Topic: GameCube Third-Party Support Rally

[Chongman]

*take note i haven't read most of this topic*

I like my gamecube. I'm satisfied with it. Heck yeah I wish there was more third party support. Heck yeah I wish nintendo was in first place.

For now though, I'm extremely satisfied with the gameplay opportunites I have on my gc. Perhaps I'm not satisfied with nintendo's business model, but that's secondary. More third party support? Sure, I'm game.

[Ymeegod]

Guess nobody is going to talk about royalties but Nintendo screwed themselves.  It started with the N64 and it's high ass rates and continued with the GC.

Big N dropped the royalties in April 2003 to that of Sony's but Sony went ahead and dropped their's again and Nintendo as far as I know didn't follow suit.  MS on the other hand chargers the least.  

Roughy from what I gathered, Nintendo is charging around $8, Sony's charging $7.25 and MS is around $6 per software.  The price varies with publisher, pricing, and how many units are sold.

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

Sidenote, Big N was also charing a FLAT rate at one point of time, meaning if the publisher/developer reduced the game's retail price, it still would have been paying the same rate to nintendo .

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

[KDR_11k]

Iday: Halo was originally headed for the Mac. The PS2 was never even considered.

Next launch Nintendo m,ust do especially one thing: Somehow have a big game that appeals to the ignorant masses (the gore-kiddies) at launch.  With this move Nintendo would secure a userbase that would buy violent third party titles and thus have third party titles sell well. I mean, compare how third party titles sell on the XBox and the GC, although they have about the same size of their userbase third party titles sell very badly on the Cube.

[1day]

WRONG, check out this (and I KNOW it was heading to MAC!)

http://ps2.ign.com/articles/134/134552p1.html

Ok, so it wasn't a pure 100% confirmation but it was pretty damn close.  

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Quote
Originally posted by: 1day
Here another funny logic loop. If the GameCube were the most powerful system, then all of Team Ninja's games would have released only on GameCube!

Team Ninja doesn't have an accurate picture of what "the most powerful system" is.  The visual performance they achieve is relative to their game designs, as is the case with all games.

[Mario]

I think they meant hats, not system. MS have more powerful hats than Nintendo.

[UncleBob]

I want a powerful hat.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

It'll cost ya.

[UncleBob]

$149.99?

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

More.

[NINJA-1]

You have to admit though it's disappointing to GC owners. I mean 3rd parties are either neglecting or barely supporting GC. GC owners should have the same games as PS2 or X-Box owners,  and not have to go out and buy either one or the other just to play a certain game or a few certaing games. C'mon. You can't tell me you're satisfied with Mario Party/Sunshine, Zelda(disney look) remakes/so-called sequels. You can't all say you bought a GC just for another batch of Mario and Link games.  At least I didn't. Hell after Mario 64 and Tennis; I've had enough. I bought a GC, because it was Nintendo's next generation console, and I couldn't wait for the upgrades of games coming from 3rd parties.; Mainly because they usually have the best version of their games on a Nintendo console. Plus I didn't need another DVD player/game system. I wanted game system. That's Nintendo made. I hope that's what they do again. If not. Hey; I'll still buy it. Maybe.

[King of Twitch]

after Mario 64 and Tennis; I've had enough.
-those games were tons of fun, and mario 64 still hasn't been topped.

You can't all say you bought a GC just for another batch of Mario and Link games
-After seeing the SW2000 demo that was barely what 15 seconds long, I knew I needed a cube, but that's just me.

I bought a GC, because it was Nintendo's next generation console, and I couldn't wait for the upgrades of games coming from 3rd parties
-but surely you knew of the 64's lousy 3rd party support, and that it would partly carry over to the next system?

so can I have your cube then? mine's broken

[Infernal Monkey]

Quote
Zelda(disney look)

You know, I would of thought by now people would of gotten over the cel shading. Because hey, it's been well over a year now. "Shrug off games everyday based on their graphics"

Quite seriously though, I have a PS2 and GC. The ONLY games that have appeared on Xbox/PS2 that I would of liked to see on GC are Burnout 3 and Bloody Roar 4. I don't CARE that we didn't get a whole barrel of crap games. Would you have bought Terminator 3, Dark Angel or V8 Supercars 2 if they were thrown on GC? Didn't think so.

[KDR_11k]

I bought my Cube to get games that differ greatly from the stuff I see on the PC. Except for Metal Arms it worked. I have about 25 games, definitely not just Mario and Link. The "there are no third party titles!" attitude is what's hurting third party support: Thare ARE lots of good third party games for the GC, many exclusive, but people ignore them. They don't sell and third parties abandon the GC.

