Do Nintendo actually NEED Third Party Developers?

The Wii U is failing, not only failing but borderline a complete failure all together. If it doesn't pick up steam this year and get level in sales at least with the other next-gen consoles, it's going to have to go down as Nintendo's first real home console failure. Sure they've had the Virtual Boy in the past that was quickly forgotten but they've never had a high priority console be a failure, not a home console. One reason people have been claiming is that Nintendo is not getting the 3rd Party support it needs. This is true, the lack of third party titles on Wii U does at times look pretty astounding. But let's take a closer look at that.

There are third party developers on the Wii U, plenty of them in fact, a lot of big name games from Ubisoft have ended up on the console. Are some of the bigger name games like Tomb Raider, Grand Theft Auto or Dragon Age ending up on the console? No, they're not. But is this really a problem is the question. Let's go back and look at Nintendo's history with third parties. In the past their consoles since and including the N64 have lacked 3rd Party support quite significantly.

The NES and SNES both had very strong third party line ups and are naturally considered the best line up of games in gaming. Of course back then, third party meant a very different thing to what it does today. Nowadays when a game is made on Playstation, Xbox and PC, it's practically the same throughout, with PC having a bit higher graphical fidelity. Back in the 8 and 16 bit eras, 3rd party games came out on say the SNES and Sega Genesis/Mega Drive, but they were completely different games. There was always a clearly better version, not to mention controller preference was always key as the SNES and Mega Drive consoles had completely different and layouts. But look at these two versions of the Contra, a 3rd party game.

They're completely different from one another. Compare that today where you get comparison videos that literally go down to the most basic of textures on the games just to try and find a difference, when really there is none.

Also interesting of note is that these games lack the same title specifically. They're both Contra games made and released around the same time for competing consoles but they're completely different games. Which brings up the next point. Third party games were often basically exclusives, sure you had your Mortal Kombat, which had a cheat-code blood version (people always forget it was hidden in a cheat code) on Genesis, and the superior version of Street Fighter II on SNES, but generally speaking third party games were often akin to what is now considered an exclusive title.

Final Fantasy for example, released six games across the NES and SNES eras (no, I don't count Mystic Quest or the other spin-offs). They were released as exclusive titles on Nintendo consoles that eventually jumped ship to Sony's Playstation with Final Fantasy VII, a game that put Sony's console on the map. The games were a huge success and I'm almost certain the video game landscape would be a very different place today if Final Fantasy had remained on Nintendo consoles - as Final Fantasy and Square Enix kinda represent that ship jumping mentality that happened in the late 90s that Nintendo never really got back.

Nintendo would continue to have third party developers for their consoles up to the GameCube era or at least more so than they do today. It didn't work out well for them then, so who is to say it would work out well now. Let's go down to basic numbers...

Ubisoft and other companies have released stats of where the percentage of sales for their game came from, and usually games like Assassin's Creed take 2-3% from Wii U. That is a very small number, now granted the install base is also considerably smaller than the other consoles and a lot of people say that is partially due to a lack of third party support. Does that mean Nintendo is in a Catch-22 scenario here. Perhaps a little, yes. But not to the extent that people believe.

What sold the Wii, it wasn't a third party game, they barely got any of those. It was Wii Sports. What sold the original Xbox or the PlayStation 2, it was Halo and the DVD Player in the PS2. None of these are third party games, they're often a bonus not a reason to buy a console. There are some GREAT third party titles out there, but often the best seem to come from first and second party developers. Games like Wii Sports, Halo, GoldenEye, Super Mario World, Gran Turismo, The Last of Us, The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, Xenoblade Chronicles, Super Smash Bros, Mario Kart e.t.c

The question in the eye of the average consumer, and make no doubt about it, the gaming industry is so insular and cliquey, that they've forgotten that most people who buy consoles, are actually averages joes not hardcore gamers. No-one outside of gamers really has loyalty to Nintendo, Sony or Microsoft. They look at three devices and say "what does this one offer me that the other two don't". For Sony and Microsoft, they offer better graphical power than the Nintendo. Nintendo last generation offered motion controls and dominated that generation, now they offer the GamePad - which while a neat innovation has had little in the way of software that showed off why this GamePad is the reason to purchase a console over the others. The main reason the PS4 is selling so well right now is the strong price point over the Xbox One. These are essentially exclusive features, reasons to buy a specific console for the non-mainstream gamer.

Nintendo's problem isn't a lack of third party games. It's a lack of games in general. No-one has a reason to buy a Wii U and it's version of let's say "Tomb Raider" when they already own a PS3 or 360 that can play that version. The GamePad simple isn't enough. Wii Sports and it's motion controls were something entirely different and new that consumers couldn't get on other consoles. The GamePad is an interesting addition but not enough to purchase a whole new console. The 3DS had a similar issue at first, 3D gaming, while I stand by and support it, is not enough to make people buy a 3DS. But hopefully, hopefully, Nintendo can convince developers to release some exclusives on the console like they have with Sega on the Wii U. Their future line ups of games might help boost the console's sales. 

More and more I see comments on Kotaku, GameSpot and other gaming sites that people are starting to say "I'm finding less reasons not to buy a Wii U". Public opinion is changing and it's not cross-platform third party games that are going to sell it. It's the question of "what does this console offer me that the others don't". And the PS4 and Xbox One are going to be powerful competitors for Nintendo, visuals are an easy sell for people to upgrade their existing consoles. Nintendo has an uphill battle but that's nothing new for them, at the very least they hopefully can bring out enough solid software that is exclusive to Wii U in 2014 to change people's minds.

