Refund and giving credit to buy new hardware are not the same.
Yeah, Im totally not gonna buy the next console after being treated like this.
Refund and giving credit to buy new hardware are not the same.
Why is Nintendo going third party such a bad thing? You still get to play their games, but on better hardware. Plus you wouldn't need to buy another system to play third party games.
Why is Nintendo going third party such a bad thing? You still get to play their games, but on better hardware. Plus you wouldn't need to buy another system to play third party games.
But isn't Nintendo the owner of Creatures too?
It's a bad thing because some GAFfers believe Nintendo is actually completely incompetent outside of Nintendo hardware. See Sega.
Yeah, Im totally not gonna buy the next console after being treated like this.
I imagine making quality games and systems that aren't selling is currently demoralizing as well.Because of the impact it would have.
They'd have to significantly downsize, meaning mass layoffs which would kill morale and have an effect on work quality.
Isn't it trending in that direction right now, as it currently is? Considering all the other genres and franchises Nintendo is currently neglecting?They would have to rely on their software output which means that the games would be released annually, specifically Mario & Pokémon with the occasional Zelda. All other IPs will be dead forever.
Well, when their hardware has been loss-leading for a while now, and when there are barely any third-parties producing games for their systems to make licensing income, is there really much benefit left to this model?In addition to no longer receiving income from their hardware, as well as third party licensing fees, they would also get less money back from their software.
In the worst case scenario, maybe. I doubt they're turn into EA over night.The Nintendo polish that we have come to expect from their games will also not exist if they are multiplatform due to deadlines and the fact that multiplatform games never run identically across all formats.
Why is Nintendo going third party such a bad thing? You still get to play their games, but on better hardware. Plus you wouldn't need to buy another system to play third party games.
Refund and giving credit to buy new hardware are not the same.
Because of the impact it would have.
They'd have to significantly downsize, meaning mass layoffs which would kill morale and have an effect on work quality.
They would have to rely on their software output which means that the games would be released annually, specifically Mario & Pokémon with the occasional Zelda. All other IPs will be dead forever.
In addition to no longer receiving income from their hardware, as well as third party licensing fees, they would also get less money back from their software.
The Nintendo polish that we have come to expect from their games will also not exist if they are multiplatform due to deadlines and the fact that multiplatform games never run identically across all formats.
It would kill Nintendo.
Nintendo have been the primary innovators in console development since the inception of the medium. Nearly every standard you take for granted in modern console gaming was set by Nintendo (save the online side of things). They are the only company still attempting to create new gameplay experiences in the hardware department, and frankly I find their design philosophies a breath of fresh air in the current gaming environment. Maybe their current designs don't speak to you, but at least they're still trying to do something other than serve the common denominator. I think the Wii U is a fantastic machine, and a great deal of its potential is being overlooked and hindered by a lack of support.
Nintendo have been the primary innovators in console development since the inception of the medium. Nearly every standard you take for granted in modern console gaming was set by Nintendo (save the online side of things). They are the only company still attempting to create new gameplay experiences in the hardware department, and frankly I find their design philosophies a breath of fresh air in the current gaming environment. Maybe their current designs don't speak to you, but at least they're still trying to do something other than serve the common denominator. I think the Wii U is a fantastic machine, and a great deal of its potential is being overlooked and hindered by a lack of support.
What's the last innovation they made? The last standard they set?
@bold. Isn't that what's happening already? 10 mario games released in 2013 along with 3 pokemon games, and at least one Zelda release every year since 2011. Yet there are tons of Nintendo franchises not being used.
I understand the part about the mass layoffs which would be unfortunate for the industry. But as a consumer, I believe it would be in our favor to be able to play Nintendo games on other platforms.
