Microsoft Nintendo acquisition hopes revealed by leaked Xbox exec email(rockpapershotgun.com)
rockpapershotgun.com
Microsoft Nintendo acquisition hopes revealed by leaked Xbox exec email
https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/microsoft-nintendo-acquisition-hopes-revealed-by-leaked-xbox-exec-email
158 comments
acquisitions are always hard
Culture fit - while a prominent factor in job interview assessment - seems frequently relegated in acquisition processes.
It's also what happened to Slack. It's culture was completely killed by the Salesforce acquisition and the old employees they have left are all disgruntled.
This was rather well done. Kudos.
What really stood out to me was his misunderstanding about the growth priorities of the board of Nintendo. Nintendo is a stable company. It doesn't need constant growth to succeed. Something that Microsoft probably could learn a thing or two from a much older and still successful business.
You never have to chase growth if continue to improve your products in a substantive way and give customers what they want.
This is a far cry from Microsoft that, for every step or two forward, there’s always at least a step backward in some crucial way.
But this is generally the culture of American companies and society where grift is rewarded for some reason.
This is a far cry from Microsoft that, for every step or two forward, there’s always at least a step backward in some crucial way.
But this is generally the culture of American companies and society where grift is rewarded for some reason.
The one thing we've learned from these leaks of Microsoft documents is that the XBox people have a shockingly wrong understanding of their own industry. I guess that explains their lack of success, at least relative to the competition.
Agreed. They don’t know what to do with xbox yet think they can steer Nintendo or valve(let alone manage to purchase them.)
I've always thought that the Xbox should double as a regular Windows desktop, but I guess I'm missing something about how that would not be the best strategy.
I think Microsoft learned their lesson last time trying to make the Xbox One into a media/gaming solution and just stick to video games now. I also wonder about how much money they see in that, too. Most people don’t give a shit about non-laptops anymore, which you can just plug into your tv anyway.
I can see that.
It's also sad that they're even considering this. They first considered this 20+ years ago before they launched the first Xbox; it was more plausible back then, compared than now, considering Nintendo's strengths with the Switch. Imagine if MS had succeeded with acquiring Nintendo back in the 2000's - I'm certain the Switch would never see the light of day.
Let us hope this never happens. MS culture would destroy Nintendo in short notice.
What culture? Microsoft makes great games
"Great" is subjective, when you use objective data, the reality is: not so much, besides they don't really make their own games, they buy studios/publishers and acquire IPs
They managed to kill Halo, they bought Rare in 2002 only to slack off for 2 decades
They still struggle to sell consoles despite having infinite cash and having spent an obscene amount in marketing
They launched 2 SKUs this gen, yet they couldn't release 1st party games for couple years, despite having bought a plethora of studios
Players have chosen, why should they still manage to buy their way in? They proved they are incompetent and incapable of moving the industry forward (even HW, proprietary storage expansion, same mistake as Sony's PSVIta era, generic controller vs Dualshock 5's gyro,haptic,speaker)
2 SKUs this gen, this is a out of touch move, they couldn't even anticipate the obvious mobile/handheld market boom (genshin), they are busy trying to buy their way in, it makes them in-flexible (rare W pun)
Honestly, both Valve / Nintendo (let's not forget that they also plan to buy Valve, according to the leaked email), are better the way they are, an acquisition by anyone would be a stupid idea and a huge mistake, for both companies and for the consumer
And let's not forget how they fucked up their Surface brand too, let's stop trying to put Microsoft everywhere
And let's not mention how horrible the Microsoft Store still is today
They managed to kill Halo, they bought Rare in 2002 only to slack off for 2 decades
They still struggle to sell consoles despite having infinite cash and having spent an obscene amount in marketing
They launched 2 SKUs this gen, yet they couldn't release 1st party games for couple years, despite having bought a plethora of studios
Players have chosen, why should they still manage to buy their way in? They proved they are incompetent and incapable of moving the industry forward (even HW, proprietary storage expansion, same mistake as Sony's PSVIta era, generic controller vs Dualshock 5's gyro,haptic,speaker)
2 SKUs this gen, this is a out of touch move, they couldn't even anticipate the obvious mobile/handheld market boom (genshin), they are busy trying to buy their way in, it makes them in-flexible (rare W pun)
Honestly, both Valve / Nintendo (let's not forget that they also plan to buy Valve, according to the leaked email), are better the way they are, an acquisition by anyone would be a stupid idea and a huge mistake, for both companies and for the consumer
And let's not forget how they fucked up their Surface brand too, let's stop trying to put Microsoft everywhere
And let's not mention how horrible the Microsoft Store still is today
Microsoft doesn't have a great reputation among the Japanese public as an employer. My understanding is it's to do with a round of layoffs they conducted in the early 2000s which caused a huge stink. The story goes that this was the reason they got laughed out the room when they first tried this.
Have you already completely forgotten the launch of the Xbox One? The Xbox division is reasonably well managed now but they're still pushing towards a rental model over actual ownership. The Microsoft store is a cesspool of malware, and Windows 11 is actively user hostile. Their game studios have next to no quality control. Not to mention previous genius management ideas like stack ranking.
What do you think will happen to Nintendo if they are assimilated by such a company and milked for all they are worth? Mario Odyssey 2 will be an open world live service game riddled with bugs and missing features like the ability to jump.
What do you think will happen to Nintendo if they are assimilated by such a company and milked for all they are worth? Mario Odyssey 2 will be an open world live service game riddled with bugs and missing features like the ability to jump.
>Have you already completely forgotten the launch of the Xbox One?
Have you already completely forgotten the launch of the Wii U?
Have you already completely forgotten the launch of the Wii U?
The Wii U was a somewhat underwhelming console with poor marketing that therefore did not sell very well. The Xbox One launch was a shitshow of controversy full of the kind of tonedeaf and user-hostile garbage that Microsoft has made itself infamous for. It's not about the hardware or the sales numbers, it's about Microsoft absolutely loathing their users.
Not even remotely comparable. One was just not good enough, the other was user-hostile bullshit.