Microsoft E3 Press Conference

Microsoft's E3 Press Conference went down pretty much as expected. They threw games out there, lots of games. Everything they didn't' show at the XBOX One reveal was shown. They showed a lot of games that were new like RYSE: Son of Rome and Titanfall as well as old favourite like Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain, a game we all knew was headed to XBox after Rising became the first Metal Gear game to crossover to Microsoft and become cross-platform. Then you've got the surprise announcements, like Killer Instinct returning this time to Xbox, which for Nintendo fanboys like myself serves as a bitter reminder of the fact that Nintendo has lost so much third party support. That being said even if it's not the same Rare that was at Nintendo, it's nice to see them reviving an old favourite once again, I look forward to smashing some skulls as Glacius. Or maybe I don't because the price point rolled around. $499...

And this is for a console that essentially bans used games and puts the power with the game publishers rather than the gamers themselves. The 24 online check in requirement and other DRM issues were not addressed at all in the conference, probably to their benefit or else they'd probably cause all kinds of issues. To be honest, had they just ditched the disc drive system, they might have avoided a lot of this hassle for themselves because that's essentially what they're doing, but discs are still around and I literally can't remember the last PC game I bought that had a disc, it's all steam or formerly Direct2Drive for me.

Now speaking as a person who before the reveal, wanted so badly to be excited for the next XBox and for their E3 presentation. I am not an XBox guy, I have never owned a Microsoft games console but I'm a PC user all the way, even a somewhat defender of Windows 8. I'd hoped the Xbox One would blow me away, and honestly, between the extortionate price point and the ban on used games, I feel I can't justify the purchase of their new console. I don't think I ever can unless they sort these issues out. The Microsoft Press Conference was solid for gamers, until you look behind the scenes a little more and realise that for all these great games, there are the huge flaws and issues in the Xbox One.

Perhaps for many Xbox Gamers, they don't care too much about that, they'd like to play the new Halo game that was announced, with no number or subtitle, we'll see how that goes down. But it's looking like the console will have a solid line up but it's a line up that for the most part, Sony will be able to compete with, match or even out do, we'll find out more soon enough.

Final Thoughts: A Solid Presentation of Games and Exclusives, but the $499 Price Point and the DRM issue still lurks over the Xbox One.

Conference Rating: 8/10 - GREAT***

*** Note the conference was great itself, but not enough to override what they'd said in the past, which at least they got out of the way early.

Pre-E3 Expo Thoughts

Just a short update this weekend. This week I will be at E3 Expo 2013, I'll get to see all the awesome new stuff Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft put out there, as well as see what else is in store. Will there be a new Zelda? A New Final Fantasy? Will Call of Duty: Dog Warfare be any good, or just yet another cash-in sequel by Activision and Infinity Ward. And perhaps most importantly, does the Xbox One actually play video games?

I'll be doing a three-day analysis at the end of each day, try and give you some impressions of what I get to play. Bearing in mind I am working at E3 this year for gaming website Screwattack.com, for whom I'll be editing many of their videos in the media room. However I'll try and give my best impressions, specifically relating to the major conferences, we have Sony and Microsoft dishing them out and Nintendo with their hour long Nintendo Direct trying to bring the conference less in a bombastic approach and a more... well direct one.

How will E3 go down this year, no idea. Everything seems pretty level this year, Sony and Microsoft have their new consoles coming up, Sony appearing to be in the lead here. They've shown off more games, though people seem to forget how bad their conference was in face of how disastrous the XBox Reveal was. Microsoft have be all about the games this year, tell us what is going to make someone like myself a person who has never owned an Xbox console before, buy one. What exclusives are you bringing to the table? The DRM thing is a real crap, so maybe they might sort something out there, but it's growing increasingly concerning that they won't be changing that any time soon and we'll all have to pay full price for used games, which frankly is BULLSHIT.

Sony on the other hand have shown off a few games, however they haven't shown off any heavy hitters really just the usual Sony stuff that we expect from them. When I saw the PS4... the presentation that is, I really hope they actually show the goddamn console this time, I was quite disappointed that all they showed off were games that had minute graphical enhancements and there was nothing new about the PS4. They've spoken about using the Vita in a similar way to the Wii U, but for someone to do that would cost them somewhere in excess nearly $1000 in all likely-hood. One thing they should emphasises is a worldwide price cut for the Vita and a massive push for cross-platform play. I love the idea that you can play one game on your PS3/PS4 then go play it on your Vita when you leave your house. The only problem is that you have to buy full copies of each. They've changed that for a couple of games but really they need to make it across all games, buy one copy get the other digitally free. Or buy the game digitally and you get the game on both handheld and home console.

Nintendo have to show off their big guns on the software side, with a very rough start to the Wii U, as an old-school fanboy I'm hoping they can pull something out of the hat. We're expecting Smash Bros, Mario, Zelda and hopefully a few surprises along the way. I'd hate to see their direct show off stuff we already knew was coming. I'd like to see some Mario Kart going on and perhaps most important for me, I want to see what Monolith Soft is working on, everyone keeps talking about Retro Studios... yeah, yeah Metroid Prime was a good game and DKC Returns was great too. But Xenoblade Chronicles was probably the best game on the Wii, and now Monolith Soft are bringing that kind of awesome RPG to the Wii U. What's coming up, I have no idea. But I'm very excited, let's just hope they don't flop like last year's conference, which started out so well and then completely lost steam by Nintendoland, which ironically has turned out to be one hell of a game.

How will things go down, it seems all companies need to focus on their games, with Nintendo probably a step behind because despite their one year jump on the others, they've not done much with it. Let's see how things go down, I'll see you guys and gals on Tuesday.