Wyrdness said:
The Monolith example is an example of the double standards critics like yourself exert, they'd try and distance Nintendo from positives while blame them for negatives, Nintendo don't have input on the franchise as we've established it's much like SE having little to no input in the Dragon Quest games as it's dictated by Horii, they have little need to take power back either given the franchises performance. Biggest company in Brazil doesn't exactly make them giants in the global markets where the are many big fish about sorry to burst your bubble, they're big to Brazil but bscure to a lot of the world. |
Sorry but even if the Pokémon is handled by a specific company it still rolls back to Nintendo. They have the final control and if they do nothing is because they are in agreement.
This is the same poor excuse used on Nintendo sole partner bad pratices in South America being overlooked by fans because Nintendo have no control of the pratices the partner used.
Where am I using double standards? Have you seem me deny credit for Nintendo because it was produced by an owned company? You are the one using it to and excusing others because "others do".
Turma da Mônica is released world wide for a while (even china have received it). Your lack of knowledge doesn't make it obscure. And there are some other big companies from Brazil that if you don't know you are quite bad informed. InBev, Vale, Petrobras, Embraer, Tam (Latam), Itaú, etc all being top players on their field. Would you say Machado de Assis is obscure or Paulo Coelho?

duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."







