What's so horrible about the idea of a third-party Nintendo?

I like the dualshock 2 controller but imagine trying to play F-ZeroGX or Monkeyball with it. The sticks on the dualshock get the job done but I'm not really to fond of them. It's the only thing I don't like about that controller.

But yeah, I'd rather have Nintendo games on Nintendo hardware for that reason. Also, with the GC controller, I've noticed for games where you have a button depressed for long periods(racers, shooter, etc) it's easier on the thumbs.
 
Gart said:
I like the dualshock 2 controller but imagine trying to play F-ZeroGX or Monkeyball with it. The sticks on the dualshock get the job done but I'm not really to fond of them. It's the only thing I don't like about that controller.
Click to expand...

I'm imagining playing F-Zero GX and Monkeyball with Dual Shock 2 and it seems to me that it still owns.
 
Oh not again! Like it hasn't been discussed like a thousand times. Nintendo will probably become Sega if they go third-party. I'd rather see Microsoft go back to PC gaming where they belong afterall, if Xenon doesn't succeed , than Nintendo to become third party.
 
Why rely on other people fanbase to sell your games. Why is the idea horrible? Because i played a nintendo when i was about 5, a super nintendo when i was about 7, a nintendo 64 when i was about 13 and a Gamecube when i was 16-ish. they are the reason i and many others got into games.
Having mario or zelda on a sony or microsoft platform isn't rite.
 
Amir0x said:
I'm imagining playing F-Zero GX and Monkeyball with Dual Shock 2 and it seems to me that it still owns.
Click to expand...

Wish I had an adapter so I could try this out. I don't know what is about the Dualshock's sticks. I guess I feel they're not as precise.
 
Nintendo makes over 50% profit margin on 1st party titles. Going third party would reduce that profit margin to about 12%. PS2 and Xbox demographics diss Nintendo and mascot games- not much increased sales there (Sonic as example). Do the math. Nintendo is not going third party. It ain't just pride; it is $$$.
 
MarkRyan said:
The touch screen may be fine for games specifically designed for it, but in no way should it replace an analog stick.
Click to expand...
Have you played Metroid Prime Hunters? Its control scheme is damn near perfect. Using the stylus to point where you want to shoot (left shoulder button to shoot) is hell of a lot better than dual analog BS. I've hated dual analog since Turok already perfected FPS controls with a controller, and now I wish the NDS has GCN/Revolution connectivity for FPS gaming on consoles.

I started FPS gaming on PC/Mac and fell in love with them during the N64 era, but i prefer more accurate control than those horrible analog sticks.
As people have pointed out in the past... touch screen controls isn't just fine for those designed specifically for them. There are many genres out there on PC that translate perfectly with a touch screen rather than analog.

I also hate the Dual Shock (1 and 2). The original PSX controller had a great digital pad, loved the handles, and extra shoulder buttons but then they slapped on the two sticks for the DS. Great idea, but badly implemented. As someone mentioned already, they're at a bad angle (and too damn close together), way too fucking loose (and still are), and the shoulder buttons' (in the DS2) lack of a real analog feel (squishy!!!) for the shoulder buttons is just really really stupid.

Nintendo should consider making controllers for other consoles and that are supported by the developers DAMMIT.

Oh, and i forgot to mention that by adding the dual sticks, it in effect, shortened the handles and because I was so used to holding the pad the original way the sticks' round base started to jab into my hands/fingers. And I still haven't gotten used to those damn pudgey handles because the N64, Dreamcast, GCN and the Xbox controllers offered ample handle space for my hands to grip onto. Just a minor complaint about it that i wanted to add. =P
 
You know, their business is really driven by software so in shouldn't be a problem in theory. But in practice I don't see them every making the shift successfully because of reasons like pride and money. I honestly think they would be better off supporting a handheld in full and branching out elsewhere.
 
Why even debate this issue? I'm confident that Nintendo will be going 2nd or 3rd party this upcoming generation or the one following that, at the latest.
 
The best example would be Sega. I don't want Nintendo to turn into Sega, a tired old shell of it's former self. They seem to be doing worse now than when they were still in the hardware business.
 
Isn't it generally agreed that Nintendo software throughput has already faltered and grown lazy? You'd still play with tired Mario Party sequels and half finished titles like SMS or Pikmin with little difference.
 
Saturnman said:
Isn't it generally agreed that Nintendo software throughput has already faltered and grown lazy? You'd still play with tired Mario Party sequels and half finished titles like SMS or Pikmin with little difference.
Click to expand...
On GameCube, it's arguable. GBA however is top notch, probably boasting the best 1st party software of any platform this generation.

