Serebii Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 I've always questioned that practice myself it's very suspect how much it actually drives sales of those other IPs on Nintendo platforms. The only example I can think that worked is in reverse Link appearing in Soul Calibur 2 and many people preferring that version as a result. BUT it was the only iteration to appear on Nintendo consoles (discounting that third person Wii game) So it makes me wonder how it sold. Obviously not enough to convince Namco that it would continue to flourish on Nintendo platforms just like I don't think we've seen a Ridge Racer on a home console since Ridge Racer 64. It sold best on the Gamecube http://uk.ign.com/articles/2004/01/24/graphs-soulcalibur-ii-sales http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=80195 At least in the US. Struggling to find the worldwide figures.
flameboy Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 It sold best on the Gamecubehttp://uk.ign.com/articles/2004/01/24/graphs-soulcalibur-ii-sales Ok thank you a fact! So in your opinion why did we never see the franchise proper on a Nintendo console since then? Yet the franchise has continued and remained relatively high profile?
Serebii Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 Ok thank you a fact! So in your opinion why did we never see the franchise proper on a Nintendo console since then? Yet the franchise has continued and remained relatively high profile? Nintendo didn't front them the cash I guess.
flameboy Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 (edited) Nintendo didn't front them the cash I guess. What cash though it's been multiplatform? +EDIT: Before I called out...with the exception of 3 they have been multiplatform on home consoles. Edited January 20, 2014 by flameboy
Goron_3 Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 I still don't understand why SC 3 didn't come to a Nintendo system :/
Serebii Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 I still don't understand why SC 3 didn't come to a Nintendo system :/ Third parties hate Nintendo. This isn't news :p
Ashley Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 Third parties hate Nintendo. This isn't news :p No, it's an opinion.
flameboy Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 I still don't understand why SC 3 didn't come to a Nintendo system :/ See a bit of looking around and seems Sony paid for it to be exclusive....but it was just for that one game. So why we never saw a version of the franchise (again not counting the 3rd person action game) appear on Wii is beyond me! If the Cube version of 2 was the best selling why didn't we get the HD re-release on Wii U? Maybe Injustice didn't sell much so they think there is no market for fighters on Wii U? The install base just isn't big enough? It is certainly an odd one. Third parties hate Nintendo. This isn't news :p No, it's an opinion. Dammit Ashley you stole my answer
Jonnas Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 Namco's actions with Soul Calibur 3 helped me hate them. There was no good reason for that game to be PS2 exclusive. And nowadays, even more egregious as even Tekken (formerly a PS exclusive) branched out. Also, their stubborn attitude with the release of Tales games in the west (Europe in particular), which made me want stop being a fan of the series. So yeah, not a fan of Namco in general. @Ashley, @flameboy, Can we please not bring that up again?
Oxigen_Waste Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 The video game industry's model is an insult to the consumer. Notions like "first party" and exclusives need to die. So... yes. Not just Nintendo, but everyone should go 3rd party.
jayseven Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 I am probably wrong, but is the Wii U the first console nintendo has sold at a loss per unit (pre-price cuts, for previous generations) for a long time? The Xbox strategy was to lose money first gen in order to build up a user base, then use the user base to grow money with 2nd gen. What is it that nintendo has done differently with teh Wii U compared to the Wii? Well I would imagine that introducing a massive new market to the gaming world works wonders for a short while... but how many people that bought a wii to use wii fit used it for more than 6 months? More than 3? Can the same poeple then go out and spend £300 again, now that they know they gave up so easily on the last gen? The last gen's market should not be looked at based on units sold. I'm sure someone will fetch a stat (please do), but if you compared units sold vs total units sold you'd probably see that, compared to the competitors, the wii sells less games per units. When you bring out a new console that is nowhere near as revolutionary, that doesn't draw NEW people in, you're going to encounter difficulty. Which is why microsoft burned their first gen in order to build a gamer user base. Many would argue that nintendo has failed to address the 'hardcore' gamer last gen, and may be paying for it this gen. At this point I've realised that I may well be regurgitating arguments oft heard 'round here, so I'll shh.
