One of my main inspirations for me trying to expose the video game industry’s anti-Nintendo agenda, is sports conspiracy writer Brian Tuohy. He has his own site called thefixisin.net, and he brings to light many of the uncomfortable truths about how professional sports are fixed. I’m basing this article off of Tuohy’s article titled “The Proof: 5 Facts”, where he lays down 5 facts about professional sports.
And I’m going to do the same here. It may sound like a pastiche based on Tuohy’s article, but my message is still the same.
For the past 8 years now, I have found myself in many arguments revolving around exposing the anti-Nintendo agenda in the video game industry. Perhaps you’re in the same boat as I am too, and you also want to work to find the truth. If that’s so – or if you think I’m just some annoying conspiracy theorist trying to defame Nintendo’s competitors, most notably Sony – then these 4 facts are for you. Let’s begin.
1 – 3rd Party developers have made up excuses to avoid Nintendo consoles since Sony entered the market.
Yes, really. This all started the minute Sony entered the market with the PS1. You’ve heard all the excuses that because of one or two minor things developers can’t be bothered to make a game for a Nintendo console. Then they’ll go on to support a competitor’s system, and even though they’ll complain about how much of a pain it is to develop for (the PS2, PS3 and Saturn), they’ll support it anyway and consider it a challenge, instead of just giving up.
Nintendo does make mistakes, I’ll admit, but nothing that should have led to 3rd parties avoiding all of Nintendo’s platforms post-SNES. 3rd parties were making PLENTY of money off the NES and SNES and yet they felt the need to leave. If Nintendo’s restrictive policies during the NES era were the real reason they lost 3rd party support to Sony and Microsoft, then 3rd parties would have all flocked to Sega when Nintendo let up on their policies in 1990. But they didn’t.
Nintendo’s dire situation for 3rd party support on their consoles has existed since Sony entered the market. It CANNOT be a coincidence that the last FIVE console generations have all followed the same trends:
1. Developers talk about how much they “love” Nintendo.
2. Developers pledge “support”.
3. Developers pull said “support” when Nintendo refuses to bend over and let developers have their way with them like Sony and Microsoft do.
4. Developers start talking about how Nintendo should pull a Sega and go 3rd party while Nintendo continues to turn a profit and the rest of the industry burns all around them.
5. GO TO 1.
With the N64 the primary excuse was carts and how it forced them to make “smaller” games, even though Capcom managed to fit Resident Evil 2, a TWO-DISC PS1 game on a single N64 cart with all the FMVs, cutscenes, content, and dialogue, plus some bonus content not found in any other version.
With the GameCube it was the miniDVDs, which didn’t give developers enough space to make the games they wanted, even though these same developers had no problem putting TONS of multi-disc games on the PS1, PS2, Saturn, Dreamcast, and Xbox 360. So…multi-disc games are fine on Sony, Microsoft and Sega platforms but a no-no on a Nintendo one, even though most 3rd party games that came out in the 6th gen were small enough to fit on a single GameCube disc anyway.
Did you know that Grand Theft Auto III, even unoptimized, was only 1GB in size on the PS2 and PC? It would have easily fit on a single GameCube disc. Only CGI heavy games were really an issue.
With the Wii the excuse was power, even though developers had no problem developing games for weaker hardware, such as the PS2 and Dreamcast. Even though the system was far cheaper to develop for than the HD Twins, and developers could have save MILLIONS of dollars developing for the Wii. Even though the Wii could have saved so many 3rd party development studios from going bankrupt like they did under the PS3 and Xbox 360. Even though the Wii sold over 100 million units, and was breaking monthly sales records that the PS2 set, so much so that the Wii sold 5 MILLION UNITS IN ONE MONTH in December 2009. A record that STILL stands today:
You get the idea. So I’ll move on to the next subject:
2 – Good console sales will not attract 3rd party support for Nintendo.
If you need further proof, look at the Wii. Again, it sold over 100 million units, and was breaking sales records the PS2 set, as the Wii set a record by selling 5 million units in ONE MONTH in December 2009. And yet developers treated the Wii as a shovelware dumping ground, with very few good 3rd party titles out of it. Despite all that, more 3rd party software was sold on the Wii than on the Xbox 360 or PS3.
And to give a more recent example, look at the Switch. The Switch is on the brink of selling 70 million units worldwide, and even though the system has attracted the best 3rd party support a Nintendo console has received since the SNES, it still doesn’t compare to the amount of 3rd party support the PS4 and Xbox One got.
Plus, 3rd parties will go out of their way to support failing competitor consoles over successful Nintendo ones. For example, the Sega Saturn, despite selling ONLY 9 million units worldwide from 1994-2000, managed to get far better 3rd party support than the N64 ever did, even though the N64 sold 33 million units worldwide – more than twice as many units as the Saturn.
3 – There is no law that prevents Sony and/or Microsoft from buying up 3rd party support.
The closest federal laws on the books are these:
(I don’t care if it’s Wikipedia. It’s a good enough source for this topic anyway.)
A short summary of the Sherman Antitrust Act:
“The Sherman Act broadly prohibits 1) anticompetitive agreements and 2) unilateral conduct that monopolizes or attempts to monopolize the relevant market. The Act authorizes the Department of Justice to bring suits to enjoin (i.e. prohibit) conduct violating the Act, and additionally authorizes private parties injured by conduct violating the Act to bring suits for treble damages (i.e. three times as much money in damages as the violation cost them). Over time, the federal courts have developed a body of law under the Sherman Act making certain types of anticompetitive conduct per se illegal, and subjecting other types of conduct to case-by-case analysis regarding whether the conduct unreasonably restrains trade.
The law attempts to prevent the artificial raising of prices by restriction of trade or supply. “Innocent monopoly”, or monopoly achieved solely by merit, is legal, but acts by a monopolist to artificially preserve that status, or nefarious dealings to create a monopoly, are not. The purpose of the Sherman Act is not to protect competitors from harm from legitimately successful businesses, nor to prevent businesses from gaining honest profits from consumers, but rather to preserve a competitive marketplace to protect consumers from abuses.”
Note the key sentence “to protect consumers from abuses.” Therefore, the Sherman Antitrust Act does not apply toward Sony and/or Microsoft buying up 3rd party support.
Clayton Antitrust Act:
“The Clayton Act made both substantive and procedural modifications to federal antitrust law. Substantively, the act seeks to capture anticompetitive practices in their incipiency by prohibiting particular types of conduct, not deemed in the best interest of a competitive market. There are 4 sections of the bill that proposed substantive changes in the antitrust laws by way of supplementing the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890. In those sections, the Act thoroughly discusses the following four principles of economic trade and business:
- price discrimination between different purchasers if such a discrimination substantially lessens competition or tends to create a monopoly in any line of commerce (Act Section 2, codified at 15 U.S.C. § 13);
- sales on the condition that (A) the buyer or lessee not deal with the competitors of the seller or lessor (“exclusive dealings”) or (B) the buyer also purchase another different product (“tying”) but only when these acts substantially lessen competition (Act Section 3, codified at 15 U.S.C. § 14);
- mergers and acquisitions where the effect may substantially lessen competition (Act Section 7, codified at 15 U.S.C. § 18) or where the voting securities and assets threshold is met (Act Section 7a, codified at 15 U.S.C. § 18a);
- any person from being a director of two or more competing corporations, if those corporations would violate the antitrust criteria by merging (Act Section 8; codified 1200 at 15 U.S.C. § 19).“
The key sentence in this act is “the buyer or lessee not deal with the competitors of the seller or lessor.” The key word here is “buyer.” 3rd party developers are not the “buyer”, they are the “seller”, as they are basically supplying Sony and/or Microsoft’s consoles with their titles. Therefore, this law does not apply either.
This law COULD apply to Sony’s acquisitions in the anime industry, like their acquisitions of Funimation, Manga Entertainment, and Crunchyroll, but that’s another topic for another day.
Only ONE of the Big Three console manufacturers (Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft) were punished for violating the Sherman Antitrust Act, and that was Microsoft in 2000, however that was one year before Microsoft entered the industry. Since the Big Three console manufacturers was officially defined to be Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft in 2001, none of the Big Three have been busted for violating the Sherman Antitrust Act or the Clayton Antitrust Act in relation to their dealings in the video game industry – ever.
4 – It is LEGAL for video game developers and the gaming press to lie to us all.
And it’s not just video game developers and the gaming press. It’s legal for the media IN GENERAL to lie to us all. What you call “fake news” has been legal to create for some time now. Don’t believe me? Check this out.
Then go and discover that in 2012, The New York Times basically admitted that it, and every other major news outlet, allows government officials and corporations to censor their work. Not kidding, they really did.
If Hideo Kojima and Konami were allowed to lie about Metal Gear Solid V, along with forcing the gaming press in review “boot camps” to give MGSV good scores, imagine what else developers and the gaming press have lied about, especially regarding what they say about Nintendo.
This is why I still stand by my stance that the real reason the Wii U failed was because of the gaming press’ disinformation, and because of 3rd party developers lying about the system’s capabilities, along with sabotaging the system only a couple months after it’s launch. The gaming press is merely a propaganda arm of 3rd party developers, and the main propaganda arm of Sony and Microsoft. They sell only one idea – that everything Sony and Microsoft do is the second coming of Christ and anything and everything Nintendo does is anti-consumer and anti-developer and should be dumped.
If this is allowed to occur, do you truly believe that GameSpot, IGN, Kotaku, GamesRadar+, Game Informer and Destructoid report truly and accurately on the consoles and games they report on?
For example, none of these publications reported on Sony’s censorship policies that they rolled out in 2018. Only Niche Gamer and One Angry Gamer covered that story. However, they had no problem reporting on Nintendo’s censorship of content in their own games on the 3DS and Wii U, even though Nintendo themselves have not censored a single 3rd party title on their platforms since 1994.
And with all this information at your disposal, what then is preventing Sony and Microsoft from buying all the 3rd party support in the world?
The answer should be obvious to you right now: