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

Forums - Nintendo - Would Nintendo survive if they went 3rd party?

 

Would Nintendo survive if they went third-party?

No 91 27.66%
 
Yes 238 72.34%
 
Total:329
Mr.GameCrazy said:
They could, but they would probably not be making some games that don't sell very well like Pikmin and Metroid. In order for a game to be successful as a third party, they need to sell more units than they would as a first party to be successful. It's why the Tomb Raider was considered a flop to Square Enix even though it sold over 3 million units.

But it wasn't considered a flop.

They simply stated that it needed to sell more. After it did, they said it sold well. And when it showed impressive legs, they said it exceeded expectations. Keep in mind that a game like Tomb Raider is much more expensive to make than a game like Mario that doesn't have realistic graphics, and doesn't require things like motion capture or voice acting.



Around the Network
naruball said:
Mr.GameCrazy said:
They could, but they would probably not be making some games that don't sell very well like Pikmin and Metroid. In order for a game to be successful as a third party, they need to sell more units than they would as a first party to be successful. It's why the Tomb Raider was considered a flop to Square Enix even though it sold over 3 million units.

But it wasn't considered a flop.

They simply stated that it needed to sell more. After it did, they said it sold well. And when it showed impressive legs, they said it exceeded expectations. Keep in mind that a game like Tomb Raider is much more expensive to make than a game like Mario that doesn't have realistic graphics, and doesn't require things like motion capture or voice acting.

Just out of curiosity, why are you responding to others but not my post when we were in the middle of a discussion? You hurt my feelings



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

naruball said:
Mr.GameCrazy said:
They could, but they would probably not be making some games that don't sell very well like Pikmin and Metroid. In order for a game to be successful as a third party, they need to sell more units than they would as a first party to be successful. It's why the Tomb Raider was considered a flop to Square Enix even though it sold over 3 million units.

But it wasn't considered a flop.

They simply stated that it needed to sell more. After it did, they said it sold well. And when it showed impressive legs, they said it exceeded expectations. Keep in mind that a game like Tomb Raider is much more expensive to make than a game like Mario that doesn't have realistic graphics, and doesn't require things like motion capture or voice acting.

Oh. My mistake. I still think they wouldn't be making games like Metroid or Pikmin though if they do go third party.



reggin_bolas said:
Not only would they but they should. No one except die-hard Nintendo fans want to play Nintendo games on Nintendo hardware.

The hardware is a tax on gamers.

There are pros and cons to it. 

People who think Nintendo would just make the same games they do now don't understand that 3rd party publishing is very different, most likely Nintendo would transform into a company that makes just 5-6 main franchises and everything else like Star Fox, Bayonetta, Xenoblade, Punch-Out, Metroid, etc. likely would never get made because they'd want to pump out a new Mario Kart every 1-2 years. 

If you have no obligation to support an entire platform, and it's not really on you to make a platform has diversity, then likely like any third party they likely would focus most on their main franchises. 

Look at the types of games Sega made when they were a hardware maker versus what they've made after that. 

That's why in the net end result I don't think it would be good for gamers. What they can do is make a hybrid type device or primary portable that's capable of running all their games ... that would cut down on people being asked basically to buy two pieces of Nintendo hardware just to play Nintendo games. 



zorg1000 said:
naruball said:

But it wasn't considered a flop.

They simply stated that it needed to sell more. After it did, they said it sold well. And when it showed impressive legs, they said it exceeded expectations. Keep in mind that a game like Tomb Raider is much more expensive to make than a game like Mario that doesn't have realistic graphics, and doesn't require things like motion capture or voice acting.

Just out of curiosity, why are you responding to others but not my post when we were in the middle of a discussion? You hurt my feelings

You wrote a proper response which deserves a proper reply. I'm currently working on a an article which I need to finish by tomorrow and replying to you would take considerably more time.



Around the Network
naruball said:
zorg1000 said:

Just out of curiosity, why are you responding to others but not my post when we were in the middle of a discussion? You hurt my feelings

You wrote a proper response which deserves a proper reply. I'm currently working on a an article which I need to finish by tomorrow and replying to you would take considerably more time.

Fair enough, i guess i can wait



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

Not if they make more money from hardware then Software, which i believe they do (Correct me if i am wrong)



 

PSN: Opticstrike90
Steam: opticstrike90

Botamu said:
I dunno, gamers are getting older and they might have started to outgrow these kids games like Mario, Donkey Kong, Pikmin, Pokémon and all those.

