Indies On Wii U: How Does Nintendo’s Approach Compare To Sony And Microsoft’s?

Edge Magazine: ''Nintendo is working with plenty of indies to bring games to Wii U’s eShop, it’s just not doing a great job of telling anyone about it.

Behind the scenes, it is approaching indies across the globe – besides Japan, it seems – to help fill out eShop’s sparse offering. It is being selective, though. When it does choose to assist a studio, it gets involved in the game’s production a little more than its fellow platform holders to ensure the final game is of sufficient quality, one studio has told us.

We tracked down four studios working on Wii U games right now to ask them how their dealings with Nintendo compared to their relationships with Sony and Microsoft.''

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
iamnsuperman1820d ago

Big difference is not allowing Japanese developers which is an odd move.

"Sony are obviously vocally and publicly courting indie developers of all shapes and sizes and they’re doing a great job. They are already seen by many in the indie community as the place to go. However, this does come with the danger that the indie space might become very crowded on Sony platforms. This then presents the same visibility problems that are so apparent on the App Store."

This is a concern for me. One of my main criticism of the Steam store is it is so dam hard to navigate through the rubbish to find a good indie title. Now I think that is mainly down to store design but it is also relevant to the above quote. What Sony needs to do with the PSN is make it easy to avoid the crap and find the jems

darthv721820d ago

Indie games on live is in the same boat. there are some real good ones but there is so much crap that it overshadows the good ones.

Now maybe that is MS is trying to avoid in the future with indie games. People are on the case of MS wanting indies to partner up with a bigger publisher and dont even take into consideration that it may be at the benefit of that indie dev to do so.

Meaning that a larger publisher can help get the game the recognition it deserves if its one of those really good games. If the game isnt up to par then the pub has the discretion to pass on it and the indie can go to another that would be more inclined to pick it up.

So if a pub passes, that could be an early hint the game is not as good as others. Now im sure all indie devs think their game is the bees knees (yeah thats an old term) but in reality, its us as gamers that have the real say if the game is good or not so the idea of quality is subjective.

I believe strongly in indie support and if encouraging smaller houses to partner with bigger more established ones will be helpful in that game being noticed then why not.

Self publishing has its pros and cons. A Pro is that the dev gets all the rewards but a con would be no quality control and potential of shovelware could ensue.

Sony courting all these indies could be quantity over quality which is stark contrast to them being quality over quantity driven previously.

s45gr321820d ago

I understand your points clearly ;however, a big major publisher may force the indie developer to add unnecessary features or decline their games due to being niche, odd, not your run of the mill game. Another option which is not considered but could help out Sony is a green light equivalent. Now now now I know is not perfect, too many rubbish games, lack of this lack of that. I strongly believe that gamers should be allowed to choose which indies are worth playing and which are not worth a penny. By letting gamers fund, advertise, suggest ideas, or have a communication or relationship with the developer. It has a better chance of getting unique, innovative, fun, odd, niche titles. Not just fps fps, besides under Valve self publishing model we got games like Trine franchise, to the moon, Gemini Rue, amnesia dark descent, Lucius, lone survivor, giana sisters twisted dreams, the cave, etc, etc. So it does work what have the big publishers published in regards to mainstream titles nothing but fps, fps, remakes, etc. A lot of mainstream game developers suffered due to publishers forcing them to add unnecessary features like online play when it was not needed, dlc content, make the game for everyone. I do not want that to happen for indie game developers for these developers without the intervention of the major publishers have kicked ass, rocked hard and prove that niche titles like dear Esther, that point and click adventure games like the walking dead, survival horror games like amnesia dark descent, platformers with ingenious puzzles like trine franchise are successful.

s45gr321820d ago

I don't agree nor disagree but I like green light in the sense we gamers decide which indies or classic games belong on steam or want to play on steam. Now because of that yes there is a lot of rubbish on green light and is up to us gamers weed out the bad ones from the good ones it may not be fun but is worth it

MegaLagann1820d ago

The reason they aren't allowing Japanese indie developers is because, for some strange reason, indie devs in Japan can't self publish. So it really isn't a Nintendo thing as it is a Japanese gaming as a whole thing.

ricochetmg1820d ago

Wii U has it flaws one being games. The graphics are good enough. I would also point to the online structure as being ps2 gen like.

Gemmol1820d ago

your crazy, my wii U internet on black ops 2 and nba 2k13 work better on my wii u then must be a real troll, or IDk

mudmax1820d ago (Edited 1820d ago )

Before you give your opinion on something, you should actually try it out yourself. Rather than just repeating what you've heard. Wii U's Online structure is actually better than PS3 in my opinion and many others:)

s45gr321820d ago

It sure lacks the features from say xbox live gold, the upcoming PS4 like the whole spectator mode, true skill system, xbox live party system, video chat, conjunction with social services like Skype, Twitter, Facebook. No ustream, twitch tv support, etc. That it has dedicated servers probably yes, that it runs it's online games with very little lag and are stable during online play probably yes. But still a very basic online gaming service, it needs perks

TekoIie1819d ago


"But still a very basic online gaming service, it needs perks."

Free online not good enough for ya?

ricochetmg1819d ago

I have a wii u and you guys are delusional.

Elem1871818d ago

If you mean that Nintendo's online is like the PS2 gen because they don't charge you to play online, than yeah I can agree with that.

Enjoy paying for online multiplayer with xBone/PS4.... I still can't believe anyone would put up with that crap.... Stick to PC/Nintendo for free online.

ricochetmg1818d ago

There is no reason we should be paying for online games.

R00bot1819d ago

The PS2 didn't really even have online, until later in it's lifetime.

ricochetmg1817d ago

You are wrong SOCOM....was out within the first year.

R00bot1817d ago

Yeah, a year after launch. Not at launch. Later in it's lifetime.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1817d ago
s45gr321820d ago

Umm so with the wii u only the highest quality indie titles will be on board. I understand about quality over quantity ; it just neglects niche, odd, unique titles. Sony approach is better, yes there will be rubbish indies but who cares at least is getting every odd, niche indie out there. Games like Lucius, Lone survivor, even slender, or say the void might not make it to wii u due to its low quality or too odd.

mydyingparadiselost1819d ago

I think your idea of quality is a little off here, it wouldn't mean that games like slender or lone survivor wouldn't make it on the wiiu it means games that only involve pushing a cat away from your breakfast wouldn't be allowed. As for odd or niche titles there's no reason for those not to make it on the wiiu unless they're crap.