Nintendo does not have to do any of that stuff. Third parties clamor that they can't sell on Nintendo's console rather than admit they make bad games or don't meet Wii values. Some games have been successful, but most third parties don't put the effort into the Wii. As a result, they don't sell well.

Wanna know what Nintendo should do? Sell more units and show third parties how the system is a better bet than the competition. It seems they are trying to do that, but the third parties are dead set on the HD twins.

@griffinA

I am sure you thought you were being clever, but you demonstrated the problem mindset for them perfectly. The reason those two enjoy such strong third party support is a testament as to how they do business. This is how you get strong third party support. You demonstrate that a console is a viable format through your software. You provide financial incentives to get needed software. You make a dedicated effort to secure the most prized consumers.

By the way the model isn't unprofitable. The reason Sony is unprofitable is because they pushed the pricing envelope too far. They did this by trying to turn a game console into a Trojan horse. Which is something Nintendo can't really do. They like Microsoft contract out for their parts and the manufacturing.

So Nintendo already has one destructive temptation out of the way. Besides we are not talking about loss leading. We are talking about investing in mature first party titles, and investing in third party titles by providing incentives, and by proper marketing.

The name of the game is not making money. The name of the game is making more money, and that is why Reggie wants stronger third party support. It means their next console could enjoy better support, and thus be more likely to be successful. The race doesn't end when you have a dominant console. You have to fight to stay on top. Having a console that sells more brings you more money, and if weak third party support might mean your next console will much less then that is something you should resolve.

Like I said in my first post I just think Nintendo is so conservative that they will not abandon their old ways. Even when the answer is right in front of them. They will not be able to bring themselves to the point where they will actually craft mature games, spend the money to acquire high end exclusives, or actually market themselves as a console for gamers. Oh and before you say so what. This is exactly what got Nintendo into third place for two generations. They were effectively not competing, and they are not really competing now. They just found a overlooked market that is paying huge dividends. Not that the others will let them have it all to themselves next generation.

You might not understand this or just blow it off, but if Nintendo does not have the core or hardcore on board. Then Microsoft with its game show concept, and Sony with its Second Life concept may very well take huge chunks out of the casual market. While they maintain those other two markets, and if that happens Nintendo will zip right back down into third place, and have another profitable console that just sells twenty million.

I thought it was pretty clear, that they're talking about 70% of the games available on the Wii in the future should be 3rd party games. My initial comment was that for every 10 games, only 3 would be Nintendo-made, so would that mean 3 Wii-something games, or rotation of their big ips (mario, zelda, metroid, starfox).

Honestly, I see it happening already. This is the first time ever, if I recall correctly, that Konami is bringing a Silent Hill game to a Nintendo home console, HVS is hard at work on 3 wii exclusives, just for a start. I think the Wii software is starting to break out of its "how do we make good 3rd party games on the Wii" issue.

Recent numbers from Ninty (in case smbd missed them), trend is pretty healthy for Wii in US\EU, can't say the same about Japan (that exactly was one of the topic of Iwata's speech):

Hmm...

Reggie, there is a concept known as multi-system games. Due to your design of the Wii, being underpowered graphically, but with a unique control scheme, the Wii is less likely to get as much third-party support as you like. A game for the Wii is a unique design, matching to the underpowered graphics, and unique controls. Because of this, the Wii didn't get Civilization Revolution, for example. In big AAA titles, it is easier to do a PS3-360 game, than one that has to drag the Wii in. The development work is more. This is why the Wii won't get as much 3rd party support, but the third-party support it gets will generally be third-party exclusives.

Keep in mind the PS3-360 combined market is larger than that of the Wii.

mai - interesting chart. I wonder if it has anything to do with the amount of western developers making games and Japan's natural reluctance to embrace western gaming?

"Keep in mind the PS3-360 combined market is larger than that of the Wii."

Keep in mind that number isn't that large and is shrinking. Also keep in mind development costs have been mitigating that in many cases.

LOL 70%??? Keep dreaming Nintendo

My first language is Spanish, I'm from Argentina.

I thought they were asking for new games, but I realized that instead they promised that new core games were going to come. The word "pledge" sound similar to "plegaria" which means to beg or to ask for with a lot of faith.

Okay, I'll be sure to ask about context next time we seem to be reading different things from certain phrases.

And I hope you know what "pledge" means now.

EDIT: You probably do, given your first reply in this quote train. Forgot about that.