Support NeoGAF

[Platy]

This game features :

Sonic - Sonic - New games coming 2017

Aiai - Super Monkey Ball - Last game : Super Monkey Ball Bounce (Android, iOS) (2014), non mobile was Banana Splitz (PlayStation Vita) in (2012)

Beat - Jet Set Radio - Last Game - Jet Set Radio HD (2012), non remaster : Jet Grind Radio (GBA) (2003)

B.D. Joe - Crazy Taxi - Last Game - Crazy Taxi City Rush (mobile) (2014). non mobile was Crazy Taxi: Fare Wars (PSP) (2007)

Ulala - Space Channel 5 - Last Game : Space Channel 5 VR: Ukiuki Viewing Show (no release date). non VR remaster was a weird cellphone game and non remaster or mobile : Space Channel 5: Part 2 (Dreamcast) (2002)

Amigo - Samba de Amigo - Last Game : Samba de Amigo (Wii) (2008). It was kinda of a port but it was enhanced and had stuff from the second arcade game

Alex Kidd - Alex Kidd - Last Game : Alex Kidd in Shinobi World (Master System) (1990) =(

Vyse - Skies of Arcadia - Last Game : Skies of Arcadia Legends (Gamecube) (2002). Enhanced port of the only game in the series

Gilius Thunderhead - Golden Axe - Last game : Golden Axe: Beast Rider (Ps3) (2008) oh god why

Joe Musashi - Shinobi - Last Game : Shinobi 3D (3DS) (2011)

NiGHTS - NiGHTS - Last game : Nights: Journey of Dreams (Wii) (2007)

Football Manager - Football Manager - Last Game - Football Manager 2017 (PC) (2016)

Shogun - Total War - Last game : Total War: Warhammer (PC) (2016)

General Winter - Company of Heroes - Last Game : Company of Heroes 2 (PC) (2015)

Ryo Hazuki - Shenmue - Last Game : it is complicated =P Either Shenmue II (Dreamcast) (2011) or Shenmue III (PS4) (god knows when)

Forgot the franchises represented by stages !

Carrier Zone - After burner - Last Game : After Burner Climax (Ps3) (2010) first released on arcades on 2006

Dragon Canyon - Panzer Dragoon - Last Game : Panzer Dragoon Orta (XBox) (2003)

Chilly Castle - Billy Hatcher and the Giant Egg - Only Game. (Gamecube) (2003)

Graveyard Gig - The House of the Dead - Last Game - The Typing of the Dead: Overkill (PC) (2013). Version of The House of the Dead: Overkill (Wii) (2009)

Burning Depths - Burning Rangers - Only Game (Saturn) (1998)

OutRun Bay - OutRun - Last Game : OutRun Online Arcade (360) (2009)

 

[Nanashrew]

Because publishers publish games? It all depends on how many platforms, and how many games per platform Nintendo would want to publish year. (PC/PS4/X1/Mobile etc)

Well they already publish somewhere between 20 to 30 titles yearly with the exception of hardware transition years.

I'd kinda expect that to drop off once going 3rd party because I don't believe any 3rd party has ever matched that. Maybe in past years where 3rd parties could make and publish a ton of games a year.

We have issues with 3rd party publishers in Japan these days with localization and getting their stuff here. Nintendo has also helped greatly in localization of some games, even footing half or most of the bill like the Dragon Quest games on 3DS.

I don't believe Nintendo would be in a position to help as much as they could.

 

[AntMurda]

Think of everything those two had to lose in order to compete with other third parties. Capcom is bascially a Resident Evil/Monster Hunter/Street Fighter factory and Square Enix would only have Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest if it weren't for the Eidos buyout. Now imagine that but with Nintendo.

Nintendo has a dozen of IPS that sell gold (500k) to platinum (million +) in Japan alone. Most the other big Japanese publishers have like 2-4 IPs that reach those plateaus. Nintendo is in a league of their own, meaning there really isn't a suitable juxtaposition to compare.

