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

Forums - Gaming - Did Microsoft kill/harm nintendo?

 

Did microsoft hurt nintendo?

Yes 67 27.46%
 
No 121 49.59%
 
i like pie! 53 21.72%
 
Total:241
mii-gamer on 23 May 2014
Gintoki said:
Nintendo refused to publish Conker's Bad Fur Day, making other companies publishing it.
StarFox Adventures was probably well in developpment at that time(if not finished) and they most likely felt like getting rid of Rare.

What?

Chris Seavor

Nintendo published the game, so if they had any doubts we’d never have got that far. They were absolutely behind it, the problem was i think the restrictive nature of how you position a game like this… It couldn’t be advertised in certain places, couldn’t even be reviewed in certain media because of the publications target audience. This restriction didn’t help at all with promoting the game.

source:

http://gamikia.com/interview-with-chris-seavor-conker/



Around the Network
Gintoki on 23 May 2014
mii-gamer said:
Gintoki said:
Nintendo refused to publish Conker's Bad Fur Day, making other companies publishing it.
StarFox Adventures was probably well in developpment at that time(if not finished) and they most likely felt like getting rid of Rare.

What?

Chris Seavor

Nintendo published the game, so if they had any doubts we’d never have got that far. They were absolutely behind it, the problem was i think the restrictive nature of how you position a game like this… It couldn’t be advertised in certain places, couldn’t even be reviewed in certain media because of the publications target audience. This restriction didn’t help at all with promoting the game.

source:

http://gamikia.com/interview-with-chris-seavor-conker/


Oh, I should've been more precise : Nintendo Europe. THQ published the game in Europe instead. 



S.T.A.G.E. on 23 May 2014
Soundwave said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Soundwave said:
In a lot of ways -- yes.

I think Microsoft squeezed Nintendo out of the core market and convinced Nintendo that they couldn't compete head on in that area because they are much smaller company than MS.

And while being the alternative game company served them well for a few years, they've lost the casual audience to iOS/Android gaming now too ... which leaves them in a very difficult position now.

If MS didn't exist, IMO Nintendo would be a much more balanced company today, making more games for core gamers (rather than being at the mercy of more unreliable and fickle casuals) while still making the same ol' Mario/Zelda/Metroid games that everyone enjoys.


Microsoft saved Nintendo from Sony's wrath.Nintendo was on a path to being destroyed by record setting numbers in the gaming industry and losing massive chunks of marketshare. Since Microsoft has been basicallu warding off Sony, Nintendo has been making their own plans. Nintendo would've gone down with the ship had Sony not been distracted by Microsoft.

 

I think if there was no XBox, the GameCube would've sold at least 30+ million units, a healthy amount and then they would've built off that and seized on Sony's mistake of making a $600 PS3. 

To be honest the game industry wasn't good for Microsoft anyway ... here we are, almost 15 years later, and MS really is back to getting worked over by Sony and still has not made proper inroads anywhere globally outside of North America.

And the reason MS entered the game biz in the first place was because they were afraid Sony was a threat to their Windows stronghold, but they actually were blind to the real threats ... Apple and Google are the ones that they should've been keeping an eye on. 

And Nintendo got pushed into a direction, which was temporarily successful for them, has in the long term (IMO) made them weaker. 

I think Nintendo would've been just fine being a profitable no.2 in the game business, even the N64 made a good amount of money for them. 


I'll give you the fact that without Microsoft the the GB would've sold more, but there was still a market issue. Sony would've gobbled up more and more of the market. Thats what happens when you have great value not only from gaming but from multimedia and great games from all parties. 

You have a point on Microsoft not really getting anywhere with gaming. They have only served as a distraction for Sony (no different than the Zune for Apple) but while they hurt Nintendos chances with third parties, Microsoft gave Nintendo breathing room to focus on a product that absolutely nothing to do with the same market, but rather a dormant market. If it was just Sony and Nintendo, Nintendo would've still tried to go for the market Microsoft has. 

In three generations Microsoft hasnt gotten much better at first party. They are still depedent on a handful of games.

Microsoft knew about Apple and Google. They want anyone who they deem to be a threat.

The GC was profitable, but Nintendo would've been hurting if left alone with Sony year after year the returns would've started to dwindle.  



etking on 23 May 2014

Retro Sudios cannot replace the Rareware magic which is now lost forever. Rareware games were the hardest games on the market and had a ton of replay value but the IPs are worthless if there are no high quality AAA games behind. Even DKC, once one of the best Jump & Runs on the market, is now a mediocre game without anything special.

The N64 had ton of AAA Rare games with very high metacritic ratings, Wii-U and 3DS barely have good games at all. Microsoft did not only hurt Nintendo with the Rareware buyout, it killed them. Because without good AAA games which Rare produced a lot, Nintendo systems are not attractive for hardcore and adult players anymore.



S.T.A.G.E. on 23 May 2014
etking said:

Retro Sudios cannot replace the Rareware magic which is now lost forever. Rareware games were the hardest games on the market and had a ton of replay value but the IPs are worthless if there are no high quality AAA games behind. Even DKC, once one of the best Jump & Runs on the market, is now a mediocre game without anything special.

The N64 had ton of AAA Rare games with very high metacritic ratings, Wii-U and 3DS barely have good games at all. Microsoft did not only hurt Nintendo with the Rareware buyout, it killed them. Because without good AAA games which Rare produced a lot, Nintendo systems are not attractive for hardcore and adult players anymore.


Rare didnt save the N64. Lack of third party was what hurt the Nintendo even though they had the best first and second party of their life at that point. 



Around the Network
DeadBigfoot21 on 29 May 2014
Areym said:
No, i don't think so. At all.

If anything, they hurt Rare. I mean Kinect Sports Rivals? That is a waste of talent.

Oops, forgot to come back here. 

I think RARE can still create a great game but they haven't really been giving the oportunity to create one. They have been making pretty much kinect only games and i bet making a kinect only game is a lot harder than creating a core non kinect game. It seems now that has changed with phil spencer and we will see if they give rare the chance to prove themselves.