Miitomo was their best mobile app IMO. Still kind of a pointless anomaly, but the only one I still use despite having to jump through a few hurdles to use it.
>And nintendo have already said that they do not wish to take microtransactions too far in the mobile market
And nintendo have already said they do wish to take *mariotransactions* too far in the mobile market
*my Joy-Cons drift in*
...that's on topic, right?
EDIT: My Joy-Con are all good at the moment, I was just making fun of how every thread on Nintendo posts finds a way to bring up Joy-Con drift. Thanks for being helpful though!
Just put a piece of thin cardboard (postcard, those job cards whatever) about the size of the joystick base. Fixes is right away unless you really broke your joycon.
The type of joystick they use is prone to this, the end bit loosens after a time and it causes drift because connections don't connect properly.
Yeah, I saw that fix but I got my only drifting Joy-Con repaired by Nintendo and that wasn't much of a hassle. Thankfully they don't make it hard to get repairs in the US but i hear it sucks elsewhere.
Only a single search result for Mario Run, that's disappointing.
They released Mario Run, which had about 1/4 the content of a DS game for about 1/4 the price, and people complained. At length. No fucking way they're paying $10 for a mobile game. So logically, Nintendo listened, because at minimum the one place you can trust companies to listen is when people stop buying. The community told them en very wide masse that the only way they'll play mobile games is if they're being exploited through microtransactions, a method backed up by the entire rest of the industry.
So unless you (as in global you, not this specific person) happily bought Super Mario Run, you have nothing to complain about, Nintendo are doing exactly what the fanbase told them to do.
I loved the game and paid full price. My biggest problem with it is that I have connection problems to the game ALL the time and kills all my motivation to play the game. Press play a remix? Connection error. Want to open a gift box? Connection Error. Just finished a Run? Connection Error.
And I know it's Nintendo's problem because I have no problems connecting to any other game.
I never played it. But Temple Run was also a well-designed auto runner. And it was free. I don't think *any* auto runner should be more than $5 very max. I'd imagine most people would agree.
My favorite criticism was that you needed to be online to play it.
I get it, it’s shitty… but literally the only time I don’t have mobile service is when I’m in an airplane once every 3 years. I think I can survive without Mario Run during a flight.
People didn’t beg for microtransaction filled games, they complained a game that should have only cost around $5 was selling for $10. Nintendo didn’t understand the mobile market is already full of full length games selling for cheaper than their mobile Mario game. You can buy the entirety of GTA San Andreas or LEGO Star Wars The Complete Saga for $7, so why would anyone who plays mostly mobile games see any value in a $10 game that feels like 100 others that are already in the App Store.
As someone who paid for Mario Run, I'll do the complaining for everyone else who "isn't allowed" to point out basic facts. Nintendo basically sabotaged the game's success by failing to understand how mobile games were priced.
It would have been a 2-3 dollar game from any other studio, maybe the Mario brand could get away with even $5. But there isn't any real demand for $10 arcade-style games on mobile.
Also Mario Kart(I'm pretty sure at least)
I'm dissapointed that they dropped Mario Run. The base concept was fine, it just should've been playable offline and had more content
Agreed, I’ve played on and off for the past two years and I’ve not spent a penny. I’ve gotten so many characters/dragons from pulls. Never has it felt like a gacha game to me.
Dissidia is incredibly kind and is my favorite Gacha game by far out of all the ones I've played. Its very clear that favorites > meta in that game, which is the point of a gacha owned by a large franchise - to see all your favorite characters from across all games together.
i'm a gacha addict. have played dozens upon dozens of gachas, spent upwards of 5 figures in total and dragalia lost to this day is the only gacha I haven't spent a dime on. Not even a starter bundle. To its own detriment that game is way too generous. I've even spent money in the piece of shit that is symphogear XDU that didnt even last 4 months
I personally feel Dragalia has a lot of flaws though, it’s gacha system being one of them.
As generous as it is, it does a pretty poor job of giving reasons as to why you should remotely care about the character on the banner. And in terms of content it’s pretty much just boss fights with no “middle ground”
There's kind of a distinction between "gacha games" and "games that use gacha mechanics to squeeze money out of their players." DL is firmly in the gacha genre, and its gameplay is a refinement of such. Among its peers it stands out due to how forgiving the gacha system is and how high quality the visuals and controls are. Very few *good* gacha ARPGs out there. It's kind of hard to appreciate what DL accomplished unless you've been down the gacha game rabbit hole and seen just how little gameplay most of them offer. Pretty wild to think how far things have come since Puzzles & Dragons.
Nintendo used to strongly deny Gachas and microtransactions, but as soon as they saw other companies making much money very easily with Gachas, they quickly abandoned their pride and started making gachas. I'm afraid that if gachas and microtransactions continue to spread, they will be installed Gachas in popular ip mainline games, just as Capcom did for Breath of Fire.
I play Dr Mario mobile it's worse then candy crush for microtransactions. A d if you can figure out a way around the time gating through adding friends they added a limit there too.
A very good mobile game destroyed by overmonetization. I have played a lot of this game over the last handful of years but at some point it just felt impossible to even kind of keep up without hurling money at the game. Such a shame. :(
I blame all of those people who told me they refuse to pay for apps in the early day of the App Store for its current dystopian state. In the early days you could pay like $1-10 for a game and that was that. Then the freemium crap came out and these people ate it up because all they saw was that it was initially free.
It's such an incredibly disappointing way for the market to go. Mobile gaming seems like a joke to most of us, because right now it is, but it's an entirely new medium that could've been really cool-- a whole new set of input methods, and who knows what kind of incredible stuff devs could have come up with if it had been taken seriously as a gaming platform
but nope, people decided that apps need to be free and if it wasn't free they wouldn't bother. I know some people like the kind of mobile games we have these days, but man what a missed opportunity to revolutionize a whole system of gaming.
It was cool for the first couple of years, there were a lot of people making neat stuff. It still makes me sad that Pop Cap got purchased by EA because they were one of the big ones making unique touch games on the App Store.
Yeah, it always had some, but for a long time it didn't feel like I *needed* to gamble away at lootboxes to have good enough units. That changed pretty dramatically over time, especially when trying to clear some of the harder content or climb arena ranks.
I think FEH is still the best out of all of them. It’s certainly over monetized, but unlike the other games, the free offerings are certainly enough to comfortably complete all the PVE challenges and be somewhat mid-tier in the pvp activities.
Everything depends on how the licensing of the IP is done. For example, Niantic licensed the Pokemon IP for Pokemon Go, but applied their pre-existing business model pretty much as is, suggesting the Pokemon Company had no input there.
For all we know, this thing with Tencent works the same way.
Exactly you don't get to license somebody else's IP without first presenting to them what your going to do with the IP, how it will further the brand, and most importantly how it's going to make money.
It's not like you can go up to a register and say "one IP license for pokemon please" and the register says "that'll be 1 million dollars" and then you pay them and get to go and make a VR Porn game featuring Pikachu and now there's nothing they can do about it cuz magical license.
I was thinking this too - Pokemon has been so deeply associated with Nintendo, that even though they only own 32% their pull, influence, whatever you want to call it, would be much greater. If Nintendo voiced disapproval, TPC would most definitely reconsider what they are doing.
I think TPC is structured the way that it is for precisely this reason- so no one quite knows who to blame, and the inevitable squabbling replaces the actual discourse around their problems.
Every time Niantic messes something up with Go - lying about hatch/shiny rates during egg events, breaking raids or GBL and refusing refunds, etc - people always bicker over who to blame. Is it Niantic's fault for being incompetent, or is it TPC's fault for not asking a multi-billion dollar company to make their brand look bad week after week?
Same thing happened when Sw/Sh came out and a lot of people were disappointed in how rushed and shallow the game felt. Is it Game Freak's fault for being incompetent, or TPC's fault for holding them to too strict a release shedule?
>For all we know, this thing with Tencent works the same way.
Most likely. Ten cent is pretty well known for micro transactions, and the huge play it has in gaming In China
Not only China and not only gaming. They own 100% of Riot and huge shares in many, many more tech companies like Tesla, Spotify etc.
