Psyberius said:
They could even demand from MS or Sony direct hardware support so that they could keep upgrading their interface to what they want/demand. You would buy your Playstation with a Nintendo controller instead of the stock PS one you don't like. It's all theoretical but honestly, with all their games, they'd probably invent a whole new form of currency...just to be able to quantify how much they were really making. |
That's not a point, it's a supposition that's based on an overly simplistic model.
For starters, prior to the Wii U Nintendo generally made a profit on its hardware; it's Sony and Microsoft who espouse(d) the idea that hardware must be sold at a loss. More importantly, as a platform owner Nintendo reaps a sum for each third-party unit sold on its platform. Shoot, it reaps a profit for every unit created for its system. You're essentially calling upon Nintendo, the longest-lasting hardware maker still in the market, to surrender a lucrative profit model and pay a royalty fee to Sony/Microsoft/whoever for every game they make, all to avoid an expense which they've repeatedly proven they can absorb.
Second, if it was easy for Microsoft or (*snicker*) Sony to absorb Nintendo, it would have been done a long time ago. In fact, Nintendo would be extremely difficult, if not outright impossible, for any company to "suck up." They're sitting on a war chest of billions, billions which they've amassed in part because they are more than a mere third-party.
Also, Sony is currently selling bonds to stay afloat. Not stocks. Bonds. They're in no position to do anything to Nintendo.
Third, if this was your original thesis, then the post you made earlier is a terrible, terrible way to express it.







