Only if you don't understand anything about businesses. I can have 1000 billion revenue with 10000 trillion costs, but I could also have just 100 million revenue and 50 million costs. If I were the CEO, I'd know what me and my shareholders would prefer. Especially when going third party opens further revenue streams as the software would be available to a wider audience.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Lets talk about Nintendo going 3rd party (from an economics perspective)
- Thread starter MercuryLS
- Start date
Only if you don't understand anything about businesses. I can have 1000 billion revenue with 10000 trillion costs, but I could also have just 100 million revenue and 50 million costs. If I were the CEO, I'd know what me and my shareholders would prefer. Especially when going third party opens further revenue streams as the software would be available to a wider audience.
How about you explain how their software revenue would grow from going 3rd party since cost from making software certainly isn't going to go down.
Making software for other HD consoles is certainly not going to be cheaper than making software for their platform.
Revenue will go down because they won't have the revenue from 3rd party software and their own software will certainly not rise to the level of offsetting the revenue lost in royalties.
Profit won't grow if you only grow cost and diminish revenue you know.
Mobile is a great to devalue the worth of their product too (although some might argue that they're not worth that much anymore) but it's certainly a stronger case than "lol put games on ps4 for massive profit".
It also closes the hardware revenue stream, decreases software revenue, and has severe initial costs. Oh, and it basically reinvents and devalues the company brand, which is always a scary thing for investors.
And if this hypothetical third-party Nintendo goes Sony-exclusive, as some deluded people think it should, then it closes off even more potential revenue streams. Gamefreak alone guarantees it's a horrible idea.
The fun part about the Hardware part is that it only closes the revenue stream, the cost of R&D, dev and everything will certainly be there in the short/medium term (who knows in what FY they intend to pass on current R&D too).
The workforce working on HW will have to be retrained or let go.
It also changes the corporate culture which may lead to even more talent being lost.
Then again if you think the HW part is the thing that need to go you probably don't value half of the workforce or something...
Aquamarine
Member
I think you're the one who doesn't understand anything about businesses....or at the very least, anything about Nintendo.
Going third-party in the short-term would result in INCREDIBLY negative consequences for the company.
Any major investor in Nintendo is not going to demand a shift to third-party in the short-term. Rather, it's how Nintendo can orient their existing models towards profitability and possibly explore new models in accompaniment, not as a replacement.
Some growth at Nintendo for the next two years will most likely be through expansion of hardware-related businesses, including the new quality-of-life business, emerging market expansion of game systems, possibly low-cost hardware, Nintendo's new handheld device to succeed the popular 3DS...things like that. When accompanied with appropriate software / marketing / licensing responses, there's potential for success. Nintendo will have to do it right, but it can work.
You can leverage Nintendo's existing systems in attempt to grow profitability without decimating company culture and employee morale.
5 pages after this? Give it up, you won't get Ninty (including Bayonetta 2) 60 fps games on PS4/Bone anytime soon. Just simply buy a Wii U. Or simply accept the fact that you won't play them and don't.
JordanN
Banned
I'm looking at those revenue numbers and they include both their last and next gen systems. I want to know what Wii U numbers are like, by themselves (the Wii never lost money, the Wii U currently does).
Their home console numbers are also quite a bit less than their handheld (duh). If we had numbers for what revenue a PS4/XBO/PC developer would bring, that would be enough to render keeping the home console useless.
Their home console numbers are also quite a bit less than their handheld (duh). If we had numbers for what revenue a PS4/XBO/PC developer would bring, that would be enough to render keeping the home console useless.
geordiemp
Member
Maybe better quoted as USED to...not making profit for 3 years.
They make money on portable, but I doubt they do on WiiU
geordiemp
Member
The don't have a WiiU profit stream, not made profit in 3 years.
I think the days of gimmicks used to make massive hardware profits for a home console manufacturer are long gone with the wii.
We have had all the gimmicks (waggle, wands / kinects etc) and people have tired of them, its almost gone full circle back to standard controller only (by observing sales in 2013 and 2014).
If people keep living in the past they will fade away eventually.
A lot of folks in this thread seem to be assuming American orthodox business practice as the best way forward (or even the only way forward).
I see something wrong with companies being paid to only think far ahead enough to see the profits of next quarter, who don't see the value of nurturing employees over decades, and who don't value innovation and the failure that naturally comes with it (I thought Silicon Valley "Design Thinking" was hip these days!)
Business and markets are many things, but one thing they are not is deterministic. Things can get shaken up by innovators at any time.
