-
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.
Bethesda: "The time for convincing pubs and devs to support Wii U has long past"
- Thread starter RagingAvatar
- Start date
McHuj
Member
You're assuming a quick port would actual be profitable. I'm not sure that's the case.
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
Given Gamebryo natively supports the Wii, I really don't see how the cost of a weeks work for an entry level coder and then a digital release wouldn't be profitable.
I wouldn't recommend that kind of focus (I'm more privvy to the whole "cheapest console/cellphone parts" with "better online/vibrant virtual console that can be shared with handheld devices" with a family/expanded audience focus). But should they go the "power" route, it would take a couple generations to reach audience parity with MS/Sony I would think. If older gamers write off Nintendo, then there are always children and young gamers growing up who could be attracted to Nintendo consoles and grow up with them, and as their tastes expand to mature content, should they find that content on a Nintendo console they might not "jump ship" to another brand. It bugs me though, are there enough people who aren't young males to sustain a console, will the children of today grow into the console gamers of tomorrow or will they still be content with their smart devices? Will smart devices and consoles coexist in a way where one device benefits from the other for gaming?
In any case, I'm getting very off topic, but those are my thoughts, that should Nintendo want to have a greater core focus, it would be long term before such a strategy paid off (if indeed it would). Nintendo knows the results of a core focus and how successful they would be (profit wise) in such a case, and with three core consoles it would be challenging to get as much potential profit out of that venture than if they could capture the expanded audience again. They got a taste of the profits that having an expanded audience provides through the success of the Wii and DS, by being different, and I think they went with the WiiU because they know the kinds of profits being like the HD twins brings in (by looking at the profits that the HD twins made for their companies). So it would follow that it takes doing something different from the HD twins to hope for more profits than those two make. The catch is that if that expanded audience doesn't bite and if not enough of the core is satisfied, we're left with what the WiiU is in. But if Nintendo dreams of Wii/DS profits again, they need to continue trying to get the expanded audience, and if the WiiU doesn't do the job, then perhaps it's not that the audience is a lost cause, but that the implementation of the WiiU is not able to satisfy that audience, and the next console (or "device" and services) will. (Which is where the "cheapest console" comes in. What do the expanded audience like about smart devices? Cheap, fun games (not necessarily AAA/cinematic). What could Nintendo's eShop and a robust Virtual Console provide, perhaps together with a cheap handheld? Cheap, quick, and fun games. That is why I say device AND services though.)
That's my biggest rub here.
YOU don't want to support Wii U? Fair enough. No problem. But they can use a can of shut the fuck up when it comes to other devs. The numerous indie devs at PAX who have projects lined up for Wii U don't have any problems whatsoever with Nintendo. That's some bitch shit to speak for other devs like that.
Pie and Beans
Look for me on the local news, I'll be the guy arrested for trying to burn down a Nintendo exec's house.
Far be it for me to defend shoddy Skyrim, but if you're going to take your shots at poor craftsmanship, shitty spelling sure is a great way to go about it!
To be fair, a lot of neogaf users are people who are not native English language learners. And that still doesn't excuse Bethesda's rep of releasing games with tons of buggy programming.
Bluemercury
Member
And does Sony and MS do? send them bags of cash?
Nocturno999
Member
Using the game pad as a Pip Boy would be awesome.
Warm Machine
Member
Nintendo needs to take the lead in terms of the demographic their console represents.
Take the Disney example. Along with family animation Disney also does films like Pirates, Tron, John Carter, etc. they have a wide catalogue for a wide audience and have been actively expanding it with their core brand. At the same time have other brands that also make content for them.
Right now Nintendo is catering more specifically to the youth audience. Thing is, they are one of the few majors who bother with that market. The remainder deal with the 15-30 and beyond audience. If they want these games they need to build that audience back.
Nintendo could easily finance and develop games for that age group but they don't. They will never get out of their perception problems until they make a concerted effort.
Take the Disney example. Along with family animation Disney also does films like Pirates, Tron, John Carter, etc. they have a wide catalogue for a wide audience and have been actively expanding it with their core brand. At the same time have other brands that also make content for them.
