News Article

Iwata: No Chance Of Nintendo's "Precious Resources" Coming To Other Platforms

Posted by Damien McFerran

Going multiplatform would be a "short-term" fix, says Nintendo President

Nintendo President Satoru Iwata has been speaking to CVG about the possibility of the company bringing its famous IPs to other platforms, and the message remains the same: Not on my watch.

Nintendo and Iwata have come under intense pressure lately to at least consider publishing the likes of Mario and Zelda on smartphone and tablet devices. Recently, industry veteran Ian Livingstone said that the Japanese firm should have its titles on every platform.

However, Iwata insists that going multiplatform would only be a short-term route to profits, and would impact the long-term health of the company:

If I was to take responsibility for the company for just the next one or two years, and if I was not concerned about the long-term future of Nintendo at all, it might make sense for us to provide our important franchises for other platforms, and then we might be able to gain some short-term profit.

However, I'm really responsible for the long-term future of Nintendo as well, so I would never think about providing our precious resources for other platforms at all.

Iwata also feels that such a move would weaken the firm and remove one of its biggest advantages:

What I believe is that Nintendo is a very unique company, because it does its business by designing and introducing people to hardware and software - by integrating them, we can be unique. And because we have hardware and software developers in the same building, they stimulate each other.

And those kinds of conditions have enabled us to create something that no other companies can create. Those kinds of backgrounds are there behind the fact that such a number of great Nintendo franchises exist, and those great franchises always shine for people around the world.

We're sure the demands from industry experts will continue, but it's reassuring to see Iwata stick to his guns. Do you think he's making the right move? Let us know in the comments.


From the web

User Comments (128)



crazycrazydave said:

That is the scariest picture of Iwata I've ever seen. He looks as though he has been beheaded. 0_0



BooJoh said:

I'm glad they're so set in their stance on this. Nintendo has always designed their hardware around their games and vice versa.



dizzy_boy said:

The answer should be glaringly obvious before the question even gets asked.
If Nintendo made games for other platforms it would compromise the sales of their own hardware, something which Nintendo is not prepared to do.



tsm7 said:

The day Nintendo goes multiplatform is the day the company goes completely bankrupt and must sell it's assests piece by piece.



FineLerv said:

But... but... the armchair experts said it would happen! How can someone on the Internet be wrong?



Marshi said:

Mr Iwata,despite what you're saying now,please please dont give in!Nintendo games are what makes nintendo great.Put them on other consoles and whats the point in having a nintendo console? Im glad Iwata's sticking to his guns.i just hope he keeps sticking



Sentinator said:

Its the right move. Anybody who followed the many developers who migrated will tell you this. Sega, Rare, SK and possibly even Bungie (though it remains to be seen) have all had their software plummet in quality due to developing for platforms they don't belong on.

When you have a home you stick to it or you lose the passion. A lot of people say how "awesome" it would be if Mario or Zelda went to Playstation but they would never be on the scale they are now. There wouldn't be a point. And you'd be barking up the wrong tree if you wanted Metroid, Pikmin or new IPs. There isn't a platform to differentiate anymore so why put your lesser franchises out?

Anyone who thinks Nintendo games would be as good as they are now is deluding themselves. If anything Nintendo should go handheld only.



dyopri said:

i thought sony was the company in trouble! does thier TV's still sell well?



banacheck said:

software plummet in quality due to developing for platforms they don't belong on.

Thats a load of nonsense, PG software isn't plummeting in quality with meny other developers, but there again we haven't seen Bayonetta 2 yet...



Sentinator said:

They did not start off as a hardware manufacturer or working second party to one. Developers I am talking about were originally owned under a company who migrated later, or were just in contract with one. Someone like Insomniac. Though I'm not a fan of their games anyway (nor Sony in particular) I have heard that FUSE (unsurprisingly) sucks compared to their previous works. But I don't feel they had credibility to begin with. It isn't nonsense. Its factual.

Their games are never the same when they make for other systems.



DESS-M-8 said:

What a question to ask, Nintendo will never go multi format, they've weathered worse storms than the wii u situation before. Not only that, they are a profitable company right now inspire of the wii u.

People seem to forget Nintendo have been around for over 100 years and have been the leading gaming hardware and software company for over 30 years.
They DO know what they're doing, things just don't always go to plan in any business, it's how you approach those times, solve them and move forward that keeps a company going. One of the companies that can do that is Nintendo.

Sony AND Microsoft have never produced a console that has made a profit. The only thing that keeps them producing consoles is the revenue generated from their masses of other ventures. If they were a pure gaming company we would not have seen the PS4 or the 360.



AltDotNerd said:

The last time Nintendo loaned their IPs to another developer, we got Mario and Zelda CD-i...

