• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.
  • Furukawa Speaks! We discuss the announcement of the Nintendo Switch Successor and our June Direct Predictions on the new episode of the Famiboards Discussion Club! Check it out here!

Discussion What kind of 3rd party support Nintendo would have if hardware and storage weren't an issue?

Guaraná

Guaraná

Paratroopa
This question should also be valid for the future Switch 2, considering the gap from the current systems will be the same.

Nintendo never had an amazing relationship with third parties, but things were a lot worst during the N64 days. Since then this issue has been improving and today I think we're at an all-time high.

The problem now (it has been since Wii) is the power gap between Nintendo's console and the competitors and the storage.

But let's imagine that these weren't an issue. Do you think Nintendo would have a 3rd support just as good as the Playstation historically has or it would be closer to the Gamecube days*? (*most of the games would be there, but a lot of absences too).

And, since we're here, what do you think could be done to minimize this situation? I think the hardware will start to be less of a problem because games are much more scalable today than they used to be 15 years ago. But the storage problem will remain. Unless Nintendo decides to go full digital, which I'm sure they won't.
 
If the Switch would be on par with the other two, they would basically get all the 2rd Party stuff that isn't under (time) exclusivity.
All these modern engines today scale over all kinds of platforms, so the extra work needed is kept to a minimum and
being able to offer your games digitally makes things even easier
 
0
There would be no reason for third parties to not support the console if it was as easy to develop for it as it is for the others. Publishers want the biggest audience they can have.
 
It would get the exact same support it's getting already.

Switch not being supported has never been a tech issue, people work around tech all the time, and we've seeing it daily with the amount of downports it is getting. It's always been a business side thing.
 
Tangerine_Cookie said:
It would get the exact same support it's getting already.

Switch not being supported has never been a tech issue, people work around tech all the time, and we've seeing it daily with the amount of downports it is getting. It's always been a business side thing.
Click to expand...
This
 
I don't think storage issue is keeping any 3rd party publisher away. Only problem is with GTA5, with updates the game reached over 100 gb and this is a problem for other consoles too.

There are just few publishers that still doesn't support Switch, and they too are giving in one by one. Square Europe hasn't released a single game until now, this ends with Life is Strange 3. Maybe this is a start of new things to come.
 
0
They'd get better western support from virtually everybody barring EA, and probably better AAA Japanese support from the companies that are already supporting them (Capcom, SE) but I wouldn't expect any change from the likes of Bamco and Falcom.
 
I never really understood hypotheticals like this. A Nintendo platform that can keep up in terms of performance wouldn't be a hybrid and exist under vastly different circumstances. No one here can guess how a platform like that would fare. If we're talking about a pie in the sky scenario where the current Switch was as powerful as a PS4, it renders the question moot. Obviously it'd get more games just by virtue of being easier to port to.
 
Dardan Sandiego said:
I never really understood hypotheticals like this. A Nintendo platform that can keep up in terms of performance wouldn't be a hybrid and exist under vastly different circumstances. No one here can guess how a platform like that would fare. If we're talking about a pie in the sky scenario where the current Switch was as powerful as a PS4, it renders the question moot. Obviously it'd get more games just by virtue of being easier to port to.
Click to expand...

Bingo.

There's more factors at play. Would a Nintendo PS4 clone have sold as well as the Switch? Especially in Japan where Switch gets significant support?
 
Skittzo said:
They'd get better western support from virtually everybody barring EA, and probably better AAA Japanese support from the companies that are already supporting them (Capcom, SE) but I wouldn't expect any change from the likes of Bamco and Falcom.
Click to expand...
Many western third parties are already doing their best for Switch. Take Two ports NBA to Switch every year, despite its size goes over 40 gbs now. THQ Nordic makes sure every game they have finds its way to Switch. So does Activision. Other European publishers like Focus or Nacon are getting better at downporting. Better physical options won't improve things for them but things will get better nonetheless.

Three problematic publishers are EA, Ubisoft and SE Europe. For some reason Ubi stopped bringing last gen games like AC or South Park. Their last two remasters (Watch Dogs 1 and Far Cry 3) skipped Switch and that wasn't a size problem. Their only upcoming Switch game is Mario + Rabbids 2 and who knows if they'll continue supporting after that (excluding Just Dance). We probably haven't seen the last of EA as they have a port studio that's fan of Nintendo and SE Europe is debuting on Switch in december.
 
0
It’s a weird one. In their mainline consoles? It’s been an issue since the N64, but their handhelds seemed to have solid support. Most of my DS games and half my 3DS are third party, and my GBA and GB were of course, packed with them.

What I really miss? Are third party games specifically made for Nintendo handhelds. So many fantastic AA Japanese games.
 
0
I mean , if the assumption here is making a device with better storage and power , but still as massively popular as the switch which basically had to choose between making those sacrifices and doing things that makes it more unique in the market . Then yea they would have basically the same level of support as the others , probably . Plain and simple.

I don’t really think there’s a world where nintendo can make such a device and doesn’t end up third fiddle though . What they can do, and sounds like they are doing, is find different ways to minimize “the gap”while maintaining the things that make them unique and appealing compared to the other systems. As mentioned a lot of games these days are more scalable, a lot of games storage sizes are also very much bloated. the switch whatever next neo ultra will probably get a notable number of “last” and “current” gen titles.
 
Oregano said:
Bingo.

There's more factors at play. Would a Nintendo PS4 clone have sold as well as the Switch? Especially in Japan where Switch gets significant support?
Click to expand...
Yup. If you're going to entertain any hypothetical like this, then the commercial success (or lack thereof) of the hypothetical Nintendo system also plays into what third party support it'd get. If the system didn't do gangbusters out the gate, third parties would in all likelihood flee the system, assuming they even join on day one.
 
0
If we're talking about them making a PS5 clone right now, there's no doubt support for more demanding games would be much better as they'd be vastly easier and cheaper to bring over. It'd certainly be a good amount better than what the GC had but I don't think it'd necessarily be on par with the PS/Xbox either as a lot of the people who manage these companies would still have views on how Nintendo systems are for kids or no one on there want 3rd party games or, if we're talking a few Japanese developers, a sense of loyalty for Sony. Ed Boon had to convince others that porting MK11 would worthwhile, if I remember right. Of course, we also need to get into if the install base would be as high as the Switch or Wii, which I honestly don't think would be the case. I do think it could beat out the Xbox though

Now, if they had done with against the PS1 and kept improving their strategy, I think they'd have been able to maintain a lot of the 3rd party support they originally lost while still losing some because of hostile relations only to gain them back later on as multiplatform development became more standard
 
0
No doubt in my mind Nintendo would get more western support assuming hardware and development is on par with Series X/PS5 and sold like gangbusters like the Switch.
 
Kano said:
There would be no reason for third parties to not support the console if it was as easy to develop for it as it is for the others. Publishers want the biggest audience they can have.
Click to expand...
This, but then you also have companies willing to pay for exclusives. I think even if Nintendo were at parity they still wouldn’t get Final Fantasy and Persona day 1.
 
Parity is an impossible dream right now. Third parties have been in bed with MS and Sony and their ecosystems for generations and Nintendo has been the odd man out. Having said that, many inroads have been built with third parties this generation and I think that will continue so long as Switch and its successors remain a success. You might see something closer to parity next gen with better hardware and even better third party relations, and the following gen maybe Nintendo is finally an equal partner.

I have bad news for you if you think this is hardware related more than it is political, but the good news is that things are on the mend.
 
Last edited:
If Gamecube didn’t have storage issues, it would have gotten the few other games that came on Xbox and PS2 but not Gamecube

If Wii was HD I guess it would have had the support that the 360 was starting to get, aka day and date versions of big games from series that were formerly PS2 exclusives

Switch is honestly the first time storage or hardware aren’t major issues since the 64. It’s a question about which publishers actually care about bringing their games to Switch. The people that don’t are usually very ignorant, the fact that the creator of Mortal Kombat had to convince executives to put MK11 on Switch is pretty telling
 
0
Assuming Switch was on par with PS4 and XBone, we would have gotten pretty much every 3rd party game without some exclusive deal. Imagine a Nintendo system with

-Final Fantasy XV
-Nier Automata and remake
-Devil May Cry 5
-Resident Evil 7 and 8 along with the RE-Remakes
-Grand Theft Auto 5
-Red Dead Redemption 1 and 2
-Sekiro
-Pretty much all of the Assassin's Creed games
-Mass Effect Trilogy
-Tomb Raider Trilogy
-It Takes Two

Granted some of those can probably be ported to the Switch as it is, but there are plenty of potential game sales that will likely never happen as the Switch currently stands.
 
0
Tangerine_Cookie said:
It would get the exact same support it's getting already.

Switch not being supported has never been a tech issue, people work around tech all the time, and we've seeing it daily with the amount of downports it is getting. It's always been a business side thing.
Click to expand...
Gamecube could run everything the ps2 did, yet it got basically nothing aside from sports games from third parties(aside from Capcom).
The truth is that for many 3rd parties, a dismal Nintendo but sovereign Sony+ Microsoft is what they'd rather have for ideal market realities.
Nintendo games tend to suck up all the oxygen, yet the crazy thing is, if they're given 3rd party stuff that looks good, it tends to be rewarded with sales.
But too many times, the efforts aren't there, but the Nintendo fanbase sees what does get the utmost consideration and spend their money accordingly.
Then the 3rd parties who tossed rubbish see the poor sales, and go "see, we knew Nintendo's audience wouldn't respond to our games well", and the cycle continues.
I'll never forget how Tales of Symphonia came out on gamecube, broke franchise records and the next three major games were all Ps2 exclusive, and they never outdid Symphonia.
Legendia/Abyss/Hearts, etc.
Self sabotage in its finest form.
 
Uniomni said:
Gamecube could run everything the ps2 did, yet it got basically nothing aside from sports games from third parties(aside from Capcom).
The truth is that for many 3rd parties, a dismal Nintendo but sovereign Sony+ Microsoft is what they'd rather have for ideal market realities.
Nintendo games tend to suck up all the oxygen, yet the crazy thing is, if they're given 3rd party stuff that looks good, it tends to be rewarded with sales.
But too many times, the efforts aren't there, but the Nintendo fanbase sees what does get the utmost consideration and spend their money accordingly.
Then the 3rd parties who tossed rubbish see the poor sales, and go "see, we knew Nintendo's audience wouldn't respond to our games well", and the cycle continues.
I'll never forget how Tales of Symphonia came out on gamecube, broke franchise records and the next three major games were all Ps2 exclusive, and they never outdid Symphonia.
Legendia/Abyss/Hearts, etc.
Self sabotage in its finest form.
Click to expand...
The question is why? Nintendo was difficult with third parties during the NES era and I believe that's where the bad blood began. Then it just became a series of excuses why not to giving Nintendo high effort third party titles, and the truth is, as you stated, they would rather not compete with Nintendo on their own platforms and MS and Sony have been setting up ecosystems for third parties where they have been building fanbases for generations. At this point though, it's getting ridiculous to the point where Switch is finally starting to make headway with third parties because ancient history eventually reaches a point where it loses relevance in the face of real money on the table and 100 million install bases, yet there still seems to be some trepidation or resistance. I would wager there are deals in place with other console manufacturer's. If not formally, at the very least in the form AAA treatment. Shutting out Nintendo has almost become corporate culture with publisher's over the generations, but the Switch came too swift and hard to be ignored, cracks are forming in the gray areas where Nintendo is being walled out.
 
Last edited:
This is frankly an impossible question to answer. As others have mentioned (@Kreese in particular), hardware is not the only consideration in play, both currently and historically.

What the situation will look like when the next piece of hardware rolls out will ultimately depend on Nintendo. But as suggested, there is ever-increasing evidence that things are definitely on the mend on the non-hardware front.

The first bit of writing on the wall in this regard IMO was actually (if you can believe it) the Disgaea series coming to Nintendo hardware. The series was PS exclusive in spite of it not taking advantage of the hardware it was released on and the narrative was "they don't release it on Nintendo hardware because PS hardware is where the audience for those games are, it'd tank on Nintendo hardware", followed by making the series not being on Nintendo systems into a bit of a running joke for about a decade.
Then Disgaea 5 Complete happened, which Nippon Ichi called a "huge success", selling 200,000 copies in North America, and outright gushed about how "incredibly attentive" Nintendo was to their needs during development. And then 2 more re-releases happened.
This year, the newest game in the series, Disgaea 6, released on Switch day-and-date with PS4, sold twice as much as it did on PS4 in its first week in Japan and saw it exclusively released in the West on Switch.

This might not be a big deal for some because it's not some big marquee/AAA game, but you could consider it a sign of things to come. Because it was. 3rd-party support is the best it's been in a while, especially from Western publishers. If Nintendo continue being more attentive to the needs and desires of 3rd-party developers and publishers, the upward trajectory will continue. Hardware capability, however, is only a part of that equation and there's still work to be done, still slates to wipe clean and fences to mend.
 
Last edited:
Some might be more slightly inclined to, but ultimately it will never be the same all around support Microsoft and Sony get cause (due to the lack of impending necessity) they wont kiss the feet of 3rd party like PS and XB require.
Also 3rd party also sees Nintendo own games as a more direct competition compared to the more sporadic release of PS and XB own 1st party heavy hitters.

3rd party support for Nintendo is something beyond only hardware, there are many other factors in between, Nintendo will need to stop being Nintendo to remove those factors
 
If just considering the Switch right now, I would say nothing different with what we have seen regardless of power. As we have seen before, those games that said to be impossible for the Switch ended up getting late ports. Compromised graphically, but still possible. So if the publisher is willing to get their games to Nintendo's latest hardware they can surely do it. And willing is the key word. The only difference maybe if power is not much an issue is how long they can make a port.

As for relationship with 3rd parties, there are great improvements compared to what it was before. Let's just hope it will continuously improve moving forward.
 
0
garf02 said:
Some might be more slightly inclined to, but ultimately it will never be the same all around support Microsoft and Sony get cause (due to the lack of impending necessity) they wont kiss the feet of 3rd party like PS and XB require.
Also 3rd party also sees Nintendo own games as a more direct competition compared to the more sporadic release of PS and XB own 1st party heavy hitters.

3rd party support for Nintendo is something beyond only hardware, there are many other factors in between, Nintendo will need to stop being Nintendo to remove those factors
Click to expand...
Considering that multi-platform games don't tend to release sales data that shows sales per platform, we will frankly never be able to make a true comparison to how 3rd-party games sell on each platform. What I can say is, despite the DS and Wii having multiple Nintendo-published games sell over 20 million copies, 55% of games sold for DS and 50% of games sold for Wii were 3rd-party titles. The only reason that the ratio of 3rd-party sales isn't higher isn't because 3rd-party games don't sell on those platforms, it's that Nintendo releases more 1st-party software than Sony or Microsoft does, which will obviously skew the percentages. But it does not seem to have the kind of negative impact on 3rd-party game sales that people think it does.
 
One thing I never understood is why Activision didn't release even a half assed version of whatever Call of Duty game was for that year. Wii had like 5 of them? And two on the Wii U. They even had a (reportedly) terrible one for Vita!
 
NarohDethan said:
One thing I never understood is why Activision didn't release even a half assed version of whatever Call of Duty game was for that year. Wii had like 5 of them? And two on the Wii U. They even had a (reportedly) terrible one for Vita!
Click to expand...
The engine is too unwieldy and the games literally wont fit on a Switch.

They can’t even farm it to some B or C teams any more given that literally every single internal developer is now working full time on CoD, and they still barely manage to get a game out every year.
 
0
TaySan said:
No doubt in my mind Nintendo would get more western support assuming hardware and development is on par with Series X/PS5 and sold like gangbusters like the Switch.
Click to expand...
This is the rub isn't it.

A non-handheld console would not have sold gangbusters like the switch.

A handheld priced to somehow be in punching range of the series X and ps5 wouldn't have sold anywhere near the switch.

Either of those being the case would mean third party support would have likely been much weaker, not better, because they absolutely needed to prove they had a market after the disaster of the Wii U, which is why several prominent third parties took years to get on the platform in earnest to begin with.

As things currently are, the Switch is probably really close to where they could have optimally landed for what is feasible that resulted in the great third party support the hardware already has.
 
0
Terrell said:
Considering that multi-platform games don't tend to release sales data that shows sales per platform, we will frankly never be able to make a true comparison to how 3rd-party games sell on each platform. What I can say is, despite the DS and Wii having multiple Nintendo-published games sell over 20 million copies, 55% of games sold for DS and 50% of games sold for Wii were 3rd-party titles. The only reason that the ratio of 3rd-party sales isn't higher isn't because 3rd-party games don't sell on those platforms, it's that Nintendo releases more 1st-party software than Sony or Microsoft does, which will obviously skew the percentages. But it does not seem to have the kind of negative impact on 3rd-party game sales that people think it does.
Click to expand...
I know that outside of themselves, only 3rd party publisher know or not if their games sale whenever they try, but my point is that Nintendo self sustaining model makes seems that 3rd party will have more competition there than just sticking to PS and XB (and PC) who has less releases and even less massive heavy hitter games

fdb7cfa727.jpg
 
In a purely hypothetical world where Nintendo release a console of equal power to Sony and Microsoft, and said console achieves similar sales and userbase to them, then Nintendo gets pretty much every third party game the others do. The costs involved in producing a third version for a similarly powered console will be low, and the lost sales from ignoring it too many to pass up.

The issue, as it ever were, is that third parties always have to go the extra mile for a Nintendo version. Cartridges and mini-discs, motion controls, downports; there's always a 'but' when it comes to working on a Nintendo console. Whether third parties bite or not comes down to whether the sales of the game will make up for the extra resources that need to be allocated. At the moment, with the Switch, sales are strong enough to keep them interested. But we've seen plenty of instances in then past where that wasn't the case.
 
0
garf02 said:
I know that outside of themselves, only 3rd party publisher know or not if their games sale whenever they try, but my point is that Nintendo self sustaining model makes seems that 3rd party will have more competition there than just sticking to PS and XB (and PC) who has less releases and even less massive heavy hitter games

fdb7cfa727.jpg
Click to expand...
I mean... let's be clear, this sort of release schedule doesn't effect indies, who are going to be the MOST vulnerable to competing with big releases, both from Nintendo and major publishers alike, especially when those big names are releasing games in the same space at similar price points. Yet they seem to thrive on the platform in a direct contradiction to this alleged perception. And that's the thing, perceptions that cannot stand up to being tested for accuracy because the accurate reality blatantly contradicts them, especially when it it happens repeatedly, don't have much in the way of longevity.

BTW, if download-only titles like FDC (no, a limited collector's edition doesn't count as a physical title) and publishing deals like Daemon X Machina and Fitness Boxing on the Nintendo side, then the Sony-published list is incomplete, I know that right off the hop because it's missing Resogun in year 1. It also miscounted game amounts in year 2.
 
Terrell said:
I mean... let's be clear, this sort of release schedule doesn't effect indies, who are going to be the MOST vulnerable to competing with big releases, both from Nintendo and major publishers alike, especially when those big names are releasing games in the same space at similar price points. Yet they seem to thrive on the platform in a direct contradiction to this alleged perception. And that's the thing, perceptions that cannot stand up to being tested for accuracy because the accurate reality blatantly contradicts them, especially when it it happens repeatedly, don't have much in the way of longevity.

BTW, if download-only titles like FDC (no, a limited collector's edition doesn't count as a physical title) and publishing deals like Daemon X Machina and Fitness Boxing on the Nintendo side, then the Sony-published list is incomplete, I know that right off the hop because it's missing Resogun in year 1. It also miscounted game amounts in year 2.
Click to expand...
I never said it was a truth of the world, just it was one of the reason 3rd party avoided Nintendo. of course there is evidence that 3rd party can still thrive if they give enough of a fuck to try, but when all is said and done, "why put an effort into a switch port, when PS,XB and PC is enough and easier to make a copy of each other ports" mentality.

about the spread sheet. I put it together on the fly, so its bound to have a mistake here and there but I guess it drives the point enough tho. and thats not even counting overall sales of each games (I wanted to, but Sony is not so open to share more up to date sales)
 
0
Guaraná said:
This question should also be valid for the future Switch 2, considering the gap from the current systems will be the same.

Nintendo never had an amazing relationship with third parties, but things were a lot worst during the N64 days. Since then this issue has been improving and today I think we're at an all-time high.

The problem now (it has been since Wii) is the power gap between Nintendo's console and the competitors and the storage.

But let's imagine that these weren't an issue. Do you think Nintendo would have a 3rd support just as good as the Playstation historically has or it would be closer to the Gamecube days*? (*most of the games would be there, but a lot of absences too).

And, since we're here, what do you think could be done to minimize this situation? I think the hardware will start to be less of a problem because games are much more scalable today than they used to be 15 years ago. But the storage problem will remain. Unless Nintendo decides to go full digital, which I'm sure they won't.
Click to expand...

There would be absolutely negligible difference in 3rd party multiplat support.

It’s a publisher decision to not port to Nintendo machines, not a dev engineer decision.
 
0
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top Bottom