 

[rawbhawb]

Square Enix is diversifying their line up by releasing AAA stuff like Tomb Raider, Deus Ex, and Final Fantasy with smaller things like I Am Setsuna, Life is Strange, episodic Hitman and Dragon Quest spinoffs.

Not every game has to be released with the intent of making a multimillion dollar profit. Those acting like Nintendo are incapable of making and publishing anything beyond Mario and Pokemon if they go third party are silly.

 

[DSix]

So just like now? I feel like outside of Splatoon Nintendo didn't really do much new stuff with the Wii U.

Agreed.

Nintendo's already at their bottom level of creativity. They still have their amazing craftsmanship, but almost nothing is really new.

As they are, they would fit right in with the other 3rd parties.

 

[Snakeyes]

Since several posters have already given enough of the usual examples as to why going third party would most likely impact Nintendo's output negatively, I'll just ask this; Why should they? What does Nintendo gain from going third party?

It's not monetary reasons, as Nintendo's current revenue (500B yen) is in the same ballpark as some of the most successful third-party publishers (Activision/Blizzard, EA, Ubisoft). As that other thread pointed out, nearly half of that figure is from hardware sales, which means that Nintendo would have to sell twice the amount of software to make up the difference.

They're also pulling these numbers with several thousand less employees than those companies, and that's despite some of their lowest hardware sales since entering the industry. If 3DS/Wii U era Nintendo is already on par with some of the best-case scenarios for a third party publisher, why give up the perks of being a platform holder and a familiar business structure?

Moreover, going third party also means closing the door on the off chance of another Wii/DS-like generation, when they were making between 1.5 and 2 trillion yen in revenue for multiple years. The potential payoff for a successful, or even a moderately successful generation is much greater than what they could accomplish as a third party.

 

[AquaWateria]

Agreed.

Nintendo's already at their bottom level of creativity. They still have their amazing craftsmanship, but almost nothing they do is really new.

As they are, they would fit right in with the other 3rd parties.

Okay now this is absolute bullshit.

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

Agreed.

Nintendo's already at their bottom level of creativity. They still have their amazing craftsmanship, but almost nothing is really new.

As they are, they would fit right in with the other 3rd parties.

Lets not get into hyperbole. Just because a familiar face is in the game doesnt mean they arent creative.

 

[archreaper93]

If companies like Ubisoft can occasionally do stuff, like Grow Home or Valiant Hearts, outside their forte, I can imagine Nintendo still doing some of the things, if not everything, you said no to.

Nowhere near as often as they do now. Despite what people say, Nintendo doesn't just make Mario and Zelda games. Just this gen for games that aren't Mario, Zelda, Animal Crossing, or Pokemon (stuff I could see 3rd party Nintendo still regularly making), Nintendo published:

Bayonetta 2.
Wonderful 101.
Kirby: Triple Deluxe
Kirby: Planet Robobot
Tokyo Mirage Sessions.
Pikmin 3.
Kirby and the Rainbow Curse.
Xenoblade Chronicles X.
Star Fox Zero.
Fatal Frame V.
Devil's Third.
Fire Emblem Awakening.
Fire Emblem Fates.
Codename Steam.
Lego City Undercover.
Splatoon.
Hyrule Warriors.
Fossil Fighters Frontier.
Kid Icarus: Uprising.
Tomodachi Life.
Fantasy Life.

You think a 3rd party Nintendo would have published even a fraction of these, in addition to the Marios, and the Zeldas, and the Pokemons?

 

[astrogamer]

Square Enix is diversifying their line up by releasing AAA stuff like Tomb Raider, Deus Ex, and Final Fantasy with smaller things like I Am Setsuna, Life is Strange, episodic Hitman and Dragon Quest spinoffs.

Not every game has to be released with the intent of making a multimillion dollar profit. Those acting like Nintendo are incapable of making and publishing anything beyond Mario and Pokemon if they go third party are silly.

Square Enix is only capable of that because they are on an upswing. Nintendo as a third party would be in recovery. Episodic Hitman is an effort to make the series profitable and Dragon Quest spinoffs are replacing Dragon Quest remakes with limited success. Tokyo RPG Factory honestly wasn't a very good business decision unless they are trying to hide something with it. Way too much money to make stuff like I Am Setsuna.

