Why does Nintendo let developers co-own their IP?

[Mnementh]

twintail said:

Mnementh said:

Actually I don't see how it is any different to any other publisher. If a game is developed by X, you have to credit X, even if it is published by Y and Y owns the IP.

So SEGA and Platinum for Bayonetta for instance. I actually think in this case Platinum even co-owns the IP.

I doubt Bandai Namco can release a Souls game without From Software. There seems to be a co-ownership in place too.

When Bungie split with MS they made a deal about Halo-ownership, which indicates beforehand Bungie had some rights on the IP. Later on they published Destiny through Activision, but had a time-limited deal with Activision after which they regained full control over the IP.

I actually cannot think of an example of an IP developed not in-house by a publisher and the publisher takes full control of said IP. It might happen, but it seems Nintendos stance on this isn't so extraordinary in the industry.

What makes you think Platinum has any say on Bayonetta? Or FS on a Souls game? Destiny is an outlier atm if you ask me. 

I'm pretty sure Insomniac has zero say on either Ratchet or Resistance. ClapHanz has none on Everybody's Golf. SuperMassive most likely doesn't own any of the dozen IP's they made for Sony. Unless I am reading your last line wrong, I don't think co-ownership is as common as you may think. I could be wrong though.

Well, maybe, we usually don't know about the contracts and can only imply. But the indication of the OP was the credit given - and that is demanded by most copyright laws. Even if you own the rights to the IP all creators have to be properly credited. So for us is no visible difference between Fire Emblem and Kirby on one hand and Souls and Bayonetta on the other. Credit has to be given to the developer, so they are credited in each case.