Sheikah Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 Namco's actions with Soul Calibur 3 helped me hate them. There was no good reason for that game to be PS2 exclusive. And nowadays, even more egregious as even Tekken (formerly a PS exclusive) branched out. Also, their stubborn attitude with the release of Tales games in the west (Europe in particular), which made me want stop being a fan of the series. So yeah, not a fan of Namco in general. @Ashley, @flameboy, Can we please not bring that up again? To be fair, we get most of the good Tales games. I used a freeloader to play Tales of Legendia back in the day. That was freaking tragic...it felt like it had the budget of about a grand.
khilafah Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 I am probably wrong, but is the Wii U the first console nintendo has sold at a loss per unit (pre-price cuts, for previous generations) for a long time? The Xbox strategy was to lose money first gen in order to build up a user base, then use the user base to grow money with 2nd gen. What is it that nintendo has done differently with teh Wii U compared to the Wii? Well I would imagine that introducing a massive new market to the gaming world works wonders for a short while... but how many people that bought a wii to use wii fit used it for more than 6 months? More than 3? Can the same poeple then go out and spend £300 again, now that they know they gave up so easily on the last gen? The last gen's market should not be looked at based on units sold. I'm sure someone will fetch a stat (please do), but if you compared units sold vs total units sold you'd probably see that, compared to the competitors, the wii sells less games per units. When you bring out a new console that is nowhere near as revolutionary, that doesn't draw NEW people in, you're going to encounter difficulty. Which is why microsoft burned their first gen in order to build a gamer user base. Many would argue that nintendo has failed to address the 'hardcore' gamer last gen, and may be paying for it this gen. At this point I've realised that I may well be regurgitating arguments oft heard 'round here, so I'll shh. no your making a good point. MS built up a userbase and it worked for them. They then managed to get more people on board with kinect. When you look @ Wii U you get the impression that Ninty actually thought that there was this big Wii userbase sitting around for 3 years who were waiting for the Wii U. Its astonishing to think that nintendo never realised that these people had moved on long time ago. Building up a core gamer userbase is massively important. These people will stick around. Nintendo actually said all this before the Wii U was released. They saw the numbers for software sold on the Wii and considering it had huge hardware sales the software sales should have been bigger.
jayseven Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 Lol exactly. That's the crux of the issue, isn't it? Number of units sold is great when you're making money and comparing stats to your rivals, but how do you measure number of active units? At the time it doesn't matter if they're active or not because hey! You've made money! I think this 'generation' (wii u, xbone, ps4) has been one of the toughest, because the previous lasted so long. Previous measures aren't entirely relevent. You have to factor in the idea that a 10-year generation means people go from 8 to 18 -- from pre-pubescent to drinking age. A lot changes. Nintendo have a real hard fight ahead, considering how multiple markets that affect gaming are changing. Can it be definitively stated that consoles will operate through TVs, through broadband connections in 10 years time?
Jonnas Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 To be fair, we get most of the good Tales games. I used a freeloader to play Tales of Legendia back in the day. That was freaking tragic...it felt like it had the budget of about a grand. Abyss never came out in Europe before the 3DS version. In fact, nothing came out in Europe for a long time except for Symphonia (distributed and localized thanks to Nintendo), that dreadful Phantasia GBA port, and one Radiant Mythology. They only started to give the series a worldwide treatment with Vesperia (and even then, there are odd omissions. Why weren't Innocence and Hearts released outside of Japan?) But even worse was that, I recall reading a few interviews with the main developers behind the series, and they just didn't care about their western/US audience at all. In an interview with two of the head developers behind Tales of Symphonia, they literally didn't know that the game had been released in Europe. That was a long time ago, but it sure left a bitter taste.
