MisterHero
Super Member
Sony and MS are fighting over having a digital storefront in household living rooms. iTunes for the TV.
Technology convergence has allowed Sony to bet all their multimedia business on Playstation.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Does Nintendo's lack of western support stem from a lack of awareness?
- Thread starter RedSwirl
- Start date
Technology convergence has allowed Sony to bet all their multimedia business on Playstation.
Baconsammy
Banned
Please tell me this is all sarcasm.
Schnozberry
Member
I like the new IP idea too. I think if Nintendo was making a Metroid reboot as a Sci Fi space shooter, it could attract some attention. There is a lot of lore there to explore for an epic space adventure, and there are enough former PC FPS developers at Retro to make a game that would please western audiences.
Kai Dracon
Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
This is closer to the truth than a lot of opinions, I think.
It's important to understand why Nintendo doesn't care though; Nintendo was always aimed at the mainstream, which includes the young market and the family market. They saw that as the biggest overall market (and they weren't incorrect).
It seems to be the fundamental misunderstanding many enthusiast gamers have related to Nintendo being "cheap" with hardware. Nintendo's game consoles, in the past, were comparable to other consoles because marketing a comparable console didn't push Nintendo out of the price range they were comfortable with. Then the 7th generation came around and everybody else was pushing consoles with high specs, hard drives, blu-ray for Sony's part, etc. In effect, the enthusiast market priced itself out of Nintendo's range. So Nintendo didn't follow.
The real problem for Nintendo now, is that while their focus was quite productive in the past (despite 3rd party troubles) is entertainment options have multiplied. The mainstream market has been cannibalized by the spread of smartphones, tablet devices, social games, browser based gaming. In essence, Nintendo's real market was consumed in a shockingly short amount of time. Just 3-4 years.
IMO Nintendo is struggling now to find their new niche. Also, they will probably be reluctant to entirely change their focus and try to compete in the blood-soaked kiddy pool of the bleeding edge enthusiast game console. With one possible exception: if Sony or MS drops out of that race. If that ever happened and Nintendo is still around as a hardware company, I could just see Nintendo making a serious push to fill the power vacuum.
Nintendo has always done their own thing to deliver a product based on their vision and their goals dissenting voices (including developers and consumers) be damned. From the censorship of games on the SNES, to the continued usage of carts, friend codes, late to embrace a fully developed online experience, underpowered systems, oddball controllers Nintendo doesn't give a fuck. They'll keep rocking 'til the wheels fall off and pay only marginal attention to the words of developers and consumers. I completely anticipate them just saying fuck it and going handheld only. Their big releases are few and far in between having to support two reasonably strong consoles with their paltry stable of 1st party developers. They'd keep the hits rolling if they amputated the home console leg.
With PS4, Sony doesn't really seem to go that route. I expect MS to go that route though, but it's about damn time it comes to fruition by now.
Why not just make a completely new IP then? Why involve it with the Metroid universe? It has never been a big seller, and Metroid fans want Metroidvania.
Except it really wouldn't accomplish much. People would look at it, say it looks cool, and then ask when the PS4\Nextbox port will be out (and then not care when they find out it won't happen).
We saw that with the Gamecube, when Nintendo courted Capcom with the Capcom 5 (of which 4 of the 5 ended up on the PS2) and released Eternal Darkness.
3rd parties have conditioned people to expect "mature" games on Sony and MS's consoles, any "mature" game that appears on a Nintendo machine is an exception to the rule.
Pretty much the only way for Nintendo to do what you're throwing out would be for them to entirely change their developmental ways and do nothing but "mature" games. No Mario, no Zelda, all "mature", all the time. One game isn't going to be enough to change people's opinions, an entire generation of Nintendo making those kind of games is needed.
Schnozberry
Member
Mostly selfishly, because I like the Universe and I like the idea of a space shooter with bounty hunters in mech like suits shooting at one another. Honestly, if it was a new IP, I would definitely pay just as much attention. I just think the Metroid Universe has been left woefully unexplored outside of Samus and would still have a lot of freshness to it.