...Never again...never forget...



luminalace said:

Good on him. I agree that putting their games would probably greatly improve their short term profit but also devalue the company as a whole. While the future of console gaming may be up in the air, I think it still provides more stability than joining the hundreds of thousands of developers on Smart phone and tablet based gaming!



banacheck said:


Bungie use to make games for the Macintosh, & if i remember rightly Myth was a very successful franchises, not just Halo. Also Rare made games for the ZX Spectrum, before making games for Nintendo.

Macarony64: @banacheck can you translate what you said please? I did not not understood it.

I can not not understand yours, not not understood it.



twistedbee said:

I don't understand why people keep insisting that Nintendo put their titles on other platforms. You never hear about people insisting that Microsoft put Master Chief on Playstation... Or Sackboy on Xbox. They are exclusive IPs. That's why you spend the money to buy the system... Smartphone & tablet gaming is just a mind numbing time waster you do while waiting for a haircut. And even still, if you're gonna have to sit around and wait, wouldn't you rather have quality games instead of 99 cent shovelware?

Oh, and in case nobody pays attention, WiiU's launch was better than Xbox 360 & PS3's launches in worldwide sales. And it did it with shotty 3rd party support and just a handful of exclusives.



taffy said:

I think the next gen is in for a big surprise after the holiday bump. With more expensive consoles (and games) coming and still a lot of support for current gen games and only higher resolutions to differentiate themselves are people really going to get a PS4 and £60 for the latest COD/FIFA/Battlefield when they can get it on the PS3 for £45 and play it online with that console for free.



Sentinator said:

And Naughty Dog made games for Genesis but all came into their glory when they served under the manufacturer. That is my point.



AlexSora89 said:

"Gee, it sure is BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORING around here!"
"MAH BOI, this peace is what all true warriors strive for!"
"I just wonder what GAAAAAANON's up to."
"Your majesty. Ganon and his minions have seized the realm of Hyrule."
"You mean the island of Koridai."
"No, Hyrule. The Legend Of Zelda: A Link Between Worlds is coming out this November..."
"... on the Philips CD-i!"
"Heh heh heh [trollface] bye!" [flies away]



Conkers64 said:

He is right, and very wrong. He is right to continue development of new games and IPs on Nintendo exclusive consoles. He is wrong to not consider selling NES and SNES, and GameBoy games in the Apple and Android stores. They are already pirated (I don't, but I know people do), so why not make profit off them? Those games would easily port--Apple would love to help, I'm sure. It would act as a new revenue stream, which would easily crush the amount of funds that VC brings in. That said, I understand that he wants VC to be a selling feature, but why not us older games on mobile devices to remind people of the glories that the company has (and still can) produce — heck might even get new people interested in new nintendo consoles.



Drewroxsox said:

@Cruznbaby85 I hate when Nintendo fanboys say that Microsoft or Sony doesn't have any innovation. So according to you, they have been doing the same thing since they released their first consoles without adding any new features or software. Give me a break. I like Nintendo, but I do realize there are other companies that offer DIFFERENT gaming experiences. Have you even played a console that wasn't made by Nintendo?



Sentinator said:

I wouldn't say they don't offer innovation but they don't do as much to differentiate themselves. Both consoles serve the exact same purpose. Funnily enough the "industry experts" as the article puts it don't note that being in direct competition puts them in more danger to going third party than Nintendo.



Technosphile said:

@Sentinator Freaking THIS. Going software-only has done nothing for Sega besides keep the doors open. They are a shadow of themselves. People WANT that for Nintendo?!?

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: just because you put Mario Sunshine on the Xbox does not mean that audience will buy it. You want to play Nintendo, you BUY Nintendo.



Conkers64 said:

@DePapier why? I get that new nintendo games are enhanced by nintendo consoles, but what does a nintendo console do for an old 2D game that a phone can't? If they sold them for 4.99 each on iTunes, you better believe people would buy them, and it would ensure a cash stream for future new nintendo consoles-- really a win-win.



unrandomsam said:

@Technosphile Sega were reckless in many ways. (I think they should make another console - put stuff like border break / Operation G.H.O.S.T / K.O. Drive on it). Not certain the problems that Sega has can be completely attributed to going Software only. (Merging with a gambling machine company and not Namco likely was a factor).

All of the big traditional Japanese developers are the same though - (Sega Namco SNK Capcom Konami Square-Enix) the JP part is the only worthwhile part. The rest don't do anything worthwhile.

I got all stars racing transformed for £2.50 (PC) and I like it (Much more than Mario Kart wii). For Mario Kart 8 at £50 it should compare in terms of price / quality. Should be at least Neo Geo kind of quality when compared to SNES.

