By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Nintendo is the only one who has balls

....or how bout we just wait to see the final verdict. Other's stated that Nintendo was going have DRM of sort but decided to drop it last minute. Seems like MS might be doing the same, and wait to see what Sony will do. Just wait and see when the consoles are actually released before seeing who had balls.

But yes, Nintendo has balls for not going through with it. I'd also like to say that Nintendo has balls to go a different route rather than trying to compete with MS and Sony.

I just know that EA is the one that doesn't have balls.



Around the Network
AbbathTheGrim said:
hivycox said:
AbbathTheGrim said:
hivycox said:

the latest rumours say that Sony had also plans for DRM but hold them because of the reactions after the XBone reveal! They might or might not be giving it to that but thats not the matter right now!

it is no wonder why EA dropped the online pass system. The XBone will have DRM and such don't require these online passes. The question is:

Have EA done this decision only for 1 console? I think NOT!

 

Without Sony on the DRM train, EA wouldn't have abandoned online passes. Its easy to let Nintendo in the dust because they won't get as much third party support as the other consoles devs.

the point is: with Sony holding their plans for DRM, EA is rethinking their strategy thus admit after the XBOne reveal that they would work at Nintendo titles. It is up to Sony and their decision.

 

That is complete bullshit what is going on! I'm disgusted with this industry right now! I'm more disgusted by many people here in this very forum who praise Sony to the death and give Nintendo zero shits. Nintendo was in my eyes the ONLY company who don't give in to EA mad game by not letting them put origin on their system. That would have made DRM on the Wii U available and EA would make more games for the Wii U.

NIntendo is the only ones who has the balls to do that! Everybody who praise Sony should or rather must praise NIntendo AT LEAST equally. Things people criticise about other console are a naturalness for Nintendo: Backwards compatibility, support of last gens controller, no not supporting used games! no paying extra for play used games! no mandatory installation of games. The Wii U may be weaker than its competitors and hasn't had a game in the last months but games will come and they will be amazing! 

people should learn not to support these stupid decisions made by greedy companies and not to buy them in order to let them know that they can't bullshit us! For the sakemof all of us I hope that Sony won't give in to DRM....Its just not worth it!

 

...and its a shame Nintendo don't get the proper credits they deserve! 

 

I'm out...peace!

 

Balls to U

Too many assumptions here:

Not pleasing third parties equals having courage.

Not considering that in the end Nintendo could adopt it.

Not considering that Sony could not implement it. The info of whether Sony has had the intention of implementing it is dubious we need to wait and see like we (or at least I) did for the Xbone.

Not considering that Micro and Sony could implement it for their own interest.

Micro did it all for EA.

EA dropped the DRM after seeing what Micro with by their own initiative were doing with the always online (every 24 hours) and used games restrictions. You can't dismiss this possibility.

EA just dropping DRM because of the backlash they've gotten for it, Micro's decision may not have been a factor to EA dropping DRM.

Nintendo not giving way to Origins as some sort of heroic take on gaming when they simply and most likely didn't want EA to have a big piece of the online cake. Just like how they didn't want Sony when they tried to make business with them to provide the CD format for their next console after Super Nintendo. I know you guys want to see Nintendo as the paladin's of gaming or something like that but gaming is for a great part a business.

That Nintendo has some special balls. Even if you think they have balls for this you posted, they would only have balls for certain things which makes the whole point just a particular discussion. For example, does Nintendo has the balls to go into this holiday and bundle WiiU with a Mature title like ZombieU? Like both Micro and Sony have done in previous years with their bundles?

I never stated what I mention was fact or not! It is all opinion based. But it is the most likely case in my op.

As me you are doing assumptions too. It could very well be that Nintendo knew all this is going to happen when EA ask them to put Origin on their platform!

I know that gaming is a business but then again I'm seeing Nintendo as the most loyal to gamers now. They could easily go the Microsoft tour and make more money off of it but decided not to. Gladly I don't know what was the motivation behind this decision but maybe Nintendo learnt from the past that being greedy isn't always great.

And to the bundles: Why would Nintendo bundle the Wii U with a mature game? They have so much more to offer. Why should they bundle it with less appealing software when they can go with the face of gaming that is Mario? And as a sidenote: You know that the Wii U was bundled with ZombiU ;)

If you agree that this is all speculation then there is nothing to do here. You will make out of this thread whatever you can possibly do.

