Topic: Not a hater but... (future prediction)

[Evan_B]

So Miyamoto is, in fact, a hater.

Syrenne mentioned on RFN that the materials in the Switch are a lot more likely to become less expensive, whereas the Wii U tech was never profitable for Nintendo.

[pokepal148]

But he's not a hater, it says so on the thread title.

[MagicCow64]

Knowing what an evidently greedy company they are

Other pessimism-preening aside, this sentiment never fails to inspire awe at how some people manage to view to world. Calling a company greedy is like calling a priest religious.

[Miyamoto]

Syrenne mentioned on RFN that the materials in the Switch are a lot more likely to become less expensive, whereas the Wii U tech was never profitable for Nintendo.

This is entirely conjecture/wishful thinking. What makes the components of the Switch any more likely to become less expensive than those of the Wii u?

[Miyamoto]

Knowing what an evidently greedy company they are

Other pessimism-preening aside, this sentiment never fails to inspire awe at how some people manage to view to world. Calling a company greedy is like calling a priest religious.

And yet Steam, Microsoft and Sony all manage to thrive and far exceed Nintendo when it comes to turning a profit precisely because they are not greedy. There is nothing naive in thinking companies should treat their customers fairly and offer them great value for money. It's what sells products.


 

[NWR_insanolord]

If you're trying to argue Nintendo's greedy and Sony and Microsoft aren't then you are most definitely a hater, or at least not paying attention to what they do.

[Evan_B]

Considering she's a developer with hands on the actual tech, I'd say she has a more informed opinion of the hardware than you. But if you'd like to continue being jaded, by all means, do so.

I'd check those facts about Microsoft and Sony, too. They are companies that don't exclusively deal in video games.

[Miyamoto]

If you're trying to argue Nintendo's greedy and Sony and Microsoft aren't then you are most definitely a hater, or at least not paying attention to what they do.

How about this for a simple comparison, google the Playstation winter sale, then google the Xbox winter sale, then google the Nintendo winter sale. Have a good look at them and see if you can spot the odd one out. Or better yet, take a $100 and see how far that could get you on the PSN store, Xbox store and the eshop. Again, see if you can spot the odd one out.

[nickmitch]

Both the Xbox and PlayStation brands weren't doing so hot until recently.  Famously, the Xbox division lost $3B in it's first 10 years.  But the PS4 has been elevating Sony lately.  The thing to remember is that while MS and Sony can afford losses on gaming hardware, this is only because videogames aren't their only revenue stream.

[Miyamoto]

Considering she's a developer with hands on the actual tech, I'd say she has a more informed opinion of the hardware than you.

Being a developer really doesn't qualify her to speculate on specific hardware component costs. I doubt Nintendo sat her down and carefully went through the details of individual deals and patent licenses that have been set up for the various bits of hardware in the device. You only have to look at the thing to see it's going to be a real struggle to really bring the price down even over a few years.

[Soren]

Guys c'mon. The Switch ain't dropping to $99 on 2019.

[pokepal148]

Hey, remember when Nintendo required you to pay $60 a year for their online service just to watch your $9 a month Netflix subscription on your Xbox 360? That was horrible. #NotAHater

[Miyamoto]

Hey, remember when Nintendo required you to pay $60 a year for their online service just to watch your $9 a month Netflix subscription on your Xbox 360? That was horrible.

No I don't remember when they did that, also I think you did get a few other perks for your $60 annual fee other than the privilege of accessing Netflix. Now that I think about it, I do remember Nintendo charging me "500 Wii Points" to download a web browser though. Oh, and compared to the plethora of free games that Sony and Microsoft offer for subscribers,  Nintendo's paltry one NES or SNES game a month is beyond tightfisted. Yet another example (if one were needed) of how Nintendo operates when compared with Microsoft and Sony.
Does it still count as "hating" when I offer well-reasoned arguments for my opinions?

[NWR_insanolord]

It's hating if you focus on Nintendo doing things like that and ignore Sony and Microsoft doing similar things, regardless of how well-reasoned you think your arguments are. You are beyond delusional if you think Sony or Microsoft or basically anybody else in this industry are somehow less "greedy" than Nintendo.