(I don't mind paying for anything. I would rather not have something though than be disappointed by it. (Which has happened for all the Mario Karts past 64 for me. All the New Super Mario Bros excluding mod's for the wii version)).

I want Nintendo to just do some genuinely different games. (Nintendo could afford to do something like Sega did with Shenmue and follow it through to the end but they won't).



Nintenjoe64 said:

Nintendo are like Jesus and everyone asking the same questions is just Satan trying to tempt him in the desert. Nobody asks MS or Sony to make their exclusives multiplatform because they aren't as good as their shared 3rd party games.



NintyMan said:

Good for Iwata. He looks ahead rather than make reckless business moves with short-term gain that end up weakening the company down the road. Nintendo games for Nintendo consoles!



unrandomsam said:

@Conkers64 I think that especially for iOS. Sell a £100 Apple Certified NES controller. (The Controller support is in iOS7). Invest the money into making world class games for Wii U and 3DS. (I don't like the way you get charged a fortune for everything with iOS but you do with Nintendo so if I use an ipad just for playing games with a certified controller that will be fine. I expect most of the stuff on XBLA will go to iOS when that winds down.)

On iOS you will probably pay between 1/5th and 1/10th per old game than you would from Nintendo you don't need to buy that many for it to be worth it.

And the ipad is 4:3 which is just what you want for stuff that was made for 4:3. (And Tate mode works much easier than turning a tv on its side).



Dolphinsquared said:

I feel that, even past Iwata's legacy, Nintendo will still stick its games to its hardware. It's about the only thing I can ask for.



Conkers64 said:

@unrandomsam I completely agree with everything you said, and I would absolutely line up to buy my Apple/Nintendo controller-- I see it as a SNES looking controller in NES colors!



unrandomsam said:

@Nintenjoe64 Those multi platforms are not worth having. (Other than maybe on PC for dirt cheap). Not enough effort put in on any platform. (Look at how many PS3 games are pretty much identical to the 360 version. If they cannot be bothered for that they really won't bother with Wii U better they don't bother at all).

And a port of an exclusive is rarely desirable either. (Unless it is something that is insanely expensive and on an older system).

I would be willing to pay for something based on Tatio Type X3 or The newest Sega Arcade board with proper none usb controls and a defined monitor. (And SSD's for games or cartridges). Nobody cares about making stuff like that though only mass market mediocre stuff. (And it is getting up there in cost to the old premium stuff like the Neo Geo / Neo Geo CD certainly the 3DO)



element187 said:

Nintendo selling hardware allows them to make games that wouldn't be possible otherwise. Their hardware business allows them to take risks that no other software publisher can take.... All those niche titles that people love would be gone.

A software only Nintendo would be adverse to risk, just like Ubisoft/EA/Activision, and the only titles we would see would be the very big sellers like a yearly release of 3D mario, 2D Mario, Mario Kart, Donkey Kong Game, Kirby Game and thats pretty much it.

No longer can take risks on the niche titles.Fire Emblem? Gone. Xenoblade series, Gone. Contracting games from third parties, gone. Pandora's tower? gone. Metroid, gone. Because they are a platform holder it allows them to spread the risk around so they can make the niche titles they love to make.



Samurairu said:

Refreshing to hear a CEO say he's not worried about only the next 2 years. This is something I very much appreciate about Nintendo. They are concerned about their legacy and long term viability and conduct themselves accordingly.




I'd feel physically ill if Nintendo was in such a condition they had to go multiplatform to survive, as I'm sure there IPs would be split somehow with some being exclusive to one console, and some the others; they might even sell some of them off.

It'd be like witnessing someone come into your home and selling off every personal belonging bit by bit.



ultraraichu said:

That was a crazy question to ask in the first place. Might as well ask the people at nintendo to take a large dose of illegal drugs as a follow up, since they both have the same effect.



GreatPlayer said:

No mario on ps3 and xbox at least. Why should I buy a wii u if these titles appear in other platforms anyway.



NorthLightSuplx said:

If people want to play Nintendo games then purchase a Nintendo console or shut up. There is no need for Nintendo to go multi-platform in any way , shape, or form. If Nintendo decides to make tablet games it will be for a Nintendo branded tablet.



kondabasu said:

@Conkers64 The piracy-to-paying-customer path only works for niche audiences, and only in a certain set of circumstances. Crunchyroll has been moderately successful, most importantly because their target audience is almost desperate to support original content creators and publishers. That's hard to establish for VC games: even fans often assume VC games are pure profit for Nintendo.

