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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Nintendo banned Square from their offices for 10 years after FFVII went to PlayStation. EDIT: japanese business model is akin to Yakuza

Tagged games:

 

What do you think

Nintendo is God they never make a mistake 7 26.92%
 
Square the ones who to be blame 8 30.77%
 
I dont why i just hate Sony 2 7.69%
 
I 9 34.62%
 
Total:26
Ka-pi96 said:
padib said:

@Ka-pi96, it should be patently obvious that I'm talking about business ethics, not popularity or marketshare.

Even in business ethics it wasn't a mistake. There's nothing ethically questionable about choosing not to do business anymore with a company that insists on dictating their own terms and instead doing business with a company that gives you more respect/freedom. There was no "betrayal", they didn't "owe" Nintendo anything.

If you ignore the history, that was posted many times, and if you ignore the concept of agreements and symbiotic relationship building between two companies, then you would be right.

But you're obviously not right because your opinion ignores what happened. I wrote ample amount of information to show that Square was essentially a second party to Nintendo in all but a paper document (and even then we don't know), yet you will insist that your opinion is the stronger one because, hey you're Ka-pi96!

I'm used to it now, but to be honest I'd prefer if you didn't quote me directly if you're to do that. I don't like it when my opinion, which I formed over a lot of reflection, is just bashed so easily by a user who doesn't put in the effort to be perfectly honest. I don't even reply to Don anymore, I'd prefer if that didn't happen with you.

If you quote me, at least make an effort to support your opinion properly, given all the fact we know, and especially, I have already laid out ITT.

Thank you ka-pi



Around the Network
RaptorChrist said:
DonFerrari said:

Yes everything Nintendo did was right, nothing was wrong...

Must be the reason most 3rd parties left Nintendo for gens and no other company had similar practices at the time or after, not even Nintendo have those practices anymore.

B-b-but Don, I thought he explained this. A large part of padibs post was explaining how Nintendo's strict rules and expensive licensing fees made them "bad" in the eyes of the devs. Your understanding of his post was that Nintendo has never made a mistake? Sure, he clearly gave his own opinions and has a liking for Nintendo, but... your reply doesn't even make sense, and then you piggy-backed off of your own misinformation to (I assume) try and make padib feel bad.

Is your liking of Sony so strong that you have a tendency to project negative feelings onto people who post their own thoughts and opinions that differ from yours? Disagreeing with someone is one thing.

You're scaring me, Don. But you're still my favorite. <3

Nintendo strict rules weren't necessary nor even productive in several parts.

Why they should strictly develop for Nintendo? How did that help the industry? Several devs started developing 2 games at different teams for the same title to avoid this rule as well.

Why should these devs be limited to 5 games? It doesn't ensure quality. You can demand QA and that you validate the quality before release, but you can have a company doing 2 games and both being utter shit while other do 10 and they are all great. Nintendo didn't limit themselves to 5 games and several companies opened multiple studios to avoid this obnoxious rule.

To give all the credit to Nintendo for saving the industry and even further saying that it was because of these bad rules is ridiculous. If that was the understanding of the devs (they are in the business) they would be grateful of Nintendo and not pissed trying to find any platform with better rules, just like they did going to Genesis and then Playstation and not really wanting to be under Nintendo, at most doing multiplats but several not even wanting to dev to Nintendo at all.

And sure also putting all the blame of Sony Nintendo deal not working out on evil Sony, yes sure, Nintendo top brass were all gullible people that signed a very evil deal with Sony and them latter discovered they were betrayed, that also may be the reason why Nintendo actions were very badly received in Japan and that their deal with Phillips didn't work out.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

HoangNhatAnh said:
Ka-pi96 said:

You can argue about who to blame and what not, but that's not even remotely true.

It was a resounding success for Sony in every regard. Absolutely not a mistake in any way, shape or form.

It was a massive success for Square too. If you change business partners and the end result is you rolling in money... how on earth is that a mistake?

So, Square did that by their own will, blame on Nintendo alone? OK

Xxain said:

Yes we know. Nintendo's was terrible back in the day.

Terrible to 3rd parties, not to their fans, look at NES and SNES. Also, that is over 20 years ago, and now, the most present exam is how Sony treat their vita fan base after summer 2014 till now.