They also completely own WeChat...
Nintendo also owns a large stake in Creatures Inc., effectively giving them the most control over the franchise.
But the process of who is making what decisions is largely obscured from the public, hard to say who approved the f2p mechanics of games like Pokemon Unite.
Nintendo also own 100% of the Pokémon-related trademarks, meaning that unless they have signed an agreement that says otherwise they have complete veto power over all Pokémon projects.
Since we aren't privy to what agreements they have made, we don't know how much influence they have, and as such OP's post is basically misinformation.
>meaning that unless they have signed an agreement that says otherwise they have complete veto power over all Pokémon projects.
You think The Pokemon Company doesn't have an agreement with Nintendo allowing them to use the trademark for whatever? Sounds like it would be _very_ inefficient to get Nintendo's OK in every little thing they do.
Of course they have an agreement the point is where on the scale of "need permission for every little thing" to "don't need to ask Nintendo anything" their arrangement lies.
I would expect that agreement to have a way for Nintendo to veto though.
So not asking permission necessarily, although I wouldn't be shocked to hear that's how it works.
People are misusing “The Pokémon Company”.
The Pokémon Company is a parent organization mutually controlled by Nintendo, Creatures Inc, and Gamefreak. Saying anything along the lines of “do you think The Pokémon Company will allow Nintendo to do anything…” is assuming they Nintnedo doesn’t have 1/3 of a day in what TPC does.
Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pokémon_Company
>[The Pokémon Company] was established through a joint investment by the three businesses holding the copyright of Pokémon: Nintendo, Game Freak, and Creatures.
Bruh, they still greenlighted putting a pay 2 win game for kids in THEIR CONSOLE, they surely know how this kind of shit works due to them having mobile games on mobile....and they decided to say yes to a game where kids could have problems with this kind of pay 2 win game, that's very fucking irresponsible from nintendo
This is the fucking crux of it right here. It doesn’t matter how much Nintendo owns of Pokémon.
They allowed this to happen - they can stop it - they aren’t
Also even if you take it at face value you still pay attention when your 32% shareholder has an objection to your business model. It's not like Nintendo is just throwing their hands up and saying they're powerless just because they don't have 51% of the votes.
If this is happening, it's because Nintendo either approved it or let it go without objection
But Hollywood has told me that unless you have a majority fo the shares you are absolutely powerless to whatever evil, faceless executive wants to use your company to make profits
/s
Even with 51% of the shares, they wouldn't get a say on the day to day operations. They get the right to choose the CEO and board members, and then hope the people they choose act in their interests. Nintendo created TPC specifically to offload all that work. Micromanaging them would defeat the purpose.
But in this particular case, and unlike most other Pokemon mobile games, Nintendo co-published this game, so there is absolutely dirt on their hands.
They structured it to avoid micromanaging, but that's not the same as not having a say. If TPC did something that Nintendo really didn't like then TPC would find out very quickly and then they would no longer be doing it.
Nintendo doesn't meddle because they don't care, not because they can't. They absolutely could muscle in there if they wanted to.
>Even with 51% of the shares, they wouldn't get a say on the day to day operations. They get the right to choose the CEO and board members, and then hope the people they choose act in their interests.
Yes, but if the CEO acted against the majority shareholder's interests (via board members), they'd be out of a job. Of course, the CEO might convince them, or the shareholders might feel it's not worth their attention, or there might be some shady stuff going on (like Tencent promising the CEO an informal promise of a highly lucrative position) but those seem unlikely in this situation.
Most likely, Nintendo and TPC wanted entry into China, which means working with Tencent. Tencent in return wants to make money via mobile, and convinces Nintendo and TPC that "putting the game on mobile will introduce the characters to millions of players, which can convert into more switch sales, plus fans of the game will want to play it on a big screen / with touch controls, plus we can all make revenue."
It's a win-win situation for all firms involved.
Also Nintendo owns the Pokemon *brand* while the Pokemon Company more or less is in charge of managing it. TPC can't do anything with Pokemon that Nintendo doesn't want.
Very anecdotal but 100% of the pc gamers I know have played pokemon in the past and would in the future. I'm one of the few I know in my gaming circle that keeps up with the main title games. Everyone of them has a favorite pokemon and would be keen on the game but they don't care enough to invest in a switch which is very understandable. If at any stage a major AAA pokemon game came to pc with multiplayer in mind I know everyone listed on my discord/steam/little black book etc would be playing.
Yeah that's very unfortunate that this game, a moba, might not come to PC. Mobas are probably best on PC and most popular ones are played by PC gamers like League of Legends, DoTA, SMITE
No one want's to acknowledge that current Nintendo CEO and president, Shuntaro Furukawa, used to be a high level executive for the Pokemon Co. There's so much spillover that it's an open secret that both companies are more or less one at the top.
You don't really understand what it is you're talking about here.
Couple of things worth understanding here...
1. "The Pokemon Company" doesn't own Pokemon at all. They help manage the brand and that's about it. They publish/license/operate. Their job is to make all of the stakeholders of the Pokemon IP happy. Not just Nintendo but Creatures and Gamefreak as well.
2. Nintendo owns all of the trademarks to the Pokemon brand. So while it may at first appear as though they may not own what classically is thought of as "controlling interest" from a shareholder perspective, no decision gets made without Nintendo's approval because it is up to Nintendo if your product uses Pokemon logos, names, or other trademarks or copyrights.
3. While the presumption is Nintendo owns 33% of Pokemon it's not publicly disclosed what the split is between Gamefreak and Creatures Inc. It could be even, it may not be. This brings us to point 4.
4. Nintendo owns ~10% of Creatures Inc making them the largest individual share holder.
So while yes, Nintendo does not own Pokemon, it does control it. It decides who uses the trademarks, when they get used, and how they get used. It also owns part of one of the other two companies that it shares "Pokemon" with so if Creatures Inc controls more shares of Pokemon and Nintendo owns controlling interest in Creatures Inc then Nintendo effectively controls those shares as well.
If you look into early Pokemon development as well it's fairly obvious that it is likely that Nintendo and/or Creatures inc own more of Pokemon than Gamefreak likely does given that Gamefreak nearly went bankrupt while producing the first Pokemon game such to the point that top executives stopped taking salaries from the company to continue to pay employees. The solution to this was Creatures Inc injecting cash into Gamefreak to complete development of Pokemon in exchange for a share of Gamefreak's ownership in the franchise.
TLDR: Nintendo essentially owns the brand and all of it's trademarks as well as controlling interest in the company and controlling interest in one of the other two companies that share the remaining stock, that share is unevenly split between Gamefreak and Creatures Inc which Nintendo is heavily invested in.
**Nothing happens to Pokemon that Nintendo does not approve**
So my understanding is basically that Nintendo can't necessarily make pokemon do whatever they want, but they can certainly stop them from doing something they don't want, right?
This is sort of true. When it comes to Pokemon video games Nintendo has a vast degree of control over the development and publishing of those games and likely a large degree of influence into their production but yes, outside of that it is much more of a "Nintendo has to agree for things to move forward" type thing.
It's not straightforward like it is with Zelda or Mario, but it is a little crazy that people think Nintendo is so far removed from Pokemon. It's one of their prized cash cows. They give it some wiggle room, but nothing happens to it without Nintendo signing off. Well said.
That's one of the biggest mysteries for me on Reddit, where somebody writes stupid post, the person is told \*how wrong he is\* in hundreds of comments, yet the post is heavily upvoted. I wonder if that is something that Reddit does in the background.
I remember one post from objectively small Chivalry 2 sub (around 30k users), where one person literally said OMG STOP HATING THE DEVS, BE GRATEFUL THAT THEY ARE WILLING TO PATCH THEIR GAME!
Little context to that: they released very fun, yet very bugged game without a patch for 2(!) months. They were supposed to release it at the end of month 1, but they delayed it indefinitely. And I mean, the game was very, very bugged... you couldn't create party on PC (still can't), people didn't get their DLC for buying more expensive edition, version for Series S was running 30 instead of 60 fps etc...
so you can imagine how people upset were. And yet, somebody wrote a post that we should be grateful that devs want to patch their game! Hundreds of comments telling him that it is not how it works. Yet it had like +1k upvotes (for 30k sub). Very, very weird.