Another problem: Google Play and iOS App Store prices have established an expectation that games are dirt cheap, and it's always assumed that Walmart economics /always/ make up the price difference. "Pay between 1/5 and 1/10 per old game" as @unrandomsam said, and attract more buyers. Another 20-30% of that price goes to Apple or Google. The proposition, then, is that Nintendo not only abandons exclusivity of VC but decimates title prices on third party platforms, while investing in rewrites of all their games (at least for iOS), but it'll work out in their favor because enough people will choose the original Legend of Zelda over Zenonia and its ostensibly shinier ilk. I would not be willing to invest in the success of that decision.

Another problem: if you look at the way Rovio, Gameloft, EA, and others treat their titles, you'll notice there's a formula to success, and it involves constant, rapid iteration and updates to stay in the top and featured slots. "Last updated" is one of the most prominent fields when buying games on an iPhone, and an old date signifies abandonware. Needless to say, Nintendo will not be issuing updates for VC titles. "Update: 2013-08-08 finally fixed World -1 bug!"

Upshot: I hope Nintendo doesn't try this. It won't be their end, but it will be a dead-end and a waste of resources I'd rather see put into localizing Mother and giving it a Western release.



Nintenjoe64 said:

@unrandomsam - I think there are normally 1 or 2 major releases per year that I'm sad won't be on a Nintendo but I have a decent PC so I can get most of them anyway. This year it's only GTAV I want for the U because I think it would be improved with a large map in my hands. I wish Sega would bring their arcade boards to the VC along with Saturn and DC games.



Quickman said:

Why would Nintendo even think of going multiplatform? They've made a profit on pretty much every console that they've ever released, The Wii + Nintendo software sold like crazy and the 3DS is smashing it home.

The Wii U isn't even a year old yet they've managed to sell 3.61 million units, with little 3rd party support no advertising or big 1st party software, now it has an excellent lineup of games coming things should really start to pick up.

All this "multiplatform" idea would do is suit is big 3rd party devs, MS and Sony..



Wanderlei said:

Iwata has literally set Nintendo up financially for the next 50 years with the success of the Wii and DS.

While Sony will be leaving the industry if they have another vita disaster because of their dire finacal situation. But the way the gaming media covers it, you woulf think the opposite is true.



canal_g3 said:

@Conkers64 you do make a point but the main problem here is that snes/nes games are on the eshop and I doubt nintendo would want to lose potential revenue or customers there



Nintenjoe64 said:

@cohort I don't think it would help smaller 3rd parties if Nintendo were on the other consoles. Sony/MS gamers would have even more AAA games to buy leaving less £££ to buy the other stuff from people like Platinum.



BossBattles said:

Gamers are clueless to not understand this. Nintendo hardware is PART of the experience of playing a nintendo game...



Quickman said:

@Nintenjoe64 That's why I mentioned big 3rd party devs because all they need to do is repackage the same game every year, Sony and MS consoles have used exactly the same gamepads over the years, they never change, whereas Nintendo are always coming up with something different so obviously it's a headache for them.

I've always said that investing in smaller devs is the future for Nintendo, relying on big 3rd party support is a false economy, MS and Sony have that market sewn up.



Nintenjoe64 said:

@Cohort - Nintendo always seem to get it right with their small purchases and quite often the ones that they end up not buying go awry after their last Nintendo collaboration.

I smell a crash coming when companies are losing money on games that sell millions of copies. Hopefully the only people that will suffer are big publishing execs rather than gamers and developers!



Sentinator said:

I agree with you about Sony's games. But I think some of the games by Microsoft I played on Xbox were among some of the best that generation. On Playstation though, the best games are definitely third party.



capac said:

I kind of see where he is coming from. It would be a big gain at first but it would probably die of like most other games do for ps3 and xbox. I would like to see zelda on ps3 but it might just kill it



FritzFrapp said:

Iwata kicking tail and taking names like Reggie could only dream of.

Nintendo will never go third-party. Not going to happen. They could quite happily survive by knocking out ultra cheap Mario playing boxes to tide them over when things turn bleak. As it stands now, they have gazillions in the bank.



hamispink said:

I really wish Nintendo would go third party. I enjoy their games, but I can't justify buying separate hardware that I don't even like just to play them.



Quickman said:

@Nintenjoe64 I've had that feeling for a while now, it amazes me how people complain about stale Nintendo franchises (most have been around since the mid 80s) and then mark out for games like FF XXIII RE 6, MGS V, Saints Row V, GTA V and CoD 38!



UnseatingKDawg said:

I hope whoever's following Mr. Iwata has the same mindset, because that would be horrible if Nintendo went 3rd Party.

And as for those who wish Nintendo would go 3rd party, I say this: if you want to play the games that badly, buck up and save your pennies, and buy a Nintendo console. Heaven forbid it looks like you're playing a "casual" or "kiddie" system when you're really not. Besides, Nintendo's hardware (usually) lasts a lot longer than other companies'.



