• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.

Discussion Market consolidation: where does Nintendo stand?

meatbag said:
Both Capcom and Square Enix have projects targeting higher end hardware that would be of no use to Nintendo.

And if Nintendo targeted either of those companies, it might drive Sony to make a defensive acquisition, and Nintendo can’t outspend Sony.
Click to expand...

Agree on the first point, but Nintendo could still release those projects on competing platforms and slowly transition these studios to their new hardware once available. Is it ideal? Definitely not, but I don’t view it as deal-breaker. Integrations like these take and you don’t bank one synergies to be fully realized on day 1.

As for being able to outspend Sony, that depends on a lot of things which I just mentioned in my previous post. It’s very possible they can, but most companies have specific hurdle rates they need to hit to get an investment approved. And I can tell you that Japanese companies can be fairly rigid when it comes to decision rules and their review process (admittedly Sony may be far more progressive in this area than Nintendo or my employer is). That doesn’t mean Sony wouldn’t overpay for something they view as being highly strategic, but it’s not as simple as them being bigger automatically means that Nintendo can’t compete. Now Microsoft is an entirely different matter, but I’d like to hope Japan would try to keep any acquisition local if at all possible.
 
Captain Falcon said:
Agree on the first point, but Nintendo could still release those projects on competing platforms and slowly transition these studios to their new hardware once available. Is it ideal? Definitely not, but I don’t view it as deal-breaker. Integrations like these take and you don’t bank one synergies to be fully realized on day 1.
Click to expand...
Let’s be realistic here. Do you think Nintendo is going to do anything of the sort. If Nintendo is gonna own the company they probably don’t want that company releasing a big game on another platform regardless of how long integration is going to take.
Captain Falcon said:
As for being able to outspend Sony, that depends on a lot of things which I just mentioned in my previous post. It’s very possible they can, but most companies have specific hurdle rates they need to hit to get an investment approved. And I can tell you that Japanese companies can be fairly rigid when it comes to decision rules and their review process (admittedly Sony may be far more progressive in this area than Nintendo or my employer is). That doesn’t mean Sony wouldn’t overpay for something they view as being highly strategic, but it’s not as simple as them being bigger automatically means that Nintendo can’t compete. Now Microsoft is an entirely different matter, but I’d like to hope Japan would try to keep any acquisition local if at all possible.
Click to expand...
I’d argued that Sony really isn’t local anymore. But that’s beside the point. I don’t see Nintendo going around and spending that much on a studio let alone a SE or Capcom who would be prohibitively more expensive then Bungie or Next Level Games. And, probably more of a headache to deal with.
 
Skittzo said:
Also I'm pretty sure Sony recently purchased a minority stake in Kadokawa Corp too, if anyone thought about suggesting someone buy them.
Click to expand...
Nintendo have a small number of shares in Kadokawa too; less than Sony (and Tencent, who have a larger stake than Sony) though.
 
The only companies i can see nintendo buying are (Probability to buy)
  • MercurySteam 4/10
  • Koei Tecmo 3/10
  • Platinum Games 2/10
  • Velan Studios 7/10
  • Level 5 5/10
  • Creatures inc. 5/10
  • Tose Software 1/10
  • Grezzo 5/10
  • ILCA 2/10
 
0
Captain Falcon said:
I gotta disagree on there never being a shortage of development staff to partner with. We have seen major periods without consistent releases, although things have improved quite a bit with the Switch. That being said, Nintendo is relying quite a bit on Bandai Namco (Smash, Mario Kart, Arms, Metroid at one point) and Koei Tecmo (Fire Emblem, Musou spin-offs) to assist with the development of their own IP. If one or both of those companies got scooped up, I really think it would be problematic for Nintendo. I think some of the smaller studios Nintendo works with could be replaced, but it would be hard to replace these bigger guys if the market continues to consolidate.

I agree Capcom is a tough one, but I feel like that has to more to do with lacking system requirements that franchises like Resident Evil require rather the bulk of the staff likely leaving. No doubt some would leave, but I doubt it would be the majority of the workforce. Again, this is all based on a hypothetical scenario in which the gaming industry has undergone mass consolidation and it’s possible working for Nintendo may be far more attractive than the alternatives.

