Buying Square would allow them to dominate the Japanese market, and bring in a lot of core gamers on the western side. Buying some smaller but skilled developers like Rocksteady (from WB if they would sell), TurtleRock (already named from a Nintendo game), BRB or others could give them the much needed software capacity and diversity we'd like to see.

On the merger side, a facsinating option would be nVidia. A unique, powerful machine at a lower cost with Nintendo software could be the result, and could be used to push nVidia's PC market.

I disagree. Staff, yes. But they also need more IPs. You'll have to excuse me, but while you're correct that Capcom has a few strong IPs left in Street Fighter, Resident Evil, etc., it just isn't the same.

With Sega we're talking about: Sonic, Nights, Streets of Rage, Golden Axe, Phantasy Star, Samba de Amigo, Virtua Fighter, Sega Rally, House of the Dead, Shinobi, Shenmue, Outrun, Hang On, Alien Syndrome, Aled Kidd, Wonderboy, Chakan, Clockwork Knight, Bug, Panzer Dragoon, the rights to the Shining Force series, not to mention full ownership of the Bayonetta franchise.

I just think there's a lot more varied and classic franchises worth owning, that Nintendo and their partners might actually do something with, as opposed to Sega who barely uses any of them anymore.

I would agree that Konami is at least a better candidate than Capcom, because with that Nintendo would be owning both Konami and Hudson Soft's libararies, twice the bang for the buck. And again, maybe Nintendo could actually do some good with some of Konami's more dormant/misused franchises, not to mention Castlevania and Metal Gear being Nintendo system exclusive. And Bomberman of course, which Konami is wasting the ownership of.

But I still think there could be a lot of value in owning Sega.

"Opens door, cans fall with sudden failed step, FACEPLANT!" I have not drank anything I swear.

It would probably make more sense to buy individual IPs than the actual IP holder, especially in the case of Capcom, where several creators have flown the nest, and their brainchildren left to fester.

Buying a small chunk in this way could forge a closer working relationship without completely removing the publisher's freedom to develop for other platforms and eventually improve their situation. This could also be the best option for a platform holder, since buying the entire publisher would incur their responsibilities and debt, whereas buying a part of it could allow the publisher to continue functioning, and perhaps work a deal with the new IP holder to licence the property back.

There are also possibilities for the new IP holder to "outsource" development back the the publisher, or even the original staff.

Although I'm a stranger to Megaman, I can only imagine a positive response to a Nintendo-directed revival with Keiji Inafune in (at the very least) a creative consultancy role. There was an interesting article from times of yore, which suggested that appealing to "superstar developers" was more important than currying favour with the companies they worked for. I wish I could find it.