Nintendo's FY 2016 has officially begun - The Year of NX

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rösti
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I guess the real question is why third-parties would be incentivized to add additional investments in Nintendo platforms when they're theoretically already peaking their franchises' performance just on Xbox/PlayStation/PC. It's not like Nintendo customers represent millions of people who actually increase the install base for their games, otherwise Nintendo customers would have bought the Wii U ports because that would have been the only way they could have played them.

If Nintendo customers are already customers for their games, they are customers for their games on other platforms. In which case investing in NX just splits the userbase and makes each individual SKU less profitable.
Exactly, it's Nintendo's job make the system atractive to third parties.

I don't agree with your other point though, it imply that people that play Nintendo games don't play other games and vice versa.
 
Yes, but speaking for myself, I never owned an Xbox 360 or PS3 when I got my Wii U, so for me those games couldn't have been "late" since that was the first point at which I would've been able to play them anyway, and I couldn't have known they were "crap" because I had nothing to compare them to.

Not to mention that there's a healthy market for remasters on PS4 and Xbox anyway.

Youtube, magazines, websites (reviews, comparisons) should have spilled the beans on that they are sub-par compared to the other platforms even for you.

Yes (bold) because they have had those type of games for the last 10-15 years on those platforms, Nintendo platforms have not.

Exactly, it's Nintendo's job make the system atractive to third parties.

And it is solely on thirdparties to not fuck it up, by NOT releasing late expensive, sub-par with no future support and/or dlc if they want to TRY to build a fanbase there.
 
Youtube, magazines, websites (reviews, comparisons) should have spilled the beans on that they are sub-par compared to the other platforms even for you.

Anyone who third parties could have conceivably reached on Wii U that they weren't reaching already on Xbox 360 and PS3 is the kind of customer that probably wasn't following their franchises so religiously as to have looked up comparisons on YouTube or read about them in magazines or reviews up to that point.

I don't agree with your other point though, it imply that people that play Nintendo games don't play other games and vice versa.

I think the people who use a Nintendo console as their primary or only console probably are satisfied with Nintendo games and genres/franchises that tend already to appear on Nintendo consoles.

Otherwise they wouldn't use a Nintendo console as their only console, because there are consoles that are better options for them.
 
Unfortunately? Lol

Only because devs are going to use it as an excuse and most people, including journalists, won't realize how BS of an excuse it is. Seriously, looking at where the world is going, if you can't program for ARM you are fucking screwed. If your engine can't run on ARM, you need a new engine.
 
Thirdparty self-fulfilling prophecy to fail right there.

They have not released games on Nintendo platforms before, or if they did, subpar CRAP (to late, no dlc, more expensive etc etc), 1 or 2 games will not be enough for them to get gamers to buy into their stuff on Nintendo platforms in the 10 of millions, that will happen after many many years of their games always also coming to Nintendo platforms at same quality and support as other platforms.

Nah.

There's an element of truth here, I'll admit, but at the end of the day, the onus is on Nintendo to convince third parties that timely, feature-complete NX ports (or NX ports, period, as the case may be) are in their best interests.

If they're not willing to play the same game that Sony and MS have been playing for multiple generations now, they shouldn't be surprised when they come in a distant third for that market.
 
I'm not even expecting an official name for NX through this days. The least I expect is the classic "We will talk more about NX at E3. Please buy Star Fox Zero"
 
I'm not even expecting an official name for NX through this days. The least I expect is the classic "We will talk more about NX at E3. Please buy Star Fox Zero"

LOL

Thats going to be my expectation going in

Hopefully we get more but im not setting myself up for disappointment at this point
 
This is zero chance we get nothing.

NX will have to be confirmed for this fiscal year or the next.

That's something.
 
Nah.

There's an element of truth here, I'll admit, but at the end of the day, the onus is on Nintendo to convince third parties that timely, feature-complete NX ports (or NX ports, period, as the case may be) are in their best interests.

If they're not willing to play the same game that Sony and MS have been playing for multiple generations now, they shouldn't be surprised when they come in a distant third for that market.

The same (bold) for thirdparties, if they are not willing to release games at par and with the same support/dlc and so on (again and again, just not once), they should not be surprised when sales numbers come in on a VERY distant third compared to the other platforms.
 
The same (bold) for thirdparties, if they are not willing to release games at par and with the same support/dlc and so on (again and again, just not once), they should not be surprised when sales numbers come in on a VERY distant third compared to the other platforms.

IIRC, didn't their launch multiplatform catalogs struggle to sell even a couple 100k copies on Wii U? I'd have noped out of there too in that scenario. They have no obligations to Nintendo just like Nintendo has no obligations to them.
 
IIRC, didn't their launch multiplatform catalogs struggle to sell even a couple 100k copies on Wii U? I'd have noped out of there too in that scenario. They have no obligations to Nintendo just like Nintendo has no obligations to them.

And that is why thirdparties will ALWAYS fail, 1 game at launch is not enough, I'm still waiting for Assassins Creed game number 3,4,5 on Nintendo platform before I decide if it worth paying for those games at €60 on a Nintendo platform, and not the €5-10 I currently pay for "those 1 time game tests" games thirdparties spit out on Nintendo platforms..
 