Right now Nintendo is catering more specifically to the youth audience. Thing is, they are one of the few majors who bother with that market. The remainder deal with the 15-30 and beyond audience. If they want these games they need to build that audience back.
Nintendo could easily finance and develop games for that age group but they don't. They will never get out of their perception problems until they make a concerted effort.
This is what I was looking forward to. But as long as Bethesda hates Nintendo it's not gonna happen.
Supposedly talked to them what kind of computer architecture they would like to develop for.
But the more I think about it, the less I think a Power PC architecture should be that big of a hurdle. Yes, its uncommon in the consumer market, which is what most people are used to, but its not as if its just a totally alien architecture like the PS3 cell processor was, and Bethesda gladly released games for that console.
Schnozberry
Member
I understand his position, but I don't know why you'd publicly say anything like this. What if the Wii U ends up selling tens of millions of consoles? Why wouldn't you take a crack at it later on?
Burning bridges doesn't seem like a good thing to do ever. Even if you don't have anything positive to say, just shut up. You always end up making more money that way in the long run.
Burning bridges doesn't seem like a good thing to do ever. Even if you don't have anything positive to say, just shut up. You always end up making more money that way in the long run.
velvet_nitemare
Member
They have seen how it's selling.
Honestly, I think most publishers can only handle focusing on two consoles. We seen it with the SNES and Genesis, when the PS1, N64, and Saturn were all out at the same time, it was the PS1 and to a much lesser degree the N64 that people focused on, with the Saturn barely noticed, and with the Dreamcast, PS2, Xbox, and GC, it was the PS2 and Xbox that saw the most noticeable 3rd party support.
Even when we had three strong systems in Xbox 360, PS3, and Wii, we had the majority of 3rd party devs ignore the Wii, claiming it was too weak to support what they wanted their talent to go to.
And right now, we're at this weird place where the HD twins are still running, with their more powerful cousins coming up, so 3rd party devs don't want any real distractions from their goals of supporting and profiting from the XBox One, and PS4, because that's what they are familiar with, and in Bethesda's case, really want to work with.
Nintendo and the Wii U is the 'other' console at the moment.
Now explain why they haven't done a 3DS game despite it being the best selling console by far this year.
I'm sure they have legitimate reasons for not developing for the wiiU (install base, audience the fact that third party games in the same genre don't do well on the system, and the fact developing for a fourth platform would be potential suicide)
This quote makes the person saying it sound like a spoiled brat. Nintendo didn't cater to my every whim therefore screw Nintendo these other two guys give me better stuff.
This quote makes the person saying it sound like a spoiled brat. Nintendo didn't cater to my every whim therefore screw Nintendo these other two guys give me better stuff.
TreasureHunterG
Banned
The time anyone cared about Bethesda and their games has long past.
By the way, Bethesda never had plans to support Nintendo anyway, I can't see the need for their comments regarding them when was clear to everyone they never cared or gave two shits about anything Nintendo-related.
By the way, Bethesda never had plans to support Nintendo anyway, I can't see the need for their comments regarding them when was clear to everyone they never cared or gave two shits about anything Nintendo-related.
Schnozberry
Member
Bethesda can't even handle one platform, let alone 3 or 4. I think they do an incredible job of building worlds, but I've yet to play one of their games without several horrific gamebreaking bugs. I waited to play Skyrim for six months until the modders got a hold of it and made it into an enjoyable experience. PS3 users got bent over a barrel.
Ahaha. What planet are you living on?
velvet_nitemare
Member
They have zero interest in handhelds, like the majority of western devs. Take a look at how many games top tier western devs have on 3DS and you have your answer. It's not unique to them
Talks about salt; becomes the saltiest of them all. It is okay if you didn't understand, I forgive you.
If a "Super" Wii U was made, I don't think things would have changed all that much. You are acting like the lack of third party support has been a recent trend, and not something that has been steadily getting worse since Gamecube, and was even worse with the N64. Those two specifically are consoles that were similar in power to the consoles of the time, yet both struggled. You could argue it had to do with their software format, ie cartridge and minidvd, but their handling of those consoles seemingly put more strain on their already strenuous relationship with 3rd parties. When you have troubles with third parties, you get less third party games. So you have arguably, about two and a half console cycles where the third party output was less than optimal. I count Gamecube as half, as they were still getting some pretty great third party titles for awhile.