flameboy Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 Lol exactly. That's the crux of the issue, isn't it? Number of units sold is great when you're making money and comparing stats to your rivals, but how do you measure number of active units? At the time it doesn't matter if they're active or not because hey! You've made money! I think this 'generation' (wii u, xbone, ps4) has been one of the toughest, because the previous lasted so long. Previous measures aren't entirely relevent. You have to factor in the idea that a 10-year generation means people go from 8 to 18 -- from pre-pubescent to drinking age. A lot changes. Nintendo have a real hard fight ahead, considering how multiple markets that affect gaming are changing. Can it be definitively stated that consoles will operate through TVs, through broadband connections in 10 years time? This truly is the crux of the matter. In a manner of speaking Nintendo have lost an entire generation hooked on then Xbox and Playstation brands. Along with mobile gaming brands like Angry Birds. Gamespot ran a feature looking at the options available to Nintendo to pull themselves back to profitability and touch upon that very point: Nintendo has been able to create lifelong fans by welcoming children into their colorful adventures at a young age, and once people play these wonderful experiences, they become invested in Mario, Link, and every other captivating character. The problem right now is that kids have flocked toward cheaper, more accessible mobile platforms, and they now have an unbreakable fondness for disposable games such as Angry Birds. If Nintendo devised fascinating, new experiences for mobile devices starring their beloved family of mascots, they would once again build a small and loyal fanbase, http://www.gamespot.com/articles/is-the-wii-u-really-doomed-exploring-the-pros-and-cons-of-nintendo-s-next-move/1100-6417207/
Serebii Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 No, it's an opinion. It's an observation based upon years of actions and statements :p And yes, that is their opinion.
liger05 Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 See a bit of looking around and seems Sony paid for it to be exclusive....but it was just for that one game. So why we never saw a version of the franchise (again not counting the 3rd person action game) appear on Wii is beyond me! If the Cube version of 2 was the best selling why didn't we get the HD re-release on Wii U? Maybe Injustice didn't sell much so they think there is no market for fighters on Wii U? The install base just isn't big enough? It is certainly an odd one. Japanese third parties saw no value in releasing games on wii u from day 1. The reason for that can debated but there was certainly an issue in convincing them that the Wii U was a good platform to sell games on. Oh and yes injustice bombed hard. Nobody bought it.
Ashley Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 This bullshit has to stop. Third parties hate Nintendo. This isn't news :p It's an observation based upon years of actions and statements :p And yes, that is their opinion. YOU CANNOT CLAIM TO KNOW OTHER PEOPLE'S OPINIONS THAT THEY HAVE NOT PUBLICLY STATED! It is not their opinion, it is yours. It is possible they hate Nintendo, sure. But have they said that? Have they actually said "we're not developing for Nintendo because we hate them"? I would like to see that. It is far more likely that they simply made a business decision, based on business. It may also be possible that they lost key staff with Nintendo knowledge, or that their dev kit broke and they didn't bother replacing it, or that they wanted to challenge themselves in a different way. There are a myriad of possibilities why they may have made the decisions they did, but apparently you know why they did it and it's because they hate Nintendo. Because everyone hates Nintendo. Because you are determined to prove that for some reason. It's fine to say you think everyone hates Nintendo, whatever. But when you constantly state that you post in "facts" and "logic" it goes from being your opinion to pure fanboyism. I would also like to point this out: I do NOT make things up. Saying that it is their opinion IS MADE UP because you don't know this to be true. You are human, you are flawed. It's fine, we all are. But you constantly try and close down arguments by saying you are speaking in fact and logic (thus in itself suggest everyone else is hysterical, taking a rather condescending tone) when in fact you're giving your opinions. When I saw Jonnas' comment earlier I almost responded, but felt it was best not. But seeing this I had to because you seem to be unaware a) how you come across at times and b) the problems you are causing. I honestly believe a lot of the time you are misrepresenting yourself, but it's causing issues that need to be resolved. I am sorry to bring this back up again, but really Serebii's post I quoted at the top started this off again. You're so determined to prove that everyone hates Nintendo that you make snide comments such as that without any real base for them and it results in threads being derailed time and time again.
Cube Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 There are a few reasons why some developers stay away from Nintendo. First, third party games typically perform poorly on Nintendo platforms (although that's become a self filling prophecy as people get other consoles for third party games due to this). Secondly, some developers don't like being handed a console, they like to be involved in the design process, and have some input on the architecture. Thirdly, Nintendo sometimes simply doesn't communicate with third parties. CryTek said that Crysis 3 was running on the Wii U, but neither Nintendo or EA supported it. Notch is unaware of Nintendo contacting Mojang about Minecraft - a game perfect for Nintendo platforms.
