Gaming Forums => Nintendo Gaming => Topic started by: Soren on April 26, 2017, 06:50:20 PM
Title: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: Soren on April 26, 2017, 06:50:20 PM
NintendoLife published a brilliant piece regarding the issues surrounding NoA's communication(or lack-thereof) regarding indies and their developers. I've pasted a few choice nuggets but the entire piece is well worth a read, so please do.
When the Switch was then unveiled in October 2016 and some developers, many of them in Europe, boasted of the fact they were already working on the hardware, frustration was inevitable. For the veteran publisher / developer comfortable with being quoted in this article - Nindie 1 - all they experienced from Nintendo of America was a cold shoulder and a lack of detail. The tone was an issue, in addition to the slowness and infrequency of communications.
Quote
Rather like with Nintendo publishing and acquiring the IP rights to Snipperclips - Cut it out, together!, which the UK-based developer was clearly happy to produce with Nintendo in Europe and Japan, Nintendo of America initially sought ownership of the potential pitch from Indie 1. It was a proposal that never got far as, ultimately, this studio didn't want to go down that route. The problem was when the studio's enquiry then shifted to its own hopes, in this case porting an existing project. "We asked about porting but it wasn't really answered. They didn't seem like they were interested in that yet. I think we just went into it expecting to talk about our current game and they just wanted us to pitch something new and exclusive. And all subsequent queries about our current game were ignored."
Quote
What we're also left with is the big question - how far should curation go? After all, different regional approaches still bring us games like Vroom in the Night Sky, which we feel is a poor game from any angle. Inconsistencies in policies are also baffling, in which we get quality re-releases like the Tomorrow Corporation trilogy but see the likes of the brilliant Axiom Verge get rejected.
I don't want the conversation to go down the NinjaPig/RCMADIAX route of quality. I think we can all agree that an eShop with higher standards is good for everyone involved. I do feel that if NoA's Nindie squad is indeed understaffed and ill-equipped to handle the volume of requests from indie developers then something needs to be done.
Also I find it rather insulting to want to demand Switch-specific features from indie developers in exchange for entrance into the eShop. Nintendo is in no such position to want to demand anything from anyone, much less small dev teams.
Quote
(...)the team is also using a curation remit to "try and force developers to create exclusive game modes or commit to some time-based exclusivity just for the right to release games on their system". The word "arrogant" is used when referencing the drive by Nintendo to gain some forms of exclusivity while offering little in return, a conflating of publication approval with "strongarm" demands for unique content.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: Evan_B on April 26, 2017, 07:01:20 PM
The fact that "Switch-specific features" often ends up raising the price by ten dollars, I really have no interest in buying indie games on Switch.
The 3DS had a great number of affordable indie titles, while the Wii U had a bloated amount of low-quality affairs that were poorly optimized and not really great. I can understand Nintendo wanting to avoid the same situation on Switch, and many of the titles announced for the system look to be of higher quality. I don't know, I personally would rather see larger scale games on Switch than indies anyway, especially with the price-jacking, so I don't have much to say on the subject.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: Mop it up on April 26, 2017, 09:46:51 PM
Sounds like one of those "Damned if they do, damned if they don't" type of situations.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: NWR_insanolord on April 26, 2017, 09:56:47 PM
Nintendo got indie support on Wii U until the bitter end, so if they're in a position to ask favors from anyone, it's gotta be the indies. The fact that they've stuck by Nintendo through all this suggests they're pretty happy with the arrangement.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: ShyGuy on April 26, 2017, 10:58:22 PM
Didn't they talk about staggering game releases for the launch window, however long that is? I think it was in an interview with Damon Baker. I'm sure Axiom Verge will come out this year on Switch.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: Kairon on April 26, 2017, 11:37:36 PM
I'm all for the floodgates being opened and indies of all shapes and sizes having a shot at the Switch eShop. Heck, have you PLAYED Poker Dice Solitaire Future? <3 that RCMadiax title.
However, that said, I think that Nintendo's curation strategy for launch, while brutally excluding some Indies from the party, has worked out the last 1 and a half months. Yes, devs who have great titles and great history aren't necessarily getting the limited supply of golden tickets (game launch slots, dev kits, etc.), but overall it's seemed like from a critical standpoint Nintendo's done a decent job in building a Switch eShop library with a high hit-to-dud ratio that allows them to market something every week.
