{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
1/17/2014 4:37:02 PM
15
I remain shocked that Nintendo is sitting on [i]billions[/i] of dollars' worth of IP and refusing to release it on more popular platforms. Mario and Zelda games would sell millions and millions and millions of copies on consoles, mobile, and possibly even PC. It is insane that the most successful video game publisher of all time is STILL trying to use the most recognizable, popular, and profitable video game franchises [i]in the history of video games[/i] to drive sales of mediocre and less profitable hardware.
Seems to me like someone over at Nintendo needs a good smack to the head. Stop making hardware, focus on your software, and make it available cross-platform.
English
-
If Zelda was on PC I'd come
-
That is just not going to happen. Nintendo sold 250 million consoles this past generation and even if the Wii U is not selling while the 3DS is, it's not like they haven't been in this situation before (GameCube and Game Boy Advance). And really, 250 MILLION consoles, it would be silly to stop making hardware just a few years after having the most successful generation of all time, don't you think?
-
I think you're off by about 150 million if you're talking about consoles. And even if you're including 3DS in "this generation," you're still off by about 110 million. In any event, the points I was making do not depend on how many devices Nintendo has sold. 1. Nintendo's expertise is in software, not hardware. 2. Software is far more profitable than hardware. 3. Going multi-platform would provide access to a much greater range of devices and, therefore, customers. 4. The era of Nintendo's major software franchises being able to drive hardware sales is likely drawing to a close. Even if the correct number of console sales was 250 million, that's way less than the billions of devices running other operating systems on which Nintendo could be publishing games.
-
Nintendo DS - 153 million Wii - 100 million Unless the DS is no longer considered a gaming console (and the most successful of all time, for that matter), my math is right. I think judging by Nintendo's history, one could say their expertise is in both hardware and software, after all they have done many of this industry's innovations regarding hardware and software through the years. Nintendo is not going multiplatform, because they simply want their exclusive IP's to be only theirs and they also want to keep on making consoles at the same time; they just [url=http://www.joystiq.com/2013/08/08/iwata-nintendo-magic-comes-from-integrating-hardware-and-softwa/]don't want to do the thing that makes the most money[/url] in the short term, they actually seem to care about the quality of their games and franchises in the long term. I guess even if not going multiplatform is indeed a mistake from a financial point of view, by looking at the quality of their 3DS games this year, Nintendo shouldn't go multiplatform and risk decreasing the quality of their games. If Nintendo's mentality was more like Activision's, they would have gone multiplatform a long time ago, made a million Marios, Zeldas, and Metroids for every console since the Commodore 64 and some of those IP's would have been run into the ground already (really, what wouldn't Activision give to have just a few more COD's).
-
DS and 3DS are handhelds; they don't play the same games, they don't have the same capabilities, and they don't compete in the same market as consoles. That's neither here nor there, however, since the number of devices sold is irrelevant to my point. [quote]Nintendo is not going multiplatform, because they simply want their exclusive IP's to be only theirs and they also want to keep on making consoles at the same time; they just don't want to do the thing that makes the most money in the short term, they actually seem to care about the quality of their games and franchises in the long term.[/quote] While this kind of statement plays well in public relations, and might put some fans' minds at ease, it is hogwash in reality. There is no basis in fact for thinking that selling less software than you could be and creating mediocre, money-losing hardware is somehow "good for the franchises" in the long term. What's good for your franchise in the long term is selling lots of games, enabling you to turn those profits around into making the next game even better. [quote]If Nintendo's mentality was more like Activision's, they would have gone multiplatform a long time ago, made a million Marios, Zeldas, and Metroids for every console since the Commodore 64 and some of those IP's would have been run into the ground already (really, what wouldn't Activision give to have just a few more COD's).[/quote]Surely you jest, sir. [url=http://nintendo.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_Mario_games]Mario games[/url]. [url=http://zeldawiki.org/The_Legend_of_Zelda_%28Series%29]Zelda games[/url].
-
Edited by mneo: 1/18/2014 2:23:51 AM[quote]DS and 3DS are handhelds; they don't play the same games, they don't have the same capabilities, and they don't compete in the same market as consoles. That's neither here nor there, however, since the number of devices sold is irrelevant to my point.[/quote] Handhelds are still consoles, they still play games, when the hardware sells they still make a profit; the entirety of the profit from a first party game sold, and a part of a third party's go to Nintendo just like any home console. On this kind of discussion about Nintendo's financial status handhelds should be mentioned, unless you think Nintendo should only ditch the home console market, and go multiplatform on those games and stick to the handheld console market. [quote]While this kind of statement plays well in public relations, and might put some fans' minds at ease, it is hogwash in reality. There is no basis in fact for thinking that selling less software than you could be and creating mediocre, money-losing hardware is somehow "good for the franchises" in the long term. What's good for your franchise in the long term is selling lots of games, enabling you to turn those profits around into making the next game even better.[/quote] That is if the multiplatform developer's intention with the games is to make a better game each time, while still making a profit; if their intention is just to make a profit off the games no matter what, there will be a lot of shitty ports released along the way. Normally, when a big developer makes as many ports as they can, when they port them to the handhelds/phones/old consoles, since they don't want to spend much money on them the ports end up having a very low quality and selling only on brand recognition. By looking at Nintendo's history you can tell they will keep on trying with the Wii U, but they'll seriously have to make something that makes people buy their console, after all they were able to make it with the Wii, DS and even the 3DS despite being seemingly inferior to their competitors or being in trouble from the beginning. [quote]Surely you jest, sir. Mario games. Zelda games.[/quote] Those IP's haven't been run to the ground, though; they still sell pretty well, and you can't deny they still come out with fantastic Zelda and Mario games. And even though it's true that Mario has been horribly milked throughout the years, you can't say the same about Zelda, there are almost as many COD's as Zeldas, and Zelda has been around for way longer. As a side note: After I wrote this I clicked Cancel instead of Preview, and had to write it all again. Now I need a drink.