Rummy Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 Lol exactly. That's the crux of the issue, isn't it? Number of units sold is great when you're making money and comparing stats to your rivals, but how do you measure number of active units? At the time it doesn't matter if they're active or not because hey! You've made money! I think this 'generation' (wii u, xbone, ps4) has been one of the toughest, because the previous lasted so long. Previous measures aren't entirely relevent. You have to factor in the idea that a 10-year generation means people go from 8 to 18 -- from pre-pubescent to drinking age. A lot changes. Nintendo have a real hard fight ahead, considering how multiple markets that affect gaming are changing. Can it be definitively stated that consoles will operate through TVs, through broadband connections in 10 years time? I think it's a very good point/question - unfortunately I don't have the numbers and stats. I do recall hearing the Wii had good attach rates at times(though did those include the included Wii Sports, the WiiPlay many bought for a cheap extra wiimote, and maybe other similar anomolies I can't think of). However yes, the Wii U's afaik their first recent console selling at a loss off the bat(it was said to turn profit with a single game sale, however). One thing that didn't help so much is that Wii games tended to hold price a bit higher/longer. 360 and now PS3 back catalogues are both vast, varied, and available for a cheap price. Having said that, I'm not sure what's bigger between my Wii and 360 collections - but I did get a cracking deal on a second hand PS3 before Xmas - console+40 games(good and bad) for £300. I don't know if I could have gotten the same with a Wii, mostly just because there wasn't as much? Excluding some of the quite poor shovelware that is.
Jonnas Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 When I saw Jonnas' comment earlier I almost responded, but felt it was best not. Honestly, I just wanted us to not go back to that pedantic "prove it" subject again, which was where I thought your post was headed. This post I'm quoting, however, was far more mature (and hopefully effective) than the childish bickering over trivial wording that was seen a couple of pages back.
Serebii Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 (edited) This bullshit has to stop. YOU CANNOT CLAIM TO KNOW OTHER PEOPLE'S OPINIONS THAT THEY HAVE NOT PUBLICLY STATED! It is not their opinion, it is yours. It is possible they hate Nintendo, sure. But have they said that? Have they actually said "we're not developing for Nintendo because we hate them"? I would like to see that. It is far more likely that they simply made a business decision, based on business. It may also be possible that they lost key staff with Nintendo knowledge, or that their dev kit broke and they didn't bother replacing it, or that they wanted to challenge themselves in a different way. There are a myriad of possibilities why they may have made the decisions they did, but apparently you know why they did it and it's because they hate Nintendo. Because everyone hates Nintendo. Because you are determined to prove that for some reason. It's fine to say you think everyone hates Nintendo, whatever. But when you constantly state that you post in "facts" and "logic" it goes from being your opinion to pure fanboyism. I would also like to point this out: Saying that it is their opinion IS MADE UP because you don't know this to be true. You are human, you are flawed. It's fine, we all are. But you constantly try and close down arguments by saying you are speaking in fact and logic (thus in itself suggest everyone else is hysterical, taking a rather condescending tone) when in fact you're giving your opinions. When I saw Jonnas' comment earlier I almost responded, but felt it was best not. But seeing this I had to because you seem to be unaware a) how you come across at times and b) the problems you are causing. I honestly believe a lot of the time you are misrepresenting yourself, but it's causing issues that need to be resolved. I am sorry to bring this back up again, but really Serebii's post I quoted at the top started this off again. You're so determined to prove that everyone hates Nintendo that you make snide comments such as that without any real base for them and it results in threads being derailed time and time again. You do realise that it was a tongue-in-cheek statement initially. It was a joke based upon the fact there was no support. Hence the emoticon. You appear to be over-reacting. But fine, I'll just remember this for the future. Edited January 21, 2014 by Serebii
Jonnas Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 You do realise that it was a tongue-in-cheek statement initially. It was a joke based upon the fact there was no support. Hence the emoticon. You appear to be over-reacting. Then apologize over the misunderstanding and try to be more careful with your wording next time. He's not reacting to a single comment, but to your general oblivious attitude over this. This is the point he made: you, not your one single post.
Serebii Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 (edited) Then apologize over the misunderstanding and try to be more careful with your wording next time. He's not reacting to a single comment, but to your general oblivious attitude over this. This is the point he made: you, not your one single post. Fine I apologise, but I believe I am owed apologies from various people here who have turned it into personal attacks, just because I disagree with them. Perhaps subconsciously my wording has become hostile because that's the environment we're in here at the moment. Seriously, it feels to me, and I know it is seen that way by many others here, that I am constantly being mistreated and insulted here just because I believe Nintendo aren't doomed. Edited January 21, 2014 by Serebii
Recommended Posts