Support NeoGAF

[JordanN]

Wii U games must be pretty expensive to make. Just because it's close to 360 hardware, doesn't mean the games can't cost upwards $20 million dollars or more.

I think Ubisoft did enough. There are two more consoles with better sales and better hardware. Having to go back to Wii U must feel like a downgrade.

"Time to announce a new game. For PS4/XBO/Wii U"
"Wait Wii U? Isn't that thing like 10x worse?"
"Yup. Get ready to reprogram everything because Wii U's architecture makes no sense in 2014".

3DS could do with something but I have no idea what. It doesn't help it can't support modern engines like even some smartphones can.

 

[cafemomo]

If Nintendo made a console that was on par with the PS4 and Xbox One, with fully functioning online capabilities and third party support, they would easily stomp the competition.

I think Nintendo realizes this, but they don't care.

Nintendo can make a 8TFLOPS with 55GBDDR and give you a blowjob on demand and that still won't land them 3rd parties.

Their relationship with both western and Japanese 3rd parties have gone down the drain with each generation since the N64.

 

[catmario]

Wait...

What about new Just dance?

WiiU will skip this?

 

[Dinstruction]

back during the NES days, Nintendo muscled retailers, publishers, and even competitors to go along with how Nintendo did business in the gaming industry. decades later and the roles really have reversed lol.



while Nintendo may have money in the bank and lots of it, they are in fact being stomped into irrelevance, besides the Wii and DS, most Nintendo consoles and handhelds have been loosing massive market share and putting up sub-par sales. regardless of if poor selling consoles like N64, GameCube, and Wii U are profitable, they certainly aren't making Nintendo tons of money, nor are they taking up market-share and mind-share within the gaming industry.

picks a chart any chart: http://www.statista.com/chartoftheday/nintendo/

Obviously, Nintendo can't maintain their current sale performance forever, but it will be a lot longer than a single console cycle before that has any tangible effects on them.

If, by the next generation, Nintendo steps up their game (i.e. acts more like Sony and Microsoft, which likely won't happen), most of the third parties will forgive them. We kind of saw this during the E3 when the Wii U was announced, but Nintendo squandered the second chance EA was giving them.

 

[shinra-bansho]

For people conspiracy-theorying about Microsoft and Sony blocking Wii U content. lol.
They engage in co-marketing with 2K and Activision and Warner and Ubisoft to compete against each other.

For people conspiracy-theorying about why it's no "Nintendo" games. I would assume Just Dance won't be shown but it will be on the Wii and Wii U.
And Ubisoft simply aren't making 3DS titles, their revenue from 3DS for the last year was something like 1% of total revenue from memory.

 

[jholmes]

I am consistently baffled by how people keep citing the Wii U's hardware sales as off-a-cliff bad and then hold up the PS4 and especially the Xbox One as runaway successes.

I'm especially baffled when sales are apparently irrelevant as Ubisoft has no interest in developing for the 3DS. But then it seems this thread is equally uninterested in discussing that point.

 

[FlashbladeGAF]

People can bitch and moan about 3rd parties, but after how Nintendo completely failed with the Wii to secure 3rd parties and thus build an audience there was no way in hell the Wii U was ever going to be able to build a good market for the games 3rd parties are making. It would have taken the unanimous support of every 3rd party, and why in the world would they care about a continually shrinking Nintendo console fanbase.

Developers thought a vastly underpowered machine wouldn't sell

And when it did they spent there time making shovel ware instead of any real AAA exclusive.

And when some of them did decide to invest.
It was way to late

 

[cafemomo]

I'm especially baffled when sales are apparently irrelevant as Ubisoft has no interest in developing for the 3DS. But then it seems this thread is equally uninterested in discussing that point.

The 3DS is a lost cause to western devs.

 

[JordanN]

Developers thought a vastly underpowered machine wouldn't sell

And when it did they spent there time making shovel ware instead of any real AAA exclusive.

And when some of them did decide to invest.
It was way to late

Wait what?
Zack and Wiki, Madworld, Red Steel 2, Monster Hunter, The Conduit, two Resident Evils, No More Heroes. Even a port of Call of Duty.

I don't think we would have ever seen AAA like on PS3/360 without Nintendo intervening.

