Why do you think Nintendo is so successful?
- Thread starter Ainem Enamas
- Start date
awwr999999
Member
Nintendo's strong position today is the direct result of retaining permanent exclusives while having less common 3rd party multi-platform titles.
This makes it harder to judge Nintendo based on games with the exact same title on other platforms.
In hindsight, PlayStation facilitated Xbox's continued existence by failing to retain key permanent exclusive PS2 games.
Key franchises like Grand Theft Auto and Silent Hill built their best games from the ground up around PlayStation hardware.
Best-ever games like Silent Hill 2 and GTA San Andreas both have spectacular audio and visual effects that only exist on the PS2.
Both SH2 and GTA SA were ported to Xbox and sold under the exact same titles despite the fact that they were objectively inferior.
This allowed Xbox users excited about the biggest PS2 games to obtain 'the same games' and then be underwhelmed by the poor performance.
Moving forward, PlayStation needs to rigorously secure key 3rd party games that best utilize PlayStation's proprietary HW as permanent PS exclusives.
Ideally, 3rd party studios would only be allowed to use certain proprietary aspects of the SDK for permanent exclusive games.
E.g., preventing games built around DualSense and other proprietary HW from releasing on rival platforms under the same title.
It should be possible to create a situation where studios are vying for the ability to make deeply optimized PS exclusive games as opposed to multi-platform games.
This makes it harder to judge Nintendo based on games with the exact same title on other platforms.
In hindsight, PlayStation facilitated Xbox's continued existence by failing to retain key permanent exclusive PS2 games.
Key franchises like Grand Theft Auto and Silent Hill built their best games from the ground up around PlayStation hardware.
Best-ever games like Silent Hill 2 and GTA San Andreas both have spectacular audio and visual effects that only exist on the PS2.
Both SH2 and GTA SA were ported to Xbox and sold under the exact same titles despite the fact that they were objectively inferior.
This allowed Xbox users excited about the biggest PS2 games to obtain 'the same games' and then be underwhelmed by the poor performance.
Moving forward, PlayStation needs to rigorously secure key 3rd party games that best utilize PlayStation's proprietary HW as permanent PS exclusives.
Ideally, 3rd party studios would only be allowed to use certain proprietary aspects of the SDK for permanent exclusive games.
E.g., preventing games built around DualSense and other proprietary HW from releasing on rival platforms under the same title.
It should be possible to create a situation where studios are vying for the ability to make deeply optimized PS exclusive games as opposed to multi-platform games.
Self_Destructive
Member
Nintendo are successful for a very simple reason, they recognize the importance of appealing to the younger market.
Nintendo creates lifelong customers from a young impressionable age with games that unapologetically serve both younger kids and adults alike. That, along with smartly differentiating themselves from their competitors in hardware.. meant that people would pick up their console in addition to another.
The people who outgrow Nintendo games, are replaced by a younger generation, and those same people then have kids who very likely get a Nintendo system because of how child friendly they are.
Add to that, they focus on quality and executing on their concepts while keeping their budgets in check.. and it's easily understandable.
Nintendo creates lifelong customers from a young impressionable age with games that unapologetically serve both younger kids and adults alike. That, along with smartly differentiating themselves from their competitors in hardware.. meant that people would pick up their console in addition to another.
The people who outgrow Nintendo games, are replaced by a younger generation, and those same people then have kids who very likely get a Nintendo system because of how child friendly they are.
Add to that, they focus on quality and executing on their concepts while keeping their budgets in check.. and it's easily understandable.
Alan Wake
Member
And they've found their audience. I wonder how well Astro Bot would've done on Switch. It's Nintendo level of brilliance and fun, but it did not sell gangbusters on PS5. On the other hand, third party games rarely does well on Nintendo systems so...
Cakeboxer
Member
Astro Bot would never sell as well on the Switch as games featuring Nintendo icons, simply because it lacks the widespread recognition, cultural legacy, and cross-generational appeal. While characters like Link, Kirby, Donkey Kong, and Mario are deeply rooted in pop culture and dominate every genre they touch, the Astro Bots feel more like cute side characters who got a rare shot at the spotlight in a game clearly inspired by Nintendo's winning formula. If Nintendo had made the same game with Mini Toads instead of soulless robots, it would've sold like hotcakes.
