The big news of 2022 is industry consolidation – with Microsoft buying Activision and Sony snapping up Bungie, it's all about big fish gobbling up the smaller fish. As we discussed yesterday, this isn't necessarily something we should be cheering on from the sidelines – but rather predictably, it has kickstarted a discussion surrounding Nintendo and what the Japanese giant's response to all of this activity is likely to be.
On one hand, it's a perfectly sensible question to ask. As Microsoft and Sony's recent actions have proven, being a successful platformer holder is very much down to the unique experiences you can offer your customers – and these same experiences can hopefully tempt other people to invest in your product, be it a console or subscription service. In any competitive marketplace, it's very much about offering the best deal to the buyer, and that often leads to the kind of consolidation we're seeing.
In an industry where its rivals are hastily trying to turn some of the biggest franchises into platform exclusives, why shouldn't we be asking how Nintendo is going to buttress its business moving forward?
Nintendo is no different, of course. Sure, people buy the Switch because it offers something unique when compared to the PS5 and Xbox Series X – TV and portable play – but it would be foolish to suggest that Nintendo's vast stable of famous properties isn't just as much of a draw. Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Fire Emblem, Kirby, Mario Kart... these are the franchises upon which Nintendo has built an empire, which ultimately suggests that software does indeed sell hardware. So, in an industry where its rivals are hastily trying to turn some of the biggest franchises into platform exclusives, why shouldn't we be asking how Nintendo is going to buttress its business moving forward?
Of course, Nintendo isn't like Microsoft and Sony. For starters, its own games – rather than those published by third-parties – tend to sell the best on its systems. That immediately means that Nintendo doesn't have to get into acquisitions in order to bolster its catalogue of IP, because its franchises are the envy of the gaming world. Also, Nintendo adopts a very different strategy when it comes to developing its games. When you list off some of the company's most memorable recent hits, it's amazing how many of them are actually created with the assistance of external studios. Intelligent Systems. HAL. Sora. Good-Feel. Camelot. Game Freak. None of these firms are owned by Nintendo, but instead, have long-standing and robust business relationships with the company that stretch back decades.
It perhaps says a lot about the Japanese way of doing business, which is based on trust and places a lot of value in the importance of long-standing, solid relationships between companies. Buying another firm is certainly one way of aggressively growing your business, but it also means you're then totally responsible for the welfare of hundreds, if not thousands, of new employees. Nintendo has forged ties with a multitude of external studios and that means it doesn't have to spend large sums of cash to gobble them up; instead, it can take advantage of their expertise only when it needs to. For the studios, they benefit from having a successful development and publishing partner who is loyal and gives them a lot of repeat business, but they can still maintain their independence and work with other companies when the need arises. It's a win-win for both sides.
Then there's the question of why Nintendo would even need to buy HAL, Intelligent Systems or any of its other trusted 'second party' partners. While these companies do the development work, the IPs they work with are owned (either fully or partly) by Nintendo. Intelligent Systems (which, contrary to popular belief, isn't an internal Nintendo studio) couldn't do a WarioWare game without Nintendo's permission, so what benefit does Nintendo get from acquiring the studio? If, say, Sony purchased Intelligent Systems tomorrow, it wouldn't get the benefit of the studio's most famous titles – so what's the point? Therefore, you could argue that there's little need for Nintendo to fear losing Intelligent Systems to another company, and therefore little need to force a purchase.
The exception here is Next Level Games, which Nintendo acquired in 2021. However, the reason for this move was largely down to Next Level's shareholders wishing to sell their stock; had Nintendo not stepped in and purchased that stock, another party would have, and Nintendo clearly values its relationship with the studio. So, that wasn't a case of Nintendo aggressively looking to make an acquisition, but rather than its hand was forced. Another exception is Monolith Soft, which Nintendo purchased 15 years ago, and Retro Studios, picked up by Nintendo 20 years ago. With the former, it was more about gaining a valuable support studio for its bigger titles (Monolith Soft has worked on the likes of Splatoon and Zelda: BOTW as well as its own games), while the latter purchase was related to reports of poor working conditions at the Metroid Prime studio. Retro also cost just $1 million – an absolute steal. In contrast, Bungie has just cost Sony $3.6 billion.
It's worth reflecting on how genuinely amazing it is that so many of the firm's most popular recent titles haven't been developed exclusively within Nintendo itself
Of course, Nintendo's approach isn't 100% foolproof. AlphaDream, the company behind the Mario & Luigi RPGs, went bankrupt in 2019, and Chibi-Robo studio Skip seems to have gone into an extended hibernation despite its relationship with Nintendo. However, you could argue that, in the latter case, it has more to do with the poor commercial performance of the Chibi-Robo series; Nintendo can't be expected to bankroll external studios forever if the resultant titles aren't generating cash.