[Ymeegod]

"but people ignore them."

As well as stores, rental shops, ect.

To sell more games, word of mouth seems to get the most attention.  

Example would be GTASA, each day during my lunch I overhear two or three people talking about it and always hear "I'm going have to try that".  Never hear crap about the GC unless I'm the one bringing it up.

 

[KDR_11k]

Bull. They're there, in the stores, it's just that they look like all the other games and unless you know about the game you're not going to notice it out of the crowd. I bought Metal Arms because people recommended it, the game didn't stand out on the shelf and quite honestly i would have ignored it if it wasn't both recommended and cheap.

[CHEN]

It's the same with every other platform, the one more noticable than the other. Games get unnoticed. Sometimes it's because of the lack of hype, the bad cover art, the lack of advertising or any other factor that might influence this. But thank God I keep informed and form opinions myself instead of letting external factors get the best of me.

[Gamebasher]

This whole third-party issue need not cause so much worry.

Why? Because ever since Nintendo themselves discovered the amount of trouble they were in, with regard to third-party support, they have been working around the clock to re-attract that support, and work with them, in mutually beneficial ways, and they´re gaining more support every month! Just look at how many companies support the new DS! And this is no GB or GBA platform, even though it can play GBA games. So it´s remarkable, because it could have been just the opposite! It´s an entirely new system, and Nintendo have no problem getting the third-parties to develope for it!

I really don´t think that it will be nescesarry to rally for third-party support! Those companies who make games, know well that Nintendo exist. And to run around getting people to tell them "Support GameCube!" would probably create just the opposite of the intended response: annoyance! You can bring a horse to water, but you can´t make him drink! Unless he want´s to!

Let them come themselves, let Nintendo do the job. Afterall they´re the only ones who can talk to the companies on a strict business-level. All we could ever do, would be to fill up their mailboxes with too many emails that would most likely go unnoticed for lack of time to respond. Some of them simply don´t respond to consumers because they´re busy making the games.

Really, if the current list of NDS games in anything to go by, we´re not having a thing to worry about come Nintendo Revolution. The attention and success of the NDS (it´s virtually sold out already!), will spill over to the next aforementioned new platform! And a new Nintendo success cycle is born, and we´re in videogame heaven!

This is not the time to get emotional, but a time to understand  w h y  all this started!!!

It´s all about what Nintendo did before and do from now on and forward, all of which will be closely monitored by all the third party developers. Afterall, it was Nintendo themselves who, for fear of piracy, created the cartridge based game platform called Nintendo 64 which started the whole problem. Not to mention the issue of the very high licensing fees. Developers today look at the risks involved at throwing millions of dollars into a game project and perhaps never seeing any profits! If they assess that the risk is too high, they wont do it! And they will completely forget it, if Nintendo´s own way of treating them is wrong. And this was the case before, but nolonger.

So I don´t think there´s anything to worry about!

Clearly Nintendo now understands, having clearly expressed so publicly, and have on multiple levels undone past mistakes, so both the developers and the consumers are happy (I really sometimes wonder if this had anything to do with the transition of power from former NCL President Hiroshi Yamauchi to current new NCL President Satoru Iwata! Yamauchi comes from a time where things were not so easy in Japan, and therefore was of the Old Order, tough and sturdy like the Samurai, not easy to negotiate with, while Iwata is more relaxed and affluent, having grown up in a society which was far easier to live in and therefore much more light at hearth and more diplomatic).

Satoru Iwate video interview

here

[Ian Sane]

"Just look at how many companies support the new DS! And this is no GB or GBA platform, even though it can play GBA games. So it´s remarkable, because it could have been just the opposite! It´s an entirely new system, and Nintendo have no problem getting the third-parties to develope for it!"

Oh yeah I'm sure it took a lot of effort to get third parties to support the DS.  "Hi we're Nintendo, the undisputed leader in the portable gaming market.  Would you like to support our new portable?"  You can bring up the third pillar talk if you want but the fact is that the public sees the DS as the next Gameboy and third parties see it as the next Gameboy so the support is going to be comparible to the GBA.  Nintendo might not have named the DS "Gameboy" but nobody sees it as anything but.