> Have you already completely forgotten the launch of the Wii U
Didn't everyone?
Didn't everyone?
More like they pay publishers, who then make great games.
Halo franchise is a good example of Microsoft culture wrecking a game
Halo franchise is a good example of Microsoft culture wrecking a game
They pay game studios, Microsoft is the publisher.
Nintendo does the same for many of their games as well. Smash is developed by Bandai Namco and Sora Lts, Paper Mario is developed by Intelligent Systems, Pokémon is developed by Game Freak. These companies have various connections with Nintendo, like Microsoft have with their publishing game studios.
Nintendo does develop their core IP in-house though.
Nintendo does the same for many of their games as well. Smash is developed by Bandai Namco and Sora Lts, Paper Mario is developed by Intelligent Systems, Pokémon is developed by Game Freak. These companies have various connections with Nintendo, like Microsoft have with their publishing game studios.
Nintendo does develop their core IP in-house though.
Halo was for the most part handled in house by MS owned studios, either Bungie or 343. Not really any different than how Nintendo handles Metroid Prime or Mario.
Nintendo seems to be a better guiding hand when working with external studios. Look at Silicon Knights output when partnering with Nintendo vs. MS for example. Or well, Rare for that matter.
Nintendo seems to be a better guiding hand when working with external studios. Look at Silicon Knights output when partnering with Nintendo vs. MS for example. Or well, Rare for that matter.
Microsoft has been a huge pain for Minecraft players.
What was the last truly great MS game?
Forza Horizon, Flight Simulator are all good games -- at the time of release, ie. no botched launches with following fixes, which is the industry standard
> are all good games
You say that like you didn’t just stop at two games.
You say that like you didn’t just stop at two games.
What games?
Don't bother, they made horrible games and whole gaming division need to be cut. I own all modern and most vintage consoles. By quality of games: Nintendo number one, then Sony pretty close, then Steam, Microsoft somewhere after.
Steam (or Valve) for matter makes games?
Wow, had to look it up and they haven't really put out an original game of note since Portal 2 in 2011. (Not counting CS:GO, as a remake, or DOTA2 since they bought it, but even counting those it would be 2013.)
What about Half Life: Alyx? Not just original, but pretty revolutionary for the platform.
you have it backwards.
CS:GO was bought (mande by external studio then bought), Dota2 is a remake of a wc3 map/mod.
Well, I was referring to Steam like to platform where I would rather chose to buy\play games over MS.
Like Starfield, for example. Or the recent Quake 2 remaster. Microsoft owns Bethesda, Obsidian, id and plenty of other big name studios.
I haven’t tried it, but according to reviews Starfield seems like a generic space soap opera version of No Man’s Sky with loading screens.
> Microsoft owns Bethesda
This... explains a lot. The user-hostile experience, the lack of innovation of their game engine, the ability to buy fantastic reviews. I never knew the two were connected.
This... explains a lot. The user-hostile experience, the lack of innovation of their game engine, the ability to buy fantastic reviews. I never knew the two were connected.
They began making Starfield years before MS bought Zenimax
Forza, Flight Simulator, Halo
Forza is awesome
Fable?
What games?
The last one, Starfield, was undercooked on all fronts: narrative, gameplay and technologically.
Halo was a huge disappointment.
So that leaves Forza and Flight Sim.
A track record like that in any other situation would get you a one way trip to the unemployment office.
The last one, Starfield, was undercooked on all fronts: narrative, gameplay and technologically.
Halo was a huge disappointment.
So that leaves Forza and Flight Sim.
A track record like that in any other situation would get you a one way trip to the unemployment office.
[deleted]
Don't worry, Nintendo is pretty skilled at destroying itself the way it treats its fans, by suing them.
I have a feeling that Nintendo gaming would outlast Xbox gaming.
Because Microsoft is smart thinking long term and doesn't care about an outdated model of selling consoles anymore, as it sees the future revenues comes from owning valuable IP and monetizing that instead on all the gaming platforms, regardless on which hardware you use to paly it: Xbox, PS5, Switch, Steam, iOS, Android, Linux, MacOS, tablets, smart-TVs, etc., they don't care, they'll gladly take your money regardless if you have an Xbox or not.
They're slowly dethatching themselves from the console HW and moving to selling services the same way the detached from Windows and Office as the core products and made more money selling O365 and Azure subscriptions including their arch nemesis Linux.
That's why they keep selling CoD to the competitor's Sony PlayStation instead of making it an Xbox excusive like Sony and fans feared they would. People, and Sony, still don't get it, that Microsft's new business model is monetizing IPs and services, not selling more console HW thanks to exclusives like the old days. They'll probably make more money form Candy Crush than Sony makes from Last of us on PlayStation.
Holding on to the "console war" ("muh console sold more than your console!") is just silly and outdated. The big money is now gonna be in IP and services, not selling console HW, and Apple also knows this which is why it focuses more on new services for existing customers (ApleTV, credit cards, SOS satelite, etc) and less on selling more iPhones to new customers as the hardware market is already saturated.
Nintendo will outlast the Xbox, but Microsoft will outlast Nintendo.
They're slowly dethatching themselves from the console HW and moving to selling services the same way the detached from Windows and Office as the core products and made more money selling O365 and Azure subscriptions including their arch nemesis Linux.
That's why they keep selling CoD to the competitor's Sony PlayStation instead of making it an Xbox excusive like Sony and fans feared they would. People, and Sony, still don't get it, that Microsft's new business model is monetizing IPs and services, not selling more console HW thanks to exclusives like the old days. They'll probably make more money form Candy Crush than Sony makes from Last of us on PlayStation.
Holding on to the "console war" ("muh console sold more than your console!") is just silly and outdated. The big money is now gonna be in IP and services, not selling console HW, and Apple also knows this which is why it focuses more on new services for existing customers (ApleTV, credit cards, SOS satelite, etc) and less on selling more iPhones to new customers as the hardware market is already saturated.
Nintendo will outlast the Xbox, but Microsoft will outlast Nintendo.