Quickman said:

@hamispink If you enjoy their games then how does not liking the console come into it?
I didn't like the PS2, the controllers are rubbish, the console was poorly manufactured and it also looked like a cheap betamax player. I still bought one though..



Sentinator said:

That is something else the people being desperate to see them go fail to note. Not everybody likes Xbox or Playstation as hardware and there are actually people who like the hardware Nintendo put out. My hands are massive and the Wii U gamepad works like a dream for me. Funny enough I bought the Zombi U bundle for the Pro controller but have never used it. I love how the gamepad feels to me.

In comparison, the PS2 controller actually gave me blisters.



FullbringIchigo said:

ok so people are saying "release your games on other systems Nintendo"

ok then how about putting Forza, Halo, Uncharted or Little Big Planet on Nintendo systems then, what you don't want them on anything but your systems, then why should Nintendo be any different then?

think about it



Caryslan said:

@DESS-M-8 The PS1 and PS2 both made Sony massive amounts of profit when those were Sony's main consoles. The main problem is that Sony took huge losses on the PS3 during its first few years that effectivly erased all the profits they had made with the PS2.

But that's old news. Back in 2010, Sony announced that they were making profit off the PS3, and since then they have made nothing but profit off every PS3 sold.

I think the only system they are not making profit on is the Vita right now.

As for Microsoft, they never made a profit on the Xbox. But the 360 has not only made a profit, but it erased all the losses that they took with the first Xbox.

So Sony and Microsoft have been making profit for years in their gaming divisions.

Sony is having issues, but I have heard them report that they have turned a profit on the PS3, and since that operates on a 10-year cycle then it's likely the PS3 will recoup all the losses it took from it's first few years.

So, Sony and Microsoft are making profit off their systems right now.



Rafie said:

@Sentinator That is definitely wrong. Playstation has way better exclusives than Xbox. If anything, I would venture that Xbox 3rd party games are the best seeing as they don't have many exclusives. Forza, Halo, and Gears are pretty much it. Playstation has too many compared to Xbox. Playstation comes 2nd to Nintendo with exclusives.

I have all systems from the past and current generations. I loved my GC more than my PS2 and Xbox. I favored my PS3 over the 360 and Wii. Still I play most of my consoles extensively. I understand this is all opinions from both sides, but Playstation 3 3rd party games can be found on the 360, but with better graphics and gameplay (due to it being developed on a 360).

Now on topic...Nintendo should NEVER go multiplat and that's that. That defeats the integrity of it's legacy as the longest and most innovating console of all time. With it's beloved makes Nintendo the forefather of this gaming world for consoles.



BATRA said:

that's very true nintendo
this is why i love nintendo and we will win



Epicnessofme99 said:

They don't need to, people just need to buy Nintendo systems instead of having thoughts that the games will come to their system instead.



JaxonH said:


Iwata's right and we all know it- they're games on they're systems is the reason the company endures. Take that away, and their days will be numbered.



Sentinator said:

The name "the pretender" comes to mind whenever I play Sony's exclusives. I haven't enjoyed a single Sony exclusive over an alternative that exists in the genre. God of War, War of the Monsters, Socom, Jak and Daxter, Ratchet and Clank, Twisted Metal and the worst offender being Killzone.

I've covered many of Sony's outings and the only one that caught my attention was Ico. More exclusives? Yeah but how many are truly worthwhile? This will be a very controversial opinion but believe it or not, I would rather take the better quality Microsoft put out than a lot of games varying in quality. This is entirely my opinion but I think Sony come out with poorer games in the genres they cover. Just look at Playstation All Stars as the latest example.



Shambo said:

It's really rude that people ask/say these things. Nintendo wouldn't be Nintendo without both original hardware completely focused on gaming and unique experiences, and the exclusive quality first party games to go with their hardware and original second and third party exclusives/exclusive features as a very welcome bonus.

I don't know what made these people think Nintendo is desperate enough to lose its pride and forget about their own future, but they should shut up about gaming if they don't even know such basic things as:
-Nintendo will remain Nintendo
-its fans love it for that
-'Haters gonna hate'
-Wait and see, Nintendo saved itself time and time again.

You want their games or not? If yes, buy their system and enjoy. If no, don't keep telling them to go multiplatform.



JaxonH said:

Really? Nintendo hardware is, in my opinion, even better than the games they make! Nintendo hardware brought the directional pad in the 3rd gen, shoulder buttons in the 4th gen, analogue joystick in the 5th gen, the awesome Gamecube in the 6th gen (the system brought nothing "new", but it rocked!), motion controls in the 7th gen, and dual screen mechanics in the 8th.

