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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Change title Only Western Developers are willing to Sell to either big 3, While Majority of Japanese don't care to sell to big 3

Nintendo and Sony should fusion. In due time all Japan would be together.



Around the Network
the-pi-guy said:

https://www.sony.com/en/SonyInfo/IR/library/presen/er/pdf/21q4_sonyspeech.pdf

Page 10:

In addition, we plan to increase software development expenses aimed
at strengthening first party software at our existing studios by
approximately 40 billion yen year-on-year, and we have incorporated
that impact into this forecast.

40 billion yen = 292,626,560.00 United States Dollar

Good catch! 

However, I'm still confident Sony will acquire a publisher or two down the line.



Shatts said:
VideoGameAccountant said:

Of the two, I think Sony needs to more than Nintendo. Sony's relationship with third parties has been to buy exclusive third party games and then supplement their games with their own internal studios. Microsoft is breaking that buy just buying the cow rather than the milk. Sony and Microsoft are also in direct competition as they are seen as substitutes. This is also why Sony is setting aside a lot of money for acquisitions. If the Microsoft/Activision deal is approved by regulators (which I think it will be), Sony will become more aggressive. Nintendo, for now, is going to be more defensive and get the companies they can't afford to lose or ones that approach them about selling. 

I don't see Nintendo getting big into acquisitions unless Sony gets involved. Nintendo rarely cares about Microsoft but they really care about Sony does. For instance, Nintendo killed the Gameboy line and started the DS when Sony entered the market. Keep in mind the GBA was only on the market for 4 years and sold 80 million units. It was a massive risk. Nintendo keeps up these gimmicks until Sony left. If Sony buys up a major third party, then Nintendo will go from "People who don't process Nintendo DNA in our group would not be a plus to the company" to "Nintendo has always saw opportunities to bring in new talent and ideas into the company to expand the Nintendo DNA". If you want to see if Nintendo will get into the acquisition game, just watch Sony. 

Yeah I think so too. However, the main reason I think Nintendo was particularly looking at Sony was because they wanted to secure their homeland first, and Sony was the biggest competitor. Btw the mindset is already "Nintendo has always saw opportunities to bring in new talent and ideas into the company to expand the Nintendo DNA" but not from acquisitions, rather from hiring new/young devs. Miyamoto stated in the shareholder meeting and interviews multiple times that they hire younger people and ingrain them with Nintendo DNA for the future of Nintendo whenever he was questioned about what happens after he retires.

You do make a good point, but that quote was a bit of a joke. Just trying to come up with some PR speak they would use if they did a 180. 

If you want a more recent example of the company's rivalry, then look at EVO. Once Sony bought EVO, Smash was immediately booted from the event. This was in spite of the games having some of the highest viewership, and other events, such as CEO, still having both Melee and Ultimate. If Sony bought up a major studio, then it would mean their games would not be on Nintendo's platform. I think this falls more into your point of Nintendo wanting to secure their homeland, and I think it would be a major driver for Nintendo becoming more acquisition aggressive. 



Visit my site for more

Known as Smashchu in a former life

ArtX said:

Nintendo and Sony should fusion. In due time all Japan would be together.

And together they shall create.........the Nintendo Playstation.  Would love to see how that turns out.....lol



V-r0cK said:
ArtX said:

Nintendo and Sony should fusion. In due time all Japan would be together.

And together they shall create.........the Nintendo Playstation.  Would love to see how that turns out.....lol

Just look for the final years of SNES and first years of PS and N64. That was the result of trying the Nintendo Playstation.



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."

Around the Network
The_Liquid_Laser said:

The best selling games tend to be developed in house.  A similar route to this is for a console maker to purchase (fully or a portion of) a company that they already have a close relationship with.  That is basically what Sony did with Naughty Dog and what Nintendo did with Next Level Games.  Either way the console maker can support the developers and let them grow in size and skill gradually.  That is how to get the best selling first party games.

However, if a company is rich and impatient, like Microsoft, then they can just acquire large studios outright.  Has Microsoft ever made a development team better?  I don't think they have a good track record with this.  They have some very valuable IP now, but I kind of expect these franchises to get slowly ran into the ground.  I don't expect them to get better.  However, they will get some really great sales for several years until their time has come.  That is something.

I don't see Microsoft's acquisition strategy to be too amazing in the long run.  However, I do think Gamepass is a really solid strategy.  If they can get a wide adoption of Gamepass, then it may not matter a whole lot if their games kind of suck in 2030.  If they can get enough people used to a subscription model, then it may be hard for them to go back to purchasing games.  These acquisitions are really just a means to get people to try Gamepass.

Disagree with bolded. 

Turn 10: Home grown studio. Always released quality titles with maybe 1 being meh (FM5)

Bungie: Say what you want but Bungie was at their peak with Halo. Each game was always improving and adding new features.

Playground: Never has released a bad game and each one is better than the last.

Rare: Had some rough patches for sure, but Sea of Thieves is easily their most popular game they have made and it only happened because MS has support them completely. 

Mojang: Minecraft has only improved since the acquisition and spinoff titles have shown to be successful with a new one around the corner.

Double Fine: Psychonauts 2 would have less polish and content if MS didn't acquire them. Their words, not mine. It's one of their best games easily. 

Undead Labs: State of Decay 2 is much better than at release and they continue to release content for the game. The real test will be the 3rd game. 

The Coalition: I wouldn't say they have improved but they were never bad to begin with. Gears 4 and 5 are not classics like the original trilogy, but certainly still good games and always stayed true to Gears. 

343I: This is the only studio I would say has not improved or stayed consistent. Ups and downs throughout and that continues now. 

Of course we have seen the downfall of studios being mishandled ie Lionhead, but MS has literally admitted to it and said they want to be better. The notion MS ruins everything they touch is fabricated. As of now, we still don't know how the most recent acquisitions will perform because we haven't seen them release a game under MS.  What we can see the growth in studio size for all their recent acquisitions so that means MS is giving them what they need to successed. 

Last edited by smroadkill15 - on 24 August 2022

zero129 said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

The best selling games tend to be developed in house.  A similar route to this is for a console maker to purchase (fully or a portion of) a company that they already have a close relationship with.  That is basically what Sony did with Naughty Dog and what Nintendo did with Next Level Games.  Either way the console maker can support the developers and let them grow in size and skill gradually.  That is how to get the best selling first party games.

However, if a company is rich and impatient, like Microsoft, then they can just acquire large studios outright.  Has Microsoft ever made a development team better?  I don't think they have a good track record with this.  They have some very valuable IP now, but I kind of expect these franchises to get slowly ran into the ground.  I don't expect them to get better.  However, they will get some really great sales for several years until their time has come.  That is something.

I don't see Microsoft's acquisition strategy to be too amazing in the long run.  However, I do think Gamepass is a really solid strategy.  If they can get a wide adoption of Gamepass, then it may not matter a whole lot if their games kind of suck in 2030.  If they can get enough people used to a subscription model, then it may be hard for them to go back to purchasing games.  These acquisitions are really just a means to get people to try Gamepass.

Man i have to laugh at your comments towards MS.

You know the saying.  "It's funny because it's true."



zero129 said:
the-pi-guy said:

Sure you're entitled to your opinion.

It's fine if you don't think Sony is doing a great job.

A few relevant rules here:

  1. Explain and justify your opinions. If you have nothing reasonable and/or relevant to add to a topic, then don't post at all
  2. Do not say that item A sucks, or that item B is better than item C. Give reasons why, and provide evidence (articles, screenshots, technical information, even opinion etc.).
  3. You have the right to express your opinion, if it is relevant, justified, and presented in a civil manner. If you want to discuss something other than the thread topic, make your own thread.

In short: You are fine to explain why you feel Sony is doing a bad job, as long as you provide evidence, be civil, etc.

There's a difference between having a negative opinion on Sony/MS/Nintendo, and just throwing out garbage to cause trouble. There's a difference between having an opinion on something, and trolling/flaming.

And again, I've asked both of you stop this line of posts. It's not relevant to the thread.

Ok i ask for you to go back and look what was said and tell me how they tick them boxes. I dont care if i get myself a ban to prove my point btw..

#Your a mod thats in this thread seen that shit posted and instead of warning that poster your here talking shit to me.

Could you talk about this stuff in PMs please.



the-pi-guy said:
zero129 said:

Ok im entitled to my opinion too.

How is it an opinon of what company has MS brought who has got better. how is it an opinon that them companys are only going to get worse etc?.

If thats the case.

Every company Sony brought was already good and Sony done nothing for them and i feel like them companys are now going to go to shit with Sony rising prices etc etc.

Hows that? its my opinion like you said im entitled to it right?.

Edit:

Im happy to say to everyone we can all flame and bait other users now as long as its "Our opinion" Thanks Pi, your such a great mod .

Sure you're entitled to your opinion.

It's fine if you don't think Sony is doing a great job.

A few relevant rules here:

  1. Explain and justify your opinions. If you have nothing reasonable and/or relevant to add to a topic, then don't post at all
  2. Do not say that item A sucks, or that item B is better than item C. Give reasons why, and provide evidence (articles, screenshots, technical information, even opinion etc.).
  3. You have the right to express your opinion, if it is relevant, justified, and presented in a civil manner. If you want to discuss something other than the thread topic, make your own thread.

In short: You are fine to explain why you feel Sony is doing a bad job, as long as you provide evidence, be civil, etc.

There's a difference between having a negative opinion on Sony/MS/Nintendo, and just throwing out garbage to cause trouble. There's a difference between having an opinion on something, and trolling/flaming.

And again, I've asked both of you stop this line of posts. It's not relevant to the thread.

There is also derailing thread rule or was that revised?



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."

Am I the only one thinking they will get Square Enix in the short run?