Seems Nintendo IP is way more valuable than what Microsoft owns (and has, by and large, mismanaged)
>Nintendo IP is way more valuable than what Microsoft owns
Source: trust me bro?
Microsft's Xbox division saw ~15 billion of revenue while Nintendo saw 12 billion revenue last year.
Source: trust me bro?
Microsft's Xbox division saw ~15 billion of revenue while Nintendo saw 12 billion revenue last year.
IP as in Mario, Pokemon, Zelda, etc.
I strongly doubt that
> Because Microsoft is smart thinking long term and doesn't care about an outdated model of selling consoles anymore, as it sees the future revenues comes from owning valuable IP and monetizing that [...]
> Holding on to the "console war" ("muh console sold more than your console!") is just silly and outdated. The big money is now gonna be in IP and services
Perhaps, but I'm pretty sure that Nintendo is aware of the value of their IP, given they've used the exclusivity of their IP to sell merchandise and hardware for what, 40 years now? If in the future, there isn't enough money in selling hardware, and keeping a slice off the money from games release on their hardware, they'll still have a very deep well of IP they can monetize in a number of ways.
> Holding on to the "console war" ("muh console sold more than your console!") is just silly and outdated. The big money is now gonna be in IP and services
Perhaps, but I'm pretty sure that Nintendo is aware of the value of their IP, given they've used the exclusivity of their IP to sell merchandise and hardware for what, 40 years now? If in the future, there isn't enough money in selling hardware, and keeping a slice off the money from games release on their hardware, they'll still have a very deep well of IP they can monetize in a number of ways.
Consoles aren't going to be obsolete anytime soon while the alternatives, PCs and laptops, are more expensive, worse at the same price range, and provide worse handheld experience. Less of a market share maybe, but still a viable niche.
I wonder if the Steam Deck might challenge that. It's already sold more units than I think anyone really expected. It has a library and other capabilities that no console maker can ever hope to match while retaining consoles' convenience.
MS pretty much merged Xbox and PC which is what the comment above you probably meant.
From MSs perspective Xbox is just a lockdown gaming PC tied to their store
From MSs perspective Xbox is just a lockdown gaming PC tied to their store
Except they bought Bethesda just to make their games exclusive to Xbox/PC
This.
It's supremely ignorant to call a 133 year old company who has the most recognizable IPs in the world and 14 BILLION dollars in revenue "skilled at destroying itself."
Nokia was also a 100 year old company with a 71 billion dollar revenue in 2007. Should I spoil the ending for you, or do you already know it?
No big company is invincible just because it's old and makes a lot of money today.
No big company is invincible just because it's old and makes a lot of money today.
"Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM."
What is your point? The comment I was replying to said "Nintendo is pretty skilled at destroying itself" which is objectively false.
IBM in this case refers to Microsoft?
/sarcasm
/sarcasm
In what way? A 100+ year old company who is riding high of the success off the Switch and just released a movie that made over a billion dollars doesn’t seem to be destroying itself.
People said the same thing about Nokia when the iPhone launched.
You are comparing a purely device manufacturer to a company with the most recognizable and valuable IP in the world.
Nokia didn’t have Mario, Donkey Kong, Zelda, Splatoon, Metroid, etc.
Also what launched that is a game changer like the iPhone? What did I miss?
Nokia didn’t have Mario, Donkey Kong, Zelda, Splatoon, Metroid, etc.
Also what launched that is a game changer like the iPhone? What did I miss?
Destroying culture could be argued, but Nintendo is an ancient company, by modern definition.
They seem to be doing perfectly fine?
The detail about using the investment fund to gain influence on the board is particularly interesting. This tactic is also used by other FAANGs as a way to evaluate (and exfiltrate) value in potential acquisitions.
Microsoft themselves seem to have fallen into a never ending extreme scale build vs buy argument beloved of current dev culture, which wants to build just enough internally to make negotiations interesting but then just use capital muscle to buy the real thing, which they will then mismanage to destruction, requiring more, and repeat. This disturbing tendency has infested so much of US business it is why I don’t see the whole manufacturing onshoring working, as who wants to do something when you can just own it?
Microsoft themselves seem to have fallen into a never ending extreme scale build vs buy argument beloved of current dev culture, which wants to build just enough internally to make negotiations interesting but then just use capital muscle to buy the real thing, which they will then mismanage to destruction, requiring more, and repeat. This disturbing tendency has infested so much of US business it is why I don’t see the whole manufacturing onshoring working, as who wants to do something when you can just own it?
This leak likely killed any chance Nintendo would even entertain the talks and may setback Microsoft-Nintendo’s relationship. But Microsoft never have had a chance to buy Nintendo and likely never will.
I don’t think Nintendo would ever sell unless they absolutely have to. And they are in a position of strength right now. They have some of the most valuable IP in the world and are just waking up to all of the opportunities they have to leverage that IP with moves into toys, theme parks, and movies and a Switch 2 is likely coming next year.
I don’t think Nintendo would ever sell unless they absolutely have to. And they are in a position of strength right now. They have some of the most valuable IP in the world and are just waking up to all of the opportunities they have to leverage that IP with moves into toys, theme parks, and movies and a Switch 2 is likely coming next year.
For me the key point in this discussion is the phrase "consumer relevance" .. Microsoft seem to be aware that they are becoming less and less relevant, and making big buys in the gaming industry seems to be a very unique means by which they can maintain their hegemony.
Lets hope this doesn't happen. Microsofts' aggressive business practices and its classist culture are really undeserving of future childrens' devoted eyeballs ..
Lets hope this doesn't happen. Microsofts' aggressive business practices and its classist culture are really undeserving of future childrens' devoted eyeballs ..
"Nintendo's future exists off of their own hardware" reveals just how poorly their competition understands Nintendo's success.
I don't think this view comes from a poor understanding of Nintendo's success. Remember when the Wii came out and people thought the motion controls sucked and games which heavily used them didn't sell well? What about Switch games which make heavy use of motion controls (e.g. Super Mario Odyssey)? Turns out those sell well today because Nintendo invested yesterday in their motion-reading capabilities: hardware.
