Yeah, it doesn't quite fit the 'third party' theme OP has going, but the whole Nintendo-Sony fallout was definitely the worst.
I'd give the Final Fantasy exit the win on the poll.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Biggest third-party slap to Nintendo
- Thread starter brykuhn91
- Start date
I'd give the Final Fantasy exit the win on the poll.
The system wasn't a known flop at the at point yet.
The system launched during the holidays and pretty much was sold out until January if I recall. It had some worrisome numbers in january and February if I recall but not total flop numbers. Rayman was set to launch in march?
At that time there was a high demand for new games coming off of launch and rayman was highly talked about and had hype behind it. Then it got delayed what was it like 2 weeks before release? Maybe a month? It was really the beginning of the end for the systems support and it left a bad impression regarding support to consumers.
Nintendo is its own fans' biggest enemy. I've been disappointed by them so much worse and much more frequently than any third party.
This console cycle alone: Switch and controller build quality, last gen first party port pricing, subpar online, non-existent social capabilities, no push for multimedia apps or a browser, drip feed of NES ROMs, etc.
The worst thing a third party has done is not release a game or two. Monster Hunter leaving Switch in the cold is most disappointing for me recently, but it's ultimately not a big deal.
This console cycle alone: Switch and controller build quality, last gen first party port pricing, subpar online, non-existent social capabilities, no push for multimedia apps or a browser, drip feed of NES ROMs, etc.
The worst thing a third party has done is not release a game or two. Monster Hunter leaving Switch in the cold is most disappointing for me recently, but it's ultimately not a big deal.
Last edited:
Monster Hunter had nothing to do with the Vita bombing outside of Japan
I would argue that SoulCalibur III non-show on the GameCube and the recent FIFA 20 version's downgrade on the Switch are two sucker punches. Namco and EA being coy about their decision makes these moves even more look like genuine 'fuck you, Nintendo' moments.
I'm not sure why people think RE4's announcement qualifies anywhere near impacting, even if we consider both the reception at the time and historical hindsight:
1. It still came out on GC first by about 10 months
2. RE fans still had reason to hang onto their GameCubes with REmake and RE0
3. The GC version was much better technologically
4. Capcom did not announce any features for the PS2 port until E3 2005, months after the game hit
5. The game showed up on Wii just 2.5 years later and did even better on there
6. GC sales were dying by this point and even RE4 couldn't have been expected to save it
RE4's PS2 announcement was a minor blip in Nintendo's history. FF7 takes the cake for sure.
1. It still came out on GC first by about 10 months
2. RE fans still had reason to hang onto their GameCubes with REmake and RE0
3. The GC version was much better technologically
4. Capcom did not announce any features for the PS2 port until E3 2005, months after the game hit
5. The game showed up on Wii just 2.5 years later and did even better on there
6. GC sales were dying by this point and even RE4 couldn't have been expected to save it
RE4's PS2 announcement was a minor blip in Nintendo's history. FF7 takes the cake for sure.
It's RE4.
FF7 wasn't a slap, that was a long-planned business decision. ME3 was dumb, but it was just a late-port, so little relevance.
Now RE4 - basically sabotaging the GCN-version directly prior to its release? And after Mikami's famous 'if RE4 isn't exclusive, I'll chop off my head' statement? That was a real bitch slap in the face of fans, Nintendo and everyone. Doubly so because the GCN-PS2-XBOX era was the peak of all console warrioring, silly as it was.
FF7 wasn't a slap, that was a long-planned business decision. ME3 was dumb, but it was just a late-port, so little relevance.
Now RE4 - basically sabotaging the GCN-version directly prior to its release? And after Mikami's famous 'if RE4 isn't exclusive, I'll chop off my head' statement? That was a real bitch slap in the face of fans, Nintendo and everyone. Doubly so because the GCN-PS2-XBOX era was the peak of all console warrioring, silly as it was.
Is this even a question? If FF7 was on the N64 instead of the PS1, chances are that the N64 would have outsold it. I'd even question whether Sony would still be in the gaming industry now if FF7 was N64 exclusive.
Let's review the other three:
Let's review the other three:
- In regards to Mass Effect, I doubt most Nintendo fans at that time could even describe Mass Effect, much less get hyped about it.
- Robbing Nintendo of Rayman Legends' exclusivity did hurt the Wii U, but not fatally, and nowhere near as badly as the BOTW delays.
- The only one of the three that was remotely comparable to FF7 being on the PS1 would be RE4's PS2 release, and even then, at least RE4 actually released on a Nintendo console.
It's gotta be the Capcom Five. Coming out saying you'll release five exclusives made from the ground up for GameCube and only coming out for GameCube.... only to announce you'll be releasing all of them (well, all but the worst performing one) to your competitors console. At least the RE4 PS2 port is impressive as hell.
Like it or not, no "slap" has been too damaging as Nintendo is still thriving in this year of 2019, decades and decades after it all started, with lots of these "slaps" in the meantime. Simultaneously you see many of these publishers shrinking down, selling out, dwindling in importance and so on.