Nintendo would narrow its focus a lot as a third party and only do stuff like Square Enix after capitalizing on their brands. While it wouldn't be just Pokemon and Mario, it would be lowering its output from 20-30 to around 10 titles with many fan favorites being pushed to the sidelines unless they can be proven to be million sellers. Stuff like Unravel and Grow Home wouldn't come out of Nintendo until a few years after becoming a third party and stabilizing their output

 

[Nanashrew]

Square Enix is diversifying their line up by releasing AAA stuff like Tomb Raider, Deus Ex, and Final Fantasy with smaller things like I Am Setsuna, Life is Strange, episodic Hitman and Dragon Quest spinoffs.

Not every game has to be released with the intent of making a multimillion dollar profit. Those acting like Nintendo are incapable of making and publishing anything beyond Mario and Pokemon if they go third party are silly.

Those Dragon Quest spinoffs never come over except for DQ Builders and Heroes cause it's a Minecraft clone and a Dynasty Warriors clone. The Minecraft clone can be better marketed in the west because It's Minecraft but with goals. DQ Heroes is an experiment.

You also forgot Bravely Default which Square Enix almost completely forgot about and the social media account going completely dead for more than a year? I think. Could be longer. No one knew if it was being localized or anything.

Square Enix is diversifying but it doesn't show that well in the west unless their hand is forced or get the help necessary.

 

[Paz]

In this thread: People who have no idea what the words creative or innovative mean, and assume something having an existing character or setting attached means it is barred from being either of those things.

Also yes I believe Nintendo's quality would drop if they went third party, one of their biggest strengths has always been the union behind hardware and software design, it doesn't always work out with every project but it's definitely something that has allowed Nintendo to be a top tier consistent game developer for longer than anyone else.

 

[PKrockin]

With Nintendo taking five to six years to make a new Zelda for a home console they designed, I have a hard time imagining a much smaller Nintendo able to justify that opportunity cost even if it sells well. I believe Nintendo said at E3 Breath of the Wild has the largest team they've ever had working on one game.

 

[Ridley327]

With Nintendo taking five to six years to make a new Zelda for a home console they designed, I have a hard time imagining a much smaller Nintendo able to justify that opportunity cost even if it sells well. I believe Nintendo said at E3 Breath of the Wild has the largest team they've ever had working on one game.

They also said later that the game would be profitable at 2 million copies, which says a lot about how well they keep budgets under control since a western equivalent would almost certainly require double that at an absolute minimum.

 

[AntMurda]

With Nintendo taking five to six years to make a new Zelda for a home console they designed, I have a hard time imagining a much smaller Nintendo able to justify that opportunity cost even if it sells well. I believe Nintendo said at E3 Breath of the Wild has the largest team they've ever had working on one game.

How would they be much smaller? I mean the only people that would get fired are the hardware designers.

 

[Nanashrew]

With Nintendo taking five to six years to make a new Zelda for a home console they designed, I have a hard time imagining a much smaller Nintendo able to justify that opportunity cost even if it sells well. I believe Nintendo said at E3 Breath of the Wild has the largest team they've ever had working on one game.

It's also a brand new engine so that counts towards the delays as well. These days companies are going more and more towards licensing engines like Unreal Engine.

But that new Zelda engine will likely be used for all their games going forward.

 

[Vinci]

I think the largest impact would be on the diversity and frequency of their releases. Nintendo tends to work hard to ensure that their franchise releases are extremely high quality, and their lack of control and full understanding of the hardware would likely cause their output to be more sporadic and less consistent. In addition, this same issue would lead them to prioritize only those titles which they deem most likely to succeed. After all, they wouldn't be responsible for building the hardware's library / ecosystem any longer. That would be someone else's problem.

In other words, they'd probably become a very talented but normal 3rd party in terms of how it treats its output and determines where to invest its money.

