Seriously what does this have to do with Nintendo games? Pretty much all the games Nintendo makes are over 80%

--> Zelda:tp, MKW, SSBB,SMG,MP3,punch out!!, excitebots,etc

Why is it people are interpreting what was said to mean quality software? This is a shareholder's report. What do shareholders want to see? Money! So when you say you have the only powerful in-house studios to shareholders, you're obviously talking about the fact that only Nintendo has broken 15 million on a single piece of software this generation and they've done it eight times already, going on 9 and 10. Microsoft and Sony haven't even come close, and the one studio that has come close to at least 10 million, Microsoft, doesn't even own the studio that did it any longer.

Sony hasn't broken 10 million in 8 years. Microsoft has never done it(Halo 3 will though).

If Nintendo's benchmark for powerful studios is that 15 million mark that only they know how to hit nowadays, then yeah they are 100% correct in saying no one can touch them and nobody possesses what they do. I mean for christs sake, they've done it eight times already just this generation and no matter what Sony or Microsoft do, does anyone here really believe either of them can reach that benchmark with a single title?

is that report in english or is this quote "translated"??? cause that could make a lot of difference...

It seems that every one is reading something different to me their statement was power full in house dev teams they at no time said that sony or microsoft didn't have good teams this is astatement about inhouse tams to direct their own way why are you gays reading more into this than there is

This goes to too many people to quote, but I'd like to respond all the same.

First off, I still do not think the statement is true on a literal level. Just in the last few years, Grand Turismo and most especially Halo show that Sony and Microsoft have their own, quite powerful, in-house developers.

Second, and this is the real meat of the matter, even if Nintendo was correct, I personally feel that this statement lacks class and dignity, which is where most of my disappointment comes from.

It's one thing to high-five yourself for a job very, very, very, VERY well done. When you're addressing investors and trying to get them to give you more money, it's almost required to do so.

However, when you try to congratulate yourself by disparaging the competition, you're being a dick, plain and simple. This is especially true when such comments are not necessary: at this point, what effect do Sony's and Microsft's first-party efforts have on Nintendo's ability to sell more Wiis and DS's?

Was it not Nintendo who started this generation by declaring that their competitor was not Sony or Microsoft, but rather Indifference? Has that changed in any way, shape or form? Of course not! In fact, Nintendo's comments imply that it's still consumer apathy, rather than Sony or Microsoft, that's preventing them from moving more hardware and software. So why go out of your way to take a stab at someone who's by now completely irrelevant?

To me, that screams "petty," and so far Iwata's Nintendo's mostly been above that. I was just hoping that they would continue that trend. The fact that they didn't disappoints me. It's not the end of the world, and as many have pointed out it's a fairly mild dig, as things go. Still, I continue to hold out hope that at least one of the three manufacturers acts like an adult for the remainder of this generation.

That's all.

Does anyone have a definition of In-house software team?
Because if it means what I think it means, Nintendos statement is true.
Is Bungie considered an in-house developer? Is Epic or Lionhead?
I know Bungie is First Party, but is that the same as inhouse?

Otherwise, I sympathise with Noname

I'm still waiting to see this "software".

Gran Turismo is nowhere near the top eight titles Nintendo has produced this generation. Microsoft doesn't own Bungie so Halo 3 does not count.

Regarding Nintendo having class, I could understand if this was PR meant to be spread around by the press, but this is a shareholders' report. These comments weren't necessarily meant to be passed along the websites and we're said within Nintendo's doors to fellow owners. This is the equivalent of saying Nintendo doesn't have class because their employees make fun of Sony and Microsoft amongst themselves at the watercooler at work. Nintendo's official PR stance is extremely mild and humble, and I don't feel these comments count towards that.

While the GC and the N64 did not do that great, Nintendo alone was able to keep them afloat. That is one reason why the 3rd parties protest so much about Nintendo Game Systems.

We who love Nintendo- buy Nin. Sys. just to play Nin. games. For the most part we will sacrifice the chance to play any other system just to play one franchise game.

That's Power. Nintendo Power.

Microsoft doesn't own Bungie anymore, but I believe that at the time they did. Gran Turismo ain't Wii Fit, I'll give you that, but the third game in particular sold spectacular, and likely moved plenty of consoles. However, even if I concede these points, it's still not the main thrust of my post.

A shareholders' report, like this one, isn't a top-secret memo that stays within a select group and never leaks to the public, as with your analogy about employees in the breakroom. Nintendo (and every other company that publishes these reports) knows full well that these are going to get out to the public: in many ways, they're supposed to, so as to attract new investors.

Were this a leaked e-mail between Reggie and Iwata in which they mocked Hirai's hair, I'd be in full agreement, but when we're talking about a report that everyone knows is going to be read worldwide (to the point where some people wait for just such a release) I'm forced to disagree with your analogy and conclusion.