Why do gamers want to see Nintendo go multi-platform?

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

because people are idiots and they will always be idiots. Seriously, something of catastrophic proportions would have to happen for Nintendo to bow out of the console market. And don't try to be clever and say the Wii U, because we all knows that's bullshit. Considering that people stamped their feet over the DS, the Wii, AND the 3DS and yet Nintendo slapped those idiots' notions upside the head, I'm confident the Wii U will be fine.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

Because they want some of their games.

But as I've said in another thread, I don't expect it and don't think it makes sense for Nintendo because otherwise their own consoles would be useless and they'd have a hard time utilising motion control/touchscreens/whatever well while also providing a good controller experience for the other platforms.

I would rather Sony and Microsoft had no exclusives as well. I don't care if other people can play games I can play, but I'd like occasionally to be able to play games I can't that others can. The difference is I'm not into Halo but I'd be up for Zelda.

EDIT: And don't call me an idiot for wanting Nintendo games on other consoles. Speaking purely in terms of what would benefit me, no console should have exclusives, and it's my prerogative to want what is good for me in the same way it's not my fault for buying used games because they're too expensive new.

 

[Something Amyss]

The reason this bugs me is that some gamers actually believe that if Nintendo was forced to go multi-platform that somehow the Nintendo IP's would get "better" graphics and would make a better game.

On the other hand, most people just want to play the games without shelling out for a console that does basically nothing but them or that has really stupid waggle controls.

 

[CrystalShadow]

Because as time passes by Nintendo consoles loose more and more third party franchises. Most people buy Nintendo consoles only to play Nintendo's own games. And that makes Nintendo's consoles being supplamentary. For a gamer who wants to play modern games, Nintendo's console can't be the only platform he will have. So that means he will have to buy 2 consoles, one only to play Nintendo's first party games,and one where he can play everything else.
But wouldn't it be better for that person to be able to play all the game it likes in one console ?
Without having to spend 600-800 euros / dollars ?
The sad thing appears to be that gamers consider more plausible that Nintendo will become a third party developer for other consoles instead of attracting third parties to its own console.
People have lost their faith in Third Party Suppport for Nintendo's consoles.

True, but up until the most recent (or perhaps I should really refer to it as the 'previous' generation now... Basically, PS3/Xbox 360), most games I'd consider worth playing have been available for PC.

Now, so what? You ask, no doubt.

Well, for various reasons, I need a PC anyway, and so I make sure that PC is as versatile as possible.
So... If I were to get a console at all, it would be to play whatever exclusives happened to most appeal to me. (And some things aren't as exclusive as they seem - Did you know Final Fantasy 7 and 8 had PC releases? XD)

In any event, 3rd party support on Nintendo systems has been bad since the N64, and has never really recovered.

I don't see it as very likely that Nintendo would become a developer for other systems in general though.
And it certainly doesn't seem like it would do anything to improve the quality of their games.

But... As to why anyone would care?
Well... Nintendo is good at making games. really good. Perhaps not very creative, if you look at their apparent tendency to release a variation on the same thing constantly...
But they're good at it nonetheless.

Consider it the difference between an artist, and a master craftsman. - One can certainly make highly unique and unusual pieces, but as interesting as they may be, they could be of highly inconsistent quality. (Even the likes of Leonardo DaVinci, while known for creating technically and artistically amazing things, was also known for never getting anything finished.) , but the other can probably consistently create very intricate and well-made items, though many of them would look quite similar to one another.

(Then again, Nintendo is on record explicitly saying it prefers to spend it's time innovating on gameplay, rather than story or characters. - Creating new settings and characters only when the gameplay dictates that it's necessary.)

 

[Nick Di Fulvio]

Also you act like Third parties are saints, when as we all know, especially around this generation, they are more than happy to screw us over with online passes, DRM, Always online, and ridiculous DLC pack prices for minimal content. They like to treat us like shit when they get the chance, yet whine when the same thing happens to them? Please.

I mean look at the Wii, except for first party games, what else do they have worth getting a Wii for? Not much. All those great 3rd party games that came out this gen, and the Wii completely missed it. I mean, if I only have a Wii this generation, I would have been a really sad camper.

Zack and Wiki, Goldeneye 007, The Conduit 1 and 2, Tatsunoko vs Capcom, Okami, Sonic Colors, Umbrella Chronicles, Muramasa: Demon Blade, Dead Space: Extraction, Mad World, Red Steel 2, No More Heroes 2, Monster Hunter Tri, Pandora's Tower, Trauma Center, Chocobo's Dungeon, House of the Dead Overkill, The Last Story. EA had all of their sports titles (Madden, Fifa, PGA). Activision brought MOST of their Call of Duty stuff to the Wii AND the DS.

Third party support was there - people just wanted to see Nintendo fail so badly

The Wii U will be the Wii story all over again - it releases, people ***** and moan because "of the gimmicky controller and the bad graphics", Nintendo reveals Smash Bros and a new Zelda, sells a billion units, EA and Activision and all the other publishers follow the money... this same shit every console generation.

 

[Negatempest]

The reason this bugs me is that some gamers actually believe that if Nintendo was forced to go multi-platform that somehow the Nintendo IP's would get "better" graphics and would make a better game.

On the other hand, most people just want to play the games without shelling out for a console that does basically nothing but them or that has really stupid waggle controls.

But that itself is just bitter resentment over something so minor. I mean really minor.
Did Nintendo implement stupid DRM? No.

Have they ever really shaft the customers in any way? No. Hell when they make mistakes they go on record a week to a month later apologizing for it.

Have they been milking their franchises? Sure, but have you really paid attention to their 1st party franchises? Just look at smash bros history and see their huge library of original IP's. There are dozens upon dozens of them.

Here is the crucial thing. Have they ever made the customer feel like an undependable thief? Like they implement ways to prove you purchased a product? No.

The hatred over the control of the wii, though understandable, is such a pointless thing to keep yourself from purchasing from them. Sure they treated developers bad, but no where near as bad to the consumers. THE people who buy their product.

 

[Shoggoth2588]

I am and I don't. I assume people want Nintendo to go multiplatform because they've already assumed Nintendo has failed this gen and just want Nintendo to hurry up and go under instead of drawing the process out. I think people forgot how several years ago Nintendo said they were going to completely stop making games when they stop making consoles...a sort of "I'm taking my ball back home" gambit which is just painful because out of all of the guys in the neighborhood, Nintendo has some of the most fun and interesting balls out there (I didn't think about the metaphor very long).

 

[NiPah]

I know I'm going to buy a PS4, I know I will never buy a Wii-U, however I would still like to play some Nintendo games.
That would be my reason in a nutshell, I didn't think much about multi-plat Nintendo until you mentioned it but I guess everyone got on the doom-and-gloom train when they heard the Wii-U hasn't sold well and now think Nintendo will pull a Sega?
I don't know, I loved Mario and Zelda back on the N64 and would love to play them again someday, but I don't see that happening.

 

[Negatempest]

When we say "Multiplatform" we specifically mean "PC."

And to answer that question, because modding + Nintendo games would be amazing.

It also means fluid, efficient online play.

boom, my answer word for word.

as much as nintendo games do things right, modding would cause those games to skyrocket, nintendo has such a hard time adding proper depth to games that mods would be able to do, not to mention all the tweaks games would get.

plus all the people that go insane over the 3D pokemon games people have tried to make FTP over the years on the computer, but nintendo shuts them down every time...-_-

fucking nintendo, there is a reason why big ass projects like those pop up.

And yet, Nintendo hasn't shut down the extensive modding community for Super Smash Bros Brawl (Brawl+ and Brawl- in addition to all of the MUGEN-like character hacks), or the incredibly-obvious-they-even-emailed-Nintendo-to-use-it Mother 3 translation, or the translation patch for Fire Emblem: New Mystery of the Emblem. Fire Emblem in general has a thriving community of ROM hacks. There are online battle sims like ShoddyBattle for Pokemon that haven't been taken down either. I think Nintendo just opposes Pokemon MMOs and 3D games because they are just too similar to the actual games for Nintendo to be comfortable with them, but I've seen ROM hacks all over the place of Ruby/Sapphire/Emerald. Nintendo will never be as open to mods as Bethesda or pre-EA Bioware, but the company still attracts a certain number of enthusiasts.

