While it's not going to happen, Nintendo wouldn't need to buy all of MS, just the Xbox devision.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Phil Spencer talks about working with Nintendo on Minecraft and overall
- Thread starter Hero of Legend
- Start date
No one currently owns the James Bond license at the moment. Microsoft and/or Nintendo could buy the rights for one game.
lightskintwin
Banned
Good point. I forgot it could put up it's division for sale, should they decide they no longer want to be in the videogame business.
The Hermit
Member
This is one crazy thread indeed.
For the record Nintendo will outlive planet Earth, so there's that.
For the record Nintendo will outlive planet Earth, so there's that.
MilkyJoe
Member
Nintendo are responsible for the block and no one owns the license.
Has Microsoft made a profit of the Xbox division yet? I remember they were in the red for like their first 5 years, then things were okay, then the RROD scandal hit and they had to spend $1 billion to fix it.
AdmiralMikey
Member
Microsoft would LOVE to have all that Nintendo IP on their systems. It doesn't surprise me that Microsoft always wants to play nice with Nintendo, in hopes that one day they could sell millions of copies of Mario games on their system.
CrispyBoar
Banned
I doubt they are. And for that matter, Sony isn't as invincible as some posters in this thread think, either. They can no longer afford to have another PS3 debacle in terms of bleeding lots of money, because if they do, either their gaming division or the company as a whole will go kaput.
LordRaptor
Member
It's not like there's an amazing sales record for Banjo, Sonic, Spyro or Crash games on their systems, so its sort of a leap of faith to assume Mario would 'make bank'.
This right here.
I love how in gaming forums people often forget Sony and Microsoft do much more than just videogames and in the case of Microsoft, videogame division is the one bleeding the most money.
I don't think MS would be looking to sell their videogame division or IPs/xbox brand.
Because none of those franchises have the star power of mario or zelda, but also the ideal situation for microsoft would be their platforms being the ONLY ones where you could play mario, so 100% of the entire nintendo base would instantly become XBOX users, and people already on team XBOX would be more likely to buy mario/nintendo games.
Livingskeletons
If I pulled that off, would you die?
Sega rolling in their grave seeing their heir play nice with Nintendo.
ForkNetwork
Banned
I wonder why Nintendo hasnt included BK in Smash yet.
LordRaptor
Member
Once upon a time they did.
Thats sort of the point.
Sega mascots earning more money being a guest star in a nintendo themed olympic games spin off than they can in their own titles
Orniletter
Banned
Can we get Rare's N64 games on Switch's VC please ?
Flame Lord
Member
That's not really a fair comparison. Banjo was never that big as far as I know, Sonic has been shit for years, and both Spyro and Crash were sold off over a decade ago and have been shit since. Mario however came out before all of the previously mentioned titles and is more well known, has been owned by Nintendo it's whole existence, and consistently has quality releases. If Pokemon did as well as it did on the smart phones, Mario would sale fucking gangbusters on pretty much any system (that people own).
They would have to downsize, pay licensing fee, move Pokémon to the mobile market and pick games that would sell.
Going third party will not help Nintendo just like how it didn't help either Sega or Atari.
Unlikely, they would focus on the bigger IP and rarely on the smaller niche IP.
Probably because they don't want to give free advertising to Microsoft.
No, it doesn't. It would mean more and more safer projects, aka more Mario, to try and make up for the humongous loss in revenue that constitutes their hardware business. No point in having a diverse lineup of games if you're not selling a platform. They would focus heavily on mobile and try to capture kid audiences that are currently being somewhat neglected in the console space.
MisterHero
Super Member
All this demonstrates is that many shareholders would rather make a quick buck than have Nintendo's longterm interests at heart.
TyMiles2012
Member
Playtonic pretty much IS Rare. Nearly the exact same team of developers when they were a Nintendo second party.
Edit: Halo on the Switch. Even if it's the 5 Forge version for W10 with the custom server browser.
Giftofgab24
Member
Xbox One has sold like 2 1/2 times as much as the Wii U did while the PS4 has outsold it probably close to 5 to 1. Both in a lot less time too. Software sales for anything other than Pokémon, Splatoon, and Mario maker and kart have been subpar haven't they? I know Nintendo cleans up as far as mobile goes, but I don't think handhelds count as consoles. Exiting the hardware market is more of a stretch than them exiting the console market. If the switch bombs do you really think they'll make another home console?
The Giant
Banned
Nope. In the last 15 years the Xbox division has spent more money and not making that money back. Even when they made profit, they are still in the red.
Unless Miyamoto comes up and shakes hands with someone form Microsoft (it could be Spencer or anybody), I don't believe their "relationship". But Shiggy did shake hands with Mr. Cook, so it's obvious who they chose to be close out of two.
Second, you don't just "think" that it would be cool to see Banjo in Smash, you have to ask Nintendo to include him. This is how things work. I bet everybody who worked on Smash probably forgot who the hell was Banjo.
