Evidently nothing came of the proposal, but I find it very difficult to believe that the executives of a Japanese company would "laugh" a proposal like this "out of the room". I imagine the scene played out with a lot of tea, carefully calibrated bows, and apologies about the timing of this excellent proposal not being auspicious.
patio11 probably could provide a more accurate projection of a sarariman reaction to the MS offer.
Nintendo is a 132 year old company (111 at the time this happened), with a "war chest" of $10 billion. They've been successful for far longer than Microsoft have existed.
I don't know what Nintendo would get out of being acquired, and I'm not certain that Microsoft would be able to put together a convincing acquisition deal.
Imagine if this happened. Japanese, traditional, inovative, and somehow slow/reasonable paced company, who basically invented gaming as we know it, versus typical American quarter-to-quarter profit chasing MBA clueless zombies, who made no progress in gaming, invented nothing, but rather trying to buy competitors. Ridiculous
A lot of Nintendo's business decisions in 2019 and 2020 seem like the exact types of decisions empty suits make though, and their glassdoor reads very similarly to one of the big banks. Nintendo has, with the exception of the switch hardware and possibly labo, played the entire decade in a very conservative fashion. Microsoft and Sony aren't exactly innovative powerhouses either, but even they beat out Nintendo in innovation on the software side.
If you want real innovation in the industry though, you basically have to play indie games.
I think many people over-focus on GPU and CPU capabilities and the raw horsepower of console hardware as the basis for determining console hardware superiority. As an avid gamer on PC and console, I've never thought of it that way, a PC will pretty much always be better on horsepower than a console. What consoles excel at is hardware that enhances the user experience or moves forward the technology focused on the act of gaming.
I am incredibly happy that Nintendo said "No." to Microsoft here, because the Nintendo Switch is the single greatest console device ever made. The way it handles docking/undocking, game switching, updates, sleep, the controller design of the removable joycons, it's an unprecedentedly good user experience in a way that's going to be incredibly difficult to top. I have been interminably sad that Sega stopped making consoles because prior to the Switch, the Dreamcast pushed the envelope in every possible way for what it meant to be a gaming console. The Xbox One did something great by improving controller design significantly, but realistically the majority of consoles released in the last few decades have not been pushing the envelope in the way that the format allows.
My only complaint is the switch has low resolution and many of the ports do not run that well. Skyrim and Witcher 3 are ports I didn’t buy because of the graphics. The Final Fantasy ports were decent but they were older games that had remakes in between. Dark Souls has decent reviews but I haven’t played the originals, remakes, or ports.
When a beefier switch comes along I’m jumping on it. The switch has been the funnest and most engaging gaming I’ve had in a decade.
Nintendo isn't a perfect company by any means. But the are the only console/gaming company that keeps thinking outside the box.
Sony and MS: let's build a gaming PC and just have a different enclosure for it.
Nintendo: what if we try <any number of crazy and interesting ideas>.
Also: a few days ago a friend of mine got stuck with shitty mobile internet for e few days. The only gadget that by default assumed there's no internet and just kept on working with no problems was Nintendo Switch. Everything else (phones, consoles, readers etc.) just couldn't imagine a world without an internet connection and would suffer when connectivity was bad/intermittent.
The internet dependency angle is a good point to bring up, and incidentally it's why I've gotten into data hoarding or purchasing products that don't require the internet. Like you said, I can use my Switch or even my Kindle without any problem. I also play most games via emulation or buy them from GOG, which gives you completely DRM-free downloads, making it possible to just boot up a game like the old days.
I do have game pass, and the experience has been a constant reminder for why I hate a lot about the modern gaming world (with the exception of Switch, like you said). Often times when I just want to sit down and play a game, I instead have to jump through a series of hoops: download xbox update > update xbox > download game update > update game. For added fun, once in a while you even have to update your controller. Meanwhile I've never updated a switch game and always have a pleasantly plug and play experience.