The business philosophies brought forth in some posts represent a world where companies should make FarmVille clones, because it'll improve the next quarter's figures. As a gaming enthusiast, I'm glad other companies with other (and in my opinion better) philosophies are around.
I see something wrong with companies being paid to only think far ahead enough to see the profits of next quarter, who don't see the value of nurturing employees over decades, and who don't value innovation and the failure that naturally comes with it (I thought Silicon Valley "Design Thinking" was hip these days!)
Business and markets are many things, but one thing they are not is deterministic. Things can get shaken up by innovators at any time.
The business philosophies brought forth in some posts represent a world where companies should make FarmVille clones, because it'll improve the next quarter's figures. As a gaming enthusiast, I'm glad other companies with other (and in my opinion better) philosophies are around.
justsomeguy
Member
Anyone signing an exclusive deal with Nintendo would immediately get a whole new userbase.
So why do you think the correct response is to go third party instead of just dropping gimmicks and focusing on other aspects of hardware? Why do you think completely cutting the revenue stream that just recently was more profitable than ever is a good idea?
Also, the idea that gimmicks "died" just because there are no currently high-selling gimmicks for the first time in a while is nonsense. Kinect, Wii, music controllers, and the DS were all massively profitable at one point or another, and the decline of one gimmick did not affect the success of the others. There is no reason to believe no new gimmicks will see widespread approval in the future; Facebook spent a few billion on Occulus Rift for a reason.
JordanN
Banned
That's not true. Sony is Japanese yet I don't know anyone who would say PS4 is a worse business than Xbox One (that isn't completely delusional).
I don't really care what country a company is from. What I am against are dogmatic policies whose sole justification is "we are who we are". Companies can have culture but they should also be open to reason.
Deliberately being obtuse is what lands you stuff like the Wii U right now (or Blackberry. They are Canadian) and I don't see the benefits from that other than reaffirming the beliefs for those who refuse to see better ways of doing business.
Ah, I was being vague. I did not mean the companies are being American, I meant the business practices are. I also didn't mean American in a dichotomous American/Japanese way.
I'm not calling Nintendo's mistakes "Japanese". Nintendo screwed up with the Wii U, and they have to change and innovative now. I'm arguing that's not by following the same philosophy as companies I described above.
Another good post.
It's stupid for a toy maker (or to be more precise an entertainment maker) to get rid of the division that design the hardware.
Nintendo need to think about a product which is cheap to make, have little to no competition (considering also Nintendo expertize) and is in demand.
Easier said than done though
But at the core that's all Nintendo has ever done in all these decades (even predating videogames).
Personally I m wondering who said Nintendo need to do only a configuration ala NES (pad+console body+ tv screen)?
Nintendo going 3rd Party might also mean that their franchises will lose some value. "Why should I buy their handheld stuff when I can have their big games on my console"-thinking...
And they gained a lot of profit with other systems. We can talk about this constellation when there will be 1 or 2 more generations where they struggle real hard.
I guess it is much more rational that they develop kind of a hybrid or just a handheld in the future.
PS: Current japanese sales figures are very shocking by the way, if nothing happens in the next 6-12 months ... :-/
Jack Videogames
Member
I think there's a bigger chance of Nintendo making only handhelds for a while than them becoming a third party software dev, honestly.
You kind of disprove your point here. What will the value of Nintendo's franchises be if they only exist on hardware nobody is buying? As it stands today, Minecraft is more popular that Mario by an enormous amount with Nintendo's younger customer base.
Nintendo not putting their IP on devices people own is a fast track to irrelevancy. I see a lot of the same "heads in sand" in this thread that you would see on Crackberry.com, and all I can do is throw my hands up. Nintendo is bleeding horrific amounts of money; their "traditional" business model is killing them right quick.
I just don't see it.
The new handheld will have the same problems the existing handheld has, expensive software. All I see are further declines as the dedicated handheld market continues to shrink. Low priced hardware? They tried that already with the 2DS, and it had no effect.
QOL? They'll be competing directly with Apple and Google and whoever else. Good fucking luck.
Emerging markets? They're again competing with smartphones and cheap tablets.
Nintendo is very close to becoming completely irrelevant to gaming as a whole. Mobile is growing and is just an all around better bargain, for portable gaming for your average person. In the home space, lets be honest we are about 6 years removed from Nintendo's glory days on Wii and they have almost zero mind share in this space anymore. The younger kid audience they might have been able to hold on to, has eroded away to more creative and connected experiences, Skylanders, Minecraft, Disney Infinity. The casual audience was never coming back for 2nds anyways. All they have left is the die hards, and they are slowly getting tired of the IP churn.