 

[starmud]

so is just dance dead? because even for the lackluster sales of JD 2014, it sold on wiiu.

im assuming no rabbids/fitness games either. been awhile since we've seen ubi go without those three.

this also brings up an interesting point with 3DS, even though i know western support on handhelds with basically DD titles only, the last release was in 2012 now, no? even if it was shovelwear type offerings, they pushed pretty heavily into 3ds in the first two years.

honestly though, if the feelers being put out about e3 this year are true... there isn't going to be a ton shown off *shrugs* will see

 

[MisterGrey3000]

The actual content produced by the console manufacturer is irrelevant. All that matters is that the content is popular enough to drive further sales of the console, creating an audience for third parties to develop games for.

Mario, Zelda, and the like have the potential to popular enough, but the console itself doesn't have the capabilities to compete.

Nope, I don't get how you've come to this conclusion.
First party games are incredibly important for establishing what kind of games you want on your console.
SONY and Microsoft actively create healthy ecosystems for current western 3rd party games by creating shooters, actions games, and WRPGs.
Nintendo doesn't, and that's one of the reasons why they don't get stuff like "Batman Arkham Knight".
How you can say "1st party games" don't matter with a straight face??

 

[MrDeeds]

The 3DS is a lost cause to western devs.

Handhelds in general are a lost cause to Western developers. They're after that sweet sweet iOS/Android juice.

 

[LiquidSolid]

Nintendo can make a 8TFLOPS with 55GBDDR and give you a blowjob on demand and that still won't land them 3rd parties.

Their relationship with both western and Japanese 3rd parties have gone down the drain with each generation since the N64.

Those relationships went down the drain long before the N64 and it's entirely Nintendo's fault for treating them like shit.

 

[jholmes]

The 3DS is a lost cause to western devs.

It's sad that you say this because that's absolutely true, insomuch as that's what the devs believe. They could sell quality games on established hardware with a large userbase with a development cost that must be a fraction of what it costs to develop on the PS3/Xbox 360, to say nothing of the PS4/Xbone. And yet they simply have no interest.

The whole industry is built on these broken models, and rather than do any painful self-assessment Ubisoft would rather blame its problems on the Wii U and release two Assassin's Creed games a year. It's frustrating.

 

[Infernal Monkey]

Well, hasn't Nintendo typically shown off Ubisoft's games for them at E3? Exclusive Wario themed Just Dance game confirmed.

 

[block tower]

Obviously, Nintendo can't maintain their current sale performance forever, but it will be a lot longer than a single console cycle before that has any tangible effects on them.

If, by the next generation, Nintendo steps up their game (i.e. acts more like Sony and Microsoft, which likely won't happen), most of the third parties will forgive them. We kind of saw this during the E3 when the Wii U was announced, but Nintendo squandered the second chance EA was giving them.

they can have money but if their user base keeps dwindling whats the point? each console generation sees a massive shrink in user base, for the exception of the Wii, and we all know that Wii audience isn't coming back anytime soon. so lets say the Wii U sells less than the Game Cube which sold 21 million units, for arguments sake lets assume Wii U's lifetime sales hit 15-18 million. pattern would show that with the next Nintendo console it'll likely continue to have a lower life time sales number, at what point does it become not worth the R&D costs, marketing costs, and game costs to release a console which only appeals to 21 million people or less?

 

[Father_Brain]

Nintendo was pitching the Wii U as an easy machine to bring publishers core franchises to that sold millions on Xbox and PS3 to an audience who had not played those franchises before. It was positioned as good ROI; load these franchises now, bring that other 66% of our market into your worlds, and then when you release new ones, now you have a much bigger pie to sell to... people who are xbox360/ps3 gamers AND the nebulous 'nintendo owner,' since now we have compatable hardware. Also we have this really cool tablet controller that can make Enhanced Editions of your games for little extra cost on your end, but tables are hot and gameplay is king so things will sell to our audience if you take advantage.

And, publishers listened. EA did it, Square did it, Acti did it, Ubi did it and a little more with some original titles...

It's what Nintendo said was going to be a good plan, it's what everyone agreed to, it's what products were made for... and the Wii U never took off. It just didn't work. It wasn't a bad strategy, it wasn't stupid... The Wii U proposition itself was just not something that was adopted. People didn't "get" it.

