That’s fair. Nintendo can’t make the game publishers do anything in an open ecosystem. What they can do is maintain a list of good game publishers and encourage people to buy from that list. Again, arguably easier to do now with say the Nintendo website, then back before high availability of internet.
From Nintendo’s perspective, locked hardware makes sense. They risk being locked out of profits from other publishers.
However, I’m not convinced that’s the case from a consumer perspective. The reason you gave in the original comment was that consumers suffered from the open platform. I still disagree with that. Consumers suffered because the platform was open AND there was no trusted source for quality control. You don’t have to take away 1) for consumers to not accidentally get terrible games, you just have to have a trusted source which tells consumers which games are good so that 2) isn’t the case. As soon as consumers know they can buy good games directly from Nintendo (or from blessed retailers), the onus for running crapware is on them.
well if you can find a way to control quality while letting anyone who owns your hardware to do as they please, I would encourage you to share that info, in detail, with the world, because no one else has figured that out, yet.
Nintendo won't even sell development kits for the Switch to just anyone. you have to have a "good enough" game pitch (with no published rules on what is good enough and what is not) and you must commit to actually producing the game before they will even let you SEE the development kit and related items in the developer account store.
of course you can buy dev kits for the Wii U and 3DS, the discontinued systems, but you can't produce software that runs on the retail hardware, even for those.
Have you heard of Steam? PC is open hardware. There is a minimum bar of quality. Steam controls which games you can buy through it. Very profitable too.
Steam theoretically can control quality as much as they want. The bar they choose is entirely arbitrary and completely upto them.
From Nintendo’s perspective, locked hardware makes sense. They risk being locked out of profits from other publishers.
However, I’m not convinced that’s the case from a consumer perspective. The reason you gave in the original comment was that consumers suffered from the open platform. I still disagree with that. Consumers suffered because the platform was open AND there was no trusted source for quality control. You don’t have to take away 1) for consumers to not accidentally get terrible games, you just have to have a trusted source which tells consumers which games are good so that 2) isn’t the case. As soon as consumers know they can buy good games directly from Nintendo (or from blessed retailers), the onus for running crapware is on them.