 

[Astral Dog]

Without a doubt, their entire qiality control and business plans would become unmanageable and unstable eventually

 

[Chindogg]

The same way EA can publish something like Unravel. They're still a publisher. They still can get pitches or seek out something to fund they see promise in.



If companies like Ubisoft can occasionally do stuff, like Grow Home or Valiant Hearts, outside their forte, I can imagine Nintendo still doing some of the things, if not everything, you said no to.

Unravel, Grow Home, and Valiant Hearts as much as they're great games are not the same calibur as Splatoon, Fire Emblem, Metroid, Pikmin, etc.

Unless you want very small budget instances of those franchises, you're not getting them with a 3rd party Nintendo. You'd get Pushmo, Dillion's Rolling Adventures, and maybe Captain Toad's Treasure Tracker.

 

[Oersted]

Because publishers publish games? It all depends on how many platforms, and how many games per platform Nintendo would want to publish year. (PC/PS4/X1/Mobile etc)

You do know that Bayonetta already had a publisher who didn't want to fund and publish a sequel, right?

Square Enix is diversifying their line up by releasing AAA stuff like Tomb Raider, Deus Ex, and Final Fantasy with smaller things like I Am Setsuna, Life is Strange, episodic Hitman and Dragon Quest spinoffs.

Not every game has to be released with the intent of making a multimillion dollar profit. Those acting like Nintendo are incapable of making and publishing anything beyond Mario and Pokemon if they go third party are silly.

Nintendo had to pay for the Dragon Quest localization, Microsoft more than likely paid for limited Lara Croft exclusivity and Life is Strange funnily enough came to life because SE turned down a bigger game.

 

[Prototype]

I don't think there's any reason to believe that the quality of Nintendo titles would drop if they went 3rd party. In fact, I think they may even improve. Without the hassle of having to spend $ R&D, ect on hardware they could 100% focus their efforts on making games. Nothing they've done couldn't be on on say the PS4 or a PC.

Edit

Without a doubt, their entire qiality control and business plans would become unmanageable and unstable eventually

What does this even mean?

 

[PKrockin]

They also said later that the game would be profitable at 2 million copies, which says a lot about how well they keep budgets under control since a western equivalent would almost certainly require double that at an absolute minimum.

Wow, I hadn't heard that. Sounds like it was responsible and well managed, then, from what relatively little I know about the game (I've watched the E3 stuff and couldn't resist peeking at a few of the recent screenshots but am mostly going blind since E3).

 

[ggx2ac]

What I find funny is the suggestion that Nintendo would be fine financially if they just exited their hardware business, that apparently they won't end up like Sega because Sega was bankrupt.

Someone just showed earlier that their hardware revenue outdoes their software revenue each year consistently.

Nintendo exiting hardware would cause them to lose a major source of revenue. The hardware they sell becomes profitable because it's not the same as having to do a multi-million dollar budget for each game they make for that hardware.

http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=740455

https://www.statista.com/statistics/216629/nintendo-sales-by-product/

For Nintendo to exit the hardware business means they'd have to do more than double their software revenue to make up for losing hardware revenue. Not only that but they'd lose money on their current software revenue having to pay licensing or royalties to other platforms.

If you're telling me the quality of their software won't go down once they exit the hardware business since they'll have to do more than double the revenue of their software with no other revenue source for them to make Nintendo-like profits for their investors well, I've got some magic beans I'd like to sell you.

I'd also like to add that Nintendo recently acquired a supply chain distributor in Japan. Exiting the hardware business means a lot of jobs become redundant for not only Nintendo but also that supply chain, Nintendo would lose a lot of money from making those staff redundant.

 

[blame space]

the production quality would improve, but they wouldn't make their b-tier games which would be a huge loss.

 

[AntMurda]

the production quality would improve, but they wouldn't make their b-tier games which would be a huge loss.

What do you consider B tier? Because a ton of those games you might consider B-tier are selling well and will continue to be made.

For example. Rhythm Tengoku > Pikmin.

 

[Laughing Banana]

People say "new IP" like they're some sort of holy grail or something. How many companies create "new IPs" but the gameplay involved bogged down into the samey old shoot this shoot that shoot this shoot that?

