Is Nintendo following Atari's footsteps?

[Austin]

 

I think the identity problem is an intentional one for marketing purposes so that once people understand one aspect of its identity they can switch to another aspect of its identity until everyone understands its full hybrid identity and to make people switch from their Wii U's and 3DSes at the right times instead of prematurely.

 

Originally the NX was said to neither be a successor to the Wii U or 3DS but some kind of new experience that isn't exactly a full replacement for either. This gave it a generalized identity that put it as kind of a third pillar to the other two consoles to not slow the sales of the Wii U or 3DS or their software. More so for the Wii U so that from then until around the holidays when discontinued it could sale more to clear it out.

 

Now that the Wii U has been discontinued and Breath of the Wild is going to be the last major first party title the Switch's identity has switched from a hybrid in the middle to a Wii U successor that is more of a home console that can be taken on the go than a handheld that can be docked. The opposite handheld that can be docked is likely to be the ultimate identity but that could harm the momentum after launch because basically sending the message,"The Wii U was our last home console. We are exiting the home console market to focus on our handhelds and the Switch is our 3DS successor that will eventually be our only dedicated gaming hardware." would be a bad message to send.

 

It would be bad because it would be harder to milk the 3DS until it is discontinued and may cause them to have to discontinue it sooner. Also, it may cause confusion with how powerful it is because Nintendo handhelds have always had a bigger gap in power compared to home consoles. So, people may get the false impression that it is a weak handheld instead of a high powered one with enough power that exiting the home console market might not be as bad as it sounds like SEGA bad. Therefore, being marketed as mostly a Wii U successor may still give the impression that Nintendo yet again is releasing a low powered home console but when it becomes also a 3DS successor it would be clear that it not only is just a handheld but one more powerful than the Wii U. I think also as far as power is concerned Nintendo wants it to have an identity more along the lines of a late 8th gen console that is replacing the place of the Wii U like a redo instead of the first 9th gen console that is a direct successor to the Wii U.

 

So, when the the 3DS is finally discontinued a year to a year and a half or so from now or however long because the 3DS owners have upgraded to the Switch along with the Wii U owners and others then they could still have the home console that you can take on the go identity but more so because it has home console like power that can be taken on the go than that it is mostly intended to be docked most of the time. To put that another way, before both the Wii U and 3DS are discontinued it is intended to have a home console identity more in terms of placement(TV) but after they are both discontinued it is intended to have a home console identity more in terms of power so that there is still the perception of a home console type of gaming even when in handheld mode.

 

In other words, I believe Nintendo is slowly rolling out and adjusting its identity to market more to home console gamers first while discontinuing the Wii U, then later to market more to the handheld console gamers while discontinuing the 3DS, and exiting the home console market while still kind of keeping a foot in the door because even though they are going fully into having just one console that is handheld it is a handheld with home console like power that can be docked to have either home console style gaming at home or home console style gaming on the go.

 

Then after everything is said and done, the Switch is the only Nintendo hardware on the market, its full identity is clear, and assuming it is successful enough to justify a Switch 2 then I think it will be much easier to market the Switch 2 because the identity would already be established. For an example, I think there would be less of seeing it as a direct competitor of the PS5 and XBOX ONE TWO and therefore underpowered but more in terms of a very powerful handheld that Nintendo has a monopoly in that market that is clearly differentiated from mobile gaming because the power and game style would be closer to consoles than phones. To put that another way, it would be like phones would take the traditional space of handhelds in the sense of having a huge gap of power compared to consoles and the Switch and Switch 2 would maintain the traditional space of being a handheld console but would be closer to a home console's traditional space in power by not having as huge of a gap as traditionally was the case. So, a hybrid in between those two extremes. It would also be easier because Nintendo is likely to do the same thing they have always done by making their handheld lines backwards compatible. So, Switch owners would see it as an upgrade that they can bring their Switch games to. However, it would be harder if Microsoft, Sony, or a new contender wants a piece of Nintendo's monopoly pie by releasing their own hybrid. Like say the Switch changes Sony's mind to release a PS Vita 2 that comes with a dock.

 

Anyway, I don't exactly know what you mean by "3DS-like portable experiences on it relative to console-like experiences (with necessary tuning for portable play)." I have been playing handheld and home consoles my whole life and both are console-like experiences but with handhelds having the ability to be portable. It is like the difference between a desktop and laptop. Both have PC experiences but one is portable. It is like that with handhelds. It being console-like experiences on the go has always been their appeal. For an example, playing Link's Awakening on the Game Boy had a console-like experience similar to A Link to the Past on Super NES. the only difference was that it was portable and there was a huge gap between the power of the two consoles but the console-like experience was the same. The only thing desired since the release of the Game Boy was to close that gap of power between consoles which has been happening but slowly but now between the 3DS and the Switch it seems like the kind of big leap we have been waiting for over the last 27 and a half years.

 

Concerning,"we really don't know if there's a market for a device like this." Of course we know this. It isn't like handheld consoles went through some video game crash and we don't know that it can be revived from it with the future entirely uncertain with nothing to go on. Nintendo handhelds have always been successful consoles. The 3DS right now is currently the top selling console of this generation, through the Fall and holidays it jumped about 9 to 10 million more units sold bringing it over 70 million, it was the best-selling quarter for software in Nintendo 3DS history with 7.3 million copies of first-party Nintendo games sold, Pokemon Sun and Moon are the fastest Nintendo games in the company's history to sell more than 4 million copies, etc. Nintendo handheld fans clearly like their handhelds and Nintendo games. Give them a handheld more powerful than Wii U, PS3, and XBOX 360 with Nintendo games showing that power that can be seamlessly docked to a TV without extra accessories connected to home consoles like Super Game Boy and the Game Boy Player? Of course we want that.

 

 

[Flojomojo]

You're not. I'm in this category too. I think there may be a lot of us like people that feel like they have to upgrade to an XL version after recently buying the standard version.

 

 

I'm sure they count every one you buy. But I'm assuming what you are hinting at is how they figure that into user base since you are just adding one person to the user base with multiple handhelds. I think that the Switch having up to 8 user accounts may play into this. For an example, they my count two user accounts on a Switch as a user base of two or one user account across two Switches as a user base of one.

I'm not thinking anything nearly as clever as that. I just wonder how many people there are like us, because the plural of anecdote is not data.

 

Each time they've redone a handheld, they've fixed a problem or added enough new functionality to make it a worthwhile upgrade for me. Color, backlighting/internal battery, nicer external shell/screen, faster CPU.

 

Except for the DSi, that early eShop screwed the pooch compared to what was later available on the 3DS. It makes you wonder what a 2019 Switch hardware bump could be? Better battery life, increased specs, bigger screen?

[carlsson]

Nintendo is a much older company than any of the other companies that have been involved with Video Games.

Close, but not entirely correct if we go back in time. I looked up a few semi-major that I could think of. Of course Nintendo is the oldest company still in the video game industry, unless Toshiba decides to make a return. I understand that Hasbro has dropped the Milton Bradley brand name, otherwise they could be making a return as well.

 

 

Milton Bradley: 1860 (Vectrex)

Toshiba: July 1875 (Nuon co-manufacturer among others)

Nintendo: September 1889

Philips: May 1891

NEC: July 1899

Magnavox: 1917

Panasonic/Matsushita: 1918

RCA: October 1919

Sawyer: 1919 (View-Master Interactive, company founded in 1914 but purchased by Edwin Eugene Mayer in 1919)

Motorola: September 1928

Coleco: June 1932

Fujitsu: June 1935

Pioneer: January 1938

Samsung: March 1938

Mattel: January 1945

Casio: April 1946

Sony: May 1946

Sanyo: 1947 (incorporated 1949)

Emerson Radio: 1948 (as Emerson Phonograph already 1915)

