RolStoppable said:
Successful in quotations? And do you seriously want to claim that the restrictions Nintendo put on third parties during the NES and SNES were what third parties wanted? Why again did third parties go to Sega and later to Sony? Look, if third parties had had a genuine interest to port their 360/PS3 games to Nintendo hardware, they had the chance to do so. Most of them refused, some of them outright. It doesn't matter that later on the XB1 and PS4 were more powerful, because the 360 and PS3 continued to get games for more than two years after the Wii U's launch. You are incredibly naive to think that Nintendo could have chased Microsoft out of the market. Microsoft lost $4 billion on the original Xbox, yet they stayed in. For Microsoft it was not about making money from video games, it was about stopping Sony from creating a convergence box that disrupts Windows as the provider of all sorts of entertainment. It's only because of Xbox being a strategic defensive move to protect Windows that a $4 billion loss could be justified, because Windows brings in profits every year that are multiple times bigger than that Xbox loss of several years. As such, if the original Xbox had sold only 10m units and lost $8 billion, Microsoft would have still stayed in the market because Windows is so valuable. Nintendo's sales did not matter in this equation. It's also why Microsoft never made a handheld. Nintendo didn't threaten Windows, so they could sell as many handhelds as they wanted because it would have no impact on Microsoft's core business. |
I agree with you. But the least nintendo could do is adopt x86 to make games easy to port to.
It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.