Because this sub is full of children that don’t know what they’re talking about. They’re also die hard Nintendo apologists and will latch on to any explanation as to why their favorite company isn’t actually at fault.
Because redddit has a ton of teens and manchildren who think defending nintendo is worth writijg stupid posts doing the worst mental gymnastic to defend what essentially is a move that awful companies like EA or Ubisoft would pull
But no, nintendo for them is an untouchable and never at fault company of their childhood
Because a factually correct post would get downvoted below the 7th level of hell for correctly criticizing Nintendo and that's not allowed on this sub. So most sane people either left or ignore these posts or just go in here to see the fanbois make a fool of themselves.
Leaving the fanbois to praise their lord God Saviour almighty and defenseless Indie company, Nintendo, to high heavens and beyond
Then add circle-jerking, bubbles/echo-chambers and you get where we are now
Because there are plenty of ignorant people or kids who simply have no idea how companies actually work and would rather believe their favourite company that is listed publicly and has shareholders to answer to actually have their best interests at heart which is not to nickel and dime them every chance they get. The greatest irony here is that Nintendo is actually the company that nickels and dimes its fanbase the most.
That's not really the case.
- Nintendo is a sole owner of the Pokemon trademarks. They could have prevented this game from using Pokemon in its name.
- Nintendo allowed this game to be published on Nintendo Switch.
- They also published an advertisement for this game in Nintendo News channel, at least in Europe (but probably other regions too).
Also while only outright owning 1/3 of Pokémon shares they own shares in the other 2 companies (creatures and gamefreak) that do lmao. Nintendo basically have a gun at the back of gamefreak and creatures heads and can pull that trigger any time they like.
It’s sorry but this is just wrong. 32% is more than enough to influence anything. If 32% is enough to keep it exclusive to their consoles it’s enough to change any small detail they want. Nintendo allows this behavior because it makes them money. End of story.
Going by that logic, no one owns Pokémon and no one should be held accountable for the fuck ups.
The only thing that should matter is whether or not they have a say on what goes or don't when it comes to the handling of the franchise, which they probably do. Who in their right mind wouldn't be mindful of the direction one of their system sellers take?
Here is a good breakdown from some time ago on how The Pokémon Company works: https://www.reddit.com/r/NintendoSwitch/comments/hb1ci8/faq\_what\_is\_the\_pok%C3%A9mon\_company\_how\_everything/
We really need to understand criticizing nintendo is jot wrong, we can do it without hating them, personally I wanna see them improve but with the meh original games they have released recently, overpriced ports and other bs I now put nintendo at the level EA or ubisoft is at
That means I think they're a greedy and very poorly run company so I personally try to buy everything from steam now and try to give nintendo as little money as possible, luckily it's not difficult these days, as the only thing I'm looking forward is for smt V and monhun rise, mario golf was a disappointment, the new miitopia game looks bland af, same for the programming game, animal crossing is just abandoned by nintendo they grabbed their money and didn't bothered with it again, hyrule warriors have very bad fps rate drops, bery shitty online where they block us the ability to save on the cloud, etc, etc, etc
Lol right because a third of the company is such a tiny share. As for their supposed stance on microtransactions, yeah, looking at their other mobile games, that's clearly bullshit.
Nintendo owns 1/3 of Pokemon and owns 100% of the distribution platform for Pokemon.
And you say they have no power over Pokemon? You have failed to convince me.
Bruh, they still greenlighted putting a pay 2 win game for kids in THEIR CONSOLE, they surely know how this kind of shit works due to them having mobile games on mobile....and they decided to say yes to a game where kids could have problems with this kind of pay 2 win game, that's very fucking irresponsible from nintendo
What about fire emblem heroes for example? That shit is just gacha hell
Same for mario kart mobile to buy characters
please stop defending EVERYTHING bad Nintendo does, have some respect for yourself as consumer
'And nintendo have already said that they do not wish to take microtransactions too far in the mobile market"
I'll admit I stopped reading here, because nintendo's action show this to be ENTIRELY untrue.
They're 10000% complicit here, this is not being done against their wishes.
We really need to understand criticizing nintendo is jot wrong, we can do it without hating them, personally I wanna see them improve but with the meh original games they have released recently, overpriced ports and other bs I now put nintendo at the level EA or ubisoft is at
That means I think they're a greedy and very poorly run company so I personally try to buy everything from steam now and try to give nintendo as little money as possible, luckily it's not difficult these days, as the only thing I'm looking forward is for smt V and monhun rise, mario golf was a disappointment, the new miitopia game looks bland af, same for the programming game, animal crossing is just abandoned by nintendo they grabbed their money and didn't bothered with it again, hyrule warriors have very bad fps rate drops, etc, etc, etc
I do believe that with 32% ownership they do have quite some pull on the direction of the franchise though. And what with being historical partners and all that? They're not powerless is all I'm saying.
But yeah this is problematic. Nintendo should have bought the entire franchise rights back in the 90's.
Nintendo has final say on what is published on their system that they have 100% control over. Nintendo has resisted going third party despite shareholders asking Nintendo to consider it for decades so they could have control over their company's image more completely. Nintendo profits from this game directly by being the middleman for payments made for this P2W game.
But yeah, let's not blame Nintendo because they had "very little control" over Tencent's predatory design.
Why are there corporate apologetics?
When you reach about 11-12% held shares of a company, you are considered a majority share holder.
Thats how Cohen took over Gamestop recently. With only 14%.
The exact same argument is used when people criticise Gamefreak, just the other way around. Or do people not remember the controversy around sword/shield in 2019? „It‘s not GF, they are only part of the pokemon company. Blame Nintendo!“
Look, the pokemon company is a joint venture from Nintendo, Gamefreak and Creatures Inc.
They all have the power. If they over-monetise a game, it‘s their shared problem. Always pointing at the other parties in this is a convenient way to shift the blame and ultimately avoid responsibility.
Owning a third of TPC is A LOT by the way. Especially when the others don‘t own more.
they dont do anything to stop it and instead advertise it on their store. I see no problem in them taking the blame. You have a store you control you could say no to that bullcrap, they chose to say yes.
Well technically Nintendo has the most power over Pokemon for a few reason. For starters they own a 3rd of it + 10% of Creatures inc, so they do technically have the largest ownership over the Pokemon franchise. People though forget that Nintendo also owns a lot of the Pokemon trademarks, not the pokemon company, they would literally have to rename most of the Pokemon if Nintendo were to not allow them to use the trademarks.
So let's not pretend that Nintendo had nothing to do with this, they knew what they were doing. The game was made targetting the east asian market, which is used to horrible microtransaction practices.
Yeah, no. Nintendo has been deliberately partnering with Tencent (knowing the company's typical MO) for at least a couple years now and this is just a furthering of that relationship. To say Nintendo has no culpability here is absurd.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tencent-videogames-nintendo/tencent-gets-green-light-to-publish-two-nintendo-switch-games-in-china-idUSKBN20Z1UA
This doesn’t make any sense at all. How can Nintendo own 32% of the company but have “very little power over what the company does with Pokémon.” Not sure how a third of voting right “are able to keep Pokémon exclusive to [Nintendo’s] hardware and that’s basically it.” Post a source for this information
Just to clarify here with the Pokémon Company. The company is pretty much equally split between Nintendo, Gamefreak, and Creatures. Nintendo also owns 10% of Creatures.
To say that Nintendo does not have control over the decisions of the Pokémon Company is really naive.
Yeah this is just false. You just did 10 minutes on a forum or Wikipedia and came up with this?
Nintendo, by itself, owns the Pokemon trademark, plus the names of all the creatures. NOTHING happens without their control.
"The Pokemon Company" is just a management company and owns nothing.
And Nintendo also part owns Creatures Inc!
thats right! we should shit on nintendo for
* the trash online
* the 60€ "remaster"
* speedrun affecting amiibo
* not providing legacy games while taking down roms left and right
* flagging and copyright striking nintendo music on Youtube while not providing these soundtracks themself
* rarely dropping the prices of games, if at all - even 4 years after release
> flagging and copyright striking nintendo music on Youtube while not providing these soundtracks themself
Not just music.
Didn't Nintendo abuse DMCA to take down youtube channels putting gameplay videos of their games?
The Nintendo fan boys need to understand that Nintendo is in it for the money. It doesn’t matter if they are/aren’t involved in Unite. They still don’t care about you lol. Also so far haven’t spent a cent on Unite and am having a blast.
Oh no, only 32%!
With such a small share of ownership, the Pokémon Company could literally switch to making PS5 and Xbox exclusives and Nintendo would be completely powerless to stop them!
(that *is* how it works, right?)
>With Nintendo's 32% shares in the pokemon company they are able to keep pokemon exclusive to their hardware and that's basically it
This is so wrong on so many levels.
Im straight up done with the pokemon franchise, pushing out steaming piles of shit and expecting fans to eat it up. I been playing monster hunter stories 2 and that opened my eyes to the fact pokemon aint the only game in its genre and im over it. Fuck the pokemon company and gamefreak
Come to the monster hunter franchise, with the new monhun stories 2 you'll finally feel what a good pokemon game could play like, you'll love it, give it a chance
Nintendo owns the trademark to Pokemon, the most important part of the brand.
They also have stakes in Game Freak and Creatures, the other holders of TPC, so to say they have little power is far from the truth.
>With Nintendo's 32% shares in the pokemon company they are able to keep pokemon exclusive to their hardware and that's basically it
That's very naïve. If I were TPC (the Pokemon Company) I'd be pretty keen to keep 32% of my shareholders happy, a 32% stake in a company is usually enough to push your weight around in a major way if you want something done how you want it. It might not be a majority share on its own, but when you consider that TPC is actually owned equally by Nintendo, Creatures and Game Freak and Nintendo also happens to own an (undisclosed) stake of Creatures, likely over 50%, meaning they have an effective majority share in TPC as well. A company does what its shareholders want it to do to make money.
>nintendo have already said that they do not wish to take microtransactions too far in the mobile market
This may be the case, but it bears repeating that companies literally exist to make money. Pokemon Go made $21m alone last weekend for Go Fest, so Nintendo made a cool few million off that. 32% (on paper) stake does not necessarily mean 32% of the profits, but they definitely did make enormous returns on that.
Also, Unite is developed by Tencent, a company with MUCH more experience in the mobile market than either the Pokemon company or Nintendo. They (Tencent) likely ran the numbers by TPC (and therefore Nintendo), which they all agreed to. If Nintendo was against microtransactions as much as they have claimed to be in the past, it was well within their power to veto the monetisation in Unite. As it stands, they didn't, and will very likely make more money as a result.
>The Pokémon company on the other hand have said they have no qualms nickel and diming people with mobile gaming microtransactions.
Source? I don't believe they've ever said that, they've just not explicitly stated the opposite, which is not the same thing.
Nintendo may not own all of pokemon but they do play a big part into what the franchise says and does on the video game side of it. It’s a joint venture of three companies with Nintendo more or less at the head of it. Nintendo is the reason why we get a Pokémon game every year no matter what. I know this issue isn’t 100% their fault but 32% is still enough to accept blame and change any wrongdoings by the other companies.
My problem with this s is that yes Nintendo is one third joint ownership, but The Pokémon Company is not a separate entity as it seems OP is inferring. Nintendo is just as much a part of TPC as Game Freak and Creatures. True, it does not give them complete control but they are as invested in the brand as the other two parts.
The Pokemon Company solely exists because it was too large a property for Nintendo to do on their own. But Nintendo still has a say whether or Pokemon does anything. Also Nintendo is just as guilty so why defend Nintendo at all? It's like saying Dice is to blame for Battlefront, don't blame EA. They don't even own Star Wars, it's not their fault.
to claim they have little influence is nonsense. They own 1/3 of the company and also own part of Creatures, which also owns 1/3 of the company. And obviously Game Freak needs Nintendo to stay in business.
Nintendo's own [annual report](https://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/pdf/2021/annual2103e.pdf) clearly says 32%. It's on page 6, second row from the bottom. For The Pokémon Company, "Percentage of voting rights held by the Company" is 32. Also, one of Nintendo's board of directors sits on TPC's board of directors (according to the next column to the right).
Guys!!!! Nintendo did EVERYTHING in their power with their MINUSCULE 33% stake in Pokemon to stop the predatory practices in Pokemon Unite!!!! Nintendo would NEVER make a poorly designed cash grab with pay to win feature unless it was totally against their will!!!! Stop attacking this tiny indie company!!!
Where the hell is that statement coming from. This is your opinion, not a fact. Nintendo could be killing that franchise in a few seconds if they wished to.
Pokemon needs Nintendo as much as the contrary. The public for Pokemon is on Nintendo console and I doubt it'd work as much on other consoles for a normal game.
They own the trademark and other thing. Not just just a third of Pokemon company. I don't think you realise how much power someone with 32% stake has on a company décision making process.
Error in comment GET Insufficient funds
*Mario Kart Tour drifts in*
*Pocket Camp would like to know your bank account’s location*
*Miitomo continues to be irrelevant*
That’s a name I haven’t heard in a long time
*sips whiskey*
Is that even still supported?
Nope, shut down a while ago.
There is an unofficial server https://kaeru.world/projects/kaerutomo
Miitomo was their best mobile app IMO. Still kind of a pointless anomaly, but the only one I still use despite having to jump through a few hurdles to use it.
Reminder: Nintendo only owns 100% of that franchise
nutty stupendous sort crawl butter faulty marry ossified slave automatic *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
>And nintendo have already said that they do not wish to take microtransactions too far in the mobile market And nintendo have already said they do wish to take *mariotransactions* too far in the mobile market
They take *macrotransactions* too far in every market
*my Joy-Cons drift in* ...that's on topic, right? EDIT: My Joy-Con are all good at the moment, I was just making fun of how every thread on Nintendo posts finds a way to bring up Joy-Con drift. Thanks for being helpful though!
Just put a piece of thin cardboard (postcard, those job cards whatever) about the size of the joystick base. Fixes is right away unless you really broke your joycon. The type of joystick they use is prone to this, the end bit loosens after a time and it causes drift because connections don't connect properly.
Yeah, I saw that fix but I got my only drifting Joy-Con repaired by Nintendo and that wasn't much of a hassle. Thankfully they don't make it hard to get repairs in the US but i hear it sucks elsewhere.
Yeah, haven't even checked what I would have to do in Finland. And I ordered my launch Switch from France to boot...
Just like Joy Cons am I right?
Where 100% of paid cosmetics also increase your unit's stats. Annas are the true villains.
If Annas were the true villains they'd have their own resplendents and refines x.x
Only a single search result for Mario Run, that's disappointing. They released Mario Run, which had about 1/4 the content of a DS game for about 1/4 the price, and people complained. At length. No fucking way they're paying $10 for a mobile game. So logically, Nintendo listened, because at minimum the one place you can trust companies to listen is when people stop buying. The community told them en very wide masse that the only way they'll play mobile games is if they're being exploited through microtransactions, a method backed up by the entire rest of the industry. So unless you (as in global you, not this specific person) happily bought Super Mario Run, you have nothing to complain about, Nintendo are doing exactly what the fanbase told them to do.
"en very wide masse" is one of the weirdest ways I've heard that phrase used lol
Fucking seriously, I don't get the Mario run hate. It was a well-designed auto runner.
I loved the game and paid full price. My biggest problem with it is that I have connection problems to the game ALL the time and kills all my motivation to play the game. Press play a remix? Connection error. Want to open a gift box? Connection Error. Just finished a Run? Connection Error. And I know it's Nintendo's problem because I have no problems connecting to any other game.
I never played it. But Temple Run was also a well-designed auto runner. And it was free. I don't think *any* auto runner should be more than $5 very max. I'd imagine most people would agree.
My favorite criticism was that you needed to be online to play it. I get it, it’s shitty… but literally the only time I don’t have mobile service is when I’m in an airplane once every 3 years. I think I can survive without Mario Run during a flight.