It may well get better AAA support in its first 6-12 months than Wii U did, before third parties start pulling support due to the early ports not selling. But that's as far as I'll go, and it's not exactly a high bar to clear.

Again, third parties are being very well served by Sony and MS right now. There's no reason to think they're desperate for new platforms to port to, and no reason yet to believe that Nintendo is taking a more proactive approach to courting them than "if you build it, they will come."

Finally, "sales enough to justify the port" is not actually that low a bar to clear, because you can't evaluate success strictly in terms of making a profit, as opposed to opportunity cost. Any NX port will involve resources that could otherwise be allocated to the PS4/XB1/PC versions, all of which will probably sell far better.

This is why I think that Nintendo should keep the opportunity cost as low as possible. Give NX just the right amount of power that they can just port over the exact settings from PS4 with no performance loss or even a performance gain. Make getting the game up an running the most challenging part of the process, rather than optimization (what happened with Wii U).
 
I'm ready fo the 10 threads with 10 different views/understanding/translation of those tweets.

New thread: "Amiibo will be Nintendo next console"

-"Wtf Nintendo?!"

-"Lmao Nintendo doomed!"

-"Not like this Nintendo.."

-"Uh that was a mistranslation, he meant amiibo will work with the next Nintendo console"

-"No it specficall states Amiibo will work the NX Console"

-"WTF?!"





HooDoo: "I can't wait until the Nintendo faithfuls try to convince us this is the best thing ever"
 
I'm ready fo the 10 threads with 10 different views/understanding/translation of those tweets.

Haha!

Well, immediately after, he tweeted:

任天堂、決算は明日の午後。WSJ向けに記事を書くのが優先順位第一位ですが、なるべく早い段階でこちらでも情報発信できればと思っています。それではまた明日。(テクニカルにはもう今日だけどまだ日が昇っていないという意味で明日)

According to Google Translate, that means:

Nintendo, closing the afternoon of tomorrow. Writing an article in for WSJ is priority first place, but I hope to disseminate information even here as early as possible. Well then, See you tomorrow. (Tomorrow in the sense that still day but the technical've had today is not ascended)

There's a clue there if I've ever seen one!
 
The same (bold) for thirdparties, if they are not willing to release games at par and with the same support/dlc and so on (again and again, just not once), they should not be surprised when sales numbers come in on a VERY distant third compared to the other platforms.

This only makes sense if you think third-party decisions regarding Wii U were driven purely by some irrational anti-Nintendo bias.

The simple reality is that Sony and MS have continually made it a priority to cultivate the 17-35 Western male gamer demographic on their platforms, and Nintendo hasn't since the N64 era.
 
3rd parties won't be there on NX, outside of a few fumbled together token ports with inexplicable omissions and zero advertisement.

If they were to actually put in some effort like with ZombiU, Blops2, Deus Ex I'd hope that this time Nintendo fans get their heads out of their asses and actually buy those games instead of sneering at legitimately good ports.
 
Comitted 1 month late for AssCreed IV and 6 months for Watch Dogs.

The six-month delay for Watch Dogs Wii U came after people didn't support them on Wii U, not before.

Call of Duty also actually had a presence on Wii and people didn't really buy it on Wii U.

Deus Ex HR's enhanced edition also released day and date alongside Xbox 360 and PS3 and was the definitive version of that release.
 
This only makes sense if you think third-party decisions regarding Wii U were driven purely by some irrational anti-Nintendo bias.

The simple reality is that Sony and MS have continually made it a priority to cultivate the 17-35 Western male gamer demographic on their platforms, and Nintendo hasn't since the N64 era.


I agree.
Plus: wiiu didn't sell neither. Like, at all.
 
"not before"
You mean late released assassin's creed games ?

One game, III, which was just as late as IV was on Xbox One and PS4.

IV was released the same day as the Xbox 360 and PS3 versions in NA.

Again, for a person who didn't already have a way to play Assassin's Creed, this is a non-issue since they weren't going to buy those games at the Xbox 360/PS3 release date anyway. There was also literally no chance for a third-party multiplatform game that wasn't coming out on or after the date of the Wii U release to not be a late port. Third parties don't control the Wii U release date.

The problem is the size of the audience of people who didn't already have a way to play Assassin's Creed but wanted to play Assassin's Creed on a Nintendo system was stupidly small. Truthfully, third parties would have been perfectly justified not porting over their games in the first place.
 
One game, III, which was just as late as IV was on Xbox One and PS4.

IV was released the same day as the Xbox 360 and PS3 versions in NA.

Again, for a person who didn't already have a way to play Assassin's Creed, this is a non-issue since they weren't going to buy those games at the Xbox 360/PS3 release date anyway.

The problem is the size of the audience of people who didn't already have a way to play Assassin's Creed but wanted to play Assassin's Creed on a Nintendo system was stupidly small. Truthfully, third parties would have been perfectly justified not porting over their games in the first place.



