Topic: M$ and Nintendo?

[Infernal Monkey]

Quote
Originally posted by: joshnickerson

Quote


Cue the "Odd Couple" theme song!

Homer: Hey Lisa, what's your faaaavorite show?
Lisa: Well, until you taped over it, The Little Mermaid
Homer: That's right! The Odd Couple! Now prepare to meet your comically mismatched roomate, Bart!
Homer: Do do do doooo, do do do do do do doooooo!
Lisa: DAD!
Homer: DO DO DO DAH DAAAAHHH! DAH DAH DAH DAH DAAAAAAAH DO!

But yeah, this sounds like an ass rumour. And ass rumours are the worst kind! Watch out next week as this obscure French site reveals SHOCKING news that Nintendo is actually teaming up with THQ to make the "CRAP BOX 4000!"

 

[Darc Requiem]

Quote
Originally posted by: thecubedcanuck
PLEASE, stop with M$ garbage, it makes your point look childish and blatently baised.

Also, stop looking at this from a Nintendo fan point of view, and look at it from a business stand point, and you will see it makes a lot of sense.

Yes, NIN is making money on consoles still, but the numbers have gone down with each of the last two consoles and will continue to drop without adding to their fanbase. In short they will eventually stop making money on consoles if Sony isnt fought a little better and MS keeps gaining more ground. Remeber that MS has lots of money, I know NIN does to, but they dont have enough to fight MS head to head, not even close.

When you look at this from a business point of view it does help NIN, it does help MS, and it would hurt Sony in the long run.

Remember, none of you believed the RARE rumor either.

Exactly how would this help Nintendo from a business standpoint? MS is losing bucket loads of money and Nintendo is making money hand over fist. Nintendo continues to make more money than even Sony. A partnership with MS would be fruitless and pointless. Nintendo does things there way. Wasting a half billion to set up X-box live, losing more than $120 per console, paying 3rd parties dev cost on games that will appear on competing consoles, etc. are MS' way of doing business. MS has lost 1.5 billion dollars on X-box. Nintendo and MS are two different companies with completely different business ideals. From a business standpoint it makes no sense. It would be beneficial to MS and not Nintendo. If you look at Nintendo's business decisions they only do things that benefit their profit margin. Its the major reason Nintendo didn't buy Sega. They didn't want to take on Sega's 2 billion dollar debt.

Darc Requiem

[Darc Requiem]

Sorry double post.....whats up with the forums lately.  

[nemo_83]

For a while I wondered if Dolphin and Xbox would turn out to be the same system.  That turned out to be false.  But the whole ATI prob means one of two things.  Same console or same architecture.  I bet on same architecture so both can dominate Sony when third parties find it easy to release a game without having to rewrite the code but still release it on two systems.

[rpglover]

"Same console or same architecture"

i dont think so- even if that were to happen (highly unlikely at least in my perspective) microsoft and nintendo probably have different thoughts on what their graphics chips should need and do- nintendo gives the designers a long list of specifications that they want their chips to do, and the designers create it to suit their needs- microsoft could go for a different route entirely- but i doubt that they will team up with nintendo

[Shift Key]

I have a few remarks about this topic:

- Microsoft have more to gain than Nintendo. They're not making money from the Xbox, and have basically no market in Japan. Nintendo on the other hand, are plodding along, making a healthy profit out of a smaller market share. Sure, 'you have to make a loss to make a profit', but how much loss will it take?

- The companies have huge differences in terms of goals and strategy. In terms of established software and hardcore fans combining with mainstream gamers and recognisable brandname, there are obvious benefits, IN THEORY. Just like communism works, IN THEORY. But to make it work requires the two companies to work together, and I just can't see that happening.

- The Sony/Nintendo partnership would be successful because it has the most popular console combined with the most recognisable characters and games, but in terms of co-operation, I see Sony wearing the pants in that partnership.

- I know Sega has major debts, but I can't understand why Nintendo wouldn't buy them. Sure it's $2 billion, but Nintendo can probably absorb that, integrate the company as a major second party like SK and Retro, and get them to work on some new stuff! Nintendo needs Sega on their side, and their side only. It may not be the best business decision, but it should pay dividends in the long term, by winning back market share.

[DrGAKMAN]

Hello kids...

Well, I happen to know that Microsoft WANTS to team up with Nintendo in one form or another.  They originally wanted to buy Nintendo before this generation, but it didn't happen 'cos of Mr. Yamauchi anti-MS stigma & Microsoft wanting Nintendo to ditch their GAMECUBE system altogether.  Microsoft knows now that they can't play such hardball with Nintendo this time as it would cost them too much to buy them out and would be asking too much to try to tell them what to do.  So I think Microsoft is instead trying the cozy approach by coming to Nintendo under Nintendo's terms and not the we're gonna buy you, you're gonna do this for us, you're gonna throw away your plans for the next system and you're gonna like it!  They have been less insulting of Nintendo lately and in fact the recent ATi announcement may be Microsoft actually complimenting Nintendo by admitting ATi's work on the GAMECUBE's graphics set impressed them to the point of wanting to work with them.

I think alot of you are thinking that they'd have to merge or Microsoft would have to buy Nintendo or something...NO...that's not the only way.  In fact a less expensive *and* more agreeable term is to just be partners.  Go on as they normally would with their own respective systems/philosophies next generation only make it to where the systems chipsets are similar (*cough*ATi*cough*) and that both systems use a jointly created disc format.  That way Nintendo & Microsoft games can be played on either Nintendo or Microsoft systems.  They take themselves out of competition with each other all the while never hendering the other companies plans.  They'd have to make it to where the developement tools would make the new games compatible with both systems and they'd have to agree on certain things like peripheral/controller specifications, but the systems themselves could be whatever each company wants them to be.

There wouldn't have to be some JOINT Nintendo+Microsoft system...they'd just to have to agree on the system's core aspects and media format.  The systems themselves could be very different.  Nintendo would most likely stick to their gaming-only philosophy and possibly make their next system a uber-console/portable.  Microsoft would instead compete head-to-head with Sony with their machine by adding all the bells & whistles to it.

Two completly different systems from two different companies BUT that play the same exact games and thusly helping themselves against a common enemy (Sony) while at the same time taking themselves out of competition with themselves.  It's like the same business model that VHS & DVD follow.  A universal format is created by the founders of the format, to use in machines they themselves make...each appealing to a different market but that play the same format which they (and outside 3RD parties) make software for to reap profits from.  It's what Sony ultimaly wants to do if their Playstation format is the only one left from the console "wars" so they can license out the software & hardware that plays the software to multiple companies to make multiple machines while they sit back and let the jack roll in.  If Microsoft & Nintendo can agree on a universal format for their systems then they sorta skip to Sony's next step before Sony can even do it and create a VHS/DVD like business model putting the squeeze on Sony to the point where they can legitamatly compete with them.

Garrison Andrew Kane

[Mannypon]

DrGAKMAN you made a good point, that idea would really work since we all know that the real money is made in the software and not the hardware.  So if they were both able to play each other's games, it'll basically increase market share in a sence and there wouldnt be a need for developers to make games across both nintendo's and microsoft's system, all they'll need is one since both can play it.  Sounds good to me and I dont see how it will do harm to either of them.  This idea is almost like how nintendo has the gamecube and the panasonic q but instead of the q, it'll be microsoft's system which will have all the extra options such as dvd and all that.

[The Omen]

Quote
The Sony/Nintendo partnership would be successful because it has the most popular console combined with the most recognisable characters and games, but in terms of co-operation, I see Sony wearing the pants in that partnership.

I think both MS and Sony see Nintendo as the wildcard.  I'm willing to bet Sony would partner with Nintendo , allowing Nintendo to work the games angle while Sony works on the entertainment side of things.  And since it'll have the almighty Playstation name, there will be massive sales, and no more 'shunning ' of Nintendo to the mass market.  I just cant see a MS/Nintendo venture helping Nintendo like this would.  In fact, it would hurt Nintendo in the Japan while remaining about the same in north america.

[Michael8983]

"Well, I happen to know that Microsoft WANTS to team up with Nintendo in one form or another. They originally wanted to buy Nintendo before this generation, but it didn't happen 'cos of Mr. Yamauchi anti-MS stigma & Microsoft wanting Nintendo to ditch their GAMECUBE system altogether."