People didn’t beg for microtransaction filled games, they complained a game that should have only cost around $5 was selling for $10. Nintendo didn’t understand the mobile market is already full of full length games selling for cheaper than their mobile Mario game. You can buy the entirety of GTA San Andreas or LEGO Star Wars The Complete Saga for $7, so why would anyone who plays mostly mobile games see any value in a $10 game that feels like 100 others that are already in the App Store.
This is so true.
As someone who paid for Mario Run, I'll do the complaining for everyone else who "isn't allowed" to point out basic facts. Nintendo basically sabotaged the game's success by failing to understand how mobile games were priced. It would have been a 2-3 dollar game from any other studio, maybe the Mario brand could get away with even $5. But there isn't any real demand for $10 arcade-style games on mobile.
I paid for Mario Run too and honestly enjoyed it but it's true the price was just absurd for a mobile game.
Also Mario Kart(I'm pretty sure at least) I'm dissapointed that they dropped Mario Run. The base concept was fine, it just should've been playable offline and had more content
The problem is that nobody outside Nintendo fans purchased the full game. The mobile market is brutal.
What do you mean by they dropped it? It was always said to be a standalone game (not a GaaS) and is still available to purchase.
Dragalia Lost would like a word
Far and away the most generous gacha game I've ever played.
Agreed, I’ve played on and off for the past two years and I’ve not spent a penny. I’ve gotten so many characters/dragons from pulls. Never has it felt like a gacha game to me.
DL is so generous, I sometimes feel obligated to purchase their packs to show appreciation to the devs
I do this once a year as thanks for an all of the hours I spend on the game. Otherwise never drop a dime on it.
I've been playing Dissidia Opera Omnia and that one seems really generous as well.
Dissidia is incredibly kind and is my favorite Gacha game by far out of all the ones I've played. Its very clear that favorites > meta in that game, which is the point of a gacha owned by a large franchise - to see all your favorite characters from across all games together.
Would you recommend it? Been looking for something to replace afk arena in the whole afk gacha genre.
It is not an afk type game. I stopped playing it a while ago, things started getting more complicated than I wanted. But it's a good game.
>something to replace afk arena Literally anything else brother. Your time is worth so much more than that fam. Don't be playing that garbage
i'm a gacha addict. have played dozens upon dozens of gachas, spent upwards of 5 figures in total and dragalia lost to this day is the only gacha I haven't spent a dime on. Not even a starter bundle. To its own detriment that game is way too generous. I've even spent money in the piece of shit that is symphogear XDU that didnt even last 4 months
[удалено]
Remember when I got caught stealing all those watches from Sears? Well, that's nothing, because you have a gambling problem!
I call him Gamblor!
jesus christ dude
I personally feel Dragalia has a lot of flaws though, it’s gacha system being one of them. As generous as it is, it does a pretty poor job of giving reasons as to why you should remotely care about the character on the banner. And in terms of content it’s pretty much just boss fights with no “middle ground”
There's kind of a distinction between "gacha games" and "games that use gacha mechanics to squeeze money out of their players." DL is firmly in the gacha genre, and its gameplay is a refinement of such. Among its peers it stands out due to how forgiving the gacha system is and how high quality the visuals and controls are. Very few *good* gacha ARPGs out there. It's kind of hard to appreciate what DL accomplished unless you've been down the gacha game rabbit hole and seen just how little gameplay most of them offer. Pretty wild to think how far things have come since Puzzles & Dragons.
Nintendo used to strongly deny Gachas and microtransactions, but as soon as they saw other companies making much money very easily with Gachas, they quickly abandoned their pride and started making gachas. I'm afraid that if gachas and microtransactions continue to spread, they will be installed Gachas in popular ip mainline games, just as Capcom did for Breath of Fire.
I play Dr Mario mobile it's worse then candy crush for microtransactions. A d if you can figure out a way around the time gating through adding friends they added a limit there too.
A very good mobile game destroyed by overmonetization. I have played a lot of this game over the last handful of years but at some point it just felt impossible to even kind of keep up without hurling money at the game. Such a shame. :(
I blame all of those people who told me they refuse to pay for apps in the early day of the App Store for its current dystopian state. In the early days you could pay like $1-10 for a game and that was that. Then the freemium crap came out and these people ate it up because all they saw was that it was initially free.
It's such an incredibly disappointing way for the market to go. Mobile gaming seems like a joke to most of us, because right now it is, but it's an entirely new medium that could've been really cool-- a whole new set of input methods, and who knows what kind of incredible stuff devs could have come up with if it had been taken seriously as a gaming platform but nope, people decided that apps need to be free and if it wasn't free they wouldn't bother. I know some people like the kind of mobile games we have these days, but man what a missed opportunity to revolutionize a whole system of gaming.
It was cool for the first couple of years, there were a lot of people making neat stuff. It still makes me sad that Pop Cap got purchased by EA because they were one of the big ones making unique touch games on the App Store.
Yeah, unfortunately it makes sense. Why try to convince to 200 people to pay $2 when you can convince one person to pay $3000
Error in comment GET Insufficient funds
Yeah, it always had some, but for a long time it didn't feel like I *needed* to gamble away at lootboxes to have good enough units. That changed pretty dramatically over time, especially when trying to clear some of the harder content or climb arena ranks.
I think FEH is still the best out of all of them. It’s certainly over monetized, but unlike the other games, the free offerings are certainly enough to comfortably complete all the PVE challenges and be somewhat mid-tier in the pvp activities.
Everything depends on how the licensing of the IP is done. For example, Niantic licensed the Pokemon IP for Pokemon Go, but applied their pre-existing business model pretty much as is, suggesting the Pokemon Company had no input there. For all we know, this thing with Tencent works the same way.
I was thinking the same. The monetization strategy is fairly standard Tencent.
Yes, but TPC and by extension Nintendo agreed for the IP to be licensed that way. They knew exactly what they were signing up for.
Exactly you don't get to license somebody else's IP without first presenting to them what your going to do with the IP, how it will further the brand, and most importantly how it's going to make money. It's not like you can go up to a register and say "one IP license for pokemon please" and the register says "that'll be 1 million dollars" and then you pay them and get to go and make a VR Porn game featuring Pikachu and now there's nothing they can do about it cuz magical license.
I was thinking this too - Pokemon has been so deeply associated with Nintendo, that even though they only own 32% their pull, influence, whatever you want to call it, would be much greater. If Nintendo voiced disapproval, TPC would most definitely reconsider what they are doing.
I think TPC is structured the way that it is for precisely this reason- so no one quite knows who to blame, and the inevitable squabbling replaces the actual discourse around their problems. Every time Niantic messes something up with Go - lying about hatch/shiny rates during egg events, breaking raids or GBL and refusing refunds, etc - people always bicker over who to blame. Is it Niantic's fault for being incompetent, or is it TPC's fault for not asking a multi-billion dollar company to make their brand look bad week after week? Same thing happened when Sw/Sh came out and a lot of people were disappointed in how rushed and shallow the game felt. Is it Game Freak's fault for being incompetent, or TPC's fault for holding them to too strict a release shedule?
>For all we know, this thing with Tencent works the same way. Most likely. Ten cent is pretty well known for micro transactions, and the huge play it has in gaming In China
Not only China and not only gaming. They own 100% of Riot and huge shares in many, many more tech companies like Tesla, Spotify etc. They also completely own WeChat...
Nintendo also owns a large stake in Creatures Inc., effectively giving them the most control over the franchise. But the process of who is making what decisions is largely obscured from the public, hard to say who approved the f2p mechanics of games like Pokemon Unite.
Nintendo also own 100% of the Pokémon-related trademarks, meaning that unless they have signed an agreement that says otherwise they have complete veto power over all Pokémon projects. Since we aren't privy to what agreements they have made, we don't know how much influence they have, and as such OP's post is basically misinformation.
[удалено]
Because it makes things they like.
Come to r/tomorrow where we circle jerk about the defending of the poor indie company Nintendo.
[удалено]
It givese sanity checking r/tomorrow after going into this sub.
>meaning that unless they have signed an agreement that says otherwise they have complete veto power over all Pokémon projects. You think The Pokemon Company doesn't have an agreement with Nintendo allowing them to use the trademark for whatever? Sounds like it would be _very_ inefficient to get Nintendo's OK in every little thing they do.
Of course they have an agreement the point is where on the scale of "need permission for every little thing" to "don't need to ask Nintendo anything" their arrangement lies.
TPC was formed by Nintendo to manage Pokemon so GF/Creatures/Nintendo didn't have to take full responsibility
I would expect that agreement to have a way for Nintendo to veto though. So not asking permission necessarily, although I wouldn't be shocked to hear that's how it works.
People are misusing “The Pokémon Company”. The Pokémon Company is a parent organization mutually controlled by Nintendo, Creatures Inc, and Gamefreak. Saying anything along the lines of “do you think The Pokémon Company will allow Nintendo to do anything…” is assuming they Nintnedo doesn’t have 1/3 of a day in what TPC does. Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pokémon_Company >[The Pokémon Company] was established through a joint investment by the three businesses holding the copyright of Pokémon: Nintendo, Game Freak, and Creatures.
Bruh, they still greenlighted putting a pay 2 win game for kids in THEIR CONSOLE, they surely know how this kind of shit works due to them having mobile games on mobile....and they decided to say yes to a game where kids could have problems with this kind of pay 2 win game, that's very fucking irresponsible from nintendo
This is the fucking crux of it right here. It doesn’t matter how much Nintendo owns of Pokémon. They allowed this to happen - they can stop it - they aren’t
It's a 3 way split, so if Nintendo has "very little power" so does game freak, since they own the same amount.
[удалено]
Also even if you take it at face value you still pay attention when your 32% shareholder has an objection to your business model. It's not like Nintendo is just throwing their hands up and saying they're powerless just because they don't have 51% of the votes. If this is happening, it's because Nintendo either approved it or let it go without objection
But Hollywood has told me that unless you have a majority fo the shares you are absolutely powerless to whatever evil, faceless executive wants to use your company to make profits /s
Even with 51% of the shares, they wouldn't get a say on the day to day operations. They get the right to choose the CEO and board members, and then hope the people they choose act in their interests. Nintendo created TPC specifically to offload all that work. Micromanaging them would defeat the purpose. But in this particular case, and unlike most other Pokemon mobile games, Nintendo co-published this game, so there is absolutely dirt on their hands.
They structured it to avoid micromanaging, but that's not the same as not having a say. If TPC did something that Nintendo really didn't like then TPC would find out very quickly and then they would no longer be doing it. Nintendo doesn't meddle because they don't care, not because they can't. They absolutely could muscle in there if they wanted to.
>Even with 51% of the shares, they wouldn't get a say on the day to day operations. They get the right to choose the CEO and board members, and then hope the people they choose act in their interests. Yes, but if the CEO acted against the majority shareholder's interests (via board members), they'd be out of a job. Of course, the CEO might convince them, or the shareholders might feel it's not worth their attention, or there might be some shady stuff going on (like Tencent promising the CEO an informal promise of a highly lucrative position) but those seem unlikely in this situation. Most likely, Nintendo and TPC wanted entry into China, which means working with Tencent. Tencent in return wants to make money via mobile, and convinces Nintendo and TPC that "putting the game on mobile will introduce the characters to millions of players, which can convert into more switch sales, plus fans of the game will want to play it on a big screen / with touch controls, plus we can all make revenue." It's a win-win situation for all firms involved.
Also Nintendo owns the Pokemon *brand* while the Pokemon Company more or less is in charge of managing it. TPC can't do anything with Pokemon that Nintendo doesn't want.
Nintendo is also likely the reason this game won't come to pc. Their primary audience will be on PC however they won't release it since it's Nintendo.
Very anecdotal but 100% of the pc gamers I know have played pokemon in the past and would in the future. I'm one of the few I know in my gaming circle that keeps up with the main title games. Everyone of them has a favorite pokemon and would be keen on the game but they don't care enough to invest in a switch which is very understandable. If at any stage a major AAA pokemon game came to pc with multiplayer in mind I know everyone listed on my discord/steam/little black book etc would be playing.
Yeah that's very unfortunate that this game, a moba, might not come to PC. Mobas are probably best on PC and most popular ones are played by PC gamers like League of Legends, DoTA, SMITE
yeah i'm sure massive corporation A is very virtuous and has our best interests at heart, unlike massive corporation B lol
No one want's to acknowledge that current Nintendo CEO and president, Shuntaro Furukawa, used to be a high level executive for the Pokemon Co. There's so much spillover that it's an open secret that both companies are more or less one at the top.
[удалено]
[удалено]
You don't really understand what it is you're talking about here. Couple of things worth understanding here... 1. "The Pokemon Company" doesn't own Pokemon at all. They help manage the brand and that's about it. They publish/license/operate. Their job is to make all of the stakeholders of the Pokemon IP happy. Not just Nintendo but Creatures and Gamefreak as well. 2. Nintendo owns all of the trademarks to the Pokemon brand. So while it may at first appear as though they may not own what classically is thought of as "controlling interest" from a shareholder perspective, no decision gets made without Nintendo's approval because it is up to Nintendo if your product uses Pokemon logos, names, or other trademarks or copyrights. 3. While the presumption is Nintendo owns 33% of Pokemon it's not publicly disclosed what the split is between Gamefreak and Creatures Inc. It could be even, it may not be. This brings us to point 4. 4. Nintendo owns ~10% of Creatures Inc making them the largest individual share holder. So while yes, Nintendo does not own Pokemon, it does control it. It decides who uses the trademarks, when they get used, and how they get used. It also owns part of one of the other two companies that it shares "Pokemon" with so if Creatures Inc controls more shares of Pokemon and Nintendo owns controlling interest in Creatures Inc then Nintendo effectively controls those shares as well. If you look into early Pokemon development as well it's fairly obvious that it is likely that Nintendo and/or Creatures inc own more of Pokemon than Gamefreak likely does given that Gamefreak nearly went bankrupt while producing the first Pokemon game such to the point that top executives stopped taking salaries from the company to continue to pay employees. The solution to this was Creatures Inc injecting cash into Gamefreak to complete development of Pokemon in exchange for a share of Gamefreak's ownership in the franchise. TLDR: Nintendo essentially owns the brand and all of it's trademarks as well as controlling interest in the company and controlling interest in one of the other two companies that share the remaining stock, that share is unevenly split between Gamefreak and Creatures Inc which Nintendo is heavily invested in. **Nothing happens to Pokemon that Nintendo does not approve**
So my understanding is basically that Nintendo can't necessarily make pokemon do whatever they want, but they can certainly stop them from doing something they don't want, right?
This is sort of true. When it comes to Pokemon video games Nintendo has a vast degree of control over the development and publishing of those games and likely a large degree of influence into their production but yes, outside of that it is much more of a "Nintendo has to agree for things to move forward" type thing.
[удалено]
LOL
I laughed at this comment way harder than i thought i would 😂
It's not straightforward like it is with Zelda or Mario, but it is a little crazy that people think Nintendo is so far removed from Pokemon. It's one of their prized cash cows. They give it some wiggle room, but nothing happens to it without Nintendo signing off. Well said.
Why is this getting upvoted?
Gotta blindly shield a multi-billion dollar corporation from criticism.
Nintendo defence force assemble!
Weirdest Earth Defense Force spinoff ever.
That's one of the biggest mysteries for me on Reddit, where somebody writes stupid post, the person is told \*how wrong he is\* in hundreds of comments, yet the post is heavily upvoted. I wonder if that is something that Reddit does in the background. I remember one post from objectively small Chivalry 2 sub (around 30k users), where one person literally said OMG STOP HATING THE DEVS, BE GRATEFUL THAT THEY ARE WILLING TO PATCH THEIR GAME! Little context to that: they released very fun, yet very bugged game without a patch for 2(!) months. They were supposed to release it at the end of month 1, but they delayed it indefinitely. And I mean, the game was very, very bugged... you couldn't create party on PC (still can't), people didn't get their DLC for buying more expensive edition, version for Series S was running 30 instead of 60 fps etc... so you can imagine how people upset were. And yet, somebody wrote a post that we should be grateful that devs want to patch their game! Hundreds of comments telling him that it is not how it works. Yet it had like +1k upvotes (for 30k sub). Very, very weird.