Make a dedicated console aimed for people of a young age and it might do alright.

I'd be likely to buy Mario & Donkey Kong games, and I'm an older gamer... However, I wouldn't buy a Nintendo console due to the lack of variety and the child orientated feel.. However, if Nintendo games came to PS4, they'd have a good customer in me. F-Zero, Zelda and the like would be greatley received...



Soundwave said:
reggin_bolas said:
Not only would they but they should. No one except die-hard Nintendo fans want to play Nintendo games on Nintendo hardware.

The hardware is a tax on gamers.

There are pros and cons to it. 

People who think Nintendo would just make the same games they do now don't understand that 3rd party publishing is very different, most likely Nintendo would transform into a company that makes just 5-6 main franchises and everything else like Star Fox, Bayonetta, Xenoblade, Punch-Out, Metroid, etc. likely would never get made because they'd want to pump out a new Mario Kart every 1-2 years. 

If you have no obligation to support an entire platform, and it's not really on you to make a platform has diversity, then likely like any third party they likely would focus most on their main franchises. 

Look at the types of games Sega made when they were a hardware maker versus what they've made after that. 

That's why in the net end result I don't think it would be good for gamers. What they can do is make a hybrid type device or primary portable that's capable of running all their games ... that would cut down on people being asked basically to buy two pieces of Nintendo hardware just to play Nintendo games. 

Plus hardware gives Nintendo a chance to experiment on gameplay experiences. If they were to just have a traditional control, it would be great, but Nintendo's imaginations would be somewhat limited. Games like Wii Sports, Brain Age, Nintendogs, Skyward Sword, Star Fox Guard, Nintendo Land, WarioWare Touched, etc. wouldn't be what they are (or even exist at all) if Nintendo didn't have the freedom to expand our way of playing games beyond traditional controls (though I still like traditional controls along with experiments). Sure not every experiment works but that's part of Nintendo's philosophy, create new experiences and new ways to play. 

And as some said, Metroid, F-Zero, Pilotwings, Xenoblade, Star Fox, and other B or C rated franchises would have even LESS likely to come back than they do now. Sure Mario, Pokemon, and Zelda may not cost as much as say Witcher or Mass Effect, but they still cost a lot of money, especially since HD gaming is more complicated, time consuming, and more costly to make. Studios have closed last gen and even this gen because they were not able to compensate the costs of making their games with sales coming as decent at best for the most part, which may not be enough to profit or make even. If Nintendo were to be third party, they would have to cut down on staff on not just hardware. Plus the new blood aren't fully proven yet so who knows whether or not they could carry the torch that Miyamoto, Tanaka, Sakurai, Iwata, Yokoi, Tanabe, and Sakamotp have built for so long.



zorg1000 said:
Ruler said:

For one, arcade is 100% irrelevant to the discussion, so im just going to ignore that part.

Barely any of those games listed are huge, how much did the best selling entry of those games sell? Ill give you Pro Evo, that was pretty big back in the PS2 era, but the rest? 1-2 million sales is not huge.

Im talking about games like Mario Kart, Smash Bros, Pokemon, Animal Crossing, Mario platformers, etc. Games that sell 5+ million every time and have sold 10+ million. Even spinoffs of these games sell in the millions.

 

And people are forced to buy Nintendo games? Possibly worst argument ever, people buy Nintendo consoles to play Nintendo games, not the other way around. 

They buy it for the next zelda and are stuck with a 300$ console waiting for it to come out so they end up buying other nintendo games in the meantime. Thats how it always worked, and it worked pretty well for nintendo.

 

 

You lost your argument when you dismissed arcades 

1996

$44 billion (worldwide)

$26 billion (worldwide arcade market)[118]

$18 billion (worldwide retail market)[119]

$64.39 billion (worldwide)

1995

$29.32 billion (worldwide)

$15 billion (worldwide retail) [28]

$9.52 billion (Japan arcade)[120]

$4.8 billion (US arcade)[104]

$44.17 billion (worldwide)
1994

$29.3 billion (worldwide)

$20.8 billion (worldwide retail sales)[121]

$8.5 billion (US arcade & rentals)[104]

$45.4 billion (worldwide)

http://vgsales.wikia.com/wiki/Video_game_industry