I think that's another problem. Nintendo is fine at making blind hype, remember pre 2012 e3, we were all sitting at the edge of our seats for that presentation. But then they fail to deliver anything epic. They focus their hype on the wrong games. All that emphasis on Nintendoland instead of Project 101 for example
They don't seem to know how to do anything epic like for their mature games. The Destiny reveal, the BF4 reveal, Nintendo doesn't seem to have anything even close to the "coolness" factor that the other games and systems are doing.
Nintendo still seems to be marketing towards the younger crowd and the casual crowd. They could have done a lot more for the BO II and AC III releases. They're really screwing the pooch with Retro's game. Remember the hype SSMB brawl had? They showed a simple screen shot like 2 years before it released and the hype was super strong until it released. What harm would there be if they showed or told us even what type of game Retro is making now or last year even?
They just don't seem to do any type of marketing or hype level for the 18-35 age group.
Schnozberry
Member
So, what is Nintendo to do then? We're talking about Nintendo trying to court western development. What better way than to show them that a western style game can sell on the platform? You describe a catch 22. Do nothing and be maligned by western developers, do something and suffer equally dismal treatment.
So...Cowboy Bebop?
I'd like a spinoff game set in the Metroid universe, but I don't think Retro is the one that should be doing it. Retro's probably working on a FPS/TPS judging by their hirings, and I'm fully looking forward to that. I'd be a bit disappointed if they went back to Metroid right now.
Schnozberry
Member
So...Cowboy Bebop?
I'd like a spinoff game set in the Metroid universe, but I don't think Retro is the one that should be doing it. Retro's probably working on a FPS/TPS judging by their hirings, and I'm fully looking forward to that. I'd be a bit disappointed if they went back to Metroid right now.
Doesn't have to be Metroid, that was just my hypothesis. I do wonder what the GAF reaction will be to their take on the Western Shooter, though. Based on observation, it will probably a bunch of people straining very hard to find reasons to rip on it.
If they're going to court western support, they're going to have to be extremely agressive from the get-go. Look at Microsoft last gen; the majority of their coups weren't even 3rd party exclusive but just maintaining day-and-date release dates for things like GTA4, FFXIII, etc. If Nintendo doesn't at least provide some incentive to get western developers to release the same stuff, let alone new original stuff, then it's going to be an incredibly uphill battle to get any kind of momentum going. It's obvious that the status quo has put Nintendo at a disadvantage given that Microsoft is the only one of the three that's actually based in the "west," but Microsoft worked very hard with the 360 to overcome their shortcomings, it seems like Sony is doing the same with the PS4; Nintendo clearly isn't doing enough of the heavy lifting.
You've got to follow it up with a steady stream of games that look cool and all appeal to that demographic and eventually they'll cave and pick up a Wii U.
I've said for a while that if I were running Nintendo, I'd open/acquire 3-4 other studios in NA/EU, and release games they made (plus Retro & NST's output) under a cool-sounding sublabel (like how Disney has Touchstone Pictures). So it'd basically act like a 3rd party for Nintendo and market hard to the enthuiast gamer (while the Nintendo branding would have all the family-friendly, all-audience stuff).
If I knew the answer to that, I wouldn't be posting on GAF from a MacBook Pro in Montana.
I described the exact Catch-22 that Nintendo has been stuck in since for the last 15 years. Let's look at the Gamecube. People said that it's a kiddie console because it doesn't have "mature" games on it. Nintendo responded by pretty much buying Resident Evil for that generation (had all the main games playable at that point), released Eternal Darkness, payed for a MGS remake and brought back Metroid.
However, those games hardly changed the perception of the console. RE4 ended up being ported to the PS2 (in addition to 3 of 5 games), Twin Snakes was hated by just about everyone (unjustified IMO).
That's why I said for Nintendo to show people they're changing their ways, it's going to take more than one game. They would pretty much have to scrap everything and just develop games that cater to that particular audience in order to make a impression.
