The Nintendo President presents his thoughts on the value of game content.
http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/news/25816
Nintendo is not interested in doing business with garage developers.
Nintendo of America President Reggie Fils-Aime reiterated Nintendo's stance on working not with "hobbyist developers." Noting the distinction between individuals making games in their free time and independent development houses, Fils-Amie stated that "[Nintendo is] absolutely reaching out to the independent developer."
However, "In our view, [working with hobbyist developers]... is not a business we want to pursue." Nintendo adopted this policy because they feel industry is risking undermining the value of games by selling software too cheaply.
"When we talk about the value of software, it could be a great $1 piece of content or a $50 piece of content," he says. "The point is: Does it maintain its value over time or is it such disposable content that the value quickly goes to zero? … We want consumers to see value in the software, whatever that appropriate value is. And we want to see that value maintained over time."
This echoes statements by Nintendo Co. Ltd. President Satoru Iwata during his GDC keynote address.
IndustryGamers: What do you make of Nintendo's constant dismissal of mobile and social games as content that devalues games overall?
Pachter: I'm not sure that Nintendo can do much to stave off competition from mobile and social games; I view Mr. Iwata's presentation to game developers at GDC last month as analogous to a record company president speaking to recording artists 10 years ago and lamenting that Apple's iTunes store would lead to their demise, as it cheapened the value proposition of music CDs by offering $1 downloads. This would have been a true statement at the time (to my knowledge, it didn't actually happen), but such a plea wouldn't have had any impact on Apple at all. Like the music analogy, Mr. Iwata's plea to developers won't stop Apple, and the success stories of developers like Rovio and Zeptolab will encourage further development by people hoping to launch the next Angry Birds or Cut the Rope.
What they don't want is the Indie stuff on XBLA. The vast majority of stuff on the service is just a riff on the tutorials included in the dev kit. "Who wants a massager?"
Nintendo went on and on about the Seal of Quality in the NES days but that only blocked outright buggy products.
It's going to be interesting when the prices for the virtual console and 3D classics for the Nintendo 3DS are revealed. As much as Nintendo would like to, I don't think they will get away with charging $4-5 for every Game Boy game without a lot of complaints. Hell, I think plenty of people will complain if it's $3.
Given the announced games, Link's Awakening is worth quite a bit more than Super Mario Land.
What Nintendo really needs to do is move away from flat pricing for Virtual Console games. Certain games are worth more than others, and the prices should reflect that. Given the announced games, Link's Awakening is worth quite a bit more than Super Mario Land. I'd have no problem whatsoever paying $5 for LA, but there are plenty of GBC games where that wouldn't be true.
What they don't want is the Indie stuff on XBLA. The vast majority of stuff on the service is just a riff on the tutorials included in the dev kit. "Who wants a massager?"
What they don't want is the Indie stuff on XBLA. The vast majority of stuff on the service is just a riff on the tutorials included in the dev kit. "Who wants a massager?"Well that's fine. Microsoft solves that by keeping indie separate from the rest of the service (and a higher threshold to publish on the main service). They don't have the most optimal solution, but at least they have something.