Hmm...strange: I find myself rejecting your premise (that Nintendo needs to stop trying to cater to 3rd parties because it doesn't seem to matter) yet I wholeheartedly agree with your conclusion that Nintendo needs to be more proactive as a platform holder by expanding its development studios and reaching out to smaller developers.

The way the Wii U has shaped out so far, 3rd parties were there at the launch and from the looks of things Nintendo's console hasn't inspired 3rd party sales so far.  With nothing inspiring coming in the near future, I'm not surprised to see 3rd parties being so gun-shy about its prospects.  Without a serious exchange of cash or the sudden unveiling of major new 1st party titles coming in the near future, I'm not sure how that can change, either.

I think it's high time Nintendo simply said to third party developers "F**k us? No, no, no. F**k YOU."

No matter how much Nintendo attempts to cater to third parties, even going so far as to publish the games themselves, third parties always act like it's such a f**king CHORE to develop something that ISN'T a Microsoft or Sony product or even, dare I say, ORIGINAL?

I'm gonna echo broodwars and say "why not both?"

Of course, the problem with nintendo is systemic, they are stuck in 1994 it seems like sometimes. I feel new blood in charge and a serious attempt to release on par hardware next gen will go a ways to heal their ills.

in this gen, drop the basic set, get their heads out of their ass on digital, profit.

Oh come now. Do you really expect "ORIGINAL" software on a Nintendo platform, a company driven by pure nostalgia?  :P:

Besides, the era of 3rd party exclusives is just about over on the other 2 HD platforms as well, these days limited to pretty much Epic games, the Splinter Cell franchise, downloadable games, and DLC. It's unusual that the Wii U launched with a 3rd party exclusive at all.

I think we can agree that if the Wii U had a better launch lineup, especially from Nintendo, the console would probably not be in the toxic situation it is now.  It needed more than ZombiU and another New Super Mario Bros. game.  And considering how absent Nintendo was in the final years of the Wii, I have to imagine diversion of resources to 3DS is the only explanation for why that launch wasn't better.

I agree and I think that Nintendo should have done this on the Wii but, seeing that the WiiU is turning into Gamecube 2, Where's my indigo?, then definitely.  Just go whole hog as the first party power house they are.

honestly, I feel like no matter what, they were gonna have this problem with droughts and 3rd party issues.

FTR NFL

I can pretty much agree. What I want to see is Nintendo expand on what they're doing right now. They've got the tried and true, they've got 3rd party exclusives that they're paying for, and they've got some experimental stuff.

So we get 3D Mario, Mario Kart, etc. We get Bayonetta 2 and W101. We get Shin Megami X Fire Emblem and who knows what those new IPs Miyamoto is working on. Add on to that the eshop, and indie devs have been saying for a while that Nintendo is treating them very well. All they have to do is keep doing what they're doing right now, just do it more and maybe a little faster. And keep localizing great games like Xenoblade and Fire Emblem. Then there will be a ton of great, unique games that you can't get anywhere else. They just need to build momentum (which should be built this year) and then keep going. Don't stop. That was my main problem with the Wii. The Wii had great games, but eventually they just... stopped. Why? They can't do that again.

And then who knows, maybe they'll also figure out a way to get good 3rd party support. But I'm confident they can satisfy people if they just increase the pace and then remain consistent.

Multi-plats from third parties would be nice, but I mostly want Nintendo to work on expanding their development studios even more to accommodate more games for development and to court more indies to work on their platforms (which they seem to be doing a pretty good job). Having devs make exclusives for them would be nice, too. Wii had plenty of nice exclusives (many of which were ignored by many gamers, but were great nonetheless).

This NWR article makes a great compliment to this Pietriots article.

I was referring to the half-assed ports that plague Nintendo consoles.

The amazing thing is my article is both doing exactly what that one said not to do and largely in full agreement with it.

I knew what you were referring to, but ports are how the business is these days outside of the 1st party platform exclusives and I've certainly seen my share of bad ones on PS3 as well (HELLOOOOOOOOOOO, Bethesda nurse!). Also, console launches in general are well-known for rushed ports, as companies have had a very limited time with the hardware (especially when apparently Nintendo kept changing the Wii U's until very late before launch).  It certainly doesn't help that Nintendo was launching near-current-generation hardware at the end of the current console life cycle when everyone else was gearing-up for the next.

I do find it hilarious, though, that you were crying out for original 3rd party games on a platform you probably bought for the same franchises you've played a billion times before.

As I said before, 3rd party exclusives are rare on any console right now. Ports are common on all platforms in all states of quality.  That's just how the business is.

I am looking at all these great games that are coming to other consoles like Metal Gear Rising, Lords of Shadow 2, Crysis 3, Killer is Dead, GTA 5, and with no Wii U version in sight. To add insult to injury, many of the developers of these games scoff at the idea of making games for the Wii U. The main reason for this is because the Wii U's install base is small and they have been burned too many times on Nintendo consoles. Why should EA port Dead Space 3 to the Wii U when DS: Extraction only sold 9,000 copies on the oriiginal Wii?

In case of all the games you listed it's not about the sales.

All 2013 games were in development for years and if dev and publisher had the slightest interest in Wii U they could allocate some resources no problem.

They just didn't care.

If the PS4 and Xbox 72o both have Gamepad controllers of their own then third parties will react as if it is the best thing since sliced bread and they will find many creative ways to support those controllers.

We're getting Monster Hunter next month. Beyond that I'm good for awhile. I'm not too concerned right now with all this panic. The system has been out less than 4 months and people are jumping to conclusions.

Why? Cause it's the internet. The land of negativity and the constant need for instant feedback on everything. Well gaming consoles you can't gauge in a 3 month window.

