If you owned Nintendo...

[Richard-RN]

What would you do differently? There are a lot of things I can think of that would help launch Nintendo out of the sales slump it has gotten itself in to. Some of these might endanger their family gaming image, but others would just be common sense. That's why I want you all to chime in on what would be different if you owned Nintendo. If I had to change 1 HUGE thing, it would be to add many second party developers. Here are my two cents, for anyone that cares.

First of all, I would scout out and purchase some talented second party developers, each individually chosen for a certain genre. If one was awesome at making sports games, then I would have them produce innovative sports franchises with play mechanics far better than Madden (because let's face it, Madden COULD be better). Even if they didn't have liscensed teams, they could still make awesome games with generic teams (like Konami's phenomenal Winning Eleven series on ps2). I would have them make football, soccer, and basketball games especially, with occasional entries in the baseball and rugby franchises as well. They could also make the wrestling games for the Nintendo sytems, which should go back to the old days of WCW/NWO Revenge play mechanics. It would have to be a huge developer, because sports is such a wide range of things, and they might want to add entries such as Racing and Golfing too (though Tiger Woods has pretty much got that covered).

The next second party should develop rounds of exclusive RPGs for Nintendo's next system. I mean, Tales of Symphonia and Baten Kaitos were definately both solid RPGs, but they lacked the presentation and originality of PS2 RPGs like Final Fantasy X or Shin Megami Tensei:Nocturne. The Revolution should have a second party specially designed for making intriguing and in-depth RPGs of all types. Strategy, Real-Time, and Turn-based RPGs all have excellent games under their belts. RPG fans are a big niche of gamers, and if Nintendo could get some RPG support from some big dogs like Square-Enix, it would be great. But seeing as how that is less than likely to happen on a grand scale...why not produce their own?

Next, Nintendo needs to innovate. They should make a second party entirely dedicated to making new game franchises, and seeing which ones work. If they are successful, they can be given their own developing house or just be continued on at that station. If they are unsuccessful, they should be dropped. NST should take care of sequels to games like Mario and Zelda, but try to add more gameplay changes into them than just 1 or 2, as has been the trend. They need to re-invent their franchises each time because that will keep their reputations intact and their core fanbase happy.

Lastly...Nintendo needs to take advantage of what they have. Here are some examples:

Retro Studios - Let them do Metroid...Forever. They do an awesome job and should have the lone responsability of handling Samus on each Nintendo console.

Intelligent Systems - They know how to make games with awesome presentations. Advance Wars, Fire Emblem, Paper Mario...all would make worthy additions to any fans library. Transform them into console works for added gameplay variety.

Namco - Let them handle the Donkey Kong franchise, they have made Donkey Konga a very cool game and DK Jungle Beat looks impressive as well.

Namco - TAKE STAR FOX BACK TO NST. Dont let Namco handle another one...that was dangerous.

Amusement Vision - Let the Sega team do their stuff and continue to make the F-Zero series. They did an amazing job with GX, let them take it off of your hands.

HAL - Let them handle Super Smash Bros. and continue the series in the grandeur way they have. Give them the oppurtunity to put it online and see how they can make it work.

Anyway, there is my rant. I know most of you aren't going to take the time to read it, but please feel free to respond to my question : ) I cant wait till the site is up so I can rant more : )

[gamefreaks365]

Nintendo seems to do everything backwards. They act as if they are still the market leader, when they lost that 10 years ago. Do I want them to stop making 1st party games like they've been releasing lately? No, the GCN has seen a strong line of 1st party titles. What I don't want from Nintendo is:

1. Mario Party clones every year
2. useless accesories such as e-Reader and drums
3. non-platforming Mario games (i.e. Mario Baseball)

What I do want from Nintendo, as a 1st party developer, is to enhance the existing franchises, while creating new ones. How does it take them 20 years to come up with a second platforming mascot? Mario's still the only one (Banjo is Rare's), aside from Donkey Kong, who hasn't seen a decent release since the SNES days.

Sony has had at least 5 platforming mascots in the past several years. Count them: five platforming mascots. Crash Bandicoot, Spyro the Dragon, Jak & Daxter, Ratchet & Clank, and Sly Cooper. All of them (at least the last 3) are of exceptional quality.

I use the word 'creative' a lot when speaking of Nintendo. I'm sorry to say, they haven't been pushing any genre like Sony has. Sony releases exceptional FPS' (SOCOM/SOCOM II), platformers (above), and action/adventure/racing (God of War, Mark of Kri, Gran Turismo 3/4, etc.). If I left anything out, feel free to e-mail me, as I'm sure I did.