Certainly they see a lot of success due to choices around branding and going the Disney route of protecting their rights to Mickey Mouse^W^W Mario at all costs but they also see a lot of success from hardware innovations they've made in gaming.
Certainly they see a lot of success due to choices around branding and going the Disney route of protecting their rights to Mickey Mouse^W^W Mario at all costs but they also see a lot of success from hardware innovations they've made in gaming.
Now we hope that all Nintendo consoles will be retro compatible until Windows 1.0. I would add to the Game & Watch series.
Oof, right as the switch demolished the xbox in hardware sales.
Am I the only one that feels uneasy about Microsoft acquiring Nintendo?
I'd feel uneasy about ANYONE acquiring Nintendo, they're the only independent game console manufacturer; and arguably the only independent game manufacturer of note.
Disney? Microsoft? Apple? Musk? The US Gov't? The Seattle Mariners?
All of them would kill Nintendo.
Disney? Microsoft? Apple? Musk? The US Gov't? The Seattle Mariners?
All of them would kill Nintendo.
This is actually an interesting argument for "why is Nintendo so protective when Sega and Microsoft show you don't have to?"
Nintendo lives and dies by their mainline characters. Sega doesn't anymore and merged with Sammy Group after their failures with Saturn and Dreamcast; and Sega of Japan really didn't like Sonic the Hedgehog as a character that much - as evidenced by how much less popular he is in Japan than America. Microsoft could lose every major Xbox franchise and have it only be, what, ~10%-20% on their stock reports as a whole company?
Whereas, if Nintendo lost Mario, the blow would be catastrophic. Just ask Sega - they lost over 200 Sonic the Hedgehog characters due to legal mistakes (Ken Penders incident).
Nintendo lives and dies by their mainline characters. Sega doesn't anymore and merged with Sammy Group after their failures with Saturn and Dreamcast; and Sega of Japan really didn't like Sonic the Hedgehog as a character that much - as evidenced by how much less popular he is in Japan than America. Microsoft could lose every major Xbox franchise and have it only be, what, ~10%-20% on their stock reports as a whole company?
Whereas, if Nintendo lost Mario, the blow would be catastrophic. Just ask Sega - they lost over 200 Sonic the Hedgehog characters due to legal mistakes (Ken Penders incident).
> Microsoft could lose every major Xbox franchise and have it only be, what, ~10%-20% on their stock reports as a whole company?
Less than even that probably, since you're not talking about Xbox revenue as a whole, just the first party IP.
25% of Microsoft's revenue right now comes from a huge bucket of items:
> Windows commercial and cloud products, Windows OEM, Surface, search and advertising, and Xbox
First party IP (including their game studios like Bethesda, not just Xbox studios) probably puts you in the single digits for revenue for the company.
> Whereas, if Nintendo lost Mario, the blow would be catastrophic.
Completely agree. Nintendo's ecosystem is such that Mario and Zelda sell hardware, which then they get licensing fees from third party titles that people are buying, because they want more than just Mario and Zelda.
Less than even that probably, since you're not talking about Xbox revenue as a whole, just the first party IP.
25% of Microsoft's revenue right now comes from a huge bucket of items:
> Windows commercial and cloud products, Windows OEM, Surface, search and advertising, and Xbox
First party IP (including their game studios like Bethesda, not just Xbox studios) probably puts you in the single digits for revenue for the company.
> Whereas, if Nintendo lost Mario, the blow would be catastrophic.
Completely agree. Nintendo's ecosystem is such that Mario and Zelda sell hardware, which then they get licensing fees from third party titles that people are buying, because they want more than just Mario and Zelda.
> Nintendo lives and dies by their mainline characters
Exactly. They’re opening a Super Nintendo theme park at Universal Studios soon and it looks exactly like what you’d expect a Nintendo theme park to look like. Now close your eyes and imagine what an Xbox theme park would have… all I can think of is maybe Master Chief? Whatever it is, it sounds boring comparatively. The Xbox brand is more hardcore-gamer-hardware… not the Xbox Universe of characters and worlds that Nintendo has built over the last 40 years. For Nintendo to shift those characters and worlds onto other hardware would completely devalue their brand
Exactly. They’re opening a Super Nintendo theme park at Universal Studios soon and it looks exactly like what you’d expect a Nintendo theme park to look like. Now close your eyes and imagine what an Xbox theme park would have… all I can think of is maybe Master Chief? Whatever it is, it sounds boring comparatively. The Xbox brand is more hardcore-gamer-hardware… not the Xbox Universe of characters and worlds that Nintendo has built over the last 40 years. For Nintendo to shift those characters and worlds onto other hardware would completely devalue their brand
Snes in universal Osaka har been open for a while. Does look very much like you would expect.
>Whereas, if Nintendo lost Mario, the blow would be catastrophic.
Honestly, I don't the loss of Mario would be catastrophic. What would be is _how_ they "lost" Mario - presumably through bad games and other properties.
Honestly, I don't the loss of Mario would be catastrophic. What would be is _how_ they "lost" Mario - presumably through bad games and other properties.
At least they survived the CD-i Mario + Zelda games and the, uh, not-so-classic TV shows based on both franchises.
I doubt Sega cares about any Ken Penders characters.
If Apple acquired Nintendo I’m confident they’d leave them alone and use them simply to bolster their ecosystem with exclusives.
In fact I’d argue Nintendo would be better off, now being able to make games without worrying about hardware as everything would be playable across a billion plus devices.
In fact I’d argue Nintendo would be better off, now being able to make games without worrying about hardware as everything would be playable across a billion plus devices.
> In fact I’d argue Nintendo would be better off, now being able to make games without worrying about hardware as everything would be playable across a billion plus devices.
I'm pretty sure that Nintendo employees disagree with you. They strongly believe in the value of the holistic approach combining its hardware and software. And Apple (or whatever US big techs) will definitely not change iPhone design just for Mario or Zelda.
I'm pretty sure that Nintendo employees disagree with you. They strongly believe in the value of the holistic approach combining its hardware and software. And Apple (or whatever US big techs) will definitely not change iPhone design just for Mario or Zelda.
