Could Nintendo Survive Going 3rd Party?

[Sheikah]

Do Sony own the Persona license, or why can't future Persona games come out for Nintendo consoles?

 

For everyone whining about "it's mean against the people whom bought the originals"... Well, guess what: many franchises that defined the PSOne had origins on other companies systems.

Final Fantasy was a traditional Nintendo franchise, Metal Gear was for a lot of westerners a Nintendo franchise (although the MSX version was the original and far supperior version).

 

I'm not a Persona fan, as I've never owned a Sony console. But I think that, as the Wii U is selling poorly, Nintendo should get any and all franchises they possibly can. And of course, since I'm not planning on buying any Sony console, this would enable me to try Persona out.

 

I don't want Persona on a Nintendo console primarily because Nintendo hardware and online infrastructure is sub par. It doesn't do an awesome title justice.

 

I would be quite happy if Nintendo became a software developer and handheld console manufacturer only. If they can't make a home console people want because it is technically unimpressive and has few good games, I'd be mighty pissed off at the thought of having to buy one just to play one awesome game. That is really bad for the consumer and really only good for Nintendo.

[Jonnas]

I don't want Persona on a Nintendo console primarily because Nintendo hardware and online infrastructure is sub par. It doesn't do an awesome title justice.

 

Multiplatform is a thing that exists, you know. I'm sure nobody is advocating it should become Nintendo-exclusive. Just because the series is Sony-exclusive now doesn't mean it should stay that way.

 

You know, like all of those franchises that branched out to the X360 (Devil May Cry, Final Fantasy, Tekken, etc.)

 

I would be quite happy if Nintendo became a software developer and handheld console manufacturer only. If they can't make a home console people want because it is technically unimpressive and has few good games, I'd be mighty pissed off at the thought of having to buy one just to play one awesome game. That is really bad for the consumer and really only good for Nintendo.

 

...You do realise we are talking about a 3rd party developer that's doing exactly this by developing a system-exclusive franchise, right?

 

And saying Nintendo should go 3rd party is short sighted. Going 3rd party sure did wonders for Sega's fans and consumers, didn't it? We sure never saw console-exclusive games from Sega again

And on a more serious note, look at what happened with all of their franchises. People are complaining that Nintendo relies too much on Mario and Zelda, if they went 3rd party, that's all they would rely on (see: Sega nowadays, relying on Sonic and Football Manager).

[Sheikah]

I don't think it's short sighted at all. Sega went down a route of making 3D Sonic games that were pale imitations of what they did best, and had nowhere near the same sort of roster of games Nintendo has. So that's not really a good comparison; you're basically extrapolating one incident and trying to suggest that everything else would be doomed to fail if it did the same. Which really, just doesn't make sense.

 

Nintendo hardware is woefully under-impressive compared to its competitors and long they have struggled with producing a console that can attract good third party software. Not only would putting their software onto multiple devices increase the number of potential customers, it'd mean I wouldn't have to buy hardware just to run a few games that I actually want. I'm talking about their home consoles here rather than handhelds.

 

I actually don't mind if Persona went PS3/Xbox/PC multiformat. So long as it's not a Nintendo exclusive I'd be happy enough. Games like Dark Souls show that excellent presentation and online features can be maintained across these platforms.

 

Assuming they made the next Persona game exactly as they intended regardless of which platform it went on, a WiiU version would be exactly the same as a PS4 version but more limited in how technically impressive they could make it. It's kinda like how I was really happy that Ni no Kuni went to the PS3 and not the Wii, even though I had both consoles.

Edited July 20, 2013 by Sheikah

[Jonnas]

I don't think it's short sighted at all. Sega went down a route of making 3D Sonic games that were pale imitations of what they did best, and had nowhere near the same sort of roster of games Nintendo has. So that's not really a good comparison; you're basically extrapolating one incident and trying to suggest that everything else would be doomed to fail if it did the same. Which really, just doesn't make sense.

 

Not too long ago, we had a couple of Sega nostalgia threads. Visit those, and you'll see just how untrue that statement of yours is. Most of the things that were posted there were Dreamcast-era, too.

 

No, Sega didn't go bankrupt or unsuccessful because of lackluster 3D Sonic games, those came afterwards. And even then, they remained profitable, so not really a liability (there's a reason Sonic is one of the few things they still rely on).

 

If Nintendo went 3rd party right now, the only difference between them and post-bankruptcy Sega would be the amount of money available (and the handheld industry, in this scenario you proposed).