Putting their games out on MS & Sony's machines is not the answer as their staff counts would be slashed (say bye bye to IRD, SRD, NBD, SDD as well as all of their 2nd party partners like HAL, Skip and everyone else, and probably Int Sys, Retro Studios, Monolith Soft, NST, NERD and most of SPD as well - leaving nothing but a shrivelled up EAD and SPD1), development costs would skyrocket (while their software margins get slashed since they would have to pay royalties AND conform to the MS & Sony's terms of license. - stifling their creative output and raising costs even further), their entire company culture would fall apart, their quality would falter, most of their talent would leave, their output would shrink down to just their absolute top IP like Mario (if you think they're milking Mario now, you ain't seen nothing yet!) and they become a mere shadow of their former selves. Their games are built around their own unique hardware and it is the continued evolution of their own hardware that has enabled them to continue to keep their existing IPs fresh with new and novel concepts and to enable their staff to make the kinds of games that they want to make.
Nintendo have been the primary innovators in console development since the inception of the medium. Nearly every standard you take for granted in modern console gaming was set by Nintendo (save the online side of things). They are the only company still attempting to create new gameplay experiences in the hardware department, and frankly I find their design philosophies a breath of fresh air in the current gaming environment. Maybe their current designs don't speak to you, but at least they're still trying to do something other than serve the common denominator. I think the Wii U is a fantastic machine, and a great deal of its potential is being overlooked and hindered by a lack of support.
No, it's not. I'm talking proper Mario games and proper Pokémon games, not spin-off and side games.
Going third party would be more detrimental than people believe.
Nintendo have been the primary innovators in console development since the inception of the medium. Nearly every standard you take for granted in modern console gaming was set by Nintendo (save the online side of things). They are the only company still attempting to create new gameplay experiences in the hardware department, and frankly I find their design philosophies a breath of fresh air in the current gaming environment. Maybe their current designs don't speak to you, but at least they're still trying to do something other than serve the common denominator. I think the Wii U is a fantastic machine, and a great deal of its potential is being overlooked and hindered by a lack of support.
Can you list all the Nintendo published Wii U games so far and all the upcoming ones as well?
No. Nintendo bought the totality of he Pokémon company. I think they own all but 5%. Aquamarine had the information iirc.
I'm so tired of the Sega comparisons. If Nintendo really is no better than Sega, then they don't deserve to be successful.
Pointing to Sega as proof that Nintendo couldn't possibly transition to third party is meaningless. They aren't the same company.
I'm so tired of the Sega comparisons. If Nintendo really is no better than Sega, then they don't deserve to be successful.
Pointing to Sega as proof that Nintendo couldn't possibly transition to third party is meaningless. They aren't the same company.
Maybe their current designs don't speak to you, but at least they're still trying to do something other than serve the common denominator. I think the Wii U is a fantastic machine, and a great deal of its potential is being overlooked and hindered by a lack of support.
Well lets just take that to its logical conclusion. Sony is trying to bail water out their sinking ship and I really dont want to buy a PS4 so why cant they just go 3rd party so I can play all their games on Xbone.Why is Nintendo going third party such a bad thing? You still get to play their games, but on better hardware. Plus you wouldn't need to buy another system to play third party games.
No, it's not. I'm talking proper Mario games and proper Pokémon games, not spin-off and side games.
Going third party would be more detrimental than people believe.
To be blunt, it is underpowered and half baked crap, and has been since the N64.
NCL - 32%
Creatures, Inc. (Independent) - 32%
Game Freak (Independent) - 33%
As a Nintendo affiliate, Nintendo uses the equity method to account for their investment in The Pokémon Company.
The difference here is the actual Pokémon IP. Nintendo can maneuver a situation in which it can take control over the IP if needed (call shares of Creatures, Inc. / possibly Game Freak in a takeover situation) because Creatures, Inc. / possibly Game Freak has strong connections with Nintendo / Nintendo influence...even if they don't directly own shares of the company as an affiliate.
However, Game Freak / Creatures, Inc. have essentially free reign over the franchise, as long as it benefits Nintendo.
