You've misconstrued my opinion. What I've said on multiple occasions is that Nintendo is selling games to children for $40-$60, a market that is proving to be satisfied with tablet/smartphone games and more importantly tablet/smartphone pricing. This is not a controversial opinion, nor is it related to the topic at hand.
-
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.
Three devs weigh in on the good and bad of Nintendos eShops: "Flawed Paradise"
- Thread starter Orniletter
- Start date
You've misconstrued my opinion. What I've said on multiple occasions is that Nintendo is selling games to children for $40-$60, a market that is proving to be satisfied with tablet/smartphone games and more importantly tablet/smartphone pricing. This is not a controversial opinion, nor is it related to the topic at hand.
No bad blood with Steam or Apple whatsoever, quite the contrary. Valve treats us with great respect and took SteamWorld Dig without Greenlighting it, and Apple put us on the map in the first place by making Anthill the game of the week on launch. SteamWorld Dig has sold really well on Steam, and Anthill keeps generating revenues. It certainly wasn't my point to take pot shots at Valve or Apple.
It's just that it was such an amazing joy to publish on the eShop. If you're also a developer, you can imagine our surprise when we starred the Nintendo-centric sites upon launch. If anything, I feel that we developers have ourselves to blame for the current situation - we're the ones who ran pricing into the ground on mobile, and we're the ones who are putting our games out on Steam at tremendous discounts. The consumers get used to it, and get stuff when they're cheap (or free).
I thought the irony would shine through, but if anything it's directed towards ourselves as developers. I hope more devs try their games on the eShop. And/or PSN, etc. There's a lot of people there who love games and are ready to pay for quality.
We apologize.
OK, gotta comment on this one because it just sounds... strange.
Don't know what you saw, but we spent roughly as much (or as little) time on the 3DS release as the PSN release, we were busy programming prior to both releases. I really don't understand what you mean by "the world's just against ya". The world isn't against us, and we don't feel it is. We made a game for the Nintendo 3DS, and it worked really well. We ported that game to Steam and later to PSN, and it has sold well there too. No offense, but what's your point?Come on guys you're better than that bunch of man-babies, you did nothing wrong, it's just a term to specify a specific demography.
"Ow I don't like that term waa waa you should have used a synonym I have you on my blacklist waa I'm offended pls apologize waaaa"
Do you know what term I do actually hate? Entitled "gamers"
But you know what? Sometimes I understand why it exists.
Laughing Banana
Weeping Pickle
Oh come on why so quick to be offended.
Although good for imageform to apologize, but damn, such a really petty thing to be offended about.
OK, gotta comment on this one because it just sounds... strange.
Hahaha.
You praising 3DS' ecosystem *might* have something to do with it.
Can you, uhh, get back to us after first featured sale (daily/Summer) when you're 50%+ off?
Curious if 'really well' will turn into 'bananas' as was the case with FEZ.
You? Not buying a Vita game? Hahahahaha
I can't say as I'm especially offended, and I certainly don't want anyone to apologise. I just can't fucking stand the term, or the concept that one can assign oneself as a gatekeeper to 'real gaming'. I understand the desire to categorise enthusiast / core gamers as a group, but I can't dig the idea that anyone else isn't really playing games. It's just needlessly divisive and serves to reinforce the bizarre mentality that there is a 'right' and a 'wrong' way to enjoy videogames.
Yeah, I'd have bought it anyway. I have no real principles when it comes to supporting Vita software. I might have grumbled whilst I downloaded it though
Now that's more credibleYeah, I'd have bought it anyway. I have no real principles when it comes to supporting Vita software. I might have grumbled whilst I downloaded it though
Zeyphersan
Banned
I love how great Nintendo has been with indies and smaller games, but the eShop UI on 3DS (don't know about on Wii U) is just abysmal. It's almost impossible to just browse for games, you basically have to know what you want when you open the app if it's been out for a length of time. Essentially I have to rely on Wikipedia pages to know what has been released on the eShop and to do my browsing.
If they fix that, the whole situation will be like 200% better
edit: NintendoLife only lists 51 Wii U eShop games (not including Virtual Console). That can't be true... right? Only 51? Their 3DS list was up to date so I'm inclined to believe them
If they fix that, the whole situation will be like 200% better
edit: NintendoLife only lists 51 Wii U eShop games (not including Virtual Console). That can't be true... right? Only 51? Their 3DS list was up to date so I'm inclined to believe them
Point taken, Dave. It's a stupid phrase and a seemingly snobbish stance, and I (Brjann, who wrote the article - no one else at I&F had a hand in it) apologize to anyone that was offended, and thank all that highlighted the stupidity of it. What I had written initially was a *quite* long-winded description of people that like to discuss and appreciate the value of games, and then got fed up with my ramblings and decided to shorten it into 'real'. My mom is just as real a gamer as anyone else (even if she sucks at playing most games).