The same goes for Grounded. Swap out the unknown kids for tiny versions of Nintendo's all-stars, and it would've been a guaranteed hit.
tomato shrub
Member
planted seeds for nostalgia and parasocial relationships over decades
Ask yourself this? The next time you're playing a much praised Nintendo exclusive like BOTW, replace all of the Legend of Zelda characters with generic placeholders and try and see if you'd still enjoy it as much.
Nostalgia is what makes Nintendo so popular.
Nostalgia is what makes Nintendo so popular.
FoxMcChief
Gold Member
Because while Nintendo does want to make huge profits, they still hold true and want to put out great games. I can't say the same for Sony or MS.
Danjin44
The nicest person on this forum
You should! The show it's super fun to watch and great artstyle and animation.
tylrdiablos
Member
As someone who grew up playing the NES, SNES and onwards... this is a great answer.
You want to re-live those awesome childhood memories.
Practically every Nintendo game is family-friendly (maybe not Metroid Dread but they're the exception) and that drives sales.
You also know that Nintendo games are usually high quality. We've seen some performance issues in recent titles but nothing show-stopping.
I'm also not a big fan of Breath of the Wild or Tears of the Kingdom (or any game with an "open world" approach) but they were still worth the price of entry in my opinion. (I'd say I vastly preferred Echoes of Wisdom & Links Awakening Switch to both TotK and BotW.)
I've also just pre-ordered a LEGO Game Boy for the October 1st release date. That's how deep Nintendo have their claws into me.
Mohonky
Member
KISS = keep it simple stupid.
Thats fundamental at their core game design. They start with a simple mechanic and design the game world around it while ensuring that mechanic operates as flawlessly as possible.
To many games have what Id consider 'jank'. It's like 'other games are doing this, so we have to do it too' despite it either not working as well as it should or just not really fitting into the game world itself. Or games that have a strong narrative but are told by playing through a world where the gameplay loop is either too convoluted. I mean I don't mind games with strong narratives or put in a lot of ideas; but its obvious compared to Nintendo, that Nintendo would rather do something simple and proceed to polish the absolute shit out of it than try and make something that does a bit of everything but doesn't do it especially amazing.
They keep it simple, tight and don't go overboard. Thats it.
Thats fundamental at their core game design. They start with a simple mechanic and design the game world around it while ensuring that mechanic operates as flawlessly as possible.
To many games have what Id consider 'jank'. It's like 'other games are doing this, so we have to do it too' despite it either not working as well as it should or just not really fitting into the game world itself. Or games that have a strong narrative but are told by playing through a world where the gameplay loop is either too convoluted. I mean I don't mind games with strong narratives or put in a lot of ideas; but its obvious compared to Nintendo, that Nintendo would rather do something simple and proceed to polish the absolute shit out of it than try and make something that does a bit of everything but doesn't do it especially amazing.
They keep it simple, tight and don't go overboard. Thats it.
BlackTron
Member
I both disagree and agree here. Yes, the characters make a huge difference. You can take a hot IP and apply it to a generic game, BUT it only helps so much depending on the quality of the game and they can't repeatedly do this to characters in sub-par games or it would cheapen them. Miyamoto was probably right that more people would play Dinosaur Planet if they made it a Starfox game. But was this manipulation or just a good business decision?
The thing about BOTW is that it sold so much more than past Zelda games, in other words it expanded the audience for the IP. So it doesn't make sense that the only reason people would be playing it is because they are devoted to Zelda. As someone traditionally devoted to Zelda, I don't play or like these new games as much as old ones, but way more people buy it than ever bought Zelda before, so it can't be loyalty. They're using old characters to make new games people want to play. The fact that I don't like that there are no dungeons seems irrelevant, whatever formula they did exploded sales.