About the Zombie U bundle, I looked it up and you are right. That is what I call a major fuck up from my part.


You're welcome :)



I agree that Nintendo are brave but they are angering the customers more if they don't have any third party games.



    

NNID: FrequentFlyer54

pokoko said:
hivycox said:

people should learn not to support these stupid decisions made by greedy companies and not to buy them in order to let them know that they can't bullshit us!

Then you won't be buying anything.  Anyone who believes that Nintendo or Sony isn't as greedy as Microsoft is fooling themselves completely.

Honestly, I have no idea why some people look at Nintendo with rose-tinted glasses in this regard.  Nintendo is the company that once lost third party support because of greed.  They're the company that tried to rule the gaming industry with an iron fist and got shot down to Earth for it.  This is the company that had the arrogance to attempt to sell the 3DS at a massive, unprecedented profit, simply because they thought people would fall for it.

If Nintendo isn't supporting DRM, then it's a business and/or technical decision, not because they only care about making people happy.  

 

Nintendo never lost third party support due to "greed". Anyone who believes that is a fool. Third parties made a TON of money and established still-to-this-day-running franchises on Nintendo consoles, even the SNES, by which time Nintendo had greatly relaxed third party publishing policy. That policy was originally implemented as a risk cutting measure for brining the NES to NA, as they had seen what had happened with the crashed American video games market. It crashed specifically because systems like Atari just allowed anyone at all to put out games for their console, and it flooded store shelves with crap that people got tired of. That isn't to say that Yamauchi's policies weren't still that of a somewhat ruthless businessman. They were. BUT, it's not as if they did it without cause, just because. And again, they relaxed those policies in the 16bit era. If third party companies hated Nintendo for these policies, they would have jumped ship to the popular-in-America Genesis console, and Game Gear. But no, for the large part, they stuck with SNES and Game Boy, or at least developed for both. Companies like Konami and Capcom eventually put out games for Genesis, but only sparingly, and their best stuff still came out on NIntendo consoles. Square and Enix both continued to exclusively put their games on SNES and Game Boy. That does not seem like the actions of companies that held Nintendo in contempt for their stringent NES-era policies.

What DID happen, which has been more than well documented, is that Nintendo decided to stick with catridges for the N64, and several third party companies decided to go more with the Playstation, not because they hated Nintendo, nor because they preferred Sony. But because they wanted to use the cheaper, and more expansive CD format. End-Of-Story. Companies like Midway, Enix, Acclaim, EA, Activision, THQ, Namco, Konami, etc. still made games for the N64. It isn't as if there was some mass exodus. And honestly, if the N64 had used CDs, you could bet your ass that the majority of games like FF7, Symphony of the Night, Resident Evil, Metal Gear Solid, X-Men vs. Street Fighter, the further MMX games, etc. etc. would have appeared on Nintendo's console, either exclusive or at least as multiconsole games. That is literally the entire story to be found there. And quite frankly, I don't think Nintendo sticking with cartidges was really a "Greed" move, because it certainly cost them potential support, and arguably that generation, even though the N64 was still a successful console with some of the highest selling games.

And as for the quip about Nintendo having the "arrogance" to sell the 3DS at it's original price? Please. People were happy to pay similar money for a Vita. The 3DS 3D technology was fairly new and certainly not cheap. The price cut they instigated had them selling at a loss for awhile. And I seem to remember the original DS selling for somewhere around the same price as well, at launch. So I honestly don't know what the hell you're talking about there.

Is Nintendo going to do some kind of used-game blocking scheme? I sure hope not. But I honestly kind of doubt they will. There is third party pressure from CERTAIN companies for the industry to go in that direction. But Nintendo understands, I think, that most hardcore Nintendo gamers buy games for keeps, and their games tend to sell well enough on average for them to not really be bothered by the prospect of the used games market. Which makes EA and MS' move more disengenuous, because both EA and MS' big franchises also tend to sell in the millions. So it's not as if the used market is costing THEM anything substantial. It's only smaller developers that might be hurt by used games sales, and people not buying new game copies. But at the same time, smaller developers are also starting to migrate towards digital. So..........really, the entire industry move makes little real sense. It just stinks of corporate greed.