We're not any kind of gatekeeper. If anything, we're grateful that gaming has become popular also among "non-gamers" (note the quotes, please don't shoot me). It means that more people play games, and hopefully that thresholds will be lowered and people will try all kinds of different games.
I'll gladly get back to you whether it goes bananas or not.
FEZ is a brilliant game and deserves all the bananas it gets, anywhere.I can't say as I'm especially offended, and I certainly don't want anyone to apologise. I just can't fucking stand the term, or the concept that one can assign oneself as a gatekeeper to 'real gaming'. I understand the desire to categorise enthusiast / core gamers as a group, but I can't dig the idea that anyone else isn't really playing games. It's just needlessly divisive and serves to reinforce the bizarre mentality that there is a 'right' and a 'wrong' way to enjoy videogames.
Yeah, I'd have bought it anyway. I have no real principles when it comes to supporting Vita software. I might have grumbled whilst I downloaded it though
But isn't there a 'right' and a 'wrong' handheld to play games on?
As a Wii U eShop user I have to say it's a nice little spot. I quite enjoy checking in to see what's on sale or whats new. It's one of my favourite platforms at the moment.
Although it's just too damn easy to buy stuff using the gamepad.
@imageform: if Steamworld Dig ever makes it to the Wii U eShop I'll certainly bite. I'm a sucker for digging games...
Although it's just too damn easy to buy stuff using the gamepad.
@imageform: if Steamworld Dig ever makes it to the Wii U eShop I'll certainly bite. I'm a sucker for digging games...
T_T I really feel that this unnecesary here. It makes us gamer looks like very sensitive people here. People had their own opinion on everything here. While it may be different, it does not mean they are right or wrong here.
It is sad that this is happening when game industry is probably one of the industry which promote diversity unable to accept that each of their developer had their own view on each thing.
Back to the main topic, I agree with u image here. While I agree that 3ds eshop is still lacking on the UI, I actually really liked the vibe there. When I enter PS3 PSN, I don't know, it feel robotic? And to search is nightmare. T_T mean while on 3DS and Wii U eshop, they actually looks alive and fun. The background music, the download sequence on 3DS(where its mascot is kinda playing with us, looks really cute)
Anyway, great news that u are happy with the sales there. I also get ur game here and it is certainly nice game. Hope to see more or ur game on Wii U or 3DS eshop again here. ^_^
Q
qizah
Unconfirmed Member
You probably really enjoyed that Frostbite April Fools tweet though.
No worries man, I get it. My rantings weren't aimed directly at you, even if that passage provided the catalyst. As I said, I don't entirely object to the stratification of gamers, it's just that one word that raises my hackles. You don't need to apologise though, I'm not really offended, I just like being bombastic.Point taken, Dave. It's a stupid phrase and a seemingly snobbish stance, and I (Brjann, who wrote the article - no one else at I&F had a hand in it) apologize to anyone that was offended, and thank all that highlighted the stupidity of it. What I had written initially was a *quite* long-winded description of people that like to discuss and appreciate the value of games, and then got fed up with my ramblings and decided to shorten it into 'real'. My mom is just as real a gamer as anyone else (even if she sucks at playing most games).
We're not any kind of gatekeeper. If anything, we're grateful that gaming has become popular also among "non-gamers" (note the quotes, please don't shoot me). It means that more people play games, and hopefully that thresholds will be lowered and people will try all kinds of different games.
Damned right there is. The 'others' are real gamers though, they're just real gamers that made a poor choiceBut isn't there a 'right' and a 'wrong' handheld to play games on?
Which one?
Point taken, Dave. It's a stupid phrase and a seemingly snobbish stance, and I (Brjann, who wrote the article - no one else at I&F had a hand in it) apologize to anyone that was offended, and thank all that highlighted the stupidity of it. What I had written initially was a *quite* long-winded description of people that like to discuss and appreciate the value of games, and then got fed up with my ramblings and decided to shorten it into 'real'. My mom is just as real a gamer as anyone else (even if she sucks at playing most games).
We're not any kind of gatekeeper. If anything, we're grateful that gaming has become popular also among "non-gamers" (note the quotes, please don't shoot me). It means that more people play games, and hopefully that thresholds will be lowered and people will try all kinds of different games.