It's not a lack of anything, but an excess of hubris which causes them not to have western support. They feel their Japanese (and some western) 1st party games are stronger and enough to sustain their console. The same hubris lead them to think that third parties would want to develop exclusively for the WiiU simply because of the Wii's sales and the WiiU's tablet.
This is a pretty good post actually. Especially with the turn most/all developers are starting or proceeding with moving towards a more PC like development ecosystem and console makers doing the same with their designs.
Nintendo had the audience with Goldeneye. They gave it up without even trying to retain it. Did they think FPS games were a fad or something? Are they incapable of either directing one of their studios to develop in that direction, or starting a new one with that purpose? I still don't understand why they let it happen when gamecube hit. They should have had some sort of answer for Goldeneye when that console launched.
MS beat them at their own game and turned HALO into the FPS that everyone had to play. It was over the minute MS showed that game off.
Mihael Mello Keehl
Banned
Pretty much and that would change the identity Nintendo has. They wouldnt want to lose it. There was a HD twins this gen, maybe GDD twins this gen.
A Black Falcon
Member
Nintendo definitely should have tried to hold that audience, but to be fair, they would have had an extremely hard time matching Halo and Microsoft's luring of PC developers over to consoles... that's what finished Nintendo's hold on that audience, MS entering the console market, and it would have been very difficult for Nintendo to hold that; their first real attempt was Metroid Prime, but that was a good year later, and didn't hit like Halo had unfortunately (even though I think it's the better game). Of course it didn't have multiplayer, though. But anyway, it would have been very difficult for Nintendo to match Halo. How could they have done it?
(Stated it much better than I did).
Nintendo couldn't fall back on the 007 license, since RARE let it go and EA had it. Hell, they really couldn't even fall back on RARE since they were doing Starfox Adventures and the Stampers were looking to get out, which throws Perfect Dark out the window.
Oh, finally something worth to read. Nintendo knows that AAA-tons of millions dollars exists, that pushing state-of-the-art technology is the trend today (Iwata talked about this in an interview a fex weeks ago, it's on GAF, where? I don't know) but it's not that they can't, they don't want to fall in this trap, it succeded during 5-6 years, how can we say that they were wrong? Numbers are with them, yes they screwed their transition (and are still in this issue).
It's their philosophy, opposed to Western one, which one is the good one? The next years will give the answer.
A Black Falcon
Member
Nintendo could have bought the rest of Rare, instead of letting Microsoft buy them, but given that Rare had just released PD in early 2000, I don't see them being able to have another FPS (GC Perfect Dark Zero?) ready in late 2001-early 2002, when it'd be most useful, or even by late 2002... Rare's development times were long and getting longer by that point, the "releasing console games every year" Rare of the N64 was passing. Could Nintendo have gotten better productivity out of them had they kept them? I'm doubtful... but they'd also need better games out of Rare, versus what they managed on the GC/Xbox/early X360, so yeah, that alone wouldn't solve it I think.
And yeah, they didn't have Bond anymore. That PD sold so much less than Goldeneye showed how much that hurt sales.
Platinumstorm
Member
Only because people avoid lower quality games, and there were plenty of low quality releases and low quality ports to deter purchases, or enough to warrant avoiding titles all together.
Capcom and Ubisoft did just fine on the Wii.
Shikamaru Ninja
任天å ã® å¿è
Perfect Dark 2. Killer Instinct 3. Riqa. A general attempt at Western produced first-party products in general like they did with the N64. They didn't need to have the games out at launch, as long as a pre-media blitz let consumers and media know it was coming.
I think Nintendo should have attempted to keep some of the licenses that were built under their muscle. Killer Instinct, and Perfect Dark for example. Pay money to keep it, release RARE.
Perfect Dark did incredibly well. Like 3.5 million. It was released in 2000, three years after Goldeneye and on the end stream of the N64. Zelda Majora's Mask had the same drop off to 3.5 million in the same situation. It was just a matter of both games being "sequels" released on the back end. Both sold extremely well.
hydragonwarrior
Member
That is why I think Rare was so good for them during SNES and N64 - they reallly helped extend the stay of those consoles with some good games.