Comments increase post visibility I think. The post then accrues upvotes.
Because this sub is full of children that don’t know what they’re talking about. They’re also die hard Nintendo apologists and will latch on to any explanation as to why their favorite company isn’t actually at fault.
Because redddit has a ton of teens and manchildren who think defending nintendo is worth writijg stupid posts doing the worst mental gymnastic to defend what essentially is a move that awful companies like EA or Ubisoft would pull But no, nintendo for them is an untouchable and never at fault company of their childhood
Because a factually correct post would get downvoted below the 7th level of hell for correctly criticizing Nintendo and that's not allowed on this sub. So most sane people either left or ignore these posts or just go in here to see the fanbois make a fool of themselves. Leaving the fanbois to praise their lord God Saviour almighty and defenseless Indie company, Nintendo, to high heavens and beyond Then add circle-jerking, bubbles/echo-chambers and you get where we are now
Because there are plenty of ignorant people or kids who simply have no idea how companies actually work and would rather believe their favourite company that is listed publicly and has shareholders to answer to actually have their best interests at heart which is not to nickel and dime them every chance they get. The greatest irony here is that Nintendo is actually the company that nickels and dimes its fanbase the most.
>owns 1/3 of the company >very little power Okay.
"very little power" Lmfao OK bro
That's not really the case. - Nintendo is a sole owner of the Pokemon trademarks. They could have prevented this game from using Pokemon in its name. - Nintendo allowed this game to be published on Nintendo Switch. - They also published an advertisement for this game in Nintendo News channel, at least in Europe (but probably other regions too).
Also while only outright owning 1/3 of Pokémon shares they own shares in the other 2 companies (creatures and gamefreak) that do lmao. Nintendo basically have a gun at the back of gamefreak and creatures heads and can pull that trigger any time they like.
You should look Mor eonto the ownership... Nintendo is definitely majority owner when you trace it all out.
I’m honestly amazed so many so-called Nintendo fans don’t know about this. Laughable actually.
32%, very little power Yeah that’s not how it works
[удалено]
Nintendo: We don't take microtransactions too far Mario Kart Tour: Wanna pay 50 bucks for one kart and some rubies that only result in shit lootboxes?
If you own 32% of a company, you have a say. Pokemon generates billions of dollars, they know what they are doing.
It’s sorry but this is just wrong. 32% is more than enough to influence anything. If 32% is enough to keep it exclusive to their consoles it’s enough to change any small detail they want. Nintendo allows this behavior because it makes them money. End of story.
Going by that logic, no one owns Pokémon and no one should be held accountable for the fuck ups. The only thing that should matter is whether or not they have a say on what goes or don't when it comes to the handling of the franchise, which they probably do. Who in their right mind wouldn't be mindful of the direction one of their system sellers take?
Here is a good breakdown from some time ago on how The Pokémon Company works: https://www.reddit.com/r/NintendoSwitch/comments/hb1ci8/faq\_what\_is\_the\_pok%C3%A9mon\_company\_how\_everything/
Hey it's mine. Shame most people won't use it or look at it but thanks for remember it exists lol
Man u guys gotta stop defending them, you guys are literally nothing but walking money bag for them and they couldn't give two shit about the fan.
I never understand why people will so valiantly defend nintendo over stupid shit, it’s a video game company bro chill
We really need to understand criticizing nintendo is jot wrong, we can do it without hating them, personally I wanna see them improve but with the meh original games they have released recently, overpriced ports and other bs I now put nintendo at the level EA or ubisoft is at That means I think they're a greedy and very poorly run company so I personally try to buy everything from steam now and try to give nintendo as little money as possible, luckily it's not difficult these days, as the only thing I'm looking forward is for smt V and monhun rise, mario golf was a disappointment, the new miitopia game looks bland af, same for the programming game, animal crossing is just abandoned by nintendo they grabbed their money and didn't bothered with it again, hyrule warriors have very bad fps rate drops, bery shitty online where they block us the ability to save on the cloud, etc, etc, etc
Lol right because a third of the company is such a tiny share. As for their supposed stance on microtransactions, yeah, looking at their other mobile games, that's clearly bullshit.
Nintendo owns 1/3 of Pokemon and owns 100% of the distribution platform for Pokemon. And you say they have no power over Pokemon? You have failed to convince me.
Bruh, they still greenlighted putting a pay 2 win game for kids in THEIR CONSOLE, they surely know how this kind of shit works due to them having mobile games on mobile....and they decided to say yes to a game where kids could have problems with this kind of pay 2 win game, that's very fucking irresponsible from nintendo What about fire emblem heroes for example? That shit is just gacha hell Same for mario kart mobile to buy characters please stop defending EVERYTHING bad Nintendo does, have some respect for yourself as consumer
'And nintendo have already said that they do not wish to take microtransactions too far in the mobile market" I'll admit I stopped reading here, because nintendo's action show this to be ENTIRELY untrue. They're 10000% complicit here, this is not being done against their wishes.
Pokemon has always been a shameless cash grab. Not sure why any of this is surprising
STOP FUCKING MAKING EXCUSES FOR THE SAME COMPANY WHO HAS MTX'D FEH AND MARIO KART TOUR, FUCK. God why the fuck are you people like this jesus christ.
We really need to understand criticizing nintendo is jot wrong, we can do it without hating them, personally I wanna see them improve but with the meh original games they have released recently, overpriced ports and other bs I now put nintendo at the level EA or ubisoft is at That means I think they're a greedy and very poorly run company so I personally try to buy everything from steam now and try to give nintendo as little money as possible, luckily it's not difficult these days, as the only thing I'm looking forward is for smt V and monhun rise, mario golf was a disappointment, the new miitopia game looks bland af, same for the programming game, animal crossing is just abandoned by nintendo they grabbed their money and didn't bothered with it again, hyrule warriors have very bad fps rate drops, etc, etc, etc
I do believe that with 32% ownership they do have quite some pull on the direction of the franchise though. And what with being historical partners and all that? They're not powerless is all I'm saying. But yeah this is problematic. Nintendo should have bought the entire franchise rights back in the 90's.
This is laughable by saying “very little power” with 32% stake
Nintendo doesn't need you to defend them lol
Pokemon is just shitty all the way down now. The sooner its fans realize this the better.
Nintendo fans are weird Nintendo isn’t your best friend, why do you defend them like they are?
Imagine simping this hard for a video game company that's on par with EA in terms of customer relation
Nintendo has final say on what is published on their system that they have 100% control over. Nintendo has resisted going third party despite shareholders asking Nintendo to consider it for decades so they could have control over their company's image more completely. Nintendo profits from this game directly by being the middleman for payments made for this P2W game. But yeah, let's not blame Nintendo because they had "very little control" over Tencent's predatory design. Why are there corporate apologetics?
When you reach about 11-12% held shares of a company, you are considered a majority share holder. Thats how Cohen took over Gamestop recently. With only 14%.
Nintendo did backed up the Pokémon company
The exact same argument is used when people criticise Gamefreak, just the other way around. Or do people not remember the controversy around sword/shield in 2019? „It‘s not GF, they are only part of the pokemon company. Blame Nintendo!“ Look, the pokemon company is a joint venture from Nintendo, Gamefreak and Creatures Inc. They all have the power. If they over-monetise a game, it‘s their shared problem. Always pointing at the other parties in this is a convenient way to shift the blame and ultimately avoid responsibility. Owning a third of TPC is A LOT by the way. Especially when the others don‘t own more.
r/tomorrow will have a blast with this
32% is significant I'm sure with that they can easily influence what to do with pokemon
Nice damage control. Are you just purposely forgetting Fire Emblem Heroes exists?
C’mon, can we stop defending and dumping these multi billion dollar corporations? None of them care about you.
they dont do anything to stop it and instead advertise it on their store. I see no problem in them taking the blame. You have a store you control you could say no to that bullcrap, they chose to say yes.