In regards to Nintendo developing their own mature or western oriented IP, I really don’t see that being possible. Yes, they could try to fund some dead IP from 3rd parties like they did with Bayonetta, but most of properties are dead for a reason and not worth revisiting financially. The point about Rare wasn’t whether their output would be sustainable if still with Nintendo (as it wouldn’t), but rather that they developed games that tailored to a broader audience. Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Jet Force Gemini, Killer Instinct & Conker’s greatly diversified Nintendo’s portfolio. Nintendo has also lost key western partners like Silicon Knights (MGS: Twin Snakes, Eternal Darkness), Monster Games (Excite series, Pilotwings, DK support), & Left Field Studios (NBA Courtside series, Excitebike 64) while also seeing their own in-house studios in both Retro (Prime / DK) and NST (Wave Race, 1080, Ridge Racer, Metroid) flounder. With the exception of NLG, Nintendo has failed to build a consistent pipeline of western development resources and they were smart to buy them out when they had the chance. Perhaps we’re going to see a rebound here from Retro & NST, but that’s not going to be enough to offset the losses more mature / western content that could arise from industry consolidation.
Click to expand...
There is no shortage of talent in this industry, but what you are pointing out is Nintendo's inability (at times) to coordinate game releases with said talent leaving gaps in their release schedule.

IMO What Nintendo should be doing instead of making major publisher acquisitions (where they likely can't outbid the competition anyway) is locking down their partners like Koei Tecmo and Bandai Namco in contracts for their upcoming game projects that will buy Nintendo enough time to make alternate plans in the event that these companies get bought out in the interim. Even Sony has been afforded this ability with Call of Duty and Activision being contractually obligated to the them for the next couple years and likely without the foresight of knowing MS was going to strike.

A lot of the games you are mentioning diversifying Nintendo's portfolio are great from our perspective, but did not exactly set the world on fire in terms of sales (barring a few exceptions) and came from weaker Nintendo generations. If we really take a closer look at Switch software sales, Nintendo's own IP and Indie developers have done most of the legwork for the Switch by a long shot.
 
Last edited:
Captain Falcon said:
I’m not exactly sure about Sony’s financial standing, but it seems like some people focus too much on size / market cap and ignore the balance sheet. Most major companies aren’t sitting on the cash reserves that Nintendo is and that strong financial position allows them to borrow significant funds if they so choose. Also, when it comes to Sony, their capital has to support multiple SBUs, so there will always be competing priorities. This is a much smaller issue for Nintendo.
Click to expand...
We know where Nintendo is spending their cash on— internal expansion, film, merch and the Nintendo theme park.

Why would Nintendo even borrow funds to make an acquisition they don’t need? Especially if that expenditure leaves Nintendo less leeway in managing their other ventures.

I’m not sure why you’re doubting Sony’s purchasing power when they’ve just shown they were willing to purchase Bungie for 3.6 billion USD. Sony has higher valued stocks and they can take on a lot more credit than Nintendo can. They can and will outspend Nintendo if they have to.

Captain Falcon said:
Agree on the first point, but Nintendo could still release those projects on competing platforms and slowly transition these studios to their new hardware once available. Is it ideal? Definitely not, but I don’t view it as deal-breaker. Integrations like these take and you don’t bank one synergies to be fully realized on day 1.
Click to expand...
It still makes the acquisition unlikely, especially as SE and Capcom as far as we know aren’t looking to sell.
Captain Falcon said:
As for being able to outspend Sony, that depends on a lot of things which I just mentioned in my previous post. It’s very possible they can, but most companies have specific hurdle rates they need to hit to get an investment approved. And I can tell you that Japanese companies can be fairly rigid when it comes to decision rules and their review process (admittedly Sony may be far more progressive in this area than Nintendo or my employer is). That doesn’t mean Sony wouldn’t overpay for something they view as being highly strategic, but it’s not as simple as them being bigger automatically means that Nintendo can’t compete. Now Microsoft is an entirely different matter, but I’d like to hope Japan would try to keep any acquisition local if at all possible.
Click to expand...
Sony would totally overpay for Square Enix. Again, they bought Bungie for 3.6 billion USD. Put it another way, it is improbable that Nintendo would be able to outbid Sony.

Kreese said:
There is no shortage of talent in this industry, but what you are pointing out is Nintendo's inability (at times) to coordinate game releases with said talent leaving gaps in their release schedule.