Bought a new studio, repurposed one of the existing ones, anything really. There are a ton of good minds in Nintendo, I find it odd the company didn't even try to think of something themselves in the genre. I think that decision to move away from those games is still the driving force for third party studios today. At this point, Nintendo needs to lead the way in fostering a player base for the kinds of games that Western studios make. That means they need to have a first party studio that can make a unique, truly exceptional game in that genre. Get the players back to thinking Nintendo can deliver the kind of games that are huge sellers in the West, and the other things will start to fall into place with third parties. At least in my opinion.
MisterHero
Super Member
Nintendo produced audiences in quantities that could rival Modern Warfare's a few times this gen. Mario, Mario Kart, and to a lesser extent, Smash Bros.. Furthermore, they have similar successes in more than one genre (action=Mario, RPG=Pokemon, racing=MK, fighting=Smash, etc.=Mario Party, Wii Series). The range in multiplayer games from N64 have dropped compared to Wii, but that's a trend for the industry. Splitscreen isn't even considered a priority anymore (thanks PCs).
Yeah it's a shame what happened to the GoldenEye team, but I don't think Nintendo would've stepped up for HAZE either. EA let TimeSplitters slip into megaobscurity.
A Black Falcon
Member
I agree that Nintendo should have done that, yeah (keep Rare, etc.). Nintendo's move to boost Japanese developer support, that they did during the GC generation, was a good move -- the N64's Japanese third party support was really, really bad, so the move was needed. They just made a major mistake by allowing their Western relationships to fade away at the same time, and by shifting most of their first and second party stuff to Japan too -- remember that they parted with Rare, Silicon Knights, Factor 5, and Left Field by the end of that generation, and replaced them with nobody nearly as important or productive (Monster Games, Next Level, etc? Yeah, they're not exactly Rare.). They did start up Retro, and they're great, but they're just one team, and take a while to make their games... Nintendo needed to keep up the N64's focus, but also do that Japanese development boosting that they did on the GC. That would have been ideal.
I also think that Nintendo made a mistake by abandoning the N64 early in the West; yes, the PS2 had taken the wind out of its sails after its release, but even so, Nintendo gave up on the N64 in Spring 2001. That left a six month gap between that, and when the GC finally released, with only the GBA and a handful of third party games releasing on N64. Meanwhile, games that should have released here like Sin & Punishment and (yes I know it'd have required work, but I think it could have paid off) Animal Forest/Crossing were left only in Japan... sure N64 sales were fading, but Nintendo's abandonment of the platform was part of why that happened! I know Nintendo of Japan wanted to move on after its lack of success there, but they should have kept it going a little longer here in the US.
Thinking about it, because Nintendo had had that market on the N64 I'd like to think that there was a way to keep it, but MS+Halo is just such a tough obstacle to get past... but yes, that they didn't try at all was definitely not smart. Nintendo of Japan somehow didn't realize how important making more of an effort to hold on to that market was. Yes, they did some things like ED, RE, MGS, etc, but those were really more things aimed at the Sony audience, not the Microsoft one, and it's MS that dealt the biggest blow to the Gamecube in the West, not Sony, I think; I mean, the PS2 was unstoppable, it was going to win by a huge margin anyway. Games like those aimed at the Sony audience were helpful, but weren't going to decide their success in the West. Xbox vs. Gamecube for second, though? That was more of a fight, and Nintendo basically ceded the ground Microsoft then took.
Actually, I think that that's an important point now that I think about it... I've said before in detail about how what happened was that MS took the shooter/"hardcore gamer" Western audience that Nintendo had with the N64 away from them with the GC, and that Nintendo failed to respond, but adding to that, the games Nintendo did have were more aimed at Sony than Nintendo. What did Nintendo have for that Microsoft audience? Metroid Prime 1 and 2, Geist, and that's about it, yes? Those games were fine, but nothing like that was available at launch, and Nintendo failed to get them to succeed like MS did, for all kinds of reasons. But anyway, I do think that that's what happened.