Bandai: July 1950

Commodore: 1954

Fairchild: October 1957

Epoch: May 1958

Binatone: 1958

GoldStar: 1958

Sega: June 1960

Bally Technologies: 1968

Amstrad: 1968

Atari: June 1972

APF Electronics: Early 1970's

Microsoft: April 1975

Apple: April 1976

VTech: October 1976

SNK: July 1978

Tiger Electronics: 1978

Capcom: May 1979

Interton: unclear, but the VC-4000 came out in 1978

World of Wonder (Action Max): 1980

Funtech: unclear, but the Super A'Can came out in 1995

SSD Company Limited: unclear, but the XaviXPORT came out in 2004

[Flojomojo]

Close, but not entirely correct if we go back in time. I looked up a few semi-major that I could think of. Of course Nintendo is the oldest company still in the video game industry, unless Toshiba decides to make a return. I understand that Hasbro has dropped the Milton Bradley brand name, otherwise they could be making a return as well.

Hasbro (founded 1923) definitely belongs on the list ... they were owners of the Atari brand for several years and attempted to do new things with old ideas. They also own Parker Brothers (founded 1883), which was a licensing and porting powerhouse for games on all platforms in the 1980s. Even if you wanted to exclude software companies, I'm pretty sure they made plug-n-play games too.

 

Wow, there's a lot of consolidation happening. Did you know Mattel owned all these brands?

The products and brands it produces include Fisher-Price, Barbie dolls, Monster High dolls, Ever After High dolls, Winx Club dolls, Hot Wheels and Matchbox toys, Masters of the Universe toys, American Girl dolls, board games, and WWEToys. In the early-1980s, Mattel produced video game systems, under both its own brands and under license from Nintendo.

[Tanooki]

schizo well said on that big ass post. I was thinking along those lines as well. You can't alienate who is there, and even more who you wish were there in the future. The insiders who make things for it (or can) know it to be the successor of both, that it's a dockable handheld. It would be suicide to sell it as that currently. It would decimate the 3DS space they have developed which has probably a good 2 years left in it, perhaps more depending how they want it to play out (perhaps as the 'budget' handheld eventually.) They do want the WiiU a forgotten rotten nightmare of a memory and to do that, kill it off, kill the support since it bombed hard, and be all about Switch Switch Switch being the new system that you can pick up and carry if you like (like WiiU off TV play mode, but far less stupidly handled.)

 

Once the WiiU is dead and a memory, Switch moves into that 10M and up sold number, then I could see them change message casually so it's less noticed by people already in, but more by those who sat on the fence as 3DS gets long in the tooth. They can go, well we pitched it as a console, but it really is a thing you can carry everywhere. Maybe not in a pocket, but it's a tablet gamers wet dream of a gaming system would be the direction to go with it. This could suck in those Nintendo handheld followers like myself who haven't caught on what they're up to already (or those who wait on price drops hoping they happen which WiiU never did.) From there it grows more as you get the handheld types in. The pricing structure is already present with the physical game library as the prices go as low as $30-40 and up to the console level of $60, so the variety is there. Stuff like SF2 or even Binding of Isaac would be your pick up and play, Bomberman R would fall in the middle, then your console shtick would be your Zelda, Mario, Skyrim types we know of that suck you in big time.

 

 

I will add I don't agree on Nintendo lying about sales numbers using the up to 8 users per Switch as a model to push people to say 'this many play' or 'make games for us we have X users' (when it it a lower Y.) They've never done that crap, they actually have historically published their numbers as not even shipped but sold (at least sold to retail outlets who then sell to consumers since they don't sell direct.) Sony was the masters of the bs'n the figures about calling stuff sold when sold was shipped and got caught over it years ago yet still do it because most people don't catch on.

[BillLoguidice]

 

I think the identity problem is an intentional one for marketing purposes so that once people understand one aspect of its identity they can switch to another aspect of its identity until everyone understands its full hybrid identity and to make people switch from their Wii U's and 3DSes at the right times instead of prematurely.

 

Originally the NX was said to neither be a successor to the Wii U or 3DS but some kind of new experience that isn't exactly a full replacement for either. This gave it a generalized identity that put it as kind of a third pillar to the other two consoles to not slow the sales of the Wii U or 3DS or their software. More so for the Wii U so that from then until around the holidays when discontinued it could sale more to clear it out.

 

<(Snip>

 

 

Good analysis, although I obviously don't agree with all of your points. I particularly don't think there will be a PS5 or Xbox Two within the next decade. I think what we're seeing now is what the new normal is, and it's what Nintendo will follow with the Switch should it prove to have a viable market, i.e., incremental, backwards-compatible upgrades that don't make the previous version of the system obsolete for those not ready to upgrade.

 

Also, although Nintendo said the Switch (or NX as it was known at the time) was not intended as a replacement for the Wii U or 3DS, everyone, except perhaps the most delusional fan, thought otherwise. Of course it was a replacement for the Wii U, which was clearly never going to regain any momentum, and it's ultimately going to be a replacement for the 3DS. We'll no doubt continue to see fewer and fewer releases for the 3DS until sales for the actual hardware slow to a trickle (following more of a Wii lifecycle wind-down than a Wii U abrupt ending). I think the Switch will be one of many causes of that. So yes, I agree that although Nintendo is saying what they have to now (and what any company says so as not to sabotage sales of existing products), it's clear that the plan all along was to replace the aging 3DS as well. You simply don't have two products existing in (prime market) parallel for very long that serve many of the same functions/target consumers.

 

And again, one of Nintendo's weaknesses has always been delivering software on a reliable schedule, which is particularly important when third party support is weak. The best way to eliminate that weakness is to focus on a single platform, rather than multiple platforms. That's one of the easier potential ways for Nintendo to ultimately find success with the Switch, which is to finally eliminate the type of software droughts they've suffered for generations now. That was almost certainly a major factor in developing the Switch the way they did.

[carlsson]

Parker Brothers (founded 1883) [..] I'm pretty sure they made plug-n-play games too.

Sure, Parker Brothers produced a tabletop LED game based on Q*Bert, and what it seems a similar one based on Frogger.

 

I wonder if we can track any company founded prior to 1860 which has had a real part of video game history. I understand it is asking a bit much to find companies more than 150 years old to begin with.

 

Sorry if this is getting the thread off topic, but if Nintendo would go out of business after flopping badly with the Switch, I suppose Samsung as a cell phone manufacturer would be next in line for the title "oldest company doing any form of serious gaming", stealing the title from Sony.

[BillLoguidice]

I will add I don't agree on Nintendo lying about sales numbers using the up to 8 users per Switch as a model to push people to say 'this many play' or 'make games for us we have X users' (when it it a lower Y.) They've never done that crap, they actually have historically published their numbers as not even shipped but sold (at least sold to retail outlets who then sell to consumers since they don't sell direct.) Sony was the masters of the bs'n the figures about calling stuff sold when sold was shipped and got caught over it years ago yet still do it because most people don't catch on.

 

Sony doesn't use "shipped" anymore. It's sell through. The PS4 numbers are indeed that impressive.

[BillLoguidice]

Sorry if this is getting the thread off topic, but if Nintendo would go out of business after flopping badly with the Switch, I suppose Samsung as a cell phone manufacturer would be next in line for the title "oldest company doing any form of serious gaming", stealing the title from Sony.

 

Although there is a reasonable chance that the Switch will flop, which, as a result would likely cause Nintendo to give up in the dedicated hardware space, they certainly would have no reason to go anywhere. Besides the tiresome "money in the bank," which is all well and good, they have IP that's the envy of just about anyone else not named Disney. They'd almost immediately move into the top 10 third party software publishers after just a release or two (not even counting mobile), and could survive indefinitely on merchandising alone. In other words, they have countless ways to make bucketloads of money and stay relevant in the videogame space even without a first party system.