 

Nintendo hardware is woefully under-impressive compared to its competitors and long they have struggled with producing a console that can attract good third party software. Not only would putting their software onto multiple devices increase the number of potential customers, it'd mean I wouldn't have to buy hardware just to run a few games that I actually want. I'm talking about their home consoles here rather than handhelds.

 

Nintendo's hardware is always unimpressive until the competitors decide they want to follow it.

 

Spreading their games over other consoles brings their own set of problems, though. After all, it's a playing field they didn't choose, they have less freedom to do the games they want to do, and whatever they do is limited by a console they have no part in developing (and that includes development, content and marketing).

Furthermore, there's no guarantee their install base will keep following them without a specialized console. Reaching to potential customers is fine and dandy, but that's defined by marketing and not much else.

 

I also would like to add, Nintendo has the most distinct console in the market. They're the "wildcard" option that does things the others don't. That's the choice they made, because the other consoles don't suit them.

I like having that extra option. I choose Nintendo's consoles over Sony's for a reason, and I know there's plenty like me. Both companies see different kinds of success, and to ask one philosophy to fully submit to the other is limiting. This is healthy competition we're seeing here.

[Sheikah]

What exactly is your point with Sega? If Sega remain profitable and people still follow their games after losing their console, surely that suggests Nintendo can do too. In fact they'd be in a much stronger position on account of having better software that can really sell copies. If Nintendo continue with a poorly selling console then can't you see how it would make sense to deliver their games to other platforms?

Edited July 20, 2013 by Sheikah

[Serebii]

What exactly is your point with Sega? If Sega remain profitable and people still follow their games after losing their console, surely that suggests Nintendo can do too. In fact they'd be in a much stronger position on account of having better software that can really sell copies. If Nintendo continue with a poorly selling console then can't you see how it would make sense to deliver their games to other platforms?

That's a whole different issue.

 

The fact is that a lot of the money Nintendo gets are from console sales and third party royalties. If those avenues suddenly dropped, it'd be solely on software so they'd just go on the games that they know sell. You think Mario is oversaturated now, wait until it and Pokémon are the only games Nintendo provide, with a periodic Zelda. Their other franchises sell barely 1m units per game which just wouldn't be seen as a viable business decision.

 

Sega remained profitable after killing off a lot of their assets and merging with another company. They also had some really bad years after dropping the console business

[Magnus]

Yeah, I like Atlus too.

[Sheikah]

I'm sure Nintendo sells enough copies of most of its killer titles, of which there are many, that would far outsell many other third party titles and therefore be profitable enough to make. I'm also only suggesting they only drop their home console - something that has lost a lot of interest within the last 5 or so years.

 

I mean, what 'profit' are they really reaping from the WiiU? Just wondering.

[Jonnas]

Truth be told, this discussion could be th'ripped.

 

What exactly is your point with Sega? If Sega remain profitable and people still follow their games after losing their console, surely that suggests Nintendo can do too. In fact they'd be in a much stronger position on account of having better software that can really sell copies. If Nintendo continue with a poorly selling console then can't you see how it would make sense to deliver their games to other platforms?

 

See, that's the thing: Sega didn't remain profitable. They kept taking less and less risks as time went by.

They went from the company that brought us (developed or distributed) Shenmue, Space Channel, Jet Set Radio, Skies of Arcadia, Panzer Dragoon and Nights, among many others...

...to the company that relied on safe releases like Dreamcast ports and Sonic Heroes alongside the occasional new release like Billy Hatcher...

...and now they are in a position where they're afraid to even release Bayonetta 2.

 

Sega just kept losing themselves more and more. If Nintendo were to become third party, this is the direction they would go. Games like Fire Emblem Awakening would not be released in a 3rd party environment, as that was a risk that, as it turns out, paid off big time.

 

I'm sure Nintendo sells enough copies of most of its killer titles, of which there are many, that would far outsell many other third party titles and therefore be profitable enough to make. I'm also only suggesting they only drop their home console - something that has lost a lot of interest within the last 5 or so years.

 

I mean, what 'profit' are they really reaping from the WiiU? Just wondering.

 

You could say the same thing about Nintendo at the end of the Gamecube lifespan, but they turned that around.

 

Serebii can tell you better than me what sort of profit Nintendo makes with their home consoles. But for the last 5 years, I'm positive it was more than the profits made from the X360 or the PS3, because they were never selling anything at a loss.