The point I'm trying to make is, Nintendo might be well-known for 1st party titles, but this generational cycle, I believe, for the first time in their history, has been over-taken by another 1st party developer, that being Sony and its immediate subsidiaries. Add to that, the PS2 is the platform of choice for every 3rd party publisher, and you have one heck of a problem to solve.

If I owned Nintendo, I would do the following things:

1. Expand: It's time that Nintendo added some new talent to the team. It's as if their developers don't get any fresh air. We see a lot of the same things over and over. Nintendo needs to swallow some small, medium, and relatively large developers, earn exclusive rights to 3rd party licenses, and expand its relations with 3rd parties as a whole.

A good start would be purchasing something that would give them an edge, and cult-following. They'd get this from a buyout or exclusive partnership with: Capcom, Namco, or their ex-rival, SEGA. Each has licenses that would not just provide them with an edge, but steal directly from Sony. Capcom with Devil May Cry/Resident Evil, Namco with Soul Calibur, and SEGA with Sonic/Virtual-On/Virtua Fighter.

Sony isn't afraid to expand into American territory, Nintendo shouldn't be either, if they ever want to compete again. Nintendo should secure exclusive partnerships with companies like Midway, THQ, or even EA. We saw with Electronic Arts an in-game promotion with Mario and team in NBA Street Vol. 3. This year's Fight Night will feature Super Punch Out!. This needs to happen, but on a grander scale, and with the Revolution, not the dying GCN.

If Nintendo shows interest, things can happen. We've seen that with the Resident Evil remake, and the follow-up of RE titles, Super Monkey Ball, Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes, even Pac-Man Vs. If Nintendo were to persue exclusive properties, they'd get them. To me, it seems they have little interest in doing that. Instead, they likely want everyone to purchase their titles instead of 3rd party. We learned something this generation: that doesn't work anymore. This should make their loyal fanbase furious, but they, for the most part, remain silent.

2. Reorganize: Once they purchase a developer, they need to integrate them into the company immediately, and seize their properties. Now would be the perfect opportunity for both step 1 & 2, as we're nearing a turning point, a new generational cycle.

Nintendo's development studios need to focus less on rehash, and more on reinvent. Nintendo needs to reinvent genres, like Sony has done. If someone told you last generation that weapon-based combat would be standard in platformers this generation, you'd have laughed at them. If the creative minds at Nintendo can't find something fresh, the adjective creative should be dropped from our Nintendo dictionary.

3. Promote: Nintendo has a horrible press team. They need to dump Golin Harris, their PR firm, and use an internal team as a replacement. Most PR firms care about one thing: doing what they have to. They don't care about the company that they're working for. Nintendo fans everywhere should demand that Nintendo bulk up in this regard, modeling off of the success of Sony.

They also need to have a more creative marketing team. The Nintendo DS 'Touch' campaign is one of the worst I could think of. Sony knows how to hype, as does Microsoft. If you have a good press and marketing team, you can sell a product, even if it's bad. Nintendo hasn't learned that you can have the best product, but it means little if the word doesn't get out. If Nintendo doesn't wake up soon, they're going to be exiting the stage shortly after they walk through the next-generation entrance.

[Richard-RN]

I wholeheartedly agree with you about the press issue. Nintendo needs to get a better advertising team and spend a lot more money on them. It's sad that the commercials I DO see for Nintendo games are for the most part poorly done and not appealing in the least.

On the other hand, I still have to disagree with you about first-party games. Though Sly Cooper, the Jak series, and the Ratchet and Clank series were all very well done and fun to play, the Spyro and Crash Bandicoot games are a joke. They lack the presentation and fun gameplay of the aforementioned games, and definately most products released in the last generation by Nintendo. As far as the others go, I agree that the Gran Turismo series is awesome and probably the best racer on current consoles, but Mark of Kri was definately nothing to write home about. God of War looks impressive.

My point is that I wouldn't mind Nintendo making more franchises popular, just as long as they are all of the high quality standards they set their other series' to. Thats part of the reason I am so upset about the degredation of the Star Fox series and the constant repetition of the Mario Party franchise. Even MK: DD was below what Nintendo standards should be, in my opinion. Nintendo doesn't make very many mediocre games, and I wish they would take the time on all of their games to make them of the utmost quality before releasing them. That is what I have come to expect from my favorite developer.

[gamefreaks365]

Well Richard, I agree with you. I've distanced myself from Nintendo because of their hesitance to change. Businesses that survivor adapt to the changes over time. Nintendo doesn't change, they stay the same. Their stubbornness has prevented them from securing properties that Sony has used to assault Nintendo's former dominance. Square is a perfect example.

3rd parties wanted a disc system, Nintendo went with carts, not only making the N64 hard to develop for, but expensive. Don't get me wrong, the N64 is my favorite Nintendo system, but it's really the beginning of Nintendo's decline.

As for Star Fox, I think Assault is a turning point for the franchise, Adventures being the low point. I gave up on Mario Party games on the N64. Double Dash was a disappointment for me too. At least there's always F-Zero GX, right?

[Jason-RN]

I agree that Nintendo needs to create some new franchises. However, Nintendo could just revive some NES games, like Kid Icarus, and make a new franchise out them. There's no need to spend years trying to make a whole new franchise when there are a bunch in existence already.

[BRO_co03-RN]

If I owned Nintendo one thing I would do is hire more programmers. As technology gets better and better, the games get more and more complex. Coming up with an idea for a game is probably the easiest thing to do. Actually programming the games is the difficult part.

In the time it takes to make a game, programming (including testing) can take up a few years to complete, while the brainstorming can take a few months. With more programmers, the brainstormers can create more game ideas.

[gamefreaks365]

I've heard people from Sony say that game development for the PlayStation was usually a year. 18 months would be considered a long development period. According to them, an average PlayStation 2 game now takes 18 months to 3 years.

[Pure_Evil]

Sony doesn't have Crash or Spyro anymore. The console games are from VU games and the handheld games are from Viscarious Visions.

If I was in charge of Nintendo, I would get more 2nd parties companys. We wouldnt have to worry about sports because of EA Sports. What I would also do is make relations with 3rd parties stronger. Maybe work together with more companies than Namco and Sega.

As for the 2nd parties, I agree with Richard except I would still leave Namco work on Donkey Konga and Jungle Beat.

Finally, I would buy the Warp Pipe Team and have them create an online community for Nintendo's consoles.

[benwayshouse]

Well, if I DID own Nintendo, I would:

1) Do more work; These days, Nintendo has been handing the development rights of their own franchises to other companies or 2nd parties. Namco currently has the rights to Donkey Konga, Donkey Konga 2, Donkey Konga 3, Star Fox, Mario Baseball, and now Mario Kart. SEGA was handed F-Zero GX to develop, Hudsonsoft develops all the Mario Party games, Intelligent Systems works on all of Nintendo's RTS games and Paper Mario, Retro works on the Metroid Prime series, Camelot Software develops MOST of the Mario sports games, and there're others there that I can't name. I can think of a couple they've developed....

• Super Mario Sunshine
  
• Luigi's Mansion
  
• Mario Kart Double Dash
  
• Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker
  
• 1080 Avalanche
  
• Pikmin
  
• Pikmin 2
  
• Legend of Zelda Four Swords Adventures
  

I'm pretty sure that there are a few more that I can't remember, and I understand sometimes they can't balance too many games in development at once. But I will say not to overdo this thing; most of the time, they chuck franchise rights onto Namco's already piled-up plate; they will eventually get full.
I say keep them with what they were already good at: The Donkey Konga games, and I hear that in Japan they have a mega popular baseball franchise under their belt, so I suppose Mario Baseball shouldn't be so bad as we think. Star Fox Assault got decent reviews, which indicates Namco might not be so good at the franchise, despite the Ace Combat team developing it. So, if reviews didn't say it was all that, then I'd pick it up out of their hands because of it, if I didn't give 'em a second chance. Leave SEGA with console F-Zeros, they knew what they were doing and the reviews reflected upon that. Retro should mainly work on Metroids, but occasionally they could work on a new franchise; that's what Naughty Dog does, right? To make SURE that games can have time taken on a game, they always stick with just one project, and usually it's a sequel or a whole new game. Intelligent also knows what they're doing with RTSs and Paper Mario, so stick with it, I say. In a list, here's how I'd work it out:

• Nintendo itself -- Works on Mario Platformers, Zelda series, Star Fox
  
• HAL Labs -- Kirby games, Super Smash Bros series
  
• Retro -- Metroid series, and occasionally a new game they choose to make
  
• Namco -- Donkey Konga, Mario Basball (But please limit it to VERY FEW MB games!)
  
• SEGA -- Console F-Zero series
  
• Game Freak -- Pokemon
  

Secondly, I'd try to deliver what gamers want. I don't think they want a new Mario sports game or Mario Party EVERY SINGLE YEAR, do they? Not really, maybe an occasional MP or Mario Sports game, but I'd prefer Mario Parties be made whenever I feel the need to have a new one (and if I were Pres, I wouldn't have one often), and Mario Sports not have a new addition to the collection every year. They want Mario platformers most likely, and at least twice a gen, I could try to provide it on the console. Zelda? They will want it, so I won't scold them by cancelling the series or sellin' it off for good. Metroid? Occasionally, not too many additions though, probably at the pace it's going now is fine. Pokemon? Yeah, believe it or not Ruby/Sapphire is the best selling GBA game, followed by Pokemon Fire Red/Leaf Green. People want it. I'll give an addition to them, possibly every 2 years, to give Game Freak time to create and announce new Pokemon for the next game. Every other franchise? Well, we know SSBM is GCN's best selling game, Star Fox is multiplayer heaven, and Kirby can't be left out in the cold. There are most likely more franchises I can't name, but you get the picture.
Besides 1st Party games, what features in the console will they want?
LAN? Check.
Online? Check.
Progressive Scan? Dunno who'd really use it, but someone apparently does, so Check.
A different 'basis' color? Well, people don't normally buy purple consoles, so if they keep it with Black or Silver, they'll be fine. Check.

Those are some of the many that they want, but these are probably the most common features. They might want LAN if a particular game they want is LAN-enabled, so they can hook them up and play 16-Players split-screen with it. Online will be a must, because some gamers DO indeed play online. Not a big percentage, but online gaming has an established fanbase to call its own. So Nintendo should at least TRY to get an online system prepared. Even if they really do buy out WarpPipe, something SHOULD be done. Progressive Scan has recently been pulled from GCN models on shelves now. Does it matter? To some, yes; some adults who love technology and get a heft salary will buy those bulky High-Definition televisions, and for some reason, they might use Progressive Scan. For the few that do, why not grant that wish? Exactly.

Okay, now we've got the Hardware and 1st Party Software down, now what's left? The main draw: third party support. Sometimes, companies refuse to develop games for Nintendo consoles. Reasons why are unknown, but they do. I hear Nintendo doesn't give a rat's behind about them, but they should. That's what sometimes sell consoles. We know SEGA, Namco and Capcom, for now, will continue to develop for GCN, but what about the rest? Let's try to welcome them, with full respect and easy development kits, so that they don't have a hassle when developing. That's why Capcom chose to put the Capcom Five on GCN; easy programming.

So we have what can help them down. Not much else I can say, but that could help, right?

[Pure_Evil]

Another reason 3rd parties don't support Nintendo is because Nintendo always puts the thumbs down when it comes to online but they can't ignore online forever and they know it. Xbox Live always has a million people in 24 countries per day. I would also create some new series. A lot of people criticize how Nintendo always recycle there old characters. Well with Geist coming out, maybe new stories will come.

[gamefreaks365]

Sony doesn't have Crash or Spyro anymore. The console games are from VU games and the handheld games are from Viscarious Visions.

When I said that, I was referring to the PlayStation, not PlayStation 2. VU picked up the Crash and Spyro license in, I believe, 2001. Vicarious Visions was purchased recently. I don't recall who it was though. Possibly Activision or THQ.

Star Fox Assault got decent reviews, which indicates Namco might not be so good at the franchise, despite the Ace Combat team developing it. So, if reviews didn't say it was all that, then I'd pick it up out of their hands because of it, if I didn't give 'em a second chance.

Reviews aren't what matter, it's what Star Fox fans think. I'm a big fan of Star Fox, (so is my female cousin, who happened to like Assault more than any other Star Fox game). They did the arwing missions perfectly, but the voice-acting and graphics on ground missions needed some changes, except Corneria, which looked awesome.

Secondly, I'd try to deliver what gamers want. I don't think they want a new Mario sports game or Mario Party EVERY SINGLE YEAR, do they? Not really, maybe an occasional MP or Mario Sports game, but I'd prefer Mario Parties be made whenever I feel the need to have a new one (and if I were Pres, I wouldn't have one often), and Mario Sports not have a new addition to the collection every year.

I must say, I agree completely with you. The only reason why Nintendo even does it though, is because people keep buying them. If people would stop buying them, just like if people would stop buying annual sports games, they wouldn't be made every year.

Another reason 3rd parties don't support Nintendo is because Nintendo always puts the thumbs down when it comes to online but they can't ignore online forever and they know it. Xbox Live always has a million people in 24 countries per day. I would also create some new series. A lot of people criticize how Nintendo always recycle there old characters. Well with Geist coming out, maybe new stories will come.

That's not true at all. In fact, without online multi-player, they would have less development time, so should actually improve their chances with 3rd parties. The only reason why we see such low 3rd party support on the GCN is because games sold better on the other two platforms, except the occasional Soul Calibur 2 or a game where the GCN has an advantage.

[benwayshouse]

gamefreaks365 said:

When I said that, I was referring to the PlayStation, not PlayStation 2. VU picked up the Crash and Spyro license in, I believe, 2001. Vicarious Visions was purchased recently. I don't recall who it was though. Possibly Activision or THQ.



Reviews aren't what matter, it's what Star Fox fans think. I'm a big fan of Star Fox, (so is my female cousin, who happened to like Assault more than any other Star Fox game). They did the arwing missions perfectly, but the voice-acting and graphics on ground missions needed some changes, except Corneria, which looked awesome.



I must say, I agree completely with you. The only reason why Nintendo even does it though, is because people keep buying them. If people would stop buying them, just like if people would stop buying annual sports games, they wouldn't be made every year.



That's not true at all. In fact, without online multi-player, they would have less development time, so should actually improve their chances with 3rd parties. The only reason why we see such low 3rd party support on the GCN is because games sold better on the other two platforms, except the occasional Soul Calibur 2 or a game where the GCN has an advantage.

True, true, sometimes games DO sell more on other platforms, but here are some games that did better on GCN:

Mega Man Anniversary (GC): 203,198
Mega Man Anniversary (PS2): 195,818

Mega Man X Command Mission (GC): 50,940
Mega Man X Command Mission (PS2): 37,495

Viewtiful Joe (GC): 296,151
Viewtiful Joe (PS2): 73,256

Viewtiful Joe 2 (GC): 67,636
Viewtiful Joe 2 (PS2): 21,947

TimeSplitters 2:
PS2 271,516
GCN 254,197
XBX 222,099


Yeah, some of those do... I think those companies really should give the games a chance, whether or not it'd sell.

And also true, it is what the fans think, but some people actually trust reviews. I sometimes do, but I think I'll bring up a famous SEGA quote:

Reviews are as useful as HIV

They are. Most of the time, anyhow.

[Richard-RN]

Actually symphonic, those companies dont have any rights to the Nintendo franchises, they are just lent them to make games. You probably knew this, I just wanted to clarify.

[benwayshouse]

Richard-RN said:

Actually symphonic, those companies dont have any rights to the Nintendo franchises, they are just lent them to make games. You probably knew this, I just wanted to clarify.

Thanks for that; I worded that idea incorrectly. Still, I think they shouldn't overstock Namco with their franchises.

[gamefreaks365]

Symphonic said:

True, true, sometimes games DO sell more on other platforms, but here are some games that did better on GCN:

Mega Man Anniversary (GC): 203,198
Mega Man Anniversary (PS2): 195,818

Mega Man X Command Mission (GC): 50,940
Mega Man X Command Mission (PS2): 37,495

Viewtiful Joe (GC): 296,151
Viewtiful Joe (PS2): 73,256

Viewtiful Joe 2 (GC): 67,636
Viewtiful Joe 2 (PS2): 21,947

TimeSplitters 2:
PS2 271,516
GCN 254,197
XBX 222,099


Yeah, some of those do... I think those companies really should give the games a chance, whether or not it'd sell.

And also true, it is what the fans think, but some people actually trust reviews. I sometimes do, but I think I'll bring up a famous SEGA quote:



They are. Most of the time, anyhow.

Um...lol, I'm in the business of writing reviews, but I'll agree with that statement. I try my hardest, as I'm sure some others do, to remain fair and open-minded, but it all comes down to what you want in a game, and what you like in games. My opinion isn't going to mean much if it doesn't match your preferences.

Now, the list that you showed is not only a low quantity of games, but they're all games from Capcom, except Time Splitters 2, which I believe was Eidos at the time. If you compare sales from American publishers, such as EA, you'll find a substantial PS2/Xbox advantage over the GCN. I'm not bashing the Cube, it just doesn't seem to match the other two in 3rd party sales.