This is launch, where I feel it's sensible to think that resources and attention is limited, and where Nintendo is being hands-on with the Switch's perception in the market. They're meticulously arranging software releases to try to avoid "game drought" perceptions, and they're ruthlessly picking and choosing indie titles to try to avoid (as much as can be avoided) an early-days conflation with "shovelware" or "all ports of old games" or "limited genres".
BUT, if the situation is the same a year from now, where indies are still being gated aggressively, then that'd be ridiculous, no question.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: Soren on April 27, 2017, 12:23:49 AM
I'm sure Axiom Verge will come out this year on Switch.
No way Happ gets approval, receives a dev kit, ports the game, submits it for lotcheck and gets a release date in less than 8 months. That sounds insane even for a big developer, let alone a one man team. Happ has a legitimate beef with the way he has been treated by NoA, which makes me more likely to believe the stories shared by the other anonymous developers.
With that said: (http://i.imgur.com/Wsp7Mwn.png) (http://i.imgur.com/WrbCqMb.png) (http://i.imgur.com/ddLmj0l.png)
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: ThePerm on April 27, 2017, 12:37:45 AM
I'm betting they will announce universal accounts at e3. They're waiting because they want some great news at the conference, but it's overall stupid and fucked up.
They're jerking people around in the name of secrecy. Usually the secret is they don't have much going on.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: Enner on April 27, 2017, 01:37:02 AM
It just wouldn't be a complete week without a baffling Nintendo decision(s) to dwell upon.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: Ian Sane on April 27, 2017, 02:30:55 AM
Nintendo making demands from indie devs for Switch exclusive content doesn't surprise me. Nintendo has always acted like they're the hottest **** and that they're doing you a big favour if you're associated with them at all. It just didn't look as ridiculous during the NES/SNES years or on handhelds when they actually did have the sort of clout to make such demands. But this attitude doesn't change in the wake of underperforming consoles. A rational company would maybe play a little more nice after their most unsuccessful console generation yet but a rational company would have done that during the N64 to Cube transition and Nintendo didn't.
The Switch is selling quite well so far so that's just going to confirm to Nintendo that they're making the right approach. If the Switch was bombing... it would be something else's fault. Something Nintendo would claim as an unavoidable industry wide problem that just so happens to not affect Sony or Microsoft.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: ejamer on April 27, 2017, 07:41:57 AM
What I love about this site: we are passionate about great Nintendo games, and brutally direct about (what we consider to be) BS business decisions that Nintendo makes.
For what it's worth, this doesn't seem surprising. It really felt like some good ideas about how to communicate and work with indie developers started with Wii and progressed even further on Wii U. To take a step backwards now is almost expected, given Nintendo's long track record of screwing up developer relationships.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: ShyGuy on April 27, 2017, 10:01:23 AM
I bet this all started because Dr. Jonny Metts mouthed off about Axiom Verge in front of Reggie and the developer. Now Reggie is like "let 'em twist in the wind!"
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: Agent-X- on April 27, 2017, 10:08:32 AM
It's my firm take that NoA is fumbling the Switch with as much authority as they are given. The American eShop has additional issues that the Japanese eShop doesn't seem to have, for example: The American "Coming Soon" appears capped at 4 games while in Japan I've seen many more than 4, which leaves me with the unmistakable impression that there's not much slated for release in the next month except one or two games. To add to matters, NOA news updates are pretty crappy compared with the videos out of Japan, and while this is not really anything new, my wife has even taken to noticing this trend as it's just not easily overlooked now that the differences sit side-by-side on our Switch.
This news piece is just the icing and cherry on top. I've been thinking for a while now that maybe NOA could use a house cleaning. I kinda feel like the American market is several times bigger than Japan and could use a bit more attention. This sh*t where Japan gets games that America never sees needs to, some how, stop. Nintendo platforms need every last game they can get. To think that they are turning away straight-ports of games from other platforms, even Nintendo ones, is infuriating when I look at recent announcements from publishers such as Capcom and see their upcoming games are landing everywhere except on Switch. Am I to conclude that Capcom doesn't think a Marvel fighting game will sell on Switch? That's silly. Is it that Capcom is still waiting to see how Switch will do? I think we have a good idea now, so why is this still a thing? Could it be that Capcom really has no intention of releasing multiplat's to Switch? I'm just not seeing a good line of logic, so that could mean Nintendo doesn't want multiplat titles... :confused;
If this is the case, I may just lose my last shred of confidence in them.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: Kairon on April 27, 2017, 11:13:01 AM
Why are we talking about Capcom when this article is about Indies?