I think we have come to the point where Nintendo can not continue with their current business model, in handhelds or in home console. Their best bet is 3rd party, I hate to say it, but if the keep pumping out gaming only devices that are lacking online features, or lower graphics, they will be irrelevant way sooner rather then later. There best bet is to leverage their software expertise, cut hardware. This way they will at least have people playing their games, into the future.
I think we have come to the point where Nintendo can not continue with their current business model, in handhelds or in home console. Their best bet is 3rd party, I hate to say it, but if the keep pumping out gaming only devices that are lacking online features, or lower graphics, they will be irrelevant way sooner rather then later. There best bet is to leverage their software expertise, cut hardware. This way they will at least have people playing their games, into the future.
shadowsdarknes
Member
That's not true unless Mario games are the only games that Nintendo makes that are profitable.
"Nintendonis becoming less relevant than mobile gaming becauss of graphics and online"
That makes no sense...
You list games that aren't really online and have so so graphics and are still only about as popular as Pokemom is still.
Nintendo are only irrelevant to the "gamers" that refuse to look at anything Nintendo does outside of Mario.
They haven't made money selling video games in three years. They're losing money even though both of their platforms are in what should be the prime of their life. The 3DS is down YOY while releasing some of its most important games. The Wii U is DOA, with no real hope of resuscitation. There are legitimate concerns for nintendo. Your attempt to minimize them is silly. Also, FYI, the PS2 is the highest selling closed gaming platform of all time.
Yep, what I was saying too.
FOCUS is so important. Nintendo is one of the best in the industry at making videogames, they are one of the worst at making platforms. It's like 1+1 = 2 (or 1-1 = 0 in this case)
The Wii made it possible to postpone going software only, but at this point there is no reason for them to make mediocre hardware with a bad ecosystem tacked on top of it.
They need to get those great Nintendo games on all platforms under the sun. PS4, Xbone, PC, Oculus, iOS, Android, whatever. Or they will slowly fade away.
Is this thread still going? Incredible.
Anyway, let me ask all those of you that become so stimulated thinking about Nintendo going third party:
Which was the last original IP Sega made after it left the console market? Where is the Sega Rally, Initial D, House of the Dead, Jet Set Radio, Cosmic Smash, REZ, Puyo Puyo, Virtua Something, Sakura Taisen, ChuChu Rocket, Seaman of this generation, or even the last one? Where is Senmue really? When was the last time a well funded, polished, amazing Sonic game got released? No? not even Sonic?
It seems that going out of the console market means that even the mascot is doomed to get lousy sequels, huh?
Where is Sega Wow? Hit Maker? No? what about Sonic Team? Smilebit? Amusement Vision? Sega Rosso?
I don't know about each and every one of you but my suspicion is that you are either too young to know all these, or never played any Japanese game apart those that Playstation offered you and certainly you are not either Sega or Nintendo fans, because business and sales be damned, the decision to abandon hardware killed Sega and it will most definitely kill Nintendo. Any gamer that likes Nintendo games better start praying it never happens and thinking it will be better for us as gamers is simple-minded simple-mildness.
Anyway, let me ask all those of you that become so stimulated thinking about Nintendo going third party:
Which was the last original IP Sega made after it left the console market? Where is the Sega Rally, Initial D, House of the Dead, Jet Set Radio, Cosmic Smash, REZ, Puyo Puyo, Virtua Something, Sakura Taisen, ChuChu Rocket, Seaman of this generation, or even the last one? Where is Senmue really? When was the last time a well funded, polished, amazing Sonic game got released? No? not even Sonic?
It seems that going out of the console market means that even the mascot is doomed to get lousy sequels, huh?
Where is Sega Wow? Hit Maker? No? what about Sonic Team? Smilebit? Amusement Vision? Sega Rosso?
I don't know about each and every one of you but my suspicion is that you are either too young to know all these, or never played any Japanese game apart those that Playstation offered you and certainly you are not either Sega or Nintendo fans, because business and sales be damned, the decision to abandon hardware killed Sega and it will most definitely kill Nintendo. Any gamer that likes Nintendo games better start praying it never happens and thinking it will be better for us as gamers is simple-minded simple-mildness.
You appear to be confused. This is not the "business and sales be damned" thread. This thread is about business and sales. It's right there in the title.