IMO What Nintendo should be doing instead of making major publisher acquisitions (where they likely can't outbid the competition anyway) is locking down their partners like Koei Tecmo and Bandai Namco in contracts for their upcoming game projects that will buy Nintendo enough time to make alternate plans in the event that these companies get bought out in the interim.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Establishing and maintaining contracts with partnered studios is a solid way to maintain software support. Instead of buying Capcom, they can partner with them for a new MH or Resident Evil.
Kreese said:
A lot of the games you are mentioning diversifying Nintendo's portfolio are great from our perspective, but did not exactly set the world on fire in terms of sales (barring a few exceptions) and came from weaker Nintendo generations. If we really take a closer at Switch software sales, Nintendo's own IP and Indie developers have done most of the legwork for the Switch by a long shot.
Click to expand...
Another good point. Even considering an absolute doomday scenario where Switch somehow loses big Japanese third party support (which they won’t because Switch is the only relevant console in Japan currently), Nintendo can keep trucking on with their first party IPs and indies.
 
meatbag said:
We know where Nintendo is spending their cash on— internal expansion, film, merch and the Nintendo theme park.

Why would Nintendo even borrow funds to make an acquisition they don’t need? Especially if that expenditure leaves Nintendo less leeway in managing their other ventures.

I’m not sure why you’re doubting Sony’s purchasing power when they’ve just shown they were willing to purchase Bungie for 3.6 billion USD. Sony has higher valued stocks and they can take on a lot more credit than Nintendo can. They can and will outspend Nintendo if they have to.


It still makes the acquisition unlikely, especially as SE and Capcom as far as we know aren’t looking to sell.

Sony would totally overpay for Square Enix. Again, they bought Bungie for 3.6 billion USD. Put it another way, it is improbable that Nintendo would be able to outbid Sony.


Agreed. Establishing and maintaining contracts with partnered studios is a solid way to maintain software support. Instead of buying Capcom, they can partner with them for a new MH or Resident Evil.

Another good point. Even considering an absolute doomday scenario where Switch somehow loses big Japanese third party support (which they won’t because Switch is the only relevant console in Japan currently), Nintendo can keep trucking on with their first party IPs and indies.
Click to expand...

The battery on my phone just died and I lost a lengthy response I had been working on. That being said, I would just point out that both Nintendo & Sony can afford Capcom or Square Enix at their current market caps plus a normal sized premium. And just because Sony is bigger, doesn’t mean they are able to forgo an acceptable financial return and pay whatever they like. Their board would never allow it. Ultimately it comes down to whoever places greater strategic value on the target and is willing to accept the lowest possible return and/or who can realize the most synergies to offset the highest possible price. Maybe that’s Sony, but just being bigger doesn’t automatically give them an edge here.
 
Captain Falcon said:
That being said, I would just point out that both Nintendo & Sony can afford Capcom or Square Enix at their current market caps plus a normal sized premium.
Click to expand...
Nintendo can afford it at the cost of losing lot of spending money for anything else. Not a sound strategy. And again we know where Nintendo is spending their money on. So they wouldn’t be able to use the entirety of their 9 billion in cash for acquisitions anyway.
Captain Falcon said:
And just because Sony is bigger, doesn’t mean they are able to forgo an acceptable financial return and pay whatever they like. Their board would never allow it.
Click to expand...
The same goes for Nintendo, who also has to consider whether Capcom or SE would be a good fit for their corporate culture.
Captain Falcon said:
Ultimately it comes down to whoever places greater strategic value on the target and is willing to accept the lowest possible return and/or who can realize the most synergies to offset the highest possible price. Maybe that’s Sony, but just being bigger doesn’t automatically give them an edge here.
Click to expand...
That’s what I’ve been getting at. It’s not just that Sony is bigger. Keeping Capcom and/or SE support is of greater importance to them. Any projects those companies have in the pipeline Sony can feasibly fold into their plans.

The cost-benefit ratio is better for Sony than it is for Nintendo.
 
Kreese said:
There is no shortage of talent in this industry, but what you are pointing out is Nintendo's inability (at times) to coordinate game releases with said talent leaving gaps in their release schedule.

IMO What Nintendo should be doing instead of making major publisher acquisitions (where they likely can't outbid the competition anyway) is locking down their partners like Koei Tecmo and Bandai Namco in contracts for their upcoming game projects that will buy Nintendo enough time to make alternate plans in the event that these companies get bought out in the interim. Even Sony has been afforded this ability with Call of Duty and Activision being contractually obligated to the them for the next couple years and likely without the foresight of knowing MS was going to strike.