Is Wii U going to be another Wii? No. Is PS4 and Xbox Durango going to come anywhere near sales of PS3/360? Nope. The casual gamer has gone to tablet. We are going to head back to the days where for the most part, it's just a core audience.

Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft are all going to be fine once they realize they all need to innovate more, and stop with trying to run franchises into the ground. Much like the movie industry.

Relax people. There was a panic about the 3DS, it took a year or so, but it has plenty of good games now, and more on the way.

Excellent article. A big problem is when Nintendo helps out a third party and they start depending on it.

Another example has surfaced recently in SQUARE-ENIX. They're sitting on Dragon Quest 7, Dragon Quest 10 and Bravely Default waiting for Nintendo to do all the work and publish the games overseas while they tell everyone how awesome Tomb Raider is. It's time we held Square-Enix accountable so Nintendo can focus on their OWN games. They simply can't police the entire industry themselves and we should STOP EXPECTING THEM TO.

You don't say? :D

Wasn't a point in Bravely Default's marketing that it's specifically made with japanese and only japanese audience in mind?

Like they went out of their way to make translation as hard as possible on purpose.

I've always wondered if Nintendo locks in these third party developers with iron-clad contracts, then they come begging to Mr. Iwata.

"Iwata-San! We are the poor and miserable Capcom! If we do not port the Capcom Five (four) to the PS2, surely we will perish! ooooooooh"

"I am the great and merciful Iwata! Once too, I was a developer. I have great sympathy for you. Therefore, I will allow you out of your iron clad contract!"

"Iwata-San! We are the poor and miserable Tecmo! If we do not port Ninja Gaiden: Razor's Edge...."

I really like Iwata, but, recently I think he and Nintendo are too nice. A little bit of the old hard-edged Hiroshi Yamauchi style is in order.

That Wii 3rd party hall of shame is a real eye-opener.


I hoped that Nintendo had some eShop or Virtual Console releases to plug holes in their calender but that was not to be. Handing out a money hat so that the finished Rayman: Legends is released or handing them out in general isn't cost effective.


While completely blowing off major third party publishers is something to be avoided, I do hope that Nintendo spends some of the gold in its war chest to assist small third party publishers and developers and independent studios in making unique and interesting games to fill spots in calendars. That the "launch window" is an empty one is quite par for course for a system launch: (sort by ascending)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Xbox_360_games
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_3_games
http://www.gamespot.com/games.html?platform=1031&mode=all&sort=release&dlx_type=all&sortdir=desc&official=all&page=0
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nintendo_3DS_games
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_Vita_games
(When the 360 and PS3 received The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion is when the Wii U, barring unexpected delays, will get Lego City: Undercover)


So expecting Nintendo to change what has been a historical habit of all systems thus far is asking them to defy the norm. Still, it stings much because of the fear that this is a sign of things to come. Iwata's recent statements gives me some hope that Nintendo will make a better, if marginal, result of avoiding software droughts.

That would definitely drive third party publishers away.


EDIT: Looking at the release lists again, I am surprised to realize that 2007 for the Wii was pretty much waiting for Metroid Prime 3: Corruption, Super Mario Galaxy, and the rest of the fall releases. Apologies to lovers of Super Paper Mario!

I would love for Nintendo to be able to just keep a steady supply of high quality software and not have to worry about 3rd parties to fill in the gaps. But realistically how many studios do they have to open to get say 6-10 major games out a year with the smaller titles in between the major ones?  Seems like it would last about a year and half tops before all the developers are knee deep in their next projects with a huge drought in the mean time.


Ideally I would love a Mario/Pikmin/Star Fox/Fire Emblem main series type of game to come at least once every other month with a Mario Kart/Wii Sports/Wave Race/spin off title to fill in the gaps.


Despite the few bones 3rd parties will throw at Wii U this gen, I guess the majority of 3rd parties will still treat Nintendo like crap. Or maybe not, things could completely turn around in a year and bunch of multiplat ps420 games are done with U versions as well.

Nintendo should definitely put it's own weight behind the Wii U, but to disregard the appeal that third party software holds would be risky. Quite frankly, there are genres and games with content and themes that Nintendo wouldn't touch with a 10 foot grapple beam. There are also games that Nintendo are simply not capable of making. Nintendo cannot be all things to all people, and it is in the spaces that Nintendo don't operate that third party's have traditionally found success on Nintendo platforms, providing the types of games that Nintendo can't or won't publish.

My worry is this. If Nintendo is not receiving third party support at a point when their system's technical aspects are comprobable to their competitors (ports being made that much easier), then what hope do they have come next year when Orbis and Durango have lept over the Wii U? Based on history I would have to suggest that the Wii U is likely to be another Wii (at least in terms of third party support). It is this worry that has urged me not to buy a Wii U yet. I had fun with my wii, but was continually frustrated by the huge gaps in the release schedule.

When I was younger I could play a game for months and therefore the gaps did not bother me so much. I'm at a stage now, however, where I can afford more games, I'm open to playing a broader spectrum of games, and I want a system that can support that diet. If the Wii U continues on it's current trajectory it's likely to be another Wii, and honestly? As much as I love 10 or so games on that system, I'm not buying another Wii.

What I'm saying is, Nintendo could throw as much weight behind their system as possible, releasing more games per year than ever before, and the Wii U would still not have a software library that could objectively be considered inclusive. So Nintendo can either court third partys in the hope that they can turn the situation around, or they can give up and just let the Wii U become another Gamecube (a secondary system owned almost exclusively to play Nintendo games).

Personally I'd prefer they try the former.

It's not about universal appeal, it's about 3rd parties complaining that people won't spend their money on their titles when Nintendo has their own out at the same time. They don't want Nintendo to compete on their own platform because Nintendo are the ones to beat. WTF crap is that? How far does Nintendo comply? No idea, but I agree that they shouldn't.

