padib said:
I think you really missed TLS's point. Re-read his post, he seems to be arguing that Iwata took over NOA due to incompetence on the part of Reggie to solidify the american strategy. One of his arguments is that Retro actually expanded post-Iwata from only Metroid to Metroid + DK + more. The other argument seems to be that Reggie didn't do a good job at growing the American strategy and should have looked into the purchasing of American devs at the Wii's peak. In other words what you're arguing is Iwata's fault, TLS is arguing is actually Reggie's fault. |
I'm saying that there is nothing to indicate that:
a) Iwata is a micro-manager who controls everything and
b) Iwata has a bias against the west.
Nintendo's investment in the west is the same now as it was years ago. Wii was western developed tech, and Retro is growing. Nintendo also just signed on Next Level Games to be second party in the last year. Do they need to do more? Absolutely. But talking about Iwata's management style or his feelings toward the west is pure fan-fiction.
Oh, and Reggie stated in interviews the porting of Xenoblade was a decision made by him and the director of product planning. He said he wanted it here, the director needed to have a solid business case that it would sell enough to cover costs.
I think Nintendo needs some dynamic initiative from the west - NoA in particular. They may need more autonomy if NoJ doesn't understand the US, or they many need more talent, or more money to spend. But there is nothing to indicate it's bias or Iwata's iron fist. That's just daydreams.