Nintendo thought they could get core-targeted multiplatform titles to sell on Wii U without actually doing anything as a first party to cultivate an audience for that type of software. Sorry, that is both a bad strategy and extremely stupid.

 

[Empyrean Heaven]

Why are 3rd parties abandoning the Wii U?

Because Nintendo is abandoning them. Not exactly fucking rocket science.

 

[boyshine]

so is just dance dead? because even for the lackluster sales of JD 2014, it sold on wiiu.

im assuming no rabbids/fitness games either. been awhile since we've seen ubi go without those three.

this also brings up an interesting point with 3DS, even though i know western support on handhelds with basically DD titles only, the last release was in 2012 now, no? even if it was shovelwear type offerings, they pushed pretty heavily into 3ds in the first two years.

It really was lackluster worldwide total? Wii and PS3 versions sold (and still sell) very well at my store. It's the main reason people still want a Wii Mini.

 

[Schnozberry]

they can have money but if their user base keeps dwindling whats the point? each console generation sees a massive shrink in user base, for the exception of the Wii, and we all know that Wii audience isn't coming back anytime soon. so lets say the Wii U sells less than the Game Cube which sold 21 million units, for arguments sake lets assume Wii U's lifetime sales hit 15-18 million. pattern would show that with the next Nintendo console it'll likely continue to have a lower life time sales number, at what point does it become not worth the R&D costs, marketing costs, and game costs to release a console which only appeals to 21 million people or less?

I think Nintendo is planning on having a unified development environment for their next hardware releases. Conceivably, they can support one platform on their own if they could develop one software title that was scalable across multiple pieces of hardware.

If third parties get an accessible development environment that allows them to reach the userbases of multiple pieces of hardware simultaneously, like they do with iOS or Android, more developers may consider Nintendo worth their while.

 

[Dinstruction]

Nope, I don't get how you've come to this conclusion.
First party games are incredibly important for establishing what kind of games you want on your console.
SONY and Microsoft actively create healthy ecosystems for current western 3rd party games by creating shooters, actions games, and WRPGs.
Nintendo doesn't, and that's one of the reasons why they don't get stuff like "Batman Arkham Knight".
How you can say "1st party games" don't matter with a straight face??

I said the content of the games don't matter, as long as their popular. Nintendo's franchises are so ingrained in gaming culture, that third parties would be willing to develop games on a console standing on the shoulders of Mario. Nintendo could encourage third parties to make their shooters and Western RPGs without making those types of games themselves.

And can you cut it out with the condescending attitude?

 

[block tower]

I think Nintendo is planning on having a unified development environment for their next hardware releases. Conceivably, they can support one platform on their own if they could develop one software title that was scalable across multiple pieces of hardware.

If third parties get an accessible development environment that allows them to reach the userbases of multiple pieces of hardware simultaneously, like they do with iOS or Android, more developers may consider Nintendo worth their while.

could work, and i hope it does, because i have owned every Nintendo console except the Wii U, will not support that shit. and i've always loved their handheld games and the 3rd party games on the handhelds. i think Nintendo walks a thin line between success and failure with the unified platform, either there needs to be two separate pieces of hardware, a console and a handheld, that both can play the same exact games; or there needs to be a very compelling handheld that uses a dock to act as a console system with controller support. it's also going to have to have a competent online and decent specs, at least on par with the Wii U to find a home with core gamers as a console. im somewhat skeptical Iwata and Co. are capable of walking this line and finding success, but i do hope they do, it could be a great trend to have such devices in the industry.

 

[Empyrean Heaven]

I said the content of the games don't matter, as long as their popular. Nintendo's franchises are so ingrained in gaming culture, that third parties would be willing to develop games on a console standing on the shoulders of Mario. Nintendo could encourage third parties to make their shooters and Western RPGs without making those types of games themselves.

And can you cut it out with the condescending attitude?

So if Nintendo's games are so ingrained in gaming culture, and they can't get any third parties to support them, what is the point of continuing to make their own hardware if their games would be just as successful on other platforms.