TheOnePercent
Member
This post is pretty ironic considering your avatar. Perhaps they did not develop Bayonetta internally, but it is their IP. They published a lot of cool new IPs after they went third party.
Also, the Yakuza franchise was created after they went third party, correct?
Since some people have determined they must push a narrative and a pointless hope regardless of facts, common sense and logic. Talk about Nintendo going 3rd party shouldn't even be acknowledge. Even as a what if it should be laughed at not indulged.
TheOnePercent
Member
This is needlessly condescending. There are legitimate concerns with Nintendo's business moving forward.
How do they deal with dwindling console relevance?
How do they deal with their nearly non-existent 3rd party support?
How do they deal with increasing pressure from mobile games in their handheld market?
These will be difficult obstacles to overcome. If they cannot, and if QOL does not succeed enough to prop up the company, 3rd party may have to be the last resort.
Ok, i think i'll elaborate and try to stay on topic, which is talking about what Nintendo has to gain or lose, pretending it actually does not affect us gamers.
Blackberry falling apart means more customers to companies like apple, it is a good thing for apple and the others and bad for blackberry.
In the case of Nintendo it's not whether Nintendo might fall apart because Sega did, it's more like Sega fell apart and look what happened! Now imagine the same happening to Nintendo.
Unlike what people may think Sega's saga has many similarities with what Nintendo is going through at the moment. Not only that, but Sega was in a better position if i may say.
Sega was at the time reigning supreme in the arcades, there's no denying this. They made a lot of money from arcades and the quality of their products was excellent. Even if someone could do a better product, something that was happening anyway, Sega was all about quality, longevity, service and support. Also at the time arcades, unlike now, were very popular.
At the other hand Sega had a home console that was unwanted to say the least, sales were not good, attach rate was not good either, people thought it was expensive for what it does and also they were dazzled with what Sony was promising. You know PS2 wasn't out yet and Sony was bombarding the media with CG quality images and videos claiming they were in-game footage, ofc poor DC could never reach this level of quality.
Gaming magazines and what was the internet back then were all about how they'll better keep their money for the better offer as DC was clearly underpowered and too expensive. They would argue that the controller is cumbersome and that it hosted a gimmick and that PS2 offered the better controller, it all sounded bad for poor Sega.
You know the rest of the story, Sega couldn't support hardware anymore, they became a publisher and with that they lost a lot of talent, both technicians and artists, who saw the sinking ship and left. After GC and the original XBOX came out for a time we were foolish enough to believe that it went ok for Sega, releasing sequels to their past games on former rival consoles and also some arcade ports, but the continued loss of hard income from selling hardware and the constant loss of personnel brought them to their knees, unable to make quality games for their existing IP's anymore and also to invest on research of new IP's and making them spend their own gold-chest to support the company until they had no other option than to sell themselves to a pachinko firm and just continue to publish works from other developers with games developed by them only now and then.
Nintendo now, also has quite a lot of money to support themselves for a time, but exiting the hardware business means that they'll have to lay off almost half their staff, this will be shocking for the rest of the employees that will try to abandon ship to save themselves. The loss of talent combined with the loss of income from hardware will make them create fewer and less diverse games as they will hit with their better known IP's, but in order to actually have any income from fewer games they will be forced to make yearly iterations of the same titles over and over, with limited staff and leaked talent, losing software quality in the process. In the end Nintendo will not be known for excellence but we'll be talking about the 'Mario Circle' every year when the next game is announced, which in turn will lead to the market abandoning them for good.
If by my previous post i was unable to convince you that it's gonna be bad from us, i hope with this one i will convince you that it's bad for Nintendo.
Bayonetta is as much Sega's as the Total War series is, they didn't create any of it, they just published it. Publishing =/= developing.
You are right about Yakuza, it's been so long since we saw one on the West i actually forgot about it, seriously.
Apart from the 3rd one (or replace mobile with psp), welcome to 2005 just before Revolution became Wii and when Nintendo expected Zelda to save the GC.
e: wait what? when was Sega ever in a better position than Nintendo?
e2 : And I love the line of Nintendo is becoming irrelevant, we've got a hardware maker who was on the brink of bankruptcy and another who can't sell its platform to countries where English is not the 1rst language and it's the 3 one who's becoming irrelevant.
