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

Forums - Nintendo - What if they are not going third party.

Soundwave on 01 November 2016
onionberry said:
Soundwave said:

Let me ask you a question onionberry.

If Nintendo continues to make Switch branded portables (that do have a TV output, but a portable form factor with LCD screen/battery/the works), but choose to put a few games on the PS4/XB1 in exchange for games from Sony/MS on Switch and money-hats ....

Is that third party?

They're still making the same hardware they would have otherwise.

Third party full on is not smart for Nintendo. But a partnership with Sony and/or MS? I think that could be workable and beneficial. 

If Mario and Pokemon can be on iOS/Android, why not XBox or PS *if* the terms are highly favorable to Nintendo. iOS/Android are as much competition to Switch as PS4/XB1 are, maybe more.

mario runs on ios exists because that's not a real mario experience, Nintendo wants brand awareness and money, said by them. Brand awarenes to promote their brand, why they want to promote their brand, because they have a real mario experienc on their own hardware. Why would they have their own hardware if mario galaxy 3 is going to be a playstation game too?

It looks like a "real" Mario game to me, just a 2D game with touch controls. But it looks to me to be (surprisingly) a fairly faithful take on the Mario 2D mythos and looks exactly like the console 2D Marios. 

If Nintendo offered say Metroid, F-Zero, and Zelda: BOTW 4K port on Scorpio, but had a brand new Zelda for Switch at the same time and all the other Nintendo IP ... then what?

This would be similar to what they do on iOS/Android. They offer only a few of their IP, but keep the bulk of their property on their own platform. People get an apetizer of those games but can then become interested in Switch. 

Could work the same way I think. Especially as Nintendo becomes more and more a global media brand with movies, theme parks, etc. A kid who owns a Playstation can see a Zelda movie, play say Breath of the Wild 4K (which of course will have been on Switch for a long time by then), become interested in the franchise and boom, now he wants a Switch for portable play.

Because Switch can function as a portable, it's no longer really in direct competetion, it's a different class of hardware, more of the successor to the hardware lines of the 3DS/Vita/PSP/DS/Game Boy, naturally evolved to have a TV out (the PSP had TV out too for certain models). 

Mario Galaxy 3 could remain on Switch, and if it did come out on XBox or Playstation it would be a long while afterwards. I could see that working out well. 



Around the Network
onionberry on 01 November 2016
lionpetercarmoo said:
The answer is pretty fucking obvious. Nintendo has failed too many times and if they leave the VideoGame market the only other thing they could do is Movies.

Well it's too fucking obvious but we are talking about fucking Nintendo, and they don't do obvious shit.



betacon on 01 November 2016

Can someone please explain why it's a big deal if Nintendo go third party?



bunchanumbers on 01 November 2016
Soundwave said:
bunchanumbers said:
My opinion is they will be a mobile only developer. If they leave the console space, they will leave it entirely. They won't develop for Sony or MS. This way they still maintain their independence, but don't have to worry about hardware development. And I sincerely doubt they will support the ones who repeatedly ripped off their ideas and concepts. They would develop for MS before they do Sony. Instead they will make a line of controllers that work with apple products and they will be all set.

That would be stupid. 

They'd be leaving a ton of money on the table. 

Hell, imagine the money-hat MS would offer Nintendo on a yearly basis alone, I bet it would be massive. No reason at all to turn that down. 

They can maintain their indepedence no matter what, does Apple/Google "force" Nintendo to do anything? Sony/MS wouldn't be able to either, if anything Sony/MS would jump through whatever hoops Nintendo wanted them to in order to get their support (Microsoft in particular, Nintendo could tell Spencer to run naked down Redmond if they want support and he'd probably do it, lol). 

Mobile is also problematic because last I checked, $60 games don't exactly work on mobile, a lot of their franchises would go extinct if forced only into the confines of how mobile players play (free to play, simple play mechanics). 

They've been leaving money on the table for years. They left money on the table when they made Wii U instead of a real console. They are doing it again with Switch. There's entire furniture stores jam packed full of tables with money on it. All left by Nintendo. They do what they want, and I can see mobile only being one of them.

They don't want to waste hundreds of millions developing a AAA game. Because that is what Sony and MS fans would demand from Nintendo on their machines. BOTW looks great because they made it with 2010 hardware in mind and used it to the fullest. They're not going to be doing that with a PlayStation or a Xbox. In a few years iphones will be plenty strong enough to meet their needs. Sony and MS could trot out 50 Teraflop machines and it means nothing to Nintendo. Because they don't use it.

And Nintendo won't be selling their games at $60. They barely did it on Wii U. I'm expecting lower prices, billions of dollars in sales, and MTs. I've said this before, but Switch is a transitional device. Once they use Switch to figure out how to do it, they will go full mobile. And yes, there will be plenty of franchises that die.