> Nintendo: what if we try <any number of crazy and interesting ideas>.
This is called "lateral thinking with withered technology", an engineering principle articulated by Gunpei Yokoi. In Yokoi's day, the rationale for "withered technology" was that it was cheaper and much easier to second-source, meaning that a shortage from a single supplier wouldn't hold up the production run.
It wasn't until fairly recently (Wii and later) that Nintendo realized that participating in the red queen's race of ever-increasing console specs was going to get them trounced by megacorporations with much more cash to burn selling consoles at a loss, so they had to pivot to producing cheap hardware with unique value adds in order to get the console profitable fast.
They also always made money, didn't sell console at a loss. Even a "failing" n64 or GameCube was net positive for Nintendo from day 1, and every year until end of service. They weren't a company in need of help.
And if they joined, Microsoft is not the company that would have let them drop everything for the Wii (strange to say after the fact given kinect and stuff, but those were followers of a known success move), or again for the switch
It's a double edged sword though. The gimmicks Nintendo comes up with can make their games not as good as they otherwise would have been. The Wii motion control for Zelda sword attacks and the touch screen levels in Super Mario 3D World come to mind.
Also all of Nintendo's mobile games require an internet connection to play.
Just playing devil's advocate. I am a huge Nintendo fan.
Nintendo is also the only one of the bunch selling their hardware for profit. MS and Sony now have to maintain selling hardware at a loss to keep up the perception of advancement.
Microsoft presented a pretty fairly innovative vision of what a “game” console could be with the original Xbox One launch announcement. It was a complete debacle.
I’m also pretty impressed with XBox game pass- it has changed my relationship with gaming. I’ve been gaming with my XBox than my Switch because its reduced the friction of accessing high quality console games, and I’ve been trying more indie games because they are just there.
Not the sort of hardware innovation you are talking about, nor is Microsoft a first mover in the game subscription space, but still important I think.
Disclaimer- I’m a Microsoft employee, but not working on anything near gaming, and my opinions are my own.
I used to be of the opinion that Nintendo should just get out of the hardware market and just sell Mario/Zelda/etc... on XBox/PS. While I wouldn't mind if they did that, the switch has me completely convinced they should never get out of hardware.
I am more curious about context here. Nintendo was (and is) a public company. Presumably Microsoft new what a reasonable bid would look like. This sounds like they weren't just laughing at the offer itself.
They could have been laughing at "your hardware sucks, why don't you do software and Microsoft will do the hardware?"
And when you look at the giant-ass (and noisy-ass) box and controllers that were the first Xbox, I'd argue that Nintendo weren't too far off laughing Microsoft out of the room. Of what little I know about Nintendo, there's no way they were sticking their name on that.
“They just laughed their asses off,” Bachus said to Bloomberg. “Like, imagine an hour of somebody just laughing at you. That was kind of how that meeting went.”
Yes, a piece of junk telling a store staple that it was a piece of junk would have that effect
> Okawa, who had loaned Sega $500 million in 1999, died on March 16, 2001. Shortly before his death, he forgave Sega's debts to him and returned his $695 million worth of Sega and CSK stock, helping the company survive the third-party transition.[188][189][190] He held failed talks with Microsoft about a sale or merger with their Xbox division.[191] According to former Microsoft executive Joachim Kempin, Microsoft founder Bill Gates decided against acquiring Sega because "he didn't think that Sega had enough muscle to eventually stop Sony."[192] A business alliance with Microsoft was announced where Sega develops 11 games for the new Xbox console.[193]
Late 90s, Sega of Japan probably had too much pride for that. Afterwards, if MS was still interested, perhaps Sammy's offer was more compelling overall.
I also don't think MS would have had much interest in all the other non-home-console-software businesses SEGA was involved in.
Could have been an organized crime/liability element too. The relationship they did end up having was fruitful enough.
Regardless of how this went, I see the mega-corp development over the last 10+ years as very concerning long-term.
