Should Nintendo go 3rd party?!

[Agent Gibbs]

In 2013, Nintendo changed. Their management changed. They increased their workforce considerably and even have a new building. We won't see the results of these things until the latter half of this year.

 

It's also worth noting that whatever Iwata announces on the 30th isn't "rushed in the past two weeks" as people will undoubtedly say, but has been in the works for months.

 

Now that is a fair point they have been expanding recently and wewon't see the change of this for a while yet

[Goron_3]

I'm surprised that people are comparing Sega to Nintendo, because Sega were in HUGE debts, even when the Sega Genesis was at its peak. Ultimately, going 3rd party was there only option because they had severe cash flow problems.

Edited January 20, 2014 by Retro_Link

[Wii]

This whole discussion is horse $h!t, pie in the sky talk. Nintendo are not going 3rd party and should not go 3rd party. It is bad in the long run, it would result in a massive streamlining and reduction in staff and number of games. Think it's bad now waiting for the next iteration of a franchise, go 3rd party and some franchises would be permanently buried. Nintendo have as much chance of going 3rd party as Sony or Microsoft for that matter. All 3 companies have their problems, it's just the limelight is always more focused on the home consoles market. Nintendo are worth as much as Sony, Vita is in the toilet yet I don't see a thread saying Sony should go 3rd party. Why not? Well I for one couldn't give a damn about Sony but I'd imagine many a Sony fanboy would wet their pants if Nintendo games turned up on their system.

 

Nintendo can compete on a technical level, it's just they choose not too and it's to their detriment that they don't. Next time, cop on and get it right Nintendo. Not a very cohesive post but it'll do.

[Happenstance]

This whole discussion is horse $h!t, pie in the sky talk. Nintendo are not going 3rd party and should not go 3rd party. It is bad in the long run, it would result in a massive streamlining and reduction in staff and number of games. Think it's bad now waiting for the next iteration of a franchise, go 3rd party and some franchises would be permanently buried. Nintendo have as much chance of going 3rd party as Sony or Microsoft for that matter. All 3 companies have their problems, it's just the limelight is always more focused on the home consoles market. Nintendo are worth as much as Sony, Vita is in the toilet yet I don't see a thread saying Sony should go 3rd party. Why not? Well I for one couldn't give a damn about Sony but I'd imagine many a Sony fanboy would wet their pants if Nintendo games turned up on their system.

 

Nintendo can compete on a technical level, it's just they choose not too and it's to their detriment that they don't. Next time, cop on and get it right Nintendo. Not a very cohesive post but it'll do.

 

There is a thread about Sony going third party, its in the general gaming section.

[Ealdst]

I've been thinking about this a bit recently since it came up in the Wii U thread, and there is part of me that wouldn't mind seeing Nintendo go second party with Sony. I do think Sony would allow them to create the games they want, without needing to resort to annual updates of the same thing as some have suggested on here. Also give Nintendo a role in developing their handheld market, so we get the best of the Playstation brand home consoles and Nintendo handhelds, all with the same Nintendo games we love, complete third party support and the need to only buy 1 home console.

[Wii]

There is a thread about Sony going third party, its in the general gaming section.

 

O.k. sorry. I'd go make a contribution in that thread but I couldn't give a f### if Sony live or die. That's how much I care about them. Same applies to Microsoft. I hear they've a couple of worthwhile franchises each e.g. Uncharted and Halo. Ignorance is bliss but absolutely nothing on the scale of Nintendo. That's why Sony and Microsoft fanboys would love to see that treasure trove on their respective consoles.

[flameboy]

O.k. sorry. I'd go make a contribution in that thread but I couldn't give a f### if Sony live or die. That's how much I care about them. Same applies to Microsoft. I hear they've a couple of worthwhile franchises each e.g. Uncharted and Halo. Ignorance is bliss but absolutely nothing on the scale of Nintendo. That's why Sony and Microsoft fanboys would love to see that treasure trove on their respective consoles.

