next »

[Richard Kain]

To be fair, a large part of the argument Nintendo was making wasn't about quality, so much as "value." They see the app store and are afraid of their software being de-valued with that open approach to platform development. They are hoping to avoid the $1.00 app syndrome. They don't want everyone to start thinking that all downloaded titles should be that cheap.

But once again I can't help but think of glass houses. I would point to the My Notebook example that was brought up. That happened. That series of apps exists on the DSi store. It's hard to imagine a more cynical money-grab, but there you have it. Those are apps that they would be overcharging for at $1.00, they are that pathetic.

That kind of software gets Nintendo's stamp, because supposedly their developers had an office. I honestly don't think most "garage" developers would mind charging more for their software on Nintendo's platforms. What they WOULD mind is signing exclusivity agreements with Nintendo when a platform like the iOS doesn't require that kind of crap. And if the same program is $1 - $2 on the iOS, and $10 on the Wii or DS, which version are people going to buy?

[s0]

Guys, I never said the SNES and N64 didn't have any shovelware at all. What I meant when I by "very little" was that the ratio of non-shovelware vs. shovelware was high. I said "a few that slipped through the cracks" specifically so people wouldn't start mentioning individual bad games.

[Alistair Aitcheson]

To be honest, this isn't a change from Nintendo's stance. They've always tended to be a fairly insular company, relying heavily on first-party hardware and software.

I think the thing that offends me is that they're saying their attitude is for the benefit of the gaming medium. Iwata talked about the next generations of Miyamotos being unable to emerge in the current system, but Fils-Aime's comments show they're not willing to foster these new talents themselves. It's hypocritical - Peter Molyneux, Will Wright, and so many other celebrated designers started out as bedroom coders, after all!

Regarding their business model, it makes sense for them to focus on being a premium brand, so people will pay $50 for a Nintendo game even though there's plenty of $3 alternatives. They missed the boat with indie games, they've lost the casual market to Apple and Facebook, so they need to reinvent themselves yet again. "The premium brand behind Mario and Zelda" is a good label to have.

It makes sense as a business model, but trying to dress it up as beneficial to the medium as a whole is ridiculous.

[Drum]

To be honest, this isn't a change from Nintendo's stance. They've always tended to be a fairly insular company, relying heavily on first-party hardware and software.

I think the thing that offends me is that they're saying their attitude is for the benefit of the gaming medium. Iwata talked about the next generations of Miyamotos being unable to emerge in the current system, but Fils-Aime's comments show they're not willing to foster these new talents themselves. It's hypocritical - Peter Molyneux, Will Wright, and so many other celebrated designers started out as bedroom coders, after all!

Regarding their business model, it makes sense for them to focus on being a premium brand, so people will pay $50 for a Nintendo game even though there's plenty of $3 alternatives. They missed the boat with indie games, they've lost the casual market to Apple and Facebook, so they need to reinvent themselves yet again. "The premium brand behind Mario and Zelda" is a good label to have.

It makes sense as a business model, but trying to dress it up as beneficial to the medium as a whole is ridiculous.

I'm not sure they're wrong though.  Because of the preponderance of platformers on XBLA, it's pretty common for people to look at games like New Super Mario Bros. Wii and wonder why it's a full price retail title.  And it's pretty much unthinkable to pay more than ten dollars or whatever for a puzzle game.  There is kind of a 'genre inflation' thing going on because of the glut of this stuff, and how it's being undervalued by the people who make it, which is creating the impression that more abstract games like puzzle/pinball/platformer games are somehow worth less than big games.  
I remember in the past Iwata said something about the 'charge $60 for games to soak the early purchasers then drop the price a couple weeks later' being a bad idea also (hence why Nintendo doesn't drop the prices for their games, like, ever).  I think he's right on both counts - indies are selling themselves short into order to spam their stuff on iTunes, creating a very competitive market with low returns, and the high-end games (without a ton of hype) are in trouble too because savvy consumers know they can just wait.
Still, NSMB sold stupidly well so I don't think similar games being cheap is necessarily going to hurt Nintendo's big guns.

[Movius]

The main reason someone like Nintendo would avoid the 'garage developer' is that they don't want games on their systems that don't work as advertised. There are many advantages that small development teams have over larger teams. Quality control is not one of them.

I'm talking about stuff like Magicka. Great game, but has had about 500234908124 patches since release. This won't do for some parent who is buying a last minute christmas present and come Christmas day they have a crying child because "Happy Kindness Elves 3" crashes after 5 minutes.

I'm not sure they're wrong though.  Because of the preponderance of platformers on XBLA, it's pretty common for people to look at games like New Super Mario Bros. Wii and wonder why it's a full price retail title.

Who actually says this?

[s0]

Who actually says this?

Go to any mainstream gaming forum on the internets (IGN, GameFAQs, /v/, etc.) for starters. TIGSource and the "indie scene" do not represent the general vidyagaming public.

[Movius]

Who actually says this?

Go to any mainstream gaming forum on the internets (IGN, GameFAQs, /v/, etc.) for starters. TIGSource and the "indie scene" do not represent the general vidyagaming public.

Calling bullshit on that one. This is the first time I've heard this comparison brought up. I'm sure there are isolated incidents of people making this claim, but it sounds more like indie scene bluster about Those AAA mainstream idiots and their polished idiocy not appreciating a work of art.

