Developers gotta eat and if they see Nintendo as a dead system, then why develop for them?
I think many would love to develop a Nintendo- esque type game, but are limited by resources and publisher demands.
travo said:Developers gotta eat and if they see Nintendo as a dead system, then why develop for them?
I think many would love to develop a Nintendo- esque type game, but are limited by resources and publisher demands.
so how would you explain the Wii? Or better yet, why does Vita get 3rd party support!
Iga_Bobovic said:travo said:Developers gotta eat and if they see Nintendo as a dead system, then why develop for them?
I think many would love to develop a Nintendo- esque type game, but are limited by resources and publisher demands.
so how would you explain the Wii? Or better yet, why does Vita get 3rd party support!
The Wii was a success financially and we definitely saw Nintendo like games such as Boom Blox, LKS and Zack and Wiki. I was under the impression that the Vita lost major support as well after a couple of years.
travo said:The Wii was a success financially and we definitely saw Nintendo like games such as Boom Blox, LKS and Zack and Wiki. I was under the impression that the Vita lost major support as well after a couple of years.
I was going to mention Wii but I don't count Japanese devs as they have done and still do Nintendo like games, mostly on handhelds and they are used to and sometimes great at making them. I think the GAF poster was talking about famous western devs. Have western devs ever made Nintendo like games?
As for Wii U being a dead system etc, I don't think most developers get to make money decisions like what platform they will be on, regardless of a Nintendo systems' success. When the GAF poster was talking about Nintendo like games from developers I guess he was talking more like Rare games or stuff like Sphinx? Some western devs decided to make HOTD Overkill and Silent Hill for Wii, not the next Banjo Kazooie?
Rare was great at making those kinds of game and they are gone. Why is HoTD and Silent Hill coming to the Wii U? Do they think there's a market for them that won't get overshadowed by other games on that particular system...or did Nintendo just toss them a ton of money?
Rare was considered part of Nintendo and got all the marketing backing of them. I don't know why but it definitely seems like most people buy Nintendo for Nintendo and nothing more over the past 10 years, and since the Wii its only gotten worse. I guess when you try to separate your hardware drastically from everything else and have this "us versus everyone else" strategy in a game climate where everyone's software needs to be a profit maker, people don't want to bother with you.
Outside of Nintendo published games there hasn't been many major hits on their systems since Gamecube. That's a long track record and I'm sure it looks risky to most studios. Also, why doesn every game need to have colorful cartoon visuals to be a hit on Nintendo's consoles? That's just as annoying as everyone copying Call of Duty elsewhere.
Iga_Bobovic said:so how would you explain the Wii? Or better yet, why does Vita get 3rd party support!
Vita doesn't get support, it got ports. The only reason it has games is cause PS3 games are easy to work on it.
travo said:Rare was great at making those kinds of game and they are gone. Why is HoTD and Silent Hill coming to the Wii U? Do they think there's a market for them that won't get overshadowed by other games on that particular system...or did Nintendo just toss them a ton of money?
I don't get the question, are you asking why those games came to Wii or why they aren't coming to Wii U? Check-out your post.
Dvader said:Iga_Bobovic said:so how would you explain the Wii? Or better yet, why does Vita get 3rd party support!
Vita doesn't get support, it got ports. The only reason it has games is cause PS3 games are easy to work on it.
Wii U does not get that either.
Iga_Bobovic said:travo said:Developers gotta eat and if they see Nintendo as a dead system, then why develop for them?
I think many would love to develop a Nintendo- esque type game, but are limited by resources and publisher demands.
so how would you explain the Wii? Or better yet, why does Vita get 3rd party support!
From my understanding porting down to a Vita is actually easy as sin, and not all those indie games (which is the support the vita gets) have cross platform play, cross platform save, or even remote play options. On the flip side you sort of are told to do something with that WiiU pad from my understanding, could be wrong.
Other thing where some indie devs find success on the WiiU, most don't, where as the Vita tends to sell its software because that consumerbase that is there literally has no other option in the grand scheme of things. And ultimately it's the benefit of the Vita being tied to a more unified network, where as Nintendo's simply isn't. PS+ deals ultimately mean they can bank on a payday from Sony, on the WiiU? not so much.
Sony and Microsoft make way more of an effort to grab indie projects or help/break deals with third party. Nintendo does less. Nintendo tends to have the mentality that if they build the bed, they'll get some without spreading their legs. And it's like nah, you need spread the legs a bit.
Gagan said:Nintendo tends to have the mentality that if they build the bed, they'll get some without spreading their legs. And it's like nah, you need spread the legs a bit.
Yeah, like many people say they are stuck in the early 90's still, where they think they should get support just because they are Nintendo and made a piece of hardware that games can be made on. That worked against SEGA and all the lesser companies than those two that tried to compete back in the day. It hasn't worked at all against Sony and Microsoft outside of the Wii, which got huge for different reasons completely...as they still weren't getting the real support & IMO in fact lost MORE hearts & minds in the Wii era than they gained.
Gagan said:On the flip side you sort of are told to do something with that WiiU pad from my understanding, could be wrong.
Yeah, you're wrong. That's never been a policy with Wii U. People can do whatever they like.
Gagan said:Other thing where some indie devs find success on the WiiU, most don't, where as the Vita tends to sell its software because that consumerbase that is there literally has no other option in the grand scheme of things.
What?
Nevermind.
Gagan said:
Sony and Microsoft make way more of an effort to grab indie projects or help
Nope, MS was reamed by indies disgusted at their policies. Wii U and Nintendo have been very highly praised, PS4 gets more press because more people work on it and because it's more high profile but most indies have loved Wii U. It's easy to port from Unity which is free too and some games have done better on 3DS and Wii U then they have sold on Steam.
Gagan said:
Sony and Microsoft make way more of an effort to break deals with third party.
This is true, Nintendo doesn't want to pay for anyone elses games and/or marketing.
What?
Nevermind.
Gagan said:
Sony and Microsoft make way more of an effort to grab indie projects or helpNope, MS was reamed by indies disgusted at their policies. Wii U and Nintendo have been very highly praised, PS4 gets more press because more people work on it and because it's more high profile but most indies have loved Wii U. It's easy to port from Unity which is free too and some games have done better on 3DS and Wii U then they have sold on Steam.
Gagan said:
Sony and Microsoft make way more of an effort to break deals with third party.This is true, Nintendo doesn't want to pay for anyone elses games and/or marketing.
Indie cats have had more success on PSN, by virtue of the cross play stuff they've had a reasonable amount of support on the Vita store front. Ergo the vita version has always validated it self in some way, the WiiU is like any other third party it's a matter of priority, and the WiiU seems to get the raw end of the deal. Would wager that has to do with either not enough of them do well commercially or there is a perception they don't do well.
Second Microsoft's shitty policies have been in place forever, but Microsoft goes out and funds more smaller projects or pimps out things like Below, or Super Time Force, or Cup Head, or has made them first party projects like Mark of the Ninja or Ori and The Blind Forest. Shovel Knight is the closest thing I can think of where the dev has prominently worked with Nintendo of America. Nintendo isn't shitty like Microsoft with a parity clause or something, but Microsoft gets more by virtue of a few things
A: More people on XBL buying games vs the WiiU
B: Microsoft actually has an indie team in place that hunts way more shit than Nintendo does in comparsion. It's not even close.
I thought this was an interesting thread. Your thoughts?
For me the first thing that jumps out at me is that whenever I see these devs talk about Nintendo these days, it's usually in relation to their kids. They make games, but can't share them with their family because they are cinematic mature single player games I guess. When they get home from work with their wife and 3 kids, they appreciate having a form of gaming that is instantly accessible, child friendly but also engaging for adults and women too.
But those aren't the sorts of games they want to make themselves or that todays publishers would greenlight? In terms of making Nintendo-esque games, I think many developers don't really understand or know quite how to recreate the kind of indefinable Nintendo "magic" that people often refer too. That extra something that make so many of their games special.
With Carmack specifically I know he loved the Wii and wanted to make games for it but that commercially he couldn't get the greenlight for the projects to go ahead.
With the market in general it's moved on from making the kinds of games Nintendo does and it's not interested in that anymore. If it weren't for Nintendo, imagine what the games market would look like without that large injection of colourful family friendly games. There has been such a relentless focus on making games for the average age of the gamer these days (32 last time I checked) you only have publishers with one standout franchise for kids (big and small alike) like lego, disney infinity and skylanders dominating the market.
And you guys would know more about this than me: Minecraft? Tablets, mobile etc?