Then, there's the small matter of Nintendo's size and the size of its pot of cash. Nintendo has reserves of $9.36 billion. To give that some context, Microsoft handed over almost $70 billion to purchase Activision and still has money in the bank. Those facts alone should make it clear that Nintendo isn't in the same ballpark as its rivals, and is therefore highly unlikely to make a sudden swoop for an external publisher or studio.
The real question we should all be asking isn't "who should Nintendo buy?" but "who should Nintendo work with next?" The company's strategy might seem odd in an industry where Microsoft is throwing money around like it's going out of fashion, but you can't argue that it doesn't work – at least for Nintendo. Again, it's worth reflecting on how genuinely amazing it is that so many of the firm's most popular recent titles haven't been developed exclusively within Nintendo itself; Metroid Dread, for example, was overseen by Nintendo but developed largely by Spanish studio MercurySteam. And Bayonetta 3, one of the most eagerly-awaited Switch exclusives, is being created by PlatinumGames, a fiercely independent Japanese developer which has ties with several companies, not just Nintendo. The Japanese company has turned the process of working with external studios on its biggest IPs into a fine art.
So, if you're sitting waiting for Nintendo to gobble up Capcom, Sega or Square Enix (three companies with which, it should be noted, Nintendo also has long-standing publishing relationships), you might want to make yourself comfortable, because you could be there for quite some time.
Comments 114
I don't see why they would, I don't think they view Microsoft and Sony as direct competitors
If Nintendo buy KONAMI = New DDR and other BEMANI games on Nintendo Switch.
I like that Nintendo buys company's they actually plan to utilize. Like the Luigis Mansion 3 studio. Cause Sony and Microsoft rarely ever properly utilize studios they purchase. Rare being a primary example. They produced very few titles under Microsoft belt, before being shoved off onto developing only for the Kinect. And then only recently were they brought back for 1 new ongoing IP, with next to nothing being produced since.
Nintendo will buy Bandai Namco. They've been helping Nintendo out with many games including BotW and they are a Japanese company - makes sense.
I don't want Nintendo to buy any major 3rd party devs from Japan and neither do I want Sony nor MS do so. I'd rather that they remain 3rd party and create games on whichever platform they feel like it.
Nintendo always have strong relationships with the Japan devs. They can work with them for exclusive games without being bought.
I'm shocked! Actually I'm not shocked. But since they at least once bought a company to 'save' it, I am curious if they would fight if Sony tried to buy one of their major partners. Of course the fact that Nintendo is a game company as opposed to one portion of otherwise enormous companies like Microsoft and Sony puts it at a disadvantage if they do ever have to bid against each other.
I don't think Nintendo's gonna buy anyone either but I do believe Nintendo's gonna hate losing game partnerships with Bandai Namco, Konami, Capcom, Sega, or SquareEnix if those companies get bought out (by anyone else).
Honestly, I'd like it if Nintendo bought a few more studios, just to expand their output to more of their catalog. Nothing in the scale of ActiBlizz of course, smaller studios such as Gust, for example. At the moment, F-Zero is not a possibility, not because Nintendo doesn't want to make one, but simply there is no capacity for it, all of their studios are working on higher priority projects. If they owned more studios, they could have a smaller one work on F-Zero.
They could seek out to do this with a 3rd party too, but that complicates things more and 3rd parties prefer to work on more lucrative projects or new IP too. This is exactly what happened with Luigi's Mansion, it isn't that they forgot it exists after Gamecube, they simply didn't have enough studios to work on it, and Next Level Games found the opportunity to become the Luigi's Mansion studio.
They are going to buy Microsoft and Sony, obviously
I hope Nintendo buys someone stupid - like Subway or something.
Then Ham Sandwich can finally be a Smash fighter
@mariomaster96 And the United States of America.
@Serpo I love the idea, but I think that would give them the Dark Souls team and I can't imagine what that would look like
If they bought Sega, maybe we could finally play a decent Sonic game... wakka wakka.
I do think that the opportunity to expand the studios it acquires could make Nintendo buying companies like Camelot (which has a shockingly low 45 employees listed as of April 2021 - not great in the HD era) and Grezzo (which has 80 employees) more feasible, since that could increase their output. And I think that, should the opportunity arise, studios like MercurySteam, PlatinumGames (not that I expect them to want to sell, but if Babylon's Fall is a huge flop, their hand may be forced, though they still have Bayonetta 3 coming), and Level-5 would be smart acquisitions for Nintendo to make that wouldn't break the bank. I wouldn't expect Nintendo to buy Bandai Namco, Koei Tecmo, or Niantic despite the relationships it has with each of those companies.
