Is Nintendo as much to blame for the poor quality of third-party content as the third-parties themselves are? Should Nintendo institute stricter quality-control policies?
I think Nintendo DOES need to make enforce stricter quality rules. It's a wonder that SPOGS Racing could make it to Wii ware. And in a wonderful world, they wouldn't let Ubisoft develop games for their console.
I agree, but really wonder what sort of approach they should take? The more rules you enforce, the more red tape, time, energy, and money it takes for developers to make a game for the system--and risk jumping ship.
I completely agree. I imagine if Nintendo said "Hey, this SPOGS game kinda sucks and you either have to make it better or it's getting canned" the media would be all over it. I don't think they CAN take any approach without receiving a huge backlash.
Perhaps one approach would be for them to allow WiiWare to be the open platform, while having retail box games follow strict quality policies. This way, WiiWare games could be sorted through user ratings, with the best rising to the top (much like how N4G works), and the finite retail shelves would be stocked with games Nintendo has assured are of sufficient quality.
They should just bring back the quality seal, and put it on the good games. That way the bad devs can still make crap, and Nintendo can moderate without alienating. You can't drop all the crap on WiiWare. The Wii already has a storage problem, it would make finding the good games impossible (so everyone would ignore it entirely),and I don't think that's really solving the problem.
Quality seal = " it works perfectly on our system " That's it.
When it comes to Wii ware games then they should do what they've been doing, only take the crappy games and release them in bunches rather than honor them as worthy of their own private release date. That would cause developers to put in more effort.
... and scare off 3rd party support completely... No, STOP pointing the finger at Nintendo, POINT them at the 3rd party devs, and stop buying their bad games and letting them get away with it.
Perhaps further enforcement would make third-parties shy away from even bothering to develop on the platform. This kind of chilling effect could make games like The Conduit not even exist.
uh... sorry. i think if there was stricter quality control on the wii the conduit would be the ONLY game in development!
Meh, as a company you should insure quality of your games. It's absurd for a Company who makes games not to care about how their product comes out. If they can't provide quality you shouldn't be standing at all. Of course the audience plays a roll in this...but even then... Quality should be insured... It's partially Nintendo's fault that they allow rubbish on their console...but i rather point at the third party developers who just think they are funny with their shovelware madness. Produce like professionals! But then again, define: Quality...
It seems the issue is that companies are appeasing to the low quality of games that the casual market deems acceptable. The hardcore, since they're enthusiasts, have higher standards. Seems to me that all parties, Nintendo, publishers, and developers, might be to blame since they all make money off the success of a sub-par quality game if it at least sells well.
Perhaps it is time for the 'Nintendo seal of approval' (The real one) to come back? I've noticed quite a few sub par games coming out (many appearing to be the same game as another just simply rehashed and re textured.) I suppose finding that perfect balance between something that appeals to both would in a sense be difficult for some 3rd party developers. Nintendo managed to achieve it (somewhat at least in my opinion) for Mario Kart Wii and Brawl, (Though I still think MKWii could have done without the Bikes but, that's another discussion all together). I guess what they (the news source) should be stating is what is taking over the aspect of quality? What aspect of the Wii is it that seems to draw in developers to make them over-look that aspect of making the game visually appealing as well as fun (though both terms are subjective let us for now just say that it is something along the lines of Super Mario Galaxy?) Many of the games coming out should have been on WiiWare in the first place leaving those that are developing rather good titles on the discs. (Ex. A few games that I believe should have been WiiWare, We Ski, Hasbro Family Game Night, etc, etc.) Though if these games were to be on WiiWare Nintendo would need to do a bit of revamping to their primary screen. First I think they should have some sort of ticker (that flashes on the screen in the middle of it that states what new WiiWare and such games came out.) That way it would at least alert those who have a Wii to check out what WiiWare is and get games from their. For one thing it would reduce the amount of titles on discs that are floating about in various stores as well as bringing more games to WiiWare and some family games making it more convenient for families to purchase some from the shop as well. It would also give Nintendo a chance to look over the games before they are placed into WiiWare since a few of the games coming out doesn't seem to be getting looked upon by Nintendo currently.
