baloofarsan said: Nintendo got something MS needs - Handhelds. MS got something Nintendo needs - Mature audience. |
Sony got something both of them need - more market share
baloofarsan said: Nintendo got something MS needs - Handhelds. MS got something Nintendo needs - Mature audience. |
Sony got something both of them need - more market share
generic-user-1 said: nintendo gets nothing out of this... they just have to wait, the xbone will be the last m$ console. they are done after the losing again. |
I dunno I think Halo exclusive and a number of other MS IP make Nintendo credible with older Western consumers as their no.1 console choice overnight.
Besides, having Windows mobile OS on their handhelds isn't exactly a loss for them in any way. It can give them cover from shareholders who want to know what their strategy is against iOS/Android. Well they can just point to their MS alliance.
Not only that but their handhelds could use more content too, MS can help there too.
Ka-pi96 said:
Yeah, a new brand entirely probably would make the most sense. Especially considering how difficult it would be to think of a name that shows a succesor to the Xbox One or Wii U My main criticism of your plan though is how Nintendo centric it is, what is the point of the partnership if Microsoft don't have about an equal influence especially in the west as I said. It sure would be an interesting console if it did come to fruition, would sell plenty regardless of what Sony did |
It has to be Nintendo centric just because Nintendo is a very lets say ... fidgety company.
To sell a deal like this to their Japanese board they would need assurances that they have a good amount of control, in Japanese culture you want to save face.
For MS ... what do they care really, their shareholders would react overwhelmingly positively to such a move IMO, it would be a huge win for MS in the (real) war versus iOS/Android to get exclusive OS/Cloud services to Nintendo handhelds for one.
This is all about playing chess ... not checkers.
Besides it's not like Nintendo is a poor shephard of a gaming division ... under Nintendo MS could rest easy knowing the quality of games like Halo would be kept high while perhaps Rare could even be salvaged. It's better than spinning off the game division or selling it to Samsung or Amazon like some of their investors want.
Ka-pi96 said:
But I don't think that would be so succesful. Microsoft know how to get the western audience, the COD and GTA audience, Nintendo don't. Nintendo know how to get the Japanese audience, and those that like platformers. They should play to their strengths. Maybe even a Nintendo is in full control of marketing in Japan while Microsoft is in full control of marketing in the US could work then? |
The whole point is they bring together different audiences. That's a bonus, not a minus, why would you want to join with a company that just does well in the same areas you already provide well in?
That's why the Disney deal for Marvel + Star Wars works well ... the average Marvel fan may not give two sh*ts about Mickey Mouse or Wall-E or Princess Aurora, but they bring Disney a ton of money that they wouldn't be getting otherwise.
Goatseye said: The best of the East teaming with the best of the West. |
We're talking about Nintendo and Microsoft, not Sony and Microsoft. Get back on topic.
I could see Nadella going for it, but not Iwata.
Of course, the trouble with Nintendo is you can't read them in regards to how they react to failure. Who could have foreseen the Wii from the GameCube? Equally, who can foresee what Nintendo will do next? Despite their "stay the course" language, which was the signal they were throwing out 10 years ago as well, clearly something needs to change. The question is what will...
Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.
Ka-pi96 said:
Yeah that's what I'm saying. I don't think they would bring together different audiences if Nintendo were dominant in the agreement, only if they had equal control over it. |
The average consumer would not know (or care) about the corporate politics behind a deal, they would just see one system that has Halo, Mario, Zelda, Gears of War, Sunset Overdrive, Mario Kart, Metroid, Smash, Xenoblade, Forza, Monster Hunter, and all third party games versus a Sony one with Uncharted, GOW, Last of Us and they'd make their choice based on those differences.
Does the average Marvel fan/movie goer really care think all that much about Disney having influence over movies like The Avengers and Guardians of the Galaxy when they go to pay their $9 at the box office? Doesn't seem like it, if anything it seems to me consumers regard Disney's involvement in these IP as a positive (ie: I hope the next Star Wars is good, because Disney did a good job with Marvel stuff).
Read the title... How about "No"?
Ask stefl1504 for a sig, even if you don't need one.
Goatseye said: The best of the East teaming with the best of the West. I'm Xbox first but Nintendo console is the best complementary system for Xbox. If you have Mario and Master Chief, you have it all. |
subjective