Nintendo a Third Party?
This important item of discussion is now re-surfacing again on the internet, thanks to certain websites who simply can’t put this topic on ice. The topic has even become a discussion on our forums, with many good points being thrown back and forth about this issue. Let’s discuss how Nintendo stands as a console company, and whether or not going third party may be the best way for them to earn more money. Please note that I generalize a bit during this editorial, because if I didn’t then I wouldn’t have many points to make.
Nintendo is currently a console developer and a software developer, which has benefited Nintendo gamers nicely. As a console developer, Nintendo has released a bevy a systems spanning over two decades. They have experienced tremendous success with each of those systems as well if you omit the Virtual Boy. However, the man responsible for much of Nintendo’s success, the late Hiroshi Yamauchi, had always maintained to “…forgo the big profits on the hardware…because it is really just a tool to sell software. That is where we shall make our money.” (Game Over, David Sheff) If this is the case, then why is Nintendo still in the console business?
I believe that the only reason Nintendo is staying in the console business is because they understand that the software and hardware must have an understanding relationship if one is meant to bring out the best in the other. This relationship comes in the form of many ways; everything from having a clear and concise API (Application Programming Interface, a way for software developers to be able to access hardware elements), to documentation of the hardware, to providing the developer with a sound understanding of how the hardware works. All of these aspects must be understood by the developer if they are to create great software.
Unfortunately, this is not always the case. Sometimes a company will release a system with a terrible API or a strange chipset, such as the Sega’s Saturn, which makes game development hard and troublesome. Nintendo experienced this problem with the Nintendo 64, and Sony had experienced this problem with the PlayStation 2 when it first released, but developers were eventually able to figure out the PS2 and began releasing great games a year after its release.
What this ultimately means is that Nintendo is able to produce such great software because they know what they’re working with, since Nintendo’s software developers had great input into the architecture of the Gamecube. This allows Nintendo to take advantage of the Gamecube in the same way that Microsoft takes advantage of its own Windows operating system. This has been a problem for third party developers who are trying to compete on same level playing field as Nintendo when Nintendo owns the playing field and can tip it anyway they please.
Now that we know why, to some degree, Nintendo remains in the console business, let’s look at the possibility of Nintendo’s software on other consoles, from a development standpoint. Ultimately, I believe that Nintendo’s strong software lineup would suffer if placed on other consoles. Nintendo’s software would never be as stable or as compelling because they would never master another console’s architecture in the same way they’ve mastered the Gamecube’s. This means they would also lose much of the control they have over the hardware too; they are at the mercy of whatever Sony or Microsoft decides to provide for them. Hypothetically speaking, if Sony decides that the RAM can only be of 128 MB capacity, and that they’re going with ATI as a graphics card provider, it is bad news for Nintendo if they are use to working with 256 MB of RAM, and they hate working with ATI’s graphic cards.
Nintendo would eventually adapt to developing software on other consoles, but it would be like working with a classmate to complete an assignment. The only problem being is that you and your classmate don’t get along and he or she has that other important part of the assignment you need to complete it.
Although I’ve painted a pretty bleak picture from a development standpoint, from a business standpoint Nintendo has a potential goldmine at their fingertips. Or do they? Regardless of how many people deny it, young children remain Nintendo’s greatest consumer. However, when you dissect Sony and Microsoft’s targeted demographics and their marketing campaigns, it’s easy to see that young children aren’t the object of interest; it’s more like the gamers between 15 and 21 which are they are interested in. If Nintendo were to release a new Mario game onto one of those consoles, what do you think the odds are that it would sell the same if released on the Gamecube? The odds remain very slim, unless Peach managed to lose her clothing. What’s worse is that even if Nintendo miraculously appealed to older gamers, these PS2 and Xbox gamers made a decision long ago to stop buying Nintendo games in favor of GTA clones and generic FPS’s. A Mario game remains a Mario game, and it would take some convincing, in the form of marketing dollars, to convince these gamers that Nintendo is cool, especially after playing those GTA games.
Either Sony or Microsoft would have to direct some of their marketing power towards younger children, or Nintendo would have to begin to create games for the older crowd. If both companies are able to see that Nintendo can move enough of their respective consoles, then it makes sense for them to begin marketing towards kids. However, this isn’t going to be happening anytime soon, since their systems are geared towards the older market; everything from the design of the system to the games already available proves that. As I mentioned before, it would take a ton of “convincing” to make gamers buy Nintendo games.
Now we approach the crux of the matter: Nintendo creating games for older kids. This is another issue all by itself, but I’ll touch on it a bit here. I never really understood why Nintendo makes games for the younger crowd until I read the superb Game Over by David Sheff. Basically there’s this guy at Nintendo named Shigeru Miyamoto. He has some influence at Nintendo. He has created some pretty good games over the years. He has the modest title as the world’s greatest game designer. Ever. People generally listen to him when he speaks.
Miyamoto’s games bring out the imagination and exploration present in every child. The process of discovery, exploration, and triumph inherent in Miyamoto’s games are what makes them such a joy for kids to play. There are two basic types of game players; the ones who blast through levels to get to the goal as quickly as possible, and those who take the contemplative and explorative route to discover new secrets. The first type of kids eventually become addicted to fast paced killing games, but the quiet, intuitive kids are able to recognize the magic hidden in Miyamoto’s games, magic that is missed by most of the older Nintendo gamers. This is the primary reason many of Nintendo’s biggest consumers are kids. If Nintendo were to begin making games for older kids, I just don’t see how they could possibly make them. They would definitely lack that unique magical quality that makes them so much fun to play and truly inspires your imagination. The explorative and imaginative games are the kinds of games which make Nintendo who they are.
I may have missed out on the fact that many Nintendo gamers will buy either a PS2 or Xbox to play a Mario game. And why should Nintendo care about appealing to older PS2 and Xbox gamers, if they weren’t playing Mario games in the first place? The answer is that Nintendo had the luxury of appealing to younger gamers when it controlled its own console. Now Nintendo faces a whole new slew of competition, and they are forced to care about these older gamers. They were the gold mine after all. If they don’t care about them, then what was the point in them becoming a third-party developer?
Another point of interest that I’d like to bring into light is competition in the industry. I believe it’s better for an industry as a whole if there is more competition, since more competition means better games and better hardware as one company tries to one-up the other. Having two console makers instead of three could drastically shift momentum Sony’s way, especially since Nintendo games have a better chance of success on the PS2 than on the Xbox.
Now that I’ve said all this, is it still possible that Nintendo could become a third party developer? The answer is a resounding yes. Much of what I said could change in the coming years, especially with regard to console API’s and the evolving state of hardware. Maybe Miyamoto will leave Nintendo, and Nintendo will reshape its entire focus on gaming. You know as well as I do that nothing remains constant in the world of gaming.
Right now and especially into the coming years, I believe that Nintendo stands a much better chance for success as a console company. Any third-party rumor is bad for Nintendo and for Nintendo’s fanbase if they are to release a new console.
Regardless of what happens in the coming years, the voice of gamers will always be the one companies will hear above all others. Should Nintendo decide to go third party or not to go third party, gamers will always be reaping the benefits. As long as Nintendo can provide us with fun and imaginative games to play, I’ll buy any console just to experience a Nintendo game.