Topic: What needs to happen for the Revolution to take back the marketshare.

[bmfrosty]

I've been thinking about this for a while.  

Lets start with with Nintendo doesn't need the most powerful hardware.  A 3ghz version of the Gekko and a high end ATI video solution are enough to get their graphics to where 99% of the population wouldn't be able to tell the difference between it and what's being offered by their competition.

It's not "mature" games either.   All mature means these days is "Sex and Violence".  These games sell because people want to see what all the controversy is about.

What other directions are there for Nintendo to go?

The third parties.  Some of these are off limits.   Rockstar, Bungie, Hipnotic, Insomniac.  Some are not:

Square-Enix
Capcom
Konami
Namco

I firmly believe that Nintendo could have these companies in their pocket.

How?

Outright buyouts would be financially stressful and dangerous.

I think the way is licencing discounts and a contract fee.  If Nintendo would first Pay these comapnies a good sum of money (enough to bankroll at least one game) and then turn around and drop licencing fees down to manufacturing cost + 10% for a course of 5 years of 100% exclusivity in the console and handheld market, they could own the industry again.

I think it would work.  I don't think it would happen.

[ThePerm]

yeah i think nintendo needs to create a new dream team..much like it had for n64..and announce it all at once..this will give and inflated 3rd party support..and it needs to pay for the production of all of these games made by the dream team.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Funny how Nintendo's dream teams fall apart each time.

[jasonditz]

How much more onboard could Namco or Capcom possibly be? SE is saying all the right things so far, but it remains to be seen if we'll get anything more out of them than subpar FF:CC titles.

Konami seems like a worthwhile target though. What with all the good games they produced for the GBA, it'd be nice to get more out of them on the console side than just Disney sports games and TMNT.

[ThePerm]

the n64 dream team fell apart because of cartridges..

the idea is this nintendo needs to attract like 10 developers 5 western and 5 eastern and have them design exclusive games that have their production paid for by nintendo. In doing this they will create a sort of community. It worked temporarilly on n64..but things fizzled out.

heres what i think they need

western
Id: Quake IV, Doom 3
Valve: Half Life 2 special edition
Lucas Arts: some new star wars game
Ubisoft
?

Japanese
Square: exclusive(game not total exclusivity)
Capcom: exclusive
Konami: exclusive
Namco: soul calibur 3 revolution(hell just buy the company and get tekken too)
?

if you can spoend say 100 million dollars getting some extra 3rd party support(they give ibm billions of dollars to design hardware that never gets used)

[jasonditz]

Namco already got bought out by Bandai

[ThePerm]

and nintendo might buy bandai

[LuWoo75]

U know i dont see konami giving the Nrev anything worthwhile just for the simple fact of they havent support Nin since SNES.  SE someone metioned it b4 that Dragon Quest would be good title for Nintendo although a port of FF would suffice and not FF:CC unless it was to be re-done and evolved into a real RPG with more realistic Graphix.  Capcom and Namco are a given and Activision and EA are given.  I have confidence that UBI will be there also.  I dont ever forsee GTA on the Nrev.

[bmfrosty]

Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm

Id: Quake IV, Doom 3
Valve: Half Life 2 special edition
Lucas Arts: some new star wars game
Ubisoft
?

Japanese
Square: exclusive(game not total exclusivity)
Capcom: exclusive
Konami: exclusive
Namco: soul calibur 3 revolution(hell just buy the company and get tekken too)
?

ID and Valve already have deals with Sony and Microsoft, but I'm sure that Nintendo can get them to make Revolution versions of these three.
Lucas shouldn't be too hard to convince to do Revolution versions of *EVERYTHING*.  
Same goes with Ubi.  Maybe Big N can get the adventure games as 6 month or 1 year exclusives, and the warfare games at least day and date.
I'm going to add Majesco.  Just for Double Fine productions.  Psychonauts as a launch title, and their next game as a 6 month exclusive.

Square would need to put forward Final Fantasy XIII-XV as exclusive.  Everything else gets discounted licencing.
Capcom and Konami for 6 month or 1 year exclusives on Viewtiful Joe, RE 5-6, a NEW MGS game, a NEW 3D Castlevania, and day and date for the Bemani games.
Namco - Nintendo needs to OWN Pacman.

As for others, Mistwalker seems to have some exclusive deal with Microsoft, but Brownie Brown might be somthing to own.