Second, you don't just "think" that it would be cool to see Banjo in Smash, you have to ask Nintendo to include him. This is how things work. I bet everybody who worked on Smash probably forgot who the hell was Banjo.
foxuzamaki
Doesn't read OPs, especially not his own
Most nintendo software has either sold okish to way better than you think they do to absolute monsters, with a few that sold below expectations, and probably majority of them have made them back even or more money than it took to make them
Neff
Member
So let's have that GoldenEye 007 HD port, Phil.
It seems that for some, it is.
Nintendo have nothing to gain by forfeiting profits from their hardware and software licensing at the behest of gambling on a pure 3rd party business model.
It seems that for some, it is.
Nintendo have nothing to gain by forfeiting profits from their hardware and software licensing at the behest of gambling on a pure 3rd party business model.
I feel like there's a pie chart that can accurately sum up this whole situation. Maybe check Polygon?
But seriously though, do you think Mario Kart 8 on the Wii U (~6mil base?) made Nintendo more money than Mario Kart 8 would make on Ps4/XB1 (~60mil base?)
Neff
Member
Well, there is this.
It's also worth noting that Nintendo's royalty cut is typically higher than that of MS or Sony's.
But who knows, honestly? The appeal of one game alone (or potential lack of it) or profit derived from it doesn't really tell us much about the merits or otherwise of transforming the entire foundation of a billion dollar multinational company.
RVIDXR
Member
frankie_baby
Member
You sure about the royalties? I'm pretty certain at least with the gamecube nintendo was lower than the other 2 and with digital stuff today all 3 of them are 30%
Japanmanx3
Member
You can't have Nintendo Phil. Thanks for the props tho.
Neff
Member
I remember reading from at least one publisher that it was higher than the competition during the Wii and DS' tenure. I wouldn't be surprised if they adjust it for every platform accordingly, just as I wouldn't be surprised if they've lowered it to entice publishers back to Switch.
But still, the point stands, if they went third party, they'd be throwing all that away.
IntelliHeath
As in "Heathcliff"
Banjo is really good candidate but why go small with Microsoft? Go Big and get Master Chief in! ;P
They should make a Microsoft pack where we could get Master Chief, Banjo and Joanna Dark.
CaviarMeths
Member
Are you implying that Mario Kart would have sold 10x better by being on a base 10x the size?
It just doesn't work like that. Check out sales of the Sonic series. Outside of the first two games and the mobile port, the games sell about 1-2 million copies each, regardless of whether they're on Sega hardware or not, regardless of being on one platform or three.
There are certain games that will sell hardware. Mario Kart and Smash are among them. Putting them on PS4 and XB1 probably wouldn't have a significantly increase in sales. It's not likely to increase software sales enough to make up for having to pay 30% of the revenue to Sony and Microsoft, plus make up for losing revenue on hardware as well. So yes, I would say it's probable, perhaps even likely, that Nintendo made more money on Mario Kart 8 as a Wii U exclusive than they would have if it were on PS4/XB1.
Downsizing a company is not a good move for a company as established and cash-rich as Nintendo. Shareholders should be wanting Nintendo to grow when they have the money to spend, not shrink.
Royalties only matter if third parties are actually selling games on your platform.
Obviously MK8 would sell more. It's crazy to act like it wouldn't. The built in fanbase would buy a system to play it, by your own admission, and the potential audience being 10 times larger would result in AT LEAST double the sales, easily. Most pepole who don't buy nintendo consoles don't hate nintendo games, they just don't care enough to buy another system solely to play them. I bet most people who own a console have played and enjoyed Mario Kart at some point, only a small fraction need to buy it to double the sales of the game.
IntelliHeath
As in "Heathcliff"
Obviously. But I'm pretty sure that most of us are just fantasying what would happens if the deal went through.
MrSaturn99
Member
Banjo in Smash would be a dream come true. Get on that, Sakurai!
I'd love to see some Virtual Console releases of their N64 games; in particular, both Banjo games, Diddy Kong Racing, and Goldeneye.
original design plz
I'd love to see some Virtual Console releases of their N64 games; in particular, both Banjo games, Diddy Kong Racing, and Goldeneye.
Neff
Member
I don't think it's a good idea for Nintendo to go third party just because of the Wii U.
I especially don't think it's a good idea for Nintendo to go third party when their business model has allowed them to make more profit than anyone in the videogames industry by a substantial margin.
Pancakes R Us
Member
$25B was the reported figure a while back now.
DUH-HUH!
Mobile yes, but shareholders haven't said a word about PlayStation or Xbox. That's not where the money is.
Not 10x no, but double would be the absolute least amount of units it would push on other consoles over Nintendo's. Selling 2 million copies and taking 100% profit is actually less money than 4 million at 70% profit, yes. Sure they won't be taking 30% in royalty fees from 3rd parties, but what 3rd parties amirite
Sammy Samusu
Member
Every company would love to have their characters on Smash.
I can't think of one company that would say no.
I can't think of one company that would say no.
NONE of those franchises were close to being as big as Mario when they hit MS consoles. Mario would make bank where ever he lands, so long as it comes with the standard Nintendo quality
Similar threads
- Locked