Also, I was gonna grab Rayman for the kids because they went crazy for the demo, but if that's the way Ubisoft wants it, they can cram it.

Two problems:

Nearly all of Nintendo's major games come out in years 2-4 of the lifecycle. The bookends (the start and end) are usually always dry. They've had two generations to reshuffle this, but have done nothing.

The second is the lack of western developers. Retro can't do everything.

Personally if I was Iwata-San I would have a clause in the contract that if something I paid developement, publishing, marketing, etc. for goes multi-platform in a region I did this in then either:
A) Nintendo gets a share of every sales.
B) Nintendo gets recouped the money it invested.

That is the only fair and business way to handle that situation.
3 Generations Nintendo has unsuccessfully tried to lure 3rd Parties to their platform.  Enough is enough.  If they come they come.  Don't make it hard and still be willing to work with them but, no longer count on them.  I take the same approach with rebates.  I've been burned enough to not count on receiving them but if I do that's nice.

This.  Although it would make third parties cry (See title of article), Nintendo should release a title every month for each platform - with at least one "AAA" title every quarter for each platform.

What's the tie in ratio for the average console?  It's likely less than ten.  If Nintendo releases 12 games a year over the course of 5 years, with four being "AAA" titles, that would give gamers 60 first-party titles (20 or which would be "AAA").  I can't imagine that wouldn't be enough to keep any casual gamer happy.  And nothing keeps hard-core gamers happy, so no one should worry about keeping them happy.

This would, of course, mean Nintendo would need to get some more first-party and second party studios under their belt.

Frankly, Nintendo has shown with the N64 and the GameCube that they have the ability to support a system on their own.  And that's all they need to worry about.

That's debatable. There were huges periods of time with both consoles that I was bored senseless because of the lack of releases.

I'm not suggesting Nintendo try to do this entirely with their own internal studios. More projects along the lines of Bayonetta 2 or Wonderful 101, or Excitebots or Punch-Out or whatever, where they partner with an outside studio to make a game, would be a part of something like this.

I'm just saying that since there doesn't seem to be anything Nintendo can do to win over third parties and have them voluntarily support the platform, they should concentrate their efforts elsewhere.

Oh I see now. Yeah that could be doable. I thought Nintendo alone which is literally impossible with how their games work. S far we have Beyonetta, W101, Fire Emblem Cross Over, and Smash Bros. I expect a lot more of these collaborations that free up their internal developers time throughout the generation. I just hope the majority of them are 3rd party IPs or brand new ones in general.

I had a very well thought out , eloquent, and resonably robust (i.e. long) response in which I discussed several interesting things and tried to find a middle ground. Unfortuantely I tried to delete a coma and backed out of the page.

:@

**** that's annoying!

You'll just have to take my word for it, because I'm not re-typing it all again. So pissed off right now, lol.

http://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/751749

Now that's good to know! Pixies jump on it if there is still time. I'm ready for some reading.

Good browsers (read: not Firefox or IE) save post content within the history. Out of the box. When i do that, i just go forward and it's still there. Too bad Opera is going bankrupt or something

To make it not completely offtopic, i had a similar experience with Assasin Creed 2 saves today -- Uplay erased them entirely. I spent an hour looking for save on the internet that i can use to continue my game.

What did i do Ubisoft for you to punish me so lately...

Nintendo needs to make more games.  What I disagree with is that Nintendo is trying to cater to third parties.  They have loosened some of their restrictions, but I don't see how they are incentivizing 3rd parties to make Wii U games. 


This has always been the issue as Sony and Microsoft work with developers and incentivize them to produce games for their systems.  Nintendo never has.  The poor economy has led to fewer risks in the industry, these developers aren't going to go out of their way to support Nintendo until it is proven profitable.  Wii U Sales have tapered off quite a bit from the holidays and it is hard to make money on anything but a budget game with an install base of 4 million.


Not that I expect Nintendo to care or to do anything different.  The gamecube made a profit and I'm sure Nintendo will make the Wii U profitable.  It just may be the "gamecube" of this generation but it will be profitable. 

You would have think Nintendo would have learned by now how well western 3rd party promises turn out with the bail out they did on the 3DS launch. And it took Nintendo making some aggressive moves to save it.  They have other options available to them, including fostering an environment where smaller-medium budget games can survive, bringing in more stuff to the west from JPN, locking down the indie market on consoles, bringing their antiquated user account system into the 21st century, expanding and creating new studios in the west to create content more geared toward western tastes, allowing NoA and NoE to have more authority  when it comes to publishing and marketing over their perspective markets (im assuming they had little to no authority because no one in the west, in their right mind, would have ever called it Wii U over Wii 2 or even Super Wii lol). They should be as ruthless with their console markets as they are in the handheld space.

Really? Still bitching about the name of the system? There is nothing wrong the name "Wii U".

Nintendo will have no issue capturing Japanese third party support for both the Wii U and 3DS, it is the western third parties that they need to mend fences with at the moment. This is where we stand in the grand scheme of things, Castlevania: Lords of Shadow: Mirror of Fate is being developed by a western studio, Mercury Steam, only because its Japanese publisher, Konami, dictates to them where they make their games. Why can't this happen on the Wii U?


Keep in mind that there are many strategic developers that Nintendo will need to buddy up with in order for the Wii U to have their games. The best example of this is Take Two and Rockstar. Nintendo HAS to Grand Theft Auto V on the Wii U. It would send a precedent through the industry that Nintendo is serious about getting support for the Wii U. They need to do similar things with Epic, EA, and Bethesda. 

The delay of Rayman Legends made me decide to get a $99 Xbox 360 for my birthday instead of a $300 Wii U with which I would have no games for.


My birthday's actually the day of Sony's big announcement coming up.