[jasonditz]

Konami has supported the GBA pretty well, and is off to a good start with the DS. They gave the N64 some worthwhile titles... for some reason they gave the Cube even worse support than the Xbox.  

[IceCold]

I would really love another Tales game or another RPG from Namco - the Rev would really benefit from that. Capcom support will be less I think unless Nintendo does something. Licensing fees definitely have to go down.  Square is up in the air. Konami: I don't think so. Western devs? EA is in, Ubi is probably there, LucasArts hopefully

[Ian Sane]

It's all about third party support.  Third party support increases market share while market share increases third party support.  Some call that a catch-22 which it largely is when you have to start from scratch which Nintendo will be doing.  But this relationship also allows for a snowball affect.  If one starts increasing the other follows and the two things feed and grow off each other.  The trick though is getting that ball rolling.  One either has to make some major third party deals or launch a major killer app that sells consoles on it's own and increases the userbase.  Ideally Nintendo should try for both.

The first step is Nintendo has to be very very competent.  There's no room for stupid little errors that are easily avoidable.  The Cube had some problems that limited what a developer could do.  No online was the biggie obviously but having smaller discs and memory cards sure didn't help.  Having higher licencing fees didn't either.  Nintendo so far actually seems to be doing this step.  Of course we don't know much about the Rev yet but we do know it's online and that it doesn't yet have any crucial mistakes that will turn people off.  There is however the rumour about the Rev being underpowered and that alone could screw this all up.  Plus there's the controller which can't be too weird.  If it works with all NES, SNES, and N64 games it won't be.

Of course merely being on the ball is only going to prevent third parties from leaving.  No one is going to jump ship just because Nintendo doesn't suck unless Sony sucks but they can't base a strategy on that variable.  Nintendo has to have an extra incentive for developers to take a chance early on before the userbase is there.  It can't just be money because MS can outbid Nintendo.  It has to be something Nintendo can give that no one else can.  In theory the "revolutionary" feature can help but that will only attract usage of the new feature.  There needs to be "normal" third party games as well that don't use that feature.  That's important for balance or else the Rev will be seen as gimmicky.

Nintendo's greatest asset is its game design talent so they should offer that.  The partnerships with Namco and Sega were okay ideas but the problem was that they resulted in Nintendo games made by a third party.  That's not meaningful third party support because it provides no variety.  We were going to get an F-Zero game anyway with or without Sega.  Nintendo didn't really gain anything with those deals.  What Nintendo should do is offer major game developers that value creativity the freedom to create whatever they want with Nintendo publishing, providing advice, and footing the bill in exchange for complete exclusivity for that game (including special editions).  So instead of Nintendo getting Metal Gear Port they're getting an original game made by Kojima and Kojima gets to have Miyamoto providing input.  Sonic Team gets to make a 3D game without a crappy camera because they have Nintendo helping them out.  Basically it's "who wants to work with Shiggy?"  Nintendo offers no restrictions on content aside from some reasonable budget and time restraints.  Nintendo lends a hand when wanted but doesn't shoehorn Star Fox into anything.

Aside from getting some potentially really great third party exclusives out of the deal it also gets brand new original stuff.  This is good because not only does it provide more variety than having third parties working on Mario games would allow but it raises the possibility of a killer app.  Killer apps are rarely calculated.  It's usually something brand new and brilliant that comes out of nowhere like Pokemon or GTA3.  Nintendo won't find a killer app like that if they stick to too many existing franchises.  They can however find one by getting some brand new stuff out of the most talented devs in the industry.

Nintendo themselves also should try for that killer app.  I suggest the ultimate Pokemon game for starters since that has never been done.  I'm talking a full 3D RPG with gyms and catching wild Pokemon (none of this snagging junk) plus an online Pokemon league for training and battling.  Aside from that obvious franchise game I think Nintendo should concentrate more on original IP for the first little while and release the sequels later on.  Retro should give a full on FPS a try before going back to Metroid.  Camelot should work on an RPG before Mario Sports.  Obviously sequels should still be there but they have to be balanced.  I'm thinking 50/50.  For every sequel Nintendo tries out something brand new with a new IP.  That way fans who want sequels get them but Nintendo provides more variety and sheds the image of a rehasher and increases the odds of a come-out-of-nowhere killer app like Pokemon was all those years ago.

[jasonditz]

Isn't Kojima supposedly (I know, its a rumor) working on a Rev launch title with Shiggy already? I seem to recall something about a cross between Ninja Gaiden and Zelda, but you know how these rumors get.

I'm not sure Sega's worth bothering with anymore. Seems like ever since the Sammy acquisition they've been pumping out safe, boring franchise title. Besides, if you whore Shiggy out to too many people he's not going to be able to work on his own titles.

[IceCold]

"One either has to make some major third party deals"

Do I hear Resident Evil??? Third parties are the key though, and their support HAS to be locked up any way possible.

Your idea of a few quality franchise games along with original games works well to retain the old fanbase and extend it as well, but these games have long developmental cycles, so we can't expect many.

"There needs to be "normal" third party games as well that don't use that feature. That's important for balance or else the Rev will be seen as gimmicky."

If it's truly revolutionary, that won't be a problem in the least bit.

"Retro should give a full on FPS a try before going back to Metroid. Camelot should work on an RPG before Mario Sports"

Agreed on both counts. Which brings me to another point; please Nintendo, please don't milk Mario for every penny he's worth. Cut back the Party games (too bad Hudson), the sports games and the other cameo games, I beg you. Don't dilute the name Mario, so that there is at least some anticipation and excitement for the next iteration of Mario.

Original IPs don't just appear. They take extremely long to conceive, and the 50/50 idea you have may not be possible. Instead, I would rather they revive some old franchises and evolve them.  

[Dryden]

So, I think we're unanimous - third party support for the Revolution is good.  Nintendo knows it.  Big deal.  What we don't agree on is how to build the third-party support.  I don't care how creative the Revolution is, or how much new content and cool control schemes they'll be able to program, it won't matter if third-party games are financially risky on the Revolution.  Brass tacks, folks, these are companies first - profit is king, and if Nintendo doesn't have the tools in place for everyone to make money, it's falling apart before it begins.

What are the tools?  For starters, lower franchising fees.  Everyone in the industry can tell you that.  But what else?  Nintendo has to get consoles into homes at launch.  Not tough, to be fair, given Nintendo's track record of first-party titles, and the backwards compatibility and free online gaming is very attractive, as long as the system is comparable power-wise to the competition.  And Nintendo has to agressively advertise the console, as well as push third-party titles in mags like Nintendo Power.  Again, proven track record.

So where else do developers make money?  Online.  Nintendo has taken an untested road here, one that may lead to their devestation.  Microsoft's Live service, though not free, is excellent for any game on the system.  Nintendo hasn't outlined their support plans for third-party games, but their first-party service will be free.

On a Nintendo console, am I going to play excellent free first-party games online, or excellent third-party games online for a price?  Is Nintendo cutting into the third-party marketshare by offering a free alternative on every game they make?  Argue all you want, but the guys at EB Games are going to be telling Moms this, and Holiday-time you're going to see a lot of free online games under the Christmas tree.

To be fair, Nintendo wouldn't make an online plan without consulting with the third-party developers they affect so much, and companies like Square-Enix love Nintendo's online plans, so it's gotta be sound business practice.  But again - uncharted waters.  If third-party companies are going to start losing money every time the go online with the Revolution, the dream isn't going to last.


As a side note, Nintendo has incredible third party support, but on lower-budget, higher yield Gameboy / DS games.  Moving that support to the Revolution, a middle-range-budget, middle-range yield market, is not going to be easy.  Tekken is on the gameboy.  So is GTA.  Kingdom Hearts and Final Fantasy too.  Low-cost, high profit.  If the Nintendo Revolution can't hit that sweet spot with the tenacity with which the GBA hit it this generation, don't expect wonders.  

[NotSoStu]

Dryden pointed out the exact thing that made the NES, SNES, and GBA hits: Low-cost to develop, high profit from the games. And, if I remember the press conference correctly, that's exactly what Nintendo is doing. Remember those indy developer comments? Perhaps Revolution *will* be a comeback for Nintendo.

Oh, and if there's one company Nintendo should buy or get third-party support from, it would be BioWare. I started playing Knights of the Old Republic on PC the other day, and I've been hooked ever since!

[KDR_11k]

Seriously guys, don't expect Nintenod to take first place even if they did everything right. Nothing short of $DEITY himself coming down from $DEITY.LOCATION() and smiting Sony and Microsoft can bring Nintendo into first place. I have my doubts about that happening (smiting Microsoft, okay, (s)he seems to have tried that a few times but Sony?).