Well it wasnt only that. It was also the fact there was no incentive to play it on Wii U. XB1 and PS4 had better graphics. Wii U was barely on par with PS360.
 
3rd parties won't be there on NX, outside of a few fumbled together token ports with inexplicable omissions and zero advertisement.

If they were to actually put in some effort like with ZombiU, Blops2, Deus Ex I'd hope that this time Nintendo fans get their heads out of their asses and actually buy those games instead of sneering at legitimately good ports.

It's click and port if current rumors are correct. Why wouldn't they just port and release it? 1 vame for 3 consoles. More money is welcome for 3rd party devs
 
Well it wasnt only that. It was also the fact there was no incentive to play it on Wii U. XB1 and PS4 had better graphics. Wii U was barely on par with PS360.

Consumers hadn't seen Xbox One or PS4 in 2012.

Also, there was incentive to play the games on Wii U: the Wii U GamePad.

But if the unique features of the Wii U weren't an incentive and Wii U didn't have better graphics, and if better graphics were the only real incentive, then third parties were screwed no matter what they did.

The Catch-22 for Nintendo is this: chasing better graphics than competing consoles has been a reliably poor strategy for them as a console maker and a software maker. But without chasing better graphics than competing consoles, they have no chance to capture the market for third-party multiplatform games that exists on other consoles. What should Nintendo do in this scenario?
 
It's click and port if current rumors are correct. Why wouldn't they just port and release it? 1 vame for 3 consoles. More money is welcome for 3rd party devs

Porting is never free, and with sales like on WiiU, the money they'd have to spend on a Nintendo version would probably be better spent on Snickers for the devs.
 
Rösti;201935659 said:
The news conference is in 13 hours. That's separate from the 2015 Fiscal Year Financial Results Briefing (which has yet to be fully confirmed).

It will be 8:00am for me. Is it for new york 2:00am?

It depends when we will hear the news. It would be a few hours later.
 
Consumers hadn't seen Xbox One or PS4 in 2012.

Also, there was incentive to play the games on Wii U: the Wii U GamePad.

But if the unique features of the Wii U weren't an incentive and Wii U didn't have better graphics, and if better graphics were the only real incentive, then third parties were screwed no matter what they did.


No, but the point remains: It made no sense to play them on wii U.
 
No, but the point remains: It made no sense to play them on wii U.

And if it made no sense to play them on Wii U, why is it third parties' fault that no one bought them for Wii U?

Moreover, on a hypothetical Nintendo console where Nintendo's own brands can succeed - brands whose market has consistently valued low-price, highly-differentiated hardware platforms that align with their "fun first" values - will the situation be any different for third parties than it is now?

Or do we think Nintendo will stop making software that's "appealing to everyone" and will instead make software that appeals only to core gamers? (Serious question: will this leave them with anything besides the stuff that consistently failed them in the N64/GameCube/3DS/Wii U eras?)
 
Consumers hadn't seen Xbox One or PS4 in 2012.

Also, there was incentive to play the games on Wii U: the Wii U GamePad.

But if the unique features of the Wii U weren't an incentive and Wii U didn't have better graphics, and if better graphics were the only real incentive, then third parties were screwed no matter what they did.

The Catch-22 for Nintendo is this: chasing better graphics than competing consoles has been a reliably poor strategy for them as a console maker and a software maker. But without chasing better graphics than competing consoles, they have no chance to capture the market for third-party multiplatform games that exists on other consoles. What should Nintendo do in this scenario?
Still bought watch dog on ps4
 
And if it made no sense to play them on Wii U, why is it third parties' fault that no one bought them for Wii U?

Moreover, on a hypothetical Nintendo console where Nintendo's own brands can succeed - brands whose market has consistently valued low-price, highly-differentiated hardware platforms that align with their "fun first" values - will the situation be any different for third parties than it is now?

Or do we think Nintendo will stop making software that's "appealing to everyone" and will instead make software that appeals only to core gamers? (Serious question: will this leave them with anything besides the stuff that consistently failed them in the N64/GameCube/3DS/Wii U eras?)



I never said it was solely their fault. I said that the narrative that 3rd parties tried their best on Wii U is a flawed one.
 
Only because devs are going to use it as an excuse and most people, including journalists, won't realize how BS of an excuse it is. Seriously, looking at where the world is going, if you can't program for ARM you are fucking screwed. If your engine can't run on ARM, you need a new engine.
That would be a very cheap excuse, far worse than any they used to avoid developing games on the Wii U. No actually it wouldn't be an excuse at all, so let's hope they just say "userbase isn't there" if they don't want to port something.

I'm not even expecting an official name for NX through this days. The least I expect is the classic "We will talk more about NX at E3. Please buy Star Fox Zero"
Rotfl
 
I never said it was solely their fault. I said that the narrative that 3rd parties tried their best on Wii U is a flawed one.

I own (Assassin's Creed III, Darksiders II) and/or rented (Sonic & All-Stars Racing Transformed, Mass Effect 3, Tekken Tag Tournament, Deus Ex) a good number of the early third-party ports. I disagree with this pretty strongly. Most third parties embraced the challenge of using the Wii U GamePad very well with their big games.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom