Nintendo is d00med, OH NOEZ

[Jonbo298]

February 23, 2005 - In an interview with the site Xbox2 News, Electronic Arts and 3DO founder Trip Hawkins suggested that he believed Nintendo would not be a hardware player five years down the road. The outspoken executive even indicated what he thought might become of the Big N.

Asked what he thought about Nintendo's future, Hawkins replied: "My magic eight ball says they will be acquired by Microsoft within five years."

Nintendo itself has repeatedly dismissed old rumors that it was thinking about becoming a software-only company, or that it might team up with another publisher to make hardware and games.

Last August, Microsoft head Bill Gates told German financial magazine WirtschaftsWoche that he would pick up the phone if Nintendo's former president Hiroshi Yamauchi called. However, days later Nintendo issued an official response, which read: "Nintendo is not for sale and there is no such talk at all."

http://cube.ign.com/articles/590/590427p1.html

People have the right to opinions. I may not agree with him but if Nintendo does ever get bought out my Microsoft, I'm done with Console Gaming. Mainly because it wont ever feel the same without a company who has been around for so long to see ups and downs in the industry. Unlike Sony and MS who have yet to feel the "brunt" of the Industry and from my view think its a Yellow Brick Road.

[GameMaster]

I'm with you, Jonbo. I've come too far and invested too much care into Nintendo to cast my allegiance to another company. If Nintendo sinks, I'm going down with it.

Even if all my favorite Nintendo characters somehow made it onto another console, I think I'd hang up my controller for good anyways.

All good things must come to an end. :(

[Solid Snake]

With the Revolution, Nintendo will reclaim its video game console dominance again. Or at least I hope so. :Nintendo:

Nintendo is the only company I am loyal to. I like Microsoft and Sony, but Nintendo is all about the gamer and having fun. I think Microsoft would just be hurting the industry to buy Nintendo.

[Crash]

:Nintendo: for life

eh, people have their own opinions, we wont get into the stuff about microsoft losig 6 BILLION dollars this generation, trying to get their xbox to work sell or that xbox has only 3 games in the top 50 selling games this generation (halo, halo 2 and splintercell)

but yeah, Nintendo is the one going down, even though since Iwata has become president, Nintendo's profit has risen 30%

get a life Trip, no one likes EA and their cookie cutter game crap

[Null]

a games a game people. loyalty to a videogame company makes no sense at all.

as for nintendo, i actually could see it happening, ms offered to buy them before, and nintendo said they thought about it before saying now. if MS keeps wearing them down with good offers, i can see nintendo caving, which actually could REALLY help nintendo. sell more games, wouldnt have to worry about hardware, wouldnt have to worry about online, they could just enable thier games and let the console company deal with it.

[Crash]

nintendo will never be second party to microsoft... EVER, they are sooner to go with Gizmondo

[The Duggler]

a games a game people. loyalty to a videogame company makes no sense at all.

That makes more sense than you think.

If the business world would be a little more about companies being true to it's own product instead of doing anything including changing the product completely in order to get more sales, than I think the world would be a little bit better.

I love Nintendo the way they are. I don't want them to change.

[Null]

nintendo will never be second party to microsoft... EVER, they are sooner to go with Gizmondo


well isnt it crazy what money will make you do then? if this site was going to be around that long, you could put a vbookie bet on it. will nintendo be bought by MS within 5 years?. i'd bet yes. i think it will happen around the 3rd/early 4th year of next gen

[Teuthida]

I wouldn't mind a Microsoft/Nintendo merge...as long as Nintendo is still allowed to express their creativity. Trip Hawkins is still a jackass though...my hate for EA only grows.

[DeathsHand]

With the Revolution, Nintendo will reclaim its video game console dominance again. Or at least I hope so. :Nintendo:

Ah just like the good ol "Nintendo Dolphin" days... Go optimism!

I think the only way Nintendo would go software only is if Sony (or someone else, but PSP is the most obvious competitor at the moment) manages to take over the handheld industry as well... Not saying that's gonna happen...

[Crash]

this is the same clown that drove 3DO straight into the ground, he knows nothing about success in the video game industry.

He also owns "digital chocolate" and everyone knows how successful that is

He also tried to make the M2 game system like 10 years ago(we all own that system dont we?)

Army Men, BattleTanx, Heroes of Might and Magic, and High Heat Baseball are the best games in their genres totally.

Seriously, we shouldn't even listen to this guy who runs 2 companies into the ground, and happens to have lots of money in EA to publish a bunch of crap games under more crap lisences!

http://www.futuregamez.net/special/3do/trip.jpg

[Jonbo298]

Null, you say a games just a game. Then you shouldnt choose preference of Mac or PC because "A computer is just a computer" or choosing Chevy over Ford because "A car is just a car".

Competition exists for a reason. I like Nintendo because of their History and thinking outside the box. Not all the time has it been the best of things but at least they aren't afraid to try something new.

But everyone has an opinion. If the company I loved buried itself by going to big corporation, (as said above) the games won't feel the same.

[Canyarion]

As long as :Nintendo: won't be some slave of M$, I don't think it's that bad.
Microsoft could create the console with a little help of Ninty, Nintendo the controller with some input of M$ and they both could create their own games. That way they can possibly beat Sony...

[Null]

Null, you say a games just a game. Then you shouldnt choose preference of Mac or PC because "A computer is just a computer" or choosing Chevy over Ford because "A car is just a car".

Competition exists for a reason. I like Nintendo because of their History and thinking outside the box. Not all the time has it been the best of things but at least they aren't afraid to try something new.

But everyone has an opinion. If the company I loved buried itself by going to big corporation, (as said above) the games won't feel the same.


incorrect, i never said not to have a preference, not once. i said blind loyalty is stupid. and in your examples. blind loyalty to a PC and ignoring all the good things from a mac is stupid. if your going out shopping for a new car. blind loyalty to ford, and dismissing everything chevy has just because its not a ford you can miss out on some good cars.

competition exists to make money, the side effect is that you get better products. dont get that mixed up. its all to make money, if one could kill the other they would do it in a heartbeat.
I always loved nintendo, but thier INABILITY to think outside thier own tiny little world caused me to open my eyes and look around, and i thank nintendo for that. its exactly what i had needed at that time.

[MuGen]

Competition exists for a reason. I like Nintendo because of their History and thinking outside the box. Not all the time has it been the best of things but at least they aren't afraid to try something new.

Far be it for me to think that all Nintendo consoles were boxes albeit the N64? ;) LOL... I'm just kidding.

I'm in COMPLETE agreement with Null. I have a preference for the PS2 but when I see a game I like for Gamecube or Xbox, I won't mind playing it.

So if you completely give up gaming because Nintendo was bought by Microsoft in 5 years... it sounds completely ridiculous. Even though Microsoft would own Nintendo... the entity Nintendo still remains and if you won't even support Nintendo after the merger..... then that just defeats the whole purpose of having loyalty for Nintendo in the first place.

If you are truely loyal to Nintendo, or Sony, or Microsoft in any case.... you'll follow them wherever they go......... no matter what decisions they make on the BUSINESS/MARKETING front.

My viewpoint is that if ANY of those 3 companies merged, they would totally dominate the generation and make serious money off each other.

But nonetheless..... giving up on Nintendo if they sold to Microsoft is just competely and utterly ridiculous. Loyal fans??? where???

I'm a Sony-bot, however I like Nintendo and I'll still play their games without hesitation, no matter what happens.

[Null]

well its rather amusing that he bought up the analogy that a cars just a car. Would that mean mean if you are 'loyal' to ford, and ford goes out of business that you are never going to buy another car ever again? a good car IS indeed a good car, it doesnt matter who makes it.

thats the way i see games. why should it matter who makes the game? its a videogame. preference is good, absolute devotion is just silly.

[Canyarion]

Well cars don't let you play Zelda. :unsure:

[Null]

Well cars don't let you play Zelda. :unsure:

some do. some have tv's and gamecubes built in :p

but also with that way of thinking, if nintendo was bought by MS, then Xbox whatever would let you play zelda.

see thats the main thing, i couldnt care less if nintendo makes the console themselves. if i still get zelda and the other good games on whatever console. what the hell is the difference?

[Jonbo298]

You all can continue thinking its ridiculous, and you know what? I dont care. The intent of this thread wasn't that. Hence, the sarcasm or whatever in the thread title.

I already said the games wouldn't feel the same. And I wouldnt seem to be supporting Nintendo, I'd be supporting Microsoft, which at last check takes months to adjust/fix things. But thats my opinion.

Bling loyal/fanboy'ism? Whats your point? Trying to make me feel so bad to the point that I go cry in the corner. Just because I prefer Nintendo to the others doesnt mean I never think about playing games on other consoles. I have in the past. Someday I'll own an Xbox but not because of Halo/Halo 2, but because of Conker because its shaping up to be a good game and loved the original.

[Null]

You all can continue thinking its ridiculous, and you know what? I dont care. The intent of this thread wasn't that. Hence, the sarcasm or whatever in the thread title.

I already said the games wouldn't feel the same. And I wouldnt seem to be supporting Nintendo, I'd be supporting Microsoft, which at last check takes months to adjust/fix things. But thats my opinion.

Bling loyal/fanboy'ism? Whats your point? Trying to make me feel so bad to the point that I go cry in the corner. Just because I prefer Nintendo to the others doesnt mean I never think about playing games on other consoles. I have in the past. Someday I'll own an Xbox but not because of Halo/Halo 2, but because of Conker because its shaping up to be a good game and loved the original.


taking it a bit personally. and no one said anything about your preference. everyone has a preference of which console they like best. you brought preference into this, not anyone else.

but if nintendo went to MS, and i still bought the nintendo game on the MS system, i am still supporting nintendo. just also supporting MS. But, the way you put it, makes it sound like, if 1 cent goes to MS while im trying to support nintendo then its not worth it.

Sorry, i just dont get the idea behind giving up something you like and really hurting the company you like just because some of your money goes elsewhere. a games a game.

[MuGen]

my point exactly...

if a person is loyal to Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft then they should support them in WHATEVER WAY possible.... even if money goes to the partner company.

of course thats my opinion...... and preference was never the issue. people started posting how they would give up gaming if Nintendo went to Microsoft. If anyone is a true gamer they'd still support the entity of Nintendo, no matter what.

[Blackmane]

Sorry, i just dont get the idea behind giving up something you like and really hurting the company you like just because some of your money goes elsewhere. a games a game.

What is trying to be said is that if Nintendo was bought out, then the games wouldn't be the same, therefore "a games a game" wouldn't be correct. The game would then be inferior to what it could be. At least, that is my opinion of what would happen if the company was bought out by MS and they had a controlling interest in what they produced.

Of course, I like Nintendo. It has always been my brand of choice. However, I would surely continue gaming no matter what (CounterStrike: Source is my love right now :D)

[Solid Snake]

I am a loyal fan to Nintendo, but I also own all three consoles and am currently playing games for PS2 and XBox. If game is a good game then I will buy it regardless if it is Nintendo or not. Nintendo doesn't have the INABILITY to just think inside their own little world, what makes them great is that they are the only company that thinks outside the box.

You can't honestly tell me if Nintendo had been bought out by Microsoft 5 years ago that there would be talk about a new console going to revolutionize gaming. The reason why I am against a merger is because of the direction Nintendo likes to take the gamer. They like to come up with new and original ideas and Sony and Microsoft just like to improve on whats already existing.

Im not saying that if there was a merger I would no longer support Nintendo, it would just be a very dissapointing and sad day for the video game industry.

[MuGen]

well....... i'm not saying no one would be disappointed... but I can't see Nintendo's fans giving up gaming because of a merger.

I think any real person would be sad if their company got bought out.... but in the longrun their company is still with them in their hearts ( lol )

[Crash]

hmm... take a look at this:

http://www.p-nintendo.com/images/dossiers/nintendo/screendigest.gif

http://www.p-nintendo.com/news/N-1064063123.html

and everyone knows that xbox sells like 400 units a week in japan compared to gamecube 25000

xbox leads gc in n. america and that's it, but they are definately in second place worldwide, plus nintendo is actually making money by selling more software, and not at a loss... if anyone quits, it'll be microsoft.. they'll probably not last another losing generation.

[Null]

What is trying to be said is that if Nintendo was bought out, then the games wouldn't be the same, therefore "a games a game" wouldn't be correct. The game would then be inferior to what it could be. At least, that is my opinion of what would happen if the company was bought out by MS and they had a controlling interest in what they produced.

Of course, I like Nintendo. It has always been my brand of choice. However, I would surely continue gaming no matter what (CounterStrike: Source is my love right now :D)


i dont see why it wouldnt be the same tho, it would still be nintendo making the game, Microsoft may say no to a project, saying we dont want to publish a game like that. but they arent going to come in and say hmmm. make ganondorf wear pink shoes. it would be all nintendo making the game.

and you wouldnt be worried about what it 'could be' because you'd be hapy of what it is. it would still be a game and therefor, a games a game.

However, i should rephrase that to say, a good game is a good game.


(whats your name in CSS?, should play sometime)

[MuGen]

I bet bill gates would step in and say something about making Zelda appear more racier.... lol... but other than that I dun think Nintendo would let Microsoft interfere with their games if they got bought.... Microsoft can only trash a project, not alter it........i hope...

[Canyarion]

Sorry Crash but that's bullcrap and you know it. M$ won't leave the console market. Never. They have enough money to monopolize that market as well. In the end they are going to win unless somebody has a VERY good plan to stop them.

Even though Nintendo still makes a lot of money, they are losing ground. :(

Not saying that I don't have faith in Nintendo. :D

[MuGen]

No one is going to drop the console market unless they aren't seeling at all. As long as their is a fan base for anything, they will remain.

Didn't you wonder how Sega left? Cuz the Tri-minion of Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft stole their fanbase.

[The Duggler]

Ah Crash...Thank you for that wonderful post :)

[MuGen]

Microsoft has enough money but money can't buy everything

They can put all their money into the console market and still wouldn't be able to beat Sony. Because they are meant to be a software company...hence Microsoft[ware]

Yes... that is a fanboy comment.....

[Blackmane]

i dont see why it wouldnt be the same tho, it would still be nintendo making the game, Microsoft may say no to a project, saying we dont want to publish a game like that. but they arent going to come in and say hmmm. make ganondorf wear pink shoes. it would be all nintendo making the game.

and you wouldnt be worried about what it 'could be' because you'd be hapy of what it is. it would still be a game and therefor, a games a game.

However, i should rephrase that to say, a good game is a good game.

Well, you may have a point, but you cannot deny that Microsoft, if they bought Nintendo, would try to make the hit franchises more applicable to older ages according to their idea of what older people want.

But, this is a silly arguement because Nintendo will never die! Long live Nintendo!!!

[Solid Snake]

I agree, this is a good controversial subject to debate over, but heck will freeze over before Nintendo gets bought out by Microsoft.

[jeepnut]

Microsoft buys Nintendo. I can see it now...

Mario Extreme Beach Volleyball

[Vampyr]

I've been hoping for a long time that Nintendo would go third party. The only reason I buy a Nintendo system is so I can play the classic Nintendo games, and if I want to be able to play anything else, I have to go buy ANOTHER system.

I think it would be excellent if I could buy Microsoft's next gen system, and be able to play all the great games along with Nintendo's games.

If I do buy a system next generation, I was already leaning towards Microsoft's system. If they are as efficient as they were this generation, than their next system will be the best as well. Xbox may not be selling the best, and may not be the most popular in households, but it is a far superior system. It has a huge hard drive, great online support, and no one can argue that the graphics are the best out there.

In my opinion, Microsoft buying Nintendo would be one of the best things to happen in gaming in a long time.

[DarrenMcLeod]

I've been hoping for a long time that Nintendo would go third party. The only reason I buy a Nintendo system is so I can play the classic Nintendo games, and if I want to be able to play anything else, I have to go buy ANOTHER system.

I think it would be excellent if I could buy Microsoft's next gen system, and be able to play all the great games along with Nintendo's games.

There's a problem with your theory. Nintendo going third party (ala sega) would mean that they'd put games on both M$ and Sony's systems. That'd be even worse, because now you have to buy two systems in order to play different Nintendo franchises in case they make some console exclusive!

Now, I don't know about you, but the amount of gaming I get out of the GameCube, even if I want games on other systems, is quite sufficient. I have a large library of Cube games, haven't had a chance to finish lots, and there are still more Cube games that I'd love to own. Nintendo's system is all I need.

And Null, call it blind loyalty or whatever you want, but I probably won't buy a system other than by the big N. I don't want to play Zelda with an Xbox controller. I don't want games pumped out for money rather than enjoyment. I don't want Sony's anti-multiplayer policy (2 controller ports, GREAT plan). Nintendo innovates while others copy... without Nintendo I fear there will be no innovation anymore.

Crash said it best... Nintendo for life.

[dropCGCF]

I don't see this happening, competition makes the industry stronger.

