Support NeoGAF

[Vagswarm]

So that's why Phil was praising Nintendo for being "sacred", when it was MS who was trying to destroy Nintendo's reputation during the Xbox | Gamecube era.

 

[Boy bawang]

For the record, I still don't believe it's coming. But there's definitely a scenario where I can see this deal as a win win situation, if Microsoft shares some of the profits with Nintendo and brings new games to the system.
Both companies are in for the money, and Nintendo may be less and less the protective and conservative they used to be. Which is a good thing.

 

[prinz_valium]

Lol MS wanting to give 30% cut to Nintendo? Didn’t you watched the Apple vs Epic lawsuit
Sidekick MS was very angry at those 30% Apple cut

MS is not allowed on IOS. That's the issue.
MS has no issue to pay Apple 30% if the customer decides to pay via IAP on IOS, if they can also just use their existing payment option via Microsoft.

That's exactly what Microsoft is doing with Microsoft 365 subs on IOS.

 

[Topher]

If this happens. My guess is.

Xcloud only.
Either indie games switch has wont be on it. Or Nintendo figures people will buy them if they like them.

This gives Microsoft more subs.
It let's nintendo have halo,forza and gears on the switch.

Win win.

No way its straight gamepass. I can't see Microsoft making switch ports mandatory for a game being on gamepass.

Exactly. It has to be xCloud only if there is anything to this at all. If so, I wonder if this is going to be a new pricing tier for xCloud. I can't imagine Microsoft is going to try and make Switch owner pay for Game Pass Ultimate just for xCloud as that is the only current way to get it.

 

[Cyberpunkd]

I have GPU paid till summer 2023 and I sold my XBX. I have Switch though….

 

[yurinka]

Looking at the xCloud streaming quality experience on PC using ethernet and a good fiber connection, good luck at those expecting something close to a playable experience on Switch using that wifi.

Maybe, but drawing Nintendo gamers away from Nintendo games is a bad thing. But if ms allowed Mario and zelda on xbox, it would open up huge potential software sales and eyes on Nintendo games that would offset that loss/risk.

The only reason I can see Nintendo doing this would be in exchange for its games coming to xbox too........otherwise why allow it, its too much give for not enough benefit.......

'If ms allowed Mario and Zelda'... xDDDD

Phil would kill to have Nintendo or Sony games on Xbox, there are zero chances of them rejecting that.

And there are also zero chances of Nintendo wanting to publish their games on other consoles, because success of their consoles are two pillars: their exclusive games and having the portable console market monopoly.

Dozens of millions of people have a Switch as a secondary gaming device to mostly play Nintendo games. If they stop being exclusive, they wouldn't buy Switch, and hardware is key for Nintendo's revenue and profits. So as long as Nintendo keeps performing as they currently do, that will never happen.

Same goes with Sony, with their current strategy they make more money than any other console platform holder ever did, so won't change it. With MLB as exception, won't release their games on other consoles.

Nintendo has zero reasons to expand to other consoles. And even if never will happen in at least a decade or two, but if some day they would expand to other one would be to the market leader that has a huge installbase, not to Xbox. Xbox always has been the 3rd in the market, and this generation their market share will be even smaller because since the console launch all their console exclusive games will be also available on PC day one, and in several cases some Xbox 1st party games will be published on other consoles at launch or after a timed exclusivity. This means less people interested on buying Xbox.

 

[reksveks]

Lol MS wanting to give 30% cut to Nintendo? Didn’t you watched the Apple vs Epic lawsuit
Sidekick MS was very angry at those 30% Apple cut

Microsoft actually probably would have accepted a world where users subscribe off device but their first issue was the different treatment of game streaming app and video streaming app based off some fake concerns about usability and parental guidance.

The xcloud app on ios never had a way to buy in-app transactions or the gamepass ultimate subscription

 

[ZywyPL]

Nintendo has nothing to gain from this. We are in Xbox fantasy land now.

They'd most likely get some sort of cut from subs. And it would be a good/only way to encourage larger audience than just 6-12yo kids. NSW Lite is a perfect on-the-go gaming machine, but there's nothing out there for an older audience.

 

[Zeroing]

Microsoft actually probably would have accepted a world where users subscribe off device but their first issue was the different treatment of game streaming app and video streaming app based off some fake concerns about usability and parental guidance.