Companies like FAAMG just grow and grow, to the point where they completely dominate markets in mono/oligopolies. This enables them to either buy up or destroy any kind of competition before it becomes noteworthy, cementing their positions for many decades. Not to speak of the political bargaining/lobbying power.
Regulators need to stop allowing corporations to expand into ever-more domains and become so dominant through shear measure of size and capital they can throw around.
Gaming is an interesting space here. Microsoft has become one of three major players. They are buying up big studios like Bethesda, and are pushing hard for a future where you don't own any games and can only rent them for playing on Windows, Xbox or via streaming.
Right now GamePass is an incredible deal, but things would look quite different if Xbox wasn't the underdog.
Think one of the key advantages Japanese (and other East Asian) companies have over the US/EU counterparts is that they have very strong national sentiments. You saw this with Nissan debacle. Same with a couple of Korean companies. All the more reasons to believe that the Chinese market is simply a mirage for Western companies.
Is that necessarily a good thing though? Sure you'd want to co-opt a national identity, when it's suitable. But imagine if all the Silicon Valley era companies doubled down on their national identity at any point in their history...
Eh, maybe in the past but not so much today. Sony is being effectively run from California, which means that their standards for appropriate game content are being decided according to San Francisco, and not Tokyo, values. The PS5 is doing worse than any previous Sony console in the Japanese market as a result.
[+] [-] microtherion|5 years ago|reply
patio11 probably could provide a more accurate projection of a sarariman reaction to the MS offer.
[+] [-] jvzr|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] franklampard|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fomine3|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] danpalmer|5 years ago|reply
I don't know what Nintendo would get out of being acquired, and I'm not certain that Microsoft would be able to put together a convincing acquisition deal.
[+] [-] nixass|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sangnoir|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] viridian|5 years ago|reply
If you want real innovation in the industry though, you basically have to play indie games.
[+] [-] tristor|5 years ago|reply
I am incredibly happy that Nintendo said "No." to Microsoft here, because the Nintendo Switch is the single greatest console device ever made. The way it handles docking/undocking, game switching, updates, sleep, the controller design of the removable joycons, it's an unprecedentedly good user experience in a way that's going to be incredibly difficult to top. I have been interminably sad that Sega stopped making consoles because prior to the Switch, the Dreamcast pushed the envelope in every possible way for what it meant to be a gaming console. The Xbox One did something great by improving controller design significantly, but realistically the majority of consoles released in the last few decades have not been pushing the envelope in the way that the format allows.
[+] [-] wil421|5 years ago|reply
When a beefier switch comes along I’m jumping on it. The switch has been the funnest and most engaging gaming I’ve had in a decade.
[+] [-] dmitriid|5 years ago|reply
Sony and MS: let's build a gaming PC and just have a different enclosure for it.
Nintendo: what if we try <any number of crazy and interesting ideas>.
Also: a few days ago a friend of mine got stuck with shitty mobile internet for e few days. The only gadget that by default assumed there's no internet and just kept on working with no problems was Nintendo Switch. Everything else (phones, consoles, readers etc.) just couldn't imagine a world without an internet connection and would suffer when connectivity was bad/intermittent.
[+] [-] silicon2401|5 years ago|reply
I do have game pass, and the experience has been a constant reminder for why I hate a lot about the modern gaming world (with the exception of Switch, like you said). Often times when I just want to sit down and play a game, I instead have to jump through a series of hoops: download xbox update > update xbox > download game update > update game. For added fun, once in a while you even have to update your controller. Meanwhile I've never updated a switch game and always have a pleasantly plug and play experience.
[+] [-] bitwize|5 years ago|reply
This is called "lateral thinking with withered technology", an engineering principle articulated by Gunpei Yokoi. In Yokoi's day, the rationale for "withered technology" was that it was cheaper and much easier to second-source, meaning that a shortage from a single supplier wouldn't hold up the production run.