A lot of the games you are mentioning diversifying Nintendo's portfolio are great from our perspective, but did not exactly set the world on fire in terms of sales (barring a few exceptions) and came from weaker Nintendo generations. If we really take a closer look at Switch software sales, Nintendo's own IP and Indie developers have done most of the legwork for the Switch by a long shot.
Click to expand...

I agree with a ton of what you’re saying. I think doing whatever they can to secure existing partnerships is a no-brainer and at a bare minimum buys you time to react if something crazy were to happen.

Regarding the latter point, I agree most of those titles never set the world on fire, but I also feel like Nintendo never went as far as they needed to in this area. You can’t just have the token Bayonetta game each generation and expect a broader audience to jump aboard the platform. Switch can survive primarily on Nintendo’s own IP, but that could prove challenging if the market moves towards subscription platforms. This is obviously more of a long-term risk, but one that’s approaching faster & faster due to Microsoft & Sony’s acquisition activity.
 
Captain Falcon said:
Regarding the latter point, I agree most of those titles never set the world on fire, but I also feel like Nintendo never went as far as they needed to in this area. You can’t just have the token Bayonetta game each generation and expect a broader audience to jump aboard the platform. Switch can survive primarily on Nintendo’s own IP, but that could prove challenging if the market moves towards subscription platforms. This is obviously more of a long-term risk, but one that’s approaching faster & faster due to Microsoft & Sony’s acquisition activity.
Click to expand...
I think you’re arguing for two different things here.

Yes, Nintendo can broaden their appeal with more western-oriented titles. But also keep in mind that their current slate of IPs are already reaching wide audiences.

However, I don’t see how the development of these IP exactly correlates to surviving in a market comprised of subscription platforms. Unless your angle is that simply “more content is needed” in which case, of course it is! But acquisitions are not the only way to get that content.
 
meatbag said:
I think you’re arguing for two different things here.

Yes, Nintendo can broaden their appeal with more western-oriented titles. But also keep in mind that their current slate of IPs are already reaching wide audiences.

However, I don’t see how the development of these IP exactly correlates to surviving in a market comprised of subscription platforms. Unless your angle is that simply “more content is needed” in which case, of course it is! But acquisitions are not the only way to get that content.
Click to expand...

That is my argument. Netflix, Disney+, HBO Max, etc. have content for a very diverse audience. I get Nintendo already has super popular IPs that are system sellers, but I also know plenty of people who have zero interest in their platform because the content they want simply isn’t there. And it’s much easier to justify paying $15/month for a subscription if everyone is benefiting from it. As for Nintendo being able to develop enough mature / western oriented content to draw in previously resistant consumers through partnerships alone color me skeptical.
 
John Omaha said:
I know Square-Enix mentioned they were not for sale in the past year, but I don’t recall Capcom commenting on this one way or another.
Click to expand...
Well it’s more of we simply haven’t heard anything about Capcom wanting to sell.

Captain Falcon said:
That is my argument. Netflix, Disney+, HBO Max, etc. have content for a very diverse audience. I get Nintendo already has super popular IPs that are system sellers, but I also know plenty of people who have zero interest in their platform because the content they want simply isn’t there.
Click to expand...
This is true for all the publishers. Arguably Sony and Microsoft are missing bigger parts of the audience than Nintendo is.
Captain Falcon said:
And it’s much easier to justify paying $15/month for a subscription if everyone is benefiting from it.
Click to expand...
Um, what does this mean? Who is “everyone”?
Captain Falcon said:
As for Nintendo being able to develop enough mature/western oriented content to draw in previously resistant consumers through partnerships alone color me skeptical.
Click to expand...
Which companies then do you think Nintendo can feasibly acquire in order to develop games for this set of consumers that are currently underserved by the current Switch lineup?
 
0
Nintendo chief Furukawa said in November that the company plans to spend up to 100 billion yen to strengthen its game development arsenal, with a focus on promoting organic growth. On Thursday, he reiterated that Nintendo plans no change in its investment policy, though he also said that the company isn’t against acquisitions if those are necessary.
Click to expand...
www.bloomberg.com

Nintendo Cuts Switch Outlook Again on Supply, Logistics Jam

Nintendo Co. cut its Switch sales outlook for the second quarter in a row as console makers grapple with a chronic chip shortage that is likely to continue this year.
www.bloomberg.com www.bloomberg.com

"if those are necessary" definitely reads to me that Furukawa will do what needs to be done to protect access to resources(like NLG).