Why a last resort? It's just a different business model. Companies must adapt to survive.
there are other ways to adapt than removing an entire division and radically shifting philosophies. you don't lop off an entire arm because it has a nasty scrape.
cheech said:
there's also this sort of overreaction, like nintendo's on the brink of financial ruin. it reminds me of the doomsayers regarding sony's health as a company. things aren't nearly as bad as people think they are, and things will take some time in correcting themselves.
the problems with the wii u and the 3ds aren't that they're nintendo platforms and no one wants those. it's that they're bad video game platforms and no one wants those. they're both confusing messes in terms of production and messaging. nintendo games sell pretty well when they're on devices people want (this actually includes the 3ds too).
Version 3.0
Member
I've said it before - I think Nintendo should not go "third party", but instead partner up with a hardware manufacturer, whether that's Sony, Apple, Amazon, Samsung, or Microsoft.
It wouldn't be a 3rd party royalty-paying situation. It would be an exclusive partnership. They have enough brand power to negotiate a win-win scenario...at this time.
Nintendo has systematically destroyed 3rd party relationships over the last 15 years. And they've equally demonstrated that they can't support their systems alone. They've said time and again that they acknowledge these problems and will fix them...and have not. Anyone who still believes this will ever happen is naive at best.
They've also clearly demonstrated that they are no longer willing to produce anything but sub-par, feature deficient hardware and out-of-date systems (OS/network/user account, etc).
So, they need a partner to fill these roles. Whether that partnership involves the loss of all hardware revenue and royalties, or only some would depend on what deal they make.
But to address the OP: there's no reason to think that the loss in revenue couldn't be offset by the absent R&D costs, and more importantly, profits could most definitely increase.
But it's all fantasy. A Nintendo that's too arrogant to even attempt to fix poor 3rd party relationships, too stupid to invest profits into sufficient expansion of development to properly support its own systems, and too stupid to embrace obvious important trends such as online infrastructure until years after its competition is not going to do anything but go down with its own ship.
It wouldn't be a 3rd party royalty-paying situation. It would be an exclusive partnership. They have enough brand power to negotiate a win-win scenario...at this time.
Nintendo has systematically destroyed 3rd party relationships over the last 15 years. And they've equally demonstrated that they can't support their systems alone. They've said time and again that they acknowledge these problems and will fix them...and have not. Anyone who still believes this will ever happen is naive at best.
They've also clearly demonstrated that they are no longer willing to produce anything but sub-par, feature deficient hardware and out-of-date systems (OS/network/user account, etc).
So, they need a partner to fill these roles. Whether that partnership involves the loss of all hardware revenue and royalties, or only some would depend on what deal they make.
But to address the OP: there's no reason to think that the loss in revenue couldn't be offset by the absent R&D costs, and more importantly, profits could most definitely increase.
But it's all fantasy. A Nintendo that's too arrogant to even attempt to fix poor 3rd party relationships, too stupid to invest profits into sufficient expansion of development to properly support its own systems, and too stupid to embrace obvious important trends such as online infrastructure until years after its competition is not going to do anything but go down with its own ship.
TheOnePercent
Member
That's like saying Wonderful 101 doesn't count as a new Nintendo IP. The publishers greenlight the project and fund its development. It is conceivable that Sega could take Bayonetta to a developer other than Platinum, if they do indeed 100% own the IP.
And yet, those two bumbling companies somehow managed to both outsell the entire Wii U LTD in a matter of weeks. It's doubly embarrassing for Nintendo coming of the astronomical sales of the Wii.
Bayonetta was a part of a 4 game publishing collaboration between Sega and Platinum when platinum taking their first steps as an independent developer was trying to find someone to publish their games.
W101 was a joint effort between Nintendo and Platinum, that even started as a Nintendo all stars action game and evolved to what it is now, Nintendo funded the project and owns the IP.
I really have no idea what you don't understand about Sega having very few developer branches belonging to it atm, developing original Sega IP's or any sequels to existing IP's anyway.
Also about the other comment, i'd love to see some solid numbers about how many consoles MS has sold to customers until this very day, because i think they still haven't reached WiiU's numbers yet and the even sadder thing is that in many countries that aren't USA or UK the WiiU has larger install bases still. XBOXOne is one big failure and as time goes by it will be even more obvious compared to PS4, and you know what? I don't feel good about it. I prefer strong players that have to do R&D to compete resulting to the evolution of the medium than one platform playing ball alone. That separates a gamer from a fanboy.
Just read three pages of a thread, where all the relevant information was contained in John Harker's Post 3 and Aquamarine's post 20.
