Email: Third parties and Nintendo games

Based off a section in one of your recent email post and reply sessions, I only have this to remark on 3rd parties and the myth of 1st part software domination:

3rd parties don’t complain about Sony, who, of the HD twins, has by far the stronger and more carefully maintained first party publishing effort. Sony has a gaggle of studios that are elite by the standards of the modern software developer – Naughty Dog, Insomniac, Studio Japan, Polyphony Digital. The games produced by these studios tend to do very well, again, by the standards of the software market on the HD twins.

But you never hear a peep about Sony’s first party efforts “destroying” the chances of  3rd party work on the PS3. What is the difference between Nintendo and Sony?

Well, generally, it is that Sony’s “elite” first party software is merely on the level of quality and widespread appeal of good 3rd party efforts from the old Nintendo days. The games the publish are good; this isn’t a knock against them. But they’re not Nintendo good. They don’t create games that perform difficult feats such as satisfying young, middle aged, and old players. Their games have trouble staying as evergreen as Nintendo’s better games.

The myth of Nintendo domination stems from 3rd parties resenting that Nintendo sets high standards. Their resentment is partially delusion, as even merely decent 3rd party games on a Nintendo platform can benefit from the market being energized by a steady supply of first party games. Just look at the NES and SNES era – there are tons of 3rd party titles that sold well and are considered classics, but are still nowhere near the quality of a fullbore Nintendo production.

Still, Nintendo shames 3rd parties daily. You may not like 3D Mario, for example. But by the standards of the typical AAA blockbuster title a modern 3rd party can produce – games aimed at hardcore who prefer 3D games, after all – 3D Mario still wipes the floor with most of them, and sells better than most of ’em… confined to a single platform, to boot. It’s funny, but I sometimes can’t help but feel that the real reason why hardcore gamers always chant “Nintendo is doomed, they should go 3rd party” is because they want Nintendo to fall. The average knob who joins in on the 3rd party chant after all, seems to hate Nintendo. They don’t buy Nintendo consoles or play Nintendo games. If they hate Nintendo so much, why do they care if Nintendo goes 3rd party and makes their games available on the console that said knob owns?

Perhaps because such knobbers who are fans of industry games and publishers, have absorbed by association the general attitude towards Nintendo. Maybe they sense that, should Nintendo fall on hard times, and actually be forced to pander to other platforms with their games – platforms Nintendo doesn’t control – that Nintendo will be at the mercy of the forces that shape software development on other platforms. That would, so the assumption goes, drag them down to Earth. But Nintendo passively mocks everyone else by sitting in their ivory tower, and being lauded for making “incomparable” games.

The real reason 3rd parties want to believe they can’t compete with Nintendo is because they know that even cleaning up Nintendo’s sloppy seconds would require them to set aside many of the horrible development and business practices they’ve enjoyed indulging in on the HD twins. As seems to often be the case, they don’t care if their habits slowly push their own market over the edge, and create rot from the inside out; as long as their short term profits seem higher, they’ll keep doing something naughty to that chicken.
_________________________
The thing that drives me insane is how the Industry keeps trying to lower the standard of quality in order to say that their games are ‘quality’. We see this is the skewed review scores where every game seems to be a 7 or above. And this constant redefining quality to be lower might fool the hardcore, might fool game journalists, and might fool investors, but it is not fooling the mass market. Interest is declining in video games because the video games, themselves, are declining in quality no matter if they have the latest graphics paint or uber gameplay gimmick. 

People say that Blizzard is a game company that produces ‘high quality’ games. I disagree with this. I believe Blizzard puts out ‘normal quality’ games. While its currently disputed, Blizzard’s quality hasn’t really changed since Warcraft 1 and Rock and Roll Racing. I remember when Blizzard and Westwood Studios were seen as equals and rivals. It is not that Blizzard ‘got better’, but everyone else got worse. The rise of Blizzard is, in great part, Blizzard walking through empty rooms.

Game developers who read this site do not want to hear that. But that is absolutely the truth coming from a consumer perspective. The game developers say that much of it is because the game company, such as Blizzard or Nintendo, has the time to polish their titles while other game companies do not. And I do not dispute that. Healthy and rich game companies have options that other game companies do not. No doubt about that.

But companies like Blizzard were not always healthy and rich. How did they get that way? THAT is what should be aimed for. Blizzard’s key to longterm success was to never lower that bar of quality. I have seen them literally destroy many games-in-progress because they didn’t meet Blizzard’s idea of quality (which is actually the customers’ idea of quality. It is customers who define the quality of products). In a way, I wish Nintendo would destroy their games more but Nintendo has a very unique responsibility to keep momentum going for hardware (which is absurdly hard).

But you wonder about why Sony doesn’t get the grief Nintendo gets. I think it goes well beyond the quality issue.