Nintendo hardware is one of the biggest things I look forward to each gen. Say what you will about the Wii (it certainly had it's criticism), but the Wii U maintains all the strengths of the Wii (like the ability to incorporate Wiimote/Nunchuk controls when it fits), but without any of its weaknesses. The graphics are on par with many 1st party games running 1080p 60fps, the online is free, there's Miiverse, VC offered through the eShop, and most importantly, the gamepad, which offers a level of gameplay we have never experienced until now.

If you've never played a Wii U game like Pikmin 3, or even a 3rd party game like Arkham City with its gamepad integration, you really should- it really is the best console I've ever owned.



Fillytase said:

@Nintenjoe64 Totally agree with you about an industry crash being inevitable. So-called "AAA" games have become way too expensive to make on PS3--let alone what it will cost on the Xbox One and PS4.

Agree with many others that Nintendo hardware is half the experience of playing a Nintendo game, and it would be truly sad to see them stop making hardware (which they most certainly would if their games went multiplatform). They're the only console manufacturer that understands how to create engaging gameplay, imo. Ugh, how boring Zelda would become if it was on the Xbox and PS... :



Rafie said:

@Sentinator Wow. I seriously can't believe what I'm hearing. Now I can get that Sony's exclusives may not be everyone's cup of tea, but to say that Microsoft has better "quality" of games under them (when they really at the time don't have any), I just have to question the better judgement of the gamer. My intentions isn't to offend you, so if I do then please humbly accept my apology in advance. Now I won't even go into the games that you listed because it's clear no matter what I say about them won't sway your opinion of them. I WILL say that they are definitely quality games. Heck one of them even one Game Of The Year and was running up the very next (referring to God Of War).

Yeah I'll definitely say your opinion is a controversial one. Most of the game mentioned were some of the best games in that consoles generation. You didn't like Shadow of The Colossus either? Well my friend I guess this is where we'll end this. Although PS All-Stars is a fun game, I can't defend it in any way. However, I think you may want to objectively look at the PS library of 1st party versus MS 1st party again. PS 1st party easily takes MS 1st party without a doubt. Most of them being worth while mentioning I might add. I guess the one thing we can agree on is that Nintendo is doing just fine on it's own and always has been in a league of it's own. Right?



Sentinator said:

I have thought about the comparison and Halo trumps anything in Sony's library. This is why Killzone annoys me so much. It gets praise like it's game of the year material yet Halo trumps it in pretty much every aspect (aside from graphics). And this is supposed to be Sony's blockbuster shooter? The controls hinder things so much I gave up. Halo stuck the simple concept and perfected it whereas Killzone tried to be realistic and the game was a mess because of it. I mentioned this before about Killzone and (surprisingly) people agreed with me.

God of War, Ninja Gaiden has enemies that attack you full force. It requires genuine skill and the buzz is kept up to me. It also had much harder bosses. It had you fighting 3 bosses at once. Whereas God of War required QTEs to finish them off (like Razor's Edge currently does). What you say about Shadow of the Colossus I can say about Pikmin.

The rest I have covered before. Earlier FPS games were getting there but Halo was the first to truly master it. The fact that it spawned so many shooters following it's lead this gen just shows how much more an impact Halo made. In fact I have noticed many today claim that Forza has surpassed Gran Turismo (my observation). So even if you disagree, there will be some out there who agree with me.

Its just so few have the courage to call out Sony exclusives because they get so much praise.



Ralizah said:

It would be a dumb move in the long run. Nintendo will survive because it has a huge, rich library of legendary IPs that are exclusive to Nintendo consoles. Moreover, Nintendo games have a unique identity, and they really integrate the hardware with the software to create a unique gameplay experience that can't be replicated by more generic PS360 titles.



Emaan said:

If you want to play Nintendo games, buy the hardware that can play them. It's really not that difficult. People are too accustomed to having everything handed to them these days. If you would like something, you have to pay for it and earn it. If people aren't willing to pay a good amount of money for a Nintendo system that will play quality games, they shouldn't be allowed to enjoy such things. You get what you pay for. The people who think Nintendo is going to cater to the crowd that expects something to be either free or 99 cents to even consider buying have got to be kidding themselves.



Rafie said:

@Sentinator LOL If you're going to compare games to others in that fashion, I can very much do the same. I can also say the same about Halo being praised for being the best, yet it has gone down hill since Halo 2. Halo Reach is the only Halo I can say that lived up to it's reputation since Halo 2. That's my opinion, but others in various forums agree with me. Oh and while I'm at it, I'll even give you Forza (from 4 on up) has surpassed Gran Turismo. That doesn't GT a bad game because it's still good.

