17 ms·
Microsoft tried to buy Nintendo, but got laughed out of the room
- emptyparadise 6y agoI wonder why they didn't buy Sega.
- anonymousab 6y agoLate 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. EDIT - Well, looks like I was wrong.
- AdmiralAsshat 6y agoThey thought about it: > 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_struggles_(1998%E2%80%932001) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega#Dreamcast_and_continuing_...
- dustinmoris 6y agoBecause they laughed Microsoft in the face, too. :P
- mankyd 6y agoI 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.
- mikestew 6y agoThey 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.
- city41 6y agoAs far as I know, the Switch Joy Cons drift problem is the only hardware issue Nintendo has ever had.
- jaywalk 6y agoThey were probably referring more to how powerful it was, not quality issues. And in that way they're still correct to this day, although Nintendo has figured out how to thrive with significantly less powerful hardware than Microsoft and Sony.
- derefr 6y agoNintendo chooses to use old components in their hardware, though. It's not like they don't have the industry contacts to source more powerful stuff if they want. They just want to have a positive profit margin on selling console hardware. They want hardware sales (and sales of first-party "killer app" software enabled by the hardware) — not third-party software license fees — to be their main revenue stream. Each console or handheld Nintendo puts out follows a formula: * Choose key components (CPU cores, screens on portables, etc.) that are two-to-five year-old, one-or-more generations-behind tech at design time, such that they're in wide manufacturing and easy to source as parts / cheap to license to build themselves. * Add in novel in-house-developed IP cores/ASICs, which allow developers to build games that "do" a lot more than the key components would seem to allow. * Wrap the whole thing in a novel interaction method that makes the console's hardware performance relative to its "console generation" kind of illegible (e.g. the Wiimote, the two screens of the DS, the portability of the Switch, etc.); which de-facto locks in games developed to target the hardware, making them much harder to port away; and which acts as a neato whizz-bang selling point in the form of enabling new "killer apps" (e.g. 3D first-person games with the N64 analog stick; Wii Sports with the Wiimote; Brain Training and other pre-smartphone "apps" with the DS stylus.) Nintendo are at their best (i.e. most profitable) when they double down on this strategy, releasing a seemingly-new hardware "generation" that's really just the same existing hardware but with new/updated IP cores. The Gameboy Color is just an overclocked Gameboy with a better PPU. The Wii is just an overclocked Gamecube with an ARM coprocessor embedding wi-fi/bluetooth/SD card support. Etc. The Switch is a departure from this strategy, in that the Tegra X1 wasn't actually all that old at the time of the Switch's release, and so likely bit into Nintendo's profit-margin on the Switch pretty heavily. I'm sure Nintendo would rather have used a slightly-older part. But there just wasn't anything like the Tegra X1 (in terms of GPU power per watt) until the Tegra X1 — no viable competitors, and no previous generation of the chip to lean on. And they were constrained by wanting to port Wii U games to the Switch, which demanded basically the X1's level of power.
- dmitriid 6y agoNintendo 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.
- silicon2401 6y agoThe 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.
- tastyfreeze 6y agoNintendo 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.
- claytonjy 6y agoAs I recall this has been true of at least MS and Sony (maybe even Nintendo?) for several console generations, though after a few years they've been able to bring costs down into profitability. Is that not expected for this generation?
- arbitrage 6y agoThere are very few details in the article beyond what is already in the headline. Fluff.
- wging 6y agoYes, but the source they link to is quite extensive and interesting: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-01-06/xbox-the-oral-history-of-an-american-video-game-empire https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-01-06/xbox-the-...
- ulysses 6y agoThank you. I think Nintendo's quote from that article is even funnier: "Nintendo does not talk about confidential discussions with other companies. In any event, nothing came of these discussions."
- danpalmer 6y agoNintendo 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.
- im3w1l 6y ago132 year old? So are some random family restaurants. How does $10bil of money matter either way? Microsofts market cal is north of $1T, while Nintendos is less than $100B. And finally the question is not what Nintendo would get out of it. The question is what their shareholders stand to gain.
- thedmstdmstdmst 6y ago$10 bil of money means Nintendo has all the money they need on hand to continue to develop for their markets or new markets so what impetus is there to be acquire or merge? Nintendo is not a very big company comparatively.
- im3w1l 6y agoAh, merging to get access to money, yes I suppose they don't need that. My uneducated guess is that the reason for a merger would rather be merging the xbox with the switch, and merging the game libraries too. Can't say I know whether that's a good idea.
- thedmstdmstdmst 6y agoYeah that could happen but why? The architectures are different. What benefit is there? Many Japanese companies actually treat North American Market as a secondary thought, Nintendo in a sense is one of them.
- jcelerier 6y ago> The question is what their shareholders stand to gain. thankfully, not the whole world thinks like that.
- hhkb 6y agoThink 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.