[Miyamoto]

It's hating if you focus on Nintendo doing things like that and ignore Sony and Microsoft doing similar things, regardless of how well-reasoned you think your arguments are. You are beyond delusional if you think Sony or Microsoft or basically anybody else in this industry are somehow less "greedy" than Nintendo.

I focus on Nintendo because this is a Nintendo forum and I love them and want them to be better. To suggest that Nintendo are no worse than Microsoft or Sony is just factually incorrect and I would suggest it is you who are delusional if you think otherwise. We could argue the point or you could use Amazon/Google to educate yourself.

[NWR_insanolord]

I own all the current platforms and am exclusively digital on all of them. I've spent plenty of time on their various digital storefronts. I really don't see a substantial difference between how Nintendo does things and how Sony or Microsoft do. So since you're the one making the claim, I'm going to have to ask you to provide specific examples of what you find to be the problem. Telling someone to Google it is a shitty way to debate.

[Miyamoto]

I own all the current platforms and am exclusively digital on all of them. I've spent plenty of time on their various digital storefronts. I really don't see a substantial difference between how Nintendo does things and how Sony or Microsoft do.

I find this quite baffling. I too own all three platforms and purchase mainly digital. The prices on Live and PSN are generally equally competitive but there is no parity with Nintendo. I find it strange that anyone would have difficulty noticing that. With Nintendo, first party games rarely go on sale and when they do the discount is minimal. Also with Nintendo, games will stay at launch RRP for years after release, something that seldom happens with Microsoft or Sony. Also, Microsoft and Sony are constantly having amazing sales (I've literally got nearly 300 games on my 360 HDD) compared with eshop discounts on shovelware that nobody wants even if it is cheap. Honestly, to spend just 15 minutes looking through each service and to come to the conclusion that they are all equal is just ludicrous, outside of these boards you would struggle to find anyone to agree with that. But then you probably think that borrowing a NES rom for a month is equal to having 4 full recent games that you can play whenever you want, so why am I even bothering?
 

[Miyamoto]

According to insanolord these things are, well, y'know, more or less the same:


Xbox winter sale:
https://majornelson.com/2016/12/22/the-official-list-of-deals-on-xbox-stores-countdown-to-2017/


Playstation winter sale:
https://blog.eu.playstation.com/2016/12/22/the-playstation-store-january-sale-starts-today-and-its-our-biggest-ever/


Nintendo eshop winter sale:
https://www.nintendo.co.uk/News/2016/December/Nintendo-eShop-Sale-Happy-New-Year-Sale-1170230.html

[NWR_insanolord]

Nintendo first party games don't go on sale that often because they don't have to. Games don't go on sale out of the goodness of developers' hearts, they go on sale because they stop selling. That's not Nintendo being greedy, that's Nintendo being in a better market position. Other developers would keep things at full price if they still sold at that price. You'll notice that there are lots of sales on the eShop for third party games. But again, this illustrates the foolishness of using a term like "greedy" in this context. Nintendo, like Sony and Microsoft and whoever, prices games at what the market will bear (or at least attempt to do so). Nintendo's prices are higher because people are willing to pay them.

[Stogi]

Miyamoto, I think you're underestimating the Switch's potential to attract attention and instantly provide fun. The ability to play two players anywhere is an incredible idea. Because...



Kids may have cell phones these days, but can you imagine a couple buddies playing MarioKart in the cafeteria? You could easily see other kids fighting over who's next because everyone wants to play. And soon enough, it'll be on everyone's wish list.

[pokepal148]

But greed man! Better market position means you're in a position to be charitable!

[MagicCow64]

To be fair, Microsoft and Sony invited me to their birthday parties last year but Nintendo snubbed me.

[pokepal148]

Youch man. Nintendo is the worst. We should rename the site to "Sega World Report"

[Khushrenada]

You can take it to the bank that Nintendo's next "console" will be a glorified dongle that plays all Nintendo games and offers mass media and retails for $99.99.

And yet Steam, Microsoft and Sony all manage to thrive and far exceed Nintendo when it comes to turning a profit precisely because they are not greedy. There is nothing naive in thinking companies should treat their customers fairly and offer them great value for money. It's what sells products.

We could argue the point or you could use Amazon/Google to educate yourself.

[Agent-X-]

Youch man. Nintendo is the worst. We should rename the site to "Sega World Report"

Or Nintendo Worst Report.