Oh gosh, I'm sorry. Let me go look at all 12 pages, post by post and get back to you on that, hun.

Also, it doesn't surprise me. My only point is that I think companies are losing touch with what gamers really want, what kind of features they want on their consoles and that just as we sometimes demonize Sony and MS, Nintendo a cheecky little devil. I bet a lot of people would gadly trade some of those social/TV applications from the Xbox one for some bakwards compatability. They are also not very concious of the good that used games or LP can do for them. While it does cost sales and it is a business after all, there can be a lot of potential buyers the next time around.

Compare LP's vs. Nintendo to blocking used games. I see blocking used games is much worse than the LP's bussiness, as I've said before, if Nintendo blocked used games, I'll be the first to say to Nintendo that they can kiss my feces smearing brown buttocks to die-kingdom-come!

You are acting a complete hypocrite and I have no respect for you.  I assure you, you are no martyr.  I mocked you because of YOU started insulting me.  YOU started with the combative attitude.  YOU started insulting other types of games as though only YOUR tastes are any good.  If you say otherwise, then you're a liar.  Out of all the different types of gamers out there, I despise the self-righteous, "the games I like are superior and special" kind the most.  And you want to pretend you acted like an adult?

I am acting like an adult. There is a huge difference between having strong opinions and expressing them strongly, IE "coming on strong", and directly trying to insult someone. I never said I was a "martry", nor do I act like one. I state MY opinions, and stand by them. I happen to know there are a healthy amount of other gamers who share opinions similar to mine, because I've talked to them, either in person or online. But I'm certainly not speaking for "everyone", and have never tried to. I'm speaking for myself. I'm not acting like a hypocrite, and it doesn't bother me in the least whether you respect me or not. But no, I didn't "start" anything, and I certainly didn't go out of my way to "insult" you or hurt your feelings, as you insenuate.

I'm not "self-righteous". However, getting on anyone's case for feeling that the games THEY personally like and prefer are "superior and special", is absurd, because EVERYONE feels that way about the things they like the most. Human beings and human existence are subjective, 100%, and if you don't get that, I'm sorry. I have said why I think they're good, why they stand the test of time, and why I like the gaming design and philosophy classic gaming embodies, in direct contrast to the very negative direction in which I feel the games industry is heading down. Quite frankly, you don't seem to have any problem coming off as condecending or insulting to others, and that includes long before you started responding to me (or vice versa) in this thread. Accusing me of acting that way when not only do I not feel I'm coming off that way, certianly not purposefully, and while you yourself DO seem to come off that way, is rather disengenous.

So sorry, but basically everything you're saying right there is your own misinterpretations, going on inside your own head, NOT how I acted or what I said. You're welcome to do that, but it's certainly not going to help you in your conversations with others. You try to paint me as some asshole who shits on everyone else's opinions and champions my own as "the only right ones". I've never said that, nor do I comport myself that way. I DO come on strong, because you can bet your ass I strongly believe what I say. But it's MY beliefs. I'm simply stating them as I feel them. If you or others don't like or can't handle that, that's not my problem.

"Nintendo never lost third party support due to "greed". Anyone who believes that is a fool."  I suppose you DIDN'T start out with a direct insult from the start?  Good god, I can't believe you're trying to pretend you didn't start this.  That kind of sickens me.

I never said "Pokoko, you're a fool". I made a very general statement that is supported by HISTORIC FACT, that the reasons they lost some of the third party support they once enjoyed was NOT because they were atrocious douchbags as some still like to wax-mythological about. Those people generally tend to be Nintendo-haters, not exactly make their opionions "objective" in the slightest, and thus sorely lacking any serious credibility. Hence the reason they are "fools" if they believe that. You pointing out statements from one bitter former EA person, does not illustrate an industry-wide contempt for Nintendo. EA didn't even really make many games for the NES, outside of Skate or Die or The immortal (both of which were published by other companies). in fact they were primarily a PC developer until the 16bit generation, when the finally made a name for themselves on home consoles, with the John Madden Football franchise. However, AS I've stated before already, AS is (as already stated) a well known fact, Nintendo seriously relaxed their stringent policies with the SNES, and EA themselves made several SNES games, it's not as if they were a "Genesis Only" developer.

Regardless, EA or not, my earlier points that you completely ignored stand, that big companies (which EA was not yet) of the time, like Squaresoft, Enix, Capcom, Namco, Konami, Hudson Soft, Acclaim, etc. all did quite a bit of good business on Nintendo consoles. They DIDN'T jump ship for PSX over bitterness (which was a moot point by then because Nintendo dropped their policies by and large during the SNES/Game Boy era), as stated, as is WELL known, it was over the CD format. Period.

And for the final time, no, I didn't "insult you from the start", and didn't "start" anything. You can be "sickened" and overly melodramatic on an internet forum all you wish. But that doesn't mean you're correct in your victim attitude, as you're not the "victim" of anything more than strong opinions that you don't seem to know how to handle . You seem incable of agreeing to disagree, you are the one who seems threatened and insulted by someone else's opinions that don't fit your own. A very immature attitude. That's not an insult, that's a factual observation. You choose to take my posts however you want, but that doesn't mean your perceptions of them are factual or correct.

"So I honestly don't know what the hell you're talking about there."  No, that's not combative at all.

