Forums - Sales Discussion - Nintendo means bad news for 3rd parties!

I was under the impression that Motorstorm and Resistance were 2nd party games...



Around the Network
Darkness said:
I was under the impression that Motorstorm and Resistance were 2nd party games...


That's something I've never heard, and it isn't true, according to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insomniac_Games

 



http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a324/Arkives/Disccopy.jpg%5B/IMG%5D">http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a324/Arkives/Disccopy.jpg%5B/IMG%5D">

They are published and funded by SCEA. That would constitute 2nd party. Maybe the company itself isn't owned by Sony, but the games are.



Diomedes1976 said:
I dont think Wii is selling so well between hardcore gamers ,its success its like the DS ...its selling well between everybody because it is "new " and "fresh " and the wiimote allows for a distinctive marketing . But ,most of those buyers are casual gamers to the bone ,many in fact will just play Wiisports and wont buy another game for a year .Thats happening with the DS right now ,many consoles are sold ,those people buy Nintendogs ,BT or Mario ...and thats it .Sure ,there are enough hardcore to guarantee some games as FF decent sales ,but most of the success outside those heavy-hitters (that continue to be the same after one year and a half ) is kiddie stuff as Dogz ,Catz ,Hannah Montana and Pokemon .That and Mario ,of course ,be it Mario Party ,Paper Mario ,Mario Soccer ,Mario in the Shower or whatever .Kids happen to love Mario ,it seems ,and so does some veteran gamers .In any case ,its nearly all Nintendo software . What I am saying is that Nintendo is replicating exactly the same pattern with the Wii ,and if that happens expect great results for Nintendo ,for Square (although less that last generation ) and for THQ and its movie cash-in.The others will have a hard time .Casual gamers the like of wich are buying the Wii just wont but 7-10 games a year as in the other plattforms ,and the kind of games they are interested is far more restricted and once all start doing the same stuff the competition will be enourmous and only one or two will manage to make benefits aside from Nintendo . And about Nintendo and third party games ...well Nintendo has interest in the third parties supporting them ,of course ,but Nintendo makes money primarily on its hardware and games .Yes ,each Wii game gives them some dollars in revenue through royalties ,but a first party game gives them much more dollars .AS for some developers I know it appears Nintendo doesnt play fair with third parties ,apparently they dont give in developing kits the same quality they keep for themselves so the third party efforts are nearly always half-baked compared to a Nintendo superproduction . As some analyst said ,Nintendo success is reshaping the market to its favour and desires ,but that is beneficial only for Nintendo ,and the losers here (aside from Sony and Microsoft ) are the third parties .

So much Nintendo hate in that post....

And on another note, please stop making points out of nowhere. The attach rate for DS is higher than that for PSP as many just have stated. You're often doing this it seems to me, you think it has to be like that and then look at it as a fact.

 



Currently Playing: Skies of Arcadia Legends (GC), Dragon Quest IV (DS)

Last Game beaten: The Rub Rabbits(DS)

I wasn't comparing RE4 GCN to RE4 PS2. I was comparing RE4 to anything that came before it. Capcom took their biggest franchise and flushed it down the toilet by making it for the wrong platform. By the time they realized this mistake, it was too late, but they rectified it as best they could. Past, present, future, whatever. No difference. Nobody's had much luck on Nintendo platforms since the SNES days, and even then, many of them were chomping at the bit to see what they could do with a less restrictive Sega. No, not per system. Per title. The average PS3 third party game in Japan is selling more copies (64k) than the average Wii third party game (42k) (when factoring in the Wii games listed here, that figure drops to 34k). Per system, the numbers get a lot bleaker. If people are only buying Wii Play because of the controller, Nintendo's wasting their advertising dollars. This explanation doesn't cut it for me. Are some of the sales coming due to the controller? Yes, no doubt. Are all of them? No, plenty of people have played Wii Sports and liked it enough to pick up Wii Play, on top of the heavy marketing campaign. If people are stupid enough to not realize Wii Play is made by Nintendo, they shouldn't be allowed to play video games unsupervised. We've already been through how third party titles are rushing to make unimportant games with their third string teams, preferably porting PS2/PSP games (strangely enough, much of Nintendo's support is contingent upon the continuing success of two Sony platforms).



Around the Network

Shane, you haven't addressed a single issue. In fact, you're refuting a couple issues simply by saying "I don't care what you say, I'm going to keep ranting." Please back up your claims, or there's no use in you posting.



Diomedes1976 said:
The others will have a hard time .Casual gamers the like of wich are buying the Wii just wont but 7-10 games a year as in the other plattforms 
I find it hard to believe that even hardcore gamers  buy that many games  for one  platform in a single year.  Maybe over the course of a few years or a total of games bought for all of their platforms. 