This might sound odd, but I think Thunderful has a decent chance of being acquired at some point because they own Bergsala, who distributes Nintendo products in the Nordic countries, and they grew out of indie devs that have supported Nintendo fairly well (SteamWorld Dig 1 even has the secret Mario area only on Wii U and Switch). Thunderful is on an acquisition streak of its own right now, though, and it's also an indie publisher on top of its development resources, but I at least think it wouldn't be surprising if we see them work with Nintendo akin to SFB, Tarsier, Paladin, or Brace Yourself Games
@jwfurness that is what I am thinking. Also I think Sonic had a history of selling most of Nintendo platforms.
Nintendo having Sonic won't be bad thing tbh
@Serpo
Bandai Namco did not work on BOTW. The only Nintendo game that Bandai Namco had a major role in developing is Super Smash Bros. (They also did some asset development for Mario Kart 8/8 Deluxe and Arms, though such asset development could probably be farmed to any studio or even to Nintendo themselves.)
If you include The Pokemon Company into the equation, Bandai Namco also worked on Pokemon Tournament (since that game is Pokemon × Tekken) and New Pokemon Snap.
Not convinced about the logic of Nintendo not benefitting from buying their closest partners. They chose not to do that with Rare and we all know how that turned out.
@Serpo Bandai Namco is part of a much larger entity which happens to be the world's larget toy company with annual revenue of about $6.5 billion.
In other words, never going to happen.
I'm not a massive fan of huge corporations (because of course) but I understand why buying a game studio can be both good and bad. Honestly, just for the potential positives that come with it, I would like to see a closer relationship between Sega and Nintendo but people willing a company to buy out another one is bizarre. Maybe instead of buying a company, an exclusivity contract could be struck or something. I dunno. It's a weird world now, man.
@JohnnyC The question there, though, is did not buying Rare harm Nintendo?
@Axecon those are pretty big companies too. In the west, we know them as video game publishers for the most part, but they have much more going on. Konami for example, they’re a huge force in slot machines and make the majority of their profits in gambling.
"If, say, Sony purchased Intelligent Systems tomorrow, it wouldn't get the benefit of the studio's most famous titles – so what's the point?"
Well, they would be taking away one of Nintendo's biggest partner studios. I doubt they would do it, but there's a good reason to do it if they wanted to take down Nintendo. Buy Intelligent Systems, buy HAL and Good Feel, you don't even need to do anything with them just take them away and give them a token project so people don't leave and reform a new studio... Nintendo is left in quite a pickle.
That's also one of the benefits of owning a studio, you know nobody is going to swoop in and steal them.
But it's not Nintendo's MO and thankfully so far it's not something anyone is trying to do to Nintendo, nor do I think they would try. After all, who wants to be the bad guys who killed Nintendo?
Ideally I'd like to see them buy Sega to open up their ips. Smaller scale id say platinum games so they continue to make switch games plus nintendo would have a more mature games focused studio then.
Nintendo didn't even buy Alpha Dream when they could have and now they are gone, Nintendo didn't buy RARE when they should have so I'm not expecting anything from them
I expect Nintendo to shelter in place while the AAA industry implodes in on itself.
Nintendo may not be directly competing with other console brands buy they will nevertheless be harmed if they lose valuable third party partnerships, particularly in Japan. Capcom and Square have put some heft behind the Switch.
Nintendo is very unlikely to buy anyone, but if they were to buy a publisher, I think a solid and sensible candididate could be Koei Tecmo:
> Koei Tecmo has produced multiple Nintendo-exclusive games, including Metroid Other M, Hyrule Warriors, Fire Emblem Three Houses & Warriors, MAU3, Age of Calamity, and the Japan-only Buddy Mission Bond & Touken Rambu Warriors.
> Of those games, Age of Calamity and Fire Emblem Three Houses are the two best-selling Koei Tecmo games if all time.
> None of Koei Tecmo's games (outside of maybe Nioh) are really pushing the bounds of technology.
> Koei Tecmo does't produce any notable Sony/Microsoft exclusive games outside of Nioh.
> Koei Tecmo's non-Nintendo collaborations include Persona 5 Strikers and the upcoming Final Fantasy Origins Strangers of Chaos - neither of them have been or will be anywhere near as successful as their Nintendo collaborations.
> Koei Tecmo is family-owned and are personally good friends with several Nintendo executives and producers.
