niceguygameplayer said:
Okay, here are Nintendo's wrongs. Please don't hate on me. This stuff is the truth. Think past the nostalgia. In the NES days, Nintendo had ruthless policies with 3rd parties, in the USA at least. They would not allow 3rd parties to release their games on the NES if they released their games on any other system. I also think (I can't remember) that they took a large percentage of the game profit. Like higher than usual today. They were and still are highly snobish with their IP. I understand protecting IP, but they push it to an extreme. You can find lots of non profit fan made games for Sega for example. There are many Sonic fan made games and Streets of Rage. Sega seems to have no problem with this. They seem to appreciate their fan's efforts. In fact Sega hired some of them like Christian Whitehead to head up Sonic games like Sonic CD HD and Sonic Mania. Nintendo on the other hand punishes the fans and makes them take down the fan made games and projects the fans worked so hard on. If they were for profit, I'd understand. Furthermore, I just read today that they are not allowing live streams of gameplay. Why?
About the first part: Yes, they had a limit for every publisher, that being 6 games a year. But the publishers quickly got around this by creating new labes to publish additional games (Like Konami creating Ultra Games) and renaming games for other consoles (Wonder Boy becoming Adventure Island on the NES, for instance). As for the large precentage, it's afaik as I know the same as nowadays (around 30%). The catch here is that back in the day that was an unusually high amount. Sega took 12% iirc, Atari just a measly 10%.
And yes I agree, Nintendo is overprotective of their IPs. I understand that they want to cover their asses for any case possible but yes, they are driving it too far.
I watched a video or two about how Nintendo sends free games to video reviewers. There is a catch. They will only keep sending the games and keep you as a Nintendo partner if you give their games good reviews. So if someone thought Breath of the Wild was only a 5 out of 10, for example, they could terminate the partnership even if the reviewer was giving their honest opinions. This is how it was explained. If true, that is corrupt guys! I don't see why anybody would just up and kill their Nintendo free games coming to give a mediocre score.
Newsflash: EVERYBODY does that, including Sony and Microsoft and all the big Publishers - even some indies! Why do you think a mediocre game gets a 50ish rating (in percent) instead of something below 30? 70% would have been a pretty good game 25 years ago, now a game with that rating is okay at best. And as far as I know Nintendo is actually more laidback than most big publishers in this regard, especially Capcom, Konami and WB.
Oh to Virtual Console. I thought it was a great idea! I really like retro games. It was going so well at 3 VC games a week on average on Wii. Then support suddenly started dwindling. 1 game a week. No game some weeks, then months. What a waste of great potential! Now VC is barely supported on any Nintendo System and there may be no VC on Switch.
Licensing deals are a thing you know. And with the failure of the Wii U it's understandable that they couldn't make as many good deals as they did on the Wii. The Wii had so many VC games of course they ran into limits there: Licenseholders who don't want to take part of it, Games where the current licenseholders are unknown or not reachable.... Why the other consoles are missing on the Wii U however I don't know, it can be Nintendos fault, but also Sega and SNK not wanting to do it anymore. You blame Nintendo way too much for it here. I agree however that the Wii U VC was pretty bad compared to the Wii. At least I finally got to play Earthbound in Europe.
Now are the recent things. Switch peripherals are ridiculously priced. Their poor support of Wii U is apparent. They abandoned it too early at 4 years, in my opinion. I think any system should be supported for 5 years at a minimum. Even the Vita is still going to some extent. The reason that the Wii U had so few games in the last year is obvious to me. Notice how the Switch has hit game after game coming? I think Nintendo neglected Wii U for Switch development. Yes, this has worked in Nintendo's favor. It was the right business decision, but is it right for the 13 to 14 million Wii U owners? I don't think it is. I think business and morals can go hand in hand. Couldn't Splatoon 2 and Mario Oddeysey have Wii U releases and keep Wii U owners supported for a 5th year?
Wii U was pretty dead in 2016 already and no amount of support would have changed that. But I agree with you on the price of the dock, which is ludicrous. Splatoon 2 and Odyssey could have been released on Wii U too, but would they have sold there? I pretty much doubt it. So it wouldn't be very viable for Nintendo to do so. Speaking of this, how much first party support did PS3 and Xbox 360 get after their successors got released? The third party support continued pretty well, but first party also stopped within a very short period.
Just a day or two ago, I read that the Wii store will be abandoned in early 2019. For some odd reason they will not allow any more Wii points to be added after late March, 2018. What is the point of keeping the store open til 2019 if you can't add any money many months before? I had planned on getting a used Wii U and slowly purchasing Virtual Console Wii titles for many systems. They are kind of high priced and would take much more than March of next year for me to be able to buy all the games. After the Wii, there were only Nintendo VC games supported. I want classic Sega Genesis, SMS, Neo Geo, and Turbo Grafx 16 games. I don't they should close it at all. At least not for a long time. There are around 115 million combined Wii and Wii U owners that could still purchase games for years. This also may send a signal for Sony and MS to abandon old stores too. I'm still slowly purchasing PS1 classics for my PS3.
Wii was discontinued in 2013, and they still kept it's store until 2019. If it would have been the same eShop as for the Wii U and the Switch, it would still be alive after that. The original Xbox Live (the one for the OG Xbox) also got cut in 2010, 5 years after the end of the Xbox. As you can see, that move was predictable. It's just not worthwhile to rent or maintain the servers if almost no one is using them anymore. Sony would have done the same if the PS3 had a diffent PSN than the one on the PS4.
I I don't hate Nintendo, just dislike a lot of what they are doing. They seem too greedy even for a corporation. Why can't fans make games or live Stream them? Why do they tend not to drop game prices like other companies do? Why does a pro controller cost you a paycheck? OK I'm over stating that. But you get the point. I feel like they are taking advantage of your nostalgia instead of rewarding you guys that are fans. I feel that they are attempting to write some wrongs like rereleasing the NES mini and releasing more of the SNES mini, but they have a long way to go.
1. Question: They're overprotective, just look further up in this post
2. Question: That practice only came up with steam sales, up until that point the shopkeepers only dropped the prices whn they needed sstore space for new titles. But they still had to pay full price for them beforehand from any and every publisher and developer. So you could consider it their grandfather's clause for continuing like they did before. They do discounts, but rarely do they lower the price permanently.
3. Question: It's literally the same price as a Playstation or Xbox first party controller (at least here it is)
In conclusion, I'm not the hater you guys think I am. I'm not lying about it. I am older, and I have the maturity to research and see what they are doing behind the scenes without the nostalgia factor. I care about other ppl. That's why I don't call out individuals and attack them. I don't want any corporation to take advantage of me or you. If Sony starts trying to rob us blind, I will call them out. If they shut down the store on PS3, I will be quite upset. They don't really have PS1 classics on PS4 like PS3. That is a third Sony wrong that I forgot to mention. Thanks for reading.
|
Currently Online 