- wassenaar10 6y agoPerhaps westerners could learn a thing or two from this attitude.
- sidlls 6y agoWe definitely should learn it: and treat those with adversarial intent (China) as the enemy they are.
- yhoneycomb 6y agoWhat makes you think China has adversarial intent? Or are you just feeling insecure at the fact that white people may no longer be at the top?
- theandrewbailey 6y ago1. China does not share liberal values. They have been genociding Uighurs for many years. 2. China is bent on expanding territory. It has border disputes with nearly all of its neighbors. https://asianews.press/2020/06/30/china-has-border-dispute-ls-with-18-countries-heres-the-list/ https://asianews.press/2020/06/30/china-has-border-dispute-l... 3. China has threatened military action against western allies, like Taiwan. 4. China has repeatedly violated promises that its made, like the Hong Kong handover. 5. China steals sensitive technology and manufacturing plans from foreign companies. It has mandated that foreign companies establish joint ventures with Chinese companies to do business in China, with unrestricted access to all internal company documents and systems of the foreign company.
- 6y ago
- nether 6y agoFun fact: Nintendo of America and MSFT are both headquartered in Redmond.
- swebs 6y agoThis is correct. I don't know why its flagged.
- yosser 6y agoOf course Microsoft bought Rare Ltd., so I guess they thought they might as well acquire some Nintendoish IP one way or another.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- rhacker 6y agoI 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.
- j_m_b 6y agoI agree. The switch is really an amazing piece of hardware. I can be playing on my TV and just pull out the switch and continue playing if someone wants to watch something. Nintendo has been innovating gaming hardware for years. Microsoft would have pretty much said "make CPU go BRRR" and left it at.
- jolmg 6y agoThe multiple Nintendo Labo kits are also an amazing show of the versatility of the Switch hardware. From hand-joystick, to motorcycle handles or a steering wheel with levers, turn-switches, pull-crank and pedal, a piano, fishing rod, etc. The controllers can be augmented to so many forms with just some cardboard and software. No need for specialized controllers like before. Its ability to accommodate 2 players with a single control-set is also amazing.
- bloodorange 6y agoThey held the record for number of handheld consoles sold at various times and at one point of time, the GBA was the most sold gaming console ever. Usually the hardware also holds up well and has good resale value too. Their games are timeless and run only on their hardware (with few exceptions). Their hardware is sold at a profit. Why did you feel they shouldn't sell hardware?
- rhacker 6y agoPretty much my experience with the Wii-U. It was so underwhelming and the portable stuff didn't deliver. They fixed all of that with the switch.
- mankyd 6y ago
- Jonnax 6y agoSo this was back around the year 2000. Imagine the company that released Windows ME trying to convince you of their competency.
- nixass 6y agoImagine 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
- sangnoir 6y agoI'm glad Microsoft didn't get the chance to buy Nintendo and Nokia it.
- viridian 6y agoA 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.
- microtherion 6y agoEvidently 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.
- jvzr 6y agoThey may have met with Nintendo of America? Which would make this story plausible
- gamegoblin 6y agoNintendo of America is headquartered in the same city as Microsoft (Redmond WA), so this is definitely plausible.
- theandrewbailey 6y agoI was going to say Nintendo is across/down the road from Microsoft, but checking again, Microsoft surrounds them: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Nintendo+of+USA/@47.6510523,-122.1435848,16z/data=!4m8!1m2!3m1!2sNintendo+of+USA!3m4!1s0x54906d69e6f323ad:0x1bc8d9a86386ffbc!8m2!3d47.6510519!4d-122.1392074 https://www.google.com/maps/place/Nintendo+of+USA/@47.651052...
- m3kw9 6y ago“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
- tristor 6y agoI 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.
- wil421 6y agoMy 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.
- tristor 6y agoMaybe because I have multiple systems, I haven't experienced this. I haven't really played many AAA ports because I would prefer to play them on PC or on the Xbox. But all of the indie games I've played as well as all the JRPGs, both Switch-exclusive and multi-system releases, have run flawlessly for me. Considering the hardware in a Switch is about on par with a mid-grade phone from a few years back, and the Switch OS seems to be a fork of Android, I am consistently surprised at how well everything just works flawlessly with it. My experience of trying to use phones as gaming devices have been pretty miserable and I don't keep any games installed on my phone these days, despite always having flagship devices. If they ever release an upgraded set of Switch hardware that maintains compatibility with previous titles, I'd be really interested. But I have to be honest and say I'm not really dissatisfied with what it is today at all. Even the resolution is okay, considering the screen size. Hades is one recent release that's really great and works perfectly on the Switch, as an example.
- alex_reg 6y agoRegardless 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.
- JoshTko 6y agoNintendo's total value is definitely limited due to their hardware lock. If they went hardware agnostic their value would triple overnight.
- unixhero 6y agoToo low price then.