It's more that EAD's faltered than Nintendo themselves, other divisions (IntSysy, Retro, R&D1, etc) are doing better than ever. Sort of like Sega with Dreamcast, where Sonic Team and AM2 took a nosedive with the quality of their output, but other Sega divisions like Smilebit, Visual Concepts and Amusement Vision started improving dramatically.
 
Where the hell would we be if Nintendo wasn't making hardware? Their controllers and handhelds are perfect examples of where they lead others will [try and] follow. Analog sticks to control movement in a 3d enviroment (not an original thing, but Nintendo made it popular), handheld hardware that allowed for interchangable software (I'm not sure if this is original or not, but again, Nintendo popularized it) and a very efficient/smart way for making consoles (ok, I'm reaching here, but MS is following in Nintendo's footsteps with the Xenon).

I'm wondering, if SEGA didn't implement the squishy analog shoulder buttons in their controllers, would current consoles have them? Both Sony and Nintendo didn't think of using analog buttons in their consoles even though both their consoles' racing games would be enhanced with them. Sony obviously didn't think to add analog sticks to their controller until Nintendo did.
So I wonder some more... do only companies who make games and hardware know what's best in making hardware? Yes, I understand that Sony makes games too, but how much input did their game developers have in the design for the hardware? Sony added two analog sticks but what games really need two? IMO, even though FPS take advantage of them I already think turok's controls were perfect. The analog clicky buttons are just gimmicky and just really poor substitutes for the tactile (squishy!) ones.
At least MS added an HD for quicker access to games and saves.
 
Amir0x said:
I'm imagining playing F-Zero GX and Monkeyball with Dual Shock 2 and it seems to me that it still owns.
Click to expand...

I have played Fzero and Monkeyball with the DS2 and it's actually not that bad. Though the sticks are loose and because of that, it's not as good as playing with the cube controllers.
 
Nothing is horrible about it at all, i'd be happy to see all the 1st party publishers on one system, and i dont care who makes that system...obviously they wouldnt all be 1st party then, but you see what i mean.


I can't see it ever happening though (not with nintendo anyway, i could see MS givng up somewhere down the line and keeping bungie and a couple of other teams making games for another console) I think even if Nintendo pulled out of the home console market they'd just stick their full weight behind the handheld market.
 
Microsoft should go third party. They could provide a cross platform online service, which is already regarded as the best, and provide XNA middleware to many more developers putting their own videogame software, the PC and Pocket PC versions of Windows/Longhorn etc in good stead.

Seriously, whats horrible about the idea of that?

Oh that's right, people here prefer Xbox. Well sorry folks, but an equal proportion of people playing Xbox in the world, play Gamecube. Double the amount played N64, and Nintendo are one of the premiere global gaming software publishers, with a high share of the portable gaming market. So no.

Oh and:
EVERY FUCKING WEEK I SWEAR.

Threads about manufacturing companies (other than SEGA) going third party should be added to the banstick list.
 
Welcome to Nintendoom week....

Anyway, probably the only reason to keep Nintendo around in the hardware business is the fact that they've always made the most sturdy hardware. Look at the damn Gamecube. Fast loading times and good lenses. My PS2 is huffing it's last goddamn breath while I play San Andreas while my GC still runs perfectly smooth. (Although that may be due to the fact that the Gamecube is hardly ever utilised these days)
 
open_mouth_ said:
Why even debate this issue? I'm confident that Nintendo will be going 2nd or 3rd party this upcoming generation or the one following that, at the latest.
Click to expand...

Nah more possible is Microsoft to return to third party than Nintendo to become one.

And btw I second that:

EVERY FUCKING WEEK I SWEAR.
Click to expand...
 
Che said:
Nah more possible is Microsoft to return to third party than Nintendo to become one.

And btw I second that:
Click to expand...

nah more possible for nintendo to can plans for "revolution", especially after the latest sales fiascos in the homme console arena
 
I'd say handheld only within the next decade is far more likely than seeing Mario or Pokemon show up on PlayStation or Xbox platform. Even with their decreased position in consoles, Nintendo still holds the most valuable collection of game properties in the world. They really have no incentive to make games on anyone's else's machine (indeed it'd be overwhelmingly more beneficial for Sony/MS to see Nintendo out of consoles, with games on their platforms), unless they were given extremely favorable terms. Microsoft might try that, but I doubt Sony would throw them a bone.
 
bitwise said:
nah more possible for nintendo to can plans for "revolution", especially after the latest sales fiascos in the homme console arena
Click to expand...
GameCube turned a profit though. A much larger profit than Nintendo would've as a PS2/Xbox licensee.
 
SonicMegaDrive said:
No. Matter of fact, I still get good mileage out of my NES, SNES, N64, and Gameboys. Can't say the same for my Sega and Sony systems.
Click to expand...
Not even your MegaDrive or Saturn? :(
 
Jeez, what a bunch of dinosaurs in this thread.

