Right. And their policy section has no environmental policies. Seems like a pretty good reason to state that they don't take environmental factors into their policies.
And has Nintendo responded to that yet in any way? Have they said "we only scored low because of these reasons, this is what we're actually doing"? or "in light of this report, this is what we have planned"?
Shouldn't companies be striving to reduce their impact? Shouldn't Nintendo have tried to show Greenpeace everything they could about what they're doing to reduce harmful chemicals and waste?
It just seems really weird that everyone is jumping to Nintendo's defense over something that doesn't actually effect the games at all. Greenpeace didn't give Mario Galaxy a 7, they just pointed out that the company doesn't seem to have any interest in reducing their environmental impact. Kind of makes sense for an environmental agency to do don't you think?
I'm a mod, come to me if there's mod'n to do.
Chrizum is the best thing to happen to the internet, Period.
Serves me right for challenging his sales predictions!
Bet with dsisister44: Red Steel 2 will sell 1 million within it's first 365 days of sales.