I'm sorry to bring the most hated argument on NeoGAF up for the 70 billionth time, but it's beginning to look more and more likely that despite Nintendo's desire to maintain their own hardware business, there will be no way for it to remain a feasible venture in the very near future. Adam Sessler was right...Nintendo isn't going to make the decision to become a third party, the decision is going to be made for them.

 

[MisterGrey3000]

I said the content of the games don't matter, as long as their popular. Nintendo's franchises are so ingrained in gaming culture, that third parties would be willing to develop games on a console standing on the shoulders of Mario. Nintendo could encourage third parties to make their shooters and Western RPGs without making those types of games themselves.

And can you cut it out with the condescending attitude?

Can you stop acting silly??
Also, no it doesn't work that way.
You have to make games that are similar to what 3rd party developers are making. If you don't, you won't get supported because you're not creating a healthy ecosystem for their games.
Current western 3rd party devs are in the business of selling their games to young western men. Nintendo's games aren't popular with that market, and they don't make an effort to create games that are aimed at that audience. Therefore, they don't get supported.
Making a PS4 powered console wouldn't solve this problem if they aren't willing to change the kind of content they produce.

...each console generation sees a massive shrink in user base, for the exception of the Wii...

This argument really needs to go away, it says absolutely nothing. :/
What's the point of excluding the Wii? Why is the NES to SNES drop off "massive"? Why aren't the market conditions of the time ever considered?

Adam Sessler was right...Nintendo isn't going to make the decision to become a third party, the decision is going to be made for them.

Sessler isn't right about anything. People said this stupid crap during the NGC era(Including him). It's didn't happen, and it's nothing new.

 

[shinra-bansho]

I am consistently baffled by how people keep citing the Wii U's hardware sales as off-a-cliff bad and then hold up the PS4 and especially the Xbox One as runaway successes. [1]

I'm especially baffled when sales are apparently irrelevant as Ubisoft has no interest in developing for the 3DS. But then it seems this thread is equally uninterested in discussing that point. [2]

[1] US 8th Gen LTD

[2] US Handheld TTM HW

Not sure what exactly is baffling.

 

[StuBurns]

Nintendo won't go third party, they will just transition more directly to software to support targeted hardware. A handheld for kids and commuters, etc, a TV box for health and family experiences, things like that.

Even if we do see things like a major Zelda on the other systems, it'll be in the course of changing their focus to those targeted systems.

 

[MormaPope]

The Wii-U will go down as the worst console Nintendo has made commercially. Not quality wise, the Wii-U seems to be a great console when it comes to hardware. But the N64 had third party games, the Gamecube had third party releases. All the Wii-U has is support from Nintendo (duh), some indie support, and a few Japanese publishers/developers.

Sad, incredibly sad really. Nintendo isn't doomed at all, but the Wii-U is a critical misstep.

 

[Dinstruction]

Can you stop acting silly??
Also, no it doesn't work that way.
You have to make games that are similar to what 3rd party developers are making. If you don't, you won't get supported because you're not creating a healthy ecosystem for their games.
Current western 3rd party devs are in the business of selling their games to young western men. Nintendo's games aren't popular with that market, and they don't make an effort to create games that are aimed at that audience. Therefore, they don't get supported.
Making a PS4 powered console wouldn't solve this problem if they aren't willing to change the kind of content they produce.

A "healthy ecosystem" is more than just the games a console manufacturer makes. It also involves the console itself and the support for third parties.

All I am saying is that Sony's relationship with third parties is one of the primary reasons the PS4 is successful. Ubisoft was already going to develop an AC game for the PS4 regardless of whether or not Killzone Shadow Fall existed.

 

[block tower]

This argument really needs to go away, it says absolutely nothing. :/
What's the point of excluding the Wii? Why is the NES to SNES drop off "massive"? Why aren't the market conditions of the time ever considered?

the Wii is excluded because Nintendo has no trend of hitting those sales numbers, and it's massive because of the console sales of the competing consoles continue to grow despite Nintendo's declining console sales, the declining trend is pretty exclusive to Nintendo. beside the Wii, what other Nintendo home consoles saw a spike in sales? and i agree, a high end console won't solve anything for Nintendo, i really believe Nintendo has a very complex problem that has less to do with what they make but who makes it. the leadership and unwillingness to recognize trends and standards in modern gaming is really whats causing Nintendo to stumble every generation, the Wii was a successful mix of foresight, luck, and timing; to expect the Wii type of success again is very unrealistic and borderline stupid. Nintendo has some very intrinsic problems within the company that they need to deal with before looking to a new console to solve their current issues within console gaming.