With the Wii specifically, many Nintendo fans felt burned with their new business direction seemingly abandoning them, and they either quit gaming or found new consoles/PC. Is this the crowd you are talking about that would come back to a powerful Nintendo console? Because they weren't enough to make the Gamecube sell more than a newcomer in the console business.
I don't think the Wii U would be in a much better position if it was more powerful. It might be worse off. At they very least, the tech behind a more powerful machine would make the console be priced like the PS4 or Xbox One. And considering there is no reason Nintendo would have ever made a traditional console after the massive success of the Wii and DS, it would probably be at least as expensive as the Xbox One due to the Gamepad or whatever. Maybe Bethesda wouldn't have dismissed it so early on though, but if the sales were just as bad I'm sure they would dismiss it anyway.
I cannot explain to you enough the absurdity of PS/Xbox fans jumping ship before the next iteration of their console of preference is released. It would need a shit ton of third party support for that to even be seriously considered, which I doubt would have happened. Also no one is talking to the friends on Xbox Live or PS Home or whatever and saying "Yo, that New Super Mario Bros Wii U and/or Pikmin 3 look mad good, but that shit is to jaggy for me to drop $300+ on."
This is why I said that Nintendo needs to mend its relationship with both third party companies and console gamers before it can be successful again.
And they're losing an opportunity there. At some point, as a dev, you need to look past your own perceived needs and develop for the platform that can give you success. Potentially walking away from an already successful platform because it's just an 'handheld' just smacks with elitism.
Why? They are incredibly successful with TES.
Meh, Nintendo needs to do more to keep Ubisoft, Activision, and Warner happy, while trying to get more support from Japan. Trying to appeal to Bethesda would almost be a waste of time.
They didn't build that kind of box for option 2 but they seem to be recruiting those type of developers considering that they were bragging about being able to port ios/ android games/apps over to the Wii U with ease .
They didn't build that kind of box for option 2 but they seem to be recruiting those type of developers considering that they were bragging about being able to port ios/ android games/apps over to the Wii U with ease .
I think that is all they can do at this point. I think because they didn't go to Bethesda in the first place for input, they had no reason to want to develop for them. At least that is what they are saying in the article linked. Nintendo did go to devs for feedback, but they probably didn't go to Bethesda because they didn't make their games for the Wii or Gamecube.
Schnozberry
Member
Nobody makes money doing option one, not even Sony and Microsoft. I think option two would be interesting in a few years when mobile hardware becomes capable of producing servicable graphics at HD resolutions. There is also a third option, which is using the hardware from your second idea and making a dockable handheld.
Because they're talking about needing to build an audience to have success. You can't have success if you don't start to build that audience. Its self defeating behavior, and sounds like an excuse to not take advantage of a platform that is selling.
Bethesda had no input on the PS3, (Hell, nobody did), but that didn't stop them from developing for that console.
Ninja Scooter
Member
That console sold. It might not have been gangbusters, but it sold well enough and had an audience that would buy their games.
As for 3DS, even though it sells well, I'd imagine the hardware doesn't really work well with the types of games Bethseda makes, and the audience for them might not be there.
Schnozberry
Member
I don't see a lot of intersections in Nintendo's audience and Bethesda's. Even though the gamepad would offer the best console interface for their games. Inventory management is always a challenge on traditional controllers.
SolidSnakex
Member
Because Sony worked their ass off to regain footing with the PS3. They even managed to convince Valve to support the console after Gabe annihilated it in interviews.
The PS3 didn't sell until around 2009 after a price drop that got it around $350 and under, which was 3 years after it came out. Bethesda released Oblivion on the PS3 in 2007, after the initial launch and when it was struggling the most, and continue to release games on it despite years of the PS3 struggling.
That is what Bethseda does with consoles they believe in, supporting it even when it doesn't make financial sense to do so.