Nicely said, thanks. Honestly, it wasn't going to stop me from buying your games. I bought your last game twice, as I said. That said, it annoyed me enough to speak up, so my hats off to you.
Q
qizah
Unconfirmed Member
Point taken, Dave. It's a stupid phrase and a seemingly snobbish stance, and I (Brjann, who wrote the article - no one else at I&F had a hand in it) apologize to anyone that was offended, and thank all that highlighted the stupidity of it. What I had written initially was a *quite* long-winded description of people that like to discuss and appreciate the value of games, and then got fed up with my ramblings and decided to shorten it into 'real'. My mom is just as real a gamer as anyone else (even if she sucks at playing most games).
We're not any kind of gatekeeper. If anything, we're grateful that gaming has become popular also among "non-gamers" (note the quotes, please don't shoot me). It means that more people play games, and hopefully that thresholds will be lowered and people will try all kinds of different games.
I don't even understand why you're apologizing. It was hardly offensive. Other developers have said far worse.
Relaxed Muscle
Member
In these instances, I don't think it's really a matter of devaluing games so much as getting noticed in a much more competitive space. If a tiny indie developer has a fanbase unique to smaller platforms, moving into a much larger ecosystem would not immediately show an advantage. Getting noticed is the first problem, before even worrying about pricing or whatever. These larger ecosystem also have players who were there much earlier and have made a name for themselves there. So yeah, none of this is really that surprising.
It's pretty funny reading comments about how they hope other developers DON'T go on the platforms they have established themselves on though. It shows a sense of insecurity expressed as fear that if more players were in their space, they would lose out. Not sure if that reflects well on the developer's confidence level about their own quality.
I think they fear more the race to the bottom that other developers may bring to the table. More players and lower prices in such small ecosystem, means bad news for devs that (except a few exceptions) they curated the same overpriced philosophy from Nintendo.
Is not insecurity, rather that they want eShop to be a niche ecosystem in which they can keep high prices and fewer releases. Which is quite oustanding, they basically want to Nintendo to fail reach the masses and get stuck with a subpar service so they can easily rip off those "GOOD" customers lol
This article by Brandon Sheffield on Gamasutra doesn't exactly paint Nintendo in a positive light though. Sorry if old.
That's terrible.
HamPster PamPster
Member
Nintendo banned Dan Adelman from twitter for showing sympathy towards people who dislike region locking? There aren't enough face palms in the world
Most companies have a social media policy, and it tends to be something along the lines of "don't call out the business on its choices". It has happened for MS employees as well before and various other companies. Tends to be frown upon in business as a whole
Had a quick read of the article, there isn't actually that much substance to it, its all "have heard form" and other theories based on a lack of information. He seems to have made quite a lot of words out of "Nintendo won't let this person talk to me". A lot of words that are completely counter to the information from the OP of this post, and developers also posting further up the thread.
Maybe its true, but not sure what to think about it when the only facts in the article (other than the sales numbers, but we don't really know from who, and they don't show the numbers for the successful company they mention) are that Dan is not allowed on twitter and he didn't talk to the author of the article
Jimmyfenix
Member
This should be a new thread. It is a very informative article.
not really... the actual information contained in the article is : Nintendo declined an interview, two unnamed games bombed on the WiiU. the rest is an opinion piece
MrGreencastle
Member
I agree with some of the posters here that the 3DS eshop needs a rework pretty badly. The Wii U shop is fine though, about as good as the iOS iPad app store in layout, more or less.
astrogamer
Member
Yeah that's accurate, well as of today its 53 but that's because 2 games came out this week. it also includes the Youtube, Hulu Plus, Netflix, Amazon instant Video and Wii U Street.
Also that their guy responsible for bringing indies to the eShop was forbidden from using Twitter, which is something not even the Onion could come up with. Truly mind boggling.
That's quite an important "if", you are not going to build that fanbase out of thin air, and they are just saying it is easier to get it on eShop.
Also, quality doesn't guarantee sales, just the fact the game doesn't suck doesn't mean is going to be successful.
That is an interesting read. Compare it with the Adam Boyes and Chris Charla interviews and it's even more interesting. I guess the attitudes and consequences speak for themselves when you look at their respective digital stores.
So all Nintendo platform owners are no older than 12?
Nintendo only selects titles to sell that are made for said kids on their platforms?
And its children who have disposable incomes to buy consoles and games?
SkeptiMism
Member
Ouch at that article. Completely agreed with the author that Nintendo really should let Adelman get out there to publicity.
I'm hoping that most games in eShop do at least decent numbers. There are a few success stories but overall I'm really skeptical about the sales (but I really hope I'm wrong).