What happens if Nintendo gets out of hardware? Well, they have to immediately get rid of their hardware division that has no worth to anyone except for Nintendo - immediately taking a huge loss on what used to be a gigantic asset on their books. They also fire all the staff involved in marketing and distributing hardware. So long employee morale.
Alright, cool, now, let's make some video games, third party Nintendo! Better do it quick, too - you're not making any money from royalties anymore, you're pretty much on your own. Oh, crap, none of your employees have the necessary skills to publish on other platforms, whether that's iOS or XBone/PS4. I guess you could fire them all and bring in new folks, or you could spend lots of money getting them up to speed. Anyway, time's a tickin', you report your results quarterly.
Now, release those games! And remember, now you have to pay platform fees, so your income from software sales is significantly lower than it used to be. Now all you have to do is pray you didn't pick a dud of a platform to release your game on, and that the audience you've never, ever cultivated will buy up your game instead of DudeBro 3: Finally Ready to Shoot/Slice. Because, well, you know what happens when a software developer has too many bombs (sometimes just one!), and they don't have any other revenue stream to fall back on. They cease to exist. Maybe they could become EA Kyoto for a while, before Papa EA took them on a long walk eventually.
What happens if Nintendo gets out of hardware? Well, they have to immediately get rid of their hardware division that has no worth to anyone except for Nintendo - immediately taking a huge loss on what used to be a gigantic asset on their books. They also fire all the staff involved in marketing and distributing hardware. So long employee morale.
Alright, cool, now, let's make some video games, third party Nintendo! Better do it quick, too - you're not making any money from royalties anymore, you're pretty much on your own. Oh, crap, none of your employees have the necessary skills to publish on other platforms, whether that's iOS or XBone/PS4. I guess you could fire them all and bring in new folks, or you could spend lots of money getting them up to speed. Anyway, time's a tickin', you report your results quarterly.
Now, release those games! And remember, now you have to pay platform fees, so your income from software sales is significantly lower than it used to be. Now all you have to do is pray you didn't pick a dud of a platform to release your game on, and that the audience you've never, ever cultivated will buy up your game instead of DudeBro 3: Finally Ready to Shoot/Slice. Because, well, you know what happens when a software developer has too many bombs (sometimes just one!), and they don't have any other revenue stream to fall back on. They cease to exist. Maybe they could become EA Kyoto for a while, before Papa EA took them on a long walk eventually.
I think what we can at least gather is that Nintendo's back would have to be completely for the wall for this to be a possibility, and that just hasn't happened yet. Nintendo won't have it's back completely to the wall financially for at least another several years. Nintendo would probably have to continually fuck up from here through 2020.
But I will agree that, suppose this did happen and Nintendo did imply the intent of some partnership with another platform holder, Sony and Microsoft would probably bend over backwards to get it.
But I will agree that, suppose this did happen and Nintendo did imply the intent of some partnership with another platform holder, Sony and Microsoft would probably bend over backwards to get it.
but there's a huge audience they're not releasing games for that secretly likes nintendo games trust me
There is no audience in this earth that continuously skips games they like for years waiting for the platform owner to go third party.
Except ofc if... is that sarcasm AniHawk?
TheOnePercent
Member
I don't see how the two are different. Do you think Bayonetta was made without any of Sega's involvement, and they just slapped their name on the box at the end? What about all those references to Sega games in Bayonetta, just a coincidence?
I'm perfectly aware that Sega is not the company they once were. They were unexpectedly forced to change their business model. Considering all that, I would say they've done a pretty good job creating or funding new IPs, and updating their old IPs. House of the Dead: Overkill was amazing. They made a sequel to NiGHTS for crying out out loud! Yeah, they aren't making Shenmue 3, but can you really blame them?
I may be incorrect about the Xbox number, but if it hasn't passed the Wii U yet, it is darn close. And to call it a failure is a bit extreme, although it's definitely not where Microsoft wants it to be.
I agree, but the question is if Nintendo has the infrastructure to remain a strong player against mega-corporations like Sony and Microsoft.
Edit: I should also include Apple, Amazon, and Google on the list of dystopian mega-corps.
Apophis2036
Banned
I dont believe we would have Bayonetta 2, X, W101, Fire Emblem,Sin and Punishment, Kid Icarus,Xenoblade, , Last Story,Metroid,some localizations etc. without Nintendo systems.
Those games were funded for a reason, what would be the point of making them for another system? they are too risky Nintendo doesnt operate in a bubble and they would publish less games.