The xcloud app on ios never had a way to buy in-app transactions or the gamepass ultimate subscription

Let’s not fool ourselves if they had an App Store they would do it too.
Meanwhile Apple and MS are joining hands to prevent the law of repairability being approved in all states in America!

big corporations doing “business” as usual

 

[Zeroing]

MS is not allowed on IOS. That's the issue.
MS has no issue to pay Apple 30% if the customer decides to pay via IAP on IOS, if they can also just use their existing payment option via Microsoft.

That's exactly what Microsoft is doing with Microsoft 365 subs on IOS.

Yeah poor MS being bullied by evil Apple.

both companies are the same. And fact MS did go on public criticizing the Apple 30% cut, so yeah they have an issue

 

[THE DUCK]

Looking at the xCloud streaming quality experience on PC using ethernet and a good fiber connection, good luck at those expecting something close to a playable experience on Switch using that wifi.


'If ms allowed Mario and Zelda'... xDDDD

Phil would kill to have Nintendo or Sony games on Xbox, there are zero chances of them rejecting that.

And there are also zero chances of Nintendo wanting to publish their games on other consoles, because success of their consoles are two pillars: their exclusive games and having the portable console market monopoly.

Dozens of millions of people have a Switch as a secondary gaming device to mostly play Nintendo games. If they stop being exclusive, they wouldn't buy Switch, and hardware is key for Nintendo's revenue and profits. So as long as Nintendo keeps performing as they currently do, that will never happen.

Same goes with Sony, with their current strategy they make more money than any other console platform holder ever did, so won't change it. With MLB as exception, won't release their games on other consoles.

You said it yourself, switch is being bought as a secondary console and for portable use.
So it stands to reason Nintendo would love to tap into the dedicated TV console market too.
If the deal was sweet enough, who knows. Both Nintendo and ms are trying to position themselves as software companies first, a swap of games would go towards this.

Now, do I think its likely Nintendo would do this? No, but every once and a while they do something really shocking........I mean as much as Nintendo exclusives mean to switch, imagine a boatload more from ms and exclusives to ms in exchange. It could, potentially position the two companies as a real threat. (As if they weren't already......)
Who knows, it's even more crazy to me for Nintendo to allow game pass just for cash.....

 

[yurinka]

You said it yourself, switch is being bought as a secondary console and for portable use.
So it stands to reason Nintendo would love to tap into the dedicated TV console market too.
If the deal was sweet enough, who knows. Both Nintendo and ms are trying to position themselves as software companies first, a swap of games would go towards this.

Now, do I think its likely Nintendo would do this? No, but every once and a while they do something really shocking........I mean as much as Nintendo exclusives mean to switch, imagine a boatload more from ms and exclusives to ms in exchange. It could, potentially position the two companies as a real threat. (As if they weren't already......)
Who knows, it's even more crazy to me for Nintendo to allow game pass just for cash.....

As I remember Nintendo got more than half of its revenue from hardware and they have been expanding to toys, movies and even theme parks. So no, they aren't a sofware first company.

And no, to publish their games on a tiny market like Xbox would add nothing to Nintendo, and same goes with having an unplayable streaming service on their console.

At its life cycle point Switch is the best selling console ever, don't need to tap anything. They are more than fine with their Nintendo exclusives + portable indies machine approach and don't need MS for anything.

Nintendo and Sony are super successful with their own platforms and don't need MS games or Gamepass for anything, specially if Gamepass competes against their current or future similar service and devaluates the indies being sold on their platform. But if MS wants to sell their games on Sony or Nintendo consoles as another 3rd party more, that will be ok for them.

All 3 console platform holders would welcome the 1st party games from the other companies being published on their consoles. But MS is the only one interested on going 3rd party, because its console market share will be smaller and smaller and their gaming division costs get bigger and bigger.

 

[THE DUCK]

As I remember Nintendo got more than half of its revenue from hardware and they have been expanding to toys, movies and even theme parks. So no, they aren't a sofware first company.

And no, to publish their games on a tiny market like Xbox would add nothing to Nintendo, and same goes with having an unplayable streaming service on their console.

At its life cycle point Switch is the best selling console ever, don't need to tap anything. They are more than fine with their Nintendo exclusives + portable indies machine approach and don't need MS for anything.

Half its revenue from hardware, all of its profit from software. Toys, movies and games just opens up more if they have a broader/larger audience.