[Ian Sane]

"Seriously guys, don't expect Nintenod to take first place even if they did everything right."

True but what about second place?  I think Nintendo could take on MS at least.  Plus they could at least increase their market share for once.  Nintendo's market share shrinks every gen.  That's why the Cube is considered a "failure".  They ended up worse off than they did with the N64.  I think it would be nice if for once Nintendo ended up in a better position than where they started.  Hell the ways things have gone I would be reasonably content if Nintendo just stayed where they are for once instead of dropping lower each time.  Growth however would be ideal.

Plus I think most of us would be happier to see Nintendo try to become number one and fail instead of doing nothing and slowly fading off into obscurity.

"On a Nintendo console, am I going to play excellent free first-party games online, or excellent third-party games online for a price? Is Nintendo cutting into the third-party marketshare by offering a free alternative on every game they make?"

That's a gamble but I think the plan is more to encourage developers to offer free play.  Plus Nintendo in theory can attract a larger userbase with free first party games which will attract third parties.  Plus Nintendo is offering flexibility with their option which MS is not.  I think it's a pretty calculated risk.  Besides I don't think that third parties make tons of money off of Xbox Live.  I think MS is largely getting those account fees.

"Original IPs don't just appear. They take extremely long to conceive, and the 50/50 idea you have may not be possible."

Nintendo already is doing half the work of creating new IPs.  A lot of their games are still very unique in gameplay.  They just throw Mario in there most of the time.  So instead of throwing Mario into a Tennis game just make a tennis game with unique characters.  It's a little bit more work but the gameplay idea can influence the character design.  What logically would have you have in a tennis game?  Tennis players!  Tennis players are all human in real life and they wear certain types of clothing and use certain types of equipment.  Even if they went with a non-realistic style it wouldn't be too hard to design characters.

[nolimit19]

i think theperm is pretty much right.

it would greatly help nintendo if they could get 1 or 2 exclusive games from some big time 3rd party companies. games sell consoles. the hardware, controller, backwards compatibility, and extras are just a bonus.

nintendo needs to be assertive and even maybe help plan release dates for some of these 3rd party companies so that their games are over shadowed by nintendos own games. i buy into the idea that nintendo is its own worst enemy when it comes to 3rd party support. companies just dont like having to compete with the nintendo's quality games.

i think the key will be the revolution launch. they really need a great 3rd party exclusive game(s) at the launch if they want to pick up significant ground in the market share...however, the market share is over rated..."the myth of market share" by r. miniter is a good book on the subject.

i just hope the revolution doesnt pull a dreamcast.

[ThePerm]

exactly what me and ian are saying Nintendo needs to spend some money trying to get the third parties to come..there has been some major improvement on the gamecube. With Revolution they have to start over and play the game harder..be more agressive.
its correlative. It needs to have more games.

[bmfrosty]

The more I think about it, the more it becomes clear.  The company that matters most has to be Square-Enix.  Final Fantasy fans will follow it wherever it goes, and there are a huge number of Final Fantasy fans.

[Caillan]

I agree, to an extent. When SE came about, I heard somebody say that no one in Japan knew who Square was and no one in America knew who Enix was. It was obviously a wild exaggeration, but you get the point. Now those two have merged, they have weight in both markets. That's something that none of the other big five really have on a consistent basis.  

[ThePerm]

it would be nice if Nintendo threw some money around and got sega up and running the way it should be.

[bmfrosty]

Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm
it would be nice if Nintendo threw some money around and got sega up and running the way it should be.

They should scoop up Sega's stars - Yuji Naka,  Tetsuya Mizuguchi - as they leave Sammy in frustration and give them their own studios.  Then they should pick up Sega's IP and Assets when Sammy eventually has a fire sale when they go out of business.

Can you tell that I'm bitter?

[BigJim]

I've mentioned it before and I think it's still valid. There's a difference between making games for everybody, and making "everybody games".

Nintendo offers the latter, and I think it hurts. It comes down to better 3rd party support. Offer many varied RPGs, not just a few throughout a system's lifespan. Offer great mature games, and not just a handful of token releases. The list goes on.

Most of GameCube's best sellers were games with star power and games that were "safe". The lack of vast support and the release of these "safe" and "everybody" games pigeonholed Nintendo and GameCube into their current state. They need to burst out of that bubble and provide OPTIONS.