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: Evan_B on April 27, 2017, 11:53:41 AM
Is anyone else as bored of hearing "this is the last time I trust Nintendo to do something right!" Or "I've lost all hope in them as a company" as I am?
You should have either abandoned your faith a long time ago or stopped taking video games so seriously.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: Adrock on April 27, 2017, 04:47:11 PM
If you post on a video game forum, you're taking video games too seriously.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: Evan_B on April 27, 2017, 05:34:47 PM
Yeah but you can't all try to steal Ian Sane's gig just because he thinks Zelda is good. Plus, he hated Nintendo when they were thriving, y'all just come off as a bunch of band wagoners with your "this one minuscule bad thing makes me distrust Nintendo!"
Posers.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: Adrock on April 27, 2017, 06:14:59 PM
It's a refreshing change of pace to have a reason to be Suspiciously Quasi-Positive. :)
I see more general lack of confidence in Nintendo on this board these days but it's probably because of the Wii U's lack of success. For a while there it looked like Nintendo was in big trouble and that tends to squash optimism compared to something like the Wii days where they're printing money.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: Evan_B on April 27, 2017, 07:00:29 PM
But guys, Breath of the Wild is a deeply flawed and dissatisfying experience.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: Mop it up on April 27, 2017, 08:27:13 PM
Is anyone else as bored of hearing "this is the last time I trust Nintendo to do something right!" Or "I've lost all hope in them as a company" as I am?
I guess I am bored of it, though I also can't help but think it's funny. I've been hearing it since at least 2006, and some of these problems have existed since the mid 90s if not earlier. It's pretty clear what kind of company is Nintendo and that they're not going to change into the company some people want.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: nickmitch on April 27, 2017, 11:40:56 PM
Nintendo clearly jumped too far in the wrong direction with the indie thing. I understanding holding back titles to space them out in the launch window, but they should have some idea of who the quality partners are and have them at least in the queue for release.
The Axiom Verge thing is just blowing my mind. Unless Nintendo has a 2D Metriod up its sleeve for E3, you'd think the Metriod-inspired critical darling would be high on their list, port or not.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: ThePerm on April 28, 2017, 12:44:24 AM
Is anyone else as bored of hearing "this is the last time I trust Nintendo to do something right!" Or "I've lost all hope in them as a company" as I am?
You should have either abandoned your faith a long time ago or stopped taking video games so seriously.
unfortunately, these attitudes are well deserved. I had a positivity meter, it is used up at this point. The company makes great games and systems, but they're horribly mismanaged. I blame the NOA change of guard during the N64 to Gamecube transition era.
I like Nintendo, but they need to have either a good third party plan, or a good second party plan. Its amazing Sony nurtures Naughty Dog into and Amazing second party and Microsoft nurtured Bungi and Nintendo lost Rare and SK. retro is good, but I think the Wii U needed more than snazzy looking Super Nintendo games.
Now is the time to A) have absolutely amazing and original first party games B)Nurture a Second Party C)Attract a AAA exclusive game from a third party D)Have as many Indy games as possible.
If they can do one of those things then this generation will be good.
I've been playing Yooka Laylee on PS4 all day. I'm still wondering when its arriving on Switch? The game is turning into Watchdogs for Wii U. Delayed well past it's target release without a firm date. The only way at this point where it could be better is if Switch got some exclusive content for waiting. Nintendo should turn Playtonic into a second party. Of course that's probably the furthest thing from Reggies mind.
Armchair executive time!