 

I think what you forget is there are plenty of younger games out there and to them Sony are their Nintendo. Got into gaming during the PlayStation era and have grown from there with nostalgia attached to those franchises (more than w couple).. So to dismiss it out of hand isn't right to me.

 

Not one of the big three platform holders started as anything resembling a "gaming company" (admittedly a product of being older companies) they all have as much of a right to be a part of this industry.

[Wii]

I think what you forget is there are plenty of younger games out there and to them Sony are their Nintendo. Got into gaming during the PlayStation era and have grown from there with nostalgia attached to those franchises (more than w couple).. So to dismiss it out of hand isn't right to me.

 

Not one of the big three platform holders started as anything resembling a "gaming company" (admittedly a product of being older companies) they all have as much of a right to be a part of this industry.

 

That's true. I know I'm generalising but imagine their nostalgia in 20 years. "Remember the good old days of Call Of Duty and FIFA"? That will be true for a lot of them. I'll take Super Metroid and A Link To The Past over that any day.

 

I feel Nintendo have more right than the other 2. I don't remember them back in 1983 with the Sony Playnothing and Microsoft Xzema. Nintendo along with Atari created this strand of gaming.

Edited January 20, 2014 by Retro_Link
Automerged Doublepost

[flameboy]

Not true, I'm perfectly calm. I may be Nintendo only but I'm certainly not a fanboy. I give Nintendo plenty a kicking when they deserve it as many people on this board will attest to and they need the almightiest kick in the b@ll@x right now. Nintendo are in a bad way at the moment but it's nowhere near irreversible.The Wii U is a write off. I said so before it even launched. The first time I ever said that about any Nintendo console and got ripped to pieces for saying it. Well look what's come to pass. This discussion is pure fantasy, it's not happening. The End. If they screw up their next console then maybe we can reopen this discussion.

 

 

 

That's true. I know I'm generalising but imagine their nostalgia in 20 years. "Remember the good old days of Call Of Duty and FIFA"? That will be true for a lot of them. I'll take Super Metroid and A Link To The Past over that any day.

 

I feel Nintendo have more right than the other 2. I don't remember them back in 1983 with the Sony Playnothing and Microsoft Xzema. Nintendo along with Atari created this strand of gaming.

 

But then the players who remember CODs better days would pick that over Super Metroid.

 

Also I'm pretty sure Atari (and others granted) felt the same when Nintendo muscled its way into the industry and look where they are now.

[lostmario]

Most likely scenario is Nintendo will drop support for the Wii U in late 2014 / early 2015 after Zelda is released and concentrate on the 3DS.

 

Only when they lose the handheld market completely, will they consider going 3rd party.

 

If they did go 3rd party and its a big IF, they would probably do something similar to what Sega did and split their franchises between Microsoft, Sony and probably by then Apple.

 

Imagine the bidding war for exclusivity rights to Mario, Pokemon & Zelda.

[Wii]

I think if things get a little hairy, I could see a merger and I hate to say it but most likely with Sony. I don't know why people assume they'll go down the same path as Sega, there are other options.

[Serebii]

I think if things get a little hairy, I could see a merger and I hate to say it but most likely with Sony. I don't know why people assume they'll go down the same path as Sega, there are other options.

I don't see that as happening. Even though the PS4 is doing well, Sony as a company is circling the drain. A merger should be the furthest thing from their minds at the moment.

[Wii]

I don't see that as happening. Even though the PS4 is doing well, Sony as a company is circling the drain. A merger should be the furthest thing from their minds at the moment.

 

I'm not talking about tomorrow, I meant years down the line. Who knows what will happen? I just think Nintendo would prefer to focus on a platform than be scattered all over the place and a merger with a Japanese company would make more sense than any other part of the world e.g. language, staff, buildings, relocation, etc. Could be Panasonic, who knows, gaming mightn't even exist. Well not as we know it. Does anyone have a crystal ball? I can't find mine.

