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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Nintendo business model is bad for gamers

TruckOSaurus on 20 June 2017
dark_gh0st_b0y said:
I only agree with the title

it is bad for gamers, because most gamers have to spend double the money on buying two consoles since with Nintendo it is impossible to have the whole pie...

it could even be a deal between the big three and the 3rd parties, in order to increase consumer spending on gaming, since millions of gamers are forced to spend at least $200 more per gen

You can't have the whole pie with Sony or MS too since they don't have Nintendo games.



Signature goes here!

Around the Network
Alby_da_Wolf on 20 June 2017

And let's not forget that those evil Ninty execs have bean eating baby seals alive since forever!



Stwike him, Centuwion. Stwike him vewy wuffly! (Pontius Pilate, "Life of Brian")
A fart without stink is like a sky without stars.
TGS, Third Grade Shooter: brand new genre invented by Kevin Butler exclusively for Natal WiiToo Kinect. PEW! PEW-PEW-PEW!   


DonFerrari on 20 June 2017
SpokenTruth said:
dark_gh0st_b0y said:

I am forced to buy two consoles, indirectly of course, since only 50% of the games I play are on Nintendo consoles

I just support the statement that Nintendo's "let's repel the 3rd parties" business model is not doing me and many people's wallets any good

on what hobbies people spend money is another story, but I agree with all the rest, all three companies are great at what they do

Are you certain it's a Nintendo policy?  Why can it not be a "3rd party repelling Nintendo" policy?

Because it's more probable that a single company (Nintendo) doesn't cater to 3rd parties than all of the hundreds company are in cohots to boycott Nintendo



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

StuOhQ on 20 June 2017

Release "any" quirky game is a stretch. Nintendo's titles are generally exceptional. If Nintendo's audience had eaten up "Amiibo Crossing" or "Ultra Smash" last year, I'd be more concerned.

The Wii U did not perform well and had a variety of games early on - but few of them worth buying a system for. The Switch has a few dozen games so far with several that are system sellers.



Retro Tech Select - My Youtube channel. Covers throwback consumer electronics with a focus on "vid'ya games."

Latest Video: Top 12: Best Games on the N64 - Special Features, Episode 7

DonFerrari on 20 June 2017
SpokenTruth said:
DonFerrari said:

Because it's more probable that a single company (Nintendo) doesn't cater to 3rd parties than all of the hundreds company are in cohots to boycott Nintendo

But they are not.  He's talking about the big AAA titles and those publishers don't balk at Nintendo for every single game.

I suspect it's a bit of both sides.  Nintendo doesn't court 3rd parties with lavish executive meetings, lopsided contracts, promotional campaigns (usually), etc... And 3rd parties take a very measured wait and see approach to a Nintendo device.  They are not going to commit millions of dollars and 4-5 years of development time on a console they don't know will provide a userbase of 10 million or 100 million.

Nintendo very much doesn't go the distance to please 3rd parties like MS and Sony do, and we end up with Nintendo fans saying MS and Sony are paying to remove content from Nintendo and that the 3rd parties boycott Nintendo.

When in reality it's more like Nintendo doesn't go there to grease the system, offer some money to assure the support and show that it can sell and them have natural support.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network
Arminillo on 20 June 2017

i thought this was gonna be about how u cant even buy a switch at msrp



Muda Muda Muda Muda Muda Muda!!!!


SWORDF1SH on 20 June 2017

This thread is pretty bad. Topic could be great if you brought a decent argument but it's just a bad OP. Sorry to be mean :(



riecsou on 20 June 2017

Nintendo is the only out of the 3 that take risks on the hardware department.



Ljink96 on 20 June 2017

Wow...just wow. I don't have any words.



DonFerrari on 20 June 2017
riecsou said:
Nintendo is the only out of the 3 that take risks on the hardware department.

launching a 600 USD console with a loss of 200 USD per HW sold certainly is taking no risk.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."