Normally I'm very debative and I can actually counter most of your claims here. Though I'm much more interested into finding out if you just don't like Sony as a whole or not. I'm inquiring because you had nothing but negative things to say in the stead of their library. Your answer will determine if this is worth debating. I don't mean to sound like a jerk, but you clearly have a distaste for most of their games.

Oh and I haven't said anything about the Shadow of Colossus except that if you yourself liked it. I actually like Pikmin and don't have a problem with Nintendo games and can openly admit if there's a Nintendo game that's more awesome than a PS or MS game.

Oh and MS games get a lot of praise to, but not all of them are as great as you make them out to be. That's real.



umegames said:

Nintendo do NOT go the SEGA route, there's no reason to submit to Sony and Microsoft just because of STOCK HOLDERS.

But why do i feel like Iwata is going to "leave" nintendo, if you know what I mean, and be replaced with someone who will do such a thing.
I'm telling you now, REAL gaming will be dead the day nintendo stops making hardware. mario, zelda, metroid, etc games will NEVER be as good because the hardware is designed to match there system. They don't have to worry out 2-5 platforms, just 1, that's why Nintendo games are excellent quality.



ledreppe said:

Why not ask the other platform holders (Microsoft, Sony) to put content on other platform. I don't see why Nintendo has to be pressured to do it all the time.



Relias said:

Halo is very generic.. actually most FPS id this day and age.. with that being out of the way.. No.. I remember Sega going to other platforms.. Sega was never the same.. when Rare went to Microsoft they ruined a lot of their credibility.. and EA going to Smartphones etc.. was a bad choice.. since a lot of people use Smartphones.. to judge what their consoles will be like or should be like.. the same goes with the PC.. so no Nintendo should never make games on either format.. unless it translates well to their hardware.. cause otherwise.. they will not go well.. (AKA the smartphone or whatever play's exactly like the console..)



DarkKirby said:

People who want Nintendo to sell out with tablets, smartphone games, and multiplatform are people who hate Nintendo and people who own Nintendo stock and want to sell it off when Nintendo's stock skyrockets temporarily.

It's obvious to anyone with 1/2 a brain that it would be detrimental to Nintendo's business model in the long run.



DaveGX said:

Wait, wait....So it's OK for Nintendo to accept other developer's chars into their own games (Super Smash Bros Brawl, Universe)(Solid Snake, MegaMan, etc) but they won't go multiplat with their own chars on other platforms? No offense, but anyone see something wrong with this picture?



allav866 said:

I already can visualize what Nintendo putting their IP's on other systems would look like. Imagine Nintendo pulling money out of his wallet and giving it to Sony, MS and Apple with one hand, while continually shooting himself in the foot with the other hand.
I kinda want a GIF of that now...



Captain_Toad said:

Heh, the sony and xbox people just keep asking for mario and co to just come into their systems yet they hate 'em at the same time.



JuanitoShet said:

This is why I love Nintendo, they always stick to what they believe in! And I usually agree with 'em, and this is definitely a topic I've ALWAYS agreed with it. :B



R_Champ said:

"However, I'm really responsible for the long-term future of Nintendo as well" Soooo, does that mean you bought Atlus? That's probably the smartest "long-term" investment Nintendo could make right now....I mean since Atlus has been profitable they'd pay for themselves! Plus, people need to know Nintendo is the ONLY place to get certain games.

If you start making for tablets Nintendo really will just become a software developer. Also, Persona 5 Wii U might coax some of the cult out of hiding or away from the belief the PS4 is the "RPG system" mean all those multiplats? X and Persona 5 exclusives would be the perfect addition to the "Only on Wii U" message that everyone keeps trying to write off (I've heard people saying "X" looks like the best upcoming RPG, until they see the only on Wii U, then they cry, moan and say FFXV looks



KnightRider666 said:

Yes. Simply put, if you want to legitimately play Nintendo titles, you should own the systems they are made for, not on some stupid i phones or tablets.



ecco6t9 said:

A CEO thinking about profit 5 or 10 years down the line? What kind of sorcery is this?



Relias said:

@DaveGX No.. it's different when you throw characters into a well done.. and most generally epic release of a series.. that is high quality.. it's another when people ask you to hand out ports of your characters in full games that may or may not go over well.. and may determine.. your sales for a entire generation.. or longer.. after all if Mario hit smart phone and sucked.. people may use that as a excuse to not buy another Mario Game.. Snake showing up in a game that is pure quality.. is another thing entirely..



Fillytase said:

@DaveGX Uh, no... those two scenarios are not analogous, at all. Cameo appearances from third-party characters (Snake and Mega Man) =/= a game exclusively owned by one console manufacturer appearing on other consoles.