 

[Koppai]

"I won't be purchasing any Ubisoft games this year," a Koppai representative said. This is due to the fact that Ubisoft slaps Nintendo fans in the face with constant delays with their multiplatform titles.

 

[Empyrean Heaven]

The Wii-U will go down as the worst console Nintendo has made commercially. Not quality wise, the Wii-U seems to be a great console when it comes to hardware. But the N64 had third party games, the Gamecube had third party releases. All the Wii-U has is support from Nintendo (duh), some indie support, and a few Japanese publishers/developers.

Sad, incredibly sad really. Nintendo isn't doomed at all, but the Wii-U is a critical misstep.

I disagree on the doomed part. You can't lose practically all of the money you made on the Wii in a few years and not be in line for major, major changes.

 

[MormaPope]

I disagree on the doomed part. You can't lose practically all of the money you made on the Wii in a few years and not be in line for major, major changes.

Well, its now like it was around the Gamecube days then financially.

 

[MisterGrey3000]

Nintendo won't go third party, they will just transition more directly to software to support targeted hardware. A handheld for kids and commuters, etc, a TV box for health and family experiences, things like that.

Even if we do see things like a major Zelda on the other systems, it'll be in the course of changing their focus to those targeted systems.

You mean making non-young male aimed consoles that are more like the original Wii and DS?

That's a pretty good idea actually. They're usually more successful when they completely ignore the SONY/MS demographic.

 

[Mysterious]

You mean making non-young male aimed consoles that are more like the original Wii and DS?

That's a pretty good idea actually. They're usually more successful when they completely ignore the SONY/MS demographic.

There are two examples in history, and that in the Wii/Nintendo DS. That market has shifted towards other devices since Apple was able to serve their needs better.

GB/GBA/NES were incredibly successful and still targeted the "gamer" market. I would be inclined to say that even N64 was successful in its current market conditions, but it doesn't look as impressive next to PlayStation (which it did outsell in Canada).

 

[LegendofLex]

So you don't even think publishers should make Wii U SKUs, you believe publishers should be investing in exclusive Wii U games tailored to the audience? That's insane.

Third parties have never been successful with porting multiplatform titles to Nintendo platforms. All the successes have been or at least begun as Nintendo exclusives, or titles tailored to the Nintendo audience.

I'm not saying that they should do that for Wii U specifically given the current state of the platform. However, the "put our games on as many platforms as possible" thing clearly doesn't work with Nintendo platforms. Every time Nintendo and publishers try to make Nintendo platforms more like other platforms in terms of hardware/software, people wind up skipping the Nintendo platform and/or choosing the other platforms.

Why do people always talk about Mass Effect 3 as if it was the only game that bombed on the system? It's the other way around. They're third parties. Free agents. They make the games they make. If you show you've built an audience for that content then it will go to said platform.

If you show there's a lucrative audience then third parties will try to sell to it. There isn't one on the Wii U to justify much.

Agreed. Wii U has no audience, so naturally there is no way for third parties to strategize about how to serve its audience.

However, there was a massive lucrative audience on Wii that most publishers (including Nintendo) wound up largely ignoring and/or throwing crappy games at, even in favor of much less profitable ventures.

Third parties have a history of not giving a shit about Nintendo's audience.

There are two examples in history, and that in the Wii/Nintendo DS. That market has shifted towards other devices since Apple was able to serve their needs better.

GB/GBA/NES were incredibly successful and still targeted the "gamer" market. I would be inclined to say that even N64 was successful in its current market conditions, but it doesn't look as impressive next to PlayStation (which it did outsell in Canada).

Eh, GB was mostly a standout platform rather than a merely successful one because of Tetris/Pokemon, which were definitely not targeting the "gamer" market.

N64 wasn't too far behind PSX in NA, which really surprises me given that it had (I believe) less than a third of the number of titles that PSX did.