Why not though ?, Nintendo could still make, fund or publish these games, except they would be on a non Nintendo console which would give them a much larger potential audience to sell to.
Being freed from the "we better just make 2D Mario, 3D Mario, 2D DKC, MK, Smash and Zelda as people bought the console just to play them" would free Nintendo to experiment even more with some of their older titles and the new larger audience and more powerful hardware might actually inspire their teams to create new IP.
As the OP said siding with either Sony or MS instead of both could yield very interesting results. In an effort to get Nintendo games as exclusives on their system both companies would be offering all sorts of terms including significantly reducing the usual third party software charge to release a game for their systems or even eliminating it altogether. Nintendo would in effect be making just as much money selling their games on PS4/XBone as they do selling their games on their own hardware.
Then there are the issue Nintendo struggle with the most... marketing. Both Sony and MS have shown that they know exactly what they are doing in terms of advertising both software and hardware. Combine that better marketing with a much larger install base and you have much better software sales.
Where did I say WiiU was "shit" ?. I would simply much rather just use one system to play all the future games I'm interested in. Being forced to mess around with the WiiU gamepad even when I use the pro controller is a real pain in the ass to me, as is the shockingly awful battery life.
And why its always the PS4? how would you feel if Nintendo made games exclusively to the Xbox One, or a more powerful system in a few years? just asking.
I wouldn't care, I was simply using PS4 as an example of the kind of visuals they could produces PS4's GPU is a full generational leap in power of it, 10x.
I don't see another future for Nintendo outside of becoming a third party developer / publisher in terms of the home console market. To have a successful modern console you need up to date hardware and good third party relations and I don't believe Nintendo will ever have either.
If they were smart they wouldn't waste another $2-$3 billion on R&D for another home console and instead just start making games for PS4/XBone or both. Combine that with selling their older titles on iOS/Android and the company would be making Wii/DS like profits within a couple of years.
It seems to me that some Nintendo fans / company management would rather see the company go under than live to see their games on an Xbox or PS...
Do you actually know what revenue is? Hint' It's completely unrelated to costs.
It's not necessarily more expensive either.
It's not as if 3rd party sales were that incredible on Nintendo platforms. And again, revenue is not really of importance when third party royalties cannot offset the costs of developing and producing a console. I'm not sure why you hang so much onto "revenues". Nintendo is no startup company which shows rapid expansion and which hopes to become profitable some day and for which revenue growth is a meaningful measure.
Profits will grow if you shut down loss incurring endevours such as console development and if you reach a wider audience by developing for platforms with a large install base.
Umm, ok. If you say so.
Same holds true for you. Who cares about hardware revenue when the hardware business incurs losses? And why would it devalue the company brand? For home consoles, the Nintendo brand currently is as dead as Elvis Presley.
I'm sorry, but if you really think that revenues are a meaningful measure for whether staying in the hardware business is the right decision, then it's simply a stupid assumption and shows that a person has no idea about business ABC.
Staying in the hardware business (i.e. the status quo) had SUPER INCREDIBLE negative consequences for the company. Have you seen the decline in cash reserves? Did you notice how targets were significantly missed and how losses were incurred, how the Wii U is basically dead at this point?
Major investors demand Nintendo moving to mobile games, as seen in various Q&As. Analysts from Nikkei even question the future of Iwata at the company. At this point, who doesn't have severe doubts about the viability of a new Nintendo home console?
Emerging markets will certainly lead to benefits, especially with cheap products such as the 2DS. The mysterious QoL stuff needs to be seen first before it can be judged. As Wii Fit U and the lack of Wii Relax have shown, it's too early to bet on a success.
With Iwata as head of the company, it's certainly impossible to achieve such a shift in proper way. That's true.
They're also all on Sony systems. None of them are on the Xbone, I swear.
It's certain they had nothing to do with anything during development. Platinum was looking for a publisher and they found one that unfortunately is in such a dire position that can't even approve a sequel. Bayonetta has some slight Sega references that were probably added later in development cause Kamiya likes easter eggs.
You still don't get it. I'm on the same boat, i used to worship Sega, but take off those rose tinted glasses plz, Sega will never again have a team that will develop a game internally that has the potential to wow people. It's over, a long time now.
And believe it or not i'm not a Senmue fan, i mentioned it cause it has a very dedicated fanbase. I'm much more into all those wacky experimental games of the NAOMI/DC era like Cosmic Smash.
It is very bad, idk where are you from and you may see it differently if you live in one of the 2 countries i mentioned. Everywhere else it's non existent, and i repeat, this situation does not please me.