"New IP" is something that quickly lost their meaning to me. Especially when they are often spoken by people whose favorite company I doubt even adhere to their standards of "new IP" anyways.

 

[blame space]

rhythm heaven is exactly the kind of game that wouldn't get made if Nintendo had to compete with PlayStation software.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

This may seem hyperbole on my part, but if Nintendo were to become full third party I'd probably quit gaming all together.

I mean growing older has kind of refined my taste where these days I don't have time to play much games. There's only a select few that I do play and they mostly align with Nintendo with some outside. I'm sure that if Nintendo did go third party they would change into a different company and most likely lose their morale that they had as a first party.

But oh well those of you that do want Nintendo to become third party will most likely regret it. Then again you probably never did gave a shit.

I wouldn't quite gaming entirely, but my interest in this hobby would diminish substantially. 95% of my gaming time would be spent on older titles.

I love games from MS, Sony, and third parties, but they're not the reason I continue to play games. Nintendo is. Those other guys are basically along for the ride.

Fortunately, Nintendo will continue to make hardware for a long, long time.

 

[ggx2ac]

the production quality would improve, but they wouldn't make their b-tier games which would be a huge loss.

Say hello to predatory DLC and microtransactions because there's no magic button for Nintendo to hit to make more than double their software revenue to make up for the loss of hardware revenue and make Nintendo-like profits for their investors which I reference in the post above yours.

 

[blame space]

i refuse to believe that sentence is in English.

 

[ggx2ac]

Nvm.

 

[Shikamaru Ninja]

rhythm heaven is exactly the kind of game that wouldn't get made if Nintendo had to compete with PlayStation software.

How does that make sense if the game was specifically developed for a wide Japanese audience and it succeeded in hitting the 500k to 1 million mark consecutively.

Bayonetta 2 and Devil's Third are better examples of what games Nintendo wouldn't bother publishing if it went third party.

 

[Ridley327]

Wow, I hadn't heard that. Sounds like it was responsible and well managed, then, from what relatively little I know about the game (I've watched the E3 stuff and couldn't resist peeking at a few of the recent screenshots but am mostly going blind since E3).

With the way that Nintendo typically develops games, I'm not terribly surprised that, for them, a large-scale project with a lengthy dev cycle would come in way under the expected budget. We're so used to developers blowing their wad on expensive setpieces and asset creation that seeing something similar like what we've seen with BotW can make someone forget that it's not really angling to be that same kind of experience. It definitely has the same grandiosity and ambition, but it's arriving at it from a very different angle.

That's why I've always been amused about the concern trolling with regards to The Last Guardian's budget, even after it was well established just how small Ueda's team has been and how much of what they were working on in the long run was finding the right hardware target for their ambition.

 

[chrislowe]

Looking at their previous effort on philips cdi i might say yes.

 

[Spyder_Monkey]

the production quality would improve, but they wouldn't make their b-tier games which would be a huge loss.

It'd be more like shittier, annual Zelda and Mario games plus a major paradigm shift that would eventually lead to the loss of major talent because of that. Just like Sega basically.

 

[blame space]

Looking at their previous effort on philips cdi i might say yes.

🤔

 

[modsbox]

I'm sorry... why does everyone think Nintendo would do less niche stuff if they went 3rd party? I don't understand....

If they went from a miniscule installed base (Wii U, GC) to something huge, all that means is that niche titles can actually be profitable instead of a waste of time. Pikmin has a chance to make serious money. Paper Mario Color Splash can sell 5x.

Point is, huge titles for them like Super Mario 3D World or Mario Kart 8 will sell 5-10x what they did on Wii U. Which finances niche titles, and justifies investment in things like Metroid franchise, which die when hardware doesn't sell enough.

Don't get me wrong, I get the idea. We've seen what happened to Sega. But I think people are hugely underestimating Nintendo's franchise power. All their best Wii U titles would sell 5x if available on PS. There is essentially zero competition on PS + Xbox for kid-friendly AAA titles, and that's before you consider that they are one step short of Disney in character recognition.

