Topic: Official Sales Thread

[TJ Spyke]

I would also like to add that Nintendo did not create that reputation of making consoles that only sell first party games. After most third parties abandoned the N64 in favor of PSX, Nintendo had to basically step up their first party efforts. The lack of quality third party games (I am talking generally, I know both N64 and GameCube had a bunch of good third party games) and the safe bet that almost any game published by Nintendo will be good led to consumers not wanting to risk money on third party games on Nintendo consoles. Some publishers have started to realize thy have to do more than just a half-assed job (at one point Ubisoft actually apologized for all the shovelware they released in the Wii's first year).

[NWR_insanolord]

Nintendo acts like they don't care about third party support because they genuinely don't care that much about third party support, and they don't care because they don't have to care.They're making money hand over fist; their hardware is still selling extremely well and the vast majority of their games are as well. Even last generation Nintendo made more profit than Sony despite coming in a distant third. As with every other aspect of the company, Nintendo is perfectly content to do their own thing, and while the third parties are welcome to come along for the ride, it doesn't really bother Nintendo if they don't.

[BlackNMild2k1]

That's whats funny. WHen Nintendo was ina distant 3rd place laste gen and making money, we were all thinking "I wonder what would happen if Nintendo was actually selling enough systems and software to be in 1st place!?"

Now it happened and they are making money making records.

[smallsharkbigbite]

And bribing won't help with any of the points you bring up.  That was my original post.

Say Nintendo funds a 3rd party game. 

Scenario (1)  The game fails to find a market (like you said), Nintendo's out of change with nothing to show for it.

Scenario (2)  The game finds modest success.  Now the 3rd party's going to ask for more money to keep the franchise on Wii, or else they'll move it over to Move/Natal who'll be happy to accomodate them (because that's the game Sony/Microsoft are playing).

It would be much better for Nintendo to lend technical expertise, or to combine marketing efforts.  These would be actual investments, instead of renting a franchise.  This is sort of what you mention near the end, but it wasn't relevant to my original post.

I don't know that either would "fail".  In scenario 1, they have started to work with the developer.  In this case, it should be easier to identify why the project failed(since the project would have happened) and come to them in the future and be able to say, "Hey I know last time didn't work because of xyz, but I've got a project that's sure to work this time."
 
In scenario 2, we aren't seeing that at all for Sony.  As mentioned priorly, PS1/PS2 started the moneyhats.  But with PS3, they have been drastically in the red and I haven't heard of them giving money hats to any project this generation.  Microsoft paid $50M to GTA, to have timed exclusive DLC.  In the past, there is no way that Sony wouldn't have had the complete game be exclusive for that amount.  And Sony got the game anyway.  Is it possible that the relationship allowed it to be on a Sony console and Nintendo didn't have the relationship so they missed out? 
 

[smallsharkbigbite]

Nintendo acts like they don't care about third party support because they genuinely don't care that much about third party support, and they don't care because they don't have to care.They're making money hand over fist; their hardware is still selling extremely well and the vast majority of their games are as well. Even last generation Nintendo made more profit than Sony despite coming in a distant third. As with every other aspect of the company, Nintendo is perfectly content to do their own thing, and while the third parties are welcome to come along for the ride, it doesn't really bother Nintendo if they don't.

This is I believe the exact truth.  But it still doesn't make sense to me.  It's like you owning a 5 star hotel in a great location that is always packed.  Then President Barack calls (or his aides whatever) and says that he is coming for a speech in a month and wants a room.  Then you say back, sorry President, we're booked 6 months in advance, click.
 
I really believe that if Nintendo tried to work with third parties they'd gain additional monies through licensing fees, advertising, additional product sales, etc.  And the end consumer wouldn't feel like the Wii is an "also" console.  But they don't care.  And they'll be fine this generation, but now that Sony/Microsoft have caught on with the motion control and HD is essentially mandatory, I wonder if it'll hurt them next gen and push them fall back into an Gamecube position.   Sony hasn't thrown around money hats but has gotten great support this gen largely because of the past relationships.  Nintendo doesn't get great support as the #1, if they don't knock it out of the park at the start of the next gen, I just can't see them continuing the money creator that is the Wii.

[smallsharkbigbite]

I would also like to add that Nintendo did not create that reputation of making consoles that only sell first party games. After most third parties abandoned the N64 in favor of PSX, Nintendo had to basically step up their first party efforts. The lack of quality third party games (I am talking generally, I know both N64 and GameCube had a bunch of good third party games) and the safe bet that almost any game published by Nintendo will be good led to consumers not wanting to risk money on third party games on Nintendo consoles. Some publishers have started to realize thy have to do more than just a half-assed job (at one point Ubisoft actually apologized for all the shovelware they released in the Wii's first year).