For as long as I can remember, the Western Computer Game Industry hates the idea of the video game console.

Hop in my deLorean, and we’re going to take a trip through time.

Above: Malstrom’s vehicle since he loves going back and forth through time.

We are going back to year 1985. We are in the United States.

What is the gaming market?

Well, there are three gaming markets at this time. There were the arcades (which were still going strongly). There were the computer games. And there were the home game consoles (that you hook up to a TV). And this third market completely crashed with Atari.

Remember that the Atari Era preceded the personal computer revolution. The Western Computer Game Industry was created with Trip Hawkins and Electronic Arts. With the Atari market imploded, the Computer Game Industry, led by Electronic Arts (and the president of Electronic Arts, Trip Hawkins), declared the video game console to be ‘obsolete’ in the new face of home computers.

Above: I love this commercial! The ‘Commodore 64 Song’ is illustrative of how everyone was joining hands and singing the future of how PCs would take over everything including washing machines, dishwashers, and of course the home video game console. [Don’t laugh, reader. In 2005, people were saying the game console would ‘take over the living room’.])

In the year 1985, the reader would be mystified to see the Computer Game Industry with its leader, Trip Hawkins. The idea was that computers would take over the household, take over refrigerators, take over washing machines, and the Atari Era home game console was ‘absolutely obsolete’.

And do you see that, reader? It is a Japanese fellow named Arakawa. He was tasked with bringing the Famicom over to the United States. Silly Arakawa! If he listened to the experts of the American gaming market, the analysts, he would realize what he was doing was foolish. The home game console was obsolete. Computer gaming was the only gaming there would be. Even if Arakawa put out a Famicom console in the United States, it would never succeed. You know why? Because it was Japanese. Americans would only watch American movies, listen to American music, and play American video games. Sure, the Famicom might have worked in Japan. But it would never work in America.

Arakawa actually put out some focus group tests on Famicom games, such as Super Mario Brothers and Legend of Zelda, The result from the kids were: “This game is crap!” All negative.

Arakawa almost gave up then. But he noticed that the American arcades were very popular. Maybe Atari’s implosion was due to the business itself and not due to customers becoming disinterested in video games.

At this time, the Computer Games Industry was absolutely convinced, with no doubt in the world, that the home console was DEAD. When the NES came on the scene, the Computer Games Industry mocked it. Even I, reader, the lovable Malstrom mocked the NES. “WTF is that? It will never be as cool as my Commodore 64!”

But the NES did not stop selling. Investors were angling the Computer Games Industry to make games for the NES. There was much resistance. The NES was an 8-bit machine but computers were now 16-bit. Developers didn’t want to go backwards!  Trip Hawkins fought the investors under the assumption that the NES would collapse just like the Atari did. But that did not occur. Trip Hawkins had a choice. He could either make games for the NES or investors would remove him as president. And when Electronic Arts signed on to the NES, there was much rejoicing at NOA. The last hold out had surrendered.

But you must understand that the Computer Game Industry never forgot this. Nor did the Computer Game Industry change. They remained the Computer Game Industry.

The ‘1980s dream of the omnipresent PC’ never died, it just went underground. To this day, the Computer Games Industry still dreams its 1980s dream.

“I do not understand,” says the reader.

Very well. Hop into the DeLorean. We will now go ten years into the future.

The year is now 1995. What do you see?

The Computer Games Industry was delirious over the PlayStation. They hated Nintendo because Nintendo had arcade roots and was a strong business demanding a licensing agreement. Nintendo’s way was not what the Computer Games Industry wanted which was a dumbed down PC to make games. They turned to Sega for the 16-bit generation and were faced with the exact same problem. Sega had arcade DNA, not personal computer DNA. Sega also copied Nintendo’s licensing agreement. But Sega wasn’t as strong as a business as Nintendo so companies like Electronic Arts could shove Sega around to get ‘better’ licensing agreements.

But Kutaragi was the Computer Games Industry’s Golden Boy. The PlayStation did not expand the popularity of video games as we commonly think. What the PlayStation did do was embrace the Computer Games Industry which Nintendo and Sega did not. Sony did not have arcade DNA. Sony was a computer company and was ‘of the cloth’ with the rest of the Computer Games Industry. So many computer games were being made for the PlayStation, a dumbed down PC connected to the TV.

“How can you say all this,” the reader asks. “You state it like it is fact.”

But it has to be fact. The evidence that this was what the PlayStation was all about is found in Microsoft’s reaction. Microsoft became alarmed that computer games were being written for Sony’s platform and not Microsoft’s platform.

In fact, the first time I ever heard ‘disruption’ was reading a paper from the Wall Street Journal about how Sony was threatening to disrupt the Microsoft ‘Empire’ via video games. This was not uncommon as every company was trying to disrupt Microsoft back in the 90s. Remember Netscape?