Its pretty clear why Bethseda isn't developing for the Wii U, but this asking 3rd party devs to help build their console and Nintendo not doing it as a reason to not development for the Wii U is sounding like a lot like a crock of shit.
ridethepiggy
Banned
They're betting the farm on the same users and companies that they bet on last gen. It seems it worked out quite well for them or else there wouldn't be a repeat performance. They also should speak out on their feelings because the fact is Nintendo needs to be shamed publicly. It's due to Nintendo's pride that the Wii U is in the situation that it is. I say more public shaming from more publishers and developers is needed.
I don't think you understand what being 'salty' actually means. Look around..several people already laughed at your bioware/bathesda mix up. No one thought it was a joke because it's too random and dumb. That's not being salty but pointing out that you are making little sense. I guess I should also forgive you for not realizing your post wasn't funny..or something
See all you're comments make it sound like it's some conspiracy lol Let me spell it out for you. Third party trouble on Nintendo consoles are due to the incompetence of Nintendo. Lack of effort, lack of features, weak hardware, poor planning and not communicating with third parties...take any combination of those factors and you have you reason as to why
Now if you think shortcomings in the past is an excuse for a new generation then I can't help you there. Gamepad was a bad idea. And I'm being objective here. Some users may have enjoyed it but looking at the sales results it's obvious the price hike that was caused by it and the corners that needed to be cut has not paid off for Nintendo. What they should have done was a powerful system with motion controls. Make the gamepad as a peripheral if they must.
It's not absurd if Nintendo was smart about it. Simple as that. They failed to cultivate a fanbase for genre like FPS by using first party resources on the wii. But they did launch a year early. They definitely would have been in a much better position with third party support with a comparably powerful system than they are now too. I see no logical reason why they would be 'worse' off than they are now. if mario doesn't appeal then they should make new titles that actually would interest them. Make sure your hardware is powerful and dev friendly enough to make third party multiplats perform the best on your system until the other consoles come to the market. That's how you try and expand your market among core gamers. If a company that makes the hardware themselves think it's no use trying to do so then the console is going to have a real rough time
Which is why we have the wiiU. You can't mend jack without being proactive and smart about your brand new console. They have already botched the launch big time on several fronts..let's see if they can recover.
w1gglyjones
Member
He does have a point, just like Bethesda has a point and you have a point. Ultimately, the last finger gets pointed at Nintendo whether their business is in the black or red (and yes, they share the largest portion of the "blame").
Ninja Scooter
Member
You are acting like Wii U and PS3's sales levels were even just because both were "struggling". For all the PS3's struggles, it never sold as miserably as the Wii U has in the last few months. On top of that, it was pretty much on par with the top hardware (Xbox360), giving 3rd parties more incentive to port current games over. Wii U, meanwhile, is coming at a time when most meaningful developers and publishers have moved on to the next gen cycle of PC and consoles. Do you expect them to keep a horribly selling Wii U in mind when they are creating next gen games?
On top of that, a lot of it does have to do with Sony and MS creating an audience for games like Bethseda's. They go out of their way to create first and 2nd party games that reach out to that audience. There is probably a lot of crossover between fans of games like Gears of War, Killzone, Uncharted, Last of Us and fans of games like Skyrim and Call of Duty.
Schnozberry
Member
Troll post? Publicly shaming Nintendo will accomplish nothing. They were the only console maker to actually make money last generation, and they did so while the rest of the industry openly mocked them for their designs decisions.
Consumers are already teaching Nintendo lessons that other publishers and developers never could. People vote with their wallets. End of story.
Nope, for the reasons you describe. The Wii U is screwed on Western AAA support for a variety of reasons, including not creating and maintaining a better relationship.
But, its clear that cross gen and current gen titles are going to be around for a while, with at least 3 games (Wolfenstein, Prey 2, and the Evil Within) in 2014 all coming from Bethesda next year. The Evil Within in particular, I think can sell well on a Nintendo console due to similar titles (REmake, RE Zero, and RE 4), selling well and the Shinji Mikami connection with Evil Within makes sense to me.
And I'm not even asking them to keep the Wii U in mind in developing, if I'm asking for anything, its to not create bullshit reasons for not developing for the console.
ridethepiggy
Banned
Nintendo made money last gen and yet this gen the Wii U is selling worse than the Dreamcast and the 3DS is trailing the DS. Simply 'making money' isn't going to carry you forever. The Nintendo 64 and Gamecube weren't successful for Nintendo regardless of them making a profit. Why? Because they lost so much market share to Sony and then Microsoft. This gen it's going to be even worse.