How would you like me to have phrased that? As if you yourself don't take this kind of tone with others in your posts. You accuse me of being "combative", yet it strikes me that this is how YOU speak to people on here whose opinions you disagree with. I used the wors "I don't know what the hell your'e talking about", because I DON'T. You were basing your opinions off of half-truths the internet has spread, most of which rational gamers who have actually bothered to do their gaming history homework understand are JUST that, half-true (often less). You can't get mad at me for having the audacity to use the word "hell" in my sentence, when you yourself seem to take a very snarky attitude towards others you don't agree with, regularly. If you want to talk about hypocricy, do start with yourself instead.

Yes, I am treating you just EXACTLY as you describe, and for a damn good reason.  I mock you because you insult me just because I suggested a damn gaming company isn't all sunshine and roses, something which I consider to be a LOT closer to childishness.  Have a NICE day.

And lastly, no, you're treating me exactly how you choose to treat me. You are acting out on your own misinterpretations of my words, acting out on how YOU choose to internalize what I say, filling in an AWFUL lot of blanks and reading things between lines that simply are not there. There IS no "damn good reason" for you to act the way you do towards me. You do it as a conscious choice, and you do it without actually rationalizing why. You seem to be acting on "gut feeling", instead of actual reason. You mock me because it's what you feel like doing, and you justify it by painting ME as the "unreasonable asshole" in the endeavor, which makes it "okay" for you to publicly berate me in your mind. I never insulted you a single time, certainly not on purpose, and I CERTAINLY didn't take the kind of stance you claim I did, simply because you "dared to suggest Nintendo wasn't all sunshine and roses".

I never said they were, not a single time, and stated RATHER plainly and clearly for all to see, more than once, that I understand and am very congnezant of the fact that they aren't perfect, and above all else ARE a company out to make money. But at the end of the day, they also have proven generation after generation to still be a company who does care about making games that people enjoy, and staying true to their longtime fans. Which they have. I would trust them at face value before I would trust mega-corporations like Sony and Microsoft, any day of the week. Those are MY stances and MY opinions. If you have a problem with them, that's really unfortunate, but it IS your problem, not mine. How you choose to take or react to someone else's words is your own personal deal, and your projecting all this negativity that is grossly misplaced and misrepresented, is your choice. And certainly not somthing I "deserve", because obviously I'm just this nasty, rat-bastard of a man.

I realize what I'm doing by bothering to respond to you, is just talking in circles, because it's not as if you're going to rationally sit down and go "Gee....maybe he has a point about how I took it". I doubt you will do that. And that's too bad. But still, you should at the very least consider calming down and not taking all this shit QUITE so seriously. Getting THIS emotional and bent out of shape over someone else's dissenting opinions, is not healthy or reasonable. If I or what I have to say, ro the WAY I say it, bother you that much, well then I'm sorry. But I'm not going to change who I am or how I act (none of which is as negative as you paint it to be), just to please one person on the internet I'm never going to meet in real life. It's unfortunate that this forum doesn't seem to have a block feature, because that would correct your problem immediately. But, seeing as that is the case, if I really bother you that much.....why not just try ignoring me in the future? Good day.

1) "Electronic Arts's relationship with Sega produced significant rewards for both companies. Genesis quickly became a lucrative new outlet for Electronic Arts, and Sega benefited from having a line of sophisticated games that appealed to and older audience more than most games on the NES.

Nintendo approached Electronic Arts about making games for NES in the mid-1980s, long before Sega announced Genesis. But Hawkins did not want to make games for the eight-bit console. He and many other Electronic Arts board members felt that NES was not powerful enough to run their computer games and they did not want to downgrade their games to run on it. Like many people at the time, Hawkins was openly disdainful of console games and critical of Nintendo's chances of success", -- The Ultimate History of Video Games by Steven L. Kent, p. 409.

Familiar rhetorics, isn't it? "Older audience", "not powerful enough", "do not want to downgrade" etc. He never really changed his stance on Nintendo and console in general to a lesser extent despite being proven wrong. For the record if you think Steven Kent is some sort of Nintendo-worshipper, he really isn't. He was openly critical about the Wii, thought it'd fail (many thought that way though), when was proven wrong was quoted to say smth like "I pity that people weren't smart enough not to buy this piece of shit", -- or smth along those lines.

2) When I was more interested in the subject VGC is dealing with, I did this chart. These are revenues from video game publishing on all relevant consoles at the time:

I still have methodology for this and links on the sources (though links might be broken by now). I went over trouble to check every fiscal report of major publishers back then and make them consistent (different fiscal periods, GAAP vs. Non-GAAP, currency conversion etc., no inflation depreciation though). The most questionable numbers are "Others" as I took them from VGC directly.

So to put this chart into words, Nintendo used to be HUGE, every fourth buck made in the biz was made by Nintendo just on two consoles versus sixth of them for the rest of the publishers, or two put it differently in 2009 Nintendo was as big as four it's biggest contenders put together. Nintendo potentionally could be literally not-reliant on third parties at all, the only way to convience third parties to make a consistent publishing business on Nintendo hardware is to make Nintendo hardware dominant by Nintendo software. Sony cannot do that, not even close, while Nintendo theoretically still could that.