Out of curiosity, any reason you opted for the subsidized Xbox 360 with the Xbox Live plan instead of buying it outright at $300 if you were willing to drop that amount of money on the Wii U anyway?

id say lock down indies and let the third parties rot for all we care
eas not bringing madden to the wii u
gee you honestly thought we'd buy a vita port for 2013

and dont build a monthly release schedule on one game that will just get delayed to September and NOT have a plan B

How do you Grand Theft Auto V?

Park five really nice cars outside my house and I'll show you.

Out of curiosity, can anyone provide details on how much effort Nintendo courting 3rd party developers has actually detracted from them producing their first party titles?

I sincerely don't know, but if it hasn't really impacted their ability to output their own games, what does it hurt for them to seek out 3rd party support for the console?  I know they were mostly ports, but the Wii U's launch would have been a drought if not for the 3rd party support it did receive.  If Rayman Legends for Wii U hadn't been delayed, but still had an announced Xbox 360/PS3 port scheduled for Fall, would it still be considered backstabbing?

And what about Bayonetta 2?  While they certainly may not have great luck courting EA, Activision, or other huge publishers, certainly the smaller devs would be worth seeking.

its more visibly hurt their release schedule
whats coming-out this month....
NOTHING

can they have proximity mines inside?

I understand, and I agree that it's ridiculous they aren't releasing the basically completed Wii U version just so they release all versions of Rayman at the same time, but my theoretical specifically suggested that if they didn't delay the Wii U game.

I'm not advocating outright hostility toward third parties as much as saying they should proceed as if they won't be getting any significant third party support and have to do it all themselves. If they get the support, great, but if not they're still covered by their own stuff.

And as I said earlier in the thread, that would definitely include more things like Bayonetta 2. This is mostly regarding courting the EAs and the Ubisofts of the world; forging partnerships with small developers would have to be a cornerstone of such an approach.

im answering your first question

3rd parties have stated these reasons are why they don't support Nintendo consoles:


Nintendo consoles are made for "casuals", kids, and families instead of "hardcore" gamers
Nintendo floods their systems with 1st party games, which end up killing 3rd party sales
Nintendo doesn't finance and market their games
Nintendo forces "gimmicks" on them
Nintendo's reputation
Nintendo insults them by offering and sending developers over to assist in development
Nintendo mandates if they fund a game to any extent, that game has to be exclusive to Nintendo

What did Microsoft do for 3rd parties on 360?
Microsoft mandated that 360 had to be the lead platform if 3rd parties wanted to develop for it (some exceptions do exist)
Microsoft mandated that 360 version had to be at parity with the other versions (no inferior versions allowed on 360)
Microsoft charged  3rd parties a pretty penny for every extra disc their games used
Microsoft charges $40k per patch and limits time between patches
Microsoft takes 40% cut of all digital sales
Microsoft will pay big for 3rd party support (they spent $50M on GTAIV, they spend over $20M each year on getting the best CoD version, and almost as much to get FFXIII on 360)
Microsoft mandates you use all the online features of Xbox 360.

What did Nintendo do with Wii U for 3rd parties?


Nintendo made all patches free with no limits on patching
Nintendo took the Steam approach to the Wii U eShop
Nintendo made getting their games approved very easy
Nintendo takes between 15%-30% cut on all digital sales
Nintendo licensed numerous engines for 3rd parties to use for free
Nintendo offered to help get their games running on Wii U
Nintendo offered to publish certain titles
Nintendo offered to fund certain titles
Nintendo offered to help market their titles including in Nintendo Directs and trade shows
Nintendo agreed to stagger 1st party support to make it easier for 3rd parties to sell their games (This goes for 3DS as well).
Nintendo gave 3rd parties the launch in exchange for 3rd party support (Same as 3DS)
Nintendo has done a lot for 3DS and Wii U to gain 3rd party support, but sadly 3rd parties are not happy with the demographics for both systems.

Well holy fu*k. This is why I hate living in Florida near Jacksonville. I was under the impression that Xbox Live had nothing to do with the $99 360s. The damn commercial said NOTHING about Live. Do not move to Florida if you're looking for a good job, a place to stay, and your common sanity. It just sucks down here for everyone. Sorry if that was kinda blunt =(


Also the Wii U was a long senseless story that I cannot begin to explain.

Yeah I hope you didn't sign the contract.

When it it all said and done, that $99 Xbox 360 will have cost you about $450.

It was just a decision, no contracts or anything. So, I guess I'll have to come up with something else to get for my birthday. Don't really have any games on my mind...

get a ps3 and ps+

I would be mighty fine with this.

Yes and no.  I believe Nintendo could make a profit with no third party support, but it wouldn't be close to the piles of cash they were pulling in with the Wii.  So from a business perspective, if they want to maximize value they need to make real concessions to big third parties to get some exciting stuff coming in.  But like most Japanese led companies, they refuse to admit mistakes.  So we likely won't see any changes to their third party approaches for the Wii-U. 

Fixed... and yeah. Your point? That there are a lot of companies that don't admit to their mistakes.

i have just realized the irony of who wrote this
god i feel stupid

I don't think Nintendo really cares as much as it might seem. Sure, they try some partnerships here and there, but there's one thing they've never given third-parties, which is the one thing they want: hardware. Nintendo hardware is and will always be designed around Nintendo's own needs. They don't offer the power, controller, online infrastructure, etc. that most publishers and developers want, which is the main reason they haven't gotten as much support the last three generations, and likely never will again. Nintendo doesn't design their hardware with third-parties in mind, nor should they.

Nintendo may toss out accessories like the Circle Pad Pro for third-parties, but all-in-all I don't see how Nintendo have suffered with the types of partnerships they've tried with third-parties.

The point is very simple.  It's fun to go rah, rah, screw third parties, long live Nintendo since obviously on a Nintendo board we all love Nintendo games. 


