Support NeoGAF

[Nilaul]

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.

 

[DragonSworne]

So what you are saying is that even if they go third party, Iwata will destory Nintendo?

 

[Kabuki Quantum Lover]

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.

It's a bad thing because some GAFfers believe Nintendo is actually completely incompetent outside of Nintendo hardware. See Sega.

 

[Spieler Eins]

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.

If they aren't on their own hardware, generic shit like New Mario Bros is all you'll get, with the amount of exceptions shrinking. And they can't even handle the WiiU, how would they deal with high end machines? :lol

 

[vinnygambini]

But isn't Nintendo the owner of Creatures too?

Common myth I believe, they are not listed on Nintendo's annual report of domestic consolidated subsidiaries.

 

[Nilaul]

It's a bad thing because some GAFfers believe Nintendo is actually completely incompetent outside of Nintendo hardware. See Sega.

+ Nintendo not focusing on a particular hardware, exclusives going all over the place. I would prefer them to be completely brought by Sony then going 3rd party.

 

[H_Prestige]

Yeah, Im totally not gonna buy the next console after being treated like this.

I remember how after Steve Jobs canceled a bunch of unsuccessful products, nobody ever bought another Apple device again.

 

[Tookay]

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.

I imagine making quality games and systems that aren't selling is currently demoralizing as well.

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.

Isn't it trending in that direction right now, as it currently is? Considering all the other genres and franchises Nintendo is currently neglecting?

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.

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?

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.

In the worst case scenario, maybe. I doubt they're turn into EA over night.

 

[TIGER-COOL]

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.

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.

 

[ChrisMahoney]

Refund and giving credit to buy new hardware are not the same.

Apple gave $100 store credit after they lowered their $600 +2 year contract phone to $400 +2 year contract. That would probably be comparable to Nintendo giving Wii U owners a $30 gift card.

 

[FiggyCal]

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.

@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. Plus with the focus being on software - rather than hardware (the employees lost on the hardware side would be gained on the software side) - they would need to have more teams and we might actually see more new IP'S from Nintendo.

 

[Tobor]

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.

 

[H_Prestige]

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?

 

[Tookay]

I feel like these "predictions" about a third-party Nintendo always assume that EVERYTHING will go wrong, while bizarrely assuming utter competence from Nintendo in their current direction... when, in reality, it's their current direction that is misfiring on almost all cylinders.

 

[Manmademan]

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.

Oh man. What's it like, living in fantasy land? This is amazing

 

[DragonSworne]

What's the last innovation they made? The last standard they set?

Nintendo has not set standards in software since the N64. Iwata has transformed Nintendo into a hardware gimmick unforntunately.

 

[JoeM86]

@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.

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. A friend of mine put it quite succinctly

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.

 

[Justagamer80]

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.

The last standard they came up with was....?

 

[H_Prestige]

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.

Can you list all the Nintendo published Wii U games so far and all the upcoming ones as well?

 

[QaaQer]

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.

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.

 

[JoeM86]

Can you list all the Nintendo published Wii U games so far and all the upcoming ones as well?

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

 

[Aquamarine]

No. Nintendo bought the totality of he Pokémon company. I think they own all but 5%. Aquamarine had the information iirc.

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.

 

[Mango The Magician]

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.

You're right, it took a lot to convince Sega to go third party, and they never had the same financial security as Nintendo, seems a little ridiculous people still seem to believe Nintendo will go third party.

 

[Cheech]

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.

It's really no different than transitioning to consoles from PCs, or an ex-exclusive console developer going at multiple platforms. Tons of developers have this.

There is nothing special or magic about Nintendo hardware. To be blunt, it is underpowered and half baked crap, and has been since the N64. Their strength has always been game design from the very beginning. Focus on selling as much of that vision as possible, and grow the business into new markets when that has stabilized.

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.

The "common denominator" is where the money is made. The whole point of the Wii was to make gameplay more accessible to a wider audience.

The Wii U is the most underpowered console relative to its competition that Nintendo has ever released. It is also the most poorly thought out, this side of the Virtual Boy, by virtue of the fact it is a super crappy tablet tethered to a super crappy console, ran by (you guessed it) a super crappy OS and network back end.