Xbox is not a tiny audience, it's 50 million xbox one gamers, plus whatever series x/s has.
I dont think xbox streaming does much for them either, but actual games would from another 30 studios.......
Everyone keeps assuming gamepass via cloud, I wouldn't, its not that hard to port over halo, forza, etc.......

Agreed, Nintendo doesn't appear to need ms, they are selling well, profitable, etc.
But they are a wildcard. And the bones of companies who were on top who did nothing to change over time is a reason for them to at least consider changes. Perhaps they are thinking ahead even further.....

 

[jufonuk]

If it happens I’m gonna get game pass. I hope the 360 arcade games get ported direct to switch. The later ones are on the cloud. Would love some Alan wake on the switch. Can love and hope. But if it does happen will be a massive win for both parties.

Then in a turn of events no one seems coming. Nintendo buys out Microsoft.

 

[prinz_valium]

Yeah poor MS being bullied by evil Apple.

both companies are the same. And fact MS did go on public criticizing the Apple 30% cut, so yeah they have an issue

Read the transcripts. MS never criticized the 30% cut. Neither Epic.

 

[Clear]

You do realize that it'd be entirely plausible and precedented for Nintendo to laugh a suggestion like this out of the room!

No comment seems about right to me.

 

[yurinka]

Half its revenue from hardware, all of its profit from software. Toys, movies and games just opens up more if they have a broader/larger audience.

Are you kidding me? These insanely overpriced hardware, accesories and toys are obviously profitable. Same goes with licensing their IPs to make movies, clothes or theme parks using them.

Everyone keeps assuming gamepass via cloud, I wouldn't, its not that hard to port over halo, forza, etc.......

Everyone keeps assuming that because it's 100% unrealistic to expect them trying to port a lot of old games to Switch or to downport to Switch their future next gen only games. Most 3rd parties don't waste their time on Switch downports because they traditionally suck, require a lot of work and people prefer to buy them on their primary gaming machine, where the game looks better, so in most cases aren't profitable.

Sure, in the future they may release a few more games as they did in the past with Doom or Ori when they see fit. But that's all unless MS decides to make a Sega and abandon Xbox to fo full 3rd party (something I see likely for the next gen after Series X, but not now that they recently released Series X and S).

 

[Woopah]

They'd most likely get some sort of cut from subs. And it would be a good/only way to encourage larger audience than just 6-12yo kids. NSW Lite is a perfect on-the-go gaming machine, but there's nothing out there for an older audience.

Nintendo want as many games as possible on their platform but they don't have an issue appealing to older audiences. Switch isn't going to sell 130 million + on just 6-12 year olds.

 

[sublimit]

Meanwhile over at Nintendo:

 

[Sybb]

As a Nintendo fan, the only game I want on Nintendo from Microsoft is Rare Replay. Would buy a pass only for that game. Anyone else?

 

[Interfectum]

They'd most likely get some sort of cut from subs. And it would be a good/only way to encourage larger audience than just 6-12yo kids. NSW Lite is a perfect on-the-go gaming machine, but there's nothing out there for an older audience.

They are selling Switch as fast as they can make them and they can serve an older audience with Pro hardware. Game Pass literally does nothing for Nintendo and hurts their digital ecosystem long term. It’s not happening.

The absolute best case for Game Pass fans is they don’t block game streaming with some new Switch browser update.

 

[yurinka]

Nintendo want as many games as possible on their platform but they don't have an issue appealing to older audiences. Switch isn't going to sell 130 million + on just 6-12 year olds.

The demographics of the Switch users are mostly the same ones as the Xbox and PS. Kids stopped being the primary Nintendo audience in the late 90s.

Kids today prefer to play mobile games, Roblox, Minecraft or Fortnite. The ones who play Nintendo games are because their parents (typically the father) are Nintendo fans.

 

[ZywyPL]

They are selling Switch as fast as they can make them and they can serve an older audience with Pro hardware. Game Pass literally does nothing for Nintendo and hurts their digital ecosystem long term. It’s not happening.

The absolute best case for Game Pass fans is they don’t block game streaming with some new Switch browser update.

More money never hurt nobody, you don't know what Nintendos abitions are. If GP can boost NSW lifetime sales by additional 20-30M units plus orovide extra monthly income without doing anything at all, that's what they'll do.

 

[Impotaku]

I don't think nintendo needs peasantpass coming to switch, they are doing more than ok on their own.

