I'm trying to explain that there is a phenomenon with nintendo's formula. To say it's a distractionary tactic is to describe the underhanded, but also legal loophole nintendo has. On one hand, there are people wanting Nintendo to lighten up, fan games etc. But Nintendo denies anyways and it's business as usual and they sell 4 million MHR in 3 days. You can call that something else, but thats what I wanted to call it. Just to see if anyone else can see it.
By the way, I'm not saying anyone should boycott Nintendo or anything. I am a fan, but as a fan of Nintendo, I can't help but think that this is kinda cool they have that power.
Errr... well it's not a legal loophole, because to my knowledge they haven't done anything illegal.
The issue with this thread is that it's suggesting that two things are related that aren't necessarily related.
Nintendo is releasing games they think are good because... you know, they're a game company and that's how they make money. It's not so that people will let them have shitty youtube policies or whatever. If Nintendo let people have melee tournaments or whatever, do you think they'd change the amount or quality of games they release?
Likewise, whether I buy Nintendo games is completely independent of what I think of their policies on fan games (which I think they actually get a bum rap on, because Smash Flash and smogon showdown are somehow allowed to exist). Even if I cared deeply about Nintendo's policy on fan games, I don't think not buying Monster Hunter Rise (which as people point out is not the best example because Capcom is the dev and publisher) would have an impact on their policies.
Again, the bottom line is just that if a company makes a good product, people are generally going to want to buy it.
Regarding mario 3D all-stars, Nintendo were clear from day one that it was a limited timed release. People have had 6 months to digest that information. Whether it's good or bad, Nintendo were very up front about it.
It's a shitty policy that is basically designed to create artificial scarcity. Honestly, I probably would have not purchased this otherwise, but they got me and my primate brain on this one. There's no reason they couldn't have let it live on the eShop, except that they thought it would probably sell more this way. People who buy the Switch later or who just may have better use for 50 bucks during a pandemic are screwed over a little. It's a policy that hurts consumers with no corresponding benefit to them.
It's more of a minor annoyance than anything and not something so vile that one should stop supporting Nintendo, but it's definitely a bad policy from a consumer point of view.