Talk:List of Nintendo development teams

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Clean up[edit]

This page is really sort of a mess. It no longer specifies or defines what "party" some developers' fit into as well as mixing first and second party developers in one category (such as Intelligent Systems being a lone 1st party in a group of 2nd parties). It's just messy and unclear. Work needs to be done. In addition to these problems, certain companies listed as second party (now referred to as third-party affiliates for some reason) simply are not. Most notably, Cinq, Monster Games, Kuju and Next Level Games; all have collaborated with Nintendo like many, many third party developers have, but neither have exclusive development contracts or partial ownership with Nintendo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.213.49.64 (talk) 20:55, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have an idea for restructuring this page.[edit]

Ok, how about we make a 1st section that has all of Nintendo's distributing subsidiaries (Nintendo of America, Europe, Japan, etc) and Name that section "main offices" There we could put pictures, their respective presidents, and discriptions about them.


Then make a second section and name that "Hardware Developers". Here is where we put teams like Nintendo IRD, Nintendo RED, and other teams that make only hardware. Other teams that could go here include Nintendo NSD, and Nintendo BTD


Then make a 3rd section called "1st Party Developers", and have all the Dev-Teams that Nintendo is the majority owner of. Teams that could go here include HAL Laboratory,Monolith Soft, ND Cube, Nintendo EAD, Nintendo SPD, Retro Studios, Brownie Brown, Project Sora, Intelligent Systems, and a few others. We could have the manager, what games that they are responsible for, and a short list of games they developed. If you want to see how it would look like, refer to the "Nintendo SPD" Page. Since Nintendo EAD and SPD each are broken up into individual development teams within them we could reserve more space for those two teams.


Then we could make a 4th Section called "3rd Party Developers" and put all of the teams in that either Nintendo is the minority owner of, or they have a publishing agreement with Nintendo. Or they make games exclusively for Nintendo to publish but don't have an official agreement with Nintendo. Teams that could go here include Skip ltd., Good-Feel, Alpha Dream, Creatures inc., Camelot Software planning, Monster Games, Game Freak, Genius Sorority, Noise, Ambrella,


      • Here is the twist. In the 3rd party section, I don't think we should have a list of games for each developer. That would take up space. I was thinking that we could have all the developers listed and that's it.


Original Dev-Teams, and Iwata asks can stay the same.

So what do you all think

Iluvthissite (talk) 18:44, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup[edit]

  • removed infobox: not an article on the company
  • unbolded some text per WP:BOLDFACE
  • WP:NPOV changes, more encyclopedic tone (in the lead section in particular)
  • WP:ELNO removals
  • introduced more reliable sources
  • dropped unsourced statements
  • removed incomplete game lists
  • removed double redirects
  • format fixes
  • name changes from R&D4 to Nintendo EAD, as explained
  • removed Iwata Asks links per WP:NOTLINK, provided collection links
  • added refimprove and cleanup notices

Prime Blue (talk) 23:56, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Worldwide Studios[edit]

Nintendo doesn't call its development teams collectively as "Worldwide Studios". Maybe change it or remove it completely to avoid confusion with SCE Worldwide Studios.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on List of Nintendo development teams. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:58, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]