Topic: Reggie Fils-Aime Explains the Garage Developer Once More

[KDR_11k]

http://www.mcvuk.com/features/903/The-success-of-Angry-Birds

But the biggest attack came from gaming’s most cherished name – Nintendo. President Satoru Iwata took the keynote stage during March’s GDC to say the smartphone business model and its cheap apps were destroying the value of games. Iconoclastic shots fired by a threatened gaming giant.

“It’s interesting to see people like Nintendo saying smartphones are destroying the games industry,” Vesterbacka mulls. “Of course, if I was trying to sell a $49 pieces of plastic to people then yes, I’d be worried too. But I think it’s a good sign that people are concerned – because from my point of view we’re doing something right.”

I don't know the sales of Angry Birds but I think Cut the Rope just bragged about 10 million sales. Nintendo's biggest hits (Mario Kart, NSMB, etc) sell twice that at 50$ a piece. And there aren't many games on the app store that sell 10 million, probably less than there are in console retail.

[BlackNMild2k1]

Are they really "selling" 10 Million or just getting downloaded 10 million times?

And there is a HUGE difference between "selling" 10 million that include millions of free copies and $0.99 add ons (which you could also probably find for $0.99) for holiday editions vs really selling 10million+ copies at retail for $50 each.

[ShyGuy]

If this keeps up we will have a market that only supports AAA Blockbusters and Five minute casual games. Bye bye games like No More Heroes. Bye bye games like De Blob.

[KDR_11k]

That's what Cliffy B wants you to believe. Fact is that making a console game on a reduced budget allows you to profit even from low sales. Not everybody has to blow 50 million on a game. People just "avoid risks" by trying to compete in the most expensive genre (setpiece-driven action game) against heavily entrenched incumbents. Meanwhile many cheaper genres are completely ignored. Publishers just seem to assume that making something expensive is the only way to go while the whole Wii concept has proven that idea wrong.

[MegaByte]

I was browsing WarioWorld, and came across the real reason for the office requirement:

We require that companies are working from a secure business location. A secure business location has security systems for the building. The office space is secured from other offices in the same building. The office space is not shared with any other company. Sub-leases will need to be reviewed. The office space is not located within a personal residence.

They just don't want their hardware getting stolen.

The more relevant point is this:

Nintendo looks for companies that are established game developers, or individuals with game industry experience. Authorization will be based upon your relevant game industry experience.

[Enner]

Understandable that they don't want their SDKs stolen. Getting one would probably be a master key to a system.

[Ceric]

I'll finish reading all comments at a PC but you have to see Nintendo's position and realize that's a good long term stance.  If you went to Nintendo with a PC concept demo, a team, and a plan that would probably get you considered.  Does Sony have much of an Indie scene I'll bet their stance is the same.  For better or worse MS has always been pretty open on who they let develop for their platforms.

[MegaByte]

Understandable that they don't want their SDKs stolen. Getting one would probably be a master key to a system.

Devs don't get the master encryption key -- their hardware is different from retail hardware. They have to send their game to Nintendo first, who encrypts it for retail.