For this case it especially doesn't mean much because the game was ported by pretty much a single guy working for a few months (5? 7? 10? Maybe something like that?) probably mostly full time (I don't know, maybe some work with the PC version in that time too). Thus the port couldn't have been that expensive, maybe something like 10-40k euros (the development itself + the rating costs + QA)? (Worth noting that I really don't have a clue how much porting such an indie game might cost, but surely it can't be that expensive? If someone has any better knowledge then please feel free to correct me.)
Since the game sold for 10 euros, that's 7 euros (Nintendo's cut being 30%) revenue to the publisher/dev. Say, if the cost of the port was 20k euros, to be profitable the game would have to sell about 2900copies. For 30k euros the game would have to sell about about 4300 copies and for 40k euros the game would have to sell about 5700 copies.
I would say in any case that it's quite little especially considering it was out in 2 regions at the same time. Also the fact that it was 2 weeks and game sales typically tend to be front loaded for the first few days.
Of course though, the game can keep on selling especially during sales since it hasn't had any so far.
I'm hoping that most games in eShop do at least decent numbers. There are a few success stories but overall I'm really skeptical about the sales (but I really hope I'm wrong).
Quoting back a bit, but I've seen Unepic brought up as an example of success for eShop a few times now and I feel something needs to be said about it. However it's worth remembering that profitable doesn't mean much especially in this case. Being profitable simply means that the game isn't on loss anymore. So far the game could've made profit for like 500 euros so far for all we know, and that wouldn't be much.
For this case it especially doesn't mean much because the game was ported by pretty much a single guy working for a few months (5? 7? 10? Maybe something like that?) probably mostly full time (I don't know, maybe some work with the PC version in that time too). Thus the port couldn't have been that expensive, maybe something like 10-40k euros (the development itself + the rating costs + QA)? (Worth noting that I really don't have a clue how much porting such an indie game might cost, but surely it can't be that expensive? If someone has any better knowledge then please feel free to correct me.)
Since the game sold for 10 euros, that's 7 euros (Nintendo's cut being 30%) revenue to the publisher/dev. Say, if the cost of the port was 20k euros, to be profitable the game would have to sell about 2900copies. For 30k euros the game would have to sell about about 4300 copies and for 40k euros the game would have to sell about 5700 copies.
I would say in any case that it's quite little especially considering it was out in 2 regions at the same time. Also the fact that it was 2 weeks and game sales typically tend to be front loaded for the first few days.
Of course though, the game can keep on selling especially during sales since it hasn't had any so far.
I can't speak for general public Twitter interaction, but the direct interaction with Nintendo in the developer program has been very positive for me and others in the indie development thread, so at least there are other avenues.
Has anyone tried emailing Dan Adelman? That might still work too.
Has anyone tried emailing Dan Adelman? That might still work too.
I always liked and respected Sheffield (as I would anyone who loves the PC Engine as much as he does) but this article comes off as very badly researched and really reads like he's holding Nintendo to a different standard than Sony or MS. I mean he holds up things like the PS Blog, E3 presentations or last gen indie moneyhats and buyouts like Minecraft or thatgamecompany's titles as shining examples of indie outreach but downplays Nintendo Direct as simple corporate messaging. Nevermind that Nintendo also features indies routinely at tradeshow presentations, gives them youtube showcases and handpicks their projects for publishing and localization. This doesn't even get into the dev support end of it which Nintendo has been matching or exceeding competitors in with stuff like loaner kits, free Unity Pro, Web Framework and so on.
He also singles out 2D Boy and Renegade Kid as unique counter examples of some implied general failure on Nintendo's part with both developer spotlighting and eShop sales but even just a cursory browsing of developer interviews, company press or the eShop itself will prove otherwise with examples like Frozenbyte, Black Forest Games, Nicalis, Yacht Club, Collecting Smiles, Wayforward, Shin'en, Gaijin Games, Vblank, Dako Dako, Genius Sonority, Spicysoft, Jupiter, Neogaf's own beril and many more highlighting success and support on the platforms. Two examples of off record failures doesn't exactly make a compelling case to counter that.
I think the worst part is that in so obviously stacking the deck against Nintendo in the article it overshadows the very real and worrying problems Sheffield bring up in this area; limiting Dan Adelman's public access to the community, weak hardware sales, bad store design/discoverability and a perhaps not enough effort into general PR messaging (although I'd argue the latter is company wide and not so much indie/eShop specific). Those are really the things that should've been pushed rather than easily disprovable claims that Nintendo isn't doing some things they actually are or that a range of developers aren't seeing the success they actually are.