 

I also don't count companies who have had involvement in the videogame (and related personal computing) industry that has come and gone. Outside of Nintendo, Microsoft (1975, although not until 1980 for their first game) and Sony (1946, but not active in personal computers until the early 1980s) are certainly up there in terms of consecutive time served without taking a significant break.

[Gentlegamer]

Hah nice charting job Flojo.

 

One thing that always mystified me was how the N64 managed to outsell the Gamecube. N64 lacked quite a bit of third party support and games in general while the Gamecube got a lot of third party support for over 1/2 its life, and even in the back half more than what N64 was graced with. Controller may have lacked a top button but was more 'right' too along with the standard. Yes it was using a 1.5GB disc, and some games came on 2 (3GB) which did limit things but quite a few conversions worked out quite nicely and some were the superior releases (Beyond Good and Evil, Defender, and others.) I know it was likely the bs MS was shoveling about online which GC mostly lacked, but it's not like Sony had any form of a network up either outside of that bundle with FF11. It's also nuts how obvious that chart makes things too. Wii aside as #1, still their best console sellers were NES and SNES respectively and they moved more than the others. And that handheld has and always will be their forte. I mean look at those Gameboy/Color and the non listed Nintendo DS totals (154 Million DS-DSLite-DSi units 6/30/16), big stuff...biggest of all blowing out GB/GBC by 30mil and Wii by around 50mil units. That's just crazy. Again why I feel more comfortable in thinking the Switch won't suffer as the WiiU did. Developers see it and handle it like a portable device more than a console, and that's a benefit.

 

N64 actually had a "dudebro" console shooter/wrestling games crowd that migrated to Xbox.

[Flojomojo]

I also don't count companies who have had involvement in the videogame (and related personal computing) industry that has come and gone. Outside of Nintendo, Microsoft (1975, although not until 1980 for their first game) and Sony (1946, but not active in personal computers until the early 1980s) are certainly up there in terms of consecutive time served without taking a significant break.

 

And this where we need to turn this thread towards the Coleco Chameleon, the greatest comeback story in the history of gaming. After 28 years of sleeping, they were poised to return to gaming greatness, only to have the dream destroyed by a thicket of haters on some weird message board called AtariAge.

 

But seriously ... Bill's right, I think Nintendo has the longest streak, followed by Sony's kickass 20+ years since 1995's Playstation. Microsoft's contribution is more behind-the-scenes with DOS and Windows support for PC game infrastructure, until the 2001 Xbox. Just about every other company is a fly-by-night in comparison.

[Flojomojo]

N64 actually had a "dudebro" console shooter/wrestling games crowd that migrated to Xbox.

Those 4 controller ports were put to good use. I feel like just about every other TV console since then (except PS2) supported 4 controllers out of the box.

[carlsson]

Yeah, Nintendo secured the Japanese distribution rights to the Odyssey in 1974 and made the arcade game EVR Race in 1975. Apple, which might not be considered a major video game manufacturer, obviously has been around one year less than Microsoft. So the company with the longest continuous streak of making video games or "game enabling" hardware, gotta be Nintendo. Yet the post I quoted with tongue in cheek said "older [..] than any of the other companies that have been involved with Video Games" which had more of a historic approach.

Edited January 25, 2017 by carlsson

[Tanooki]

Lots of quotes.

 

Yes I'm aware PS4 is shipped, this was some new form of honesty from them. I'm actually fine with Sony, owned all their hardware but doubt unless it was cheap or supported some new future disc/media physical format I'd buy another as they're too PC like now and my PC is better.

 

I also agree even if it took another couple hardware fails for Nintendo to say screw it, they'd not quit, they'd just develop probably for Android and IOS of all things with not just their bite sized spinoffs but main line games. They'd not want to be tethered to the useless clownish closed environments of Sony or MS, let alone have to kiss their butts as a subordinate. Android, iOS, even home computers would be far more viable to get their brand out in their level of control they want to enjoy.

 

 

I think the N64 being a dudebro box is a little bit of a stretch. Sure it had Goldeneye and Perfect Dark, but outside that much of the rest was on PSX anyway sports and racing included. It just was more obvious there due to a small 300game library with a backdrop of some Nintendo, Rare, and Midway/Activision games and a few, Konami, Capcom, and Factor5/Lucasarts projects to round out stuff. Sony was the real dudebro box sticking to the term given the wide appeal audience and titles it got, or the preferred versions of say those EA sports packages but I do get your point.

[BillLoguidice]

I also agree even if it took another couple hardware fails for Nintendo to say screw it, they'd not quit, they'd just develop probably for Android and IOS of all things with not just their bite sized spinoffs but main line games. They'd not want to be tethered to the useless clownish closed environments of Sony or MS, let alone have to kiss their butts as a subordinate. Android, iOS, even home computers would be far more viable to get their brand out in their level of control they want to enjoy.

 

 

If Nintendo were in that position, I'm sure they'd happily support both Sony or Microsoft, assuming they didn't sign an exclusive deal with either. Your impression of "useless clownish closed environments of Sony or MS" is, obviously, strictly your (impassioned) opinion, with no real relevance to their relative success being as they are.

[dj_convoy]

 

 

Each time they've redone a handheld, they've fixed a problem or added enough new functionality to make it a worthwhile upgrade for me. Color, backlighting/internal battery, nicer external shell/screen, faster CPU.

 

 

Even the New 3DS? I feel that was a real slap to anyone who had already purchased a 3DS. A bigger screen is one thing; exclusive games (granted, only a few... but then that's a dick move in it's own way) and SNES compatibility is another. Still annoyed about that one.

[BillLoguidice]

Even the New 3DS? I feel that was a real slap to anyone who had already purchased a 3DS. A bigger screen is one thing; exclusive games (granted, only a few... but then that's a dick move in it's own way) and SNES compatibility is another. Still annoyed about that one.

 

I was happy with getting a New 3DS, although I will admit that I likely would have never done it if I couldn't have traded in an original 3DS when Gamestop had a particularly good trade-in deal. The bigger screen and better 3D is worth it for me, and it allows me to play one of my favorite games, The Binding of Isaac, which is otherwise not possible on a non-New 3DS. As upgrades go, it is indeed fairly minimal, but still a logical one. And frankly, there's really not more much they could have done with it anyway at this point without releasing a whole new handheld platform (and we know that that's almost certainly not going to happen thanks to the Switch and other market conditions). I think the Switch will be much better positioned for relatively substantive upgrades in the vein of PS4 Pro and Xbox One S/Scorpio.

[Flojomojo]

Even the New 3DS? I feel that was a real slap to anyone who had already purchased a 3DS. A bigger screen is one thing; exclusive games (granted, only a few... but then that's a dick move in it's own way) and SNES compatibility is another. Still annoyed about that one.

 

I thought that was a good upgrade, personally. Faster CPU, cool 3D Wii-style RPG in Xenoblade, SNES games, and Isaac, poop and all. The old machines hold their value so I eBay'ed my original little black 3DS, gave my red XL to my kid, and consider this my favorite game device after my iPhone. It was $200 but that was almost 2 years ago, so I was glad that they were able to wring some more life out of the platform. Stuff like Bit Trip Runner and Hyrule Warriors run way better on the New 3DS.

 

Yet a PS4 Pro or Xbone Slim don't appeal to me at all. Go figure.

 

I still wish there were digital versions of Namco games like Ridge Racer 3D, Tekken 3D, and Pac-Man/Galaga Dimensions.

[D.Daniels]

 

I thought that was a good upgrade, personally. Faster CPU, cool 3D Wii-style RPG in Xenoblade, SNES games, and Isaac, poop and all. The old machines hold their value so I eBay'ed my original little black 3DS, gave my red XL to my kid, and consider this my favorite game device after my iPhone. It was $200 but that was almost 2 years ago, so I was glad that they were able to wring some more life out of the platform. Stuff like Bit Trip Runner and Hyrule Warriors run way better on the New 3DS.