[Agent Gibbs]

I don't see that as happening. Even though the PS4 is doing well, Sony as a company is circling the drain. A merger should be the furthest thing from their minds at the moment.

 

No thats right, but what were are saying is that IF the PS4 saves Sony and they recover,THEN IF nintendo did g down, Sony would be the most likely option given their previous relationship, and their joint heritage in the East

 

MS wouldn't even be considered IF it ever got to that stage

 

but like i said this is all dependent on if things go right for Sony and terrible wrong for Nintendo

 

 

and before anyoneclumpsme in with the "wanting nintendo to go third party" crowd, I'm just saying if it got to that stage i'd prefer Sony - what i want is in the WiiU thread - rebrand, remarket,churn games out, shorten lifespan and produce successor in 2015

Edited January 19, 2014 by Agent Gibbs

[pratty]

I don't like the idea of Nintendo doing third party. So if Mario and Zelda etc are on the PS4 and Xbox One we get ever so slightly better graphics, standard controllers and generally less scope for innovation? I don't see how that makes the games better. If this had happend last gen we'd have missed out the unique features that the Wii provided for gameplay such as with Skyward Sword, Wii sports, FPSs etc.

 

Loads of people love Nintendo and their franchises - it's the Wii U that they have the problem with.

 

I'm not so sure, if they love Nintendo's games why don't they invest in a Wii-U? It's not like the Wii-U is totally unplayable or the games look like crap. If games like GTA 5 were Wii-U exclusive I'm sure the Wii-U would sell way more. I don't think the hardware is really the problem, I just think many gamers simply prefer other types of games like GTA, to games like Mario. You hear it all the time from people, how they've "moved on/grown up from Mario/Nintendo."

 

Personally I don't really understand it, I think all these core gamers must just be insecure or something. If you're such a "hardcore gamer" how can you be so dismissive of critically acclaimed games like Mario 3D World? Generally pink balls of fluff don't appeal to me, but Kirby's Epic Yarn got rave reviews as being a FUN game, so I picked it up.

 

Of course some are curious about nintendo games but just not to extent that they'll buy another console. Seems to me most people just want Nintendo to go third party so it saves them buying multiple consoles. People will just have to accept the fact that Nintendo want to make their own hardware to they can dictate the gameplay experience that their software will offer. If the market ignores them they'll just try something new, and it they ever genuinely come close to going under, they'll probably just be a bit more conservaitive and more in line with the industry status quo while they steady the ship.

[Serebii]

Quote of the month there. Early contender for the year but it's only January. I'll get back to you. Nintendo must be screwed so because wait who do they only concentrate on? As a Nintendo only owner, I'm not allowed have a say? Right, where's my bag? Bull$h!t!!! I'm well aware of what they do and how they perform, I just don't own their consoles.

 

Only the Wii U is screwed anyway. As I listed earlier, Nintendo's financial woes this year come from the fact they have expanded and obviously the impact of those expansions have yet to come.

$135m extra in R&D, beyond the budget.

Extra staff, think I read they hired around 1,000 new people last year, though I can't remember where. They have definitely been hiring in Japan, however.

New R&D building.

All these add up. I mean hell, Sony selling one building added $685million to their operating income last year, which made them no longer look like they were about to go bankrupt. It goes to show what an impact just one single thing can do.

 

No thats right, but what were are saying is that IF the PS4 saves Sony and they recover,THEN IF nintendo did g down, Sony would be the most likely option given their previous relationship, and their joint heritage in the East

 

MS wouldn't even be considered IF it ever got to that stage

 

but like i said this is all dependent on if things go right for Sony and terrible wrong for Nintendo

 

 

and before anyoneclumpsme in with the "wanting nintendo to go third party" crowd, I'm just saying if it got to that stage i'd prefer Sony - what i want is in the WiiU thread - rebrand, remarket,churn games out, shorten lifespan and produce successor in 2015

 

Agreed. For Nintendo polish, they have to focus on one platform. Working on both would cause disparity in performance, and so they'd have to go to one. They'd go to Sony.

 

Of course, that won't happen. Should the worst happen, and Iwata gets removed and replaced, much like with Square Enix, the new CEO will want to go to "where the money" is to please investors and that's smartphones, not dedicated games devices.

[Goron_3]

Only the Wii U is screwed anyway. As I listed earlier, Nintendo's financial woes this year come from the fact they have expanded and obviously the impact of those expansions have yet to come.

$135m extra in R&D, beyond the budget.

Extra staff, think I read they hired around 1,000 new people last year, though I can't remember where. They have definitely been hiring in Japan, however.

New R&D building.

All these add up. I mean hell, Sony selling one building added $685million to their operating income last year, which made them no longer look like they were about to go bankrupt. It goes to show what an impact just one single thing can do.

 

 

 

Agreed. For Nintendo polish, they have to focus on one platform. Working on both would cause disparity in performance, and so they'd have to go to one. They'd go to Sony.

 

Of course, that won't happen. Should the worst happen, and Iwata gets removed and replaced, much like with Square Enix, the new CEO will want to go to "where the money" is to please investors and that's smartphones, not dedicated games devices.

 

That's not the role of a CEO though. The Nintendo board as a whole decide the future strategy of the company and the CEO is responsible for rolling it out; if the CEO disagrees with the strategy there's fuck all he can do one it's board approved.

[Serebii]

That's not the role of a CEO though. The Nintendo board as a whole decide the future strategy of the company and the CEO is responsible for rolling it out; if the CEO disagrees with the strategy there's fuck all he can do one it's board approved.

And yet Iwata is being blamed for all the woes of Nintendo. Fascinating how these things work

[Goron_3]

And yet Iwata is being blamed for all the woes of Nintendo. Fascinating how these things work

 

He's being blamed as he is the one ultimately responsible as the direction and strategy he set alongside the board was completely misguided, which he himself has admitted to.

 

During the Wii era, he didn't realise several things:

1. The rise and accessability of smart phone/tablets.

2. The difficult of HD development.

3. The lack of new, diverse, western I.P was hurting their image to western gamers.

 

The 1st and 3rd points are items HE should have put onto the agenda of those meetings and he should have encouraged some serious market research into what gamers actually want. Yes, the overall strategy is a combination of the board and their wishes/desire however the CEO must actively be leading the organisation and getting things prepared for the companies next era. Iwata was not prepared, hence he is being held responsible. Nintendo based their Wii U decisions on the wrong information.

 

Anyway, that's business 101 for you (from the point of view of someone who has been involved in creating the strategy for huge organisation).

[khilafah]

I don't like the idea of Nintendo doing third party. So if Mario and Zelda etc are on the PS4 and Xbox One we get ever so slightly better graphics, standard controllers and generally less scope for innovation?

 

why the hate for standard controllers?

 

The lack of buzz for Wii U and the high sales of PS4 and xbox one shows that people are perfectly happy with standard controllers and dont need some gimmick controller. Nintendo's innovation should be in their games. Thats where nintendo's magic is, not in a special controller that nobody else does.

 

I hope nintendo go back to a standard controller with the next console. This idea that you have to bring something different is BS. Have people forgot that nintendo have made great consoles with standard controllers.

 

Also even with the Wii U gamepad I am not seeing much innovation going on. People love to bring the argument that without the gamepad the Wii U is no different from PS3/360.

 

I would argue that with the gamepad the Wii U is no different to the 360/PS3. The gamepad is not bringing all this fantastic innovation that the competition does not bring.

Edited January 19, 2014 by khilafah

[Wii]

why the hate for standard controllers?

 

The lack of buzz for Wii U and the high sales of PS4 and xbox one shows that people are perfectly happy with standard controllers and dont need some gimmick controller. Nintendo's innovation should be in their games. Thats where nintendo's magic is, not in a special controller that nobody else does.

 

I hope nintendo go back to a standard controller with the next console. This idea that you have to bring something different is BS. Have people forgot that nintendo have made great consoles with standard controllers.