[Vampyr]

There's a problem with your theory. Nintendo going third party (ala sega) would mean that they'd put games on both M$ and Sony's systems. That'd be even worse, because now you have to buy two systems in order to play different Nintendo franchises in case they make some console exclusive!

Now, I don't know about you, but the amount of gaming I get out of the GameCube, even if I want games on other systems, is quite sufficient. I have a large library of Cube games, haven't had a chance to finish lots, and there are still more Cube games that I'd love to own. Nintendo's system is all I need.

And Null, call it blind loyalty or whatever you want, but I probably won't buy a system other than by the big N. I don't want to play Zelda with an Xbox controller. I don't want games pumped out for money rather than enjoyment. I don't want Sony's anti-multiplayer policy (2 controller ports, GREAT plan). Nintendo innovates while others copy... without Nintendo I fear there will be no innovation anymore.

Crash said it best... Nintendo for life.


I would rather that Nintendo be bought by Microsoft so that I would only have to buy that system, an no other. But how would Nintendo, by making games for Microsoft and Sony, be worse than them being first party and designing games for their own hardware? Either way I would need two systems. As it is currently, I have to have a GCN if I want the Nintendo titles, and another system if I want to enjoy anything else. I don't care what the biggest GCN fanboy says, Nintendo's third party support sucks.

And I would still be saving money, anyway, because I currently own all three current generation consoles. If Nintendo dropped out and started developing only software, that's one less system I would need.

And lets say that Nintendo did become third party and developed games for Microsoft and Sony. Nearly all of their games would be available for both systems (that makes the most money), and if a game is exlusive for one console, it probably wouldn't remain that way forever, a la Resident Evil 4.

And really, what does a different controller matter? I didn't know anyone really LIKED the GCN controller. It's my biggest turn off to the entire system. It just feels wierd. I like using the XBox controller for shooters, and the PS2 controller for everything else. (except maybe driving games)

And it is flawed thinking to say that Nintendo develops games for enjoyment rather than for money. Face it, every company is in it for the money. If Nintendo was just doing it for the fun of things, than why aren't their prices lower than everyone elses?

And Nintendo claims to be the great innovator of the gaming industry...yet they are clearly the most hard headed and stubborn of them all. How can they claim to be innovators when they won't even give up the idea of online gaming not being mainstream? They are the most unwilling to change, yet somehow get landed with being the "most innovative". If you ask me, Xbox Live is innovative. The Eye Toy is innovative. The DS is kind of innovative...but still really gimmicky, and pretty much a rehash of that old two screen game and watch thingy.

But you are right about Sony's two controller port concept. I don't know where they got that idea. But this thread isn't supposed to be about Sony, it's supposed to be about Nintendo and Microsoft coming together, and other than for the sake of tradition, I can't think of a single negative connotation to this idea.

[Null]

And Null, call it blind loyalty or whatever you want, but I probably won't buy a system other than by the big N. I don't want to play Zelda with an Xbox controller. I don't want games pumped out for money rather than enjoyment. I don't want Sony's anti-multiplayer policy (2 controller ports, GREAT plan). Nintendo innovates while others copy... without Nintendo I fear there will be no innovation anymore.
you never will play a zelda on an xbox controller tho, if it happend you'd be playing a zelda game on whatever controller is out at that time. are you seriously saying that a controller that hasnt been made yet is already not good enough?

the money/enjoyment comment is just stupid. nintendo doesnt put games out only for enjoyment. they put them out to make money on them. I have no idea where people get the idea that nintendo is the saints of the universe and dont care about money, thats complete bs.

you dont want sonys multiplayer, (ala online, bunches of people together) but you want nintendos multiplayer (ala.......well not really much idea of multiplayer at all really) MS is the only 1 of the 3 who got the whole idea right. 4 controllers AND online.

and i've seen as much innovation from nintendo as i have seen from MS and sony lately. which incase you were unable to tell, is none. neither of the 3 have innovated jack. however what they do, is 2 of the 3 give gamers what they want, or at least try. the 3rd gives you things you never wanted and taunts everything it does as INNOVATIVE!

serously tho. innovation comes with time. forcing something innovative doesnt do any good if its time hasnt come. and as far as i can see, (please list some if there are) there has been no real innovation in quite a while. nintendo seems the same as the other 2. if nintendo (or any one of the 3 for that matter) quit today, i think we'd be in the exact same spot 10 years from now than if they never quit.


Crash said it best... Nintendo for life. well. from the sound of most people. its more like, "Nintendo for life! unless any of my money goes to another company in which case nintendo can burn!" its quite the interesting idea tho. ;)

[Jason1]

"Asked what he thought about Nintendo's future, Hawkins replied: "My magic eight ball says they will be acquired by Microsoft within five years."


My magic 8 ball says you can suck it.

[Null]

"Asked what he thought about Nintendo's future, Hawkins replied: "My magic eight ball says they will be acquired by Microsoft within five years."


My magic 8 ball says you can suck it.

mine always says ask again later. :(

[KillerGremlin]

Yup.....I'm going to back Null up on this topic. The amount of fanboyism on this forum is sickening. You people would rather pledge your soul to Nintendo then move on. Some people are just afraid of change I guess....

[Jonbo298]

Do you even know what GameTavern originally was Gremlin?

[Blackmane]

Lol, he thinks this is fanboyism?

Does he not know that this is nothing?

[DarrenMcLeod]

I'm gonna tackle a lot here, so bear with me. Remember, this is all opinions. Everyone has personal bias, and obviously mine is with Nintendo, just like other people here are for Sony, Micro$oft, or whoever.


And I would still be saving money, anyway, because I currently own all three current generation consoles. If Nintendo dropped out and started developing only software, that's one less system I would need.

If you're dropping down the cash for every single platform out there, I don't think money is a big concern for you.


And really, what does a different controller matter? I didn't know anyone really LIKED the GCN controller. It's my biggest turn off to the entire system. It just feels wierd. I like using the XBox controller for shooters, and the PS2 controller for everything else. (except maybe driving games)

I find GC controller most comfortable, PS2 controller most versatile, XBOX controller....is good for halo.


And it is flawed thinking to say that Nintendo develops games for enjoyment rather than for money. Face it, every company is in it for the money. If Nintendo was just doing it for the fun of things, than why aren't their prices lower than everyone elses?

Nintendo takes risks left and right if they feel it would add enjoyment. You can't tell me that Pikmin and cel shading Zelda were results of deciding what is best for profit.


And Nintendo claims to be the great innovator of the gaming industry...yet they are clearly the most hard headed and stubborn of them all. How can they claim to be innovators when they won't even give up the idea of online gaming not being mainstream? They are the most unwilling to change, yet somehow get landed with being the "most innovative". If you ask me, Xbox Live is inno

vative. The Eye Toy is innovative. The DS is kind of innovative...but still really gimmicky, and pretty much a rehash of that old two screen game and watch thingy.

Wow. Let's see.

Xbox Live and Eye Toy have both been done on PC for as long ages and ages. It can hardly be considered "innovative". The only thing innovative about Xbox Live was the timing.

Who made Game and Watch? And touch screen and wireless networking and microphone are more than rehashing.


But this thread isn't supposed to be about Sony, it's supposed to be about Nintendo and Microsoft coming together, and other than for the sake of tradition, I can't think of a single negative connotation to this idea.
I mentioned Sony because you talked about Nintendo as a third party developer, which would include Sony.

Finally, no negative connotations to the idea of being with Microsoft?

One word: Rare.


you dont want sonys multiplayer, (ala online, bunches of people together) but you want nintendos multiplayer (ala.......well not really much idea of multiplayer at all really) MS is the only 1 of the 3 who got the whole idea right. 4 controllers AND online.


Call me old-fashioned, but when I mention multiplayer, I don't mean online gaming. When I want online gaming, I'll mention online gaming. See, I've played XBox Live and PS2 Online. Just because I only talk about Cube doesn't mean I haven't placed some time into other consoles. XBox Live is great in theory, but then you play it, and it's a bunch of ****in twelve year old kids yelling and doing stupid ****. You can't control it. I don't know these people. Do you? It's like playing with a bunch of bots with poor grammatical skills. The one time I had fun on XBox Live was when I XBox Lived with people I know.

The most fun I've ever had multiplayer (excluding LAN parties, although this tops those in most cases) is 4 players, in the same room, trash talking and fighting and cheering and chest bumps all around. Nintendo owns all three categories when it comes to straight out four player fun. Beach Spikers, Mario Kart, Mario Golf, Mario Tennis, Sports games (NBA Street Vol 2, Sega Soccer Slam, NHL games, etc), F-Zero, Smash Bros Melee, Super Monkey Ball, and basically every good 4 player game available on all consoles.


You can use makeshift terms like "fanboy" or whatever you want. I've tried other systems... I owned a PSX and my buddies own Xbox and PS2 and I've played a hell of a lot of them... but they aren't the same. Everyone tells me PSX won the console war of the era, but they didn't in my mind. I had the mod chip and burned games... I tried to not be a "fanboy" like I was told I was. But it didn't work. Nintendo for life doesn't mean we'll hate them if they go to another company. I wouldn't boycott them in the least, I just probably wouldn't buy a console by someone else. Maybe I would, maybe I wouldn't. Who knows.

[Null]

Finally, no negative connotations to the idea of being with Microsoft?

One word: Rare.

Microsoft hasnt done anything bad to rare tho, they havnt forced them to change the way they do anything. if microsoft did do that, if they did step in and say do this or that. Xbox would probably have a couple more Rare games right now. Rare seems to be doing exactly the same as they had done before. i personally believe nintendo kinda saw this coming in them, and sold them for good reason.

But i believe MS is letting rare work how rare wants.


and you keep bringing up the word fanboy whenever you talk to me, its like you want me to call you that or something, well im not and i wont. totally not the point of anything im saying.

[MuGen]

I'm sorry but I'm going to have to support Null on this one, because I agree with him wholeheartedly. Every single company is in it for the money, nuff said.

If you want Nintendo to win in a console war, put it in it's own category called "Just Games!" and every other console will compete in their own console war in a category called "Changing the Times"

I also laughed really hard, and had lots of LOL's when I saw Null replied to that post,
"Nintendo for life" and pointed out how the majority of people in this thread said they would give up gaming if Nintendo went third party.

I said... majority.... and you people know who you are, so if you didn't say you'd give up gaming don't reply saying "I never said I would."

It's a hardcopy fact that each company does it for the money. Sony I would have to say is a big money cruncher considering they require you to buy accessories to spruce up their system. (ala Multitap). But we all know each company has their way of sucking money out of their customers.

Sega was almost as old as Nintendo and they are making good money as third party support. Nintendo in my opinion is losing ground, and no matter how much of a fan of Nintendo you are, you cannot deny that fact.

The demograph that we saw showed that Gamecube owners were losing ground to even Xbox owners. I won't even mention Sony because they owned every country.

So between Xbox and GameCube, Xbox has been gaining in on Nintendo step by step and I feel its only a matter of time before Nintendo sells.

(And awaits the abundance of rebuttles and arguements)

[Blackmane]

I'm sorry

So am I. :(

First off, I only saw maybe two people say they would give up gaming if Nintendo goes out of the console business. Now, since somebody happened to say that, you are using that to categorize all of us opposing viewpoints. That is silly so you should stop bringing that up. The people who did say that haven't thought about it, or were just joking.