If I were NOA I would:
Snatch Playtonic Exclusivity
Snatch Tom Happ and put a team under him(I'd have grabbed him back in the summer and given him lots of moneys)
Have Retro make a new Metroid game(I'd have had the game started development more than 2 years ago. I actually built a unity metroid clone at least a year and a half ago...so if I had a team of people we'd be pretty far along, but I'm just a lone programmer/graphic artist working for free, not a team of people on a 30 million Capcom budget)
Found some Indy developer to make a survival horror game. Lots of Silent Hills clones could use some funding and would get a popularity boost for being an exclusive game
Hired Martin Holis and had him make a Spy Shooter. Not Goldeneye, Not Perfect Dark. Actually I'd like it to be cheeky, and cartoony. Very violent though. Somewhat of a 60s British spy parody game.
Fund Shadows of the Eternals.
But on top of that give Denis Dyack a second job as director of Eternal Darkness 2. There's room for both.
I'd have Ubisoft develop a Donkey Kong game. Something like Assassins Creed, Uncharted, or Tomb Raider, but with Donkey Kong. You're in a big beautiful jungle, you explore temples, you climb walls, vines and buildings, and you fight Kremlings, collect bananas. I would focus more on melee attacks though. You might ride around with Funky Kong in a Jeep.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: Evan_B on April 28, 2017, 01:24:05 PM
I am so out of touch with what you want out of video games I can't even begin to comment on that list.
I am so sorry.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: Phil on April 28, 2017, 02:52:20 PM
Is anyone else as bored of hearing "this is the last time I trust Nintendo to do something right!" Or "I've lost all hope in them as a company" as I am?
You should have either abandoned your faith a long time ago or stopped taking video games so seriously.
unfortunately, these attitudes are well deserved. I had a positivity meter, it is used up at this point. The company makes great games and systems, but they're horribly mismanaged. I blame the NOA change of guard during the N64 to Gamecube transition era.
I like Nintendo, but they need to have either a good third party plan, or a good second party plan. Its amazing Sony nurtures Naughty Dog into and Amazing second party and Microsoft nurtured Bungi and Nintendo lost Rare and SK. retro is good, but I think the Wii U needed more than snazzy looking Super Nintendo games.
Now is the time to A) have absolutely amazing and original first party games B)Nurture a Second Party C)Attract a AAA exclusive game from a third party D)Have as many Indy games as possible.
If they can do one of those things then this generation will be good.
I've been playing Yooka Laylee on PS4 all day. I'm still wondering when its arriving on Switch? The game is turning into Watchdogs for Wii U. Delayed well past it's target release without a firm date. The only way at this point where it could be better is if Switch got some exclusive content for waiting. Nintendo should turn Playtonic into a second party. Of course that's probably the furthest thing from Reggies mind.
Armchair executive time!
If I were NOA I would:
Snatch Playtonic Exclusivity
Snatch Tom Happ and put a team under him(I'd have grabbed him back in the summer and given him lots of moneys)
Have Retro make a new Metroid game(I'd have had the game started development more than 2 years ago. I actually built a unity metroid clone at least a year and a half ago...so if I had a team of people we'd be pretty far along, but I'm just a lone programmer/graphic artist working for free, not a team of people on a 30 million Capcom budget)
Found some Indy developer to make a survival horror game. Lots of Silent Hills clones could use some funding and would get a popularity boost for being an exclusive game
Hired Martin Holis and had him make a Spy Shooter. Not Goldeneye, Not Perfect Dark. Actually I'd like it to be cheeky, and cartoony. Very violent though. Somewhat of a 60s British spy parody game.
Fund Shadows of the Eternals.
But on top of that give Denis Dyack a second job as director of Eternal Darkness 2. There's room for both.
I'd have Ubisoft develop a Donkey Kong game. Something like Assassins Creed, Uncharted, or Tomb Raider, but with Donkey Kong. You're in a big beautiful jungle, you explore temples, you climb walls, vines and buildings, and you fight Kremlings, collect bananas. I would focus more on melee attacks though. You might ride around with Funky Kong in a Jeep.
WHAAAAA?
For one, indies are indie because they want their independence. Not every indie wants to be bought and taken over by a publisher or have their games played by less people. Sort of defeats the purpose of why they were indie to begin with. Secondly, Bungie left Microsoft because they didn't want to be a Halo dev for the rest of their life like Microsoft wanted them to be and how Microsoft treats many of their developers. Retro at least gets to choose what games they make. As for everything else, WHAAAA?