This fact is overstated. At the end of the day as shown over and over again they want to make games for the largest audience, which is why they’re priced accordingly.
What do you mean by "overstated"? This has been explicitly stated by at least tens of senior Nintendo employees, including all former+current CEOs as well as Miyamoto.
Nintendo as stated literally on their about page wants to put smiles on people’s faces. Making hardware is certainly one way to accomplish this, but it isn’t strictly necessary.
Not to mention I never said a hypothetical Nintendo acquisition would mean they don’t still make their own input devices compatible with of course Apple devices. See beats for example
Not to mention I never said a hypothetical Nintendo acquisition would mean they don’t still make their own input devices compatible with of course Apple devices. See beats for example
Doubt it. Apple would try their damnedest to bring Nintendo into their wider ecosystem.
Also, a game being playable on a billion devices is a turn-off, not a turn-on. Nintendo's hardware/software integration is SO tight that part of the game experience would die if it wasn't on a Nintendo device. Plus, I don't want big console games being made with players on mobile phones in mind. If you want a Nintendo experience, you go to a Nintendo platform. Imagine if the next Mario Kart had to abandon a bunch of features so the game could also be played on an iPhone. That would suck.
Also, a game being playable on a billion devices is a turn-off, not a turn-on. Nintendo's hardware/software integration is SO tight that part of the game experience would die if it wasn't on a Nintendo device. Plus, I don't want big console games being made with players on mobile phones in mind. If you want a Nintendo experience, you go to a Nintendo platform. Imagine if the next Mario Kart had to abandon a bunch of features so the game could also be played on an iPhone. That would suck.
There could be some truth to what you said but in reality, the Switch has no quirky hardware. It's basically like a normal console.
That's why games from PS4/Xbox One can be ported to Switch easily.
That's why games from PS4/Xbox One can be ported to Switch easily.
Nintendo has their freemium iPhone games to rake in money from that segment of players. The people interested in the good games are gonna buy into Nintendo's ecosystem. They win both ways, and they don't risk screwing up their brand.
Apple has a far stronger and more recognizable brand than Nintendo so I’m not sure why you believe it would be sullied by an acquisition.
Apple generally leaves its companies alone. Look at beats for example.
If Nintendo would be acquired I suspect the only changes you’d see are ads for Apple services when visiting Nintendo.com or playing their games.
Apple generally leaves its companies alone. Look at beats for example.
If Nintendo would be acquired I suspect the only changes you’d see are ads for Apple services when visiting Nintendo.com or playing their games.
>Apple has a far stronger and more recognizable brand than Nintendo so I’m not sure why you believe it would be sullied by an acquisition
This just isn’t true.
This just isn’t true.
You think Nintendo is more recognizable than Apple? lol
When I actually think about it, yeah, they 100% are. Nintendo is one of the few companies I can think of that has had as much success as Apple, for arguably a longer time. The NES, SNES, Nintendo 64, GC flopped, Wii, Wii U flopped, Switch. Countless successful games. They have basically had an in-home brand advertisement world wide for >40 years. Even Apple doesn’t have that; they spent a long time as pretty much irrelevant from the mid 80s to 2000. Apple’s early success was confined to a relatively small market; Nintendo’s wasn’t. There are a lot of old people who don’t care about technology at all and only understand Apple in passing, but every console ever gets called a Nintendo by them.
I think Apple is more recognizable today, but in all time, Nintendo for sure.
Alright, we’ll have to agree to disagree.
"brand" isn't a single scalar value. Apple is one of the most known brand in the world, but Nintendo it the top reputed brand for gaming.
Putting all of Nintendo's titles on iPhones, as you suggested, would not be leaving Nintendo alone. Nintendo has its own hardware and ecosystem.
So what? Beats has its own hardware and it’s also owned by Apple. I don’t know why you believe they couldn’t make hardware and be acquired by Apple. You lack imagination.
Beats didn't have an important ecosystem paired with its hardware. As you said, Apple mostly left them alone. If Nintendo wanted their titles on iPhones, they would've released them there.
> You lack imagination.
No, I lack frustration over Apple not owning Nintendo. Enjoy it.
> You lack imagination.
No, I lack frustration over Apple not owning Nintendo. Enjoy it.
[deleted]
lol, I sure will
I think the opposite. Imagine how many MTX iPhone games we'd get. Please GOD no.
Why do you believe this would happen? Seems like fud. More realistically you’d simply be able to play on Apple TV and on an iPhone via controller with seamless switching via some hypothetical “GameDrop”
It doesn't have to be a full acquisition.
They could just get Nintendo games on Xbox and PC, or gamepass.
That would benefit consumers greatly, if Nintendo games were on other platforms.
They could just get Nintendo games on Xbox and PC, or gamepass.
That would benefit consumers greatly, if Nintendo games were on other platforms.
I don't think Nintendo wants to be acquired. And I imagine a hostile takeover would go over very poorly.
Pretty sure the japanese government feels the same way.
How reasonable or delusional really are all these private ramblings? Because it looks like they would buy half the world if they let them do so.
It would have seemed sort of reasonable in 2013 where the Wii U was clearly struggling and the 3DS was barely gaining decent traction but still lagged against the DS. In late 2020 it just seems sort of insane when the Switch had already beat the lifetime sales the Xbox One in 3 years and brushing up against 360 numbers, Animal Crossing had a launch bigger than Halo 3 IIRC and Mario Kart 8 was still trucking along regularly in the sales chart despite already being over a half decade on.
... and that was the day that all the executives conveniently forgot there was no way in hell that the government of Japan, the people of Japan, or the FTC would allow such a thing to happen.
Remember when Abe Shinzō (requiescat in pace) dressed as Mario at the Olympics? It's hard to overstate how important Nintendo is in Japanese popular culture.
Nintendo themselves would never let it happen.
It would be a catastrophic blow to their independent brand.
> or the FTC would allow such a thing to happen
Gonna disagree with you there.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/entertainment/gaming/how-the-ftc-f...
(By many metrics Activision is a bigger gaming company than Nintendo)
It would be a catastrophic blow to their independent brand.