That said, Nintendo has never really been aiming towards older, tech-savvy gamers, but have always aimed for being family-friendly. Kids do not pay attention to the "story" of Pokemon, nor do they care about the intricacies of the battle system. They only care that it's a portable adventure with lots of cool creatures that allows them to have material to socialize over with their friends. Many older parents have no idea how the Wii controller works, only that Wii Sports more or less copies their actions and makes the controls easy to grasp. A lot of people in the older generation have no idea how to control something using dual analog, and they don't know what to do with all those buttons. By comparison, the Wii controller is intuitive to someone who hasn't play videogames before because it's so simple by design. This particular market probably has no idea what a mod even is.

Now, I wouldn't mind if Nintendo did become more mod friendly, but their design philosophy revolves around an intimate understanding of their own console's capabilities.

you're pretty much preaching to the choir here, i've known about all of those, but it's just funny that people in there free time absolutely SMASH what nintendo has to offer when it comes to cash cows like pokemon, it just shows how stunted its growth is (hell alot of their games are the same way). also i call shenanigenz on the pokemon, me and my friends used to read up all the time on pokemon and so does my 6 year old brother now, (hell he watches the cartoon religiously to learn more about ash while he is playing him in game)

like i said, you're preaching to the choir, most of this is all known information, and it won't sway my opinion of the fact that nintendo won't get another cent from me with the way they do things.

Ah. PC. And nope I can see the reason why Nintendo won't go their. Miyamoto is very prideful when it comes to the quality of his product. Just look up Shigeru Miyamoto quality and see interviews of his talking pridefully about quality. If he was to put Nintendo games on PC there would be problems of some kind for a fact. It would be something he could not easily control and would have to make a PC team to fix the problem. The man I would say is like a Chef of his own restaurant. He can control the product in his own restaurant and make sure it is quality stuff. Sure you may want to see his products sold in stores, but he wants to be proud of what's on the plate and he can control it's quality. You cannot, in any form, say that a game on PC will run perfectly on all PC's. You cannot do that, there will be problems. Mr. Miyamoto is a man that does not want to have any problems with his products if he can prevent it. Thus a console and the exclusives to it. If you see the games on PC, expect it to be buggy for someone for a fact.

 

[RedDeadFred]

Because I'd love to see what other, more powerful systems could do with their games. Imagine what developers could do with Zelda if they got to work with a gaming PC.

 

[Headsprouter]

Because people like their games and want to play their games, because they're great games, but they don't want their consoles that get so little third-party support it'd be the equivalent of buying a console for, say a mario game or two, a Zelda game, a couple Metroids and Smash Bros., with the console just gathering dust between those being released.

Basically, people want more games, and if they can add some great Nintendo titles to that list, awesome. Keep 'em coming. But they don't want to buy several expensive consoles.

But handhelds? Nice, cheaper, don't take up much space, virtually no competition (Sorry, Vita, I didn't even know you existed) and plenty of 3rd party support.

 

[Negatempest]

It can probably be summed up by saying that they make shitty hardware with near to no proper 3rd party support, but the bunch of 1st party titles that they have every "generation" are rather good and would also sell on other platforms.

This isn't as much of a problem on the PC, since you can basically emulate every single Nintendo console but the Wii U (for now) since their hardware always seems at least a generation behind, but it would be preferrable if Nintendo would just stop making outdated consoles with gimmicky concepts and sell their games on better platforms.

The only time I would ever call hardware "shitty" is if it fails for no reason at a random time. (Xbox360) But yeah, even when the hardware is actually shitty, people will buy it if it comes with shiney games.

Look, your a smart guy and I won't call you silly. But you also have to remember, Nintendo has always been behind the very powerful PC since the beginning. Their games had no where near the depth computer games had, but it prevails to this day. You know why? The hardware is dependable, very unlikely to break randomly. Their 1st party IP's, though are dated to some people, run with very few to no bugs that can be easily remembered.

Sony and Microsoft games are fun and great in their area. But you have to remember, they are buggy at minimum of 40% of the time. They are not game breaking, but buggy non the less. So, you really gotta refine the word shitty. How about you say that Nintendo hardware is not powerful enough to play the games I want to play. Heck even saying that it has non of the 3rd party support I want is a valid excuse. But shitty hardware? Please, you know better. Out of everything, Nintendo hardware is still reliable enough to play even with some damage it takes.