It wasn't until fairly recently (Wii and later) that Nintendo realized that participating in the red queen's race of ever-increasing console specs was going to get them trounced by megacorporations with much more cash to burn selling consoles at a loss, so they had to pivot to producing cheap hardware with unique value adds in order to get the console profitable fast.
[+] [-] nolok|5 years ago|reply
And if they joined, Microsoft is not the company that would have let them drop everything for the Wii (strange to say after the fact given kinect and stuff, but those were followers of a known success move), or again for the switch
[+] [-] city41|5 years ago|reply
Also all of Nintendo's mobile games require an internet connection to play.
Just playing devil's advocate. I am a huge Nintendo fan.
[+] [-] tastyfreeze|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dvfjsdhgfv|5 years ago|reply
I've just discovered Warioware Smooth Moves and man, was it fun! A great way to spend time with friends in these sad times.
[+] [-] topkai22|5 years ago|reply
I’m also pretty impressed with XBox game pass- it has changed my relationship with gaming. I’ve been gaming with my XBox than my Switch because its reduced the friction of accessing high quality console games, and I’ve been trying more indie games because they are just there.
Not the sort of hardware innovation you are talking about, nor is Microsoft a first mover in the game subscription space, but still important I think.
Disclaimer- I’m a Microsoft employee, but not working on anything near gaming, and my opinions are my own.
[+] [-] fomine3|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] recursive|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] anotherman554|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rhacker|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Jonnax|5 years ago|reply
Imagine the company that released Windows ME trying to convince you of their competency.
[+] [-] jhare|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Grazester|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mankyd|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mikestew|5 years ago|reply
And when you look at the giant-ass (and noisy-ass) box and controllers that were the first Xbox, I'd argue that Nintendo weren't too far off laughing Microsoft out of the room. Of what little I know about Nintendo, there's no way they were sticking their name on that.
[+] [-] wodenokoto|5 years ago|reply
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCOJ_2007_No.30
[+] [-] yosser|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] m3kw9|5 years ago|reply
Yes, a piece of junk telling a store staple that it was a piece of junk would have that effect
[+] [-] arbitrage|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] emptyparadise|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] AdmiralAsshat|5 years ago|reply
> Okawa, who had loaned Sega $500 million in 1999, died on March 16, 2001. Shortly before his death, he forgave Sega's debts to him and returned his $695 million worth of Sega and CSK stock, helping the company survive the third-party transition.[188][189][190] He held failed talks with Microsoft about a sale or merger with their Xbox division.[191] According to former Microsoft executive Joachim Kempin, Microsoft founder Bill Gates decided against acquiring Sega because "he didn't think that Sega had enough muscle to eventually stop Sony."[192] A business alliance with Microsoft was announced where Sega develops 11 games for the new Xbox console.[193]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega#Dreamcast_and_continuing_...
[+] [-] anonymousab|5 years ago|reply
I also don't think MS would have had much interest in all the other non-home-console-software businesses SEGA was involved in.
Could have been an organized crime/liability element too. The relationship they did end up having was fruitful enough.
EDIT - Well, looks like I was wrong.
[+] [-] dustinmoris|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JoshTko|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] alex_reg|5 years ago|reply
Companies like FAAMG just grow and grow, to the point where they completely dominate markets in mono/oligopolies. This enables them to either buy up or destroy any kind of competition before it becomes noteworthy, cementing their positions for many decades. Not to speak of the political bargaining/lobbying power.
Regulators need to stop allowing corporations to expand into ever-more domains and become so dominant through shear measure of size and capital they can throw around.
Gaming is an interesting space here. Microsoft has become one of three major players. They are buying up big studios like Bethesda, and are pushing hard for a future where you don't own any games and can only rent them for playing on Windows, Xbox or via streaming.
Right now GamePass is an incredible deal, but things would look quite different if Xbox wasn't the underdog.
[+] [-] unixhero|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hhkb|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wassenaar10|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dynamite-ready|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bitwize|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nether|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] swebs|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]