they were to get more multiplats then they would sell more consoles, and more people would buy the multiplats on Nintendo consoles. Then leading to more interest from 3rd party publishers. |
To do that. The system would have to be close to equal in power the the other systems. Nintendo doesn't want to go this route. So they're stuck in this repeating loop.
Ka-pi96 said:
There aren't really enough 3rd party games they can get to be exclusives though, besides that the big ones that would really be worth it would usually cost way way too much. What if... they didn't need to pay to get multiplats though? If they made a console that was really easy to port to then they would get plenty of multiplats. Even if multiplats haven't sold well on Nintendo consoles so far, if porting games was easy and cheap enough then publishers would do it because they would still be able to make profit even with the current low 3rd party sales. Failing that they don't have much choice but to pay for multiplats, unless they can prove they can sell and be profitable on their consoles anyway. But if they were to get more multiplats then they would sell more consoles, and more people would buy the multiplats on Nintendo consoles. Then leading to more interest from 3rd party publishers. |
Again, Nintendo does not care about third party games that are not exclusive to thier console. Once a game is multiplatform, Nintendo takes a complete hands off approach and it is 100% the decision of the publisher whether to put the game on Wii U/3DS or not. Dropping money on a multiplatform game is not only just plain stupid, but it opens up Nintendo to bribes and threats.
Imagine hypothetically if Smash 4 was a third party game and the publisher threatened Nintendo saying, "give us $$$ or Smash 5 will be PS5/Xbox 4 exclusive." LOL, Nintendo would be retarded to put themselves in that situation.
| RolStoppable said: If Nintendo were really handling third party relationships so badly as it is usually portrayed, then third parties should have the dignity to not go in front of a camera to praise an upcoming Nintendo console they do not plan to support or announce games that will never go into production. If third parties truly aren't happy, then they shouldn't pretend that they are. After all, you can't save a problem if you act like there is none. The reality is that there isn't much of a problem from Nintendo's side, because indie developers have repeatedly gone on record to say that Nintendo has been forthcoming. The actual problem is that the big third party publishers feel entitled to get paid off by Nintendo. |
People lie in front of the camera/articles all the time. Some can be genuine. But others is just to protect their image to consumers. And to make themselves bigger. If Ubisoft did say what they should say about Nintendo. Than Nintendo fans that do own both consoles will get pissed and boycot. Small numbers. But it's a profit line and image. So it's better to be neutral above all things. It's like Reggie totally agrees with Iwata's way. He has to show a public image. But I will not buy it for a second he likes everything Japan decides on, while he's sitting in his office alone.
After all these years and people still dont know what Nintendo is as an enity? Why am I not shocked? As Perrin Kaplan said years ago during the Gamecube era, Nintendo is "not" a tech company, they are an entertainment company. They make hardware to have 100% contol of the development tool chain, 100% control over innovation (Wii Mote) and to create new revenue streams like Amiibo, N3DS faceplates, etc. Third party devs are not a key part of the equation.
lets get real. these exclusive 3rd party games are going to be niche at best. Stuff like Bayo2 isnt going to do anything for their system sales and at the end of the day that is what really matters. Where are the GTAs and the CODs?
RolStoppable said:
The Wii U was easy enough to port to and we've seen how that turned out. The majority of 360/PS3 multiplats for 2013 didn't release on the Wii U and their respective publishers often never had any intentions to release them to begin with (meaning that Wii U sales were irrelevant). It's also a fallacy to believe that more multiplats would make Nintendo consoles sell more. We can look back at history, the GC clearly outpaced the overall game library size of the N64 thanks to its bigger amount of multiplatform games, but it still sold considerably less in its lifetime. Now factor in that in this day and age all major multiplatform games are tailored (content, marketing) to an audience that wouldn't even consider to buy a Nintendo console, then it becomes apparent that getting those games on their console wouldn't Nintendo do much good at all. It's the opposite actually, because the requirements to get those games would compromise the things that people want from a Nintendo system; so Nintendo doesn't gain anything from those games because the audience of said games doesn't wand a Nintendo console and at the same time Nintendo loses out on people who would be willing to buy a Nintendo console, but now aren't because the actual product is a piece of trash. |
So basically Nintendo is screwed either way they go at current date. And can only be saved by luck of the consumer enviroment.
| Deeds said: After all these years and people still dont know what Nintendo is as an enity? Why am I not shocked? As Perrin Kaplan said years ago during the Gamecube era, Nintendo is "not" a tech company, they are an entertainment company. They make hardware to have 100% contol of the development tool chain, 100% control over innovation (Wii Mote) and to create new revenue streams like Amiibo, N3DS faceplates, etc. Third party devs are not a key part of the equation. |
then nobody should complain when they dont get 3rd party games
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