[Sheikah]

Well I would expect the current 'new' generation to last at least another 7-8 years, and I feel the WiiU will take something miraculous to turn its fortunes around. Even if on paper an individual console can be sold at a profit, if they aren't selling any significant number then they're not going to be selling anywhere near the number of games to people that they could be.

 

If they're really struggling to make a console that can compete with the competition on a technical level (due to them not having the same sort of capital to buffer smaller profit margins) then it would make sense to put their games on other consoles. I think a loss of their own control over new peripheral design (the main thing they wouldn't be able to do anymore) is a small price to pay to not have to fork out hundreds for mostly one developer's software.

 

Also I don't see any reason why Nintendo would follow Sega's direction. They can still keep their existing game devs and studios (which may not have been the case for a company that underwent bankruptcy) - there's no reason why they would have to change the direction of their game design. Their games are profitable - their console not so much.

 

Also worth bearing in mind that many successful games are already made by third parties not affiliated with an individual console directly, and have managed to either consistently deliver to a formula or constantly improve their games. Most Nintendo games are down to a formula these days anyway; constant churning of similar gameplay is what they're doing already. They would just have to keep doing it.

Edited July 21, 2013 by Sheikah

[Serebii]

The fact is, in the unlikely event that Nintendo quits the home console business, they would not go third party, they'd just shift their entire focus to their handheld platform.

 

If they were to go third party, as I said before, they wouldn't be getting royalties from consoles, third party licenses etc. As such, they'd have to downsize. If you think that nothing would change, then you are severely mistaken.

[Sheikah]

They're doing terrible with the WiiU though, what kind of royalties can they expect? Especially when they have had to go to the expense of researching, designing and manufacturing a new console; is there meaningful profit in the end? I'm guessing no.

 

It's likely there'll be a similar situation to the Wii where games that run on Xbox/PS4 won't be worth the effort to put on the WiiU on account of hardware limitations, meaning it'll miss out on lots. The way I see it, the WiiU isn't going to do well.

[Serebii]

They're doing terrible with the WiiU though, what kind of royalties can they expect? Especially when they have had to go to the expense of researching, designing and manufacturing a new console; is there meaningful profit in the end? I'm guessing no.

 

It's likely there'll be a similar situation to the Wii where games that run on Xbox/PS4 won't be worth the effort to put on the WiiU on account of hardware limitations, meaning it'll miss out on lots. The way I see it, the WiiU isn't going to do well.

They're doing terribly with the Wii U right now, yes. However, things turn around (as I noted in the sales thread, there are actually queues for the Wii U in Japan right now) and they're still getting third party games on it as see with this autumn's lineup of games such as Assassin's Creed, Splinter Cell, Watch_Dogs, Scribblenauts, Sonic, Batman etc.

 

The Wii U will not do amazingly, no. I concede that. However, overall over its life, it will turn a profit and be a healthy system for Nintendo.

 

People said similar of the 3DS, if you recall. Now, that's doing well everywhere, brilliantly in Japan, and it has a moderately healthy third party presence, especially in Japan.

Edited July 21, 2013 by Serebii

[Sheikah]

Nintendo should obviously keep at the handheld market as they're consistently the market leader in that area. But if they stand to make a lot more profit by selling console games multiformat, it'd be good both for them and the consumer.

 

We'd have to ask this question at the end of the Wii U life - if it's likely going to continue down this path again, they'd probably be better off not making their own home console.

[Serebii]

Nintendo would never release home console games on other devices while sticking on handhelds. They'd just shift everything to the handheld.

[Daft]

And you're saying that based on what evidence?

[Happenstance]

And you're saying that based on what evidence?

 

I'm not sure you've heard, but he's a journalist

[Serebii]

And you're saying that based on what evidence?

Based on them saying so?

[Cube]

If Nintendo did stop their home consoles, I don't think their shareholders would let them just work on handheld games.

[Sheikah]

Nintendo would never release home console games on other devices while sticking on handhelds. They'd just shift everything to the handheld.

 

Thus denying themselves a lot of money. Seems silly.

[Daft]

Based on them saying so?

 

Source? I think that'd be a strange decision, would love to hear their reasoning behind it.

[RedShell]

I read something interesting (think it was on NeoGaf) where it was being predicted that Nintendo's next system will unify their handheld and home consoles, and primarily be a handheld device but one that can also be connected to a TV.

The concept is obviously inspired by the news of Nintendo merging its hardware R&D departments, but it sounds like a great idea to me, and the perfect solution to Nintendo's home console/3rd party problems.