-
[quote]Nintendo's expertise is in software, not hardware.[/quote] NES SNES N64 GameCube
-
Thought you were trolling. Turns out you weren't. Am glad. Do agree with you.
-
seriously, is the US ever going to get an Earth-Bound game? come on Nintendo.
-
Nintendo releasing their IPs on rival consoles isn't going to save them: it's going to kill them. Although I think their hardware is pretty solid, especially their handhelds, it's clearly the games that draw people in. If suddenly you could get Pokémon on your iPad or Zelda for your Xbox, why would you buy a 3DS or a Wii U? Besides, it's not like making cross-platform games is an option they'll ever lose. If Nintendo ever do go the way of Sega, then they can just... go the way of Sega.
-
Edited by FoMan123: 1/17/2014 6:06:39 PMLike I said before, I believe Nintendo should stop making hardware entirely. Of course nobody would buy a 3DS or Wii U if they could get their games on other platforms. But doesn't that say a whole lot right there? Isn't that proof that Nintendo should stop making hardware? Even though Nintendo's consoles and handhelds have sold well, there are a [i]hell of a lot more[/i] devices out there running other operating systems. Sure, there are lots of Nintendo devices out there. But that's a teeny tiny fraction of the number of Windows, Android, iOS, and Sony devices. Super Mario Bros. is Nintendo's best selling video game of all time at 40 million copies. But Angry Birds has sold over [b]2 billion[/b] (including the freemium versions). Furthermore, unless your company has a massive apple-shaped logo on all of its products, software is massively more profitable than hardware. Look no further than the balance sheets of your nearest software developer as compared to a device manufacturer (excluding Apple) for proof of that. The act of going cross-platform, by itself, may not be an option Nintendo will ever lose. But the competitive advantage that comes from the brand recognition of Mario, Zelda, and Metroid is fast slipping away. More people have played Angry Birds and Candy Crush than [i]all Nintendo games combined[/i], and that number is only growing while Nintendo's stubborn insistence on remaining platform exclusive on an arguably dying platform is shrinking its brand recognition and the value of its franchises. And once those are gone, the question of whether they will ever come back is anyone's guess. Certainly not the kind of thing an intelligent corporation should leave to chance and hope.
-
I don't think you can put Angry Birds and Candy Crush on the same level as Super Mario Bros. or any other "big" game. I mean, we talk about casual games a lot here, but that's exactly what they are. I don't mean that as a derision; it's just that, generally, people don't play Candy Crush because they're looking for a good game: they play it to kill time, and because it's right there. Nobody buys an iPhone for the gaming experience: they buy one because they want a phone. The games only sell because they're cheap and available. Angry Birds may have sold staggeringly well, but when it only costs a couple of dollars and is available on a device that a billion people have already bought, it's not really fair to compare it to any console game. Though, you are right that Nintendo have to be careful not to lose their brand recognition, but I don't think they need to quit the console game just yet. I'm sure they've got a few more years to turn things around, [url=http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2014/01/we_cannot_continue_without_winning_but_its_not_as_simple_as_moving_mario_to_smartphones_insists_iwata]and it seems they're aware of the problems now...[/url]
-
I agree that Angry Birds/Candy Crush/other "freemium" casual/mobile games are certainly not on-par with AAA titles, and they differ in numerous ways. We are definitely on the same page there. But my point is that, when I was a kid, EVERYBODY who played video games played Super Mario Bros. and Zelda. Now, that brand recognition is being quickly eroded by Nintendo's insistence on remaining exclusive to hardware that is not selling as well as it used to. Anyway, interesting article, thanks for the link. It will be interesting to see how they move forward, and Iwata is certainly a smart guy. But Nintendo has a lot of institutional hubris, and I worry that it may get in the way of good business decisions. I do still side with the idea that Nintendo should focus on software and go multi-platform ASAP, rather than waiting until they're desperate (which seems inevitable at this point). But this has been an interesting conversation and you've brought some new points to light, so thanks for that :-)
-
Edited by Vampire Nox: 1/17/2014 8:51:06 PMIt was pretty good. An good additional read.
-
You're welcome. It's been enlightening for me too, as I really didn't really know a whole lot about mobile games, so I had to do lots of quick Googling of terms like "freemium" and stuff. Thanks. :)