Second, you guys keep saying that these are companies and companies try to make money. Well, guess what? Nintendo made more than XBox this console war because they didn't have to take a loss on their hardware. Plus, they have the handheld market (for now). Even if PSP takes a foothold, you cannot deny that they will have the majority for at least this generation.

So, Nintendo is not going broke, so it really doesn't have to worry about going third party. My feeling is it still has a console or two under it's belt before it gets hard to tell whats going to happen.

[Null]

So am I. :(

First off, I only saw maybe two people say they would give up gaming if Nintendo goes out of the console business. Now, since somebody happened to say that, you are using that to categorize all of us opposing viewpoints. That is silly so you should stop bringing that up. The people who did say that haven't thought about it, or were just joking.
The reason thats the main point of the argument in this thread is because thats what the thread was started on. the rest of the thread really is an argument about that point. its not that one just happened to wonder in and say it, is that the thread was started on that exact thought. no ones catagorizing everyone, its was just still a debate about that original thought.


Second, you guys keep saying that these are companies and companies try to make money. Well, guess what? Nintendo made more than XBox this console war because they didn't have to take a loss on their hardware. Plus, they have the handheld market (for now). Even if PSP takes a foothold, you cannot deny that they will have the majority for at least this generation.

So, Nintendo is not going broke, so it really doesn't have to worry about going third party. My feeling is it still has a console or two under it's belt before it gets hard to tell whats going to happen.

at this point its way too early of who will have the majority in the handheld market for this generation. if your already ruling sony out i'd say your way ahead of yourself. right now its up for grabs. either could end up taking majority. odds are for nintendo, but that doenst mean anyone else has no shot.

and the discussion was never about who made more money on each console. it was about the fact that they are trying to make money. This point was not brought up to say nintendo is failing, it was brought up because someone said nintendo's the only one who makes games just for enjoyment. which is wrong, they do it to make money. That said, even if one company makes much more on each console sold, that doesnt mean they're doing better, the other company could be selling way way more and getting more because of it. Nintendo does not have to go bankrupt to sell, they just have to be hit with a deal they really like.

[MuGen]

well said...

[Blackmane]

at this point its way too early of who will have the majority in the handheld market for this generation. if your already ruling sony out i'd say your way ahead of yourself. right now its up for grabs. either could end up taking majority. odds are for nintendo, but that doenst mean anyone else has no shot.

and the discussion was never about who made more money on each console. it was about the fact that they are trying to make money. This point was not brought up to say nintendo is failing, it was brought up because someone said nintendo's the only one who makes games just for enjoyment. which is wrong, they do it to make money. That said, even if one company makes much more on each console sold, that doesnt mean they're doing better, the other company could be selling way way more and getting more because of it. Nintendo does not have to go bankrupt to sell, they just have to be hit with a deal they really like.

You have to be a realist and understand that even if Sony does incredibly well, they will not take the majority away from Nintendo in one generation. If they did very well and then made another handheld, that one might be able to take the lead. I never said they couldn't do well this generation, I said that they would not take the majority hold Nintendo has right away. It will take time, and one generation is not enough.

Second, you are speaking in a generality and not looking at facts. Xbox sold some more than Nintendo, but Nintendo had a profit margin that was much greater than Microsofts. We all know Microsoft didn't make much money this time around. So, why try to argue that? I understand that Microsoft needed to take a hit in profits in order to break into the market, and thats fine. But stop trying to suggest that they made it up in quantity because it wasn't much higher than Nintendo.

Nintendo is not near ready to sell, so of course, Microsoft could keep throwing bigger offers at them, but they are going to have to make a huge deal to get Nintendo to crumple with the current state of things. Like I have said, its hard to tell much farther then Revolution because we don't know how it is going to fare, but for right now, I think Nintendo is making plenty of money with what they are doing.

[DarrenMcLeod]

it was brought up because someone said nintendo's the only one who makes games just for enjoyment. which is wrong, they do it to make money.

I'm pretty sure you're referring to me. What I said was "I don't want games pumped out for money rather than enjoyment." All of a sudden, this is interpreted by everybody as "Nintendo is the only one who makes games that are fun, they don't care about money, Sony and Microsoft are moneywhores." That's not what I'm saying at all. Nintendo is in it to make a profit. That's obvious. It's why they didn't go into online gaming, it's why they do a lot of things. However, I see them a little less into profit than the other companies. Nintendo is dropping money into games like Pikmin, Donkey Konga, DK Jungle Beat etc etc. They changed Zelda, a beloved franchise, into a cartoony game. I don't know Microsoft and Sony's funded games, but i'm pretty sure most of them have been pretty safe bets : shooters, racing games, RPGs, etc.

The bottom line for all companies is profit, but I find Nintendo to be one company that cares a bit more about trying new gaming ideas that they think are fun.

Nintendo does not have to go bankrupt to sell, they just have to be hit with a deal they really like.
Exactly. A lot of people here are confusing being bought out with going bankrupt. The discussion is not "will Nintendo go bankrupt?", it's "Will Nintendo be bought by Microsoft". The answer to both questions, in my opinion, is no. The most I could see with Nintendo is a merger, but I can't see it with Microsoft... they're too American of a company (although that'd be beautiful for Xbox, they'd have good hold in the American market, and they'd finally be able to get some share in the Japanese market as well.)

[Null]

You have to be a realist and understand that even if Sony does incredibly well, they will not take the majority away from Nintendo in one generation. If they did very well and then made another handheld, that one might be able to take the lead. I never said they couldn't do well this generation, I said that they would not take the majority hold Nintendo has right away. It will take time, and one generation is not enough.

you said this generation. which means DS vs PSP. and what i said its up for grabs of which sells more and has the bigger percent of the market for this gen. which is true.
im not sure what your getting at tho. are you saying total? as in GB, GBC GBA etc. ? i hope not cuz thats majorly stating the obvious and something that needs not be said. if your talkin every handheld ever, then i'd say GBA will own more of the market then either DS or PSP. but thats a pointless discussion to be having.