But as a business decision it is stupid.  Last I heard, Nintendo charges a licensing fee of about $12 a disc.  So assuming the Wii has a userbase of about 85 million, if they sell 1 third party game to the entire population this year that makes them over $1 billion dollars.  You want to go tell your boss to ignore a possible billion dollars a year because your tired of being a bridesmaid? 


It seems to me the better method is to figure out a way to make the Wii U more enticing so that the billion dollars grows. 

Any way to do that would involve cutting into that profit margin. You're devoting resources toward that by either cutting costs for third parties or outright paying them for support.

I want to agree with you, but my friend who manages a Play N Trade still has to explain to people that Wii U/GamePad isn't for Wii; it's a whole new console with a completely different controller that can't be used with Wii. That only accounts for the people who come into his store. Think of all the people who still don't know what it is because it's not super-obvious. I mean, anyone who is still miffed that it sounds lame need to get over it. There's nothing wrong with the name... except that it's unnecessarily confusing people who are too stupid and/or lazy to google it (as funny as Let Me Google That For You is, it's pathetic that it even exists). Like I said months ago, it should taper off 6 months to a year into the console's life. However, it's unfortunate that this is even an issue because it's just 1 more thing on top of everything else.

I think you can cross off the controller as the GamePad is exactly what they want with a screen on it and the Pro Controller is pretty fantastic. The Pro Controller is the best controller I've ever used. It mops the floor with both competing controllers (besides the inexplicable lack of a headphone jack). The online infrastructure is getting there, but it is missing universal chat which quite frankly is inexcusable in 2013. I agree with you there though I think Nintendo can patch it. Kind of pathetic that they didn't think to make it a priority to have that at launch though.

Honestly, neither has Sony and that didn't stop the PS3 (which is notoriously unfriendly) from getting solid support.

If third parties aren't bring you the games, you have no profit margin to worry about. 


I'm not saying everyone should get a deal, but that they should make sure that some high profile games come to the Wii U or have exclusive content.  Case in point.  GTA V is almost certainly not coming to the Wii U and will likely sell at least 10 million units.  10 million x $12 is $120 million in potential royalties just for that game. 


Now, yes, the Wii U doesn't have the user base to absorb all those sales.  But who knows how many people would buy a Wii U if the Wii U had "the best" version of GTA V because of gamepad implementation.  Then we could get into a whole new scenario.  What if 1 million people buy a Wii U because they need the best version of GTA V.  Then that's another $300 x 1 million = $300 million.  Now that's revenue, not profit, but those are new people who will buy other Wii U games including Nintendo published games.  The Gamecube sold about 18 million systems.  That's about how many people would buy a console just for Nintendo games.

2010 had the best third party support if i recall correctly
and Galaxy 2
i see something wrong with that picture

Nintendo should troll all US football gamers and pay the NFL whatever amount of money they want to secure exclusive rights to the license and players association for the 5 years once EA's deal expires then release their own football game. Would all the Madden fans buy a Wii U just for a football sim? Possibly. This will never happen, but if it did, it would be worth it just as big a "fuck you" to EA.

I considered that, but regardless of how accurate it is I think third-parties really do feel that they have to use the GamePad's extra features for something or people will view the games as lacking. I mean, I do recall a lot of reviews for Wii and DS games that complained about them not using the system's features. As for the Pro Controller, it doesn't come with the system so it can't really be a primary controller for a game unless it's bundled (like how Monster Hunter Tri came bundled with the Classic Controller Pro).

As for the PS3, I think it was still close enough to the Xbox 360 that it was still easy enough to port to. Certainly a lot easier than the Wii, and nothing had to be sacrificed. Plus it was a lot more popular in Japan than the 360 so it got the Japanese developer's support.

I just wanted to clarify.  Businesses only care about net income.  If you have to spend $50 million to make $100 million you do it every time.  And certainly Nintendo has a pile of cash so it's not like their internal development would suffer at all. 

I am not sure where to put this but if one thing about the Wii U that needs a price cut it is the Pro controller. Nintendo needs to cut that thing down to $29.99 and let more people purchase them. This way more third parties can just port over their games and use only the pro controller.

Oh god, I would LOVE this. Could you imagine all of the poo that would go flying? Internet AND IRL? Oh my.

Do it, Nintendo. DO IT.

Maybe Nintendo should drop the price on the pro controller, i don't know. But third parties just need to suck it up and use the gamepad. If it's that hard to pop a map/inventory down there, or just support off-screen play, then you're not good at your job.

I, for one, would welcome the opportunity to care even less about Football than I already do. Please, gaming industry: please do all in your power to make that sport less popular in this country so I can stop hearing about it on gaming podcasts.

i think its funny that alone the nintendo 3ds has sold way more 3ds's in 3 years than sony sold ps3's in 6 years.for all the bad comments that are to come its true look it up yourselfs, lol.nintendo needs to stop thinking bout everyone else.for most the ideas that are out nintendo already did.like in the 80;s the power glove hmmm seems like a wii remote.ooo did i metion that the ps1 was going to be the n64 but nintendo said naaa we dont want disc baesed games  so sony ran with it so it became the playstion.nintendo is the orinater nintendo dont bite lol love the wii u control lol sonys new playstation controler will have a touch screen in the middle of it lol hmmm can wii say wii u controller lol

Just to clarify, that is Japan only.  The PS3 has sold much more globally in 6 years than the 3DS in 3.  The 3DS is also in a different position than the Wii U.  The 3DS is the defacto handheld.  The Vita has sold about as much as the Wii U despite being out much longer.  The 3DS gets most of the good 3rd party handheld games.  Okay, so it doesn't have a new Madden.  Excluding first party games, the 3DS still owns the Vita in software support which is a big reason it's still so popular.

