Among the big Japanese publishers, is Nintendo the least creatively risk-averse?

[DonFerrari]

Bofferbrauer2 said:

Sahib said:

Clearly you do not understand the concept of IP ownership, and you're inconsistent on top of it. Allow me to explain...

Wonderful 101 is a game developed by Platinum games, but is funded and owned by Nintendo. Hence it is on the list. Similarly games you crossed out citing their devs are indeed developed by a 3rd party developer but are funded and owned by Sony, yes even that multiplatform title you listed.

Proof: https://trademarks.justia.com/864/72/what-remains-of-edith-86472634.html

You can find the trademarks for other games on there as well and see who the IP belongs to, all those IP I listed are owned by Sony similar to most of the games that Nintendo puts out that are made by 3rd party devs be it Yoshi, or Kirby, or Smash Bros. or Pokemon. 

 

Secondly you seemed to have inflated Nintendo's list there by adding some more titles I see, I went ahead and took a closer look at them as I couldn't have left those out if they actually qualified:

Captain Toad -Not a new IP, it's a spin off of a character from the Mario franchise.

Flip Wars- I can't even find this...

Devil's Third- Not owned by Nintendo

NES Remix- Not even gonna look it up, just by the name I can assume this is collection of old games and can't possibly be a new IP.

Sing Party- Ok, So I did miss one...

Tokio Mirage Sessions- I have to question if you know what a New IP even means...

NES Remix isn't a collection of old games, look it up. It reuses some parts of different NES games, but none is playable on it's own, just the challenges of the game

Tokio Mirage Sessions is neither Shin Megami Tensei nor is it Fire Emblem, though it uses some elements of both. Otherwise, Persona wouldn't count as IP either, as it's also a spinoff from SMT - a spinoff in the same light as Captain Toad btw. If Persona counts as an IP (and it DOES), then both TMS #FE and Captain Toad do

Flip Wars is a digital only small party game that came out in summer last year, but got quickly drowned by the flurry of higher profile releases.

Forgot Sushi Striker, btw

 

No need to explain, just couldn't find any information that those IP belonged to Sony, only that they were made by independent studios. As such, since I couldn't find any Sony ownership on them, I crossed them out. Mea culpa on all those that I crossed out wrongly.

Since you couldn't determine owner you supposed they weren't Sony? As said, you could look on the Copyright, you could check on their historic. You could have asked. All those games that person listed are owned by Sony, 2nd party type of release.

Mnementh said:

VAMatt said:

Please provide an example of any IP that comes anywhere close to the whoring level of Mario.  

Spiderman. Basically every three years or so the movie series is rebooted. Also he is in many other movies, is in diverse games and so on.

Please list 200 movies where Spider-Man is the main protagonist.

Mnementh said:

Sahib said:
Nintendo is easily the most risk averse big publisher as far as home consoles market goes. The sheer lack of new IPs by Nintendo is astonishing.

If Nintendo does never new IPs, how come they have a lot of them. Just take a look at Super Smash Bros vs. Playstation All Star Battle Royale. Sony had to deeply scrape the barrel for IPs they could include and still have a much less remarkable roster. I don't even compare to Smash Ultimate, just compare with Smash Brawl, which was at a similar time. Nintendo could whip up easily more remarkable IPs to fill the roster than Sony. So something says to me, that actually Nintendo isn't that bad at creating IPs.

This is so wrong it isn't even funny. It have much more to do with Nintendo nurturing the IPs for over 4 gens than Sony not creating the IPs (your comparison on Roster).