However FF7 seems like the first significant moment when Nintendo had come down to earth and have a taste of what it is to play without the invincibility star power up.
However FF7 seems like the first significant moment when Nintendo had come down to earth and have a taste of what it is to play without the invincibility star power up.
FF7 going to Playstation. RE4 pales in comparison. FF7 went back to Nintendo nearly 20 years later, so they got it too. FF XII, X, X-2, XV Pocket Edition, IX all came back with VIII remaster being ported to the Switch as well.
It was one of the reasons why I picked up a Playstation instead of the N64 when articles back then were comparing disc vs cd's.
It was one of the reasons why I picked up a Playstation instead of the N64 when articles back then were comparing disc vs cd's.
For some of the people here that's exactly the impression they give.
Probably FF.
But the most mindboggling one definately is Mass Effect 3 - How does that even make any sense?! I cant understand it.
But the most mindboggling one definately is Mass Effect 3 - How does that even make any sense?! I cant understand it.
I feel like many people are somehow forgetting that Monster Hunter originally came out on PS2, and then moved onto PSP way before it ever came out on a Nintendo system. That was a big slap against Sony, who certainly could have used even a port of the latest game at the time as a launch title for the Vita, for example. You can't really talk about the disappointment of Capcom jumping ship, again, without acknowledging this.
Similarly, when talking about the impact of Nintendo losing the GameCube exclusivity of Resident Evil 4 you also have to keep in mind that the series suddenly going from being multi-plat (whose fans were mainly playing on PC or PlayStation) to being Nintendo exclusive was also perceived as a big slap against everyone else in the first place.
How you get 'em is how you're gonna lose 'em, as they say.
Squaresoft leaving Nintendo for Sony made a lot of sense business wise, but unlike the Capcom titles that I've just mentioned Final Fantasy had at least been associated with Nintendo systems for almost an entire decade at that point (not counting the odd MSX port of the first game). So I feel that's the only real answer here.
FF7 was huge at the time, but let's face it, it's likely Square never even started working on a Nintendo-based FF7 before the "betrayal" beyond that famous FFVI 3D demo. They went with the machine and the publisher that would give them more freedom and better revenues.
And the same goes for the Capcom 5 games (you'd ignore the greatest market leader that ever was in the video game market, not to mention the successor to the console where Resident Evil even launched and found success?) and Rayman Legends (the higher ups at Ubi probably thought that Rayman was a waste of resources even before greenilighting a sequel to Origins, and sending it out to die on all platforms at the same time was probably still more profitable than have it bomb on WiiU first and have zero public interest for the game on other platforms).
But EA announcing ME3 on WiiU and the trilogy for PS360 at the same time and price was just evil.
And the same goes for the Capcom 5 games (you'd ignore the greatest market leader that ever was in the video game market, not to mention the successor to the console where Resident Evil even launched and found success?) and Rayman Legends (the higher ups at Ubi probably thought that Rayman was a waste of resources even before greenilighting a sequel to Origins, and sending it out to die on all platforms at the same time was probably still more profitable than have it bomb on WiiU first and have zero public interest for the game on other platforms).
But EA announcing ME3 on WiiU and the trilogy for PS360 at the same time and price was just evil.
There was nothing wrong with a Wii U exclusive platformer and the game sold best on it anyway. The console failing didn't mean every game on it failed. The problem was them delaying it from a period when the Wii U had nothing to the same day as Pikmin 3 and on other consoles to basically the week before GTA V
it's not so much about FF7 itself, but the indication. at the time it was believed nintendo would more or less retain their iron grip on 3rd parties
after that it was drip drip drip
FFVII was definitely A slap
Followed by a multitude of other slaps in quick succession
Did Nintendo pay for exclusivity? Why fuck over the other consoles if you don't get anything from Nintendo? Because it's big N? Why would ubisoft care?
Slap to Nintendo? I can understand "slap to its fans" but to discuss betrayals between companies feels weird since these are all just places trying to make money. Especially when Nintendo is no stranger to "betraying" other companies as well lol.
Anyway, for the fans bit, I felt most impacted by Rayman Legends. My most anticipated launch title became my only anticipated dry release schedule title, which then got delayed again by 7 months for a simultaneous release... Still don't understand why they couldn't release it in February as a timed exclusive rather than sending it out to die against the likes of GTA on other systems. Game sold well in the long run so guess it didn't end up mattering, but that delay made Game & Wario and Pikmin 3 my first games bought post-launch. Worst launch period I've ever experienced.
Anyway, for the fans bit, I felt most impacted by Rayman Legends. My most anticipated launch title became my only anticipated dry release schedule title, which then got delayed again by 7 months for a simultaneous release... Still don't understand why they couldn't release it in February as a timed exclusive rather than sending it out to die against the likes of GTA on other systems. Game sold well in the long run so guess it didn't end up mattering, but that delay made Game & Wario and Pikmin 3 my first games bought post-launch. Worst launch period I've ever experienced.