And on a final note, while I have no doubt that Nintendo is a business out to, above all else, make money. If I honestly thought they didn't really care about their fans or "the gamer", they wouldn't still to this day be making "Nintendo" kinds of games. If ALL they wanted was money, they would have long ago abandoned many of their own IPs, for the more recent trends of shooters, ultra-violent games, and "Western Inspired" game design, like many of the other big Japanese publishers have. Nintendo hasn't, and won't, do that. They know what they do well, and they know the long-time, and new kinds of fans they make their games for. And personally, I'm GLAD they haven't changed. Thank God there is still a few companies like Nintendo out there who make games that actually appeal to me, and not just more cookie-cutter, "me too" garbage like most of the rest of the industry shits out there days.



hivycox said:


You're welcome :)


Wait, slow down cowboy. You can't end a quote tree with me just like that. You can't assign "balls" to someone without knowing if they deserve it. You assume all these points and didn't fight any of mine. Only argued with more possibilities and that is what it is all about. You can't call Nintendo more ballsy than Sony or Micro just on assumptions. This thread is nothing but a thread based on assumptions.

That being said, I was wrong about the bundles.



Nintendo is selling their IPs to Microsoft and this is true because:

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=221391&page=1

Around the Network
DevilRising said:
pokoko said:
hivycox said:

people should learn not to support these stupid decisions made by greedy companies and not to buy them in order to let them know that they can't bullshit us!

Then you won't be buying anything.  Anyone who believes that Nintendo or Sony isn't as greedy as Microsoft is fooling themselves completely.

Honestly, I have no idea why some people look at Nintendo with rose-tinted glasses in this regard.  Nintendo is the company that once lost third party support because of greed.  They're the company that tried to rule the gaming industry with an iron fist and got shot down to Earth for it.  This is the company that had the arrogance to attempt to sell the 3DS at a massive, unprecedented profit, simply because they thought people would fall for it.

If Nintendo isn't supporting DRM, then it's a business and/or technical decision, not because they only care about making people happy.  

 

Nintendo never lost third party support due to "greed". Anyone who believes that is a fool. Third parties made a TON of money and established still-to-this-day-running franchises on Nintendo consoles, even the SNES, by which time Nintendo had greatly relaxed third party publishing policy. That policy was originally implemented as a risk cutting measure for brining the NES to NA, as they had seen what had happened with the crashed American video games market. It crashed specifically because systems like Atari just allowed anyone at all to put out games for their console, and it flooded store shelves with crap that people got tired of. That isn't to say that Yamauchi's policies weren't still that of a somewhat ruthless businessman. They were. BUT, it's not as if they did it without cause, just because. And again, they relaxed those policies in the 16bit era. If third party companies hated Nintendo for these policies, they would have jumped ship to the popular-in-America Genesis console, and Game Gear. But no, for the large part, they stuck with SNES and Game Boy, or at least developed for both. Companies like Konami and Capcom eventually put out games for Genesis, but only sparingly, and their best stuff still came out on NIntendo consoles. Square and Enix both continued to exclusively put their games on SNES and Game Boy. That does not seem like the actions of companies that held Nintendo in contempt for their stringent NES-era policies.

What DID happen, which has been more than well documented, is that Nintendo decided to stick with catridges for the N64, and several third party companies decided to go more with the Playstation, not because they hated Nintendo, nor because they preferred Sony. But because they wanted to use the cheaper, and more expansive CD format. End-Of-Story. Companies like Midway, Enix, Acclaim, EA, Activision, THQ, Namco, Konami, etc. still made games for the N64. It isn't as if there was some mass exodus. And honestly, if the N64 had used CDs, you could bet your ass that the majority of games like FF7, Symphony of the Night, Resident Evil, Metal Gear Solid, X-Men vs. Street Fighter, the further MMX games, etc. etc. would have appeared on Nintendo's console, either exclusive or at least as multiconsole games. That is literally the entire story to be found there. And quite frankly, I don't think Nintendo sticking with cartidges was really a "Greed" move, because it certainly cost them potential support, and arguably that generation, even though the N64 was still a successful console with some of the highest selling games.

