When the developers use the hardware properly it works well like lego city undercover. It's just convincing them to put time into creating exclusive games for system. I suppose money would help the situation.
Nintendo WILL pay for developers to make exclusives for Nintendo platforms, but this is a very rare occurrence. I think it's a strategy that works well for launch - instead of giving as many developer access to the system as possible, just reveal it to four or five and pay them to make great launch titles along side one 1st party title.
I agree but when the system is dying they need to act before it's to late.
Money isn't the issue in this case. All publishers want to provide, are ports, even when paid to do it. I've seen this reality first hand. I know one publisher who wanted Nintendo to pay for a port of a game that had been on PS3 and X360 for over a year, and when asked what additional content they would do to make it stand out from the other SKU's the answer was "Nothing".
And if a publisher has a chance of a successful IP, they want to make as much cash as they can, which means multi-platform and complete ownership. Why should Nintendo pay whatever grossly inflated development costs they demand for that?
But is it also maybe Nintendo are just to picky "trying to protect the brand" instead of allowing publishers to make them games, do they put to many restrictions on those games for instance why no R* games. So you end up with publishers hiring a team to port a game, then having to fire them. close the office once the port is done, then hiring again in a years time if Nintendo decide they want such and such game (not sure how these things work, so forgive me, if wrong)
I think first Nintendo has to decide what audience they are aiming at?
I don't think 'everyone' is going to work: it's too vague. When Sony launched the Playstation they were firmly aiming at the age '19'. Because hey all the older guys want to be 19 and so do all the younger people!
And then, Nintendo has to develop must have games for that audience....
I really think it's an audience targetting problem they have. Wii U Fit and Mario 3D World for 'everyone' just doesn't wash with the general public. Even though they are excellent.
Nintendo probably gave Rockstar a list as big as a very big thing on things that they wanted changed in GTA for it to appear on one of their consoles which is probably why they said foxtrot oscar.
Money isn't the issue in this case. All publishers want to provide, are ports, even when paid to do it. I've seen this reality first hand. I know one publisher who wanted Nintendo to pay for a port of a game that had been on PS3 and X360 for over a year, and when asked what additional content they would do to make it stand out from the other SKU's the answer was "Nothing".
And if a publisher has a chance of a successful IP, they want to make as much cash as they can, which means multi-platform and complete ownership. Why should Nintendo pay whatever grossly inflated development costs they demand for that?
Yeah, I had a feeling this was the case. I think Nintendo with the Wii U should aim for a unique library, full of games that you can't get elsewhere. Moneyhatting ports of games that people can already play on their existing systems won't get them far, especially as those ports usually end up lacking in some way. More third party exclusives like Bayonetta 2, The Wondeful 101, collaborations like Hyrule Warriors, etc is the way to go.
But is it also maybe Nintendo are just to picky "trying to protect the brand" instead of allowing publishers to make them games, do they put to many restrictions on those games for instance why no R* games. So you end up with publishers hiring a team to port a game, then having to fire them. close the office once the port is done, then hiring again in a years time if Nintendo decide they want such and such game (not sure how these things work, so forgive me, if wrong)
Back in the SNES days before game ratings, this was the case. Nintendo controlled the content very tightly. But these days, there are no restrictions of what can appear on a Nintendo platform.
If it can get a rating, then it'll get released on Nintendo platforms.
^^Not sure can't really think of many 18 or even 15 Age rated games on the Wii's, else why didn't GTAIV come out on the Wii, I think Nintendo like to think of themselves as the "family" console and fits with lack of major FPS's, GTA's etc on both systems, again are they too "Japanese" as I understand FPS's and GTA type games aren't popular in Japan.
^^Not sure can't really think of many 18 or even 15 Age rated games on the Wii's, else why didn't GTAIV come out on the Wii, I think Nintendo like to think of themselves as the "family" console and fits with lack of major FPS's, GTA's etc on both systems, again are they too "Japanese" as I understand FPS's and GTA type games aren't popular in Japan.
There was GTA China Town Wars for the DS so no reason why they couldn't do it for the Wii U except that the user base isn't big enough for them to bother.