Really doubt this can happen.  I wouldn't complain since I don't have a pro yet, but the pro is essentially a gamecube controller with bluetooth.  The gamecube controller sold for $34.99 and bluetooth is like $15.  So they are right in the expected range.

I was half-joking, but when you think about it, it's the ultimate "statement" deal. It instantly boosts the console to relevance. It gives Wii U a major yearly exclusive. It forces football fans to pay attention to the platform or go without an NFL game for almost an entire generation. It's Nintendo's way of stepping up to the plate for their own hardware and sticking it to EA who simply refuses to meet them halfway on anything and is still butthurt over the Origin thing. At this point, 3rd parties would (even begrudgingly) have to reconsider supporting Wii U because Nintendo would have just undeniably scooped up a major demographic or at least the potential for it. To make this extra trollish, Nintendo could even make a deal with 2K Games to brand the football sim NFL 2KXX. They have everything to gain from this because EA had the NFL license for the last 37 years. That would strengthen Nintendo's relationship with a major publisher too.

The problem with sports sims is that they quickly lose value and it makes no sense to rerelease them which are 2 things Nintendo isn't too keen on. However, it would stand to greatly benefit Wii U while simultaneously harming their competitors in the North American market. Nintendo cares more about Japan, but this could lead to a domino effect. I'm not much of a football fan; I just think this could be one of the biggest trolls ever which, as a Wii U owner on the side not getting trolled, would be worth it just see all the football fans whining then buying Wii U consoles.

The NFL wouldn't go for it.


When I think we have all came to the conclusion that Nintendo will never get proper third party support and will be treated as am after though. My problem is why hasn't Nintendo started to build up new first party development studios when the Wii U was first announced. One of nintendo's biggest problems is they lack good western studios. Sony of all people have shown that if you start to build up studios and acquire the ones your close with that it page out in the long run. Microsoft has also tasted that sweet taste after Building 343i and has ramped up building studios all over the world like crazy.

Why hasn't Nintendo looking at this try and reach out start building studios in North America as well as Europe. Are they afraid over lack of control or something. Also picking up smaller studios they have good relations with would be key (shi'en, Way forward, Renegadge kid.

quote] So the big topic in the Nintendo Community this past week has been Nintendo's relationship with third party developers something which has been a recurring theme since the days of the Nintendo 64.  One of the big things I think Nintendo has excelled at is getting indie developers to praise their system and develop for it.

We all know that this  past generation generation online storefronts have become pretty integral with what we have come to expect with consoles. The Nintendo eshop on the Wii U had a pretty damn good launch with a nice mix of Original titles and ports of Older games.


http://cdn.wiiublog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Mighty-Switch-Force-Hyper-Drive-Edition-1-500x281.jpg
http://www.gamers-association.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Little-Inferno-Burning1.jpg
http://i2.cdnds.net/12/37/618x322/gaming_nano_assault_neo_1.jpg

One of Iwata's main promises was to work with third party developers on exclusive games to help carry the load as Nintendo has entered the era of HD development. We have this promise on a much larger AAA scale with the like of Atlus's Shin Megami Tensi X Fire Emblem, Twp high profile projects from Platinum Games in The Wonderful 101 and Bayonetta 2. We have also seen Nintendo as a whole on a smaller scale being more receptive to projects such as Acckatudio's Two Brothers and Pier Solar HD.

http://blogs-images.forbes.com/erikkain/files/2013/01/Shin-Megami-Tensei-X-Fire-Emblem.jpg
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120605214217/lego/images/thumb/c/ca/LEGO_City_Undercover_promo_art_2.jpg/480px-LEGO_City_Undercover_promo_art_2.jpg


One of things I noticed about Nintendo Versus Microsoft and Sony in this regard is that Nintendo hasn't actually partnered with that many their party/2nd party developers. The bulk of their development is still in house for the most part. Whereas Microsoft and Sony alongside their current first party developers have no problem contracting or funding games from other developers. Usually they keep the IP and form a working relationship with that Developer for sometime to come.
http://www.xblafans.com/wp-content/uploads//2013/02/king645-620x348.jpg
http://www.gamedynamo.com/images/galleries/photo/2120/crimson-dragon-xbox-360-xbla-screenshots-2.jpg

One of the blogger things both companies have started are incubation programs within their various studios,  Sony Santa Monica has been running a program for star up developers for a few years now. Sony reserves space inside of the studio for smaller developers to work on their games and shares resources with the main larger studio. So far this has worked out pretty well for Sony having quite a few developers in the program but having the two of note being thatgamescompany and Giant Sparrow.

http://thatgamecompany.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Journey_JC.png

Microsoft too has recently started a incubation program. Their newest studio Lift London helmed by Lee Schuneman is working on its own project as well as housing a smaller indie studio call Dlala games to work on their own project as well.

http://www.mcvuk.com/static/images/assets/2584/4832_Dlala.jpg

So with this in mind is this something Nintendo should start consider doing to gain more mind share and development in western markets. Take Nintendo's two american interest. Nintendo Software Technology is based in Redmond and until 2010 shared a building with Digipen. Why not set a up a small group for the schools gradutes and have them work at NST making smaller eshop games for a year. The same could be said for a studio like Retro. Take a smaller developer like Renegade Kidd and have them work inside of Rwtro's building using those resources to make games with an exclusive contract for a certain number of games.

So what are your thoughts on how Nintendo could increase its output. Have studios incubate smaller devs, purchase more studios,

As much as I agree with the idea that Nintendo needs to not hold back...but push aggressively in all areas to create a strong console...I feel it isn't self sustainable.


For instance, Nintendo only has limited resources...it can't push out the quantity of products needed for them to provide enough support to go it alone...even if they are not going it truly alone, but just in principle. 


