By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Should Nintendo Buy Game Freak?

 

Should Nintendo buy Game Freak?

Pika!! (Yes they should) 20 51.28%
 
Glub glub, Magikarp (They should not) 19 48.72%
 
Total:39
Green098 on 27 August 2018
CaptainExplosion said:
twintail said:

Have you seen a Pokémon or Kirby game on a competing platform?

I have seen a Pokemon game on a competing platform; Pokemon Go on mobile devices, a competitor to the Nintendo 3DS.

By that logic so is Mario, Fire Emblem and Animal Crossing. Mobile is a third pillar for Nintendo used to advertise and promote their IP, attracting people to their mainline games on dedicated gaming devices.



Around the Network
Miyamotoo on 27 August 2018
CaptainExplosion said:

I might've asked this before, but I think in doing so Nintendo would have full access to Pokemon as a whole, with no risks of losing rights to Pokemon creatures or characters.

Right now Pokemon isn't fully a Nintendo franchise.

 

Do you think Nintendo should buy Gamefreak?

They already have full acces to Pokemon as a whole and they cant losing rights for Pokemon creatures and characters, even if Pokemon isnt fully owned buy Nintendo only. They also cant release games on other platforms if Nintendo dont agrees.

So no, there is no need for buying Gamefreak.

Last edited by Miyamotoo - on 27 August 2018

Helloplite on 27 August 2018

Nintendo has nearly full control over the Pokémon franchise. This discussion is needless. Even Pokémon Go, which is cited here as a game on a "non-Nintendo" platform was the outcome of a 20 million USD investment into Niantic by Nintendo. If this was entirely Creatures/Pokémon Company then why would have Nintendo spent so much money on a third party? The decision to make Pokémon Go and even the choice of third party were entirely Nintendo's doing.

People overestimate the extent of control Pokémon Company has in the decisions and also exaggerate Creatures decision making extent. Creature is primarily a developer and they have creative freedom in that sense. Managerial decisions about the future of the franchise still remain with Nintendo however.



Trentonater on 27 August 2018
Helloplite said:
Nintendo has nearly full control over the Pokémon franchise. This discussion is needless. Even Pokémon Go, which is cited here as a game on a "non-Nintendo" platform was the outcome of a 20 million USD investment into Niantic by Nintendo. If this was entirely Creatures/Pokémon Company then why would have Nintendo spent so much money on a third party? The decision to make Pokémon Go and even the choice of third party were entirely Nintendo's doing.

People overestimate the extent of control Pokémon Company has in the decisions and also exaggerate Creatures decision making extent. Creature is primarily a developer and they have creative freedom in that sense. Managerial decisions about the future of the franchise still remain with Nintendo however.

Pokemon Company makes ALL licensing decisions not related to the mainline series. It is just that those from the Nintendo, Gamefreak and Creatures vote on what those decisions should be.



https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3Biofy1meIfE562y8VMnww

BUG LONDON.

SuperNova on 27 August 2018

Nintendo already owns the the Pokemon trademak in full. They own the copyright to every Pokemon and character name. They have no risk of ever loosing it.
As for the IP itself, Nintendo probably owns at least 50% of it, probably more, since they own about 10% of Creatures inc, who in turn own part of Game Freak and the Pokemon IP.
It's true they have no direct stake in GF, but they own part of it through their stake in Creatures inc.

As for the Pokemon Company, who manages the brand, it's owned in equal shares by Nintendo, GF and Creatures inc., so Nintendo again through their share in Creatures owns the majority of it.

source: https://toucharcade.com/2016/07/28/who-owns-pokemon-anyway-its-complicated/