 

[Mysterious]

Third parties have never been successful with porting multiplatform titles to Nintendo platforms. All the successes have been or at least begun as Nintendo exclusives, or titles tailored to the Nintendo audience.

I'm not saying that they should do that for Wii U specifically given the current state of the platform. However, the "put our games on as many platforms as possible" thing clearly doesn't work with Nintendo platforms. Every time Nintendo and publishers try to make Nintendo platforms more like other platforms in terms of hardware/software, people wind up skipping the Nintendo platform and/or choosing the other platforms.



Agreed. Wii U has no audience, so naturally there is no way for third parties to strategize about how to serve its audience.

However, there was a massive lucrative audience on Wii that most publishers (including Nintendo) wound up largely ignoring and/or throwing crappy games at, even in favor of much less profitable ventures.

Because Nintendo did not foster such a market. They didn't make the "Nintendo version" seem better, since it lacks in graphics, online infrastructure, etc. So it is actually worse and obviously the market would move away from those kinds of titles. IIRC the latest Batman didn't even have online play.

 

[Empyrean Heaven]

Third parties have never been successful with porting multiplatform titles to Nintendo platforms. All the successes have been or at least begun as Nintendo exclusives, or titles tailored to the Nintendo audience.

I'm not saying that they should do that for Wii U specifically given the current state of the platform. However, the "put our games on as many platforms as possible" thing clearly doesn't work with Nintendo platforms. Every time Nintendo and publishers try to make Nintendo platforms more like other platforms in terms of hardware/software, people wind up skipping the Nintendo platform and/or choosing the other platforms.



Agreed. Wii U has no audience, so naturally there is no way for third parties to strategize about how to serve its audience.

However, there was a massive lucrative audience on Wii that most publishers (including Nintendo) wound up largely ignoring and/or throwing crappy games at, even in favor of much less profitable ventures.

Third parties have a history of not giving a shit about Nintendo's audience.

It's a lot easier to give a shit about an audience when you feel like the console maker gives a shit about your games. Nintendo's treatment of third parties has been deplorable since the NES games and if anything it has gotten worse. They provide no funding, no developer support to 3rd parties and basically expect them to create and market their games on their own. Who can blame them if they no longer want to make things for a company that doesn't even give a shit if they make games for their system or not?

Seriously, I am so sick and tired of Nintendo fanboys blaming third parties for the Wii U's third party problems. Having a wide array of great games made for your platform is the responsibility of the console maker and no one else's. End of fucking story.

 

[LegendofLex]

Because Nintendo did not foster such a market. They didn't make the "Nintendo version" seem better, since it lacks in graphics, online infrastructure, etc. So it is actually worse and obviously the market would move away from those kinds of titles. IIRC the latest Batman didn't even have online play.

This is all definitely true. Nintendo is not really interested enough in the AAA multiplatform market to be successful in it.

However, it's interesting to me that no one else wants to play in the spaces they have fostered, even when it's clear that the profit potential can be way higher and there are tons of overshot players that have been falling through the cracks for years.

 

[shinra-bansho]

Agreed. Wii U has no audience, so naturally there is no way for third parties to strategize about how to serve its audience.

However, there was a massive lucrative audience on Wii that most publishers (including Nintendo) wound up largely ignoring and/or throwing crappy games at, even in favor of much less profitable ventures.

Third parties have a history of not giving a shit about Nintendo's audience.

The Wii essentially took everyone by surprise, Nintendo included. People like Riccitiello fully admit to missing that boat.

But when third parties saw an audience there, they attempted to cash in on it to mixed success - for example Ubisoft generating a highly successful franchise in Just Dance.

[Certain] third parties have a history of not making titles aimed at certain demographics.
And Nintendo has a history of making platforms that are comparatively weak attracting the demographics that those third parties do target.

This isn't some spiteful vendetta. It's just misalignment of their target markets. The expectation that third parties should change what they're doing ignores the balance of market forces.

 

[boyshine]

The Wii-U will go down as the worst console Nintendo has made commercially. Not quality wise, the Wii-U seems to be a great console when it comes to hardware. But the N64 had third party games, the Gamecube had third party releases. All the Wii-U has is support from Nintendo (duh), some indie support, and a few Japanese publishers/developers.