I don't think Nintendo could release a new game every other month and have a holiday season of 2-3 killer games prepared for Christmas for basically 2 systems.  If Nintendo could do that I believe they should. 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


An alternative to that could simply be Nintendo needs to embrace their virtual console and eshop more.  Do not hold back.  Have blow out weeks releasing 10 games a time.  Go hardcore on digital games, creating unique eshop Nintendo indie products to sell.  Push for releasing the most product of significant quality that you can.  And do not hold back franchises or experimental games, or new IPs.  Look at each console as your last chance to get your ideas and your dream game released to the market.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Now this argument could work next generation if Nintendo fused the console and home market into one device.  Imagine a device that could be your portable system and dock and be your console.  It works with the Wii motes, Wii U tablet, and all Wii devices.  It could be called Wii Go.  And literally would be the new portable and console system. 


That would allow Nintendo to put all their portable gaming teams and console gaming teams working together to create great games.  Nintendo could easily then release the quality and quantity of games needed for them to go it alone, and would allow Nintendo to within a year fill a library with all the genres needed for a system. 


If I knew I could own a single Nintendo system and get 12 Nintendo games a year for this system, that is the only system I would need, or even want. 

Man, I only see this as a problem if a person does nothing but play video games. But for me, there's way so many games for me to play and keep up with in addition to other things one can do with their free time.

Personally, I have TV shows I watch regularly. In the past 3-4 years, I've been watching a ton of movies and increasing my cinematic knowledge and appreciation of that art form. I started a supper club with some friends of mine where we go out and try new restaurants in our city at least once a month. Plus, I like to do some cooking myself and trying out new recipes and ideas. I've always liked and been interested in break dancing so lately I've been spending time learning that. I'm getting close to being able to do a head spin which is awesome. Just need to work on my balance a bit more. Last year, I bought an electric guitar and a bass guitar at a garage sale and I want to start learning how to play those. As well, I do a lot of reading and decided to start reading through the encyclopedia and further increase my knowledge.

Whenever I see all these threads complaining about a lack of games being released or how third parties aren't bring games over, I'm rather thankful since I've bought more than enough games to play through already and it helps delude me into thinking that maybe I can catch up in my backlog after all. Or at least feel better in not falling further behind. Quite honestly, my reaction to a lot of this complaining is to broaden out your interests into other pursuits.

http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/forums/index.php?action=dlattach;attach=3307;type=avatar

...

i went home to visit family and found my cousin trying to learn to breakdance via youtube tutorials...

This kind of statement is precisely why it's so easy for me to only own Nintendo systems, I just constantly keep up with other things and Pokemon Black/2 just keeps on giving. When Ian says he feels sorry for guys like me, the Nintendo only owner, I feel sorry people who act like all their free time is devoted to every single AAA release from other systems.

With that being said it could only benefit everyone if Nintendo could have companies releasing things at a steady pace with no 5+ month gaps. Doesn't matter if I personally don't care when a game makes it, as long as it makes it(Rayman being a special case) I'm good. But for the greater good a steady release of titles does no harm and nothing but good for us consumers.

Sometimes Nintendo's teams release games very close to each other within even the same month. Or release one of theirs very close to a major 3rd party game on darn near the same day. One of the biggest examples I bring up often is F-Zero GX being sent out to die against the likes of Soul Calibur 2 featuring Link. Not that I remember what came out soon after but if Nintendo and Sega just waited one more month or 2 to release F Zero I think it would have sold a bit better.  Of course once everyone had their fill of SC2 they could have just went out and got GX, but that's never how it works for most games and F Zero is not an ever green title.

A few of the games we've seen at the ND and the ones we only herd about have a good chance of coming out this year and I bet a few of them will come extremely close together cannabalizing another's sales.

Heh. I know. That's what makes it so awesome. No one expects it and then I stun them. It's a great morale boost.

And to Easycure's post, (and it sounds silly to admit this) I took out some video's at the library on it. Makes me feel like Napolean Dynamite. But it is like a magic trick. You show people the result and not the work behind it and people think it is cool.

hey i don't care how you learned, more power too you because it isn't easy. good luck with guitar, let me know of you need pointers.

You're right. It requires quite a bit of upper body strength which is good because I started working out and staying fit awhile ago and then stopped so it's helped get back into a routine and given me a new goal to reach.

The title of this article is pretty funny since I would say Nintendo stopped caring what people think a LONG time ago and that's the reason they're in the mess they're in and have been the weirdo of the console industry for so long.

If Nintendo was to outright give up on third party support, why even make a system?  Why not just go third party then?  Even though Nintendo consoles are effectively Nintendo-only it would be dumb for such a system to exist if that was literally all it was.  I don't think the market would accept it either.  Stores wouldn't dedicate much shelf space to a system with so few games and it would have very little games even if Nintendo ramped up their output.  Remember also that kids and casuals are a big part of Nintendo's customerbase.  Having shitty Dora the Explorer games on the system seems useless to us but it looks good for parents of young kids to have such games on the system.  They may suck, but someone buys them.  For all the Wii's problems in terms of just sheer numbers the Wii section of a store never looked empty, just full of lots of crap in the eyes of a core gamer.

Now I would like Nintendo's output to be such that they appear aware that their third party support sucks.  They kind of seemed to know this on the N64.  You didn't get games too often but when you did it was a big one.  It was like they knew that everyone had waited for months for something to come out so "yeah, here's Ocarina of Time".  You didn't wait months and months for Excitebots or a glorified port of Animal Crossing.  The N64 also didn't really go dead until about six months before the Cube came out.  I wasn't thrilled at the time but that's NOTHING compared to virtually two years of drought ending the Cube and Wii.  2000 was the N64's second last year and that was one of the best years for that system with great games like Majora's Mask, Mario Tennis, Banjo-Tooie and Perfect Dark all coming out.