Also a large chunk of New Super Mario Bros. audience would not even know what xbox live arcade is.

[Drum]

Who actually says this?

Go to any mainstream gaming forum on the internets (IGN, GameFAQs, /v/, etc.) for starters. TIGSource and the "indie scene" do not represent the general vidyagaming public.

Calling bullshit on that one. This is the first time I've heard this comparison brought up. I'm sure there are isolated incidents of people making this claim, but it sounds more like indie scene bluster about Those AAA mainstream idiots and their polished idiocy not appreciating a work of art.

It comes up from time to time, often enough that I've noticed. See it sometimes in comments sections on videogame sites, occasional comments on NeoGAF.  All anecdotal, but consistent enough to kinda bug me.  Maybe shoulda said 'occasional' instead of 'common', also screwed up by making it seem like I thought there was a direct link to XBLA content and this mindset - that's not what I meant.  It's more general - people associating 'abstract' with 'cheap' (which is actually true - it's certainly cheaper to make a game like NSMB than it is Bulletstorm or Gran Turismo).
Actually, in light of this clarification, let me spin this around - this is surprising to you?  You really find this unlikely?  That people balk at paying as much for abstract or 'primitive' game types as they do more realistic, cinematic games?  I have a hard time believing that - seems intuitive to me (intuitive and illogical, but hey).  I mean, how else do you explain the dearth of more abstract/classic games at retail on 360/PS3/PC but the massive amount available for download?  Abstract/classic is totally the domain of downloads, Wii and handhelds - and that means cheaper.

Also a large chunk of New Super Mario Bros. audience would not even know what xbox live arcade is.

?  That reinforces my point if anything (not really, but it sure doesn't support yours).  It's the people who are aware of both that pipe up about it.  Sheesh!

[Drum]

Also, what time is it in Australia? (it is 4:56am in New Zealand :( )

[s0]

Who actually says this?

Go to any mainstream gaming forum on the internets (IGN, GameFAQs, /v/, etc.) for starters. TIGSource and the "indie scene" do not represent the general vidyagaming public.

Calling bullshit on that one. This is the first time I've heard this comparison brought up. I'm sure there are isolated incidents of people making this claim, but it sounds more like indie scene bluster about Those AAA mainstream idiots and their polished idiocy not appreciating a work of art.

Wat? Now you're putting words in my mouth. Where did I say these people are idiots or that the "indie scene" is better? I lurk the GameFAQs forums occasionally and read comments sections on news sites and stuff (because it's interesting to know what gamers outside of my little niche think) and the idea that games should be cheaper because they have 2D graphics, are short and/or are part of certain genres is pretty widespread. Whenever a game with at least one of these characteristics is brought up, there are "I'm not paying [x price] for that" comments galore.

I haven't really noticed it with platformers (except if they had 2D graphics) though and certainly not with NSMBW.

[gimymblert]

I heard the size of NSMBWii is enough to fit into a wiiware dl size limitation... But does the nintendo quality compensate for that? I don't know if nsmb was enough a risk regarding the long platformer tradition of nintendo, and they reused asset...

Do we need to pay full price for NSMBWii? It's a good edge case.

[s0]

What assets were recycled?

[[RM8]]

If I recall correctly, the size of NSMBWii is around 350MB, so it doesn't fit the WiiWare size limit, even if it's still quite small. I personally didn't mind paying full price for it, it was really fun and the red case looks awesome. And no, of course NSMBWii wasn't a risk considering the first NSMB was a huge hit.

[Golds]

this isn't new, it's been the case for years. nintendo only does business with indies who actually have office space and so on, not people who work out of their homes.

That's not really true.  Sony and Microsoft will throw this line out there too, but Edmund and Tommy never had an office, nor Derek and Andy, etc etc.

If you have a hot title in development, you can get on their downloadable services.  The thing is, why would you want to?  They have the least profitable download portal of all the consoles.  The all-time best selling third party Wiiware title is World of Goo, and from 2DBoy's iOS numbers post, even their iPad port makes more money for them.

[s0]

I personally don't mind paying full price for any good game. I would have gladly paid $50 for some indie games too.

[Christian223]

Sponsors and publishers don't look at games in the same that that players or developers/indies do.

I imagine that most of them study a game and then decide which game to support if previous games with the same features have been successful or not. I think they must have different ways to measure if a game will bring money to the company or not, different ways of thinking about games, that's why there has always been games with big production values but really horrible as games.

If you have an original idea but has no proof of success, they won't support it, until they can clearly see it is making money they won't try to clone it.

[Drum]

I remembered a good general example:  There was kind of an outcry over the price of Braid when it was first released.  People thought $15 was an awful lot for a 2D downloadable platformer (I wish I didn't pay that much for it, but that's a different thing).  So it's not just that cheap games are devaluing similar games, it's that people do expect this sorta stuff to be cheaper.

[[RM8]]

"Nintendo always appreciates good quality content regardless of whether that's coming from an indie developer or a more established publisher. For example, we've worked with 2D Boy, the people behind World of Goo for WiiWare. This is a group of guys who don't even have an office. So we embrace that kind of independent spirit and it's ultimately the most innovative content that will rise to the top." - director of PR Marc Franklin

http://gonintendo.com/viewstory.php?id=154218

[gimymblert]

PR Damage control

[moi]

FLIP-FLOPPING