Third-party games on WiiU - were they worth it?

[SanAndreasX]

potato_hamster said:

GhaudePhaede010 said:

I do not know. I thought Nintendo owned at least partial stock in Gamefreak. Honestly, I never talk about Pokemon other than in Smash so I do not know the business side of things. However, Pokemon may very well be why the term, "second-party" has evolved since nobody could accurately describe the business partnership between Nintendo and Gamefreak.

Admittedly, I just tried to google the situation because I am not versed on the business of Pokemon since I am not a very big Pokemon fan (like I said, other than Smash, Pokemon is not a franchise I play or care about) but I was unable to find out anything other than Nintendo owning a third of Pokemon (the franchise). I was unable to find out anything about their business relationship with Gamefreak. A funny grey area. But today, you would be insane to call Gamefreak and the Pokemon titles anything other than second party so I guess it was beneficial in some ways to evolve the term.

I honestly don't know the entire situation myself, just that Nintendo has a stake in the pokemon franchise as a whole, which is why it's Nintendo exclusive. As far as I know they don't actually own Gamefreak, but do publish the Pokemon games.

Maybe someone else has more insight on the situation?

The copyright is split three ways between Nintendo, Gamefreak, and Creatures. Nintendo owns the overall trademark, however. This is from The Pokemon Company's website.