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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - If Nintendo had to, which one?

 

If Nintendo was forced to merge with Sony or Microsoft, which one would it be?

Sony 281 80.98%
 
Microsoft 66 19.02%
 
Total:347

Get this filth off the forum, you want to play Nintendo games buy a Nintendo System!!!



 

Around the Network

Sony because Japan and Europe.

Rare that Nintendo used to own literally doesn't exist. The only thing of value they have is the Banjo IP that I'm sure Nintendo could buy if they wanted it enough,



CaptainExplosion said:
Teeqoz said:


My most played game on Steam is Rocket League....


Which looks nothing like a Nintendo game. Ergo Nintendo games on Steam wouldn't sell.


Rocket League looks nothing like a nintendo game? You know Metroid Federation Force exist right? 



 

Sony and Nintendo on the same console would step on each other's feet since collectively they would have too many 1st party studios and IPs.
On the contrary, Nintendo and MS would complement each other and become more competitve. As a result, Sony would be compelled to publish even more great 1st party titles. Everyone wins.



Nintendo and ouya



Around the Network
Teeqoz said:
Ck1x said:

Once again because these are the types of games that sell on these systems! This isn't even a theory at this point, Nintendo style games or anything similar don't sell on Microsoft or Sony platforms. FFXV doesn't even look like a Final Fantasy game because it's trying to draw in a bigger audience that only cares about the games visuals. If Nintendo should have as much say in what they create as you suggest then my guess is that Nintendo would just stay in the hardware business at that point...


Then how do you explain the non-realistic games that both Microsoft and Sony make?

If there are any artistic looking games on either of those systems, they don't sell well at all! Nothing like how Nintendo titles sell on their own platforms. A game like Pikmin would be lucky if it sold 300-400,000 copies on PS4. These systems are 3rd party driven and only mainstream games sell in big numbers, to where even Sony's 1st party games don't outsell the yearly 3rd party games. So how would you expect Nintendo to come in and do on Sony's platform what they themselves can not?

Nintendo would be an extremely niche brand on Xbox or Playstation and to think that every core Nintendo fan will go out and buy a Playstation or Xbox to play Nintendo games is reaching. Believe it or not, having more choices in the gaming industry helps to keep each company competitive. This is the whole reason that Sony got overtaken in the electronics segment, because competition brought in cheaper comparable products of similar quality. 



Ck1x said:
Teeqoz said:


Then how do you explain the non-realistic games that both Microsoft and Sony make?

If there are any artistic looking games on either of those systems, they don't sell well at all! Nothing like how Nintendo titles sell on their own platforms. A game like Pikmin would be lucky if it sold 300-400,000 copies on PS4. These systems are 3rd party driven and only mainstream games sell in big numbers, to where even Sony's 1st party games don't outsell the yearly 3rd party games. So how would you expect Nintendo to come in and do on Sony's platform what they themselves can not?

Nintendo would be an extremely niche brand on Xbox or Playstation and to think that every core Nintendo fan will go out and buy a Playstation or Xbox to play Nintendo games is reaching. Believe it or not, having more choices in the gaming industry helps to keep each company competitive. This is the whole reason that Sony got overtaken in the electronics segment, because competition brought in cheaper comparable products of similar quality. 


So your argument once again relies on Sony/MS forcing Nintendo to make realistic Mario, despite how stupid of an idea that is, and that then leading to Nintendo fans quitting gaming alltogether.

 

Why would Nintendo games stop selling just because they switched platforms? You think Mario, one of the biggest IPs on earth would be completely destroyed just because the console it was released on changed name from Nintendo to Playstation or Xbox?

 

Nintendo wouldn't become a niche brand just because they were on Playstation or Xbox. The demographic and the fanbase Nintendo appealsto wouldn't seize to exist just because the games was on a non-Nintendo console.



I'd rather nintendo just commit seppuku and die with their pride intact than to sell to either of them. They have a charm all their own that I don't think would survive that transition.

The best thing that could have happened for video games was Nintendo and Sony not merging their efforts back in the 90's; they're both bringing different things to the industry, push one another at times, and offer different experiences. For that reason I can't bring myself to pick an option lol

Ah yeah, I don't think I need to explain why microsoft is also a bad idea... RIP Rare.



CaptainExplosion said:
Teeqoz said:


So your argument once again relies on Sony/MS forcing Nintendo to make realistic Mario, despite how stupid of an idea that is, and that then leading to Nintendo fans quitting gaming alltogether.

 

Why would Nintendo games stop selling just because they switched platforms? You think Mario, one of the biggest IPs on earth would be completely destroyed just because the console it was released on changed name from Nintendo to Playstation or Xbox?

 

Nintendo wouldn't become a niche brand just because they were on Playstation or Xbox. The demographic and the fanbase Nintendo appealsto wouldn't seize to exist just because the games was on a non-Nintendo console.


No, but it likely would if Sony or Microsoft forced Nintendo to make reaistic versions of Nintendo games.


Yeah probably, but neither Sony nor Microsoft are stupid enough to do that, so that doesn't really matter.



It is NEVER going to happen but if it did it would absolutely be Sony. Nintendo going 3rd party is possible though