" Perhaps it is time for the 'Nintendo seal of approval' (The real one) to come back?" Don't you mean Nintento seal of Quality? That pretty much meant that the game worked correctly with the system...that's pretty much it. Nintendo has always been D-bags towards Third party developers, keeping developers out would only result in negative matters. There past wasn't that great, with developers that is. Although it's not something great of them to allow Spogs, but at least they are more open to developers. " First I think they should have some sort of ticker (that flashes on the screen in the middle of it that states what new WiiWare and such games came out.) " That's what Nintendo Channel is for. And by entering the shop, people know what the shop is for.
Yes but how many people know of the Nintendo or even check the Nintendo channel? Granted it is a nice little feature but also cluttered at the same time. When I say ticker I mean darkening the lights behind it with the thin strip running across the screen with an O and an X button underneath to signify either Okay or X out and get back to the normal screen. As for the seal of quality or whichever what I mean to say is Nintendo having to hold the code close to them and only handing it out to a few developers who they will trust to make games for their console. (At least I believe the NES had something like this?)
"3.1 - Well... It seems the issue is that companies are appeasing to the low quality of games that the casual market deems acceptable. The hardcore, since they're enthusiasts, have higher standards." Every console has its share of crap. look at the ps1 and ps2. Unless u call hanah montana, shrek party, horsez and dogz high quality for u enthusiasts.....because they all exsist on the ps2. The snes had extremely high quailty games (and at the time was aimed mainly at kids/teens....not adults)...and it had its poor games. But how can nintendo really control what OTHER companys do. And PLZ do not say "bring back the seal of quality" as all this did was notifying the buyer that the game has not been pirated and works 100%, basically its AUTHENTIC...it had nothing to do with the quality of the game.
Perhaps I have stated it wrong, what I mean to say is that perhaps Nintendo should bring back that coding once more you know the one they had on the Nintendo Entertainment System. I also say they should bring back the seal of quality and re-think that because of the way the Game cube was (Yes it was bad for most people, but personally I liked the cube but since many didn't and sales were "meh" compared to most; Nintendo should probably reevaluate their strategy of going after a market of people while trying to stay and ensure that another realm gets sated just as well.) Which is why I say bring back both the seal of quality (Re'vamped) as well as the coding that they had for the Nintendo Entertainment System @To Mini Mario The coding alone could very well in a sense "control" companies as Nintendo would have to review and look at their design concept and decide whether or not they want it to be saturated on their console with other games. It keeps from having multiple versions of a game on their console. Perhaps the best way to say this in analogies way is to compare this to a neat and tidy closet compared to one that is not so. Think of the neat and tidy as the Wii with the coding in it while the not so tidy is the one without it. Of course games (Shovelware) are subject to find a home every new console generation, but to curve that Nintendo could do the code and curve some of the shovelware. Granted they will still get it, but it shall not be as bad as we see (or perhaps in my opinion as I see?) As people are wanting to sell their Wiis at this point and the NES would have had the same problem if not for the coding, as didn't the atari die off this way? Hopefully this shall clear up why I stated those two should be brought back and with one changed to reflect true seal of quality.
I think the lower performing games on Wiiware like SPOGS shouls be removed at least.Or Nintendo should talk to Ubisoft and get some better games on the system like a true Rayman on the Wii not Raving Rabbids
Question: How exactly is a company supposed to objectively measure this 'quality' thing?
Feedback, it's that simple. I mean there should be game testers there too right? Each company should allow criticism from outside the company.
Fair enough. So, how many of them, then? If companies are looking at a potential audience in the millions, and you have a thousand game testers, does that mean that each game tester's opinion is comparable to a thousand people?
How many, I honestly don't know that, never will xD. But is it hard for people to actually say things that could help improve their games? ...Although They always keep things behind closed doors, and people won't play it until it's out... but they should atleast let some random guys outside the company play the game and criticize it. ( and im not talking about "testers" who look if there are any bugs) I think that the amount of people is not important, it's rather that they could provide feedback that actually helps the development.