PD did sell very well, but GE0007 had sold more than twice as much... it's a big dropoff.
So bad, they messed up everything, how do you mess up the characters seriously. Then the battle system was a crap basket.
On point, Nintendo abandoned the hard core market, and treated devs western and eastern kinda jerkish for a while.
Nintendo has something like 4000 people in the company. They have ~20 software teams/divisions/ first party studios in Japan, and maybe 4 in the US (and outside Retro, none can handle a full game by itself). They have ~20 second party studio in Japan, 3 in North America and one in Europe.
Someone to precise my numbers if needed (I will be glad to that by the way), but you get the point: They better start themselves to invest outside Japan in newer studios before understanding/appealing to western third parties.
Someone to precise my numbers if needed (I will be glad to that by the way), but you get the point: They better start themselves to invest outside Japan in newer studios before understanding/appealing to western third parties.
H_Prestige
Banned
Not rocket science. It's because they continually refuse to make hardware capable of supporting the software western devs make.
Shikamaru Ninja
任天å ã® å¿è
You are ignoring the factors behind it. One game was released in 1997, and one in 2000. There is going to be a discrepancy in sales! Same way Ocarina sold more than twice of Majora's Mask. The 1997 N64 game is going to outsell an N64 sequel released in 2000. You know when the Dreamcast and PS2 started their runs.
It wasn't just Goldeneye 007/Perfect Dark though that built this pre dude-bro Nintendo market. It was the combination of WWF/WCW, FPS, and Mario Kart (maybe Smash Bros.) that had teen/college males playing this stuff in their living room.
I wouldn't really have minded the lack of western support if there was a semblance of hinting that Wii U was doing it's best to recuperate with some unparalleled Japanese support, because apart from the PG and an Atlus one-off it doesn't seem like it's doing much beyond that. There was ample opportunity for several publishers to prove their support but nothing at all seems to have come out of it. Either they have some heavy duty work they're just sitting on, or realistically speaking, there's really nothing going for it period.
As for the subject of new IPs, I really do feel it's a wasted opportunity for Nintendo not to pursue being a sort of bastion for a large slew of ideas and concepts, because the reason people buy Nintendo consoles is for the most of the part, to enjoy the output of games that they have to offer. Their partnership with PG is probably the best thing they've ever done, because a lot of ideas that PG reflect in their games is something that I personally feel, similarly mirrors a lot of Nintendo's varied output. Just think about what Nintendo has here; a "Super" platformer series set in a wacky universe, a fantasy series with knights and elf-like beings, a sci-fi adventure where you explore planets in search for deadly creatures, a sci-fi racer with insane speeds, a sci-fi space shooter with anthropomorphic animals, a city sim, you name it. PG doing a game like The Wonderful 101 for Nintendo seems like a great fit because it's adding to a repertoire that's so varied yet underestimated within Nintendo. These are the kind of partnerships I want to see of more, no matter who the relations are with, and also from Nintendo's own studios.
As for the subject of new IPs, I really do feel it's a wasted opportunity for Nintendo not to pursue being a sort of bastion for a large slew of ideas and concepts, because the reason people buy Nintendo consoles is for the most of the part, to enjoy the output of games that they have to offer. Their partnership with PG is probably the best thing they've ever done, because a lot of ideas that PG reflect in their games is something that I personally feel, similarly mirrors a lot of Nintendo's varied output. Just think about what Nintendo has here; a "Super" platformer series set in a wacky universe, a fantasy series with knights and elf-like beings, a sci-fi adventure where you explore planets in search for deadly creatures, a sci-fi racer with insane speeds, a sci-fi space shooter with anthropomorphic animals, a city sim, you name it. PG doing a game like The Wonderful 101 for Nintendo seems like a great fit because it's adding to a repertoire that's so varied yet underestimated within Nintendo. These are the kind of partnerships I want to see of more, no matter who the relations are with, and also from Nintendo's own studios.