 

[MarkMe2525]

"Satan declined to comment when asked about hell freezing over."

 

[Billbofet]

I don't see why Nintendo wouldn't do this, but they won't. I can't imagine their eShop aside from high profile Indies and exclusives does too well. The eShop is a mess. I would love this but know it is unlikely.

 

[NewYork214]

I don't get how it would work from a financial point. There is no way Microsoft is making any money on gamepass when they are pretty much giving it away. They must be losing money on paying the developers as it is. And then they will have to give nintendo a cut of subscriptions on switchs version. Eventually they are gonna jack up the price on the service, they have to.

I'm probably missing something here.

 

[6502]

After Nintendo's decline of online services I expect no more than Microsoft providing the infrastructure to allow streaming of n64 roms. With 1 new game per month. 5 free nes games you already bought 6 times to early adopters when they drop the price from £20 to £10.

 

[Kumomeme]

this doesnt necessary sounds positive..

 

[THE DUCK]

Are you kidding me? These insanely overpriced hardware, accesories and toys are obviously profitable. Same goes with licensing their IPs to make movies, clothes or theme parks using them.


Everyone keeps assuming that because it's 100% unrealistic to expect them trying to port a lot of old games to Switch or to downport to Switch their future next gen only games. Most 3rd parties don't waste their time on Switch downports because they traditionally suck, require a lot of work and people prefer to buy them on their primary gaming machine, where the game looks better, so in most cases aren't profitable.

Sure, in the future they may release a few more games as they did in the past with Doom or Ori when they see fit. But that's all unless MS decides to make a Sega and abandon Xbox to fo full 3rd party (something I see likely for the next gen after Series X, but not now that they recently released Series X and S).

You seriously think the biggest percentage of thier profit comes from hardware when that hasn't been the case for any game manufacturer fir 40 years? Mario kart and animal crossing sold 32 million copies each, do the math, that's pretty much pure profit, they probably broke even on dev costs at 5 million or less. That's almost 2 billion in profit right there on 2 games.

Downporting games to Switch isn't hard or costly, with today's development tools. Ms could literally outsource all of it to 2 or 3 smaller developers. They don't need to become full third party to do this partnership.

 

[yurinka]

You seriously think the biggest percentage of thier profit comes from hardware when that hasn't been the case for any game manufacturer fir 40 years?

As I remember there was a recent graph here in Gaf coming from Nintendo IR numbers that shown their hardware and software split (not sure if revenue/sales or profit, I'd bet revenue) and the hardware one was bigger.

Next to it there was the same graph from Sony, and in their case the software portion of the chart was way bigger than the software part, and also bigger than the Nintendo one.

The lesson from that comparision was that hardware is a way bigger part of Nintendo's business than in Sony's case.

Downporting games to Switch isn't hard or costly, with today's development tools. Ms could literally outsource all of it to 2 or 3 smaller developers. They don't need to become full third party to do this partnership.

In this case, if downporting AAA games to Switch is easy, cheap and profitable please tell me why almost nobody downport their AAA games to Switch. If that would be true not only MS, but all 3rd party AAA publisher would downport all their AAA games to Switch.

And they only downported a few games, and many of the ones who did it stopped doing it after trying.

 

[reinking]

So we are going to do this to ourselves again? Hype it up based on something someone didn't say?

I do not think it is impossible but we are talking about Nintendo. Traditionally one of the most secret companies in video gaming. On top of that, they have never focused on the online presence in gaming. They are the ones that are going to open up their platform to a competitor for a game streaming service? Eh. guess we will see.

 

[Rob_27]

I've got a switch lite foes that do 5ghz wifi. Hope so as this is the perfect device to run it on. Maybe a bigger screen but nice size.

 

[John Wick]

It's going to be really hard to run native Switch (base console) code of Xbox first party.

Probably it's only xCloud? Like how some new titles recently have released on the Switch, like RE7, Hitman 3, Control etc?

It's a stupid title. It's clearly streaming which really won't interest many.

 

[Kerotan]

Why would Nintendo agree to have a competitors subscription service on its device?

The Switch is selling just fine. Nintendo would also jeopardize their "full price forever" sale of games.

Would there really be more people who would buy a Switch if GamePass is allowed, considering that Microsoft is poised to release a streaming stick and TV apps?

People can keep dreaming I guess.