> or the FTC would allow such a thing to happen
Gonna disagree with you there.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/entertainment/gaming/how-the-ftc-f...
(By many metrics Activision is a bigger gaming company than Nintendo)
Yeah but by virtue of MS having already acquired AB, the FTC would be less likely to approve a Nintendo acquisition.
Point of order: That acquisition is far from complete. It's winding its way through the courts in the UK now, and it could still get jammed up. Everyone else has grudgingly given it their blessing.
Yeah, Japan is different than the currently relatively meak US. Fiercely nationalistic. There is no way this would be allowed to happen.
As a genuine question, why are govts so protective of homegrown companies?
Like unless they have a stake in them or have actually invested time and resources to build them.
I'm no anti-govt guy. But if I want to sell my company I built without any govt benefits(TAX breaks go to all companies?) Then why am I not allowed to sell it to anyone I wish to.
I know that companies run to govts for bailouts and other related reasons, but consider an ideal economy for +/- 20 years. I want to know the answer.
Governments do a lot of things that are effectively investing time and resources into their homegrown companies--things like education of the populace, building and maintaining physical infrastructure, and management of the legal system, to name just a few essentials.
There's basically no way to operate a company without benefiting from some government.
There's basically no way to operate a company without benefiting from some government.
It is their pride, their nation's representative to the global audience. When people speak of Nintendo, they implicitly acknowledge Japan as a global player in the entertainment industry. It is a source of patriotism and advertisement.
In a way, everyone know of the US because everyone needs Microsoft, Google, Apple, etc. When you talk about Huawei, you acknowledge China as a powerhouse in phone and tech. When you mention TSMC, you have to remember about Taiwan. etc.
In a way, everyone know of the US because everyone needs Microsoft, Google, Apple, etc. When you talk about Huawei, you acknowledge China as a powerhouse in phone and tech. When you mention TSMC, you have to remember about Taiwan. etc.
There are a bunch of general reasons:
- job opportunities for domestic employees
- knowledge concentration that might otherwise disappear (i.e. brain drain) and lessen the quality of domestic education
- economic effects, more so if you subscribe to trickle down economics and take into account potential loss of jobs, which means loss of pay and loss of income tax and loss of spending elsewhere etc.
- prestige that can be useful for diplomatic purposes
On top of that there could also be cultural or country specific reasons.
In collectivist cultures the prestige can translate into national pride or the company and its brands can be part of the national identity.
Often in those countries the legacy of a company can also be important. Companies that are decades, centuries or even thousands of years old are held in high regard.
This can go so far that taking over your parent’s hundreds year old family business making matcha can be more prestigious than being, say, a doctor or lawyer.
The cultural driven values are hard to explain if you’re not a part of it, but that doesn’t make them less valid for those people.
It’s how most Americans value freedom of speech above all else, taking the bad (hate speech) with the good despite non-Americans not necessarily understanding it. Or the reverse, how most Europeans value banning hate speech, taking the bad (risking further restrictions) with the good, despite most Americans not understanding it b
Both have a cultural historical context, but in isolation without it it’s something that an outsider might not understand.
- job opportunities for domestic employees
- knowledge concentration that might otherwise disappear (i.e. brain drain) and lessen the quality of domestic education
- economic effects, more so if you subscribe to trickle down economics and take into account potential loss of jobs, which means loss of pay and loss of income tax and loss of spending elsewhere etc.
- prestige that can be useful for diplomatic purposes
On top of that there could also be cultural or country specific reasons.
In collectivist cultures the prestige can translate into national pride or the company and its brands can be part of the national identity.
Often in those countries the legacy of a company can also be important. Companies that are decades, centuries or even thousands of years old are held in high regard.
This can go so far that taking over your parent’s hundreds year old family business making matcha can be more prestigious than being, say, a doctor or lawyer.
The cultural driven values are hard to explain if you’re not a part of it, but that doesn’t make them less valid for those people.
It’s how most Americans value freedom of speech above all else, taking the bad (hate speech) with the good despite non-Americans not necessarily understanding it. Or the reverse, how most Europeans value banning hate speech, taking the bad (risking further restrictions) with the good, despite most Americans not understanding it b
Both have a cultural historical context, but in isolation without it it’s something that an outsider might not understand.
The Japanese people love 'made in Japan' in a way that few others do. Furthermore, you wrote a lot of 'I' statements but eastern countries subscribe to collectivists values and the case could be made of Mario as a civic institution that belongs to the whole, not to be sold away to some foreigner. Depending on where you go with the traditional spiritualism, Mario might even have a soul and not merely be a property to be traded at all.
This does not fit neatly onto a spreadsheet or make for a good HN-type answer, but cultural values, religious values, family values, overall different social contracts, etc are perfectly valid levers that will constantly bite you if you are only interested in your personal abilities or things that can be quantified on a spreadsheet, esp when working with people of other countries.
This does not fit neatly onto a spreadsheet or make for a good HN-type answer, but cultural values, religious values, family values, overall different social contracts, etc are perfectly valid levers that will constantly bite you if you are only interested in your personal abilities or things that can be quantified on a spreadsheet, esp when working with people of other countries.
Because governments often look at the bigger picture, as much as we like to pretend they don't.
Clarification: This is what competent governments do. Many aren't.
The argument is that it's impossible to build your company without government benefits. First (and foremost), they hold a monopoly on violence that they use to protect you. In many countries, they guarantee a degree of healthcare for your employees. And so on.
They already tried to buy Nintendo in the early 2000s and got laughed at.
"But our BoD has seen the full writeup on Nintendo (and Valve) and they are fully supportive on either if opportunity arises as am I."
(emphasis mine)
Oh please God no, not Valve. MS has changed pretty dramatically since the Gates/Ballmer days, but Valve is way too valuable to computer gaming to be owned by a company like MS. Luckily Valve is privately owned, and even if they were public, their valuation would/should be pretty insane. So I think anyone buying Valve is unlikely.
(emphasis mine)
Oh please God no, not Valve. MS has changed pretty dramatically since the Gates/Ballmer days, but Valve is way too valuable to computer gaming to be owned by a company like MS. Luckily Valve is privately owned, and even if they were public, their valuation would/should be pretty insane. So I think anyone buying Valve is unlikely.
Valve may be the single greatest asset to desktop Linux at this point (after Redhat, possibly), and it would be such a shame to have all that destroyed.
Even if I still played video games, I wouldn't care what happens to Valve. They were the reason some games forced you to install this Steam nonsense and launch it every time to run em, which seemed to just be for DRM purposes. MS would probably do something just as annoying, though.
It doesn’t just seem to be hopes, but actually taking steps in acquiring equity to play the long game:
“I say "until recently" as our former MS BoD member ValueAct has been heavily acquiring shares of Nintendo […] and I've kept in touch with Mason Morfit as he's been acquiring. It's likely he will be pushing for more from Nintendo stock which could create opportunities for us. Without that catalyst I don't see an angle to a near term mutually agreeable merger of Nintendo and MS and I don't think a hostile action would be a good move so we are playing the long game.”
The hubris is also palpable:
“It's just taking a long time for Nintendo to see that their future exists off of their own hardware. A long time.... :-)”
And then there’s the matter of them contemplating buying TikTok: https://www.threads.net/@techemails/post/CxYy4BdS99n/
MS/Spencer is acting like a teenager that just got their hands on their parent’s credit card.
The message is clear, they’re on the lookup to buy all kinds of stuff in an attempt to conglomerate everything under the MS umbrella.
All the nonsense uttered to appease regulators during the BGS and ABK is just that, nonsense to reassure regulators.
“I say "until recently" as our former MS BoD member ValueAct has been heavily acquiring shares of Nintendo […] and I've kept in touch with Mason Morfit as he's been acquiring. It's likely he will be pushing for more from Nintendo stock which could create opportunities for us. Without that catalyst I don't see an angle to a near term mutually agreeable merger of Nintendo and MS and I don't think a hostile action would be a good move so we are playing the long game.”
The hubris is also palpable:
“It's just taking a long time for Nintendo to see that their future exists off of their own hardware. A long time.... :-)”
And then there’s the matter of them contemplating buying TikTok: https://www.threads.net/@techemails/post/CxYy4BdS99n/
MS/Spencer is acting like a teenager that just got their hands on their parent’s credit card.
The message is clear, they’re on the lookup to buy all kinds of stuff in an attempt to conglomerate everything under the MS umbrella.
All the nonsense uttered to appease regulators during the BGS and ABK is just that, nonsense to reassure regulators.
Notably a >3 year old email, at this point.
Nintendo is incredibly litigious & defensive. They're both loved, but one of the most carefully managed companies. Most of their platform is 1st party software.
Personally I can't think of a worse more dangerous acquisition for Microsoft. Microsoft was won a lot of trust over the last decade by participating nicely in the intertwingularizing world, by supporting devs and power users, by having a useful helpful web browser & web standards team, by having great open community around azure and wsl and others. Having an arm of their business suddenly operating in old world cut throat tight modes of operation like Nintendo would be a terrible look. And Nintendo wouldn't be Nintendo without that totalized control they've spent decades growing into.
Nintendo is incredibly litigious & defensive. They're both loved, but one of the most carefully managed companies. Most of their platform is 1st party software.
Personally I can't think of a worse more dangerous acquisition for Microsoft. Microsoft was won a lot of trust over the last decade by participating nicely in the intertwingularizing world, by supporting devs and power users, by having a useful helpful web browser & web standards team, by having great open community around azure and wsl and others. Having an arm of their business suddenly operating in old world cut throat tight modes of operation like Nintendo would be a terrible look. And Nintendo wouldn't be Nintendo without that totalized control they've spent decades growing into.
I remember the report that when Microsoft initially planned to enter the console space they wanted to recruit Miyamoto with 10x salary. The proposal was outright rejected because he cannot do anything meaningful without the team and culture he had been building over decades. In the creative industry, teams and cultures are (almost) everything.
Nintendo will unlikely keep its team and culture when it's acquired by some random US big techs. Japan and US just have so different corporate cultures at their fundamental level. Think about a hypothetical scenario; another big economical crisis is looming and Satya mandated Nintendo to cut 5~10% of its HQ employees. Would Nintendo keep its unique culture after its first ever lay-off? I don't think so.
Nintendo will unlikely keep its team and culture when it's acquired by some random US big techs. Japan and US just have so different corporate cultures at their fundamental level. Think about a hypothetical scenario; another big economical crisis is looming and Satya mandated Nintendo to cut 5~10% of its HQ employees. Would Nintendo keep its unique culture after its first ever lay-off? I don't think so.
I have a (now retired) relative who spent a majority of his career as a high-level MSFT exec, and he knew a lot of the OG Xbox guys. As a kid in the early 2000s who grew up with Nintendo consoles, I asked him over the years more than once why there was no effort to purchase Nintendo.
His answer every time was a simple "the Japanese corporate culture and the American corporate culture have differences in ways that money simply cannot overcome"
As much as I'd love to be able to play Mario or Zelda in 4k 60fps, or play FZero or Smash Brothers over Xbox Live, it's just not gonna happen.
His answer every time was a simple "the Japanese corporate culture and the American corporate culture have differences in ways that money simply cannot overcome"
As much as I'd love to be able to play Mario or Zelda in 4k 60fps, or play FZero or Smash Brothers over Xbox Live, it's just not gonna happen.
>As much as I'd love to be able to play Mario or Zelda in 4k 60fps
You can do this on PC with emulators if you want to. It's probably not "legal" but if you have already paid for a copy of the game there isn't much harm in it.
You can do this on PC with emulators if you want to. It's probably not "legal" but if you have already paid for a copy of the game there isn't much harm in it.
I hope this does not happen, but maybe we'd finally get some remakes of Diddy Kong Racing, Donkey Kong 64 and other good games by Rare
Would love for this to happen. Might even get a 3rd Banjo-Kazooie game out of it, too...I could dream but another Conker's BFD, Killer Instinct, or even Perfect Dark would be fun too.