Geometric-Crusher
"Nintendo games are like indies, and worth at most $19" 🤡
Better yet, take Minecraft and add Nintendo characters... wow this is goty says ign
One IP that Nintendo is targeting is Uncharted, so don't be surprised if this thing becomes an Ice Climber in the Nintendo universe. That's the secret in addition to the other two I've already mentioned.
yurinka
Member
- They had the monopoly of portable consoles, so Switch has been the only option for who wanted portables, including the PS, XB, PC players who wanted a portable console as secondary gaming device
- They merged the resources and catalog they had in home consoles and portables into a single device
- A ton of parents don't know that the favorite games for kids are Roblox, Minecraft, Fortnite or mobile games, and want to give the kids a portable or home console, and this is the only publisher they know they make good games for kids because played them when young
- Evey handful years or so they make a top quality game
- They have around half a dozen proven IP that have been successful during 30-40 years, so don't depend on new IP
- They managed to have a very large cult-like fanbase that buy whatever they do, including cardboard accesories that need to be manufactured by the customer and who don't care about missing most top games in that device
Last edited:
BlackTron
Member
But IGN already gave Minecraft a 9/10 and it's the best-selling game of all time. Your example, as usual, sucks.
BacklashWave534
Member
Because they make fun games. Unfortunately, they have a CEO now who is willing to take advantage of the fan base.
Mohonky
Member
Literally a dumb argument when you consider most gamers now, started out on a Playstation system.
Where's the nostalgia for Zelda etc coming from there?
I should have clarified that I mean the LoZ experience that includes the sounds, outfits and areas that reference other games in the series that tick those nostalgia expectations.
I understand that Nintendo do push the boundaries but I just don't see their games having the same impact without using their huge repertoire of first party characters.
Personally I can't see what all the fuss is about when I'd rather experience games such as Desth Stranding and KCD2.
i wouldn't be surprised if that's the game they bring to Switch 2.
Easy, they tap into the broadest markets. With the Wii, they tapped into the casual gamer (usually viral marketing and simplicity will get you there), young, old, the core gamer (they have a history of making great games for them as well i.e. Zelda), no region specific appeal (Western/Eastern gamers alike are attracted to their products since they don't really follow social trends), reputation built on decades of quality, which also sucks in the nostalgic crowd.
With the Switch they brought that, as well as tapping into demand for mobile gaming with core games (not offered by phones). In today's market, where kids are growing up with mobile entertainment as the norm, it makes sense that the Switch would be perfect for them. That all about sums it up i think.
With the Switch they brought that, as well as tapping into demand for mobile gaming with core games (not offered by phones). In today's market, where kids are growing up with mobile entertainment as the norm, it makes sense that the Switch would be perfect for them. That all about sums it up i think.
TheMule1983
Member
Best in class first party software, no political agenda involved, games are purely fun for everyone.
BlackTron
Member
The responses that make sense aren't nearly as entertaining as the salty ones. I love the common themes of being dismissively judgemental, sarcastically insulting, passive aggressive, etc etc. Shines a giant light on how bad the collective argument is when nobody who has it seems to have any cogent thoughts. Keep it coming, let the salt flow through you.
I Love Rock 'n' Roll
Member
People have been brainwashed. Nintendo hasn't been genuinely fun for decades. They keep recycling the same formulas, clinging to the same franchises, and prioritizing casual audiences. Their hardware is limited, their online services are outdated, and they rely almost entirely on nostalgia, and not even in a meaningful or well, executed way. Innovation is nowhere to be found.
Last edited:
Danjin44
The nicest person on this forum
Just because you personally don't find them fun it doesn't mean that's true for others.
For me their games are incredibly fun, especially with recent DK Bananza.
Ainem Enamas
Member
Woopah
Member
The "buy whatever they do" part never made much sense. There's a massive gulf between the best selling and worst selling Nintendo products.
Nostalgia is definitely part of the reason, but doesn't explain why Zelda had millions more fans now than it did a few years ago.
The design of the game itself matters way way way way more than the characters or IP.
I think it's the opposite. Nintendo's gameplay innovations and ingenuity are often dismissed because they reuse the same IP (which is good business sense).
Seriously, look at the gameplay mechanics of BotW. Show me another game with their type of physical interactivity - where you can climb any surface, set the forest on fire, ride the wind currents, to land on the giant's back?
Then take their next Zelda game after that, where any enemy you defeat you can summon, and any item you touch you can copy? Multiple ways to combine to solve puzzles and reach your goal.
Nintendo consistently switches the mechanics up - but because they reuse the same IP, it gets casually handwaved away.
"Oh, it's just Zelda. They're just reusing the same formulas. Can't they do anything new?
"Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll