A reason to hate Iwata (BIG NEWS)

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"][QUOTE="Maxned"][QUOTE="Jaysonguy"][QUOTE="Maxned"][QUOTE="m_machine024"][QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

I love it and support him 100%

Shame on you who want Nintendo to back down

Hooray Iwata!!!

Does Nintendo own everyone this gen?

This keeps them there

I love it!

Maxned

Seriously... I dont care if Microsoft has it... why would we care if we get to play the game. Anyways, if they were brought to the the 360, then twice as many people can experience those wonderful classics.

Great, you be Switzerland, try to see the best on the Allies and the Axis

There's a reason why console sales are called wars

And thats the reason you're a fanboy.

No I understand it's a business, it's a fight, you don't stop hitting just because someone is on the mat

You want people to all shake hands and go out to dinner, that doesn't happen in the real world

You want to play it like it's a 4 year old's soccer game where goals don't count and "we're all here to have fun" be my guest, just know that nothing in the world operates like that

Listen, I've been a nintendo fan all my life but I also respect other consoles. There is no war here.. its just games. Come on...

And I havent played the best third party games in about 5 years.

So, because we don't "hate Iwata" that immediately means that we aren't upset or confused by the decision he made? Just because we're not acting like this is the end of the world, we're "fanboys"?

We're looking at it from Nintendo's point of view. Iwata had some reason why he thought it was a better decision. Meanwhile, you're wearing your emotions on your sleeve, and nothing logical ever comes out of that.

It's obvious that you're just mad because you're not going to get to play a few old games. If it really bothers you so much that you can't play the games, go online and buy an N64 for cheap and the few games that you want.

I mean, it's not like they're changing anything about the games. In fact, because there is no N64 controller support on the Wii the controls are not going to be the way they were meant to be, so the 64 is actually the better way to go.

Please research what you're talking about next timeJaysonguy

Please explain what i said that was incorrect?

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]Please research what you're talking about next timecolonel_beeb

Please explain what i said that was incorrect?

Everything? Like almost down to each individual word?

You want Nintendo to be a little dictator when it comes to games

You think "shovelware" is actually selling

You think that all low (professionally) rated games are bad and people aren't enjoying them

It's an argument that's been tried here, a lot. And has fallen down hard each time.

Correct me if I'm wrong, hasn't Conker's bad fur day been remade for the Xbox already? If that is true, why would they need Nintendo's permission to bring Goldeneye and other RARE games. Jakendo

Yes, but I think there are a couple of differences:

1) The game didn't have the enormous following that Goldeneye did. Less interest equals less sales for Xbox.

2) I don't think Nintendo was very proud of that game. It's too "Adult" for their image.

[QUOTE="Maxned"][QUOTE="Jaysonguy"][QUOTE="Maxned"][QUOTE="Jaysonguy"][QUOTE="Maxned"]

Seriously... I dont care if Microsoft has it... why would we care if we get to play the game. Anyways, if they were brought to the the 360, then twice as many people can experience those wonderful classics.

ag1052

Great, you be Switzerland, try to see the best on the Allies and the Axis

There's a reason why console sales are called wars

And thats the reason you're a fanboy.

No I understand it's a business, it's a fight, you don't stop hitting just because someone is on the mat

You want people to all shake hands and go out to dinner, that doesn't happen in the real world

You want to play it like it's a 4 year old's soccer game where goals don't count and "we're all here to have fun" be my guest, just know that nothing in the world operates like that

Listen, I've been a nintendo fan all my life but I also respect other consoles. There is no war here.. its just games. Come on...

And I havent played the best third party games in about 5 years.

Not funny. And people here who are saying that we should NOT have gotten Banjo, Perfect Dark, Goldeneye, and DK64 should actually get a job in the video game business if they want to discuss that its good for business. You're a gamer, not a Nintendo representative.

I think this is still in rumour stage, but if it turns out to be true, then Iwata has a damn strong sense of integrity.bob_newman

What does this have to do with integrity?

[QUOTE="Jakendo"]Correct me if I'm wrong, hasn't Conker's bad fur day been remade for the Xbox already? If that is true, why would they need Nintendo's permission to bring Goldeneye and other RARE games. bob_newman

Yes, but I think there are a couple of differences:

1) The game didn't have the enormous following that Goldeneye did. Less interest equals less sales for Xbox.

2) I don't think Nintendo was very proud of that game. It's too "Adult" for their image.

And Nintendo just decided not to do anything about it? Its confusing because they already have one of Rare games that was on the Nintendo 64 and it didnt create any problems, so why does Microsoft and Rare (assuming that this rumor is true) decide to play it safe and ask Nintendo's permission first? This sounds bogus to me...

Not funny. And people here who are saying that we should NOT have gotten Banjo, Perfect Dark, Goldeneye, and DK64 should actually get a job in the video game business if they want to discuss that its good for business. You're a gamer, not a Nintendo representative.

Maxned

Nintendo owns Donkey Kong. Rare devoloped the Donkey Kong Country games, and they are on the VC. DK64 could be placed on the VC if Nintendo wanted to.

[QUOTE="Maxned"]

Not funny. And people here who are saying that we should NOT have gotten Banjo, Perfect Dark, Goldeneye, and DK64 should actually get a job in the video game business if they want to discuss that its good for business. You're a gamer, not a Nintendo representative.

Jakendo

Nintendo owns Donkey Kong. Rare devoloped the Donkey Kong Country games, and they are on the VC. DK64 could be placed on the VC if Nintendo wanted to.

Really? Awesome. Whats taking them so long then.. I dont really care about 9/10 of the games on the VC

That would've been great if the Goldeneye and Perfect Dark games would be added online funtionality and graphical improvement like the 360 version(including voice chat), while still having the option to play the game like it was back then. Otherwise I don't see how Nintendo and we win, so basically we would've been getting ANOTHER watered down port of a game we ORIGINALY and EXCLUSIVELY had while the others are laughing their asses off with a greatly improved version.

Thank you Iwata, you're very smart. Trust me I used to play this godly game back then when it originaly came out and it's not fair that after waiting so long we get the worst version of a game I used to shove on the faces on my friends because only I had it. Only people that just started playing this gen or last gen(i.e Reggie Fils Aime) see this deal working of because they won't feel the nostalgia this game carries.

[QUOTE="Jakendo"][QUOTE="Maxned"]

Not funny. And people here who are saying that we should NOT have gotten Banjo, Perfect Dark, Goldeneye, and DK64 should actually get a job in the video game business if they want to discuss that its good for business. You're a gamer, not a Nintendo representative.

Maxned

Nintendo owns Donkey Kong. Rare devoloped the Donkey Kong Country games, and they are on the VC. DK64 could be placed on the VC if Nintendo wanted to.

Really? Awesome. Whats taking them so long then.. I dont really care about 9/10 of the games on the VC

I'm not sure what is taking them so long. DK64 required an expansion pack so that might cause problems.

[QUOTE="Maxned"][QUOTE="Jakendo"][QUOTE="Maxned"]

Not funny. And people here who are saying that we should NOT have gotten Banjo, Perfect Dark, Goldeneye, and DK64 should actually get a job in the video game business if they want to discuss that its good for business. You're a gamer, not a Nintendo representative.

Jakendo

Nintendo owns Donkey Kong. Rare devoloped the Donkey Kong Country games, and they are on the VC. DK64 could be placed on the VC if Nintendo wanted to.

Really? Awesome. Whats taking them so long then.. I dont really care about 9/10 of the games on the VC

I'm not sure what is taking them so long. DK64 required an expansion pack so that might cause problems.

Cause problems? The expansion pack only added 4 MB of RAM to the console, when the Wii has the N64's memory(10MB) AND the expansion pack(4MB), 10 times more than that.

I agree with Iwata on this. Financially, of course it's a good plan for Nintendo to not let some of their golden games from the N64 go to the XBLA. Secondly, as a Nintendo fanboy, I don't want them there either. Games like Banjo Kazooie and GoldenEye and other RARE N64 games helped make that system as great as it was and they have absolutely no business popping up on the 360. I'm willing to let them be off the VC if it means they're off the 360 as well. I'd rather them be nowhere than be where they don't belong.JAB991

I couldn't have said it better myself.

[QUOTE="ag1052"][QUOTE="Maxned"][QUOTE="Jaysonguy"][QUOTE="Maxned"][QUOTE="Jaysonguy"][QUOTE="Maxned"]

Seriously... I dont care if Microsoft has it... why would we care if we get to play the game. Anyways, if they were brought to the the 360, then twice as many people can experience those wonderful classics.

Maxned

Great, you be Switzerland, try to see the best on the Allies and the Axis

There's a reason why console sales are called wars

And thats the reason you're a fanboy.

No I understand it's a business, it's a fight, you don't stop hitting just because someone is on the mat

You want people to all shake hands and go out to dinner, that doesn't happen in the real world

You want to play it like it's a 4 year old's soccer game where goals don't count and "we're all here to have fun" be my guest, just know that nothing in the world operates like that

Listen, I've been a nintendo fan all my life but I also respect other consoles. There is no war here.. its just games. Come on...

And I havent played the best third party games in about 5 years.

Not funny. And people here who are saying that we should NOT have gotten Banjo, Perfect Dark, Goldeneye, and DK64 should actually get a job in the video game business if they want to discuss that its good for business. You're a gamer, not a Nintendo representative.

[QUOTE="Maxned"][QUOTE="Jakendo"][QUOTE="Maxned"]

Not funny. And people here who are saying that we should NOT have gotten Banjo, Perfect Dark, Goldeneye, and DK64 should actually get a job in the video game business if they want to discuss that its good for business. You're a gamer, not a Nintendo representative.

Jakendo

Nintendo owns Donkey Kong. Rare devoloped the Donkey Kong Country games, and they are on the VC. DK64 could be placed on the VC if Nintendo wanted to.

Really? Awesome. Whats taking them so long then.. I dont really care about 9/10 of the games on the VC

I'm not sure what is taking them so long. DK64 required an expansion pack so that might cause problems.

dude it took them forever to put the donkey kong country trilogy so Im not really surprised

its pretty funny you responded to my very simple post instead of bob's very educated posts... it easy to not seem like you are losing when you pick who your fight against...
ag1052

I dont think insulting him is going to help...

*sighs*we could possibly be getting Banjo Kazooie and maybe even Banjo Threeie

[QUOTE="m_machine024"]

My N64 is broken since long time ago.

I don't see why support this I mean what benefit are you getting from this honestly? Nada. Accepting that deal would be the good decision for us gamers but people care about more Nintendo pride. LOL. Who cares if Goldeneye ends on 360? It's only freakin' one game. No big deal. And gamers will end to enjoy thoses classic.. Pride... lol gimme a break. You people make yourselves look like fanboys thinking about Nintendo more than your own enjoyment. "OMG I love Nintendo sooooo much that I don't care if they threat us bad as long as they have their pride..." LMAO.

Don't take the above too seriously. I just want to play Banjo. >_>

bob_newman

Don't be blind. It's more than Goldeneye. It's about the fact that once Microsoft sees how easy it is to walk over Nintendo they'll start trying to get the rights to all of Nintendo's former exclusive titles, and from there they could start buying Nintendo shares, who knows?

You're not in the business, so you obviously don't know that it's more than just one game here. There's something going on in the background that we're not seeing.

Remember, everything that a company does is about money. When Iwata weighed the outcomes (Which he obviously did. He's not a CEO for nothing), for whatever reason he saw that it was a better idea to go with the decision he did.

Also, this is still just a rumour right now, so nobody knows what happened, if anything.

Still I really hope Banjo come on VC. I kinda overreact cuz of that.

I love it and support him 100%

Shame on you who want Nintendo to back down

Hooray Iwata!!!

Does Nintendo own everyone this gen?

This keeps them there

I love it!

Jaysonguy

Totally agree:D:);)

Im sure there was something bad. Like they would get a cheap remake supervised by MS and then 360 would get a real overhaul.

If they can get assurance that thos game will fully be remade im sure they would have allowed it. As it is i bet there was some major problems.

[QUOTE="bob_newman"]

[QUOTE="Jakendo"]Correct me if I'm wrong, hasn't Conker's bad fur day been remade for the Xbox already? If that is true, why would they need Nintendo's permission to bring Goldeneye and other RARE games. Jakendo

Yes, but I think there are a couple of differences:

1) The game didn't have the enormous following that Goldeneye did. Less interest equals less sales for Xbox.

2) I don't think Nintendo was very proud of that game. It's too "Adult" for their image.

And Nintendo just decided not to do anything about it? Its confusing because they already have one of Rare games that was on the Nintendo 64 and it didnt create any problems, so why does Microsoft and Rare (assuming that this rumor is true) decide to play it safe and ask Nintendo's permission first? This sounds bogus to me...

Nintendo Published and was actively involved in Goldeneye development.

[QUOTE="Maxned"][QUOTE="ag1052"][QUOTE="Maxned"][QUOTE="Jaysonguy"][QUOTE="Maxned"][QUOTE="Jaysonguy"][QUOTE="Maxned"]

Seriously... I dont care if Microsoft has it... why would we care if we get to play the game. Anyways, if they were brought to the the 360, then twice as many people can experience those wonderful classics.

ag1052

Great, you be Switzerland, try to see the best on the Allies and the Axis

There's a reason why console sales are called wars

And thats the reason you're a fanboy.

No I understand it's a business, it's a fight, you don't stop hitting just because someone is on the mat

You want people to all shake hands and go out to dinner, that doesn't happen in the real world

You want to play it like it's a 4 year old's soccer game where goals don't count and "we're all here to have fun" be my guest, just know that nothing in the world operates like that

Listen, I've been a nintendo fan all my life but I also respect other consoles. There is no war here.. its just games. Come on...

And I havent played the best third party games in about 5 years.

Not funny. And people here who are saying that we should NOT have gotten Banjo, Perfect Dark, Goldeneye, and DK64 should actually get a job in the video game business if they want to discuss that its good for business. You're a gamer, not a Nintendo representative.

So.. pretty much your argument is, "HA HA U LOOOSEE I WINZ"

So.. pretty much your argument is, "HA HA U LOOOSEE I WINZ"

Maxned

No my argument wasnt "u lose I win" its that you are only responding to posts that will make it look like you arnt losing...

you had several posts in which you could have chosen to respond too... why you decided to go with the one where I said "yep... 4 year old soccer world..." Im not sure... the only reason I could think of is because you are trying to take the higher ground instead of responding to meaningful posts like my one before that or Bob's post

ok a couple things...

First, what I have already said is we dont know this is true right now and if it is we dont know if we have heard the whole story or not.

Second, Iwata has done so much for gaming... he has made so many good choices over his career shouldnt we give him the benifit of the doubt in a situation such as this. He know what he is doing, he has proven that to us year after year.

Third, The rumor that gonintendo was talking about said part of the rumor was that nintendo doesnt have any real legal way to stop this from being made but just the thought of hurting the relatioship with nintendo was enough to make Activision stop from making it... So even by this still very speculative rumor Iwata just said he doesnt want it to happen, its Activision who actually had the say so one way or the other.

ag1052

So, because we don't "hate Iwata" that immediately means that we aren't upset or confused by the decision he made? Just because we're not acting like this is the end of the world, we're "fanboys"?

We're looking at it from Nintendo's point of view. Iwata had some reason why he thought it was a better decision. Meanwhile, you're wearing your emotions on your sleeve, and nothing logical ever comes out of that.

It's obvious that you're just mad because you're not going to get to play a few old games. If it really bothers you so much that you can't play the games, go online and buy an N64 for cheap and the few games that you want.

I mean, it's not like they're changing anything about the games. In fact, because there is no N64 controller support on the Wii the controls are not going to be the way they were meant to be, so the 64 is actually the better way to go.

bob_newman

these are the posts you should be responding too...

That was really stupid. Nintendo is getting cocky again, and they're going to pay for it again. Remember when Sony was on Nintendo's side, making a peripheral that was going to be able to use CD's for SNES games, and then Nintendo went behind their backs and made a deal with CD-I, resulting in those HORRIFIC "Zelda" titles? Well after that Sony made the Playstation, and what happened? They took over the gaming industry. Then they released the PS2. What happened? They kept control over the gaming industry. Now Nintendo FINALLY has it back, and Iwata is about to screw it up again. *face to palm*Wiifanboy_4life

Learn your history first, then post.

Nintendo cancelled the deal with Sony because Sony was planning on getting all of the profit that the console would make. Sony was going to screw over Nintendo, basically. They made the right choice, they didn't sell out.

[QUOTE="bob_newman"]

[QUOTE="Jakendo"]Correct me if I'm wrong, hasn't Conker's bad fur day been remade for the Xbox already? If that is true, why would they need Nintendo's permission to bring Goldeneye and other RARE games. Jakendo

Yes, but I think there are a couple of differences:

1) The game didn't have the enormous following that Goldeneye did. Less interest equals less sales for Xbox.

2) I don't think Nintendo was very proud of that game. It's too "Adult" for their image.

And Nintendo just decided not to do anything about it? Its confusing because they already have one of Rare games that was on the Nintendo 64 and it didnt create any problems, so why does Microsoft and Rare (assuming that this rumor is true) decide to play it safe and ask Nintendo's permission first? This sounds bogus to me...

Nintendo published Goldeneye. Nintendo did NOT publish Conker's BFD. Conker's BFD was publish by RareWare, and by THQ in Europe.

[QUOTE="Wiifanboy_4life"]That was really stupid. Nintendo is getting cocky again, and they're going to pay for it again. Remember when Sony was on Nintendo's side, making a peripheral that was going to be able to use CD's for SNES games, and then Nintendo went behind their backs and made a deal with CD-I, resulting in those HORRIFIC "Zelda" titles? Well after that Sony made the Playstation, and what happened? They took over the gaming industry. Then they released the PS2. What happened? They kept control over the gaming industry. Now Nintendo FINALLY has it back, and Iwata is about to screw it up again. *face to palm*bob_newman

Learn your history first, then post.

Nintendo cancelled the deal with Sony because Sony was planning on getting all of the profit that the console would make. Sony was going to screw over Nintendo, basically. They made the right choice, they didn't sell out.

Oh... XD G4 said it differently on Icons... Lo Siento.

OK, according to Xbox 360 World Report (a Magazine), Goldeneye was coming to Xbox 360 in mid-2007. However, there was the small matter of Nintendo's approval. Rare and Microsoft representatives talked with Reggie Fils-Aime and Satoru Iwata about the matter. Rare agreed to PORT GOLDENEYE TO WII and also to bring RARE TITLES TO THE VIRTUAL CONSOLE if Nintendo allowed the game to be on the 360.

Fils-Aime agreed, but Iwata did not. He said that he didn't want to see the game on another console.

Ok, so if Iwata agreed to this, we would have gotten:

• Goldeneye Remake on Wii
• Banjo-Kazooie on VC
• Banjo-Tooie on VC
• Donkey Kong 64 on VC
• Perfect Dark on VC
• Goldeneye 007 on VC

WHY WOULD YOU NOT AGREE TO THIS!?!

www.gonintendo.com reported this, aswell as Xbox 360 World Report Magazine

Maxned

Golden eye was alright... I mean it was the best shooter ever when it came out but I wouldn't buy a remake...maybe download the game from VC. Perfect dark might have been okay too but the rest of those games bored me to death.

[QUOTE="bob_newman"]

[QUOTE="Wiifanboy_4life"]That was really stupid. Nintendo is getting cocky again, and they're going to pay for it again. Remember when Sony was on Nintendo's side, making a peripheral that was going to be able to use CD's for SNES games, and then Nintendo went behind their backs and made a deal with CD-I, resulting in those HORRIFIC "Zelda" titles? Well after that Sony made the Playstation, and what happened? They took over the gaming industry. Then they released the PS2. What happened? They kept control over the gaming industry. Now Nintendo FINALLY has it back, and Iwata is about to screw it up again. *face to palm*Wiifanboy_4life

Learn your history first, then post.

Nintendo cancelled the deal with Sony because Sony was planning on getting all of the profit that the console would make. Sony was going to screw over Nintendo, basically. They made the right choice, they didn't sell out.

Oh... XD G4 said it differently on Icons... Lo Siento.

Yeah, the history can be a little fuzzy, but it's pretty well-known.

No need to apologize.

if i had to choose between goldeneye on live arcade and vc id probably pick live arcade!

HD graphics, maybe a few new levels and weapons and online multiplayer with voice chat and leaderboards and all the good stuff!!! versus the game i already own sitting in my closet.....

For a man who said his inspiration for the wii was to make gaming accessible to everybody, this is awfully contradictory. It's not like people are going to purchase 360s just because online-enabled Goldeneye is on XBL. This isn't competition. Everybody knows that what made Goldeneye so great was the multiplayer. XBL is going to do the multiplayer much more justice than the VC would, so just let them have it. Especially if it gives it to the wii owners who had Goldeneye in mind when they first found out about VC. This deal, if true, was the best way to put great games in the hands of a lot of people. If Iwata turned that down, then he's a hypocrite.supreuph

They want to make gaming accessible to everyone, yes, but only on their system. They are a company, after all.

