Phil Spencer: "....getting Nintendo would be a career moment and I honestly believe a good move for both companies."

Dr Bass

The doctor is in
Founder
20 Jun 2022
2,042
3,450
No, they're right. In the '80s, Nintendo locked virtually every major Japanese 3P into exclusivity deals. They could make games ONLY for Nintendo's own consoles. No one else. Not Sega, not NEC, no one.

They also limited the amount of games a 3P could publish on their systems per year. This is why some Japanese publishers made spinoff subsidiaries, so that they could circumvent the publication limit. The exclusivity stuff is also why some like Namco made Namcot; to skirt around the clauses and make games for rivals like Sega. Hell, it's why Sega had to purchase the license for so many games (especially Japanese ones) early on in Genesis/MegaDrive's life, from companies like Capcom (Strider), reprogramming them in-house too.

It got so bad Nintendo got hit with an antitrust lawsuit in 1990/1991 in America...and lost the lawsuit. Even Microsoft hasn't quite had that happen yet, though they're fast on their way to try making it a reality.
Not disputing what you're saying here, in general, but Microsoft got hit with a huge antitrust lawsuit in the late 90s and lost. Everyone knows this right?


By the way, for the Nintendo one, are you talking about the "American Video" lawsuit? That's nothing compared to the US Govt. coming after you like in the MS case. Yeah Nintendo used to have a heavy hand in the NES era when they had the most control but again ... comparing that to what the big tech companies currently engage in, they aren't even close. And Nintendo didn't exactly lose. And the company suing them were trying to circumvent licensing on the market.

I don't really see any corollaries between either of the companies behaviors on this topic.

 
Last edited:

KiryuRealty

Cambridge Dictionary High Priest of Grammar
28 Nov 2022
6,646
8,166
Where it’s at.
Not disputing what you're saying here, in general, but Microsoft got hit with a huge antitrust lawsuit in the late 90s and lost. Everyone knows this right?


By the way, for the Nintendo one, are you talking about the "American Video" lawsuit? That's nothing compared to the US Govt. coming after you like in the MS case. Yeah Nintendo used to have a heavy hand in the NES era when they had the most control but again ... comparing that to what the big tech companies currently engage in, they aren't even close. And Nintendo didn't exactly lose. And the company suing them were trying to circumvent licensing on the market.

I don't really see any corollaries between either of the companies behaviors on this topic.

Nintendo ran afoul of the FTC themselves in 1988 due to their bullying of retailers to keep Atari and SEGA products off the shelves as well as their publishing policies, so if you’re going to bring up MS’ antitrust suit, at least acknowledge that MS wasn’t the only console maker that got their dick slapped for anticompetitive practices.

Oh, also, while MS has been in FTC trouble, only Nintendo has been there due to their console business tactics.
 
24 Jun 2022
3,982
6,954
Not disputing what you're saying here, in general, but Microsoft got hit with a huge antitrust lawsuit in the late 90s and lost. Everyone knows this right?


By the way, for the Nintendo one, are you talking about the "American Video" lawsuit? That's nothing compared to the US Govt. coming after you like in the MS case. Yeah Nintendo used to have a heavy hand in the NES era when they had the most control but again ... comparing that to what the big tech companies currently engage in, they aren't even close. And Nintendo didn't exactly lose. And the company suing them were trying to circumvent licensing on the market.

I don't really see any corollaries between either of the companies behaviors on this topic.


Admittedly looks like I turned to the wrong lawsuit, but @KiryuRealty is right; Nintendo was investigated by the FTC in 1988 and settled out of court a few years later:

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1991-04-11-fi-359-story.html

So, I got the lawsuit itself wrong, but Nintendo was found potentially guilty of anticompetitive practices like price-fixing:

To settle price-fixing charges by the Federal Trade Commission and 39 states, Nintendo of America--maker of the Mario Brothers and other popular video games--agreed to give up to $25 million in discounts to owners of its products, company and government officials announced.

New York Atty. Gen. Robert Abrams said the company had been accused of coercing retailers into keeping the price of its basic video system at $99.99 or more and threatening to slow supplies to those who reduced prices on its products by as little as 6 cents.