Freezie KO
Banned
Nintendo said they approached third-parties when designing the Wii U. We know they at least spoke with Ubisoft and EA.
My assumption is that Ubi and EA pushed for a high-spec machine, Nintendo couldn't get it done with the tablet and a decent price, so they went with the Wii U as is.
From there, you can extrapolate other reasons how and why they failed to make the Wii U an interesting proposition to the market.
My assumption is that Ubi and EA pushed for a high-spec machine, Nintendo couldn't get it done with the tablet and a decent price, so they went with the Wii U as is.
From there, you can extrapolate other reasons how and why they failed to make the Wii U an interesting proposition to the market.
And the need for expansion pack for both games.
Numbers (thanks StreetsAhead!):
They're up to 5,095 permanent staff as at September 2012, up from 4,394 in December 2009 between all their branches.
Other companies/first parties:
Good Feel: 72 (Oct 1 2012) -
Game Freak: 90 (April 2012) - up from 52 in 2007
HAL Laboratory: 140 (Oct 2012) - up from 128 in 2008
Brownie Brown (1-UP Studio): 32 (April 2011, current unknown due to restructure)
Monolith Soft: 92 (March 2012) - up from 83 in 2009
Intelligent Systems: 127 (Nov 2012)　－up from 115 in 2007
Shikamaru Ninja
任天å ã® å¿è
Obviously the Nintendo Co. in-house developer number is hard to gauge (although we are trying to get that done on Kyoto Report). But I think in 2010, there was a Nikkei quote that threw the number of 800 developers working inside Nintendo. Of course that includes hardware developers, and maybe even manufacturing related staff.
KojiKnight
Member
Really seems to me it's less like the western devs are uninformed or underinformed as it is so much that Nintendo just doesn't care.
Nintendo is first and foremost always for it's first party titles. Third party titles just don't sell as well... so Nintendo is doing something different. Something INGENIOUS in my opinion. They are doing what they can to turn the Wii U into the indie platform. Indies in no way compete with Nintendo. Nintendo mostly just releases VC titles, so now they are opening their platform using existing and simply tools (unity, HTML5, javascript) and making it easy for the little guys to find a home.
They did this too by being the first platform to announce no fees for game patches (bug or expansions of any kind), allowing devs to set their own prices, and actually listening and allowing devs to do their own sales as well.
Now this is a long slow road, but it's one that Nintendo has made good strides toward and promised even more (recent comments on making games super easy to port from iOS for example), but ultimately I think this could be a huge winning strategy for Nintendo. Get all the small fries, and be the primary source for "big" titles in your own platform. Everyone wins except for EA and people who only buy Nintendo consoles.
Nintendo is first and foremost always for it's first party titles. Third party titles just don't sell as well... so Nintendo is doing something different. Something INGENIOUS in my opinion. They are doing what they can to turn the Wii U into the indie platform. Indies in no way compete with Nintendo. Nintendo mostly just releases VC titles, so now they are opening their platform using existing and simply tools (unity, HTML5, javascript) and making it easy for the little guys to find a home.
They did this too by being the first platform to announce no fees for game patches (bug or expansions of any kind), allowing devs to set their own prices, and actually listening and allowing devs to do their own sales as well.
Now this is a long slow road, but it's one that Nintendo has made good strides toward and promised even more (recent comments on making games super easy to port from iOS for example), but ultimately I think this could be a huge winning strategy for Nintendo. Get all the small fries, and be the primary source for "big" titles in your own platform. Everyone wins except for EA and people who only buy Nintendo consoles.
crazy monkey
Banned
I think it is other way around.
Yeah I used your site to try to compile those ressources numbers a few months ago
800 developers is a ridiculous number, Nikkei is wrong. That leads to 3500 people working on marketing and other things? Wasn't Ubi that said that Assassin's Creed was 600 people?