^^Not sure can't really think of many 18 or even 15 Age rated games on the Wii's, else why didn't GTAIV come out on the Wii, I think Nintendo like to think of themselves as the "family" console and fits with lack of major FPS's, GTA's etc on both systems, again are they too "Japanese" as I understand FPS's and GTA type games aren't popular in Japan.
You've missed out Madworld by Sega for the Wii. It was unreleased in Germany as it was refused a rating there (against the law to sell unrated games) and Nintendo was criticized for allowing the game to be released on the system at all by at least one charity.
I'll say again; Nintendo has no say on what is and what isn't released on their systems. Compare this to Sony and Microsoft who only recently got rid of their game concept approval process, where Nintendo hasn't done that since the SNES.
It's entirely up to the publisher if they want to release on Nintendo platforms or not.
The Wii U is a brilliant system. I've had Nintendo consoles because the games that Nintendo develop make it worthwhile even if no other developer made stuff for it. Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Super Smash Bros, Mario Kart, etc are some of the best game series ever made.
I really hope the Wii U picks up on sales, it certainly deserves it.
Third partys will never fully commit serious support to a nintendo console. They had their chance with the wii the first couple of years to put out some decent games and they didn't do it. Just look at RE4, a port of a gamecube game that showed there was an audience to beggin with for those type of games.How many games similar to that was made after before the fanbase left and fanboy and western media propaganda swarm started? I think the big third party devs damaged their own name with nintendo consoles after some of the junk they put out on the wii. The majority of the best games on the system was ether nintendo games or from a niche studios.
Ohh and all the Analysts making predictions i would not take serious for one second. It is in them and their clients best interests that nintendo go third party!
Money isn't the issue in this case. All publishers want to provide, are ports, even when paid to do it. I've seen this reality first hand. I know one publisher who wanted Nintendo to pay for a port of a game that had been on PS3 and X360 for over a year, and when asked what additional content they would do to make it stand out from the other SKU's the answer was "Nothing".
And if a publisher has a chance of a successful IP, they want to make as much cash as they can, which means multi-platform and complete ownership. Why should Nintendo pay whatever grossly inflated development costs they demand for that?
But the other 2 do pay for ports with a bit of exclusive content. Nintendo do not. That is why we've dropped Wii U any way.
Nintendo probably gave Rockstar a list as big as a very big thing on things that they wanted changed in GTA for it to appear on one of their consoles which is probably why they said foxtrot oscar.
Pure speculation I know.
No, there's no speculation about that - especially since 2009 saw the release of the then-DS exclusive GTA: Chinatwon Wars.
Nintendo probably gave Rockstar a list as big as a very big thing on things that they wanted changed in GTA for it to appear on one of their consoles which is probably why they said foxtrot oscar.
Pure speculation I know.
I really don't understand why this outdated perception continues. House Of The Dead: Overkill, then the sweariest game ever, was approved for release on the Wii. Rockstar released Manhunt 2, Bully and Godfather there too. The Wii U launched with ZombiU, an exclusive survival horror....
But the other 2 do pay for ports with a bit of exclusive content. Nintendo do not. That is why we've dropped Wii U any way.
Nintendo WILL pay for exclusive content. However, there's no way a platform holder is going to pay out 5 to 10 million just so they can have a port of a year old game with little new content or some content that only cost a 100k to produce.
Not only that, the developer/publisher has to be able to have a good track record of producing great games on Nintendo platforms. The guys at TT Games/TT Fusion are a great example of that.
We can talk til the cows come home! ... It doesn't change the fact the WiiU is pretty much dead! ... Anyone with any sense will avoid it like the plague & get a ps4! (or if ya really desperate an X1) ;-)
We can talk til the cows come home! ... It doesn't change the fact the WiiU is pretty much dead! ... Anyone with any sense will avoid it like the plague & get a ps4! (or if ya really desperate an X1) ;-)
The 3DS was also pretty much "dead" at one point as well. I think the next year will be critical.
Remember, the machine just has to be profitable for Nintendo. It doesn't have to be a massive success like the Wii.
Comments
They'd still only come up with another game with Mario in it, albeit a little bit faster.
Nintendo WILL pay for developers to make exclusives for Nintendo platforms, but this is a very rare occurrence. I think it's a strategy that works well for launch - instead of giving as many developer access to the system as possible, just reveal it to four or five and pay them to make great launch titles along side one 1st party title.
Money isn't the issue in this case. All publishers want to provide, are ports, even when paid to do it. I've seen this reality first hand. I know one publisher who wanted Nintendo to pay for a port of a game that had been on PS3 and X360 for over a year, and when asked what additional content they would do to make it stand out from the other SKU's the answer was "Nothing".
And if a publisher has a chance of a successful IP, they want to make as much cash as they can, which means multi-platform and complete ownership. Why should Nintendo pay whatever grossly inflated development costs they demand for that?
That will be even more the case when we (likely) see an Full HD remake on the PC/Xbone/PS4 Which would make the Wii U version look poor in comparison.
I don't think 'everyone' is going to work: it's too vague. When Sony launched the Playstation they were firmly aiming at the age '19'. Because hey all the older guys want to be 19 and so do all the younger people!
And then, Nintendo has to develop must have games for that audience....
I really think it's an audience targetting problem they have. Wii U Fit and Mario 3D World for 'everyone' just doesn't wash with the general public. Even though they are excellent.
Pure speculation I know.
Yeah, I had a feeling this was the case. I think Nintendo with the Wii U should aim for a unique library, full of games that you can't get elsewhere. Moneyhatting ports of games that people can already play on their existing systems won't get them far, especially as those ports usually end up lacking in some way. More third party exclusives like Bayonetta 2, The Wondeful 101, collaborations like Hyrule Warriors, etc is the way to go.
Back in the SNES days before game ratings, this was the case. Nintendo controlled the content very tightly. But these days, there are no restrictions of what can appear on a Nintendo platform.
If it can get a rating, then it'll get released on Nintendo platforms.
There was GTA China Town Wars for the DS so no reason why they couldn't do it for the Wii U except that the user base isn't big enough for them to bother.
You've missed out Madworld by Sega for the Wii. It was unreleased in Germany as it was refused a rating there (against the law to sell unrated games) and Nintendo was criticized for allowing the game to be released on the system at all by at least one charity.
I'll say again; Nintendo has no say on what is and what isn't released on their systems. Compare this to Sony and Microsoft who only recently got rid of their game concept approval process, where Nintendo hasn't done that since the SNES.
It's entirely up to the publisher if they want to release on Nintendo platforms or not.
I really hope the Wii U picks up on sales, it certainly deserves it.
Ohh and all the Analysts making predictions i would not take serious for one second. It is in them and their clients best interests that nintendo go third party!
But the other 2 do pay for ports with a bit of exclusive content. Nintendo do not. That is why we've dropped Wii U any way.
The whole industry is going to hell at this rate.
No, there's no speculation about that - especially since 2009 saw the release of the then-DS exclusive GTA: Chinatwon Wars.
I really don't understand why this outdated perception continues. House Of The Dead: Overkill, then the sweariest game ever, was approved for release on the Wii. Rockstar released Manhunt 2, Bully and Godfather there too. The Wii U launched with ZombiU, an exclusive survival horror....
This is interesting. What game was it?
Nintendo WILL pay for exclusive content. However, there's no way a platform holder is going to pay out 5 to 10 million just so they can have a port of a year old game with little new content or some content that only cost a 100k to produce.
Not only that, the developer/publisher has to be able to have a good track record of producing great games on Nintendo platforms. The guys at TT Games/TT Fusion are a great example of that.
The 3DS was also pretty much "dead" at one point as well. I think the next year will be critical.
Remember, the machine just has to be profitable for Nintendo. It doesn't have to be a massive success like the Wii.
***General public!!!*** .... Yeah whatever!!! ... Heard it all before!!! etc! etc! ;-)
(Goes back 2 playing TombRaider & MetalGearSolid on their PS4s & X1s)