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: Soren on April 28, 2017, 04:22:37 PM
2 things:
1) Playtonic is mostly made up of former Rare employees. Why on earth would they want to be tied to a specific hardware/company again? Most of these indie devs were people who worked for major developers before and are seeking a level of independence that they can't have with those companies. Most of these people aren't looking to get bought out by Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft.
2) As mentioned in the article, NoA isn't really offering much in return for these exclusive deals, which is probably why Runner 3 is the only indie exclusive to Switch so far. And I'm 99% sure that exclusivity deal has an eventual expiration date.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: ThePerm on April 29, 2017, 03:41:07 AM
I'm not saying chain them down forever, just be patrons. As far as exclusivity goes. It would have be better if it was timed. Nintendo used to take some developers under their wings. Today's small developers could become the future Capcoms, Square Enixs, Konamis, EA, Ubisoft.
I am aware bungee is not with Microsoft as a second party. But you do see Destiny on PS4 and Xbox but not a Nintendo system. I had meant to throwthat caveat in, but it sort of is(whats left unsaid).
Take for instance what Sony does with Kojima. He could make games for any system, but he has some patronage.
What I should really say instead of making it a challenge for great companies to make games on the system, shouldn't they make it lucrative both creatively and financially? If it is a technical challenge then they need to be compensating.
I have mostly indy games for Wii U. I was just saying what their overall strategy should be. Headhunt good talent. Offer rewards to those that reward you. Create mutually beneficial relationships. Treat people with respect.
When you look at someone like Tom Happ who made a game all by himself. He did the music, wrote the code, designed the levels, you wonder what someone like that would do if they had excellent support. I could imagine with some help he could churn out either a gigantic game or several games. When you hear they're keeping him from releasing the game that's some time in sales he isn't going to get back. This is actually one of the most optimal times to be buying a game for a system. It would be nice if he could sell the game to people who just bought a switch and want an excellent platformer for the go. Instead of jerking him around maybe they should facilitate him or let him in on what is probably an obvious secret? Do you want Tom Happ's next game? Because facilitating him is how you get his next game. Tom Happs communication with Nintendo should not be like trying to get a hold of the Engineering department at Verizon.
And honestly I think all the fault is on NOA and not NCL. They get some games over in Japan from Japanese developers, NOA has been a dump since Klobb and Peter Maine left. There's massive and regular miscommunication and easily preventable errors.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: Agent-X- on April 29, 2017, 06:26:22 PM
Why are we talking about Capcom when this article is about Indies?
Because it's relevant. Just because the article in question speaks specifically to Indies, doesn't mean we can't draw a conclusion that this treatment/behavior is not limited to Indies and could also explain why even Japanese third parties are kinda being slow to support the Switch.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: Agent-X- on April 29, 2017, 06:41:44 PM
I'm not saying chain them down forever, just be patrons. As far as exclusivity goes. It would have be better if it was timed. Nintendo used to take some developers under their wings. Today's small developers could become the future Capcoms, Square Enixs, Konamis, EA, Ubisoft.
I am aware bungee is not with Microsoft as a second party. But you do see Destiny on PS4 and Xbox but not a Nintendo system. I had meant to throwthat caveat in, but it sort of is(whats left unsaid).
Take for instance what Sony does with Kojima. He could make games for any system, but he has some patronage.
What I should really say instead of making it a challenge for great companies to make games on the system, shouldn't they make it lucrative both creatively and financially? If it is a technical challenge then they need to be compensating.
I have mostly indy games for Wii U. I was just saying what their overall strategy should be. Headhunt good talent. Offer rewards to those that reward you. Create mutually beneficial relationships. Treat people with respect.
When you look at someone like Tom Happ who made a game all by himself. He did the music, wrote the code, designed the levels, you wonder what someone like that would do if they had excellent support. I could imagine with some help he could churn out either a gigantic game or several games. When you hear they're keeping him from releasing the game that's some time in sales he isn't going to get back. This is actually one of the most optimal times to be buying a game for a system. It would be nice if he could sell the game to people who just bought a switch and want an excellent platformer for the go. Instead of jerking him around maybe they should facilitate him or let him in on what is probably an obvious secret? Do you want Tom Happ's next game? Because facilitating him is how you get his next game. Tom Happs communication with Nintendo should not be like trying to get a hold of the Engineering department at Verizon.
