By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Frogger on 03 March 2014
Edit Thread
Soundwave said:
spemanig said:
Jumpin said:
I don't think buying Capcom would be a very good idea either. Why spend billions when you can spend a few million on purchasing and developing studios instead? Nintendo buying Monolithsoft last generation was a great move, for example. Then there was also retro studios, 1-up studios. They should do much more of that.


I'm not saying they shouldn't. I specifically said that they should, buy they should buy Capcom first, because what Nintendo is really missing is relevant IPs, and purchasing talent alone won't bring that. Purchasing relevant IPs will.


I wasn't making a prediction above, how can you cite Nintendo as needing to be like Disney and Apple when they simply don't have that level of management? It's not a prediction, it's reality, Nintendo can't be like Disney because they don't have the competent management to get it done, period. They are a small, even smaller-minded Japanese game company that happens to have a few really great game studios, but are mediocre at marketing anything, mediocre at keeping up with industry trends, etc. etc. 

Good game developer, awful management, that's the here and now of it, not tomorrow. 

Nintendo already has virtual exclusivity on the major Capcom franchise they need -- Monster Hunter. 

The longer they ignore any real Western collaboration (not just having a few studios work on their own franchises), the further removed from the gaming mainstream Nintendo will become because the Western developer is now the dominant force in the industry. 

Sinking billions into a company like Capcom would be an investment they'd likely never ever sniff a profit on, the people who have a PS4/X1 and refuse to buy a Nintendo console would simply just stop playing the Resident Evil and Street Fighter series, neither of which is a "spring chicken" franchise. 

It'd be 100x smarter to buy the rights to the available James Bond franchise. That's an IP that's cooler than any game character created, has a history with Nintendo, and would cost not even 1/1000th of what it would cost to overpay for a few Capcom IP. It's also a character property that's more relevant in North America, Europe, and well known everywhere else in world if you give it to a very talented studio (ahem, Retro Studios) and you could put Daniel Craig in TV commercials to bring some badly needly class/"cool" to a brand that needs it worse than a desert needs rain. 

How can I cite what a company needs to do to succeed? Is that even a real question? Who cares about how bad their management is? That doesn't change that they need to change and that this are how they should do it. 

Street Fighter is the most relevant fighting franchise in the world. People wouldn't just "stop playing it" because it's on a Nintendo platform. Evo wouldn't just stop using it because they don't like Nintendo. Die hard fans would still buy it, because that's what fans do. Same with Resident Evil and any other relevant franchises. These are no Bayonetta 2. If you seriously are trying to compare 007 games to Capcom franchises, you clearly don't know what you're talking about. Golden Eye 007 was a one hit wonder. It's no franchise worth purchasing over Capcom and it wouldn't have nearly the impact that purchasing an entire bouquet of popular gaming IPs would, western or otherwise.

That being said, I see no reason why it wouldn't be a good idea to purchase the James Bond franchise on top of buying Capcom. I do see why it is a worth while investment, but when choosing between 007 and Capcom, you choose Capcom every time.