The midnight launch of the Wii U is a perfect time to reflect on the craze, six years ago, surrounding its predecessor, and the industry-transforming success of the Wii. And there really is no finer story you could read about that than what Rob Crossley has written for CVG.
Microsoft and Sony both had their shots at acquiring the motion control technology that would make their consoles second- and-third place to Nintendo. Had either done so, it could have been the end of console making for Nintendo, whose GameCube was in dire straits.
40°
30°
30°
40°
Ad 
40°
I......you....just read what you type...Do you think exec's at Sony are going to say "Oh hey man im sorry we didn't back up your idea, here is a coupon for a Sony TV and cookies on the way out"?
Come on!! Don't be such a fanboy, please. Get real.
Quote from Tom Quinn about his meeting with Microsoft's Xbox division: "But the meeting went terribly. The attitude I got from them was that if they wanted to do motion control, they would do it themselves and make a better job of it. I mean, they were just rude. In fact, the meeting went so terribly that one of the executives came over to me afterwards and apologized on behalf of others. I remember him saying how this was not how Microsoft should be engaging with potential partners."
If you can put your bias aside for a minute, you'll quickly realize that the vast majority of companies in this business cares about money first and foremost, not about the people.
http://www.computerandvideo...
Quote: "We were in a tiny little room with a big PC projector and Kutaragi comes in, introduces himself, sits down and - I swear this is true - he closed his eyes the moment I started showing my pitch. He never opened them until I had finished.
It was awkward, very awkward, but I still asked him for feedback and he said, 'well, can you produce this for 50 cents?'"
That's not letting someone down easy no matter how you look at it. Microsoft wasn't much nicer to this guy, but then again all companies has acted douchey at some point.
Oh silly me, I forgot. Nintendo is the inventor of all, if they fall they take every genre with them since they created everything.
Oh my god I'm scared, how would Sony/I/everyone live on!! Think of the children!!! Because only Nintendo offers different genre games, but last I check, it was Zelda, Mario, metroid and some jrpgs. But oh my god Sony!! The company who introduce a few new genres like "create, play, share".
Really dude you'll be playing games a lot less because they're mostly shooters or because you don't own other consoles? Especially a ps3?
Honestly, i couldn't care less. I used to love Nintendo but now i'm 26 and the lack of mature games has turned me away along with motion controls.
SEGA is a third party developer now. that's how they can get Sonic games on playstation and xbox.
If Nintendo leaves, then every IP owned by Nintendo leaves the gaming world forever.
That is a big deal even if you don't like Nintendo anymore.
Lets hope Mario will not join Mr. Twinkie.
But I wouldn't want Nintendo to go out of business because of one console I didn't like, I loved my Gamecube, N64, SNES and NES I've had great fun with them and gaming just wouldn't of been the same without them.
I hope Nintendo and Sony are around for a long time because for me personally they bring the best gaming experiences and have been doing for a long time now.
Still, the console was well worth it imo for Nintendo games (skyward sword, metroid prime 3, brawl, galaxy 1 & 2, kart, kirby, dk county, a few others) and the small amount of quality 3rd party games (xenoblade especially.. my favorite jrpg of all time)
Definitely do not want to see Nintendo ever exit the games industry, and even if the lack of 3rd party AAA titles continues I'll still end up buying their systems if they keep making such great games.
Anyone else have a really rough time trying to make sense of that title? It's like a mixture of time tenses or something... "could have killed" to me implies past and "would save Nintendo" seems like an event that could take place in the future but the author is implying that Nintendo was already saved by the Wii. Maybe it's proper and I've just not seen much of this before. It's like saying (don't read this if you haven't seen season 4 of Dexter because I'm going to use that as an example) Dexter could have killed Trinity before he would kill Rita. I wouldn't say that. Should I say that? I would say Dexter could have killed Trinity before he killed Rita. Actually I'd put a few more words into it to add more clarity, Dexter could have killed Trinity long before Trinity had the chance to kill Rita. But should I just be saying Dexter could have killed Trinity before he would kill Rita?
ANYWAYS, I am maybe a bit too focused on this and should just go to bed.