Making games is the core of Nintendo; Personnal guesstimation is that developers should be at least 50% of their total employees, even including overseas.
Either way, it become obvious why they struggle to release a fourth 1st party game in HD in 5 months...
I believe even if Nintendo made the Wiiu similiar to the ps4 tech wise that it still wouldn't get western dev support. Western developers simply don't like Nintendo systems, partly because nintendo doesnt like to put graphics above gameplay. Thats not to say some western games have both great gameplay and graphics, its just that nintendo values gameplay way more.
I think the Wiiu will pick up in sales. The Ds also went through similiar growing pains, but once the killer app drops and a change in marketing strategy occurs i'm sure sales numbers will go up significantly. But even when that does happen, western devs will still shy away.
I think the Wiiu will pick up in sales. The Ds also went through similiar growing pains, but once the killer app drops and a change in marketing strategy occurs i'm sure sales numbers will go up significantly. But even when that does happen, western devs will still shy away.
Shikamaru Ninja
任天å ã® å¿è
Yeah I used your site to try to compile those ressources numbers a few months ago
800 developers is a ridiculous number, Nikkei is wrong. That leads to 3500 people working on marketing and other things? Wasn't Ubi that said that Assassin's Creed was 600 people?
Making games is the core of Nintendo; Personnal guesstimation is that developers should be at least 50% of their total employees, even including overseas....
I think our first dry run had maybe about 300+ developers? Obviously missing a lot of the hardware engineers, post production artists, and tool programmers. Names who don't get mentioned in game credits often. But yeah. Then again, that new Kyoto Building was built to house 1500+ developers.
Technically this shouldn't have anything to do with internal resources though. It seems more like a blunder in production scheduling. Nintendo could have launched with double the first-party games if they contracted more software from internal or external developers. That was all poor management. On a related note, I believe that some in-house games suffered an automatic 2-3 month delay with this alleged February R&D restructure when the developers physically moved to the new facility no?
Yeah I used your site to try to compile those ressources numbers a few months ago
800 developers is a ridiculous number, Nikkei is wrong. That leads to 3500 people working on marketing and other things? Wasn't Ubi that said that Assassin's Creed was 600 people?
Making games is the core of Nintendo; Personnal guesstimation is that developers should be at least 50% of their total employees, even including overseas.
Either way, it become obvious why they struggle to release a fourth 1st party game in HD in 5 months...
They've been expanding for a while now, though, so it's not like they're doing nothing. They've tried to lessen the load by having some third-parties work on a few of their games, and have quite a few second-party developers. I think they're just strategically delaying games at this point in order to provide a maximum push.
Edit: There's no way Wii Fit U or The Wonderful 101 (it's Platinum for god's sake, they don't struggle with HD development) aren't done at this point, and there's no way localization isn't done for Game and Wario.
Criminal Upper
Banned
I honestly think it stems from western devs just wanting to make the same games over and over and replicate whatever is currently popular.
Having a system that is remotely different from other established consoles already is a huge roadblock to the cycle of replication and sequels.
Having a system that is remotely different from other established consoles already is a huge roadblock to the cycle of replication and sequels.
Actually, considering what happened... they didn't let their Western relationships fade away... The Western second and third parties Nintendo had relationships with collapsed in on themselves. The new western third parties that replaced them never had a relationship with Nintendo in the first place and don't care to start one anyway. The comment from EA about this upcoming fourth generation is rather telling of Western third-parties. They see the type of gaming they like to make to have started on the PlayStation 1.
It just feels like Nintendo designed the system for Japan and not the world. The entire "off tv play" is something that would only appeal to handheld gamers who only play at home (lol), kids who share a TV with siblings, and people in Japan who often only have 1 TV which they share with their entire family. Then they made the thing run on very little energy (more important in Japan than everywhere else), and made a line up that'll appeal to Japan (NSMBU because 3D Mario's don't sell in Japan, Monster Hunter 3, Dragon Quest X, etc). It really feels like Nintendo decided they want to take over the Japanese console market an then forgot about the rest of the world.