Xen on 01 November 2016
betacon said:
Can someone please explain why it's a big deal if Nintendo go third party?

Lots of good IP's, less of a need to buy extra hardware. Simple.



Around the Network
Soundwave on 01 November 2016
betacon said:
Can someone please explain why it's a big deal if Nintendo go third party?

1.) Console wars are serious business for some, Nintendo going "third party" would be a shameful event for some Nintendo "faithful". This is a bit of a childish reasoning. 

2.) In a practical sense it could damage Nintendo's software output, where they only make 4-5 of their bigger franchises and basically ignore everything else because they have no responsibility for selling the hardware any longer. 



onionberry on 01 November 2016
Hiku said:

There's no reason why they would just leave the video game industry though.
If they are convinced that they can make significantly more money by not funding another system that ends up selling poorly, they will invest their money in what will give them and their investors the biggest return. They know their video games are still popular. No way they would just abandon that aspect of their business.

The potential is always higher if you own the system your games are on. But it's a risk. And one they've chose to go with again.
Many people simply don't think they will do it again if Switch under performs because they are a business.

I understand but there are more options even when talking about gaming, like a gaming service, phones, something like steam, which is a digital platform and would be their own structure without a console. that's why I say that we should not assume that Nintendo is going to do something specific.



Conina on 01 November 2016
onionberry said:
Soundwave said:

If Mario and Pokemon can be on iOS/Android, why not XBox or PS *if* the terms are highly favorable to Nintendo. iOS/Android are as much competition to Switch as PS4/XB1 are, maybe more.

mario  on ios exists because that's not a real mario experience,

So you have played it yet to be sure that it ain't "a real mario experience"?

And what is "a real mario experience"? Only the Mario platformers? What about the Mario sport games? Mario Kart? Paper Mario? Mario & Luigi RPGs? Mario Party? Mario vs. Donkey Kong? Dr. Mario? Which of these are "real mario experiences" and which aren't? Where you draw the (arbitrary?) line and why?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_games_featuring_Mario



betacon on 01 November 2016
Soundwave said:
betacon said:
Can someone please explain why it's a big deal if Nintendo go third party?

1.) Console wars are serious business for some, Nintendo going "third party" would be a shameful event for some Nintendo "faithful". This is a bit of a childish reasoning. 

2.) In a practical sense it could damage Nintendo's software output, where they only make 4-5 of their bigger franchises and basically ignore everything else because they have no responsibility for selling the hardware any longer. 

Point 2 I can understand but with the same mindset they can now increase software output with resources not going to hardware development.



Soundwave on 01 November 2016
bunchanumbers said:
Soundwave said:

That would be stupid. 

They'd be leaving a ton of money on the table. 

Hell, imagine the money-hat MS would offer Nintendo on a yearly basis alone, I bet it would be massive. No reason at all to turn that down. 

They can maintain their indepedence no matter what, does Apple/Google "force" Nintendo to do anything? Sony/MS wouldn't be able to either, if anything Sony/MS would jump through whatever hoops Nintendo wanted them to in order to get their support (Microsoft in particular, Nintendo could tell Spencer to run naked down Redmond if they want support and he'd probably do it, lol). 

Mobile is also problematic because last I checked, $60 games don't exactly work on mobile, a lot of their franchises would go extinct if forced only into the confines of how mobile players play (free to play, simple play mechanics). 

They've been leaving money on the table for years. They left money on the table when they made Wii U instead of a real console. They are doing it again with Switch. There's entire furniture stores jam packed full of tables with money on it. All left by Nintendo. They do what they want, and I can see mobile only being one of them.

They don't want to waste hundreds of millions developing a AAA game. Because that is what Sony and MS fans would demand from Nintendo on their machines. BOTW looks great because they made it with 2010 hardware in mind and used it to the fullest. They're not going to be doing that with a PlayStation or a Xbox. In a few years iphones will be plenty strong enough to meet their needs. Sony and MS could trot out 50 Teraflop machines and it means nothing to Nintendo. Because they don't use it.

And Nintendo won't be selling their games at $60. They barely did it on Wii U. I'm expecting lower prices, billions of dollars in sales, and MTs. I've said this before, but Switch is a transitional device. Once they use Switch to figure out how to do it, they will go full mobile. And yes, there will be plenty of franchises that die.

Nintendo sold a lot of software at $50-$60 on Wii U. 

That money from Mario Kart 8, Splatoon, NSMBU, didn't exactly go to charities, lol. 

Fact is Microsoft/Sony would both be on the phone so quickly for Nintendo offering them huge incentives to make games for their platforms if they decided to stop making their own hardware too. 

Microsoft I could see even going as far as giving them a share of their entire XBox division. The bidding war between Sony and MS for Nintendo's support would be immense. 

Nintendo would be stupid to turn that down. It's not like they couldn't still make all the shitty mobile games they wanted to, lol.