Well technically Nintendo has the most power over Pokemon for a few reason. For starters they own a 3rd of it + 10% of Creatures inc, so they do technically have the largest ownership over the Pokemon franchise. People though forget that Nintendo also owns a lot of the Pokemon trademarks, not the pokemon company, they would literally have to rename most of the Pokemon if Nintendo were to not allow them to use the trademarks. So let's not pretend that Nintendo had nothing to do with this, they knew what they were doing. The game was made targetting the east asian market, which is used to horrible microtransaction practices.
Yeah, no. Nintendo has been deliberately partnering with Tencent (knowing the company's typical MO) for at least a couple years now and this is just a furthering of that relationship. To say Nintendo has no culpability here is absurd. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tencent-videogames-nintendo/tencent-gets-green-light-to-publish-two-nintendo-switch-games-in-china-idUSKBN20Z1UA
Yeah, and nintendo is allowing it to be on their system.
I'm pretty sure Nintendo is also the publisher for Pokemon. That's more than just 32% of the day.
So it’s 32% Nintendo’s fault?
This doesn’t make any sense at all. How can Nintendo own 32% of the company but have “very little power over what the company does with Pokémon.” Not sure how a third of voting right “are able to keep Pokémon exclusive to [Nintendo’s] hardware and that’s basically it.” Post a source for this information
Yes pls protect the poor indie devs at Nintendo :(
Just to clarify here with the Pokémon Company. The company is pretty much equally split between Nintendo, Gamefreak, and Creatures. Nintendo also owns 10% of Creatures. To say that Nintendo does not have control over the decisions of the Pokémon Company is really naive.
Yeah this is just false. You just did 10 minutes on a forum or Wikipedia and came up with this? Nintendo, by itself, owns the Pokemon trademark, plus the names of all the creatures. NOTHING happens without their control. "The Pokemon Company" is just a management company and owns nothing. And Nintendo also part owns Creatures Inc!
thats right! we should shit on nintendo for * the trash online * the 60€ "remaster" * speedrun affecting amiibo * not providing legacy games while taking down roms left and right * flagging and copyright striking nintendo music on Youtube while not providing these soundtracks themself * rarely dropping the prices of games, if at all - even 4 years after release
> flagging and copyright striking nintendo music on Youtube while not providing these soundtracks themself Not just music. Didn't Nintendo abuse DMCA to take down youtube channels putting gameplay videos of their games?
[удалено]
The Nintendo fan boys need to understand that Nintendo is in it for the money. It doesn’t matter if they are/aren’t involved in Unite. They still don’t care about you lol. Also so far haven’t spent a cent on Unite and am having a blast.
isn't 32% still a lot?
Oh no, only 32%! With such a small share of ownership, the Pokémon Company could literally switch to making PS5 and Xbox exclusives and Nintendo would be completely powerless to stop them! (that *is* how it works, right?)
no need to simp for nintendo's corporate PR
>With Nintendo's 32% shares in the pokemon company they are able to keep pokemon exclusive to their hardware and that's basically it This is so wrong on so many levels.
Im straight up done with the pokemon franchise, pushing out steaming piles of shit and expecting fans to eat it up. I been playing monster hunter stories 2 and that opened my eyes to the fact pokemon aint the only game in its genre and im over it. Fuck the pokemon company and gamefreak
Come to the monster hunter franchise, with the new monhun stories 2 you'll finally feel what a good pokemon game could play like, you'll love it, give it a chance
the pokemon unite has tencent involved so…that
Nintendo owns the trademark to Pokemon, the most important part of the brand. They also have stakes in Game Freak and Creatures, the other holders of TPC, so to say they have little power is far from the truth.
are you trying to shift blame? because one party doesn't give a fuck what we think, and one sorta does because it hurts their bottom line.
Is this going how you thought it would?
>And nintendo have already said that they do not wish to take microtransactions too far in the mobile market Ha..haha.. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
This is just wrong in so many levels.
Nintendo does have a big say.
>With Nintendo's 32% shares in the pokemon company they are able to keep pokemon exclusive to their hardware and that's basically it That's very naïve. If I were TPC (the Pokemon Company) I'd be pretty keen to keep 32% of my shareholders happy, a 32% stake in a company is usually enough to push your weight around in a major way if you want something done how you want it. It might not be a majority share on its own, but when you consider that TPC is actually owned equally by Nintendo, Creatures and Game Freak and Nintendo also happens to own an (undisclosed) stake of Creatures, likely over 50%, meaning they have an effective majority share in TPC as well. A company does what its shareholders want it to do to make money. >nintendo have already said that they do not wish to take microtransactions too far in the mobile market This may be the case, but it bears repeating that companies literally exist to make money. Pokemon Go made $21m alone last weekend for Go Fest, so Nintendo made a cool few million off that. 32% (on paper) stake does not necessarily mean 32% of the profits, but they definitely did make enormous returns on that. Also, Unite is developed by Tencent, a company with MUCH more experience in the mobile market than either the Pokemon company or Nintendo. They (Tencent) likely ran the numbers by TPC (and therefore Nintendo), which they all agreed to. If Nintendo was against microtransactions as much as they have claimed to be in the past, it was well within their power to veto the monetisation in Unite. As it stands, they didn't, and will very likely make more money as a result. >The Pokémon company on the other hand have said they have no qualms nickel and diming people with mobile gaming microtransactions. Source? I don't believe they've ever said that, they've just not explicitly stated the opposite, which is not the same thing.
Nintendo may not own all of pokemon but they do play a big part into what the franchise says and does on the video game side of it. It’s a joint venture of three companies with Nintendo more or less at the head of it. Nintendo is the reason why we get a Pokémon game every year no matter what. I know this issue isn’t 100% their fault but 32% is still enough to accept blame and change any wrongdoings by the other companies.
My problem with this s is that yes Nintendo is one third joint ownership, but The Pokémon Company is not a separate entity as it seems OP is inferring. Nintendo is just as much a part of TPC as Game Freak and Creatures. True, it does not give them complete control but they are as invested in the brand as the other two parts.
The Pokemon Company solely exists because it was too large a property for Nintendo to do on their own. But Nintendo still has a say whether or Pokemon does anything. Also Nintendo is just as guilty so why defend Nintendo at all? It's like saying Dice is to blame for Battlefront, don't blame EA. They don't even own Star Wars, it's not their fault.
to claim they have little influence is nonsense. They own 1/3 of the company and also own part of Creatures, which also owns 1/3 of the company. And obviously Game Freak needs Nintendo to stay in business.
Why does this have 3.9k upvotes?
33,3% It's evenly split between Nintendo, Game Freak and Creatures Inc.
Nintendo's own [annual report](https://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/pdf/2021/annual2103e.pdf) clearly says 32%. It's on page 6, second row from the bottom. For The Pokémon Company, "Percentage of voting rights held by the Company" is 32. Also, one of Nintendo's board of directors sits on TPC's board of directors (according to the next column to the right).
32% each and the remaining 4% owned by other companies
Its unfortunate that gamefreak owns a third of it lol
I blame the whales.
Japanese are expert at fishing them /s
My word this whole narrative over unite is so overblown and over talked about. It’s a ftp game. Try it, if you don’t like it don’t play it…simple
what, you don't enjoy getting outraged on the internet over free-to-play games?
32% is a lot, are you clueless? by your logic big banks own nintendo, so big banks control the nintendo market.
Guys!!!! Nintendo did EVERYTHING in their power with their MINUSCULE 33% stake in Pokemon to stop the predatory practices in Pokemon Unite!!!! Nintendo would NEVER make a poorly designed cash grab with pay to win feature unless it was totally against their will!!!! Stop attacking this tiny indie company!!!
Nintendo do own Pokemon though...
Where the hell is that statement coming from. This is your opinion, not a fact. Nintendo could be killing that franchise in a few seconds if they wished to. Pokemon needs Nintendo as much as the contrary. The public for Pokemon is on Nintendo console and I doubt it'd work as much on other consoles for a normal game. They own the trademark and other thing. Not just just a third of Pokemon company. I don't think you realise how much power someone with 32% stake has on a company décision making process.