I will admit however that Nintendo did a great job in making the DS third party friendly.  Aside from having new features that allow more freedom with game design the DS is flexible enough to allow for more traditional games to be made as well.  That's a big deal.  When I first heard of the DS I was afraid we were going to get something that's so different that you couldn't even play Tetris on it.  Bringing this level of flexibility to the Revolution would be a great idea and it would probably attract a few hardcore developers.  But it's not going to be enough.  All Nintendo had to do to get DS support was not screw up.  With the Revolution they have to be absolutely exceptional to get the same level of third party support.

Still, judging by the DS, Nintendo has at the very least recognized that they have to design a system that works for everyone.  So I'm less afraid that the DS is going to have tiny memory cards and an irregular controller design that works well for Nintendo but nobody else.

[NINJA-1]

Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey

Quote
Zelda(disney look)

You know, I would of thought by now people would of gotten over the cel shading. Because hey, it's been well over a year now. "Shrug off games everyday based on their graphics"

What I meant by that actually was the fact that they made Link a child with big bright blue eyes instead of; say for example mid-teen age like he was; when he was on the old Captain N cartoon. I don't mind cel-shaded graphics especially when the game is based off of animated show. Like Robotech. Cel-shading should apply for that. Transformers which was only the PS2 should've been Cel-shaded in my opinion to look more like the actual show. But back to this 3rd party issue. I can only hope Nintendo is actually trying to appeal to the 3rd parties, because getting them to develope games for another portable platform is really no big leap when you think about it. I mean they know the average gamer will buy it. I mean the GBA alone out sold the major consoles. Nintendo has to really wake-up and realize that this not the NES-SNES era, and they are not the big man on campus. Because today when people think VIDEO GAMES. Playstation is the first thing that comes to mind. Not Nintendo. Nintendo has to stop this "You should develope games for us because we're Nintendo" attitude.  I mean C'mon doesn't anybody here agree that all consoles should have a version of a game. You have shell out an extra $100-200. For example Blood-Rayne was on all the home consoles. Now the sequel is on the the PS2 and X-Box only. You can't tell you guys/gals agree with that. Forget about sells crap. It doesn't cost that much to port that game; If you don't want to take the time to develope it for one platform over the other. They make the money back for the cost of porting the game.

[KDR_11k]

Are people STILL harping on that "Because we're Nintendo" answer? Hell, what should they have said? There IS no reason to develop for the Gamecube but answering "none at all" would've been even worse than answering "Because we are Nintendo". Sony could have said "Because we have the most users", MS could have said "Because we have a PC-like console" but what should Nintendo say? Except for connectivity which nobody cares about anyway the GC does nothing the competition doesn't do.

Besides, giving the mods a hint that you had a previous account that was banned is a quick way to get banned again. God forgives, never does.

[NINJA-1]

Man you just don't get it do you? Let me break it down for you. First of all it's not about harping about anything as you put it. Here's the difference. Nintendo as a game company/corp. Is still under the belief that is the dominant leader in the video game market/industry. So they believe that 3rd parties should just jump for them. Sony from what I can tell hasn't being throwing that concept in 3rd parties faces. They've just been getting them to sign exclusive contracts. Like Rockstar for example with Grand Theft Auto.(Somehow they found a loop hole and made GTA for the X-Box). They also help Market the games from 3rd parties just as much or nearly as much as they're own games. MS has a similar, but different relationship with 3rd parties. They try to buy them as well as give the same treatment as Sony; and their seems too be no issue when it comes to content as well. Unlike with Nintendo.  Not saying that those type of games should be made, but if we have a game rating system what's the problem with it. Nintendo. Well they are now starting to do this.. But before it seemed like they want to have their 1st-2nd party games to get marketed, and push the release of 3rd party games back. Which may explain why GC versions of games end up coming out months or sometimes a year after a PS2 and X-Box version of game. Which effects the sell of the game to a degree, because some GC owners may either not care or forget about the game or worse just go ahead and buy a PS2 or X-Box to get that version of game.  

