| RolStoppable said: Yeah... no. Absolutely not. Nintendo didn't lay off developers during the 3DS and Wii U era despite investors asking for cost-cutting measures. Nintendo's response was that development staff is an asset, because games drive hardware sales. Therefore laying off developers would only be a short term benefit, but then have very bad consequences in the mid to long term. And this is the correct thinking. There were other things that investors repeatedly asked for during the dire Wii U days, but Nintendo did not cave in. That's because Nintendo is not reliant on investors' money to get their funding for their next big project. We do not need to speculate if Nintendo would take similar actions to Sony and MS, because we already have the history of Nintendo not even considering such moves because such moves would be detrimental to their core business. When we know that Nintendo did not consider these moves when they were posting losses, then it's safe to say that Nintendo won't consider them either when they are in the situation of Sony now where profit margins have declined by around 5 percent points. The point is that you can't make a post about all companies being the same when that is clearly not the case due to Nintendo being an outlier in so many different aspects of this business. You are making the all too common mistake that you think the industry works this way because that's how it has to work. But Nintendo not only clearly shows that it does not have to be this way, but also that you can actually be more profitable by doing it differently, and that there's no mutual exclusivity between high profitability and high customer satisfaction. You begin your post by talking about the reality of the real world and end with the question if anyone would rather see their favorite company bite the dust or make as much money as possible by going multiplatform. This conclusion is extremely detached from reality when you've thrown Nintendo in the mix, and even if you explicitly excluded Nintendo from the topic, your conclusion would still only somewhat work. I still find it a bit puzzling that Sony, despite their current sales and black numbers, would rather do things the Microsoft way than taking a few cues from Nintendo. I'm not talking about the last few months, but the last several years since Jim Ryan took the reins of the PS division. Because clearly, Microsoft is not the company you should strive to be like in gaming. PlayStation is still making profits every quarter, so their recent business decisions strike me as an overreaction that could bite them in the butt in the long run. As a console manufacturer they have to look at first party software as more than just the games making money, but also as a driver of hardware sales which in turn increase collected royalty fees from third parties and PS+ subscriptions; this isn't as simple of an equation as putting games on the PC and making more profit overall by default, because some money is undoubtedly going to be missed out on on the PS console side. |
This is where you fail to understand. You are not looking at this as a whole. The Console industry has always been this way, it started when companies were choosing to be different all the time. Did you game during the Nintendo and Sega era? If so, then you would have seen how different companies were back then. Always trying new things to break the market open. The issue we have today is, the market has reached its peak. Unless these manufacturers go full experimental mode with their next line up of consoles, I can't see that happening. It's too risky and many have fallen straight out of the industry for trying to innovate. These companies are playing it safe now, unfortunately playing it safe only keeps the same customers, it doesn't create new customers.
I also don't ever expect Nintendo to put their games on other platforms, not unless they are on the verge of closure, and even then, they probably would rather just die than give up their IPs. In saying that, what I mean is that Nintendo will find ways to please shareholders if they start to fall behind targets. Nintendo have been smart with their approach over the years. They develop affordable hardware and have focused on a market that has been lacking AAA gaming and that's the portable hybrid market. That will soon be flooded with options as the years progress. Its only going to get harder for Nintendo as more competition arrives.
As for Sony following Microsoft's way, it's pretty simple. Sony are not doing enough for their shareholders, and they know they can't compete with Nintendo in the portable market, they have tried many times. Sony are not set up for that style. They have designed their structure to make high budget AAA experiences, it will all need to be shuffled around if they start focusing on Nintendo's way of gaming.
Xbox might not be doing as good as the other two in raw sales figures; however they are set up for the future, they can adapt and evolve a lot quicker than Sony and Nintendo if the digital, PC, Streaming future started to explode tomorrow.
Last edited by Azzanation - on 01 March 2024