In the Iwata era it feels like Nintendo doesn't know to differentiate between good third party support and bad.  Like they figure "hey 8 games come out this month" and that's fine, even though they're all shovelware.  I would like it if Nintendo really appeared to know about this problem and would aim to fill the gaps themselves.  That's not really giving up on third party support but rather addressing the shortcomings of their console.  There shouldn't be multiple month gaps of nothing.  They shouldn't effectively abandon their consoles two years before they're replaced.  If there is a drought they shouldn't be all tightlipped about games that are due to come out.  We shouldn't get surprise releases like Excitebots.  If Nintendo was in tune with this they would recognize the drought and let us know about what's coming with time for us to build anticipation for it.  At least then you figure that they care.  You should never wonder when anything else worth a damn is coming out.  Even if you don't have games to play you should know there are games coming.  That recent Nintendo Direct did a good job of that actually.

And Nintendo should also address genres and styles that are not represented.  If the console is weak on FPS games then Nintendo should fill that gap.  Sticking to Mario side-scrollers the whole time is idiotic.  We have a million of those now, what about the types of games that Nintendo systems DON'T have?  Why do I need a Mario and a Donkey Kong and a Kirby and a Wario and a Yoshi sidescroller when I've got jack shit for FPS or fighting games or openworld GTA-style games?  Back in the 16 bit days Sega had to work very hard to compete with Nintendo and they very clearly filled in genre gaps themselves.  No Dragon Quest?  They create Phantasy Star.  No Final Fight?  They create Streets of Rage.  No Street Fighter II?  They create Eternal Champions.  No Mario?  They create Sonic.  See how that works?  There is a need on their console that no one else is addressing so they address it.  Nintendo doesn't do that.  They just give us some new Mario sports game.

Nintendo should work as hard as they can to make their userbase feel that they're not missing out on anything by only owning a Nintendo system.  The Sega Genesis and original Xbox are really good examples of systems that did not lead the market but made their userbase feel that way, and both systems created strong footholds for the companies that made them.

@Ian

What the what?

1. Why not go 3rd party? Are you cereal? They would have to pay Sony/Microsoft licensing fees. Also, Sony's/Microsoft's principles are contrary to everything Nintendo stands for. Even without 3rd party support, Nintendo is still in charge of their own destiny and they don't have to answer to the whims of Sony and Microsoft. i can't believe this has to be explained to you. You might as well tell Apple, "Why not just make Windows PCs?"

2. Nintendo knows the difference between good and bad 3rd party support. They don't turn down shovelware because, ironically, it makes them look bad. This is lose-lose. That brings up terrible memories of the overbearing Nintendo that 3rd parties ditched in 1996. Nintendo doesn't know how to fix 3rd party relations without giving up their identity. Your solution (which seems to mirror many 3rd parties) seems to be, "Just be like Sony and Microsoft" which makes no sense because then they wouldn't be Nintendo anymore. I know you have an axe to grind against Nintendo because you feel they abandoned you, but that solution seriously sucks. No offense, but it does. The day Nintendo starts conducting business like Sony/MS is the day I stop being a Nintendo fan and probably a gamer. I'll take up a new hobby like cooking or pogs.

3. You get Mario, Kirby, and Yoshi sidescrollers because that's what those teams make. Do you really want a FPS from HAL Labs? That game would probably suck because they haven't the slightest clue how to make that kind of game.

4. Using Sega as an example isn't really helping your cause because Sega has been poorly managed since forever ago. It was nice that they addressed some of their console's deficiencies, but Nintendo still consistently outsold them. That's why Nintendo plays it safe. I know you say you don't care about sales and such and that's fine, but the fact of the matter is that Nintendo cares about that and they should because if they didn't, guess what? No more Nintendo. Why would Nintendo follow Sega's lead? If Sega ever had even the slightest idea what they were doing, they still be making consoles, not holding a decade-plus firesale on their artistic integrity.

Adrock, I wouldn't say that because Sega ultimately failed that everything they did was wrong or that they never knew what they were doing.  They did know what they were doing (or at least Sega of America did) during the Genesis years and then lost it.  What if Nintendo went under?  Would we damn their entire history for it?  Clearly they at least knew what they were doing in the NES and SNES years.  Sega certainly did not fail because they made an effort to fill in genre gaps on the one system they had that was very successful.

And if all of Nintendo's teams know how to make sidescrollers, well they need to diversify their teams.  No publisher the size of Nintendo's should have multiple teams stuck in the same genre rut while whole other genres are completely ignored.  What should Nintendo do?  Stick with the same old stuff forever because that's what their teams are good at?  Obviously at some point EAD went from making 2D games to 3D games.  It isn't like they went into the 32/64 bit generation with the same 2D sidescrollers that were successful in the 16 bit gen.  They took risks and tried new things.  I don't need an FPS from HAL Labs because I'm sure that someone else could do a better job.  Retro could do a better job but their last game was a 2D sidescroller and they've got Good Feel and EAD working on those as well.  It makes no sense to have four teams working on the same type of game particularly when we know that Retro and EAD are perfectly capable of other genres.  It's just simple planning.  If you're thinking about a team's next project and you know another team is working on one type of game why would you start another project that is so similar?  It isn't like Nintendo historically has stuck to only a few genres.  We know that as a whole the company is capable of variety.

If Nintendo is screwed on third party support it is their responsibility to give their console a good selection of games.  That means they have to try to touch all demographics and all genres because that's what great consoles offer.  Of course the consoles that achieved that did so with third party support and I think that ultimately that's the real cure to all this.  But then if they do their best to fill in the release schedule themselves it should in theory attract more interest from the very customers that third parties wish to sell their games to and thus they might just start attracting better third party support.  At the end of the day it's all business and if a third party doesn't want to release their game on a Nintendo console it's because for whatever reason they do not think it will make money.

*sorry for the late response*
oh i see, like what i did with your mom last night