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

Forums - Nintendo - I wonder what it felt like for Japanese to stab Nintendo in the back when the PS came out?

Anfebious on 14 August 2013
Zero999 said:
Anfebious said:
happydolphin said:

It was silly of Sony to include that, it's more than a catch that's thievery. It was Nintendo's SNES we're talking about, who the hell was Sony to reserve any rights on Nintendo's games on it?

Ridiculous if you ask me.

It's thievery if Sony does it but when Nintendo took control of Cartrdirge manufacturing in the NES era and forced third party to sign a contract full of restrictions to make games on the system it was perfectly fine.

You know I think both of them are ridiculous if you ask me .

nintendo has the right to do any policies they want on THEIR console, bad as they were. sony making a partnership with another company and stealthly including on the contract that it has full rights for the games released on the pheriferal, that's kinda unethical.

As Pokoko said above. They had a lot of time to analyze the contract it sounds kind of fishy they never stoped the project until te very end.



"I've Underestimated the Horse Power from Mario Kart 8, I'll Never Doubt the WiiU's Engine Again"

Around the Network
happydolphin on 14 August 2013
pokoko said:

So, wait, Nintendo didn't read the contract they agreed to follow?  They didn't realize what it said until years later?  Then, instead of going to Sony and attempting to work out a new deal, they secretly canceled everything, obviously with the intent to fuck Sony over, and made a deal with someone else, which they revealed to Sony with a surprise announcement?

And people act like Nintendo was some kind of innocent victim in all of that?  Holy cats.

It certainly sounds like they got what they deserved out of the situation.  That was mostly a FUBAR of their own making.  If they didn't agree with what Sony wanted then they should have said so from the start.

Actually, you know, reading that over, it sounds like bullcrap.  How the hell do you just suddenly realize what a contract says years down the line?  How does a large corporation not have legal experts examine every major agreement?  Something is really fishy with this explaination.

@bold. And do you blame them?? I would fuck Sony over too, quite eagerly, had they pulled off a move like that on me.

Holy fucking cats indeed.

If anyone deserved bad karma for it, it was Sony. They pulled a fast one on Nintendo, Nintendo got fucked, yet after all these years Sony still can't beat them. So who's the loser after all?

Hopefully it's the one who deserves it, and in this case, it's Sony. If anything's fishy with anything it's your reasoning.

And it wasn't years later, it was more like months later, maybe a year's crossed. But the thing was a hidden clause which required a lawyer to unearth, otherwise Nintendo would never have agreed to the contract, knowing Nintendo. I mean, for those who know Nintendo historically speaking. They don't treat the right to their fucking IPs lightly.



theshonen8899 on 14 August 2013

They made a better console. There's no backstabbing BS or whatever. The better console won, and that's how it should be.



Hynad on 14 August 2013

This topic is lol worthy to no end. All the agendas come out like flies to a pile of crap.



happydolphin on 14 August 2013
Hynad said:

This topic is lol worthy to no end. All the agendas come out like flies to a pile of crap.

Yup, that of revisionist historians. We know what happened, there is no need to hide or butter things up. Sadly in a world where that doesn't work, we have arguments, and people watching saying people have an agenda.



Around the Network
Zero999 on 14 August 2013
Anfebious said:
Zero999 said:
Anfebious said:

It's thievery if Sony does it but when Nintendo took control of Cartrdirge manufacturing in the NES era and forced third party to sign a contract full of restrictions to make games on the system it was perfectly fine.

You know I think both of them are ridiculous if you ask me .

nintendo has the right to do any policies they want on THEIR console, bad as they were. sony making a partnership with another company and stealthly including on the contract that it has full rights for the games released on the pheriferal, that's kinda unethical.

As Pokoko said above. They had a lot of time to analyze the contract it sounds kind of fishy they never stoped the project until te very end.

the point was about him defending sony's contract terms by using nintendo policies for their OWN platforms. and those things are simply not related.



Hynad on 14 August 2013
happydolphin said:
Hynad said:

This topic is lol worthy to no end. All the agendas come out like flies to a pile of crap.

Yup, that of revisionist historians. We know what happened, there is no need to hide or butter things up. Sadly in a world where that doesn't work, we have arguments, and people watching saying people have an agenda.


You have what happened. And then you have interpretations of what happened. In those interpretations, you have people taking sides based on their bias. Ready to dismiss the bad actions of one to crucify the bad actions of the other. . Hypocrisy at its best.



happydolphin on 14 August 2013
Hynad said:

You have what happened. And then you have interpretations of what happened. In those interpretations, you have people taking sides based on their bias. Ready to dismiss the bad actions of one to crucify the bad actions of the other. . Hypocrisy at its best.

Hypocrisy is to be unable to read, research and understand the history for what it was. We know where that is. But it's worse even when it's only passed judgement, rather than contribution. Then it's just spam.



Hynad on 14 August 2013
happydolphin said:
Hynad said:

You have what happened. And then you have interpretations of what happened. In those interpretations, you have people taking sides based on their bias. Ready to dismiss the bad actions of one to crucify the bad actions of the other. . Hypocrisy at its best.

Hypocrisy is to be unable to read, research and understand the history for what it was. We know where that is. But it's worse even when it's only passed judgement, rather than contribution. Then it's just spam.

Hypocrisy = not reading, researching and understanding?

Care to provide me a link to that dictionary you're using?



Wonktonodi on 14 August 2013
happydolphin said:
pokoko said:

So, wait, Nintendo didn't read the contract they agreed to follow?  They didn't realize what it said until years later?  Then, instead of going to Sony and attempting to work out a new deal, they secretly canceled everything, obviously with the intent to fuck Sony over, and made a deal with someone else, which they revealed to Sony with a surprise announcement?

And people act like Nintendo was some kind of innocent victim in all of that?  Holy cats.

It certainly sounds like they got what they deserved out of the situation.  That was mostly a FUBAR of their own making.  If they didn't agree with what Sony wanted then they should have said so from the start.

Actually, you know, reading that over, it sounds like bullcrap.  How the hell do you just suddenly realize what a contract says years down the line?  How does a large corporation not have legal experts examine every major agreement?  Something is really fishy with this explaination.

@bold. And do you blame them?? I would fuck Sony over too, quite eagerly, had they pulled off a move like that on me.

Holy fucking cats indeed.

If anyone deserved bad karma for it, it was Sony. They pulled a fast one on Nintendo, Nintendo got fucked, yet after all these years Sony still can't beat them. So who's the loser after all?

Hopefully it's the one who deserves it, and in this case, it's Sony. If anything's fishy with anything it's your reasoning.

And it wasn't years later, it was more like months later, maybe a year's crossed. But the thing was a hidden clause which required a lawyer to unearth, otherwise Nintendo would never have agreed to the contract, knowing Nintendo. I mean, for those who know Nintendo historically speaking. They don't treat the right to their fucking IPs lightly.

so following years of nitendo requireing other companies to follow shady terms. They agree to something with sony that put them at a disavantage instead of an advantage. Then it takes them 3 years to ralize it. and instead of renegotiating go and make a deal with someone else behind there back?

Sorry but considering nintendo was very good at contracts and agrements favorable to them, they should have taken care of it much sooner. Yes it was far to far in sony's favor, but that's why you negotiate better terms before agreeing.

From the thing you showed before it was in 88 and they came forward with philips in 91

How can sony hide a clause? Nintendo has a legal team and they shouldn't have agreed until they read it. This isn't congress shoving in last minute changes before a vote .