EDIT:

Oh, he elaborates

“Our brand was built upon products crafted with dedication by our employees, and having a large number of people who don’t posses Nintendo DNA in our group would not be a plus to the company,” Furukawa said.
Click to expand...
 
Oregano said:
www.bloomberg.com

Nintendo Cuts Switch Outlook Again on Supply, Logistics Jam

Nintendo Co. cut its Switch sales outlook for the second quarter in a row as console makers grapple with a chronic chip shortage that is likely to continue this year.
www.bloomberg.com www.bloomberg.com

"if those are necessary" definitely reads to me that Furukawa will do what needs to be done to protect access to resources(like NLG).

EDIT:

Oh, he elaborates
Click to expand...

I think this is pretty much in line with what most of us expect: They will bring close partners into the fold if they're at risk of losing them and the circumstances allow it but they won't target any large scale mergers.
 
meatbag said:
I do wonder if they’ll consider getting ILCA after the resounding success of BDSP.
Click to expand...

ILCA is pretty big: 288 people as of 2020. I don't think Nintendo would be interested in having to pay the salaries of this many people lmao. They might invest in them though, who knows.
 
Yellowmus said:
I assume you've left out Monolith Soft cause you don't like their games or cause they haven't lead development on a Nintendo legacy IP? Stop with the bias, mate.
Click to expand...
Woah there, calm down. I left out Monolith Soft because I was talking about development outside of Japan, which is pretty apparent if you read the text surrounding what you've quoted:
MisterSpo said:
And of course, there's That Old Chestnut: create a bigger internal development presence outside Japan. Nintendo have subsidiaries like Retro Studios and Next Level, who can lead development on software projects. But the other international subsidiaries - iQue, NST, NERD - don't yet have that capacity.
Click to expand...
 
SiG said:
Which 3rd party studios carry "Nintendo DNA"?

Would Mercury Steam count as one?

CyberConnect maybe?
Click to expand...
Mercury Steam on the game development front but not the management front. For other third parties I would think Grezzo, Good Feel, Camelot, Platinum Games, Indies Zero, Vanpool, and Wayforward. I’m sure they’re more studios that I didn’t think of as well.
 
People are going to hype up a big time acquisition from Nintendo in their heads and then one day Nintendo will randomly announce that they finally made it official with someone like Arika, and the collective internet is going to be all "Excuse me but... whomst?!"
 
E.Gadd said:
People are going to hype up a big time acquisition from Nintendo in their heads and then one day Nintendo will randomly announce that they finally made it official with someone like Arika, and the collective internet is going to be all "Excuse me but... whomst?!"
Click to expand...
Sorry to say, but that's always the case with Nintendo and not just with acquisitions...
 
MasterGold said:
Mercury Steam on the game development front but not the management front. For other third parties I would think Grezzo, Good Feel, Camelot, Platinum Games, Indies Zero, Vanpool, and Wayforward. I’m sure they’re more studios that I didn’t think of as well.
Click to expand...
Essentially, anyone that has worked significantly on Nintendo IP.
 
John Omaha said:



Looks like they are betting on Capcom getting acquired fairly soon.
Click to expand...


I think that's a bit of a leap. Gaming stocks in general have been growing over the last few years so it's seen as a relatively good investment.

Nexon has actually been for sale and no one has bit.
 
0
Dardan Sandiego said:
ILCA is pretty big: 288 people as of 2020. I don't think Nintendo would be interested in having to pay the salaries of this many people lmao. They might invest in them though, who knows.
Click to expand...

ILCA was founded as a video production company focused on animation, movies and television and only later entered video game development. So who knows how many of it's 288 employees are even dedicated to video game development. Plus, outside the Pokemon remakes, they have primarily been an assist studio for other video game developers. They seem relatively un-established on their own for now, but maybe that changes if Nintendo fosters a lasting working relationship with them.
 