Second, you are speaking in a generality and not looking at facts. Xbox sold some more than Nintendo, but Nintendo had a profit margin that was much greater than Microsofts. We all know Microsoft didn't make much money this time around. So, why try to argue that? I understand that Microsoft needed to take a hit in profits in order to break into the market, and thats fine. But stop trying to suggest that they made it up in quantity because it wasn't much higher than Nintendo.

you are totally not getting what im saying tho. im not speaking in anything because i dont know where your getting this topic from, i've never talked about who sold more. i dont care who sold more, i dont care how much money each makes. what im saying is, and only this. -- they all want to make money --. so why do you keep bringing up who makes more or less? its still making money.

the other part was a hypathetical responce to what you said. i think your taking in real companies and using them in my hypothetical situation, but im not sure why. i never said MS makes more in quantity, YOU came up with that yourself. all i said is its possible for one making less on each console to make more total. dont stick names into things i said and say i said em. please.


Nintendo is not near ready to sell, so of course, Microsoft could keep throwing bigger offers at them, but they are going to have to make a huge deal to get Nintendo to crumple with the current state of things. Like I have said, its hard to tell much farther then Revolution because we don't know how it is going to fare, but for right now, I think Nintendo is making plenty of money with what they are doing.

of course they have plenty of money. i have not seen one person dissagree with that. who said they arent?
Fact tho, you dont know if nintendo is ready to sell or not. all you know is that they arent in money trouble. im not saying they're ready to sell. but i sure as hell dont know whats going through thier minds. Microsoft could be ready to sell to nintendo for all i know. no one knows whats going to happen. crazy things happen all the time. as i said, nintendo does not have to be in money trouble to sell.


and to clearify again so we dont keep going into an argument over thigns we agre on..

I dont care who sells more
Nintendo makes a bigger profit on each console sold.
Nintendo is not in money trouble.
and all im saying is they're all trying to make money.


So my question im leaving you with, is what exactly are we arguing about?



The bottom line for all companies is profit, but I find Nintendo to be one company that cares a bit more about trying new gaming ideas that they think are fun.

i agree with everything you said, but this line is very well put. because its something thats always bothered me. they make games and new ideas that THEY think are fun. i really wish they'd listen to what everyone else thinks is fun. not totally, i like that they come up with some stuff. but i wish they'd listen more. kind of a compramise between the 2.

[Solid Snake]

Maybe this will end this debate that could go on forever.

What are we arguing about? We are arguing about if Nintendo is doomed. Which the answer to that is NO.

Would it be dissapointing or sad day if Nintendo was bought? YES.

Would most people like to see Nintendo get bought out? NO.

Will people stop playing games if Nintendo is bought out? maybe an extremely small percentage.

Does Nintendo have the tendency to be considered more innovated? YES.

Is it possible that Nintendo could get bought out? YES.

Is it likely that Microsoft will buy Nintendo? NO.

So there you go, answers to all our questions.

[DarrenMcLeod]

you said this generation. which means DS vs PSP. and what i said its up for grabs of which sells more and has the bigger percent of the market for this gen. which is true.
im not sure what your getting at tho. are you saying total? as in GB, GBC GBA etc. ? i hope not cuz thats majorly stating the obvious and something that needs not be said. if your talkin every handheld ever, then i'd say GBA will own more of the market then either DS or PSP. but thats a pointless discussion to be having.
Agreed. That's like saying "Nintendo sold so many SNES consoles, they're obviously going to beat out Sony's Playstation with their next system." Way too early to call.


So my question im leaving you with, is what exactly are we arguing about?

Nothing, really.


i agree with everything you said, but this line is very well put. because its something thats always bothered me. they make games and new ideas that THEY think are fun. i really wish they'd listen to what everyone else thinks is fun. not totally, i like that they come up with some stuff. but i wish they'd listen more. kind of a compramise between the 2.
Yeah, that's why I phrased it that way. Nintendo does what Nintendo thinks is best, whether it is or not. It's a double edged sword - I like it most of the time, sometimes I wish that they'd just figure out what the public wants. For the most part though, I like what Nintendo does.

[DarrenMcLeod]

Maybe this will end this debate that could go on forever.

What are we arguing about? We are arguing about if Nintendo is doomed. Which the answer to that is NO.

Would it be dissapointing or sad day if Nintendo was bought? YES.

Would most people like to see Nintendo get bought out? NO.

Will people stop playing games if Nintendo is bought out? maybe an extremely small percentage.

Does Nintendo have the tendency to be considered more innovated? YES.

Is it possible that Nintendo could get bought out? YES.

Is it likely that Microsoft will buy Nintendo? NO.

So there you go, answers to all our questions.
Best post in this topic yet.

[Null]

Maybe this will end this debate that could go on forever.

arguments are fun tho as long as they dont turn into personal attacks or things that would make people angry. thats what forums are for; discussing things. :)

[MuGen]

Yay!! :beerchug: We've settled a long arguement. Now... heres fun with smilies... you guys can join in too as some of you might disagree with these smilies:

:PS2: does...
:bonk: :boxing:
to...
:GC: and :Xbox:

hahahaha! lol....i know... its such a fanboy thing to do... but really after all those debates... i can't help myself

[KillerGremlin]

Do you even know what GameTavern originally was Gremlin?

I've been here nearly as long as you, and yes, I know this forum is one of the two spawns of a Nintendo-fanboy forum. Ironically, I grew up. Being a fanboy sucks. It really does. But whatever floats your boat. No one here is a hardcore fanboy, but some of the reactions to Nintendo going third party have been harsh.