 

[Negatempest]

Because I'd love to see what other, more powerful systems could do with their games. Imagine what developers could do with Zelda if they got to work with a gaming PC.

Other than be buggy? Remember that Miyamoto is a prideful man about quality. PC gaming is far from quality gaming. Fun gaming, deep gaming, but not quality gaming. There will be bugs for a fact and Miyamoto is a guy who does not want bugs in his game like the way other developers allow bugs to exist. But that is the nature of the beast of PC gaming and Miyamoto wants quality, thus exclusive to consoles.

 

[Diddy_Mao]

Because every single console since the SNES has had a staggering lack of decent games to play. don't bother listing off your favorite N64, Gamecube and Wii titles...I'm well aware that these games exist and I won't argue that they aren't great games.

What I will argue is that there is no longer any need for them to be exclusive Nintendo console games.

What kind of sense does that make? Yes, how dare Nintendo give you incentive to buy their crap with legitimate and respectful business practice! Buy that same logic, you shouldn't buy a PS4, since Infamous has no business being an exclusive because you like it (if you don't like Infamous, replace with another title you do).

Honestly, why is anyone still willing to complain about Nintendo? Is it pure spite? Microsoft is out, so wouldn't it make sense to look past the problems you've had with Nintendo and see what they're doing now? I've looked past the problems I had with Sony and I'm glad I did.

My point is that exclusivity might be a tipping point for which console you purchase but in the long run a console needs to have a wider range of titles available. and that's been a weak point for Nintendo for quite some time now.

Nintendos in house properties are good games and they are worth playing, but that's the only thing that they have going for them.

At the end of the day I don't want to buy an entire console just to play Mario, Zelda and Metroid and damn near nothing else. That's been my experience with almost every Nintendo home console since the SNES. I buy the holy trinity and then the system collects dust for months on end as I sift through the shovelware that makes up the rest of the system's library trying to find a game to justify keeping the damn thing plugged in...and I'm not going to do it anymore.

 

[Negatempest]

Because people like their games and want to play their games, because they're great games, but they don't want their consoles that get so little third-party support it'd be the equivalent of buying a console for, say a mario game or two, a Zelda game, a couple Metroids and Smash Bros., with the console just gathering dust between those being released.

Basically, people want more games, and if they can add some great Nintendo titles to that list, awesome. Keep 'em coming. But they don't want to buy several expensive consoles.

But handhelds? Nice, cheaper, don't take up much space, virtually no competition (Sorry, Vita, I didn't even know you existed) and plenty of 3rd party support.

Well not really. As others have pointed out, the Wii got lots of unique games on their console that was from 3rd parties. You know why they are ignored? They weren't an FPS. Remember that military FPS's and 3rd person shooters were extremely popular in the past generation, stupidly so. But we are tired of them now, cause that is what most developers in the west did. Lots of shooters. That is why I got the Wii U. I don't have to worry about it being flooded with FPS's.

Mario
Zombie U
Monster Hunter
Nintendo Land
Ninja Gaiden

My library so far. To me, the strong complaint against the Wii-U is that it's not gonna focus on FPS like the other consoles will. Which is a pity really.

 

[Negatempest]

Because every single console since the SNES has had a staggering lack of decent games to play. don't bother listing off your favorite N64, Gamecube and Wii titles...I'm well aware that these games exist and I won't argue that they aren't great games.

What I will argue is that there is no longer any need for them to be exclusive Nintendo console games.

What kind of sense does that make? Yes, how dare Nintendo give you incentive to buy their crap with legitimate and respectful business practice! Buy that same logic, you shouldn't buy a PS4, since Infamous has no business being an exclusive because you like it (if you don't like Infamous, replace with another title you do).

Honestly, why is anyone still willing to complain about Nintendo? Is it pure spite? Microsoft is out, so wouldn't it make sense to look past the problems you've had with Nintendo and see what they're doing now? I've looked past the problems I had with Sony and I'm glad I did.

My point is that exclusivity might be a tipping point for which console you purchase but in the long run a console needs to have a wider range of titles available. and that's been a weak point for Nintendo for quite some time now.