[QUOTE="Wiifanboy_4life"][QUOTE="bob_newman"]

[QUOTE="Wiifanboy_4life"]That was really stupid. Nintendo is getting cocky again, and they're going to pay for it again. Remember when Sony was on Nintendo's side, making a peripheral that was going to be able to use CD's for SNES games, and then Nintendo went behind their backs and made a deal with CD-I, resulting in those HORRIFIC "Zelda" titles? Well after that Sony made the Playstation, and what happened? They took over the gaming industry. Then they released the PS2. What happened? They kept control over the gaming industry. Now Nintendo FINALLY has it back, and Iwata is about to screw it up again. *face to palm*bob_newman

Learn your history first, then post.

Nintendo cancelled the deal with Sony because Sony was planning on getting all of the profit that the console would make. Sony was going to screw over Nintendo, basically. They made the right choice, they didn't sell out.

Oh... XD G4 said it differently on Icons... Lo Siento.

Yeah, the history can be a little fuzzy, but it's pretty well-known.

No need to apologize.

No you're both wrong(I think),Nintendo cancelled the deal with Sony because they re-read the whole contract again and it said that Sony would take over their IP's(Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, metroid, eveything for their time) completely, you know how Nintendo loves to milk... er... make sequels to their Ip's only on their consoles so they cancelled out. Sony was left with a the near-finished Playstation add-on for SNES, they did some little changes, packed them and sold them are their own console.

[QUOTE="supreuph"]For a man who said his inspiration for the wii was to make gaming accessible to everybody, this is awfully contradictory. It's not like people are going to purchase 360s just because online-enabled Goldeneye is on XBL. This isn't competition. Everybody knows that what made Goldeneye so great was the multiplayer. XBL is going to do the multiplayer much more justice than the VC would, so just let them have it. Especially if it gives it to the wii owners who had Goldeneye in mind when they first found out about VC. This deal, if true, was the best way to put great games in the hands of a lot of people. If Iwata turned that down, then he's a hypocrite.bob_newman

They want to make gaming accessible to everyone, yes, but only on their system. They are a company, after all.

For a man who said his inspiration for the wii was to make gaming accessible to everybody, this is awfully contradictory. It's not like people are going to purchase 360s just because online-enabled Goldeneye is on XBL. This isn't competition. Everybody knows that what made Goldeneye so great was the multiplayer. XBL is going to do the multiplayer much more justice than the VC would, so just let them have it. Especially if it gives it to the wii owners who had Goldeneye in mind when they first found out about VC. This deal, if true, was the best way to put great games in the hands of a lot of people. If Iwata turned that down, then he's a hypocrite.supreuph

Ya but they could put this on Wiiware on go full force with motion controls, online, and new content. This isnt about graphics because either way its not gonna look that great. TEH HD is the least of my concerns if they released this. If the potential Wii version could have a robust online and all the same features as the 360 one then I would say the wii version has a leg up due to the motion controls.

Iwata may be waiting for full voice chat or a HDD or MS was try to pull a fast one and ensure the Wii version was gimped.

[QUOTE="bob_newman"][QUOTE="Wiifanboy_4life"][QUOTE="bob_newman"]

[QUOTE="Wiifanboy_4life"]That was really stupid. Nintendo is getting cocky again, and they're going to pay for it again. Remember when Sony was on Nintendo's side, making a peripheral that was going to be able to use CD's for SNES games, and then Nintendo went behind their backs and made a deal with CD-I, resulting in those HORRIFIC "Zelda" titles? Well after that Sony made the Playstation, and what happened? They took over the gaming industry. Then they released the PS2. What happened? They kept control over the gaming industry. Now Nintendo FINALLY has it back, and Iwata is about to screw it up again. *face to palm*nintendog66

Learn your history first, then post.

Nintendo cancelled the deal with Sony because Sony was planning on getting all of the profit that the console would make. Sony was going to screw over Nintendo, basically. They made the right choice, they didn't sell out.

Oh... XD G4 said it differently on Icons... Lo Siento.

Yeah, the history can be a little fuzzy, but it's pretty well-known.

No need to apologize.

No you're both wrong(I think),Nintendo cancelled the deal with Sony because they re-read the whole contract again and it said that Sony would take over their IP's(Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, metroid, eveything for their time) completely, you know how Nintendo loves to milk... er... make sequels to their Ip's only on their consoles so they cancelled out. Sony was left with a the near-finished Playstation add-on for SNES, they did some little changes, packed them and sold them are their own console.

But I said, "Nintendo cancelled the deal with Sony because Sony was planning on getting all of the profit that the console would make" as in "everything that was made for that console, Sony would get the profit".