What would be so terrible about Nintendo going third party on consoles?

#91Jacob46719Posted 5/2/2013 3:04:42 PM
Fox133 posted...
I don't see anything but positives if Nintendo decided to go 3rd party for consoles.

+ Their games would reach a much wider audience.

+ We wouldn't have to spend hundreds of dollars to buy Nintendo hardware just to play Nintendo games.

+ Online features for Nintendo games would be greatly improved and there would be more players online.

+ On the hardware side they could focus solely on handhelds and make a wonderful handheld system.

I'm sure there are more positives that I can't think of. I'm not saying Nintendo is in any kind of financial trouble, but going 3rd party would benefit us gamers greatly.


They have years to go. At least as many as the other 2 companies.
---
Currently Playing: Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword, Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask, 007 Legends, StarCraft 2, SM3DL, Luigi's Mansion: Dark Moon
#92El_ZaggyPosted 5/2/2013 3:05:39 PM
nintendo going 3rd party would actually be great.

They would try to force the damn gimmick gameplay of their own consoles (motion controls, tablet gameplay) . its arrogant.

They be concentrating their money on making games instead of making gimmick consoles.

better game qualityu overall with less restrain due to their own old hardware.
#93eternalblue02Posted 5/2/2013 3:47:08 PM
Nothing, I've missed out on a lot of games franchises I grew up with. I would welcome it with open arms.
#94zoogelioPosted 5/2/2013 4:45:47 PM
Less competition is *always* bad. Now, I'm sure there's some point where having so many competitors... each new competitor doesn't really add much, but I think a three console market is much more dynamic than a two console market. Look at how much Sony & Microsoft responded to Nintendo in this past gen.

Nintendo said back when the Wii launched, they realized going the more power route (the PS3/360 route) wouldn't bring them success because it was more of the same, so they opted to be dramatically different. The power crowd will always look down on Nintendo as inferior, for kids, etc. A powerful Nintendo console will not win them over. Seriously, look at the hate for Nintendo. The Wii U forum is mired in it (3DS forum here doesn't seem dominated by it). These people may hate Nintendo consoles more than they like their very own console (reminds me of some sports fans, hate their bitter rival more than they like their team). How many extra people would they gain in sales by making games for Playstation # or Xbox ###? Sure, there's at least a little bit extra, but the same could be said for Playstation or Xbox exclusives going multi-platform and being on a Nintendo console (e.g. Halo on Wii). For one's argument to be effective about a third-party Nintendo, they would have to show there is a large base of potential buyers which is *deterred* by Nintendo exclusivity (people who are PS or Xbox diehards but whom really want to play Mario, Zelda). I always find it odd people demand multi-platform from Nintendo but don't do the same for the other console's exclusives.

From what I've seen of sporadic monthly sales figures from the Sixth Gen, a lot of people held off on buying the Gamecube who wanted it (pretty good sales even years later for the Mario, Luigi, Zelda, Metroid games). That was a generation as I noted elsewhere which was utterly dominated by one console overwhelmingly (NES, PS2 dominated a greater percentage of their gen than PS1, Wii, SNES & Genesis dominated theirs). Unless there is a must-have console that so totally wraps things up, generally the people who want a Nintendo console will get it at the time they want it (money and other concerns notwithstanding).


Now, the Wii U launched rather weak and holiday sales... weren't they decent? It's the post-holiday sales that tanked (suggesting the initial demand was met and everyone else who might want it is waiting for more games). 3DS is booming even more than the DS, which was a huge success.

And Nintendo is one of the last holdouts from that earlier time in video games, before it became a huge industry. They take pride in having control over the platforms their games are on, of being a hardware & software developer. Sony's first-party games are just what the giant can buy up. It's not quite homegrown. Sega went third-party due to a series of bad decisions and bleeding money over years (there's a great multi-page article about that from 2003 or 2004 somewhere IIRC). How well has Sega been doing since then? What kind of stature do they have now? How about Sonic? All their fellow hardware & first-party software developers from the past have very low profiles now (Sega, SNK, Hudson/NEC).
#95Lelouch71Posted 5/2/2013 5:39:27 PM
Fox133 posted...
I'm sure there are more positives that I can't think of. I'm not saying Nintendo is in any kind of financial trouble, but going 3rd party would benefit us gamers greatly.


Correction it would benefit lazy bastards who think they are too good to buy a Nintendo console but they want to whine and complain about not being able to play them. This seems to be the case with people who keep creating these threads.
---
"Your arms are too short to box with God!"
#961shadetail1Posted 5/2/2013 5:48:59 PM
1shadetail1 posted...
Right now, Nintendo can't be ignored, no matter what anyone wants to claim. They have an entire gaming platform of their own and that gives them influence. If they suddenly start releasing their games on other platforms, all that influence just disappears. Even if they continue making hardware, their platforms really will be ignorable at that point.

If that happens, a huge portion of their income will suddenly dry up. Also, a lot of Nintendo employees will lose their jobs. On top of that, the hardware manufacturers they contract with will, at best, see reduced cash-flow, and maybe see their Nintendo contracts disappear entirely. That, in turn, will have a ripple effect on their own operations and employees. And so on and so forth.

There is nothing good that would come from this.

---
Religion is like spaghetti: either stiff and fragile, or wet and limp.
#97RecinoPosted 5/2/2013 5:53:55 PM
Okay let's look at this from a business perspective.

What is the purpose of a business, any business: the purpose is to get money. They get money by giving value to the customer. So how does Nintendo get money? Well, yes, they do get it from games they develop, and thats pretty good. But Nintendo also gets money from selling consoles.

Why do companies do console exclusives? They need to have a game that makes the gamer say, "I gota' have that console!"

Let's imagine a world where there are no console exclusives. In this world one company would have a monopoly on the console market, and probably the handheld as well. Why? Because if all consoles have the same games, then we would only get one, and it would be the one that has the best hardware, or the perceived best hardware. This has happened with Blu-ray vs HD DVD, VHS vs Betamax, the list goes on and on.

Now from the consumer's perspective, some would say sign me up! But from the business point-of-view, this is going to drain more money than it will generate.

And you can't think that Sony or Microsoft is guiltless of console exclusivity; they are very guilty. So even if you get 90% of all games for both consoles, that 10% is what they need for your repeat business. And clearly it is working, you want Nintendo games, but you don't want to buy Nintendo consoles.

As for the controller issue, you do realize that Nintendo's "whacky controller gimmick" is actually to support there games. So for those games it's not a gimmick, it's the way the game is played. The Wii U tablet was made specifically for the Zelda team; they requested it. But now Nintendo is going to find interesting ways to use that tablet to play their first party exclusives. While I'm sure that playing SSBM is the same with an XboX or a Gamecube controller, if you try to play skyward sword with anything but a Wiimote, you will be miserable.

And if Nintendo was on other consoles they would have to release peripherals to play their games, which would drive their sales down.

So at the end it is because the company wants to keep sales up high. Stinks for the consumer, but it makes sense.
---
Slow down, buddy! Just because people can read it doesn't mean it isn't crap!
#98TaplampPosted 5/2/2013 6:05:19 PM
trenken posted...
CHAINMAILLEKID posted...
Uh... Nintendo games wouldn't be the same without nintendo hardware.

.


Apparently this guy doesnt think Nintendo could make amazing games for systems that are much more powerful. Derp.

Dont know about you, but I sure wouldnt mind a Zelda game where you could run around Hyrule field with dymanic wind and weather, the wind blowing every individual blade of grass, snow realistically building on the ground.

Possibly on the PS4. Not possible on the U. Need an hardcore amount of memory to deal with stuff like that, an area where the U is far behind the times.

Instead we will get an HD version of Skyward Sword. Thrilling stuff after a 4 or 5 year wait.


I feel that people with this opinion are not gamers, they are escapists.

You care more about how realistic a system can render grass or snow than the fun novelty of a unique piece of hardware? A gamer wants to play a game, an escapist wants a false reality created outside of their own.

I think this is sad.
---
UponADarkThorne: When I was a kid, I didn't hate the kid with Sega and he didn't hate me, I'd go over to his home to play Sonic, he'd come over to play Mario.
#99DorotimusWitikPosted 5/2/2013 6:08:46 PM(edited)
x2link777 posted...
As I posted in another topic, this is one of the 2 scenarios I'd most prefer(the other being them going solely portable market only, as they actually get a fair bit of 3rd party support there, and lets face it, there isn't much competition). Frankly, even though I can see and understand the point of view against it, in the end,Nintendo going 3rd party would be he best for everyone AS LONG as they keep full creative rights on their IPS. There's really no downside at all that can't be argued strongly against, and plenty of positives such an event would bring.

Frankly, despite my initial liking the system, the ultimate realization that I have a $300 system that at best will have about 10-15 good worthwhile games on it through its life. Nintendo makes most of my favorite game series, but the fact that most are years apart between releases(a good thing, don't get me wrong, gives them much time to make a GOOD game) coupled with the fact that since N64, it's literally buying Nintendo SOLELY for Nintendo in console terms, means dropping $300-400+ every five or so years just for a handful of games, AS well as a PS4+ or XBOX and onwards.. And frankly, I'm at the point were I just can't justify it much more no mater how good their games are, and given the Wii U's abysmal performance, I'm far from alone in that.


Frankly frankly frankly frankly frankly frankly frankly.

--------------

Here's what I worry about. If Nintendo doesn't have to put together really great games to sell systems, they'll start phoning it in like SEGA did for a long time after they stopped doing hardware. Less experimentation, less effort putting together games that are high cost to them in the short term, but sell systems, and more cheaply made games that sell tons like New Super Mario Bros. (and don't get me wrong, I like NSMBU, but if that's all I got out of Nintendo because it's what's most profitable to them, I'd get pretty frustrated).
#100TaplampPosted 5/3/2013 8:50:51 AM
100th post I feel so special!
---
UponADarkThorne: When I was a kid, I didn't hate the kid with Sega and he didn't hate me, I'd go over to his home to play Sonic, he'd come over to play Mario.