"But is it hard for people to actually say things that could help improve their games?" It's not hard at all, which is probably the issue. It's all to easy to get feedback from anyone and everyone. The problem is that not all feedback is necessarily good feedback. Different kinds of people have different kinds of suggestions. Are you familiar with the phrase "Too many cooks in the kitchen"? And when companies try to *mandate* these sorts of things in projects, they often get less than desirable results. To illustrate what I'm talking about, let me use an example from the U.S. Military. Back in the 70s, the army commissioned a bunch of people to build a tank, which if I'm not mistaken would eventually come to be the Bradley tank. The team in charge was given a set of goals from several different sources. One source wanted them to make the Bradley a really, really fast vehicle for quick strikes. Doesn't seem like such a bad idea, does it? A faster vehicle is an improvement over a slower vehicle. Another source wanted them to make the Bradley really, really durable and strong, with tons of heavy armor such that it could weather attacks well. Not an unreasonable thing to ask of a tank. A stronger vehicle is an improvement over a weaker one. The problem, of course, was that the team was obligated to follow *both* directives, the folly of which was revealed when the team realized that more armor = slower vehicle and that it was literally impossible to physically create a product that fulfilled both of those requirements. The resulting prototype was almost completely worthless, since it didn't really fulfill *either* of the requirements very well. Now, I realize that the military and the videogame industry have differences, but I seem to recall a couple of interviews with High Voltage where they were talking about the benefits of working without a publisher. And one of them mentioned that publishers often have bizarre feedback like asking developers to incorporate racing game aspects into a shooter or some other such nonsense. That's *their* idea of how to improve quality. "I think that the amount of people is not important, it's rather that they could provide feedback that actually helps the development." But how do you differentiate between the feedback that's useful and the feedback that is not? Does it not still ultimately come down to the discretion of the people who are making the game?
Whatever they are selling with the Wii, great, good that they are selling and making money. What does this have to do with gaming? I don't think anything. The PS3 and 360 battle on.
What does that have to do with gaming? They still make games you know.... What? If they keep selling like this they actually keep the a part of the gaming market healthy. Also you sound different this time around? 2 bubbles pain in the ass? 0_o
so just because it is outselling, beating, and destroying the psp it's out just because a bunch of douche "hardcore" players that wouldn't know a good game if it bit them in the ass say so it's true? I dunno, nintendo is still in the race, and the fact that a bunch of fps shooters on 360 can't outsell a plumber in blue overalls who's more than twenty years old has got you eating sour grapes and making stupid comments on sites like this, it just proves that you need to start admitting that your 600 dollar black box just got beat by a lighter, cooler, more innovative white box.
lightning what kind of opinion is that? what has the ps360 done this gen so innovative besides copy features from my computer?
Every entertainment medium has rubbish. I think it's ultimately up to the consumer to decide that they won't buy it. If someone is buying it, obviously someone likes it or is uninformed. Unfortunately quite a few people are uninformed, especially during the gift giving seasons. Nintendo has more crap available for it's console as a direct result of being the most popular console. As people correctly pointed out, where do you draw the line on quality? I'm sure someone would argue that Nintendo are tough to deal with for developers if they were to strict, so either way they probably wouldn't win.
The Wii has become the platform of choice for shovelware. In my opinion for every great title on the Wii there are 20 terrible titles.
"The Wii has become the platform of choice for shovelware. In my opinion for every great title on the Wii there are 20 terrible titles." Just like the psONe and ps2. The most popular system ALWAYS has the most crap. The gamecube had hardly any compared to the ps2. Because it was not popular. Shovelware has always exsisted...and now its a big issue for everyone ....because...>> ?.....its not on a sony system for a change......?
It's not suddenly a big issue. Shovelware is part of the reason that the home video game market crashed in the 80's. Shovelware was a mainstay on the NES, considering all a developer had to do to get Nintendo's quality seal of approval was to pay them royalties. Both the SNES and Genesis had their fair share as well. I think that the reason that it is an issue with the Wii is that shovelware has been a mainstay on the Wii since day one. The PS1 and PS2 didn't really start to accumulate it until much later in their lives as the cost of development began to drop and the companies started talking about new consoles. The cost of development on the Wii has always been low enough that it's been easy to release poor quality software right from the start. I believe that if Nintendo doesn't make efforts to reign it in the lack of quality software is going to cause the Wii's popularity to drop off and could become a drag on the industry as a whole.
I dont see the issue really. 90% of those same games can be found on PS2. Nobody seems to have issues with it though. Why should Nintendo stop something that helped the PS2 to become the best selling console ever? I might not like Agitha Christie but it seems some people out there do even if many consider the games "shovel ware". I'll never play Dora but somewhere there is a little girl who will and love it even though many here will consider it garbage.