From my perspective Nintendo is the one company that does massively better as a 3rd party. Keep making handhelds, sure. But put your best stuff on PS & Xbox and watch the money pour in.

 

[Platy]

How does that make sense if the game was specifically developed for a wide Japanese audience and it succeeded in hitting the 500k to 1 million mark consecutively.

Crazy Taxi for the dreamcast sold 1.4 million copies in the USA alone.
After they went third party a Crazy taxi was made for the original Xbox, one for the gba and a compilation for the PSP.

If you mean 2 games and a compilation in 15 years than yeah, Rythm Heaven will still be made.

I guess it is not a big loss since in this time it had 4 games but whatever =P

edit :
crazy taxi 3 is 4 years younger than the first rhythm heaven... and the maximum distance between rhythm heaven games is exactly 4 years between the wii and 3ds ones

 

[AquaWateria]

I'm sorry... why does everyone think Nintendo would do less niche stuff if they went 3rd party? I don't understand....

If they went from a miniscule installed base (Wii U, GC) to something huge, all that means is that niche titles can actually be profitable instead of a waste of time. Pikmin has a chance to make serious money. Paper Mario Color Splash can sell 5x.

Point is, huge titles for them like Super Mario 3D World or Mario Kart 8 will sell 5-10x what they did on Wii U. Which finances niche titles, and justifies investment in things like Metroid franchise, which die when hardware doesn't sell enough.

Don't get me wrong, I get the idea. We've seen what happened to Sega. But I think people are hugely underestimating Nintendo's franchise power. All their best Wii U titles would sell 5x if available on PS. There is essentially zero competition on PS + Xbox for kid-friendly AAA titles, and that's before you consider that they are one step short of Disney in character recognition.

From my perspective Nintendo is the one company that does massively better as a 3rd party. Keep making handhelds, sure. But put your best stuff on PS & Xbox and watch the money pour in.

You do realize hardware is half of Nintendo's revenue?

 

[Raw64life]

Yes. It helps to have the people who the designed the hardware you're developing on sitting right next to you while your making your games. They wouldn't have that.

 

[astrogamer]

I'm sorry... why does everyone think Nintendo would do less niche stuff if they went 3rd party? I don't understand....

If they went from a miniscule installed base (Wii U, GC) to something huge, all that means is that niche titles can actually be profitable instead of a waste of time. Pikmin has a chance to make serious money. Paper Mario Color Splash can sell 5x.

Point is, huge titles for them like Super Mario 3D World or Mario Kart 8 will sell 5-10x what they did on Wii U. Which finances niche titles, and justifies investment in things like Metroid franchise, which die when hardware doesn't sell enough.

Don't get me wrong, I get the idea. We've seen what happened to Sega. But I think people are hugely underestimating Nintendo's franchise power. All their best Wii U titles would sell 5x if available on PS. There is essentially zero competition on PS + Xbox for kid-friendly AAA titles, and that's before you consider that they are one step short of Disney in character recognition.

From my perspective Nintendo is the one company that does massively better as a 3rd party. Keep making handhelds, sure. But put your best stuff on PS & Xbox and watch the money pour in.

Because that's not how markets work. While the Wii U does limit the sales of their software, at best it would double the sales they had on Wii U assuming every Wii U Owner transferred over (i.e. NSMBU compared to NSMB2). The PS4 and XB1's ecosystem just hasn't been all that receptive to kids games (as every notable kid's game has trended downward between generations) and it doesn't seem like they would magically gain that audience. And doubles the sales likely means the same amount of profit as they are currently getting as they now have to pay platformer holders fees to play games on their system.

 

[Nanashrew]

People aren't keeping in mind the split in money a 3rd party publisher gets and the platform owner gets for every copy of a game sold. Nintendo would need sell more to earn back the money they used to get as a 1st party publisher and this would effect how much they can produce.

EDIT: Also everything that astrogamer said. Especially the kids and family game market on those systems. Sony and MS have done little to rebuild that demographic.