I disagree.  Mario/Zelda/Metroid built Nintendo from the NES to SNES to the N64.  Mario 64/Zelda OOT were released while N64 still had some good third party support and were close in the race with the PSX.  Nintendo games have always been great and a good reason to own a Nintendo console.  In fact, I'm not going to count every Nintendo game, but it seemed to me that Nintendo releases (while still great) got farther and farther apart starting with the N64 leading to fewer first party games to support the consoles themselves.  Sony paying moneyhats started leading to the downfall of third party support for Nintendo.  And Nintendo's striking indifference has kept them away.  Third parties keep testing Nintendo consoles (largely with crap as pointed out by Ubi).  But tests don't work because consumers that want the good games sit on the sidelines and wait for the good games that never come.  There are several great games for the 360/PS3 and even PC that can compete with Nintendo's top line, they just choose not to release them for Nintendo consoles for various reasons. 

[Mop it up]

Considering that many of my favourite games were released on the Nintendo 64 and GameCube, I've always preferred it when Nintendo wasn't number 1. They seem less passionate than they used to, probably because they don't need to try as much.

[Chozo Ghost]

Considering that many of my favourite games were released on the Nintendo 64 and GameCube, I've always preferred it when Nintendo wasn't number 1. They seem less passionate than they used to, probably because they don't need to try as much.

But Nintendo released their best stuff during the NES-SNES years (imho) when they were number 1. Its just this current generation that Nintendo is forsaking its hardcore fans for casual gamers.

[Mop it up]

Their "best" stuff is subjective, I'd say. I found that to be on N64 and GameCube.
I would also argue that Nintendo has never been "hardcore" and have always been "casual," it's just that some people who grew up with Nintendo started wanting more complex games and Nintendo wasn't changing and still hasn't changed. But I don't want to go further into that because it is sure to result in a definition war.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Wii Sports is their best.

[Chozo Ghost]

Nintendo has released excellent A+ quality games in every generation, whether they were the market leader or not. I think we can all agree on that, so I'm not sure how much effect their market share had on influencing the quality of games. Maybe it helped, maybe it hurt. Its really just a matter of opinion, but like I said every generation had at least some A+ material.

In the NES years you had the original SMB games, Zelda, Metroid, etc. In the SNES years you had Mario World, Zelda, Super Metroid, DKC, Mario Kart, Star Fox, etc. In the N64 - present there was all sorts of excellent titles as well.

But in this current Wii generation I think a lot of gamers are disappointed. The A+ titles are definitely there, but they are drowned out by the shitty casual non-gamer crap from both Nintendo themselves and the 3rd parties. The Gems are there, but they're harder to notice because of the tons of manure piled over them...

But you can't say its because of Nintendo being #1, because Nintendo was #1 in the NES and SNES years and we didn't have the casual shovelware then like we do today. So Nintendo being successful isn't the reason, imho. I just think the problem has to do with their focus.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

I'm disappointed in gamers, but rejoice with all the "regular people" who've saved gaming.

[broodwars]

I'm disappointed in gamers, but rejoice with all the "regular people" who've saved gaming.

*I'm disappointed in "gamers" who claim that making gaming a toy once again is somehow "saving gaming".  I look forward to seeing just how much more gaming will be "saved" when Nintendo suddenly realizes that its saviors aren't interested in Wii 2.0 in a few years.

*Note: I actually have very few problems with motion control in general, just that we're 3 years into the Wii's life cycle and we're still at the base level of motion control: getting it to work.  There's been very little attempt (outside of perhaps Silent Hill and Zack & Wiki) so far to make it add anything meaningful to the experience that we never had before, something that grows ever frustrating as time goes on.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Nintendo has released excellent A+ quality games in every generation, whether they were the market leader or not. I think we can all agree on that, so I'm not sure how much effect their market share had on influencing the quality of games. Maybe it helped, maybe it hurt. Its really just a matter of opinion, but like I said every generation had at least some A+ material.

In the NES years you had the original SMB games, Zelda, Metroid, etc. In the SNES years you had Mario World, Zelda, Super Metroid, DKC, Mario Kart, Star Fox, etc. In the N64 - present there was all sorts of excellent titles as well.

But in this current Wii generation I think a lot of gamers are disappointed. The A+ titles are definitely there, but they are drowned out by the shitty casual non-gamer crap from both Nintendo themselves and the 3rd parties. The Gems are there, but they're harder to notice because of the tons of manure piled over them...

But you can't say its because of Nintendo being #1, because Nintendo was #1 in the NES and SNES years and we didn't have the casual shovelware then like we do today. So Nintendo being successful isn't the reason, imho. I just think the problem has to do with their focus.

Nintendo has been quite consistent quality wise on Wii with only a couple of missteps. Also NES and SNES had tons of crap, makes me wonder if you ever even played either of those systems much (especially NES).

[SixthAngel]

Sony hasn't thrown around money hats but has gottengreat support this gen largely because of the past relationships. 

Sony's "past relationship" is that they had the number 1 console last gen and the developers expected it to happen again.  Pretty much all the big games started way before the consoles were even released.  The only reason Sony has them is because people bet that they would win, and they were all wrong.  This is why GTA4 was on ps3.  Final Fantasy XIII is the perfect example since it JUST came out and it was in development before the system was released.
If these companies have a brain they will release games spread across all the platforms at the start of the next gen and then focus on the leader.