 

Also even with the Wii U gamepad I am not seeing much innovation going on. People love to bring the argument that without the gamepad the Wii U is no different from PS3/360.

 

I would argue that with the gamepad the Wii U is no different to the 360/PS3. The gamepad is not bringing all this fantastic innovation that the competition does not bring.

 

The Wii remote is brilliant for certain franchises. Call Of Duty, PES, Tiger Woods and Skyward Sword (hate the game but the controls are great). I never ever ever want to play a FPS with dual analogue again. It's wrong, absolutely wrong. Yes standard controllers are irreplaceable but they're not the be all end all.

[Serebii]

I argue that the GamePad enhances gameplay in its simplest use, too. Sure it doesn't make it amazingly new and awesome, but I struggle to go back to "standard" controllers these days, due to the ease of access to things like maps/inventory.

 

He's being blamed as he is the one ultimately responsible as the direction and strategy he set alongside the board was completely misguided, which he himself has admitted to.

 

During the Wii era, he didn't realise several things:

1. The rise and accessability of smart phone/tablets.

2. The difficult of HD development.

3. The lack of new, diverse, western I.P was hurting their image to western gamers.

 

The 1st and 3rd points are items HE should have put onto the agenda of those meetings and he should have encouraged some serious market research into what gamers actually want. Yes, the overall strategy is a combination of the board and their wishes/desire however the CEO must actively be leading the organisation and getting things prepared for the companies next era. Iwata was not prepared, hence he is being held responsible. Nintendo based their Wii U decisions on the wrong information.

 

Anyway, that's business 101 for you (from the point of view of someone who has been involved in creating the strategy for huge organisation).

 

Exactly, and that actually furthers the point I made about a new CEO.

[pratty]

why the hate for standard controllers?

 

I'm not hating on standard controllers, I'm just saying if a game like Zelda goes back to a standard contoller then what does Sony or Microsoft have to offer other than slightly better graphics. And what's to stop Nintendo matching them graphically with their next console? I don't see how it benefits a game like that to be on a Sony or Microsoft console. Skyard Sword wouldn't have been the innovative gameplay experience it was on the PS3 or 360 without the Wii hardware.

 

Nintendo think outside the box when it comes to hardware, and I think that's good, it offers something different and it can lead to developments that improve gaming that could even become standard. I don't think you really get that to the same extent from Sony or Microsoft.

 

As it happens compared to the Wiimote I think the Wii-U Pad is a pretty clear concession to developers and the gamer who prefers a standard controller, not to mention there is infact a standard controller available for the Wii-U.

 

I agree so far the Wii-U pad hasn't innovated to a large degree and that's disappointing (although not every game needs to use the screen, it's an option), but at least the potential to do so is there, developers have more options and scope for creativity. Remember this video, lots of ideas and creativity here:

Edited January 19, 2014 by pratty

[Cube]

I'm not hating on standard controllers, I'm just saying if a game like Zelda goes back to a standard contoller then what does Sony or Microsoft have to offer other than slightly better graphics.

 

If the next Zelda uses the Wii Remote, I'd probably scream.

 

Standard controls (with GamePad inventory management and motion aiming, like Wind Waker HD) is the perfect way to play Zelda.

 

Edit: Same for if they make a new Metroid Prime. Wii Remote controls could be an option, but I'd want to play it with dual analogue.

Edited January 19, 2014 by Cube

[Goron_3]

I argue that the GamePad enhances gameplay in its simplest use, too. Sure it doesn't make it amazingly new and awesome, but I struggle to go back to "standard" controllers these days, due to the ease of access to things like maps/inventory.

 

 

 

Exactly, and that actually furthers the point I made about a new CEO.

 

No, because only an idiot would present papers which would say 'The only route is for us is the smart phone route, let's ditch the current strategy'. Give Nintendo some credit, man. Anyway, we're venturing off topic. Please stop serebii'ing.