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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Give me ONE reason Nintendo shouldn't go 3rd party.

Barozi on 23 December 2014
Neodegenerate said:
If they go third party they will be pressured to keep to the same deadlines that are causing current third party developers to release broken and unfinished games. Nintendo works fine on their own hardware and take their time to put out games that don't require patches day 1 to keep them operational. I don't think that would continue if they went 3rd party.

No.

What you're suggesting is that Nintendo is being bought by either EA, Ubisoft, Capcom or Activision etc., developing games for them.

That was never part of the OPs question. Nintendo would still be the publisher, so they can set and move their deadlines as they wish.



Around the Network
thegamerpad on 23 December 2014
yolosan said:
they can't sell theire Hardware anymore, what is one of theire main Profit Driver


but that's really the only one


Software is always the main profit driver



bigtakilla on 23 December 2014
Never said:

Reasons Nintendo shouldn't go third party:

1. Sega's third party decline.

2. Third parties often struggle and go through hard times. People make a fuss when Nintendo goes in the red but financially they've been very stable compared to the third party competition. Nintendo are where they are because of their business model. They shouldn't throw it all away and become one of the crowd on a knee jerk reaction.

3. As part of the crowd they'd have to compete with the competition in terms of marketing. Nintendo spends a fraction on marketing for their games as big third parties do. Suddenly the cost of making a game will dramatically increase when factoring the increased cost of promotion.

4. Love them or hate them Nintendo hardware pushes in a different direction and that variety enriches the gaming landscape.

5. Nintendo consoles and the overall tone of the games appeal to a different kind of audience than the competition. Yes, you can get family friendly games of a Playstation but even with Nintendo's third party support it's not the systems focus. You risk losing an audience that might otherwise not get into non-smartphone/tablet gaming.

6. I'd be a PC only gamer. Nintendo is the only company that offers enough contrast to make me want a console.

Also great reasons.



Fusioncode on 23 December 2014
ganoncrotch said:
Fusioncode said:
WolfpackN64 said:
Give me one good reason Sony and Microsoft shouldn't go third party?

Because they both have successful next gen consoles. 


Why not go 3rd party in terms of handhelds? make games for the 3ds it's clearly the place to put their handheld games for profits? Why not just both agree that 1 system is better and just make games for that? why have people compete between ps4 or X1 just shake hands and then everyone wins right? Give me one good reason why they don't as a person who buys games I don't see why the world shouldn't be a way that would make it easier for me to buy all the games on 1 system since I matter so much!!

Sony should leave the handheld business. I've never denied this. 



Sigs are dumb. And so are you!

Fusioncode on 23 December 2014
Aielyn said:
Fusioncode said:
Because they both have successful next gen consoles. 

You do realise that "sells a lot" isn't actually the same as "successful", right?

Wait, you probably don't, so I'd better explain it to you like you're a child. You see it's successful if it makes money. Nintendo is currently making money. It will be making more money in the near future. And before you mention recent losses (before the most recent few months), I'll point out that despite the PS4 selling a lot, Sony's game division lost $78 million last financial year. And Microsoft appears to be losing money on the Xbox One (although it's harder to determine with confidence, due to the structure of the company).

Simply put, if you don't comprehend that sales are different from success for a business, then you might want to study up on elementary business principles.

Calm down friend. There's no need to make things personal. We can agree and disagree like adults. 



Sigs are dumb. And so are you!

Around the Network
Neodegenerate on 23 December 2014
Barozi said:
Neodegenerate said:
If they go third party they will be pressured to keep to the same deadlines that are causing current third party developers to release broken and unfinished games. Nintendo works fine on their own hardware and take their time to put out games that don't require patches day 1 to keep them operational. I don't think that would continue if they went 3rd party.

No.

What you're suggesting is that Nintendo is being bought by either EA, Ubisoft, Capcom or Activision etc., developing games for them.

That was never part of the OPs question. Nintendo would still be the publisher, so they can set and move their deadlines as they wish.


Setting and moving deadlines as a third party developer is influenced by the other developers/publishers.  The fact that others rush games out could influence Nintendo to start doing the same to stay relevant in the same space.  Getting a game once a generation from Nintendo wouldn't appear as relevant to the general consumer as an Assassins Creed or CoD annual release.  This could result in a drop off in purchases for anything that isn't just Mario or Zelda (does anyone really think Splatoon would go over well as a third party PS4 XB1 game?) and thus an increased production timetable in order to get them out.  Is it what would happen?  Probably not.  However, it would be silly to dismiss the possibility if they went 3rd party.



Multishanks on 23 December 2014

Simple. One less platform will mean less competition and less jobs. Please tell me an industry that became healthier after that.



zorg1000 on 23 December 2014
Fusioncode said:
POE said:
Because they have a successful handheld and their home console gives them money too?

I never said they should leave the handheld business. Just consoles. 


In that case why not just make a cheap home console version of their handheld? Think about It this way, instead of releasing Wii U in 2012, they released 3DS TV a device that is low cost and plays all 3DS games on a TV. It wouldn't sell anything huge, perhaps Wii U level sales but they can start making more money on software this way. Games like 3D World, Tropical Freeze, Mario Kart 8, among others could all have released on 3DS, a device with a large install base that allows these games to sell much better. These games have underperformed  because they are exclusive to Wii U, an overpriced struggling console. Releasing a handheld with a companion console version similar to Vita/Vita TV could be a good route, but in this case it's based on a strong selling device that has big multimilllion selling franchises to support it.

U see now that their software output is hurting by having to develop games for both 3DS and Wii U, I think that will get worse once they have to release games on a new, more powerful handheld while at the same time develop for PS4/XB1/PC at the same time. Their handheld might struggle from this.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

yolosan on 23 December 2014
thegamerpad said:
yolosan said:
they can't sell theire Hardware anymore, what is one of theire main Profit Driver


but that's really the only one


Software is always the main profit driver


if u compare sony/ms and nintendo
sony and ms make money long term with software and service

nintendo always made huge profits with hardware.
if software is the only main profit driver for nintendo, why don't they cut the price to sell more hardware and even more software?

 



Mac3theAc3 on 23 December 2014

I swear everyone wants Nintendo to go third party but wouldn't buy their consoles because their too "kiddy"



WTF is a signature?

PSN: Haz3theFaz3