*I'm disappointed in "gamers" who claim that making gaming a toy once again is somehow "saving gaming"

Wii Fit - turning gaming into a baby toy.  Seriously, Nintendo has done more than anyone to make gaming not a toy simply with the release of this.

The A+ titles are definitely there, but they are drowned out by the ****ty casual non-gamer crap from both Nintendo ..

Including Nintendo in there is just wrong.  Even throwing out the quality issue (looove Resort) this is ridiculous.  Lets see... Wii Sports Resort(the original didn't even take up shelf space since it was a pack in), Wii Fit, Wii Music, Wii Play (with a remote) and ummmm... Mario Party?

They aren't even a drop in the bucket.  Nintendo released 4 super casual Mario Parties on the Gamecube alone so this should be a welcome improvement to fans from the GC era since it brings in variety.

I loved the NES but

Also NES and SNES had tons of crap,(especially NES).

[Chozo Ghost]

Nintendo has released excellent A+ quality games in every generation, whether they were the market leader or not. I think we can all agree on that, so I'm not sure how much effect their market share had on influencing the quality of games. Maybe it helped, maybe it hurt. Its really just a matter of opinion, but like I said every generation had at least some A+ material.

In the NES years you had the original SMB games, Zelda, Metroid, etc. In the SNES years you had Mario World, Zelda, Super Metroid, DKC, Mario Kart, Star Fox, etc. In the N64 - present there was all sorts of excellent titles as well.

But in this current Wii generation I think a lot of gamers are disappointed. The A+ titles are definitely there, but they are drowned out by the ****ty casual non-gamer crap from both Nintendo themselves and the 3rd parties. The Gems are there, but they're harder to notice because of the tons of manure piled over them...

But you can't say its because of Nintendo being #1, because Nintendo was #1 in the NES and SNES years and we didn't have the casual shovelware then like we do today. So Nintendo being successful isn't the reason, imho. I just think the problem has to do with their focus.

Nintendo has been quite consistent quality wise on Wii with only a couple of missteps. Also NES and SNES had tons of crap, makes me wonder if you ever even played either of those systems much (especially NES).

I grew up with those systems and played them to death. The NES was my first system ever, way back when I was like 7 or something.

[Stratos]

A lot of us grew up with the NES and SNES. But we were young and only got a few games for the system I'll bet. Who had more that 20 games? Odds are most of them rocked or were at least enjoyable. I mostly owned Mario games and Capcom Disney games so I don't think I owned any stinkers myself even if there were a lot. I think I only owned a total of 14 SNES games and about 10 NES games at best. That;s including used games I bought later or got given to me by family years down the road. So it's quite likely our gaming lives were sheltered more. We didn't have the internet to swap horror stories of the Superman 64s and Chicken Shoots.

[Chozo Ghost]

I probably had over 20 games on each system. Some of them were crap, but most were either okay or were excellent. The thing I remember most, though, is that the games were generally very hard. Part of the reason was because I was a little stupid kid at the time, but looking back at those games now from an adult perspective I still think they were generally harder than the games of today. I don't know why, but today's 3D games seems like a piece of cake, but something like SMB Lost Levels could send someone into a nervous breakdown.

[Mop it up]

I was never really very interested in the NES or SNES, the Nintendo 64 is when I got into gaming. Most NES and Super NES games were just too simplistic, too difficult to be enjoyable, or just plain boring. But the Nintendo 64 provided games I never imagined were possible.

looking back at those games now from an adult perspective I still think they were generally harder than the games of today. I don't know why, but today's 3D games seems like a piece of cake,

There are numerous reasons for that. The main one is that most games today are longer than games in the NES days. Because of limitations, most NES games were pretty short, so they were overly difficult to keep you from playing through them on your first sitting. Plus many developers were coming off of an arcade mentality, where games are designed to cause the player to lose and shove more quarters into the machine. Also, 3D games are inherently easier due to their more complex design.

[KDR_11k]

Now that is interesting. Sonic & Sega All-Stars Racing is selling best on Nintendo platforms - I'm guessing the prosperous Mario Kart crowd must have picked up on all the TV ads. I might get around to picking this up for Wii.

Sonic fans apparently went with Nintendo once Sega died (since for all the rivalry Nintendo is still closer to what Sega was than MS or Sony) so Sonic games always sell the most on Nintendo systems.

[TJ Spyke]

I am not surprised, Nintendo fans ironically seem to love Sonic (going back to the big success of Sonic Advance). Also funny since Sega basically admitted that they considered the Xbox to be the successor of the Dreamcast. I remember in an old episode of Radio Free Nintendo that one of the editors (I don't remember who since it was like 8 months ago) suggested that maybe Sega should let Nintendo make a Sega game.

[BlackNMild2k1]

But we already wait long enough for Nintendo to make Nintendo games......

[TJ Spyke]

Ugh, I meant to type Sega should let Nintendo make a Sonic game (I normally am not even awake at 8AM).

[BlackNMild2k1]

I agree, but I would still have posted the same response.

[TJ Spyke]

You can be sure that Nintendo would make it worth waiting for. Wouldn't you rather wait and get a good 3D Sonic game rather than crap like the 2006 Sonic The Hedgehog or Sonic Unleashed?