Topic: PlayStation Boss Admits Vita Has Been A Tough Sell To Publishers

[broodwars]

The rule of the game is kill or be killed. Look what happened to Sega. Sony did that to them, and probably would have done the exact same to Nintendo if Nintendo didn't have the handheld market.

Well, I'd argue that Sega did "that" to Sega, given that Sega's death was entirely caused by splitting their market 3-4 different ways in quick succession (and subsequently angering their fans) with the 32X, Sega CD, Saturn, and eventually the Dreamcast.  Sony merely finished them off.

Diversity and competition are sometimes a good thing, but not always. Look what happened to the native wildlife in Australia when things like Dingoes and Foxes (and man) were introduced there. Diversity is nice in theory, but when you put a lot of different competing things into an environment together sometimes things end up extinct, and that's not good or healthy.

And yet homogenization and inbreeding are also the cause of evolutionary and societal stagnation, as well as harmful mutation.  Competition breeds adaptability, which allows old species to develop the means to fight off new predators.  Throughout history, civilizations fell because they grew stagnant after lengthy periods of  sheer dominance, and thus they were swiftly taken out by new conquerors with new ideas and technologies.

Regardless, when companies compete we the consumers always win.

[Luigi Dude]

The Gameboy Advance had no competition and as a result, Nintendo just released a lot of SNES ports instead of new games.  Oh and lets not forget all classic NES games that they released individually for 20 f*cking dollars on the system as well.  The DS on the other hand had competition and as a result Nintendo released more unique software on a handheld then ever before.

So yeah, I'm going to go with the people saying Nintendo needs competition because we've seen what happens when they don't.  The GBA easily has the worst Nintendo software lineup because Nintendo knew they had a monopoly on the handheld market and as a result they didn't put much effort into it.

[Chozo Ghost]

And yet homogenization and inbreeding are also the cause of evolutionary and societal stagnation, as well as harmful mutation.  Competition breeds adaptability, which allows old species to develop the means to fight off new predators.  Throughout history, civilizations fell because they grew stagnant after lengthy periods of  sheer dominance, and thus they were swiftly taken out by new conquerors with new ideas and technologies.

That's a good point, but keep in mind evolution is a slow process. Native Americans were decimated by the introduction of smallpox and other diseases which they had no natural immunity to and 90% were killed off. Those who survived had a genetic resistance to it, and were less likely to die in the future, but the damage was done and the deluge of European immigrants to the new world meant that the native Americans were never able to bounce back from that devastating blow.

Exposure to competition can make Nintendo stronger in the long run, but they have to gradually be eased into it. When the PS1 came out it was this huge knockout blow that came instantly and they never really fully recovered from that. But I think what we're seeing with the PSP and Vita is probably the best sort of competition, because its there and its a potential threat, but at the same time its not so powerful that its instantly destroyed Nintendo. So Nintendo has the time to gradually evolve and develop a resistance to this new disease so in time they can be immunized against it.

Regardless, when companies compete we the consumers always win.

Except Atari or Sega consumers... just saying. I know they made a lot of mistakes and their demise was largely their own fault, but I'm just saying that in a vacuum with no competition none of those mistakes would have been fatal. Atari and Sega accidentally wounded themselves, but competition swooped in and mercilessly dealt the coup de grace.

[Ian Sane]

THIS Nintendo with no competition would not be like the NES days.  The Wii, with it's casual focus and endless sequels and complete abandonment nearly a year before its successor comes out, is what present day Nintendo is like when they feel indestructible.  Nintendo kind of sucks at dealing with competition but they're not a company that does well when they're complacent.

One thing to note is that the NES was released after the videogame industry crash.  Nintendo initially had to fight for their product to even be carried by stores because retailers thought the videogame "fad" was over.  And over in Japan they were essentially creating the home videogame market.  They might have had little competition at the time but they were hungry and fighting to just get their foot in the door.  They did not have the security to phone it in.

[ThePerm]

Rear touch pad innovation

Didn't that innovation first appear in Prison showers?

i thought about that for a second, then R. Lee Emery's voice came in my head and I legit LOL'd

[Louieturkey]

I don't know what you're thinking Chozo.  Throughout the last 25-30 years, whenever Nintendo has had competition, they have produced the best games in the industry.  When they are at the top (like with the Wii and handheld market for most of time), they have not produced the best games (see LuigiDude's comment about the GBA).  While I may enjoy Nintendo games when they are ruling the roost, I enjoy them much better when they are fighting for a piece of the pie with other companies.  They may not make the best design choices or the best feature choices, but when the competition is fierce, they definitely step their game up.  I'd much rather have them in second or third place fighting for the top spot than being in the top spot resting on their laurels.

[Chozo Ghost]

I'm talking about 3rd party support. Maybe Nintendo produces their best 1st party efforts when they have serious competition, but that gets canceled out by the fact 3rd parties leave. So do you want 3rd party support like the NES-SNES, or do you want an N64-GC with terribly 3rd party support but perhaps better 1st party stuff? I don't think 1st party software on the N64-GC was really that better the it was in the NES-SNES years. Maybe it was a little bit better, but considering the price you pay for that marginal improvement is the total lack of 3rd party support that's a really serious sacrifice to make.