They have the staff, the know-how, the funds and the artistic and technical experience to do so. What they need to do is adapt to current times. I bet my head that a WiiU with the exact same specs, but with a different name like Nintendo Revolution or something badass like this, a full modern account system and online infrastructure, region free and competent marketing could do miracles.
Oh, and i think the gamepad is a bad idea. I like it but i'd prefer if it had a pro controller bundled and handheld support for off tv/second screen like the PS4/Vita combo.
I insist on my belief that their player-base, the people that actually want to play those games is shrinking but it's more than the few millions that own a WiiU and Nintendo has to expand their way of thinking but without losing themselves in the process.
Additionally i want to add that the way i see it, mobile is now a direct threat, not only to Nintendo but to the whole industry, but i can see it losing it's appeal soon. As i have said before, mobile gaming is sustained by a user-base that is know to migrate to the next best thing, they are not loyal to anything and if you want me to say it they are the same crowd that made the Wii the hit it is right now.
Those users will move on and gaming will belong to dedicated platforms again, but in the meanwhile it's important that those platform owners, publishers and developers stay into business till the storm pass.
timetokill
Banned
Man, keep fighting the good fight, Anihawk. I don't think people are thinking this through, sadly enough.
Nintendo's marketing was top-notch during the Wii and DS generation, in the meantime, with "Wii Would Like to Play" as one of the best advertising campaigns I've ever seen, and the DS marketing attracting a ton of the expanded market.
But really, the issue is that last gen Sony had bad products they were trying to sell, without a clear message, and marketing couldn't save it. Similarly, the Wii U is a bad product without a clear message, and marketing can't save it. But unless you think Nintendo can never make good hardware again (a ridiculous claim), the point is moot.
The idea that they'd be making Wii/DS profits in a couple years is straight-up batshit logic. It showcases a complete lack of understanding of how business works.
Nobody provided a larger audience than Nintendo did on their own last generation. To say that another publisher would definitely do so is not really grounded in reality. Furthermore it takes that control of their own destiny out of Nintendo's hands. It means hoping another company does what's in your best interests, which is never as sure of a thing as you doing it yourself.
Nintendo creates new IP constantly. The idea that they'd make fewer Mario games or Zelda games or whatever is completely backwards. As a company that is then COMPLETELY dependent on software sales, they would focus more on key titles. EA stopped making Dead Space despite it selling millions. What makes you think Nintendo is going to focus on making games that sell tens of thousands when they could be selling millions per title?
So first you say Nintendo should go third party to get access to a wider audience, then you say they should go exclusive to a platform-holder, which would then reduce that audience size again. Make up your mind. And Nintendo would have to sell DRASTICALLY more to make the same amount of money. You guys seem to think that's a guarantee but there's absolutely no logic to that.
I'm not so sure that Sony's marketing is all that great. Sacrificing goats, weird spinning baby heads in a room, white is coming, it's a nut you can play outside with?
Nintendo's marketing was top-notch during the Wii and DS generation, in the meantime, with "Wii Would Like to Play" as one of the best advertising campaigns I've ever seen, and the DS marketing attracting a ton of the expanded market.
But really, the issue is that last gen Sony had bad products they were trying to sell, without a clear message, and marketing couldn't save it. Similarly, the Wii U is a bad product without a clear message, and marketing can't save it. But unless you think Nintendo can never make good hardware again (a ridiculous claim), the point is moot.
The Wii was the fastest selling console in history without either, though. The XB1/PS4 hardware isn't exactly "up to date," it's old by PC standards. A successful product just needs a good value proposition or something that catches the market's imagination. They didn't hit the right combination with Wii U, obviously.
So instead of "wasting" billions on R&D and hardware, you'd rather them just waste all of that talent and fire them (which costs money, believe it or not) and seriously reduce the size of the company? Just start dumping assets and retooling, spending years to get any sort of efficiency on hardware Nintendo has never worked on before, with tools Nintendo doesn't use?
The idea that they'd be making Wii/DS profits in a couple years is straight-up batshit logic. It showcases a complete lack of understanding of how business works.
The fact that you think the company is in danger of going under anytime soon just proves how out of touch you are with this situation.
NotMyRealName
Banned
Hasn't Nintendo lost money the last 3 years in a row? Why do Nintendo fans think its a good idea for Nintendo to keep making games and hardware that few people are buying when its hurting their bottom line?
Ken Masters
Banned
They should go third party and continue the 3DS