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

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?

I'm aware of those companies especially the likes of Inbev who from what I recall was a Belguim based company who merged with Ambev, I'm quite well informed I just find it laughable that you'd think that all these companies from differing industries would operate in the same manner and that Nintendo should as well. It's also hilarious that you can't seem to understand the concept of what a brand management firm do and how they operate, you think a company sets up a brand management company so they can still dictate all aspects of the brand they want managed? Lol, Nintendo only need to step in when the brand begins losing money which as the franchises history goes doesn't seem to be anytime soon, brand management companies are given full run of what they're put in charge of.


More like AmBev was the main force not the belgium company. Their operation have nothing to do with it, just a counter point against you calling Mauricio de Souza obscure by being brazilian and you unaware of it. Although Maurício de Souza productions pratices have much to do "in field" to Disney (which is hardly obscure right???) and Nintendo as all 3 have strict rules to license any products with one of its icons.

 

Laughable is you deny that because Nintendo funded a company to manage the brand it isn't they anymore. Yep the brand is doing good and Nintendo doesn't need to micromanage, but do you think Pokémon company doesn't have to report to Nintendo? Silly. Anyway we can infere if Nintendo is satisfied with the anime's results they are to be credited by its success and also criticized by any shortcoming related (that obviously can be discussed if it's a shortcoming or not... Some here think the anime is good as is and focus viewer are good with it and older viewer should move on and don't complain).

 



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."