That's why we've seen a few iOS Pokemon companion apps. Nintendo didn't approve them, but Nintendo doesn't directly control where the Pokemon IP goes (within reason). All Nintendo cares about are the profits and prestige.
Maybe not Zelda, but Pokemon and Mario are already annual released titles. And there is an entire library of Nintendo franchises being neglected - probably because the company has to fund it's hardware also. Imagine a Nintendo where all they did was create and publish games.
Because of the impact it would have.
They'd have to significantly downsize, meaning mass layoffs which would kill morale and have an effect on work quality.
They would have to rely on their software output which means that the games would be released annually, specifically Mario & Pokémon with the occasional Zelda. All other IPs will be dead forever.
In addition to no longer receiving income from their hardware, as well as third party licensing fees, they would also get less money back from their software.
The Nintendo polish that we have come to expect from their games will also not exist if they are multiplatform due to deadlines and the fact that multiplatform games never run identically across all formats.
It would kill Nintendo.
Oh man. What's it like, living in fantasy land? This is amazing
NCL - 32%
Creatures, Inc. (Independent) - 32%
Game Freak (Independent) - 33%
As a Nintendo affiliate, Nintendo uses the equity method to account for their investment in The Pokémon Company.
The difference here is the actual Pokémon IP. Nintendo can maneuver a situation in which it can take control over the IP if needed (call shares of Creatures, Inc. / possibly Game Freak in a takeover situation) because Creatures, Inc. / possibly Game Freak has strong connections with Nintendo / Nintendo influence...even if they don't directly own shares of the company as an affiliate.
However, Game Freak / Creatures, Inc. have essentially free reign over the franchise, as long as it benefits Nintendo.
That's why we've seen a few iOS Pokemon companion apps. Nintendo didn't approve them, but Nintendo doesn't directly control where the Pokemon IP goes (within reason). All Nintendo cares about are the profits and prestige.
The Gamecube wasn't underpowered.
Why don't you engage in conversation rather than commit ad hominem fallacies? Refute what I've stated above in any way other than resorting to petty insults, or don't bother responding to me. I come here with an expectation of more mature discourse than this.
For the time of release it certainly was.
The Xbox launched within a month or so, was significantly more powerful and could push HD resolutions, while literally using an off the shelf GPU and a pentium III processor.
The PS2 was equivalent to or better than the strongest gaming PC on the market at release, the gamecube wasn't.
You bet
New Super Mario Bros. U
Nintendo Land
Ninja Gaiden 3: Razor's Edge
Sing Party
Lego City Undercover
New Super Luigi U
Game & Wario
Pikmin 3
The Wonderful 101
The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker HD
Wii Party U
Wii Fit U
Mario & Sonic at the Sochi 2014 Olympic Winter Games
Super Mario 3D World
Sonic Lost World (Published by Nintendo in PAL regions only)
Art Academy: SketchPad
Pokemon Rumble U
Wii Sports Club - Tennis
Wii Sports Club - Bowling
Wii Sports Club - Golf
NES Remix
Dr. Luigi
Announced
Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze
Mario Kart 8
Super Smash Bros. for Wii U
Bayonetta 2
X
Hyrule Warriors
Yarn Yoshi
Shin Megami Tensei X Fire Emblem
"Untitled The Legend of Zelda game"
Wii Sports Club - Boxing
Wii Sports Club - Baseball
Why don't you engage in conversation rather than commit ad hominem fallacies? Refute what I've stated above in any way other than resorting to petty insults, or don't bother responding to me. I come here with an expectation of more mature discourse than this.
Isnt like creatures owned 100 percent by Nintendo?
Because of the impact it would have.
They'd have to significantly downsize, meaning mass layoffs which would kill morale and have an effect on work quality.
On the software development side they should be able to keep the key talent, competition for places would see the best stay, Nintendo is still a big enough draw to attract the best developers in japan for a chance to work on their IP
They would have to rely on their software output which means that the games would be released annually, specifically Mario & Pokémon with the occasional Zelda. All other IPs will be dead forever.