Kutaragi also admitted this publicly. The plan was for the PlayStation to become popular via games and then use that as a foothold to take over the living room. The future of computers was seen in entertainment which meant the living room. As you can see, this was the Computer Game Industry’s 1980 dream updated. The computer would take over the household.

While Sony and eventually Microsoft would duke it out, the Computer Games Industry cheered for the future, laughed at Nintendo’s downfall, and applauded the destruction of Sega.

Now, reader, it is time to get back into the DeLorean.

“Where will we go now?”

You mean when will we go. Once again, we will travel ten years into the future. We will go to the year 2005!

It is the year 2005. The Computer Games Industry is very excited as is Wall Street. Sony and Microsoft are set to engage in a climatic and final battle over the living room. Nintendo and its ‘Revolution’ was, agreed by all analysts, to sell less than the Gamecube, and Nintendo would likely abandon the console business to make games for Microsoft and Sony consoles.

But something funny happened on the way to the future.

It was 1985 all over again. Right when the Computer Game Industry thought they were at the gates to the Promised Land of omnipresent PCs (of Sony or Microsoft ‘taking over’ the living room), Nintendo ruins everything.

It is the desire for this dream that animates the Computer Game Industry’s distaste for Nintendo. Nintendo consoles are not dumbed down computers hooked up to a TV. And Nintendo, while they do not realize it yet, has arcade DNA, not PC DNA.

Like the NES, the Computer Game Industry refused to make games for the Wii. But unlike the NES, the Wii had alternative home consoles (not 90% of the market) where they could port their games.

Now, reader, it is time to go back to the future!

Reader, you might think I am just playing with paragraphs like a cat plays with yarn. “How can any of this be true?”

Why does the Computer Games Industry have a current ‘love affair’ with Apple right now concerning the iPhone and iPad? It is the same exact dream of the omnipresent PC. It is no different at all from the 1985 dream of PCs running our washing machines. The Computer Games Industry has never outgrown their 80s dream but keep revising it each decade. “Maybe this computer manufacturer will be our savior!” they cry. First, it was Commodore. Then, it was Sony and Microsoft. Now, it is Apple. The only thing consistent about the Computer Game Industry is that it keeps picking the losing side.

In time, the Computer Game Industry will lose faith in Apple just as they lost faith in Sony and Microsoft. They will find another company to pin their hopes on. And then, Nintendo (or another type company) will create an actual game console and start the revolution all over again. It’s like we’re in a time loop.

“I still cannot believe this is true,” says the exasperated reader (who would be exasperated after riding in Malstrom’s awesome flying DeLorean).

Consider Trip Hawkin’s rant at GDC 2011:

We used to have a free and open games business, and then Nintendo came along and introduced a thing called a licence agreement. There’s a whole lot of companies these days that have basically copied that model. How’s that going for us? Well, let’s take a look.

As you can see, this guy speaks of some mythical ‘platform of openness and fairness’ with unicorns and skittles raining from the sky. But then, the villain, Nintendo, came from the shadows and demolished it. Worse, every console company copied the Nintendo model of the licensing agreement.

Still don’t believe the Computer Games Industry is still lose in this 1980s dream? Aside from Trip Hawkins referencing that dream (which Nintendo destroyed with its evil NES), he says this:
Freedom, and openness, and access to opportunity and may the best man win and a whole bunch of other principles like this. So we don’t want these things that don’t do this. We don’t want something that’s un-American. We don’t want to be that idiot. Let’s not be that un-American Idiot while we’re trying to be an American Idol.

It is Trip Hawkins’ Undiscovered Country! A mythical land of freedom, openness, and access to opportunity! The Computer Games Industry believe in Trip Hawkins’ Undiscovered Country and, at a time, thought Apple would deliver it to them.

Sony as savior failed. Microsoft as savior failed. Apple as savior failed. It has been over twenty five years, Trip Hawkins! It is time to abandon the dream.

But no, the dream goes on. Behold the next new savior for the Computer Games Industry:

I’ll leave you with one last thought. There is a place which we can gravitate to over the years. It is in fact a place used by some of these platform companies. It’s extremely ubiquitous, it’s open. That is the browser. Think more about the browser. The browser will set you free.”

So to the emailer, I believe the ‘third parties’ (i.e. computer game makers) reluctance to Nintendo is greatly animated due to this ‘mythical dream platform’ they believe exists if only some brave manufacturing company would make it.

In a few years, we could be hearing how all game machines are ‘obsolete’ due to ‘browser gaming’. When you do hear it, just remember that this is the latest incarnation of the Computer Game Industry’s dream, and it will end just as all the previous ones.