Yamauchi isn't the only one with an anti-MS stigma.
If Nintendo did anything with MS, it would destroy Nintendo's reputation in Japan with consumers and especially other Japanese companies.
Nintendo is one of the most respected and most praised companies in the Japanese business world and there's no way it would throw that all away.

"That way Nintendo & Microsoft games can be played on either Nintendo or Microsoft systems. They take themselves out of competition with each other all the while never hendering the other companies plans. They'd have to make it to where the developement tools would make the new games compatible with both systems and they'd have to agree on certain things like peripheral/controller specifications, but the systems themselves could be whatever each company wants them to be."

That would work out great except Nintendo's console would be a huge failure. Everywhere except maybe Japan.
Nintendo has constantly stressed that it relies on exclusive games to sell its consoles. Take away the exclusive games and people don't buy Nintendo consoles anymore.
If both an MS and a Nintendo console played all the same games, the vast majority of people would buy the MS console.
Nintendo would essentially end up being nothing more than an unofficial MS second-party.

"Two completly different systems from two different companies BUT that play the same exact games and thusly helping themselves against a common enemy (Sony) while at the same time taking themselves out of competition with themselves."

As long as Nintendo and MS were still seperate companies with seperate consoles that consumers would have to choose between, they would still be in competition.  

[rpglover]

"Two completly different systems from two different companies BUT that play the same exact games and thusly helping themselves against a common enemy (Sony) while at the same time taking themselves out of competition with themselves."

yeah but how would that help nintendo at all? as michael pointed out earlier- that means that all the things that nintendo helps push consoles with (thier exclusive game titles) would now be on a completely different system along with theirs- that just makes the next xbox from microsoft even more enticing to buy rather than nintendo's console- sure nintendo would sell the games and make profit as a publisher, but what about the consoles? i really dont see how that could help nintendo, but it sure could help get the xbox pushing- combining their lineup with nintendo's

[Pale]

I don't believe this at all.....but wouldn't it be damn cool if the next system was backward compatible with bout Nintendo and Ass-Box games? =P

[KDR_11k]

What has MS to bring to the table? Sony can manufacture hardware, Nintendo can make games, what can MS do? Provide money? Hell, there are banks for that. Give an image? There are advertisement companies that specialize in building up images. Really, MS used mostly PC parts for the XBox meaning they don't have much to add by themselves and they don't make good games either, all they do is buy out game companies. That sure as hell isn't something you get a partner for.

[DrGAKMAN]

Uhhhhh...

I think their individual console sales would be moot at this point since they BOTH play the same games.  Exclussives are moot too since they're really not trying to outsell each other, but instead, Sony...or at least compete.

Giving gamers a choice between a cheaper Nintendo made games-only machine and an all-in-one Microsoft system that both play the same games is not only good, but diversifying people's tastes without really competing with one another.  I've forgotten that this isn't gaming-age.com where I've been talking about my Nintendo going more portable theory for a while now.  I believe that Nintendo will aim to make their next system discman sized and make it to where the next GameBoy can display GAMECUBE quality visuals so you can hook them up together and ultimatly play next generation games on the go.  This would be more than the perfect answer to PSP *and* cosolidate Nintendo's GameBoy dominance with their ailing console line to create a uber-portable/console market all their own.  Microsoft's machine will not just play games, but I imagine will have alot of features the PSX3 has.  The big thing is now, if they team up now they can have each others games as an extra selling point to their systems over Sony's.  While Microsoft would probably do better in America with their bigger badder system, Nintendo would most likely do better in Japan since it's name/system design will do alot better there for that market...but either way it doesn't matter 'cos the *real* money is in the software and I garauntee if they were to team up they would sell more software.  It would really benifit developers 'cos, by making just one game for them, they reach two completly diverse markets.  It would benifit gamers 'cos instead of having to buy two systems to enjoy Microsoft & Nintendo's software libraries they'll only have to buy one.

This talk of a Sony team up is what's *really* rediculous.  Sony has already drawn the battle lines with PSP...they're not gonna back down...they want to force Nintendo out of the market or force them to go 3RD party...not to team up with them.  Sony are control freaks, they would want Nintendo to drop the GAMECUBE & GameBoy line before joining them thus making them dependant on Sony.  Microsoft may have wanted that before this generation, but they know that Nintendo won't give up their portable or console lines and be b!tched into making games for someone elses system.  Besides, Microsoft doesn't want Nintendo to ditch the strong GameBoy line  for some silly "X-BOY" either...I'm sure they're more willing to come to terms than Sony is...why...'cos Sony is dominant and therefore arogant where as Microsoft is in the same boat as Nintendo...under Sony's boot.