They already keep releasing Mario in whatever format, Reggie keeps repeating that Mario, Zelda, Donkey Kong are their key IP. When was the last time Nintendo released a big new IP on a home console? They aren't prolific at it already - this seems to me to be nintendo coloured glasses where everything they do is magical. Also look at Take Two for a publisher that gives Rockstar all the time and resources they need to work on the GTA games, Bioshock etc, it doesn't always have to be nasty publisher insisting yearly sequels
In addition to no longer receiving income from their hardware, as well as third party licensing fees, they would also get less money back from their software.
Examine the third party sales of the biggest multi platform third party game releases, and see how they did on the Wii U- Assassins creed was 1%? You have to weigh this up against the new income from selling their IP on the established platforms which I think would be substantial
The Nintendo polish that we have come to expect from their games will also not exist if they are multiplatform due to deadlines and the fact that multiplatform games never run identically across all formats.
This really isn't a big deal to the mass market, as long as its playable and completable, Having say Mario on a device you don't have to buy to especially play Mario and the cost of buying that platform would outweigh any possible bugs or glitches from having it on another platform
It would kill Nintendo.
What has Nintendo done hardware wise that has become standard of recent? Nothing with the Wii U or 3DS has become standard. The DS? Nothing with that became standard. Wii? If you want to argue motion controls that's fine even though it was tacked on with the PS3 and even PS4 and for the most part folks couldn't care less. Kinect took what the Wii was and has improved it significantly and I say that as someone who despises motion controls. So what else do you have?
What has Nintendo done hardware wise that has become standard of recent? Nothing with the Wii U or 3DS has become standard. The DS? Nothing with that became standard. Wii? If you want to argue motion controls that's fine even though it was tacked on with the PS3 and even PS4 and for the most part folks couldn't care less. Kinect took what the Wii was and has improved it significantly and I say that as someone who despises motion controls. So what else do you have?
For the time of release it certainly was.
The Xbox launched within a month or so, was significantly more powerful and could push HD resolutions, while literally using an off the shelf GPU and a pentium III processor.
The PS2 was equivalent to or better than the strongest gaming PC on the market at release, the gamecube wasn't.
For the time of release it certainly was.
The Xbox launched within a month or so, was significantly more powerful and could push HD resolutions, while literally using an off the shelf GPU and a pentium III processor.
The PS2 was equivalent to or better than the strongest gaming PC on the market at release, the gamecube wasn't.
The wii u could have been that if it supported more than one gamepad. local gameplay that gave each person their own private small screen could have seen some great games. As it is, the wii u gamepad adds nothing.
Haha what?
Revisionist history is amazing isn't it?Dude whut?
Because of the impact it would have.
They'd have to significantly downsize, meaning mass layoffs which would kill morale and have an effect on work quality.
They would have to rely on their software output which means that the games would be released annually, specifically Mario & Pokémon with the occasional Zelda. All other IPs will be dead forever.
In addition to no longer receiving income from their hardware, as well as third party licensing fees, they would also get less money back from their software.
The Nintendo polish that we have come to expect from their games will also not exist if they are multiplatform due to deadlines and the fact that multiplatform games never run identically across all formats.
It would kill Nintendo.
They do help with development of the main games, however.
Pokémon is not yearly. Main Mario titles are also one per console (one 2D Mario and one 3D Mario). Yeah they are neglecting somewhat, but they aren't totally, and we get new ones like Rolling Western, as well as others. It'd just get worse if they went third party though.
They do help with development of the main games, however.
Revisionist history is amazing isn't it?
Well lets just take that to its logical conclusion. Sony is trying to bail water out their sinking ship and I really dont want to buy a PS4 so why cant they just go 3rd party so I can play all their games on Xbone.
Its crazy to think any of these companies would put games the rival platform unless we have another total meltdown like Sega.
Nintendo has not set standards in software since the N64. Iwata has transformed Nintendo into a hardware gimmick unforntunately.