4 ms·

I'm friends with Bob. He was my team lead, twice, at EA. He's a talented developer and a great boss. Nothing at all surprises me about the mixed reaction. Some

I'm friends with Bob. He was my team lead, twice, at EA. He's a talented developer and a great boss. Nothing at all surprises me about the mixed reaction. Some people are mad because they love Nintendo. Some are mad because they hate EA. But I haven't seen a lot of people mad because they disagree with his message -- because he's speaking the truth. Nintendo's platforms are disappointing and underwhelming. Just do a search for "Nintendo Wii U sales". It's a fact. (Yet at the same time, like Bob says, Nintendo makes great games -- it's strange how that particular comment seems to have been lost in the noise!) It's hard to tell the truth sometimes, but especially in the games industry. Gamers get emotionally attached (or opposed) to companies, platforms and games more intensely than anything else in life. Any time you say anything about anything you're risking the digital mobs coming out with the pitchforks and the torches. And we know how mobs always take the time to pause and reflect. His only mistake is not being Linus Torvalds talking about Nvidia.

Natsu 13y ago
Nintendo has been "dead" a few times now, but they've been going since the 1800s or something when they made playing cards. They also have the capacity to come up with crazy new stuff nobody ever expected. Maybe they're not doing well right now, but I have a hard time believing they're "dead." On the other side, we have EA, best known for insulting people and lying about DRM, including their ex-customers, who they like to imply are homophobes. They haven't managed anything more inventive than tired Madden retreads and they're best known as a company for having their devs toil away in the EA slave mines, where they make minor stat tweaks to Madden for 26 hours a day. As a gamer, I know which company has more credibility with me. It's not EA.
- shaggyfrog 13y ago
  The thing about sales figures is they're facts, not opinions. Finding Nintendo "more credible" than EA is an opinion that doesn't change the fact that Nintendo's platform isn't selling very well. Furthermore, you seem to be conflating two different topics. I'm not a fan of EA's DRM schemes any more than you are, but that's just not relevant in this discussion.
  - stfu 13y ago
    The thing about sales figures is they're facts Maybe... if they are 3rd party verified. And even then you can skew numbers in whatever direction you like just by allocating promotional budgets.
    - shaggyfrog 13y ago
      Indeed, like Samsung: http://www.asymco.com/2012/11/29/the-cost-of-selling-galaxies/ http://www.asymco.com/2012/11/29/the-cost-of-selling-galaxie...
  - Natsu 13y ago
    I'm not disputing whether or not their business is doing well, just whether or not I think they will go out of business anytime soon, which is what "walking dead" means to me. To that effect, I have pointed out that they have a long history, have "died" several times, and have proven resilient even when various people imagine them "dead" or anything like that. It appears that EA is looking only at quarterly revenue and not taking anything else into account. It's exactly what I would expect of them. It's one of the many reasons I mistrust them. People play games to have fun. Dealing with assholes is not fun. If I played EA games, I'd have to deal with EA. So the only winning move is not to play.
- hkmurakami 13y ago
  >Nintendo has been "dead" a few times now, but they've been going since the 1800s or something when they made playing cards. They also have the capacity to come up with crazy new stuff nobody ever expected. Maybe they're not doing well right now, but I have a hard time believing they're "dead." Yup, 1889 to be exact. [1] They made "Hanafuda" cards, which are a very old, traditional set of cards, sometimes used for gambling. Comparing it to poker I think is a somewhat inaccurate yet simultaneously fair comparison [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanafuda https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanafuda
gradstudent 13y ago
> I haven't seen a lot of people mad because they disagree with his message -- because he's speaking the truth. Nintendo's platforms are disappointing and underwhelming. There was nothing factual about any of Bob's comments. Had I been ignorant of his resume I would have assumed that series of tweets came from a teenager; pissed off because he can't play Mario on a machine he and his circle of friends deem sufficiently "adult". I wish somebody would explain to me what technical sin Nintendo has committed for WiiU to be regarded so poorly by western developers. As far as I can see the machine is more capable than what the competition has available right now.

Natsu 13y ago

Nintendo has been "dead" a few times now, but they've been going since the 1800s or something when they made playing cards. They also have the capacity to come up with crazy new stuff nobody ever expected. Maybe they're not doing well right now, but I have a hard time believing they're "dead." On the other side, we have EA, best known for insulting people and lying about DRM, including their ex-customers, who they like to imply are homophobes. They haven't managed anything more inventive than tired Madden retreads and they're best known as a company for having their devs toil away in the EA slave mines, where they make minor stat tweaks to Madden for 26 hours a day. As a gamer, I know which company has more credibility with me. It's not EA.

shaggyfrog 13y ago
The thing about sales figures is they're facts, not opinions. Finding Nintendo "more credible" than EA is an opinion that doesn't change the fact that Nintendo's platform isn't selling very well. Furthermore, you seem to be conflating two different topics. I'm not a fan of EA's DRM schemes any more than you are, but that's just not relevant in this discussion.
- stfu 13y ago
  The thing about sales figures is they're facts Maybe... if they are 3rd party verified. And even then you can skew numbers in whatever direction you like just by allocating promotional budgets.
  - shaggyfrog 13y ago
    Indeed, like Samsung: http://www.asymco.com/2012/11/29/the-cost-of-selling-galaxies/ http://www.asymco.com/2012/11/29/the-cost-of-selling-galaxie...
- Natsu 13y ago
  I'm not disputing whether or not their business is doing well, just whether or not I think they will go out of business anytime soon, which is what "walking dead" means to me. To that effect, I have pointed out that they have a long history, have "died" several times, and have proven resilient even when various people imagine them "dead" or anything like that. It appears that EA is looking only at quarterly revenue and not taking anything else into account. It's exactly what I would expect of them. It's one of the many reasons I mistrust them. People play games to have fun. Dealing with assholes is not fun. If I played EA games, I'd have to deal with EA. So the only winning move is not to play.
hkmurakami 13y ago
>Nintendo has been "dead" a few times now, but they've been going since the 1800s or something when they made playing cards. They also have the capacity to come up with crazy new stuff nobody ever expected. Maybe they're not doing well right now, but I have a hard time believing they're "dead." Yup, 1889 to be exact. [1] They made "Hanafuda" cards, which are a very old, traditional set of cards, sometimes used for gambling. Comparing it to poker I think is a somewhat inaccurate yet simultaneously fair comparison [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanafuda https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanafuda

gradstudent 13y ago

> I haven't seen a lot of people mad because they disagree with his message -- because he's speaking the truth. Nintendo's platforms are disappointing and underwhelming. There was nothing factual about any of Bob's comments. Had I been ignorant of his resume I would have assumed that series of tweets came from a teenager; pissed off because he can't play Mario on a machine he and his circle of friends deem sufficiently "adult". I wish somebody would explain to me what technical sin Nintendo has committed for WiiU to be regarded so poorly by western developers. As far as I can see the machine is more capable than what the competition has available right now.