Then we have the Wii which is the worst of both worlds because not only does it lack 3rd party support, but the 1st party offerings aren't really so great either (I'm talking Wii Sports, Wii Music, Metroid Other M, etc). There was some great 1st party titles sure, but there was also a lot of stinkers, and over all I wouldn't say it was Nintendo's best creative era. Far from it.

The only way Nintendo gets 3rd party support is when its dominant in the market, because then 3rd parties have no choice but to support it even if they don't want to. 3rd parties almost literally have to be FORCED to support Nintendo hardware. Unless Nintendo is a near monopoly its just not going to happen.

[Louieturkey]

Many third parties just don't like working with Nintendo, or at least that is how it appears.  They were dominant with the Wii and they still got shafted on third party quality.  The Wii U will possibly be the first time that Nintendo listens to third parties and actually implements what they were asking for.  I'm just hoping Nintendo doesn't think they are riding high into this new generation.  They need to feel hungry and I'm hoping that the first annual loss will light a fire under their creative butts and gets them going.

[NWR_insanolord]

The Wii wasn't that easy to develop for for studios used to the kind of power and tools available on the other platforms; there were a lot of restrictions there that they didn't have to deal with on 360 and PS3, and sales for core-oriented games didn't scale with the overall hardware sales. I don't think the third parties had anything against Nintendo, it's just that supporting the system, more often than not, wasn't worth the trouble.

Nintendo involving third parties in the decision making process for the Wii U from the beginning is a really good sign, and the very strong third party launch lineup is evidence of that. Hopefully the support stays that strong, if not even stronger.

[Ian Sane]

Third parties shouldn't have to feel forced to support Nintendo's console.  They should WANT to support it.  How about instead of Nintendo gaining support through a dominant monopoly, they gain it by not being inflexible stubborn out-of-touch shitheads who treat third parties like competition even though they get a licence fee for every third party game and should therefore WANT to have as much third party support as possible because it generates revenue?

Nintendo is the ONLY company to sell the most consoles of a generation and not only not have the best third party support, but actually have the WORST.  Atari 2600, NES, SNES, PS1, PS2 - all of these led the market and just had fantastic third party support.  In comparison to those the Wii is this strange oddity.  Think how undesirable it must be to work with them if having the third highest selling console EVER is not enough to attract support.

Even if somehow Nintendo regained NES style dominance where third parties feel they have to support them, what then?  Isn't that just a step away from another N64 style exodus where everyone is just looking for an excuse to bolt?  What Nintendo should aim for is for third parties to have an excuse to bolt and they don't.  They don't because they're making good money on Nintendo's console and they have a good relationship with Nintendo and the hardware suits their needs well.  Sony has been last for this entire generation but it has not really affected their third party support at all.  They're no saints but obviously working with them is profitable and the PS3 suits their needs.  With the support they've kept it suggests that there was more to the PS1 and 2's third party support than market dominance.

Nintendo is like some anti-social prick that has no friends.  Which is the proper course of action?

1. Admit fault and make an effort to be a nicer and friendly person to make friends.
2. Take over the world and force people to be your "friend" through intimidation and fear.

It's 1. and Nintendo isn't going to have squat for third party support until they realize that.  They don't deserve to be successful.  They're hard to work with and take advantage of both their customers and business partners.  The Wii was successful because it preyed on rube newbies who don't know better and unless Nintendo can keep finding new groups to target as the old groups catch on to their bullshit, their failure is inevitable.  They keep dodging the real issue here.  They're huge jerkwads and they need to recognize that and change that.  If they do that it will be better for both the industry and us gamers.  Oh and it will be better for Nintendo as well.

[NWR_insanolord]

The Wii didn't see that much support because 1. it was hard to get the most out of it from a developer's perspective and 2. games (specifically the third party core-focused variety) didn't sell all that well. If Sony or Microsoft had made the same system the same thing would have happened.

[tendoboy1984]

The market for a high end gaming handheld has always been niche.

Fixed. People would rather spend their money on expensive phones and tablets, but handheld game systems have always been a niche market.

[TrueNerd]

The Gameboy Advance had no competition and as a result, Nintendo just released a lot of SNES ports instead of new games.  Oh and lets not forget all classic NES games that they released individually for 20 f*cking dollars on the system as well.  The DS on the other hand had competition and as a result Nintendo released more unique software on a handheld then ever before.

So yeah, I'm going to go with the people saying Nintendo needs competition because we've seen what happens when they don't.  The GBA easily has the worst Nintendo software lineup because Nintendo knew they had a monopoly on the handheld market and as a result they didn't put much effort into it.

I'm not going to turn this into a larger scope argument, but I love the GBA library. Fusion/Zero Mission, Wario Ware/Twisted, Minish Cap, Superstar Saga, THREE Castlevanias (maybe only Aria was truly good), Wario Land 4, Sonic Advances, Fire Emblem, Advance Wars, Drill Dozer, Kirby and the Amazing Mirror and probably others that I'm forgetting. Sure, there were a lot of ports on GBA, but this is a fantastic list of games, all originals and most of them developed by Nintendo. The DS had a larger, more diverse, more wildly eccentric library, but I'll take the best the GBA has to offer over the best the DS has to offer every day of the week.