[Perfect Cell]

Its an interesting theory. But not totally plausable.  If they will run each others games. Then they would run the same disk drive. Thats fine for Nintendo and Microsoft games, but not nececarily for Third partie games. For example, why would EA Sports release 2 different versions of Madden? When the same could run on either the X-Next or GCN2? Who gets the liscencing fees? It opens a pandoras box actually, id rather see Nintendo work by themselves, and hopefully never sell out ever...

[nitsu niflheim]

Quote
If Microsoft & Nintendo can agree on a universal format for their systems then they sorta skip to Sony's next step before Sony can even do it and create a VHS/DVD like business model putting the squeeze on Sony to the point where they can legitamatly compete with them.

Wouldn't be too hard since Sony already had this happen to them when Sony released the BETA, where as another company (sorry I can't for the love of Nintendo, spell their name, though it starts with a M and I think is the Japanese counter-part of Panasonic, the company responsible for the "Q" Player)later released the VHS which then became the standard, and BETA became somewhat of a novely.  

But I don't see Nintendo and Microsoft teaming up of sorts, the close would be to create the new standard in storage format like DrGAKMAN mentioned.  Other than that makes no sense.  Microsoft is part videogame, part all out home entertainment center, and part world domination, where as Nintendo is only in the business for videogames, if you may.


And are you, "THE" DrGAKMAN from the old board, if so, then a howdy hello.

[Sirmorphix]

Quote
sorry I can't for the love of Nintendo, spell their name, though it starts with a M and I think is the Japanese counter-part of Panasonic, the company responsible for the "Q" Player

Mitsubishi?  Don't really know much about the Q, that's my best guess though.

[DrGAKMAN]

Hey...what's up.  Yes I am THE DrGAKMAN.

The VHS format I believe was created by Matsushita (as you said) and JVC.

To respond to the guy before you...no...I don't think creating a universal format to be played on both Nintendo & Micrsoft systems would be "selling out".  And as far as licensing goes it should be 50/50.

The *real* problem if they've come this far in agreement (on creating a universal format) is what format to use.  Do they go Sony's route with BRD?  Or do they make their own?  I think they absolutly should create their own.  BRD is nice, don't get me wrong, but I think Sony plans are to make it the "next" format for HiDef movies & games.  I'm under the belief that they're doing it too soon as people are *quite* happy with DVD just as they are *still* quite happy with CD's for music.  Nintendo & Microsoft should instead stick with a dirrivative of the current DVD format IMO.  That way they could be loads cheaper (since it's not exactly a new technology) and thusly publishers may find it more attractive than PSX3's BRD.  Sony will either dominate with BRD ('cos it'll hook into the whole digital video recording/HiDef format craze) or they'll be humbled 'cos of it due to the fact that it just may be too soon to ask people to jump from DVD to BRD.  Plus most developers may not have the budget to create 25-50GB games next generation so it could really all backfire on Sony...which is where Nintendo & Microsoft's new universal propriety DVD could step in.  It may not hold as much data, but it'll be LOADS cheaper than BRD at this point AND it won't be relying on becoming a new entertainment standerd since DVD is already pretty much standerd anyways.  Plus Nintendo & Microsoft could add their own hooks (extra selling points) by sticking with DVD.  For instance if Nintendo does go portable with their next machine then they could have the "hook" of being a portable DVD player too (which to me would >CRUSH< PSP's UMD format as a portable movie format).  Microsoft could combat PSX3's BRD Recording by adding a CD-RW or DVD-RW to their next X-BOX as it's "hook" 'cos by that time such technology would be way cheaper to impliment than BRD Recording...plus people would be more accepting of making their own CD's & DVD's to play in their existing players than they would making BRD's which would only really be playable mainly in PSX3 at that point.

Sorry, I went of topic with that whole "which format should they choose", but it's been on my mind.  

[The Omen]

Quote
This talk of a Sony team up is what's *really* rediculous. Sony has already drawn the battle lines with PSP...they're not gonna back down...they want to force Nintendo out of the market or force them to go 3RD party...not to team up with them. Sony are control freaks, they would want Nintendo to drop the GAMECUBE & GameBoy line before joining them thus making them dependant on Sony. Microsoft may have wanted that before this generation, but they know that Nintendo won't give up their portable or console lines and be b!tched into making games for someone elses system. Besides, Microsoft doesn't want Nintendo to ditch the strong GameBoy line for some silly "X-BOY" either...I'm sure they're more willing to come to terms than Sony is...why...'cos Sony is dominant and therefore arogant where as Microsoft is in the same boat as Nintendo...under Sony's boot.

1.  Microsoft is more arrogant than Sony, and more dominating.  As i stated earlier, Sony views MS as the threat to their do-everything entertainment box.  Nintendo isnt in that category.  As for being under Sonys boot...ummm, Nintendo makes MORE money off their system than anyone.  

2.  Teaming up with Sony is no more ridiculous than your idea of the MS/Nintendo partnership.  In fact, its much more plausible.  Nintendo would get something out of it, a lot actually, as would Sony.  And do not discount the japanese influence these two hold.  Again, your theories are good in writing , but they wont work in Japan.  Sony/Nintendo will work world wide.  Nintendo handling the games side, Sony handling its all important entertainment side.  Sony doesn't make great games anyway.

3.  MS did try to buy Nintendo, however they tried to buy Sega as well, among many others.  As far as i can remember ,Sony hasn't tried to buy out anyone.  Did you ever think Sony sees a partnership with NIN making them even more dominant over their direct rival?  And isn't that the point?

I must say that i dont see either of these happening, for the simple fact that Nintendos problems arent money related.  They're image related, and that can be changed in a generation.

[thecubedcanuck]

Quote
Nintendos problems arent money related. They're image related, and that can be changed in a generation.

Not when they announce games like Donkey Konga it cant be.

[Pale]

I'm soooo sick of this donkey konga ****.....Is ddr on x-box tarnishing their image??  jesus christ, its just a different genre than you are used to...

[Perfect Cell]

I agree.... The Dreamcast had Samba de Amigo... PS2 has a bunch of these Benmani music games

[The Omen]

Quote
Not when they announce games like Donkey Konga it cant be.

I'd say thats just a different genre, not a kiddie game.  Lots of people love these kinds of games, and they're pretty big in Japan.  But since GC's introduction, Nintendo has taken many steps to improve this image.(which is unwarranted, by the way)

The biggest problem has been advertising, like the Sunshine commercial, for instance.  Games -wise, i think theyre doing great.

[slacker]

This rumor has a lot of merits to it.  It sounds quite logical (at least to me).  Nintendo's profit has been mainly coming from the GameBoy line for the last several years, not the GC.  I don't think Nintendo is making as much money with the GC as they would have liked.  Partnering with a giant like MS would be a good strategic move.  First, the cost of development for the next console would be split.  Second, Nintendo would shore up their weakness with older crowd and MS with the younger ones.  Third, Nintendo can still do things independently such as releasing games on their own time table and not worry about licensing fees (Assumption is that MS and Nintendo would not charge each other fees).  Fourth, Nintendo can still release their own peripherals and vice versa without getting permission (assumption, both companies can act almost independently as long as the add ons don't split the user base).  Fifth, battling against one competitor in a tight market is a lot more promising than battling two.  Finally, the risk of a significant financial loss if the system flops would be split.  Sounds like a win-win situation.  Nintendo can get back a larger user base and try and re-establish its brand among more mainstream gamers that in turn could give it an advantage in the following next gen wars if it decides to go solo again.  I'm being speculative here, but stranger things have happened.

[The Omen]

Quote
Nintendo can get back a larger user base and try and re-establish its brand among more mainstream gamers that in turn could give it an advantage in the following next gen wars if it decides to go solo again. I'm being speculative here, but stranger things have happened.

The only way any of those things happen is by partnering with Sony, not MS.  Nintendo has just as big a share worldwide as MS does.  More mainstream gamers own Playstation , not XBOX.  Playstation / nintendo /pn3 or whatever you want to call it would dominate, allowing Sony to achieve its entertainment domination, and Nintendo gets to dominate the mass audience as far as gaming is concerned.