A sensible analogy would be the one many here have already brought up: why does no one ask for Uncharted to be on the Wii U or Xbox One, or for Halo to be on the Wii U or PS4?



mikeyman64 said:

Didn't even have to read the article. Read the title, and all I can say is: Amen. Thank you Iwata.



retro_player_22 said:

@DaveGX You're comparing characters own by third parties (Namco, Square Enix, Capcom, Konami, EA) to characters own by a first parties (Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft). 3rd party characters can appear on any platforms they like as they don't have one of their own, 2nd parties (Intelligent Systems, Naughty Dog, Rare) are families of the 1st party, their IPs will have to appear on a 1st party console no matter what and 1st parties are the console maker, they kept their IPs exclusive to their own platform (except SNK who are nice enough to give us Neo Geo ports of their arcade games for multiplat even though they had their own console too).



StarDust4Ever said:

Investors just wanna bump up the stock so that they can cash out for a profit. If it crashes later, so what; they've already made their money off it.



Paperluigi said:

I totally agree. A 3DS or Wii U is made for gaming, an ipad is for web browsing. Just because milions have bought the ipad doesnt mean Nintendo are wrong to not bring their games onto it. I have nothing against tablet gaming but it doesnt even come close to a properly made piece of console software. Its the same with every argument about Nintendo, people just want to talk about tech specs and frames per second, they dont care about the reasoning behind Nintendos decisions.



knvx said:

@Shambo "haters" is so tired... just like fail.. if its old in the Arkansas backwoods it should be prehistoric anywhere



knvx said:

I do think Nintendo could make some interesting products for phones and tablets but not anything in the vein of porting.. I can see maybe some Zelda or Mario themed puzzle or strategy games with tons of content like characters and music from other franchises and so flooded with it that the software is more like a museum than a game but I would be happy with something like that in a very limited quantity. I think we are all better off without it tho.



Kage_88 said:


How would something like THIS help Nintendo's brands? Poor Sony...

@Decker22 - I'm the same. At the moment, I'm happy with Nintendo & PC. Nintendo is smart in the way it designs its hardware & software; in that they are experiences that cannot be found anywhere else. The fact that PS4 & Xbox One are basically 'PC-lite' kind of makes them redundant, in my book.



Shambo said:

@knvx that's why its between " ' " 's but the act of 'hating' for the sheer 'fun' of it or any other plain dumb so-called reason should be a thing from the past too...



DaveGX said:

I want to address the few people who responded to my initial comment; The problem isn't me. I think the point everybody is missing here is that this isn't a case of "3rd parties can put their game on any platform", no. This is a case of fitting 3rd party chars into those 1st party universes to which they clearly don't fit in, and Nintendo is unwilling to do the same. It has nothing to do whether it's 1st or 3rd party. THAT'S what I see wrong with this picture, Did M$ or Bungie have a problem with Tecmo for the little content each provided 1 another? No, they made a compromise; An unlockable spartan for Dead or Alive 4. Unlockable Hayabusa armor in Halo 3. (Granted OK, this once could've been considered 1st/2nd parties working with 3rd party. Regardless, do you see my point?? Neither's chars/properties fit 1 another's universe(s).)



SpookyMeths said:

The answer to the question of why Nintendo is always pressured to go multi-plat with its IPs and Sony/MS are not is quite simple, really. Nintendo IP is a) consistently excellent in quality and b) a license to print money. Everyone wants a shake of the money tree. You look at mainstream media all blowing loads over the new AAA Game of the Year contender, meanwhile Nintendo goes "LOL" and releases a Mario game for 1/5th the cost, sells 5x the copies, and tops the yearly list on Metacritic.

Meanwhile, "industry experts" come off as entitled casual gamers that think Nintendo owes them a mobile port of Zelda for 99 cents so that they can tap their phones for 5 minutes while pooping.



DaveGX said:

Hmm...".consistently excellent in quality". See, there's another problem with Nintendo in comparing them to M$ or $ony; (not to go off topic) For 1, the majority of hardcore gamers don't see it that way, leading to 2, the most obvious reason why. They could do be doing so much more to up the look and feel of their games, texturing and all, but they won't it's a wonder the majority doesn't take them seriously. Just the smallest simplest changes alone would make all the difference, but they're unwilling to compromise and take a risk that that just might buy back the audiences they lost and are trying to reach out to, like the developers for 1. They can't just "lol" their way to victory forever, guessing what people want and doing their thing their way without actually listening to what people really want. This is exactly what's killing them right now.



Araknie said:

Who's even keeping this question up?

Surely one that discovered Nintendo by now.

Leave A Comment

Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...