How did Nintendo win developer of the year at the Game Awards?

[Troll_Whisperer]

darkcreap said:

Troll_Whisperer said:

Not a "let's shit on Nintendo" thread, bear with me.

I just thought about this. Nintendo are a publisher. Within it they have EAD 1, EAD 2, EAD Tokyo, Retro, etc.

Why is Nintendo considered a developer, while for Ubisoft it was just Ubisoft Montreal? I mean, Nintendo and Ubisoft are similar in that sense (let's forget the quality aspect of it...), many internally created developers under one name. If Retro makes a great game, "Nintendo" made it, but if Naughty Dog makes it it's not Sony? I don't get it.

I know I'm late to the party and that I'm trying to find logic in a video game award ceremony, but I found it curious.

I did not see all the comments in the thread, but after seeing like two pages and no one citing sources (although there were certain users that pointed it out correctly) I assumed most people here haven't tried this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_Entertainment_Analysis_%26_Development

Basically, Nintendo EAD is a division of Nintendo, not a company owned by Nintendo.  Also, each EAD team is a team inside the EAD division, not another independen studio. That means that speaking of Nintendo EAD and Nintendo is virtually the same, because EAD is an internal division inside the very Nintendo. Ubisoft Montreal, on the other hand, is a company owned by Ubisoft (a subsidiary):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubisoft_Montreal

So technically speaking, it is correct to point out Ubisoft Montreal as a single entity and not making a difference between Nintendo and Nintendo EAD. Another thing would have been if we were talking about Monolith Soft and Retro Studios:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retro_Studios (This article says that it is a division, but then it says that it is a subsidiary on another part, personally, I take the latter due to the fact that Nintendo bought Retro, so it cannot be a division, but a subsidiary. Nintendo EAD is a department consolidated into a division if you read the article I linked above).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monolith_Soft

So, considering Monolith and Retro as different developers is right, because they are different companies, but Nintendo EAD and Nintendo are the same since Nintendo EAD is an internal division of Nintendo. I guess they valued Nintendo's EAD output. Nevertheless, it could also happen that they do not differentiate between Retro Studios and Nintendo EAD, but I personally doubt so because the people following in the industry is most likely well informed. Ubisoft Montreal is not Ubisoft, because Ubisoft is the core company who owns Ubisoft Montreal as a subsidiary. Despite the fact that both have the Ubisoft name, they are different companies in the same way that Monolith and Retro Studios are different companies from Nintendo.

Plainly speaking, it is a bussiness management issue.

Very interesting thread, it made me do some research.

Thanks, this is a great answer. I still think they should have nominated Nintendo EAD to clarify they're not including Retro.