SolidSnakex
Member
I just think Nintendo needs to start approaching third party developers like they do indies. We hear all this talk now about Nintendo loving indies, but we hear very little about any relationship with major third party developers. Some may be a lost cause for them during this generation, but they can still talk to them about the future. We've heard Cerny mentioning that he was going around to third party developers as early as 2008 to get their input on the PS4. In other words, it's never too early to show developers that you're listening to them.
Schnozberry
Member
Well, making money while you're competitors are losing money is generally considered positive. You can't make up for a per unit loss with volume, especially with software profits being soft due to elevated game budgets.
Nintendo is losing their ass on Wii U, no question. The product has yet to find an audience. We'll see what happens after the holidays.
I doubt going to Bethesda in the first place would change things. Sort of how going to EA didn't change things. If these companies wanted to support the console they would.
Last Hearth
Member
This is news?
If publishers were to start development now for the WiiU they wouldn't be out for another 2-3 years if the games are to be the kind of quality we are talking about.
The fact is the time to get developers on board is well before your console launch, not a year after launch, particularly a year after a disastrous launch.
The fact is Nintendo arrogantly assumed that the success of the Wii proved that they didn't need broad 3rd party support to have a successful console, when the truth is that the Wii caught lightning in a bottle and that its success cannot be easily duplicated.
If publishers were to start development now for the WiiU they wouldn't be out for another 2-3 years if the games are to be the kind of quality we are talking about.
The fact is the time to get developers on board is well before your console launch, not a year after launch, particularly a year after a disastrous launch.
The fact is Nintendo arrogantly assumed that the success of the Wii proved that they didn't need broad 3rd party support to have a successful console, when the truth is that the Wii caught lightning in a bottle and that its success cannot be easily duplicated.
w1gglyjones
Member
To be honest, there's little point in talking to third parties for feedback and input on your hardware when you've already decided there are things you do and/or don't want to do. As far as 3rd party developer input, what exactly were they going to say? Increase the TFLOPs of your machine? Add more CPU cores? The only other thing Nintendo lacks is 1) audience and 2) a digital account system
As far as addressing the needs for certain parts of the gaming market/audience, the way MS and Sony do, Nintendo really needs to do more than just make a better console and get multiplatform parity. Their online system, as far as actually playing games online seems to be fine, AFAIK (maybe with a better box they'd have party chat or other things).
I personally think they could have tried for a bit more balanced approach than they have with their console hardware. I don't think the multiplatform support is fixed just by getting feedback from 3rd parties early on, and it's probably best for them to try and cultivate other audiences over a slower/longer period of time. Of course, that requires an investment, too.
tehrik-e-insaaf
Member
interesting response - given how much respect nintendo has for bethesda - the zelda team apparently really liked skyrim, and the guys at monolith soft wanted to be "like bethesda softworks of japan" and apparently really liked fallout
i don't blame nintendo for not approaching bethesda and really trying to get their games - i just don't think nintendo feels it's worth the cost-benefit trade off of spending time and money attracting that software when it's probably not going to sell or drive any meaningful or incremental sales
better to try and release your own content on the platform (zelda, X), show there is a clear audience interested in certain genres, and then offer incentives like japan publishing or something (like rayman) to get them at a later, more stable point in the wii u's life span
bethesda loves money like anyone else, if they see an audience and opportunity to make profit (and have a publishing partner in japan), they will make the effort
i don't blame nintendo for not approaching bethesda and really trying to get their games - i just don't think nintendo feels it's worth the cost-benefit trade off of spending time and money attracting that software when it's probably not going to sell or drive any meaningful or incremental sales
better to try and release your own content on the platform (zelda, X), show there is a clear audience interested in certain genres, and then offer incentives like japan publishing or something (like rayman) to get them at a later, more stable point in the wii u's life span
bethesda loves money like anyone else, if they see an audience and opportunity to make profit (and have a publishing partner in japan), they will make the effort