 

Imagine a 3DS like system in terms of size that you can take anywhere for gaming on the go and stuff like StreetPass, which can also be hooked up to a TV and have additional Wii Remotes or Classic Controllers connected via blutooth for home console gaming.

I'm assuming software will be DD only by this point too, meaning no need for carts/discs.

 

If they released a device like that, which is essentially still a portable console, it's basically guaranteed success in Japan and highly likely to succeed worldwide too.

Also, seeing as Nintendo get more 3rd party support on their handhelds, it should eliminate the problem that's currently being seen on Wii U.

 

I really don't think Nintendo will be going 3rd party any time soon/ever.

Their hardware and software development seems far too integrated for that to even be an option.

[Serebii]

I read something interesting (think it was on NeoGaf) where it was being predicted that Nintendo's next system will unify their handheld and home consoles, and primarily be a handheld device but one that can also be connected to a TV.

The concept is obviously inspired by the news of Nintendo merging its hardware R&D departments, but it sounds like a great idea to me, and the perfect solution to Nintendo's home console/3rd party problems.

 

Imagine a 3DS like system in terms of size that you can take anywhere for gaming on the go and stuff like StreetPass, which can also be hooked up to a TV and have additional Wii Remotes or Classic Controllers connected via blutooth for home console gaming.

I'm assuming software will be DD only by this point too, meaning no need for carts/discs.

 

If they released a device like that, which is essentially still a portable console, it's basically guaranteed success in Japan and highly likely to succeed worldwide too.

Also, seeing as Nintendo get more 3rd party support on their handhelds, it should eliminate the problem that's currently being seen on Wii U.

 

I really don't think Nintendo will be going 3rd party any time soon/ever.

Their hardware and software development seems far too integrated for that to even be an option.

Thing is, Nintendo quickly clarified and said that they're still doing two devices. The merging is just so that the two consoles have similar architecture to allow for cross play of say Virtual Console games, ports of games across both consoles etc. perhaps with a unified account system

[Hero-of-Time]

I'm not sure you've heard, but he's a journalist

 

Keep it civil, fellas.

 

I read something interesting (think it was on NeoGaf) where it was being predicted that Nintendo's next system will unify their handheld and home consoles, and primarily be a handheld device but one that can also be connected to a TV.

The concept is obviously inspired by the news of Nintendo merging its hardware R&D departments, but it sounds like a great idea to me, and the perfect solution to Nintendo's home console/3rd party problems.

 

Yeah, I read that topic as well. There were quite a few decent ideas floating around in there.

[Fierce_LiNk]

I read something interesting (think it was on NeoGaf) where it was being predicted that Nintendo's next system will unify their handheld and home consoles, and primarily be a handheld device but one that can also be connected to a TV.

The concept is obviously inspired by the news of Nintendo merging its hardware R&D departments, but it sounds like a great idea to me, and the perfect solution to Nintendo's home console/3rd party problems.

 

Imagine a 3DS like system in terms of size that you can take anywhere for gaming on the go and stuff like StreetPass, which can also be hooked up to a TV and have additional Wii Remotes or Classic Controllers connected via blutooth for home console gaming.

I'm assuming software will be DD only by this point too, meaning no need for carts/discs.

 

If they released a device like that, which is essentially still a portable console, it's basically guaranteed success in Japan and highly likely to succeed worldwide too.

Also, seeing as Nintendo get more 3rd party support on their handhelds, it should eliminate the problem that's currently being seen on Wii U.

 

I really don't think Nintendo will be going 3rd party any time soon/ever.

Their hardware and software development seems far too integrated for that to even be an option.

 

But what about all the money they'd be losing from the people that usually buy both the handheld and the home console? Also, if the console was primarily a handheld, surely the "home console" type of games wouldn't be powerful enough to run on the system. Imagine it right now if you were trying to run something like Watch Dogs on the 3DS...surely you'd have that situation repeated over on the next situation, which would ultimately mean Nintendo would lose those 3rd party games anyway.

 

Anyway, it seems like very wishful thinking to me. Some people obviously aren't happy with the Wii U and they want the system to bomb so that they (possibly) can have the Nintendo franchises they love on their PS4/5s or Xbones/whatever. Can't see it happening. As long as Nintendo can continue to turn a profit, they'll stay in the hardware business. They'll find a way. Their exclusives almost guarantee that they'll receive a certain amount of hardware sales anyway, hence why we see so much Mario. It's all the other stuff they need to improve, online infrastructure, securing 3rd party titles, using their other lesser known franchises, etc.