And as for the quip about Nintendo having the "arrogance" to sell the 3DS at it's original price? Please. People were happy to pay similar money for a Vita. The 3DS 3D technology was fairly new and certainly not cheap. The price cut they instigated had them selling at a loss for awhile. And I seem to remember the original DS selling for somewhere around the same price as well, at launch. So I honestly don't know what the hell you're talking about there.

Is Nintendo going to do some kind of used-game blocking scheme? I sure hope not. But I honestly kind of doubt they will. There is third party pressure from CERTAIN companies for the industry to go in that direction. But Nintendo understands, I think, that most hardcore Nintendo gamers buy games for keeps, and their games tend to sell well enough on average for them to not really be bothered by the prospect of the used games market. Which makes EA and MS' move more disengenuous, because both EA and MS' big franchises also tend to sell in the millions. So it's not as if the used market is costing THEM anything substantial. It's only smaller developers that might be hurt by used games sales, and people not buying new game copies. But at the same time, smaller developers are also starting to migrate towards digital. So..........really, the entire industry move makes little real sense. It just stinks of corporate greed.

And on a final note, while I have no doubt that Nintendo is a business out to, above all else, make money. If I honestly thought they didn't really care about their fans or "the gamer", they wouldn't still to this day be making "Nintendo" kinds of games. If ALL they wanted was money, they would have long ago abandoned many of their own IPs, for the more recent trends of shooters, ultra-violent games, and "Western Inspired" game design, like many of the other big Japanese publishers have. Nintendo hasn't, and won't, do that. They know what they do well, and they know the long-time, and new kinds of fans they make their games for. And personally, I'm GLAD they haven't changed. Thank God there is still a few companies like Nintendo out there who make games that actually appeal to me, and not just more cookie-cutter, "me too" garbage like most of the rest of the industry shits out there days.

Very well written!



AbbathTheGrim said:
hivycox said:


You're welcome :)


Wait, slow down cowboy. You can't end a quote tree with me just like that. You can't assign "balls" to someone without knowing if they deserve it. You assume all these points and didn't fight any of mine. Only argued with more possibilities and that is what it is all about. You can't call Nintendo more ballsy than Sony or Micro just on assumptions. This thread is nothing but a thread based on assumptions.

That being said, I was wrong about the bundles.

Why? Why should I fight your arguments? I wasn't denying any of your points because i thought you are equally as right as I am.
And yes: This thread isn't about facts, news or rumours...its just opinion-based. Not meant to fight anyones opinion. I made it clear that I think Nintendo is the most ballsy. It is right in my opinion.

I don't see any point in fighting your points because at the end its just assumptions..isn't it ;)



hivycox said:
AbbathTheGrim said:
hivycox said:


You're welcome :)


Wait, slow down cowboy. You can't end a quote tree with me just like that. You can't assign "balls" to someone without knowing if they deserve it. You assume all these points and didn't fight any of mine. Only argued with more possibilities and that is what it is all about. You can't call Nintendo more ballsy than Sony or Micro just on assumptions. This thread is nothing but a thread based on assumptions.

That being said, I was wrong about the bundles.

Why? Why should I fight your arguments? I wasn't denying any of your points because i thought you are equally as right as I am.
And yes: This thread isn't about facts, news or rumours...its just opinion-based. Not meant to fight anyones opinion. I made it clear that I think Nintendo is the most ballsy. It is right in my opinion.

I don't see any point in fighting your points because at the end its just assumptions..isn't it ;)

Fair enough. Just a note, I ain't basing my argument in assumptions. My argument is that you can't give such a fancy adjective to someone or something out of assumption, it/they need to earn it. I just threw more assumptions to let it be understood that none of your points are set in stone and that other assumptions can be brought forth as well.

The difference between you and I is that I didn't make a thread calling a specific console company ballsy over the others based on assumptions.



Nintendo is selling their IPs to Microsoft and this is true because:

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=221391&page=1

I didn't read most of that, but I'm gonna comment anyway.

That could be why there are no EA games in development for Nintendo. Depending on what, if any DRM is being implemented by SONY, I would gladly boycott the console. I don't want what happened to PC games waaaay back when to happen to console games.



I am the Playstation Avenger.

   

If Sony was indeed planning to introduce Xbox1 type DRM, then I agree. If they introduce DRM, I'm going back to PC gaming.