By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo - Theory: NoA won't publish M games

nordlead on 08 April 2009
Kenology said:
Gamerace said:
I agree and already advanced this theory in the other thread. I think NoA wants to give parents the assurance that then they pick up a Nintendo branded game it's one the whole family can enjoy.

And actually, I'm fine with that.

However, if that's the case then I would appreciate it, and as a fan, expect that they allow someone else to publish those same titles (like Temco or Sega) instead of just sitting on the publishing rights.

That may be true, but it's very unfortunate.  Regardless if the game is Nintendo branded or not, the M rating will be clearly legible on the box.  They're letting parents off the hook if this truly is the case.

But really, Nintendo says it's Tecmo's IP and Tecmo says it's up to Nintendo to publish it.  Clearly someone is wrong here.

yea, Reggie said that it is up to Tecmo, and Tecmo said it is up to Nintendo. Obviously there are some communication problems going on somewhere.

 




If you drop a PS3 right on top of a Wii, it would definitely defeat it. Not so sure about the Xbox360. - mancandy
In the past we played games. In the future we watch games. - Forest-Spirit
11/03/09 Desposit: Mod Bribery (RolStoppable)  vg$ 500.00
06/03/09 Purchase: Moderator Privilege  vg$ -50,000.00

Nordlead Jr. Photo/Video Gallery!!! (Video Added 4/19/10)

Around the Network
Xxain on 08 April 2009
bdbdbd said:
Not sure... Would sound pretty stupid, since Nintendo involved in developement and if it holds the publishing rights, that would sound very stupid.

Also a thing that should be taken into consideration is, that their PR have mentioned Madworld and The Conduit several times, which would mean that they are ok with the rating.

He's saying Nintendo would never PUBLISH a M rated

Red4ADevil on 08 April 2009

@ Xxain thats true, the way they have been booming in success they might have changed there ways of marketing.

@ Mr Khan Thats also true so i would have to agree.



BrainBoxLtd on 08 April 2009
Godot said:
Mr Khan said:
Red4ADevil said:
If they did brought it here nintendo would have published it. Dont forget they also published Geist, and Eternal Darkness on the GC.

True, but this could be a more recent development of policy.

 

I think we can blame the press for stories of video game and violence effecting Nintendo. Back in the days that Nintendo was considered a company for kids, they released Conker's Bad Fur day.

 

 Actually no, Nintendo hated what Rare did with Conker and disowned it. They wouldn't even review it in Nintendo Power magizine. Rare had to publish it themselves, except in Europe where THQ was the publisher.



dsister44 on 08 April 2009

nitendo has said that they will not publish a game from a unknown dev. like platinum games whose first game is madworld. they are a company first, and they want to make a profit. :D



Around the Network
mike_intellivision on 08 April 2009
Gamerace said:
I agree and already advanced this theory in the other thread. I think NoA wants to give parents the assurance that then they pick up a Nintendo branded game it's one the whole family can enjoy.

And actually, I'm fine with that.

However, if that's the case then I would appreciate it, and as a fan, expect that they allow someone else to publish those same titles (like Temco or Sega) instead of just sitting on the publishing rights.

 

It sounds like there is some dispute who owns one game in question.

When asked about Fatal Frame IV, Reggie Fils-Aime said: "We are not the publisher of that title in the Americas." (That was before Tecmo said it was NoA who decided not to publish the game in the region.)

That means that either (a) Tecmo is confused or (b) Nintendo has already sold its rights (or somebody is lying).

 

Mike from Morgantown



      


I am Mario.


I like to jump around, and would lead a fairly serene and aimless existence if it weren't for my friends always getting into trouble. I love to help out, even when it puts me at risk. I seem to make friends with people who just can't stay out of trouble.

Wii Friend Code: 1624 6601 1126 1492

NNID: Mike_INTV
bdbdbd on 08 April 2009

@Xxain: Yes, but promoting the games in their PR would sound stupid in the sense, since these games are seen as "Nintendo suggests" games. Then again, Nintendo released Disaster, but the game is PEGI 16+ rated.



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.

Khuutra on 08 April 2009
BrainBoxLtd said:
Godot said:
Mr Khan said:
Red4ADevil said:
If they did brought it here nintendo would have published it. Dont forget they also published Geist, and Eternal Darkness on the GC.

True, but this could be a more recent development of policy.

I think we can blame the press for stories of video game and violence effecting Nintendo. Back in the days that Nintendo was considered a company for kids, they released Conker's Bad Fur day.

 Actually no, Nintendo hated what Rare did with Conker and disowned it. They wouldn't even review it in Nintendo Power magizine. Rare had to publish it themselves, except in Europe where THQ was the publisher.

I did not know that. It makes sense, though.

I remember when Conker was supposed to be cute. He was going to go out collecting presents, as opposed to cold hard cash to buy beer.



Xxain on 08 April 2009
bdbdbd said:
@Xxain: Yes, but promoting the games in their PR would sound stupid in the sense, since these games are seen as "Nintendo suggests" games. Then again, Nintendo released Disaster, but the game is PEGI 16+ rated.



rgame1 on 08 April 2009

u forgot geist, eternal darkness, wtf?