 

Yet a PS4 Pro or Xbone Slim don't appeal to me at all. Go figure.

 

I still wish there were digital versions of Namco games like Ridge Racer 3D, Tekken 3D, and Pac-Man/Galaga Dimensions.

 

me too, I wish there was Ridge Racer (and any 90s arcade games) in 3D for 3DS

Edited January 25, 2017 by D.Daniels

[Flojomojo]

 

me too, I wish there was Ridge Racer (and any 90s arcade games) in 3D for 3DS

 

Oh there totally is, it was a launch game.

http://www.nintendolife.com/reviews/2011/03/ridge_racer_3d_3ds

 

I just wish it were in the eShop, so I don't have to handle a cartridge, like an ape.

[D.Daniels]

 

Oh there totally is, it was a launch game.

http://www.nintendolife.com/reviews/2011/03/ridge_racer_3d_3ds

 

I just wish it were in the eShop, so I don't have to handle a cartridge, like an ape.

 

cheers, checked it on YouTube, another gem I didn't know was out there

[dj_convoy]

 

so I don't have to handle a cartridge, like an ape.

Blasphemy.

[D.Daniels]

Blasphemy.

 

lol,

but I know what Flojomojo means, its nice to have all your games just there, downloaded

and you don't need to worry about storing the boxes/cases

however I remember the 3.5 floppy disk days, there was some satisfaction in those with the Atari ST, great loading sound

Edited January 26, 2017 by D.Daniels

[Andromeda Stardust]

 

Close, but not entirely correct if we go back in time. I looked up a few semi-major that I could think of. Of course Nintendo is the oldest company still in the video game industry, unless Toshiba decides to make a return. I understand that Hasbro has dropped the Milton Bradley brand name, otherwise they could be making a return as well.

 

 

Milton Bradley: 1860 (Vectrex)

Toshiba: July 1875 (Nuon co-manufacturer among others)

Nintendo: September 1889

Philips: May 1891

NEC: July 1899

Magnavox: 1917

Panasonic/Matsushita: 1918

RCA: October 1919

Sawyer: 1919 (View-Master Interactive, company founded in 1914 but purchased by Edwin Eugene Mayer in 1919)

Motorola: September 1928

Coleco: June 1932

Fujitsu: June 1935

Pioneer: January 1938

Samsung: March 1938

Mattel: January 1945

Casio: April 1946

Sony: May 1946

Sanyo: 1947 (incorporated 1949)

Emerson Radio: 1948 (as Emerson Phonograph already 1915)

Bandai: July 1950

Commodore: 1954

Fairchild: October 1957

Epoch: May 1958

Binatone: 1958

GoldStar: 1958

Sega: June 1960

Bally Technologies: 1968

Amstrad: 1968

Atari: June 1972

APF Electronics: Early 1970's

Microsoft: April 1975

Apple: April 1976

VTech: October 1976

SNK: July 1978

Tiger Electronics: 1978

Capcom: May 1979

Interton: unclear, but the VC-4000 came out in 1978

World of Wonder (Action Max): 1980

Funtech: unclear, but the Super A'Can came out in 1995

SSD Company Limited: unclear, but the XaviXPORT came out in 2004

 

It really doesn't matter how old each company is. Fact of the matter none of them were involved in arcade or video games or amusement because those didn't exist until the latter half of the 20th century, with the exception perhaps of some early pinball/pachinko machines or other electro-mechanical novelties.

 

Also where is Namco on the list? I did notice you included Bandai, but Namco is the more famous of the two for creating Pacman. You should include arcade companies as well, and game developers, and any pre merger subsidiaries if both parents were producing game machines or software before the merger.

 

For instance, I would consider Namco/Bandai, Hudson/Konami, Square/Enix, etc separate companies when used in a historical context.

[Osgeld]

oldest company may mean a lot with traditional goods and services, in high tech you want to look for the younger ones shaking up the scene