I had a Wii U for several months last year. Everything about the experience was straight up shit. It's certainly the worst Nintendo console ever built (with the notable exception above), with the least amount of foresight or attention paid to what their customers want.

Nintendo: Just go third party, guys. Your stock price will go through the roof, and you'll instantly be one of the highest profile publishers, able to dictate (well, "strongly suggest if you want our games on your platforms") to Sony and Microsoft the direction of their gaming businesses to better suit Nintendo's needs.

 

[Kimawolf]

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.

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.

 

[FiggyCal]

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.

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.

 

[Laieon]

To be blunt, it is underpowered and half baked crap, and has been since the N64.

The Gamecube wasn't underpowered.

 

[JoeM86]

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.

They do help with development of the main games, however.

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.

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.

 

[zma1013]

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.

Sure, they'd have to downsize, but only their hardware division. I'm not sure how that would effect their software devs at all especially when they would still be busy making games. Quality of software doesn't have to go down, plenty of devs out there making quality software as 3rd party. Mario is basically already annualized, 5 Mario platformers have come out for consoles in the last 7 years. Even knowing that though, they wouldn't have to do that to all their games. If anything they would have more freedom knowing that they don't have to pump out a Mario or Zelda every time to help lift sagging hardware sales. They don't receive income from the Wii U hardware, but yes, they would take a hit in licensing fees but I'd imagine their software would sell more given that they would have a much larger audience to sell to than they traditionally have. Not sure how deadlines force mutliplayer. And you think Nintendo games don't already have deadlines? Would Nintendo have to go multiplat though? Why not exclusive 2nd party to Sony or something like that?

Now don't get the wrong idea here, I do not think, nor do I want Nintendo to drop 1st party, I'm just saying that your reasoning why they wouldn't work as anything else just isn't convincing me.

 

[TIGER-COOL]

Oh man. What's it like, living in fantasy land? This is amazing

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.

 

[Nilaul]

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.

Isnt like creatures owned 100 percent by Nintendo?

 

[Manmademan]

The Gamecube wasn't underpowered.

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.

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.

The flood of people calling you out should be a hint that mayyyyyyybe what you wrote wasn't the most accurate statement in the world. Nintendo hasn't innovated shit since the N64, and many of the things fans give them credit for had been "innovated" in generation 1 or 2- you just aren't old enough to know any better.

The analog stick? Pioneered by the Atari 5200 in 1982. Improved and basically perfected by Vectrex in 1983. Nintendo didn't get around to using one until 13 years later. And even then, every game pad you can name is using Sony's dual analog stick design, developed for the sony dual analog flight controller in 1996, and scaled down into the dual analog controller/dualshock in 1998.

The D-pad? Intellivision invented a controller with an 8 way directional disc in 1979. The intellivision controller also incorporated shoulder buttons, and an optional voice synthesizer module in 1981/82 called "intellivoice." Mario didn't say a word until again, over a decade later.

All of these companies build off of earlier innovations, and nintendo has fallen SERIOUSLY behind since the launch of the N64. Consoles are all using some form of optical media, which nintendo didn't pioneer (sony and philips did.) consoles went from using memory cards (not a nintendo innovations) to hard drives (obviously not a nintendo innovation) to cloud storage and digital downloads. And that's not saying anything about GPU and CPU design- Sony had designed not only the sound chip for the SNES (because nintendo didn't have the expertise) but multicore processors long before they were common for PC use. And even they build in innovations of those who came earlier.

no one has a lock on innovation, especially not nintendo.

 

[The Technomancer]

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.

Haha what?

 

[H_Prestige]

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

Which of these would cease to exist if they went third party? Out of those, which ones will Nintendo fans "miss"?

 

[Azulsky]

Going software only will kill them.

They just need to get back on their feet with hardware.

They really will have a tough time getting 3rd party pubs back

 

[Justagamer80]

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.

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?

 

[Aquamarine]

Isnt like creatures owned 100 percent by Nintendo?

Nintendo does not directly own any equity in the company. It's regarded as "independent" for accounting purposes.

However, you have people very, VERY close to Nintendo who control the company. So "technically" Nintendo doesn't own them at all, but realistically? They're pretty much a part of the company.


Kinda like Intelligent Systems (Fire Emblem, Advance Wars, Paper Mario, Pushmo). Nintendo doesn't own them per se, but they work in Nintendo-owned buildings right next to Nintendo 1st-party...

 

[Mikro]

I would like to offer some counter points because you seem to repeat these and are steadfast in your opinion of them.

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.

 

[Mpl90]

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?

You...you just said that touch screen interfaces didn't become standards?

These days, Gaf is too populated by people who almost don't think, seriously XD

 

[BlackJace]

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?

Uh, touch control gaming is here to stay buddy.

 

[jblank83]

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're severely misinformed. The PS2 was by far the weakest of the bunch, as someone will likely point out with RE4 screenshots or some such, and had very convoluted hardware design. GC and Xbox were fairly similar in strength, each focusing on different designs that resulted in different sorts of games.

 

[Nilaul]

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.

Dude whut?

 

[TIGER-COOL]

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.

Have you played Nintendoland? There are some well executed examples of asymetrical play using one gamepad and multiple local players on the TV. Everyone I've played that game with, gamers and casuals alike, think it's really innovative and fun. The new Rayman game used it well too. The only problem is that more developers haven't taken advantage of it, and I was hoping for much more from Nintendo in this regard, though it seems like they've been playing a lot of catch up lately

 

[Saint Gregory]

Haha what?

Dude whut?

Revisionist history is amazing isn't it?

 

[royalan]

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.

Why are you so sure Nintendo would have to downsize in order to go third party? I mean, they're not that big NOW - EA, Ubisoft and Activision Blizzard are bigger in terms of manpower.

Also, while I'm not sure I'm ready to say Nintendo should go third party, a lot of your reasoning seems to be contingent on one thing: Nintendo actually doing well. Profiting on hardware, licensing fees, etc...well, that's all great when Nintendo is actually performing. But going into year three of sound losses, all of that is just theoretical and doesn't mean jack. It's not helping them now, and they might not ever be able to return to that level of profitability again.

 

[AnkiRendan]

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.

You can't blame him for thinking Pokemon is yearly. Since 2009, North America and Europe have gotten a new Pokemon game (from Platinum to X and Y) every year.

 

[Aquamarine]

They do help with development of the main games, however.

That they do...but they're not ramming design decisions down Game Freak's throat like they did with Paper Mario: Sticker Star for 3DS.

Nintendo is like a cheerleader. They exist to support and promote Game Freak and The Pokemon Company...but it's up to those companies to grow profits and create new opportunities with the Pokemon IP.

Considering the incredible success of Pokemon X / Y, their magic touch is still just as golden now as in the past.

 

[Manmademan]

Revisionist history is amazing isn't it?

Really? Check out what PCs were capable of in 2000 when the PS2 launched, then look at Tekken Tag Tournament and MGS2.

The PS2 was well past what PCs were capable of at launch in terms of 3D performance, this isn't revisionist at all. The GC and Xbox launched a good 18 months later of course by then the PS2 was the weakest of the three- but PC had innovated past console performance by then.

 

[FiggyCal]

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.

You can already do that. They share about 90% of the same games. People buy Nintendo hardware to play Nintendo games. Well if that's true, wouldn't it be advantageous to the consumer to be able to play those Nintendo games on hardware that also can play those 90% of games that the Wii U is missing.

And I'm not even saying it could happen. Just that it would be advantageous to the consumer. And who's to say they couldn't do both.

Left 4 Dead, Half-Life, Portal are all made by Valve but aren't exclusively available on their platform. Many Xbox exclusives are also available on PC. Sony is making mobile games. And with PS Now- you'll be able to play Playstation 3 games on non Playstation devices. It's not the end of the world for Steam, Microsoft, or Sony.

 

[Infinite]

Nintendo has not set standards in software since the N64. Iwata has transformed Nintendo into a hardware gimmick unforntunately.

Gimmicks that produced two of the most successful consoles in history.