Of course (thread is about Nintendo's relationship with third parties during that time).  Btw, guys we dont need to  keep bringing SONY up as some deflection tool. I bring it up multiple times Kutaragi was also a asshole and SONY used to threaten 3rd parties with not being able to publish if their port wasnt the best.



RaptorChrist said:

Anyways, crazy time. Squaresoft was rock solid in the 90s and I don't know that Sony would have managed without them.


Fair point. Sony obviously didn't have a strong development background like Nintendo and Sega when they entered the market so their strategy was securing third parties with great games. They did one hell of a job with that.



Ka-pi96 said:
HoangNhatAnh said:

So, Square did that by their own will, blame on Nintendo alone? OK

Yes. You can't "blame" a business for taking a better deal than the one you're offering them. You just have to accept that your offer wasn't good enough.

Besides, from everybody other than Nintendo's perspective there is no blame. It was a massive success, there's only credit to assign to people.

By ignoring some facts, of course only Nintendo had fault in this, Square and Sony didn't do anything wrong to you.



Around the Network
Xxain said:
HoangNhatAnh said:

So, Square did that by their own will, blame on Nintendo alone? OK

Terrible to 3rd parties, not to their fans, look at NES and SNES. Also, that is over 20 years ago, and now, the most present exam is how Sony treat their vita fan base after summer 2014 till now.

Of course (thread is about Nintendo's relationship with third parties during that time).  Btw, guys we dont need to  keep bringing SONY up as some deflection tool. I bring it up multiple times Kutaragi was also a asshole and SONY used to threaten 3rd parties with not being able to publish if their port wasnt the best.

I am a customer, not a 3rd party so as long as some of their games are still good to me, i don't care about that, but obviously a lot of non-Nintendo fans (especially Sony fans) care about this matter for some reasons.



HoangNhatAnh said:
Ka-pi96 said:

Yes. You can't "blame" a business for taking a better deal than the one you're offering them. You just have to accept that your offer wasn't good enough.

Besides, from everybody other than Nintendo's perspective there is no blame. It was a massive success, there's only credit to assign to people.

By ignoring some facts, of course only Nintendo had fault in this, Square and Sony didn't do anything wrong to you.

Nope, Square and Sony did nothing wrong as far as I'm concerned.

I'd also say the only thing Nintendo did wrong was not making themselves a more attractive partner to keep working with. So I'm not even saying they were "bad", just that working with Sony was a more attractive proposition. I mean, if your supermarket charged ¥1000 for a newspaper and then another store opened nearby that sold the same newspaper for ¥400, why would you keep buying the more expensive one?



Fairly sure the limiting publishers to so many games a year was NES only as SEGA came along with Genesis which was a more powerful and attractive platform without those restrictions. Konami's Ultra brand vanished after the NES era. NOA still had restrictions on religion and nudity of course. MK had sweat and no blood but after the feedback, MKII brought it back.SEGA forced Nintendo out of some of those aspects. Night Trap was possibly being ported to Nintendo PlayStation CD add on. When at the senate hearings Nintendo showed the game trying to pass the footage off as SEGA CD and saying this filth would never appear on a Nintendo system (lol Nintendo Switch says hi btw) but the quality was much better than SEGA CD.



Bite my shiny metal cockpit!

HoangNhatAnh said:
Xxain said:

Of course (thread is about Nintendo's relationship with third parties during that time).  Btw, guys we dont need to  keep bringing SONY up as some deflection tool. I bring it up multiple times Kutaragi was also a asshole and SONY used to threaten 3rd parties with not being able to publish if their port wasnt the best.

I am a customer, not a 3rd party so as long as some of their games are still good to me, i don't care about that, but obviously a lot of non-Nintendo fans (especially Sony fans) care about this matter for some reasons.

Cool.... Ya do know this is kinda the topic of the thread right? If you are not interested in discussing said topic then you shouldnt be here. Btw, Nintendo vs third  parties has been the major topic on this side of the forum since the birth of the site, mostly initiated by Nintendo fans.



Did it really last 10 years?When did Crystal Chronicles launch?Because as far as I remember that title was thought to be the game that healed Nintendo and Square relationship.



My (locked) thread about how difficulty should be a decision for the developers, not the gamers.

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241866&page=1