I think many of you are missing the direction things are headed, and is precisely what nintendo is missing to. A big reason that nintendo blew it is because they are holding on to the notion of a game only system, but sony and MS see it, a system that also plays MOVIES and MUSIC, 2 things alot of people like to do in addition to games.

Consoles are going to add more functions with each iteration, which is why MS got in this business. They can forsee a time when the pc is replaced by a all in one box which runs off your television, hooked up to the net without their core business windows running it.

And this notion that MS and sony are not innovating is BS, MS added a hard drive which allows me to make music lists like a ipod, which I am presently listening to while I write this. It also allows me to download game content, play Xbox live, a game service that has never been done successfully on a console.

Sony has introduced eyetoy, a new way to play games that reminds me of something nintendo would do, like the ds dual touch screen.


You guys holding on to the notion that consoles should be a 1 function only box are going to be disappointed, and if nintendo doesnt get its shit together next generation will be worse than this one. They need to change philosophies, the times have changed. The way some of you are talking I think nintendo has been listening too much to its fans.
 
I'm sure most of you non-Nintendo whores wouldn't mind seeing the work of your favorite gaming company show up on a machine of their own design, if they could financially pull it off. As well, for reasons of size, price, look, loading time, top loading, controller, controller ports, and noise, I quite prefer GCN hardware to PS2 hardware; though of course some of those advantages have been removed with recent PS2 models.
 
I just think its stupid that Nintendo has been making hardware for longer than both the other guys and yet everyone wants them to stop that.
 
If Revolution offers other things in the way that DS offers built in wireless chat, stylus control and an inbuilt microphone -- even if it is just multifunctionality of some form - I think this BS 'they should go third party' talk will all but cease for the most part. Bring on E3!
 
Flatbread said:
Jeez, what a bunch of dinosaurs in this thread.
Click to expand...
Naw, Nintendo's just ahead of their time. They had networked set top box ambitions back in the early 1980s with Famicom originally. If it makes you feel better though, Iwata mentioned they won't allow the competition any advantages when it comes to featuresets next gen.
 
jarrod said:
Not even your MegaDrive or Saturn? :(
Click to expand...

I'll admit, my Saturn has held up very well. Bought mine on release day, and I'm still playing my original. The cartridge slot acts up, and I get disc errors from time to time, but it works pretty good for a disc system that has seen consistent usage since 1995.(as a side note, I went through 4 Playstations from 1995-2000. Still on my 4th one, though I never play it anymore).

Though that still isn't as impressive as my NES. Working fine since 1986, baby!
 
what's so horrible about it is we'd have to see at least 50 more troll threads from drinky crow alone bitching about uninspired nintendo cashins ruining his ps2 library of uninspired square-enix, konami, capcom etc. cashins.
 
I think the real problem is whether they can really survive 3rd party. There are a lot of costs going into the 3rd party, where normally that would be profit, or money.
 
Flatbread said:
Jeez, what a bunch of dinosaurs in this thread.

I think many of you are missing the direction things are headed, and is precisely what nintendo is missing to. A big reason that nintendo blew it is because they are holding on to the notion of a game only system, but sony and MS see it, a system that also plays MOVIES and MUSIC, 2 things alot of people like to do in addition to games.

Consoles are going to add more functions with each iteration, which is why MS got in this business. They can forsee a time when the pc is replaced by a all in one box which runs off your television, hooked up to the net without their core business windows running it.

And this notion that MS and sony are not innovating is BS, MS added a hard drive which allows me to make music lists like a ipod, which I am presently listening to while I write this. It also allows me to download game content, play Xbox live, a game service that has never been done successfully on a console.

Sony has introduced eyetoy, a new way to play games that reminds me of something nintendo would do, like the ds dual touch screen.


You guys holding on to the notion that consoles should be a 1 function only box are going to be disappointed, and if nintendo doesnt get its shit together next generation will be worse than this one. They need to change philosophies, the times have changed. The way some of you are talking I think nintendo has been listening too much to its fans.
Click to expand...

Thank god you're here to wake up us disoraurs. :P Anyway I don't think multimedia functions are THAT important to determine the future of a console. And don't forget that in case Xenon has a HD-DVD and PS3 Blu-Ray things are gonna be more complex. Does it affect sales? Yes. A lot? No. As we've all seen big franchises, power, and hype are the main reasons affecting console sales. And it seems that Nintendo next gen will have the first two and it's in their hands and with the right marketing to succeed to the the last one. Things are much better than many Nintendo haters are trying to make it look.
 
Amir0x said:
That made me :lol

Seriously, though, that handle was the worst design decision Nintendo has ever made (aesthetically speaking and not including Virtual Boy). Not because it isn't functional... but it just tosses everything off and makes it even uglier. A generic box was bad enough :(

I hope Revolution is so rad that it makes my eyes explode just by looking at it.
Click to expand...

And my opinion is exactly the opposite. Outside of the launch color and the top-loading design, I think the Gamecube is brilliant in its minimalist qualities. With the GB Player attached, it's an actual cube, and the size of the unit completely betrays the amount of power under the hood. I think that's really cool; it's essentially a $99 bragging box: "Look how much stuff we can cram into this amount of space."

The thing's won design awards, you know?

At the other end, there's the XBox, which looks okay if you're talking about the crystal variation, and you're squinting.
 
I can understand the arguement that Nintendo should keep producing hardware for financial reasons (revenue per sale, limiting competition for their titles) but the whole idea that experiencing a game on one system is better than experiencing it on another is fucking retarded. :lol Would Pikmin be less fun if it was played on a console made by Coca-Cola, or one that has Nike Swoosh on the side of it? When I watch DVDs, I don't give a rat's ass if the DVD player is a Sony or a Panasonic. I watch the movie for the movie, not for the hardware it's on.

It would be great if there was a common hardware model and I could buy it from a hundred different manufacturers. Let all game makers go third party for all I care. I'd love to not have to play Zelda on the horrible GC controller, and I'd love to see MS license Xbox live to other companies. The Halo 2 experience would be the same on Sony or Nintendo hardware, provided that I could use the a good controller and sign onto Xbox live.
 
Slo said:
I can understand the arguement that Nintendo should keep producing hardware for financial reasons (revenue per sale, limiting competition for their titles) but the whole idea that experiencing a game on one system is better than experiencing it on another is fucking retarded.
Click to expand...

It has more to do with Nintendo only having to answer to Nintendo. See also: SCEA's rather haphazard (and sometimes random) treatment of publishers.)
 
Honestly, Nintendo going third-party nowadays would make no sense. If they were going to go third-party, they should've done it after the Super NES era. Back then, EVERYBODY wanted Nintendo's games, even people who didn't necessarily own a Nintendo system.

Today, not even the Nintendo fanboys really eat up Nintendo's shit like they used to. Without a dedicated userbase, Nintendo would be even deeper into the dumpster -- and would have to pay royalties on top of it all. On PlayStation 2, Nintendo would just be another face in the crowd.
 
xsarien said:
It has more to do with Nintendo only having to answer to Nintendo. See also: SCEA's rather haphazard and (sometimes random) treatment of publishers.)
Click to expand...
Not only that, but knowing the ins and out of your own hardware helps immensely. Compare Sega's amazing work with Saturn software (arguably the most difficult platform to work on) and how they struggle these days on PS2 (also arguably the difficult platform to work on). Sega was doing Saturn games that even rivaled the best PS1 software at the time, yet their PS2 output is overwhelmingly mediocre compared to other 3rd parties.
 
snapty00 said:
Honestly, Nintendo going third-party nowadays would make no sense. If they were going to go third-party, they should've done it after the Super NES era. Back then, EVERYBODY wanted Nintendo's games, even people who didn't necessarily own a Nintendo system.

Today, not even the Nintendo fanboys really eat up Nintendo's shit like they used to. Without a dedicated userbase, Nintendo would be even deeper into the dumpster -- and would have to pay royalties on top of it all. On PlayStation 2, Nintendo would just be another face in the crowd.
Click to expand...
Well, Nintendo's still got a bit of pull, depsite GameCube's performance. Mario Sunshine is still the best selling platformer this generation. Pokemon RuSa is still the best selling game this gen. These properties are still very lucrative... moreso than those of any other single game company even. Particularly among Japanese publishers, all of whom have taken a bit of humbling this generation.

Nintendo can still stand up to EA, UbiSoft, THQ or Activision in the world market. That's something Sega Sammy, Capcom, Namco, Konami or Square Enix can't really say these days.
 
Slo said:
It would be great if there was a common hardware model and I could buy it from a hundred different manufacturers. Let all game makers go third party for all I care.
Click to expand...

Trip Hawkins called, he wants his idea back.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Locked
What's the next Sony AAA IP to go third party on Nintendo Switch/Switch 2?
32
486
StueyDuck replied
Will Sony become third party publisher?
2 3 4 5
232
3K
RCX replied
[ My Nintendo News] Bloomberg: Nintendo stopped Amazon US sales as third-party sellers were offering games lower than advertised rates
2
67
501
ReBurn replied
The Game Business: It was the biggest console launch of all time, but was Nintendo Switch 2 a success for third-parties?
Business Analysis Sales-Age  2 3
123
819
Miyazaki’s Slave replied
  • Poll
Are Nintendo preventing third parties from announcing Switch 2 games?
2 3
102
5K
RetroGamingUK replied
Top Bottom