Rare had some absolutely excellent games on Nintendo consoles. Noticeably, they went to shit when MSFT got them.
Rare had some absolutely excellent games on Nintendo consoles. Noticeably, they went to shit when MSFT got them.
In what world would any gaming hardware manufacturer not consider how they could acquire the best games? As if there aren’t comparable emails in Sony inboxes. Seems like a very expected line of thinking and strategy for any exec
[deleted]
When I looked at this I thought the title had been shortened and the meaning was obfuscated. The idea that Nintendo would sell to Microsoft is pretty laughable to me.
Please no.
Apple should have bought them. The iPhone is a great portable console.
No. A phone is not a great portable console. Anything without physical buttons is not a great portable console.
No! My beloved Nintendo no, please.
I would actually welcome Microsoft's acquisition of Nintendo. Purely because I have hope that perhaps Microsoft could stop Nintendo from behaving as evil as they do. DMCA claiming videos that don't contain any IP from Nintendo. If you mention Nintendo and emulation in the same day, you get a letter from Nintendo. Also shutting down game stores on previous hardware. Sometimes it really does just feel like Nintendo doesn't like its customers.
Don't get me wrong, I (and my family) own a GameBoy, GameBoy Colour, DS, DSi, brother has a Switch and he's happy with it. While I carry DSi with me with Tetris which I love. But I dream of a brighter day.
It's really quite sad.
Don't get me wrong, I (and my family) own a GameBoy, GameBoy Colour, DS, DSi, brother has a Switch and he's happy with it. While I carry DSi with me with Tetris which I love. But I dream of a brighter day.
It's really quite sad.
Nintendo more evil than Microsoft. What the fuck are you talking about? As if couple DMCAs are even a blip in the ocean that is Microsoft's evilness.
I meant from a point of view of a normal person.
At least that has been my experience. Microsoft hasn't done anything that made me angry enough to remember in quite a while, multiple years. The last thing that's on my mind that Microsoft did that was negatively received was Windows 8 and that was quite a while ago.
Could just be my ignorance. But I did submit the original comment knowing that it'll get downvoted to oblivion, so it's okay.
I still welcome Microsoft's acquisition of Nintendo.
At least that has been my experience. Microsoft hasn't done anything that made me angry enough to remember in quite a while, multiple years. The last thing that's on my mind that Microsoft did that was negatively received was Windows 8 and that was quite a while ago.
Could just be my ignorance. But I did submit the original comment knowing that it'll get downvoted to oblivion, so it's okay.
I still welcome Microsoft's acquisition of Nintendo.
That is because Nintendo's evilness is a drop of squid ink that can be easily seen before it dissipates into the vastness of the water.
Microsoft's evilness is the ocean that you swim in. You do not see it because it just looks like The Way Things Have Always Been to you.
The entire PC ecosystem—indeed, the entire tech world—is worse because of Microsoft's monopolistic behavior in the 1990s. We are still stuck with, at best, a desktop platform triopoly (is that a word?), and the big "Microsoft vs Apple" paradigm contributed greatly, I would argue, to the mindset that led to us having a mobile OS duopoly today.
If not for Microsoft actively, aggressively, and, above all, illegally throwing their weight around in the 1990s to make sure they were the only option for most people, we could very easily have had a half-dozen different OSes with open standards governing interoperability between them.
Microsoft's evilness is the ocean that you swim in. You do not see it because it just looks like The Way Things Have Always Been to you.
The entire PC ecosystem—indeed, the entire tech world—is worse because of Microsoft's monopolistic behavior in the 1990s. We are still stuck with, at best, a desktop platform triopoly (is that a word?), and the big "Microsoft vs Apple" paradigm contributed greatly, I would argue, to the mindset that led to us having a mobile OS duopoly today.
If not for Microsoft actively, aggressively, and, above all, illegally throwing their weight around in the 1990s to make sure they were the only option for most people, we could very easily have had a half-dozen different OSes with open standards governing interoperability between them.
[deleted]
>The last thing that's on my mind that Microsoft did that was negatively received was Windows 8
How about everything around Windows 11? All the TPM stuff?
How about training their AI model on _private_ github code?
What about removing ability to purchase office products since subscriptions make more money?
What has Nintendo done? DMCAd some fan projects that used their IP and assets and had few Youtube videos taken down? Sure that seems about the same. On other topic I saw today on my way to work someone throw trash out their car window, what a dick! At least <insert your (least) favorite dictator> did it years ago!
How about everything around Windows 11? All the TPM stuff?
How about training their AI model on _private_ github code?
What about removing ability to purchase office products since subscriptions make more money?
What has Nintendo done? DMCAd some fan projects that used their IP and assets and had few Youtube videos taken down? Sure that seems about the same. On other topic I saw today on my way to work someone throw trash out their car window, what a dick! At least <insert your (least) favorite dictator> did it years ago!
This is like saying a guy who kicked a dog is more evil than the one who keeps spilling harmful chemicals into the town’s drinking water, because you saw the former but had no knowledge of the latter. Then hoping the polluter hires the dog kicker “to stop them from behaving as evil as they do”.
“The point of view of a normal person” is not a good barometer of harm to society. Companies spend truckloads of money on PR and hiding their harms from the general public. We should reward the ones who do good, not the ones who are skilful at hiding they’re harmful.
“The point of view of a normal person” is not a good barometer of harm to society. Companies spend truckloads of money on PR and hiding their harms from the general public. We should reward the ones who do good, not the ones who are skilful at hiding they’re harmful.
"Microsoft purchased the developer in 2002, and the Stampers departed in 2007. The family atmosphere of the 90s, when Chris and Tim sat in on interviews and left their talented developers to work unhindered, offering occasional golden nuggets of advice, was long gone. “Microsoft and Rare was a bad marriage from the beginning,” Rare’s Martin Hollis told Eurogamer in 2012. “The groom was rich. The bride was beautiful. But they wanted to make different games, and they wanted to make them in different ways.”[0]
[0] https://www.theguardian.com/games/2023/aug/07/ultimate-rare-...