Dardan Sandiego said:
ILCA is pretty big: 288 people as of 2020. I don't think Nintendo would be interested in having to pay the salaries of this many people lmao. They might invest in them though, who knows.
Click to expand...
If they acquired ILCA I’m pretty sure they would be their largest internal studio outside of EPD of course
 
0
nenned said:
ILCA was founded as a video production company focused on animation, movies and television and only later entered video game development. So who knows how many of it's 288 employees are even dedicated to video game development. Plus, outside the Pokemon remakes, they have primarily been an assist studio for other video game developers. They seem relatively un-established on their own for now, but maybe that changes if Nintendo fosters a lasting working relationship with them.
Click to expand...
Acquire ILCA and force them to make more pikmin shorts!
 
nenned said:
ILCA was founded as a video production company focused on animation, movies and television and only later entered video game development. So who knows how many of it's 288 employees are even dedicated to video game development. Plus, outside the Pokemon remakes, they have primarily been an assist studio for other video game developers. They seem relatively un-established on their own for now, but maybe that changes if Nintendo fosters a lasting working relationship with them.
Click to expand...
Video production is probably the most valid argument you could make for Nintendo being interested in ILCA; that's a medium they're trying to break into, and it doesn't sound like they'll be solely sticking with Illumination for that purpose.

nvSPaP5.png


yOInIhj.png


Still don't think it'd happen, of course. They've worked with The Pokemon Company on Home and now BDSP; but that's still not really much of a relationship compared to more regular customers of ILCA like Square Enix and Bandai Namco.
 
Dardan Sandiego said:
www.videogameschronicle.com

Platinum’s CEO says he wouldn’t dismiss acquisition offers ‘as long as our freedom is respected’ | VGC

President Atsushi Inaba thinks Activision will be afforded autonomy under Microsoft…
www.videogameschronicle.com www.videogameschronicle.com

Bumping this with a super assuring comment by Inaba
Click to expand...
Ngl, I fear what the next generation properly kicking into gear will do to PG's place in the industry (and also the Japanese game industry at large in the West, but that's a broader topic).

It sure feels like the studio has struggled to adapt to even PS4/XBO development standards for the longest time now. Other than NieR Automata, there's only a few projects built for those systems they can add to their portfolio: Babylon's Fall, the TMNT and W101 upports. They had two chances to put out visually impressive games that could attract more partners (Scalebound and Granblue Fantasy: Relink), and in both cases it didn't work out. Square seems uninterested in collaborating with them for Yoko Taro games, and I can't see them contracting them for other projects after Babylon's Fall releases, going by how mixed it looks. That would only leave Nintendo commissions and their self-published games as their moneymakers. It's not exactly what I'd call a healthy position going forward, unless they pivot to targeting Switch hardware exclusively.
 
MarcelRguez said:
Ngl, I fear what the next generation properly kicking into gear will do to PG's place in the industry (and also the Japanese game industry at large in the West, but that's a broader topic).

It sure feels like the studio has struggled to adapt to even PS4/XBO development standards for the longest time now. Other than NieR Automata, there's only a few projects built for those systems they can add to their portfolio: Babylon's Fall, the TMNT and W101 upports. They had two chances to put out visually impressive games that could attract more partners (Scalebound and Granblue Fantasy: Relink), and in both cases it didn't work out. Square seems uninterested in collaborating with them for Yoko Taro games, and I can't see them contracting them for other projects after Babylon's Fall releases, going by how mixed it looks. That would only leave Nintendo commissions and their self-published games as their moneymakers. It's not exactly what I'd call a healthy position going forward, unless they pivot to targeting Switch hardware exclusively.
Click to expand...
Agree platinum is definitely in a tough spot unless by some miracle their live service game turns out to be a success I’m excepting them to be bought up by someone or worse bankruptcy
 
It's difficult to say what the issue with Granblue was and why they're working on Babylon's Fall (instead of a new Nier?) which seems doomed to fail.

I suspect that someone like Tencent is going to gobble them up and leave them to their own devices for a while until they become unsustainable for too long.
 
Dardan Sandiego said:
www.videogameschronicle.com

Platinum’s CEO says he wouldn’t dismiss acquisition offers ‘as long as our freedom is respected’ | VGC

President Atsushi Inaba thinks Activision will be afforded autonomy under Microsoft…
www.videogameschronicle.com www.videogameschronicle.com

Bumping this with a super assuring comment by Inaba
Click to expand...
If there Is a Company that Nintendo should buy, this Is It. A low price, a lot of talent Just hampered by some questionable decision here and there, the chance to be on the map and attract talent in the Osaka area. I'm against market consolidation but this Is the world we live in, so I hope Nintendo take the chance.
 