[KDR_11k]

What leads you to believe Nintendo has a "we are the leader" attitude?
The userbase that bought the GC doesn't care about third party titles. There are a LOT of kids in there and kids don't buy many games (and don't inform themselves but buy whichever game is labled "Spongebob" or "Mario"). Given equal chances, a third party title that deviates much from Nintendo's offerings will sell worse on the GC than the XBox or PS2. Third parties just don't see it as worth that effort.
Sony and MS can establish exclusivity contracts more easily. A dev or pub will only accept such a contract if the compensation is larger than the profits he'd get from going multiplatform. Sony doesn't have to pay much for that, leaving out the XB and GC doesn't mean many lost sales. Microsoft has the money advantage, even though they need to pay more they can afford it. Nintendo cannot throw around money left and right, at least if they want to stay alive until the Rev launches.
Now, as a dev, why would you develop for the GC or even enter an exclusivity contract with Nintendo? Some people here would because they are Nintendo but I cannot think of any good reason. Go with the PS2, get big sales and maybe money hats (or a rejection but as long as you produce generic shovelware SCEA won't step in). Go with the XBox, get lotsa money and the ability to use Live instead of setting up your own servers just so PR has another bullet point. Go with the GC and you won't get nothing except for bad sales.
Nintendo is already securing exclusivities, the problem is that the only major company they could convince was Capcom who don't like to honour any conteracts. Except for them, Nintendo can only afford buying smaller developers (where a buyout is probably more profitable than a contract) and let them make games. Retro, N-Space, previously Silicon Knights (SK's stuff didn't sell so they weren't worth much, despite what their fans might think).

[Ian Sane]

" Are people STILL harping on that 'Because we're Nintendo' answer? Hell, what should they have said? There IS no reason to develop for the Gamecube but answering 'none at all' would've been even worse than answering 'Because we are Nintendo'."

Well if "Because we're Nintendo" is the only answer to give then it means they've dropped the ball.  I'm not just mad because that's they're answer.  I'm mad because they can't just say "because the Gamecube is a commerically worthwhile console to invest in".  And "because we're Nintendo" is NOT the only answer to give.  They can offer to publish a game or advertise it (though I wouldn't consider THAT sweetening the deal) or make deals where the licence fees are lower or they'll lower GBA licence fees in exchange.  They can still provide an incentive as long as they're willing to take a risk.

Nintendo DOES act like they're still number one.  They always do things different and assume that others will accept that.  You can't do that if you're not the market leader.  You can't release a smaller memory card and just expect third parties to make conservative save requirements if the market leader is letting them make bloated saves.  You can't expect third parties to make online titles without any help when both competitors are going out of their way to accomodate online gaming.  You can't have a wacky controller and expect everyone to adapt their games to it.  You can't charge higher licencing fees if you're not the market leader.  Nintendo does (or at least did during the crucial first years of the Cube's life) everything as if they have a position of power.  They have no power so their third party policies are worthless.

Hell they do the same crap with their customers.  They limit demos to kiosks or make us jump through hoops for them.  When they first released the Cube's Player's Choice line it was $10 more than the PS2 or Xbox budget line.

Now they're improving but it's at such a slow rate it makes no difference.  Why should a third party support the guy who's slowing improving when the compeitition is STILL better?

I think this is why Nintendo did what they did with DS and supposedly plan to do with the Revolution.  They know they don't have any good reason for third parties to support them so they created one.  The DS can support types of games that no other system can AND it does that without sacrificing traditional game mechanics.  From a creative standpoint that's a big draw.  If Nintendo can do the same thing for the Revolution it should improve third party support.  But it needs to not sacrifice traditional game mechanics so that means it has to be online.  Otherwise they're doing the connectivity thing again where they're trading one way of doing things for another.

[Gamebasher]

IanSane, I really think that we don´t have to worry a bit.

They have something up their sleeve, which is going to delight everyone. I think they will finally deliver, and find also a final solution to the third party issue and online gaming.

Truly, they wouldn´t be talking about a revolution and not secure a hefty support from third-parties. As stated before, even if they don´t get enough third-party support, they need to expand their own gameproduction and aquisition of gamestudios in order to simply deliver the games themselves that others do not find themselves able to- or simply do not care to make properly! That´s the only solution I see to the longstanding problem of poor thirdparty make-a-quick-buck offerings that unfairly leave Nintendo in a quagmire of pressure from two sides: 1) people who "want more games to choose from" and 2) the situation of not being able to deliver enough games themselves to compensate if even a little.

They already abandoned the traditional long developement cycles, and now that that is history they´re sending out new games much faster than before. Just look at how fast Pikmin 2 was made and released! And how good it is!!

Let´s give them a break, and compliment then for what they have achieved more vigorously. I don´t think you would like to be critisized too much, if in fact you were improving a lot! If people critisize too much, Nintendo might grow tired and feel it isn´t worth it! So we should give them the support they deserve! Afterall, they´re they only ones who can make games with that level of quality that only few others can rival!

I know how annoying they´ve been, but I think it´s just history. A new President has taken office, and with him many wonderfull changes will come!