"I dont see the issue really. 90% of those same games can be found on PS2. Nobody seems to have issues with it though. " U make a very good point and used your brain by using LOGIC (unlike most ppl on here). I bet u get all the disagrees. Just like i will be getting in my comments.
a couple of months ago i went into a gamestop, and all they had was shovelware.Petz, imagine series and a whole bunch of others. also if the wii is doing so good, how come every time i walk into a gamestore the wii section is like half a wall, but the 360/PS3 get an entire wall and a half? and it's more than one store that does this. i own a wii, and like it a lot. i don't buy shovelware either. recently there has been quite a a lot games i would want to get. so maybe things are getting better now...
has a problem with substandard games flooding their console and they do need to do something about it. Instead of just allowing a blanket license for every game that gets put in front of them, Nintendo actually needs to review the game. At the very least they need to make sure that the game actually functions. How many Wii games, compared to the other consoles, have been completely broken upon release. Too many. What that means is that Nintendo is not taking a look at the games at all. So, what are they doing then? Eventually, this will come back to bite the big N. It may not happen for a while (casual gamers don't know what a crap game is and will buy anything) but it will happen.
A garbage console of the past, now suitable only for the casuals.
for years people (including those in the industry) criticized nintendo for being too strict. for ruling out the possibility of even considering some games to be allowed on its system. for example, do you think mad world would have been on a nintendo console in the past? i think not. i'm glad they have 'opened up,' just because poor games are being published, doesn't mean you have to buy them. buy the games you like, obviously.
I was just about to say the same thing. Basically in the 80's and 90's (SNES) Nintendo was seen as the big bad publisher who had strict standards and such. Sony with PS1 was much less tight and third parties went to greener pastures. Now that nintendo adopted this strategy now all of a sudden its a huge problem, but it wasn't a huge problem for the ps2? Gimme a break. The excuses that many sony fans will say is "sony had more good games" fine if you wana go with that weak argument fine..but not only is that a very subjective statement but its not something that can be empirically proven as fact. Second the ps2 was largely barren of any good games until what 2002? and this was on a system that third parties EXPECTED to be the market leader. Wii caught every industry insider by surprise. I remember a game called "the bouncer" yeah square made it, and it was trash, it was also the only game on the system back in like 2001. Many people see the past with rose colored glasses. they constantly move the goal post for the Wii. Just look at the DS, largely ignored by third parties for the first two years of its life, thought to be a fad. Thought it was to get its ass handed to it by the psp, due to lack of hardware. Sound eerily familiar? DS is now poised and expected to outsell the ps2 in its lifetime. Wii is trending like the DS. Just a thought, since graphics have reached such a level this gen, where were we to go next gen? Console gaming in my opinion was getting stale, same sh!t with upgraded graphics, when you've been playing video games for more than 6 generations after a while graphics can only bring our industry so far. Graphics are just one spice of the soup. But if you want that soup to taste good you need other ingredients as well.
If nintendo took a harder line with the really big developers/publishers(well Ubi basically) then they wouldn't have half the trouble with lazy offerings. When they allow Raving Rabbids and the awful xbox BIA ports from a company who offer far better to other platforms then why would any smaller teams take the trouble with smaller profit margins? Ninty should really help push a game like NMH2 when it drops and not be forthcoming with the extra ads for games that aren't up to it. It's the only way they can show they know whats going on and their approval(and lack of)for a game without offending. Trouble is I fear there's a feeling at Nintendo that they actually enjoy the kudos too much of also being the very best developer for their console. I hope Wii music hurt them a bit and made them realise that people wont just swallow anything they put out just because Metroid and Mario games are so well made. They need to drop the self obsession and nurture the games out of third parties by pushing a few good ones even if it means losing a little limelight now and again. I mean, I know EA don't need Nintendo's approval but if it hadn't been for MoHH2 nobody would have ever played a FPS online with Wii til WaW last week(that we don't have to have damn friend codes helped as well)so that's the kind of thing Ninty should give kudos to and for. That NMH had to survive by word of mouth and the wonderful Z&W was almost totally ignored tells you all you need to know about what Nintendo feels about 3rd party games and it must change-I was disappointed that they didn't turn out to publish The conduit too as that would have been a big step in the right direction, IMO.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.