Keeping in mind Inaba's drawing the line at wanting to maintain their freedom and his specific comparison to Activision Blizzard, alongside the fact that Platinum specifically chose to go multiplatform with The Wonderful 101 instead of working with Nintendo on a Switch version the question would be whether Platinum's vision of freedom is compatible with being under Nintendo's wings.

It's fine saying Nintendo should buy them but would they agree to a Nintendo acquisition if it tied them to Nintendo hardware exclusively? Their GaaS ambitions? Would Nintendo be interested in buying them and keeping them multiplatform?(this last one is a definite no).
 
Vyplo said:
If there Is a Company that Nintendo should buy, this Is It. A low price, a lot of talent Just hampered by some questionable decision here and there, the chance to be on the map and attract talent in the Osaka area. I'm against market consolidation but this Is the world we live in, so I hope Nintendo take the chance.
Click to expand...
Nah. If PG is looking for independence, then Nintendo is a bad fit. They can't really give Platinum independence due to their general hands-on approach and non-interest in multiplatform.
 
KCannon said:
Nah. If PG is looking for independence, then Nintendo is a bad fit. They can't really give Platinum independence due to their general hands-on approach and non-interest in multiplatform.
Click to expand...
Well, thanks to Nintendo Bayonetta 2 & 3 were possibile, and TW 101 was Kamiya Dream game. I think they Will be free to do whatever they want in terms of ideas. Of course you're Right when you Say that under this scenario games won't be multiplatform, but I don't think this could stop a potential acquisition, of the Right offer Is made.
 
Dardan Sandiego said:
It's difficult to say what the issue with Granblue was and why they're working on Babylon's Fall (instead of a new Nier?) which seems doomed to fail.

I suspect that someone like Tencent is going to gobble them up and leave them to their own devices for a while until they become unsustainable for too long.
Click to expand...
I mean, not even Yoko Taro is working on a new Nier as far as we know.

Honestly, I think Nier is too big for platinum now, and Square will probably want to work on the series internally.

Feels weird to say, but Nier Automata has some of the most unexpectedly good legs for a JRPG in years. Like, you'd think something like Persona 5 would have similar sales but nope, Nier Automata just kept trucking at about 500k every 5-6 months, that is just amazing for a Nier game or any non-Huge JRPG for that matter. (This is not a diss to Persona, please don't focus on that part lmfao)
 
KCannon said:
Nah. If PG is looking for independence, then Nintendo is a bad fit. They can't really give Platinum independence due to their general hands-on approach and non-interest in multiplatform.
Click to expand...
Nintendo's worked with Platinum before, and had given them tons of freedom and support.
 
Vyplo said:
Well, thanks to Nintendo Bayonetta 2 & 3 were possibile, and TW 101 was Kamiya Dream game. I think they Will be free to do whatever they want in terms of ideas. Of course you're Right when you Say that under this scenario games won't be multiplatform, but I don't think this could stop a potential acquisition, of the Right offer Is made.
Click to expand...
Monolith Soft already went on record that Nintendo isn't accepting anything else but Xenoblade from them despite other pitches, so we know creative independency for studios is not Nintendo's forte, at least in regards to their non-EPD subsidiaries.
 
KCannon said:
Monolith Soft already went on record that Nintendo isn't accepting anything else but Xenoblade from them despite other pitches, so we know creative independency for studios is not Nintendo's forte, at least in regards to their non-EPD subsidiaries.
Click to expand...

Do you have a source for that? Never heard that before.
 
Dardan Sandiego said:
www.videogameschronicle.com

Platinum’s CEO says he wouldn’t dismiss acquisition offers ‘as long as our freedom is respected’ | VGC

President Atsushi Inaba thinks Activision will be afforded autonomy under Microsoft…
www.videogameschronicle.com www.videogameschronicle.com

Bumping this with a super assuring comment by Inaba
Click to expand...
Sounds like it's probably happening:

www.resetera.com

Platinum Games is open for acquisition talks if their independence is guaranteed News

If it would mean bigger budgets and more consistent games, that would be great for someone to acquire them.
www.resetera.com www.resetera.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top Bottom