Nintendo are making more profits then ever same as Sony. Why give Microsoft the lifeline they desperately need. They're probably only willing to allow xcloud if MS pay silly money.

 

[martino]

most of the time fucking nothing is just fucking nothing.

 

[THE DUCK]

As I remember there was a recent graph here in Gaf coming from Nintendo IR numbers that shown their hardware and software split (not sure if revenue/sales or profit, I'd bet revenue) and the hardware one was bigger.

Next to it there was the same graph from Sony, and in their case the software portion of the chart was way bigger than the software part, and also bigger than the Nintendo one.

The lesson from that comparision was that hardware is a way bigger part of Nintendo's business than in Sony's case.


In this case, if downporting AAA games to Switch is easy, cheap and profitable please tell me why almost nobody downport their AAA games to Switch. If that would be true not only MS, but all 3rd party AAA publisher would downport all their AAA games to Switch.

And they only downported a few games, and many of the ones who did it stopped doing it after trying.

The only.lesson that you can take from that is that they have a large dollar value for sales, it tells you zero about profit.

There are actually quite a few games with switch downports. But anyway, easy or moderate, you have to agree, it would 100% percent be worth ms time and money if the return favor was nintendo games on xbox, plus increased exposure / sales for game pass.

 

[Kokoloko85]

So that's why Phil was praising Nintendo for being "sacred", when it was MS who was trying to destroy Nintendo's reputation during the Xbox | Gamecube era.

Thats typical Mr passive aggressive Phil Spencer for you

 

[Interfectum]

 

[BlackTron]

The only reason I can see Nintendo doing this would be in exchange for its games coming to xbox too........otherwise why allow it, its too much give for not enough benefit.......

Nintendo does not want their games on Xbox. In fact, Nintendo wouldn't put a game on Xbox no matter how much money MSFT offered them. So this is not much of a bargaining chip.

 

[Victor Omega]

Even if...What on earth does Nintendo get in return?

Please don't come and say "better online" or "game that wouldn't physically run on the hardware".

"While others are memorized by diamonds," Nintendo "sits on them as sports".

Microsoft has no IP, no franchise that would benefit Nintendo for a measly cameo.

 

[THE DUCK]

Well since nothing was announced today, maybe it's just some random MS game on switch, or they had to agree to allow Nintendo to announce it.......whatever it is.

I have say it since you said it MegaZoneEX, Nintendo could really learn how to run an online gaming service from MS (since Nintendo online is pathetic in almost every single way imaginable), but doubtful any of this is what that is about.

 

[blacktout]

Even if...What on earth does Nintendo get in return?

Presumably a share of the Game Pass revenue for Switch subscribers. I think that's probably the only real consideration here: Would Nintendo's cut of GP revenue be greater than the money they'll potentially lose from Switch owners who end up deciding not to buy a new game physically or via the eShop because there's something on Game Pass they'd rather play? I don't think there's an easy way for them to know the answer to this hypothetical, since there's no real precedent for a deal like this. GP could have essentially no impact on software sales, or a massive impact, or something in between (like hurting third party software sales—which Nintendo still gets a cut of—while having a nominal impact on first party sales). This is probably why we've been hearing rumors about these negotiations since like 2018. It's a complicated problem with a lot of unknowns, even if your sole goal is to maximize your profits.

Well since nothing was announced today, maybe it's just some random MS game on switch, or they had to agree to allow Nintendo to announce it.......whatever it is.

The rumor—and god knows these rumors are wrong just as often as they're right—was that the deal would be announced in the fall, not at E3. So maybe it'll show up in the September Direct. (Or maybe it'll never materialize at all.)

 

[Three]

It's not happening and the reason he declined to comment is because the stupid mystery or possibility of it builds more hype for their product than a simple no. Much like buying sega on a Wednesday.

 

[Yselacrey00]

It's going to be really hard to run native Switch (base console) code of Xbox first party.

Probably it's only xCloud? Like how some new titles recently have released on the Switch, like RE7, Hitman 3, Control etc?

Of course it would be only xcloud. Native games don't make sense at all.

 

[Majukun]

not sure how it would work though

 

[UltimaKilo]

They need to figure out what it would take for Nintendo to agree to it, and it would likely be quite a lot. An ownership stake in Microsoft, upwards of a billion dollars in cash? I’m sure it would take something crazy, but Nintendo has the upper hand here. This could be huge for Microsoft.