 

[ronaldthump]

why would quality drop? They'll probably sell more games too

 

[rawbhawb]

You think a 3rd party Nintendo would have published even a fraction of these, in addition to the Marios, and the Zeldas, and the Pokemons?

I don't doubt they'd release less games each year as a third party. I doubt that they'll purely be a Mario-Zelda-Pokemon machine.


I bring up Square Enix and Ubisoft because they make highly budgeted games hoping to sell multi-millions of copies, as well make games with more modest sales expectations. Nintendo's titles are comparatively cheap to make, even their more expensive ones, and are usually profitable. Their output maybe slower, but I think they can manage fine without exclusively relying on their big hitters.

 

[Mass_Pincup]

I'm sorry... why does everyone think Nintendo would do less niche stuff if they went 3rd party? I don't understand....

If they went from a miniscule installed base (Wii U, GC) to something huge, all that means is that niche titles can actually be profitable instead of a waste of time. Pikmin has a chance to make serious money. Paper Mario Color Splash can sell 5x.

Point is, huge titles for them like Super Mario 3D World or Mario Kart 8 will sell 5-10x what they did on Wii U. Which finances niche titles, and justifies investment in things like Metroid franchise, which die when hardware doesn't sell enough.

Don't get me wrong, I get the idea. We've seen what happened to Sega. But I think people are hugely underestimating Nintendo's franchise power. All their best Wii U titles would sell 5x if available on PS. There is essentially zero competition on PS + Xbox for kid-friendly AAA titles, and that's before you consider that they are one step short of Disney in character recognition.

From my perspective Nintendo is the one company that does massively better as a 3rd party. Keep making handhelds, sure. But put your best stuff on PS & Xbox and watch the money pour in.

They won't do niche titles because niche titles aren't huge sellers. Just look at the multiplatform niche games.

When you're making a console, producing niche titles is a smart idea because you can cater to the niche audience, the audience who buys 10 games a year, games that they can buy on your platform instead of another.

Going 3rd Party would mean that they'll want to achieve the highest possible profitability for all of their games.

Now it wouldn't be as interesting financially wise to invest in Bayonetta 3 because the first 2 sold like shit and you could be investing in something else which sells more.

 

[Aldric]

Point is, huge titles for them like Super Mario 3D World or Mario Kart 8 will sell 5-10x what they did on Wii U. Which finances niche titles, and justifies investment in things like Metroid franchise, which die when hardware doesn't sell enough.

That'd mean an hypothetical 3D World on PS5/Xbox Two would sell 25 to 50 million copies and MK8 40 to 80 million copies. You're talking nonsense.

 

[ggx2ac]

why would quality drop? They'll probably sell more games too

If they don't want to piss off their investors, they'll have to do more than double their software revenue to make up for losing their hardware revenue and that means lots of DLC and microtransactions to get people to pay more than $60 for a game.

Imagine how hard that would be to avoid having franchises decline and end up like those on Activision with Guitar Hero, Skylanders and now CoD.

 

[Htown]

They won't do niche titles because niche titles aren't huge sellers. Just look at the multiplatform niche games.

When you're making a console, producing niche titles is a smart idea because you can cater to the niche audience, the audience who buys 10 games a year, games that they can buy on your platform instead of another.

Going 3rd Party would mean that they'll want to achieve the highest possible profitability for all of their games.

Now it wouldn't be as interesting financially wise to invest in Bayonetta 3 because the first 2 sold like shit and you could be investing in something else which sells more.

Yes. It's why you saw Sega drop Bayonetta 2 and Nintendo pick it up. This exact thing.

 

[archreaper93]

People say "new IP" like they're some sort of holy grail or something. How many companies create "new IPs" but the gameplay involved bogged down into the samey old shoot this shoot that shoot this shoot that?

"New IP" is something that quickly lost their meaning to me. Especially when they are often spoken by people whose favorite company I doubt even adhere to their standards of "new IP" anyways.

Completely agreed.

 

[Otakumegane]

Quality-Honestly I think no.

The issue is

Variety-Yes