Sad, incredibly sad really. Nintendo isn't doomed at all, but the Wii-U is a critical misstep.

I wish people would stop saying T/M-rated 3rd party = all 3rd party. Wii U has pretty much full support for everything kids related + disney/dreamworks movie tie-ins, even exclusives. For families with kids it really is the best choice with skylanders/infinity/lego+1st party. And as much as GAF doesn't want to admit it, the core audience for Nintendo is kids. If Ubisoft is pulling the plug on Just Dance however, that's very surprising.

 

[MisterGrey3000]

There are two examples in history, and that in the Wii/Nintendo DS. That market has shifted towards other devices since Apple was able to serve their needs better.

GB/GBA/NES were incredibly successful and still targeted the "gamer" market.

You've got to be kidding me.
The NES, SNES, GB, and GBA were all exclusively aimed at kids. The Wii/DS was exclusively aimed at casual gamers, kids, and families. When ever Nintendo ignores the young male audience they tend to be pretty successful.
The N64, and NGC saw their largest loss in market share and it makes sense when you consider who Nintendo's key demographic is.

...the declining trend is pretty exclusive to Nintendo.

It really isn't
The PS3 was a pretty big drop off from the PS2, and you better believe the PS4 isn't gonna get anywhere near PS3's LTD. Plus, the Xbox one isn't looking like it's going to be reaching 360's LTD any time soon as well.
That argument ignores so many different factors just for the sake of getting across an agenda.

 

[LOCK]

I take this to mean their conference. I expect Just Dance to be shown by Nintendo in their Digital Event.

 

[LegendofLex]

But when third parties saw an audience there, they attempted to cash in on it to mixed success - for example Ubisoft generating a highly successful franchise in Just Dance.

Did they, though? By all accounts, it seems that most of them were throwing the B-team at it. Even Just Dance was an incredibly cheap project that Ubi didn't even think would actually do well. The ones that weren't tended to see Wii as an opportunity to do whatever the heck they wanted (see the MadWorld disaster).

[Certain] third parties have a history of not making titles aimed at certain demographics.
And Nintendo has a history of making platforms that are comparatively weak attracting the demographics that those third parties do target.

I think this really hits the crux of the third party problem, and that's that none of them actually wants to really make games for Nintendo hardware (and by "really," I mean "correctly"). That probably explains the above.

Interestingly enough, we're seeing that indies are often an exception to this. And, just as interestingly, many indies report their best sales performance comes from Nintendo platforms. I wonder why this is? I don't mean to point fingers so much as to try to come to a constructive conclusion about the ideal relationship between third parties and Nintendo. I think people are focused too much on other platforms spending to cater to publishers (which, if you haven't noticed by the amount of money both other platform holders bled last gen, is probably not a long-term sustainable solution), and not enough on third parties making games that suit the software environment (and creating a software environment that's favorable to third parties is definitely a weakness of Nintendo's).

This isn't some spiteful vendetta. It's just misalignment of their target markets.

I hope I didn't characterize it as a spiteful vendetta. But I'd say it runs a bit deeper than misalignment - many third-party publishers seem to see the non-stereotypical gamer as beneath them.

the Wii is excluded because Nintendo has no trend of hitting those sales numbers, and it's massive because of the console sales of the competing consoles continue to grow despite Nintendo's declining console sales, the declining trend is pretty exclusive to Nintendo.

Way too soon to call the declining trend as exclusive to Nintendo. Neither PS4 or Xbox One was nearly as badly executed, and we certainly don't know whether either will even approach the LTDs of last-gen consoles. Judging by last gen, which saw decline for the combined Xbox + PlayStation audience despite the generation being fully supported for much longer, it'd be pretty surprising if either saw gen-over-gen growth.

 

[Empyrean Heaven]

I take this to mean their conference. I expect Just Dance to be shown by Nintendo in their Digital Event.

Unless it isn't coming out for Wii U, which is a big possibility.

 

[Kazuma Kiryu]

Anyone could see this coming a year ago. Support for the WiiU dried up really fast as publishers moved on to PS4/X1/PC, with only a small number of token franchises showing up.