[Blackmane]

I think I just like arguing with you, Null :D

[Jonbo298]

Just because I have a preference means I'm still acting like a 10 year old? Wow, thanks

[Solid Snake]

Posted by Blackmane
I think I just like arguing with you, Null

Totally, you bring up some good points and you know your stuff.

+ rep for Null

You are the definetly the Master Debater. lol :D

[Teuthida]

Whee.

Never had a Nintendo console break except for my original GB after it "fell" out of a 10 story building.

My Sony TV only lasted 25 years. Pathetic.

Never owned any hardware made by Microsoft but I did "abuse" my roommate's Xbox when he wasn't there. Quite durable indeed.


If Nintendo were to be a 2nd party I would rather have them develop for Microsoft. 25 years for a TV just doesn't cut it...

[Crash]

I've said this many times... you can compare nintendo to the Mac... superior but have a cult like fan base... not going anywhere at anytime...


sony is like microsoft windows (pc) inferior technology and games (in my opinion) but sells more because the world is sold on ps2...

i play my xbox the most probably, like more games on the cube and they wont ever catch up to sony, but nintendo will never drop hardware.....


in other news the new cell chip for the PS3 is crap.... sony admitted it themselves:


Meanwhile, Nanako Kato, official spokeswoman of the Sony Computer Entertainment headquarters in Japan, was careful to cut through the hype created by the Cell Chip announcement.

“The details of Cell announced at ISSCC are based on the full specs of the chip. Cell is the broadband processor used for a wide number of applications, and will be optimized according to the needs of each application,” she told INQ7.net.

Asked to comment on how powerful a Cell processor the PS3 will be able to accommodate, she replied: “The performance of Cell announced at this time may not equal the performance of SCE’s next-generation computer entertainment system. At this point in time, it is too premature to discuss our next system. We will announce the details in due course.” lol_2.gif

Ironically, both the PS3 and the next-generation console of its closest rival, Microsoft, will make use of IBM’s processor technology, though of course the next Xbox won’t be powered by the Cell chip. Microsoft has yet to unveil the specs of the successor to the Xbox, which has been code-named Xenon (and sometimes referred to as Xbox 2 or even Xbox 360). Some of these alleged “official documents” leaked on the Net have claimed that Xenon will be powered by three IBM 64-bit processors (which ironically are supposed to be the same type of chips that power Apple’s G5 PowerMac).

Asked to compare the IBM chips that will be used for the PS3 and Xbox 2, IBM Fellow Kahle replied: “Microsoft announced that it has licensed leading-edge semiconductor processor technology from IBM for use in future Xbox products and services to be announced at a later date. No other details have been disclosed and we cannot compare Cell to any custom work for Microsoft.”


translation: "cell chip isn't going to be able to work the way we want it to in the PS3... We suck hardcore"

[Null]

:rolleyes:

[Jonbo298]

Didnt Sony hype cell to be eleventy billion times faster then any PC Processor :p (I'm being sarcastic, OK?)

But oh well. Every company is gonna have to cut corners from their hype

[Blackmane]

Hmmm, interesting, but no unexpected.

You have to think. Would Sony be willing to pay so much money to get the very best Cell chip? It is probably too costly to do that, so they are going to go with a good, economic version. It makes sense.

[Vampyr]

If you're dropping down the cash for every single platform out there, I don't think money is a big concern for you.

It took me a very long time to collect every system. I just got my Xbox back in January, so I havn't had all three systems for very long. I got a GCN for Christmas (it was my very first console for this generation), and then I saved up and bought a PS2 the summer following, and then a couple years later got the Box. I'm not rich, I just manage my money well enough so that I can eventually get the things I want. I would be much happier if I could have put that money I spent on a GCN into buying more games for the other two systems.


I find GC controller most comfortable, PS2 controller most versatile, XBOX controller....is good for halo.

Good for you. That's really a matter of personal opinion, I have nothing against the GCN controller, it just doesn't seem to be really GREAT for anything.


Nintendo takes risks left and right if they feel it would add enjoyment. You can't tell me that Pikmin and cel shading Zelda were results of deciding what is best for profit.

I said that Nintendo was in it for the money (which they are), but in no way did I say they were doing a good job of it. It's easy to see they are being stupid about their marketing. They make their system look like a purple purse, they REFUSE to listen to their fans by designing a cel shaded Zelda and not going online. If they aren't trying to please us, then what the hell are they doing? Why do they want to make things that their fans don't want?

They are definatly in it for the money, they just aren't being smart about it. Take their memory cards for example. It took them FOREVER just to release a memory card with over a 1000 blocks on it, and by then it was too late. We already had a crap load of their other measly memory cards. Are you saying that things like small memory cards are an innovation as well? I think Nintendo has fallen into the idea that if they make ANYTHING different, for better or worse, they are being innovative.


Wow. Let's see.

Xbox Live and Eye Toy have both been done on PC for as long ages and ages. It can hardly be considered "innovative". The only thing innovative about Xbox Live was the timing.

Who made Game and Watch? And touch screen and wireless networking and microphone are more than rehashing.

You do know the definition of the word "innovative", right? It means "new" and "different". PC may have had online gaming and an eye toy product (I'm not sure about the latter, I'm just taking your word for it), but a CONSOLE didn't, therefore it is NEW. The dreamcast was online, but never before had a company designed such a powerful online system that brought all gamers together and unified the monthly fees. Even PC's havn't done something like that, where you pay one fee and can play all your games online. Xbox Live was innovative, and so was the Eye Toy.

And so what if Nintendo made Game and Watch? They made it a LONG TIME AGO. You can't remake something that you did a long time ago and was innovative at the time and STILL call it innovative. The touch screen thing is cool, and it is innovative, I'll give you that, but it's nothing ground breaking.


Finally, no negative connotations to the idea of being with Microsoft?

One word: Rare.


Rare does as Rare wants. Microsoft didn't change that.