Nintendos in house properties are good games and they are worth playing, but that's the only thing that they have going for them.

At the end of the day I don't want to buy an entire console just to play Mario, Zelda and Metroid and damn near nothing else. That's been my experience with almost every Nintendo home console since the SNES. I buy the holy trinity and then the system collects dust for months on end as I sift through the shovelware that makes up the rest of the system's library trying to find a game to justify keeping the damn thing plugged in...and I'm not going to do it anymore.

Your point though, is a little weak. As I mentioned in other posts, the Wii did get 3rd party support. It just did not get those shooters that people wanted. You know, Halo, CoD, GoW, Uncharted. The past generation had a serious amount of shooters. Nearly that is the only thing it had. Quite a few of them were really good, but they were shooters. The Wii games weren't really shooters so no one really wanted to buy those games. But since most of us are getting a little sick of Shooters... Who knows?

 

[RedDeadFred]

Because I'd love to see what other, more powerful systems could do with their games. Imagine what developers could do with Zelda if they got to work with a gaming PC.

Other than be buggy? Remember that Miyamoto is a prideful man about quality. PC gaming is far from quality gaming. Fun gaming, deep gaming, but not quality gaming. There will be bugs for a fact and Miyamoto is a guy who does not want bugs in his game like the way other developers allow bugs to exist. But that is the nature of the beast of PC gaming and Miyamoto wants quality, thus exclusive to consoles.

What.....? I don't even... I thought it was common sense that a game made for a PC would be better than the same game made for a console. Look at the Witcher 2 for example. It's great on consoles but it's absolutely stunning on a decent gaming PC.

Gee I'm not even primarily a PC gamer and I know that their games are better in quality. The only reason I play consoles are for their exclusives. If there were no exclusives, there would be hardly any reasons to own a console over a PC.

Also, while I love playing games on my PS3 and Xbox, hardly any of them are without some bugs.

Hell, even if Zelda were more buggy on the PC than the Wii, it could still be made into a much better game. I guess I don't really know what you mean by quality. In my mind, a game that is better than another game in every way but has some bugs is of much higher quality than the game with no bugs.

I'm sorry but to say PC gaming is not quality gaming is one of the most laughable statements I've heard all week.

 

[Negatempest]

Because I'd love to see what other, more powerful systems could do with their games. Imagine what developers could do with Zelda if they got to work with a gaming PC.

Other than be buggy? Remember that Miyamoto is a prideful man about quality. PC gaming is far from quality gaming. Fun gaming, deep gaming, but not quality gaming. There will be bugs for a fact and Miyamoto is a guy who does not want bugs in his game like the way other developers allow bugs to exist. But that is the nature of the beast of PC gaming and Miyamoto wants quality, thus exclusive to consoles.

What.....? I don't even... I thought it was common sense that a game made for a PC would be better than the same game made for a console. Look at the Witcher 2 for example. It's great on consoles but it's absolutely stunning on a decent gaming PC.

Gee I'm not even primarily a PC gamer and I know that their games are better in quality. The only reason I play consoles are for their exclusives. If there were no exclusives, there would be hardly any reasons to own a console over a PC.

Also, while I love playing games on my PS3 and Xbox, hardly any of them are without some bugs.

Hell, even if Zelda were more buggy on the PC than the Wii, it could still be made into a much better game. I guess I don't really know what you mean by quality. In my mind, a game that is better than another game in every way but has some bugs is of much higher quality than the game with no bugs. I'm sorry but to say PC gaming is not quality gaming is one of the most laughable statements I've heard all week.

Quality my friend. Does it turn on well without freezing often? Will this character glitch out for no reason? To make a long story short, think of Fallout 3. Great game, but buggy as all hell. Miyamoto is a kind of guy that would have a heart attack and lose all pride if a game of his came out like that. That is what I mean that he wants to control quality. The visuals of a game is not quality. But more of aesthetics. I think that's the right word.

Edit: Remember someone out there is going to have the same game as you on PC, but it's gonna take some work to make it work. Miyamoto pride would find that unacceptable.

 

[likalaruku]

I can see why Nintendo would be against it. I mean is I could get any of their games for my PC, I wouldn't have bought a DS3.