And honestly I think all the fault is on NOA and not NCL. They get some games over in Japan from Japanese developers, NOA has been a dump since Klobb and Peter Maine left. There's massive and regular miscommunication and easily preventable errors.
You're spot on. NOA could/should do a lot more to nurture Indie support as well as third party support. Instead, it almost looks like they're raising the bar for entry onto the platform.
I kinda get the impression that if we see any multiplat titles, they will all have Switch-specific enhancements tacked on, aka EA games using last-gen engines with motion controls and HD rumble added on.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: Kairon on April 30, 2017, 12:53:33 PM
Why are we talking about Capcom when this article is about Indies?
Because it's relevant. Just because the article in question speaks specifically to Indies, doesn't mean we can't draw a conclusion that this treatment/behavior is not limited to Indies and could also explain why even Japanese third parties are kinda being slow to support the Switch.
I get what you're saying, and there's definitely stuff to dig into on the larger third-party side, but I don't see anything in this article that supports that. In fact, this article has a couple things thatsuggest that larger traditional third parties have a separate and distinct experience from Indies:
1. The article makes it sound like Indies have a dedicated team at Nintendo that handles them. 2. This article seems to make it sound like Nintendo is more attentive to Publishers instead of straight self-publishing shops, and most traditional third parties ARE publishers. 3. The article's critical aspects are mostly focused on NA, whereas it contains much less criticism from Europe and Japan. Given that Capcom is a Japanese Dev, doesn't that suggest that they might even have had a more distinctly difference experience than the quoted devs? 4. The article suggests out that Japan's process is mysteriously less stringent than the one experienced by the more critical Nindies, using VROOM as an example.
I mean, it's obvious that there are issues with the larger world of third parties, just as there has been since the beginning with Nintendo. I just don't believe that this article sheds any new light on that, instead focusing on the "I got a golden ticket" esque saga where some Indies feel the glow of the Nintendo Switch Launch period support, and some other indies, surprising given their track record, are being left out in the cold.
I think this is just a reminder that behind the scenes of the Switch's significant indie presence of Fast RMX, Snipper Clips, The Binding of Isaac, Snake Pass, Has-Been Heroes, Jackbox Party Pack 3, Mr. Shifty, WonderBoy, Tumble Seed, Graceful Explosion Machine, and others, there is a system that created that lineup, and that system has created losers as well as winners.
Tentatively, I would argue that the system has worked well for this first two months. It's brutal, and it's insensate of past Nindie history, but it's accrued a lineup of well-received, varied, and interesting games to cover one of Nintendo's most public weakspots: the post launch drought.
I would argue that speaks to a sense of priorities and focus at Nintendo. Brutal, unrelenting, constrained focus perhaps, with a general favoring of exclusives over older ports, favoring indie publishers over indie developers, and of business and market concerns over personal histories of collaboration. A focus that got them through the first two months... but one that could be harshly restrictive if it remains a pattern over the next two years.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: Soren on April 30, 2017, 01:29:33 PM
Why are we talking about Capcom when this article is about Indies?
Because it's relevant. Just because the article in question speaks specifically to Indies, doesn't mean we can't draw a conclusion that this treatment/behavior is not limited to Indies and could also explain why even Japanese third parties are kinda being slow to support the Switch.
If Capcom pitches a port for the Switch, they're not going to get the runaround from Nintendo. There's just not a reasonable comparison here.
Title: Re: Nintendo of America's troubling Indie gatekeeping
Post by: Agent-X- on April 30, 2017, 05:18:43 PM
Kairon, Soren: You're both making good points. I jumped to conclusions. The same day I saw this article being shared, I saw Capcom's game announcement of Marvel vs Capcom for PS4, XB1, and Steam. That obviously fed into my negative feelings, because that would be par for the course at the moment. They're porting a 10-year old digital title with a $40 price tag to Swtich, while they heap on the quality titles on other platforms.
It doesn't make sense, but I now see that it's completely unrelated to NoA and Nindies. Although... the lone Capcom title has tacked on Switch-exclusive content. *cue the X-files/conspiracy music*