As for the terms of the settlement agreement:

Under the agreement, Nintendo of America will:

* Mail a $5 “instant redemption certificate” toward purchase of any Nintendo game cartridge to consumers who bought game machines between June 1, 1988, and Dec. 31, 1990.

* Guarantee redemption of at least $5 million of the certificates and agree to issue up to $25 million in coupons if enough qualified consumers apply.


* Pay a total of $4.75 million to the 39 states involved in the dispute to cover administrative and enforcement costs.

* Advise all Nintendo dealers in writing that they are free to sell the game machines, cartridges and accessories at any price they choose.

* Include a disclaimer in promotional material that the “suggested” retail price is not mandatory, assuring dealers that they can set their own prices.

And considering the stranglehold Nintendo did have with 3P in the NES/Famicom era, it's very likely they were guilty of what was being levied against them, hence settling out of court to avoid trail. Similar to what Microsoft did in their antitrust lawsuit.

So in both cases, I think we can agree Nintendo and Microsoft lost those respective cases, though technically Nintendo just avoided having theirs go to court, and Microsoft reached a settlement before things could proceed further.
 

BroodCorp

Veteran
Icon Extra
28 May 2023
893
677
No, they're right. In the '80s, Nintendo locked virtually every major Japanese 3P into exclusivity deals. They could make games ONLY for Nintendo's own consoles. No one else. Not Sega, not NEC, no one.

They also limited the amount of games a 3P could publish on their systems per year. This is why some Japanese publishers made spinoff subsidiaries, so that they could circumvent the publication limit. The exclusivity stuff is also why some like Namco made Namcot; to skirt around the clauses and make games for rivals like Sega. Hell, it's why Sega had to purchase the license for so many games (especially Japanese ones) early on in Genesis/MegaDrive's life, from companies like Capcom (Strider), reprogramming them in-house too.

It got so bad Nintendo got hit with an antitrust lawsuit in 1990/1991 in America...and lost the lawsuit. Even Microsoft hasn't quite had that happen yet, though they're fast on their way to try making it a reality.
Comparing the two companies, Microsoft is a particularly American staple so I can see a world where any shady business moves are looked upon more softly than a Nintendo or even Sony.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Would_you_kindly

Fenton

Veteran
22 Feb 2023
1,187
2,734
Jizz will defend his fellow bots, but they will never change

F6bXWHaWsAAiQJB
 

Eggman

Well-known member
12 Apr 2023
347
865
Jizz will defend his fellow bots, but they will never change

F6bXWHaWsAAiQJB

They found their narrative to defend what Phil said, they are pretending all he said was "it would be cool to own Nintendo" when in reality they are envisioning and planning a future where they do literally own them while they "play the long game" and claim Microsoft know what's best for Nintendo and that is being owned by Microsoft and their games are no longer on their own hardware since that is their "future" according to Phil.

While ignoring Microsoft's clear intentions to buy up the game industry
 

Zeno

Member
28 Jun 2023
71
117
I also noticed a few hours after the news leaked that the current defending take "Of course as a company you would like to buy Nintendo, duhhh, who wouldn't?" has increased substantially.
In the beginning, even on resetera I mainly read concern and people critizising/making fun of Microsoft, I feel like the sentiment has shifted a bit.

And that post from IGNs favorite Xbox Fanboy Destin shows exactly how weak that excuse is.

We are not talking about "smart investments" here. These are industry changing, incredibly monopolistic goals that Microsoft has. People and fans are rightfully enraged. It's not about "Ohh but Microsoft knows it's unrealistic to get them at the moment and also this was 3 years back". It's about what Microsoft actively sets out to do.

These are not brainstorming sessing where Nintendos name just randomly dropped.
 

Vertigo

Did you show the Darkness what Light can do?
26 Jun 2022
5,541
5,006
Phil still posing as a competent exec while overseeing the destruction of Xbox’s entire game division and worst generation so far. That’s what he is… a poser.

100% chance that if he were to ever ask anyone at Nintendo they’d laugh in his face and get an order of protection with a minimum distance of 3,000 miles.