Wyrdness said:
They have the controlling stake in the company which means they hold more than any one else and have more control, look it up Nintendo approves all of their actions because Nintendo not only owns the IP they own the controlling stake in PC, they wouldn't need Nintendo's approval otherwise. Firstly Smash is an IP and therefore a brand no different to King of Fighters and Street Fighter which also use characters from other brands. Smash itself is a brand notable for it's unique approach to the genre, Smash s a brand that many brands gain exposure from. Secondly Metroid is not a big marketable brand in any form it's this illusion that I'm pointing out in my earlier post that Metroid fans refuse to accept the reality of the IP. Games like FE and AC don't need a particular character's face for their franchise as they have a distinct style that people recognize that's their face, Samus being the face of Metroid doesn't mean much when the IP at best is niche it's like you saying you're the face of your local convenience store, yeah they get enough business to get by but compared to the likes of Walmart they're not even in the same ball park. Your claim that Metroid is the third strongest brand of the first party library is simply untrue in truth it barely makes the top 10. |
Nintendo does NOT own a controlling stake in Pokemon- later tonight ill find some documentation that will clarify
I think we have both said our part on the other brand topics- our opinions differ -