You think all exclusives are paid for? Like I said, Ubisoft fucked over themselves. I don't think you remember, but that was way back when MS had their whole release date parity rule, which is what forced Ubisoft to delay the game. It was always a temp exclusive for the Wii U, but MS forced them to delay it and it did nothing, but fuck over Ubisoft as it then released at a time when all 3 consoles had other, more compelling, games released for them
Well, Monster Hunter going Nintendo 3DS and Wii made "some" Sonyfans cry too.
Regarding 3rd parties, many of them shit on Nintendo systems since a long time, especially on consoles. I was still surprised about the lack of 3rd party presence on Switch at the beginning, especially in japan, and that many 3rd parties thought Switch was a successor to Wii U and that it was going to flop. We and nintendo can be very happy that the Switch was a big success without extremely good 3rd party support.
I still find hard to believe cartridge base console was the thing that made Square jump out the N64 train. They didnt even knew how to code 3D games on PSX!!. It was all new ground for all devs!!
Pretty sure Nintendo figured a third party developer would pick up Rare. I'm sure Rare getting picked up by a competitor surprised them at the time.
Final Fantasy going to PlayStation represents the point where it all goes downhill for Nintendo for years and years. Biggest slap by far.
I think Final Fantasy jumping to PlayStation is the biggest and maybe the one that effected them the most. It set the precedent for a giant third party exodus to PlayStation that generation, and cemented Sony as Nintendo's main competitor to this day.
It wasn't a slap though, it was a smart business decision just like Monster Hunter World was.
It wasn't a slap though, it was a smart business decision just like Monster Hunter World was.
No.
FF7 exclusivity was a big catch for Sony (which they paid a lot to get) but Sony strategy to focus on third-party software instead of what was the common practice for the console makers of the time to focus on first-party software to push their systems would prove to be a trumping card for Sony regardless of FFVII (which, again, was big but part of grand strategy that Sony followed for PS1).
What Sony brought to the table with PS1 was a paradigm shift.
FF7 going to the Playstation. It's no surprise that a series that loves being pushing it's pretty graphics eventually parted ways with a platform that is consistently under powered, but it gave this new competitor one the biggest exclusive games of all time. So much so, that I grew up associating the FF brand with the Playstation brand. Bad move on Nintendo's part.
Yep, most of these "slaps" to Nintendo were self inflicted by the shitty way they've treated 3rd parties throughout their history.
This thread is really melodramatic lol. Nintendo has done surprisingly fine with their console businesses without major third party support on their platforms and that's in spite of some publishers jumping ship.
Nintendo's 1st part output is so powerful and influential, Sony and MS would never survive on their own in-house 1st party talent as platform holders (although Sony definitely has stepped up their game, but their collection of IP is nowhere near the recognizable Disney-level of star power Nintendo's collection of IP is).
Nintendo has had their ups and downs no doubt (GC/Wii U) but in most cases, they've been able to weather the storm and stay afloat, mostly on the back of their own IP and in-house talent and innovation, which is honestly astonishing. That's something you can't really say for most other video game companies.
Any other company losing that level of third part support for their platform post-SNES would've been buried, instead Nintendo showed the entire video game industry how to design incredible 3D video games in the form of Super Mario 64 and Zelda OOT. The amount of game design innovation from Nintendo, both in terms of tight hardware/software integration, in the N64-era is seriously under-looked. I'm pretty sure all those 3rd party devs who jumped ship to the PlayStation were heavily inspired by what Nintendo did in that era and still do to this day. They are pretty unique in that regard.
Nintendo's 1st part output is so powerful and influential, Sony and MS would never survive on their own in-house 1st party talent as platform holders (although Sony definitely has stepped up their game, but their collection of IP is nowhere near the recognizable Disney-level of star power Nintendo's collection of IP is).
Nintendo has had their ups and downs no doubt (GC/Wii U) but in most cases, they've been able to weather the storm and stay afloat, mostly on the back of their own IP and in-house talent and innovation, which is honestly astonishing. That's something you can't really say for most other video game companies.
Any other company losing that level of third part support for their platform post-SNES would've been buried, instead Nintendo showed the entire video game industry how to design incredible 3D video games in the form of Super Mario 64 and Zelda OOT. The amount of game design innovation from Nintendo, both in terms of tight hardware/software integration, in the N64-era is seriously under-looked. I'm pretty sure all those 3rd party devs who jumped ship to the PlayStation were heavily inspired by what Nintendo did in that era and still do to this day. They are pretty unique in that regard.
Last edited:
Good post.
I'll add to it, that it's beyond me how allowing more people to play RE4 after the GC release hurt the fans. It sounds like it's more about what others have, than what Nintendo fans have. They could still play the game, unlike it was with REmake, which left PS2 and PC players out despite of the original's roots. The downturn in sales proved it was a bad business decision for Capcom, just like the infamous Rise of the Tomb Raider exclusivity. It's only logical, that RE4 was given available for a larger audience.
Third party exclusive are mostly gone. Why would It be different with Nintendo?
And the could have released it even later before going against pikmin and gta.
You realize we're talking about almost 6 years ago, right? And from a company that had given Nintendo a number of exclusives