radioheadrule83
Banned
The guy has gone way over the top, but to say the media doesn't unwittingly misinform about the current state of Nintendo isn't a wild accusation.
Some of it is Nintendos fault. Remember the spec sheet debacle before Gamecube launched? I've never seen a bigger mess than all those mainstream news articles pitting MS/Sonys theoretical numbers against Nintendos conservative numbers. Talk about killing your own hype.
More common than anything like that though, is the doom and gloom stories. They forget that GCs tie is at about 8+ or something now, and I wager a fuckload of that software is Nintendos own. If Nintendo relied on third parties more, their 2+ million userbase defecit to Microsoft and poorer third party support would perhaps make things as bad as they say... but why is it everybody forgets Nintendo is up there with EA in the software publisher stakes, even though they're exclusive to their own hardware?
Further -- Nobody ever recognises in mainstream reports that Nintendo have been the only hardware manufacturer this generation that consistently posted huge profits year on year when compared with other gaming depts of competing companies (Microsoft H&E, SCE). Hopefully nobody doubted that the Microsoft and Sony ventures would make money in the end, or that those companies could cope with it... but its something when Nintendo has never had to worry about haemoragging resources, and at worst case, posting fluctuating amounts of profit.
Theres some sort of double standard where periods of non-profit (aka loss) is okay if you're Sony and Microsoft. The perspective then is that its an investment. Bottom line concious Nintendo is treated differently... a 21% drop in profit (which is still profit) becomes a huge story on Gamespot, or sensationally worded by Reuters at the source. Not all sites managed to put it in context and mention the fluctuating capital they have the yen to thank for. Nor do any of them take into consideration that recently Nintendo has been selling three different platforms, all successful enough (not necessarily 'successful' in relative terms) to make money. They've launched a new version of GBA, a totally new handheld (DS) console, an online network, and they've been deep in revolution R&D. Instead they merely take stock of Nintendos dominance in the handheld field and that its got the first real competition ever. Omitting detail makes it read better I guess. I suppose they expected profits to go up?
They're not Microsoft, they're not Sony... and now they're not even trying to be like them either. But they're certainly not doomed. That was probably the motive for the story... unfortunately (like many Nintendo fans can) its over-egged things, and riled the usual Nintendo detractors, and fans of the other systems to boot. I wonder if he really thought such an article would have any effect?
Some of it is Nintendos fault. Remember the spec sheet debacle before Gamecube launched? I've never seen a bigger mess than all those mainstream news articles pitting MS/Sonys theoretical numbers against Nintendos conservative numbers. Talk about killing your own hype.
More common than anything like that though, is the doom and gloom stories. They forget that GCs tie is at about 8+ or something now, and I wager a fuckload of that software is Nintendos own. If Nintendo relied on third parties more, their 2+ million userbase defecit to Microsoft and poorer third party support would perhaps make things as bad as they say... but why is it everybody forgets Nintendo is up there with EA in the software publisher stakes, even though they're exclusive to their own hardware?
Further -- Nobody ever recognises in mainstream reports that Nintendo have been the only hardware manufacturer this generation that consistently posted huge profits year on year when compared with other gaming depts of competing companies (Microsoft H&E, SCE). Hopefully nobody doubted that the Microsoft and Sony ventures would make money in the end, or that those companies could cope with it... but its something when Nintendo has never had to worry about haemoragging resources, and at worst case, posting fluctuating amounts of profit.
Theres some sort of double standard where periods of non-profit (aka loss) is okay if you're Sony and Microsoft. The perspective then is that its an investment. Bottom line concious Nintendo is treated differently... a 21% drop in profit (which is still profit) becomes a huge story on Gamespot, or sensationally worded by Reuters at the source. Not all sites managed to put it in context and mention the fluctuating capital they have the yen to thank for. Nor do any of them take into consideration that recently Nintendo has been selling three different platforms, all successful enough (not necessarily 'successful' in relative terms) to make money. They've launched a new version of GBA, a totally new handheld (DS) console, an online network, and they've been deep in revolution R&D. Instead they merely take stock of Nintendos dominance in the handheld field and that its got the first real competition ever. Omitting detail makes it read better I guess. I suppose they expected profits to go up?
They're not Microsoft, they're not Sony... and now they're not even trying to be like them either. But they're certainly not doomed. That was probably the motive for the story... unfortunately (like many Nintendo fans can) its over-egged things, and riled the usual Nintendo detractors, and fans of the other systems to boot. I wonder if he really thought such an article would have any effect?
