RolStoppable said:
That kills the premise of the thread then. Retro putting out a game that sells well won't change anything about how third parties think about Nintendo consoles. Retro putting out three games that sell well won't do anything either, because that doesn't prove that there is an audience for third party software. Worse, by the time Retro has put out three games for a single Nintendo console, third parties will already have suffered failures from their half-baked ports and decided that it's business as usual and their games don't sell because of the audience.
As for handhelds, you make an interesting excuse. Third party games are selling because they are good and cater to the tastes of the audience. Aren't you the guy who likes to say that it is a company's job to sell a game to you and that it isn't a gamer's obligation to buy whatever a company puts out? Yet here you've made a thread about how everyone except third parties themselves have to change in order to make certain games sell. It's not Nintendo's job to sell third party software; it's not Nintendo gamers' job to buy games that suck. Decide what you really believe in.
|
No, it absolutely doesn't. Retro's game isn't to prove there's an audience; it's meant to build one. If Nintendo makes games specifically tailored towards western gamers who don't typically buy Nintendo hardware, and those games selling well on Nintendo hardware, and the simultaneous western third party games start sell well on Nintendo hardware along side them, in what alien alternate reality does that make third party studios think that their games won't sell well on Nintendo hardware? Also, where did I ever say that Nintendo or third parties would have to wait for Retro to make three games for a single Nintendo console? I definitely never said that Retro would be the only studio providing western first party games, that's for sure.
Are you kidding? Nintendo is running a platform. If it takes third party software support to get consumers to buy their hardware, to hell if it isn't Nintendo's job to get that support. If it takes western first party IPs to cultivate an audience who will buy those games, and it does, then it is literally noone's job but Nintendo's to provide them. None of my views are conflicting. When did I ever say that it's Nintendo gamers jobs buy third party games? Nintendo's current audience clearly doesn't want those games, and they don't need to want them. It's Nintendo's job to build an audience that does, because the audience that does literally dwarfs the audience that doesn't, and the audience that does isn't buying Nintendo home consoles. It's not western gamers' jobs to buy Nintendo hardware, it's Nintendo's job to sell it to them. Wrap that in a bow.
The fact is, handhelds and consoles are completely different ecosystems with different needs. Handhelds do better in japan, are a better environment for the types of games those guys can afford to create, and Nintendo makes games for it that adequately feed that ecosystem, so the 3DS gets better 3rd party support from them. News flash; it still get's shit third party support from western devs who aren't indies. That doesn't matter, because the kinds of games western studios are making don't work with the handheld games. They cost too much to make for the sales they get. When Nintendo's handhelds aren't selling and the reason is because of poor western 3rd party support, then come talk to me.
Western devs want to make console games. That's the big market in the west and those are the games that most consumers want to buy in the west. Third parties are clearly making games that people want to buy; that's why they sell so well on other platforms. Them not selling well on Nintendo isn't some magical "oh, well everything they put on Nintendo is shit" alibi. There are games that aren't shit ports, and they still don't sell because there is no audience there to buy them. That's Nintendo's fault and that's up to Nintendo to fix, or their consoles will continue to sell like garbage.