 

[PlumCantaloupe]

Nope, I don't get how you've come to this conclusion.
First party games are incredibly important for establishing what kind of games you want on your console.
SONY and Microsoft actively create healthy ecosystems for current western 3rd party games by creating shooters, actions games, and WRPGs.
Nintendo doesn't, and that's one of the reasons why they don't get stuff like "Batman Arkham Knight".
How you can say "1st party games" don't matter with a straight face??

This is a really interesting point. I had not thought of it in this way before but it seems quite logical.

 

[block tower]

You've got to be kidding me.
The NES, SNES, GB, and GBA were all exclusively aimed at kids. The Wii/DS was exclusively aimed at casual gamers, kids, and families. When ever Nintendo ignores the young male audience they tend to be pretty successful.
The N64, and NGC saw their largest loss in market share and it makes sense when you consider who Nintendo's key demographic is.



It really isn't
The PS3 was a pretty big drop off from the PS2, and you better believe the PS4 isn't gonna get anywhere near PS3's LTD. Plus, the Xbox one isn't looking like it's going to be reaching 360's LTD any time soon as well.
That argument ignores so many different factors just for the sake of getting across an agenda.

you caught me.. im part of the Nintendo conspiracy...
and of course console makers have peaks, and it's not realistic to expect either Nintendo or Sony to hit the Wii and PS2 type sales again any time soon. but to say that Sony's drop off is equivalent to the sort of decline Nintendo's seen is disingenuous. and while i think it's unlikely that PS4 will reach PS3 lifetime sales, it's not guaranteed Sony wont come very close.

 

[LegendofLex]

but to say that Sony's drop off is equivalent to the sort of decline Nintendo's seen is disingenuous.

You're right. They're not equivalent at all. The Sony drop off lost Sony more money in a year than they made in the previous four. Meanwhile, Nintendo hasn't even lost one year of Wii profits after three years of losses.

 

[Mysterious]

You're right. They're not equivalent at all. The Sony drop off lost Sony more money in a year than they made in the previous four. Meanwhile, Nintendo hasn't even lost one year of Wii profits after three years of losses.

In terms of profit, Sony's drop off was worse. But I think he was referring to PS2 -> PS3 unit sales, for which PS3 sold ~50% of PS2's install base. For reference, Wii U will likely sell ~10% of Wii's install base when it's all said and done.

 

[shinra-bansho]

Did they, though? By all accounts, it seems that most of them were throwing the B-team at it. Even Just Dance was an incredibly cheap project that Ubi didn't even think would actually do well. The ones that weren't tended to see Wii as an opportunity to do whatever the heck they wanted (see the MadWorld disaster).

I think this really hits the crux of the third party problem, and that's that none of them actually wants to really make games for Nintendo hardware (and by "really," I mean "correctly"). That probably explains the above.

Interestingly enough, we're seeing that indies are often an exception to this. And, just as interestingly, many indies report their best sales performance comes from Nintendo platforms. I wonder why this is?

I hope I didn't characterize it as a spiteful vendetta. But I'd say it runs a bit deeper than misalignment - many third-party publishers seem to see the non-stereotypical gamer as beneath them.

Not necessarily you, but some people do characterize it as something personal or irrational.

Just Dance was a project well-aligned to the audience on the Wii though, even if it was a low budget/risk affair. Skylanders is probably another example. EA tried to modify their titles in ways they thought would appeal to the audience, and I think that was roundly rejected. Mixed success.

With regard to indies, I'd say they typically want to be on as many platforms as is possible given limited resources. They're not really looking at opportunity cost in the multi-millions etc in terms of ROI. They don't really have to answer to investors for growth and profitability etc. A lot of the time they have a guaranteed market through the likes of Kickstarter to confirm their platform choices. Visibility is probably better on the eShop given limited competition.

Some larger publishers are exploring mobile as an avenue to reach those gamers. Square-Enix wants its own Puzzles and Dragons. EA spent a 3/4 of a billion acquiring PopCap and I doubt EA would be unhappy had it made Candy Crush. They want those dollars, but haven't had the best success in gaining them.
I think to a degree developers themselves don't want to make certain types of titles, even under publisher mandate. But I don't know if it's right to characterize it as seeing such gamers as "beneath them."