Darkness said:
They are published and funded by SCEA. That would constitute 2nd party. Maybe the company itself isn't owned by Sony, but the games are.

No, that still makes them 3rd party. Publishing games != 2nd party. You actually have to be an owned subsidiary.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-party_developer

This is why Spyro games can still be found on the DS, even though the character is still the intellectual property of Insomniac. 

 



http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a324/Arkives/Disccopy.jpg%5B/IMG%5D">http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a324/Arkives/Disccopy.jpg%5B/IMG%5D">

Shane said:
I wasn't comparing RE4 GCN to RE4 PS2. I was comparing RE4 to anything that came before it. Capcom took their biggest franchise and flushed it down the toilet by making it for the wrong platform. By the time they realized this mistake, it was too late, but they rectified it as best they could. Past, present, future, whatever. No difference. Nobody's had much luck on Nintendo platforms since the SNES days, and even then, many of them were chomping at the bit to see what they could do with a less restrictive Sega. No, not per system. Per title. The average PS3 third party game in Japan is selling more copies (64k) than the average Wii third party game (42k) (when factoring in the Wii games listed here, that figure drops to 34k). Per system, the numbers get a lot bleaker. If people are only buying Wii Play because of the controller, Nintendo's wasting their advertising dollars. This explanation doesn't cut it for me. Are some of the sales coming due to the controller? Yes, no doubt. Are all of them? No, plenty of people have played Wii Sports and liked it enough to pick up Wii Play, on top of the heavy marketing campaign. If people are stupid enough to not realize Wii Play is made by Nintendo, they shouldn't be allowed to play video games unsupervised. We've already been through how third party titles are rushing to make unimportant games with their third string teams, preferably porting PS2/PSP games (strangely enough, much of Nintendo's support is contingent upon the continuing success of two Sony platforms).

 Had you considered the possibility that "nobody has had much luck on Nintendo platforms since the SNES days" because Nintendo consoles have had a significantly smaller user base than Playstation? Again: considering the size of the userbase, both Rogue Squadron and Resident Evil sold quite well. Resident Evil sold better than many of the most important Nintendo franchises. However, because the system had 1/5th the installed base of PS2, this success was comparatively mild. 

Let's put this simply: you agree that 3rd parties did well on Nintendo systems during the NES and SNES days. Those were the days when Nintendo had the largest install base. 3rd party titles have sold less well since then (again, compared to PS1 or PS2 sales), while Nintendo has had a much smaller slice of the pie. Why is it not logical that, with Nintendo regaining the largest section of market share, that 3rd party titles would once again be highly profitable?

As it stands right now, several 3rd party companies developing exclusive games for the PS3 claim they are struggling to make a profit (source: http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3155564). I'm certainly not suggesting this is because Sony is a bad company that hates 3rd party developers. There is one, completely logical thread that ties these systems together: a comparatively small user base. Other systems such as 3D0, CD-i, and Neo-Geo all fall in to the same category: none recieved significant 3rd party support because their user bases were too small.

I repeat: this isn't a "3rd parties can't make money on Nintendo systems" problem, as the NES and SNES clearly show. It's a "3rd parties can't make money on small platforms" problem. 


 



http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a324/Arkives/Disccopy.jpg%5B/IMG%5D">http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a324/Arkives/Disccopy.jpg%5B/IMG%5D">

Shane said: If people are only buying Wii Play because of the controller, Nintendo's wasting their advertising dollars. This explanation doesn't cut it for me. Are some of the sales coming due to the controller? Yes, no doubt. Are all of them? No, plenty of people have played Wii Sports and liked it enough to pick up Wii Play, on top of the heavy marketing campaign. If people are stupid enough to not realize Wii Play is made by Nintendo, they shouldn't be allowed to play video games unsupervised.

 

I would also assume that not every single person who bought Wii Play purchased it because it had a controller. Given that it's sold millions of copies, saying that "every single customer" bought it for any specific reason is probably a bad idea.

I can tell you this, Shane: I work in the Games department at Toys R Us. I have never, ever had anyone come into the store and ask me for "any game made by Nintendo," or any such thing. I've had tons ask me for "that game that comes with a controller." Parents don't tend to even know the name of the game, let alone who developed it. They just know it comes with a controller, and little Becky or Johnny needs a second controller to play with his friends.

Again, not suggesting that this represents every purchaser. I'm saying it represents most of them, and that very few people are literally buying this game because it was technically developed by Nintendo.  Lastly -- please don't mock people who don't know who developed each game they purchase. In a lot of cases, the people purchasing it aren't going to be playing the game at all: they're buying it for their child or friend. Even for those who are going to be playing it, the particular development house really isn't a significant issue.



http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a324/Arkives/Disccopy.jpg%5B/IMG%5D">http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a324/Arkives/Disccopy.jpg%5B/IMG%5D">