@Damo Lost a few decent titles (Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Conker, Jet Force Gemini etc) and having an extra studio even just doing sequels or remasters of those games would have been good during some of their leaner times. Also, it took way too long to get the Donkey Kong games on the Virtual Console due to the issues with Rare, not to mention Banjo. Not so much an issue these days, but would have been useful to have had them during the latter days of the Wii and the entire lifespan of the Wii U. Also, it's impossible to say what might have happened to Rare if they'd been under Nintendo, as their current direction is based on Microsoft's leadership.
I can see them putting a bid in for an obscure Bamco or Sega team, and even then only buying just the controlling shares
Removed - offensive remarks
I say nobody, but if they were I would think it would be Sega? The absolute final nail in the console wars.
Yeah, cause Nintendo has such a good rapport buying companies with extensive catalogues to their names.
Cause buying Maximo, Dino Crisis, Dead Rising, Gacha Force, Lost Planet, Darkstalkers, Onimusha, Power Stone, and even Viewtiful Joe is going to do wonders for a company who cannot do Chibi Robo, F-Zero, Golden Sun, Drill Dozer, Rolling Western, Pushmo, and Excite (Anything) on their own. Let alone run THAT many more studios.
IP stacking is a bad, bad idea.
If Nintendo would do anything, they would likely be reasonable to buy a studio FROM a company. There was once whispers of Nintendo making an offer on Sonic Team (With only like 3 IP with it) many moons ago. But the idea... THAT sounds more plausible on Nintendo.
@JohnnyC Rare, at the time, was perhaps at the point where talent was about to start leaving (indeed, the Stampers a few years after the MS purchase) so perhaps Nintendo reasoned that it wasn't worth the cost of the purchase? Don't get me wrong, I would have loved to have seen Rare remain in the Nintendo fold up until the present day, but I'm not sure I'd argue that it harmed the company.
@Paraka I do hope that could be the case. Sonic Team with Nintendo would be great considering SEGA doesn't really know what to do with Sonic
@Damo Ultimately we'll never know. If Rare had been put to work on more Nintendo IP and develop their existing titles, would more people have stayed? Impossible to know, but it's hard to deny that one of Nintendo's biggest problems for at least a decade was a lack of support from external companies as well as not having enough internal resource to produce a steady string of decent games, resulting in barren release schedules in terms of AAA titles. If the likes of Grezzo or Intelligent Systems were quietly taken over by any of the other big companies, yes Nintendo would still have the IP, but they wouldn't have the capacity to make the same number of games. Their ability to work with partners has been a big help to them, and losing any of them would definitely hurt them, as I believe losing Rare did.
@anoyonmus - I dunno if it's true or not, or if the talks simply fell through. I just brought it up as an example of something Nintendo would reasonably do.
If Nintendo, theoretically, bought Sonic Team, and it came with the namesake, Chu Chu Rocket and maybe NiGHTs? Nintendo would have something they're known for on all fronts, both established and experimental.
Though that's 3 IP for 1 studio. Nintendo may just bring Sonic with them and call it.
Nintendo dont buy any, its the other companys that pay to be a part of Nintendo.
😌🤫
About Nintendo buying Bandai Namco, if they do so, what would they get? Only the Namco part or also the Bandai part? If they get both, would that mean an increase in licensed games released as first-party games?
Also, now when Nintendo had money to spare due to the success of the Switch, they invested it in more internal dev teams and similar instead. That way, Nintendo gamers will get more games but they don't also take something existing away from others, like Microsoft does with their aquisitions of third parties.
Personally, I wouldn't mind if Nintendo bought back Rare from Microsoft. Then we could see HD remasters of or sequels to games like Banjo Kazooie, Conker's Bad Fur Day, Star Fox Adventures (my personal favorite game of theirs), Donkey Kong Country, Donkey Kong 64, and Battletoads, to name a few.
@Paraka I hope Nintendo does that
One cannot be betrayed if one has no people.. . . Keyzer Soze xxx
@westman98 namco did work on prime 4 before they got the boot.
if platinum studios do ever want to be bought out they would rather have nintendo aquire them then anyone else.
I wish they'd buy Konami. I wish ANYBODY would buy Konami.
Nintendo buying Sega would be amazing, but I don’t really want to support any attempts at monopolizations, even if it’s by defense.
This question is ... dumb? Like more so then normal.
"Sony" and "Microsoft" are large companies with many verticals. They both buy and sell assets not associated with video games all the time. For Microsoft in particular, Xbox and all game studios make up like 0.1% of there yearly sales.
We seem to be really good with removing PlayStation form the Sony brand and Xbox from the Microsoft brand, but always seem to forget to remove Nintendo games divisions from Nintendo THE TOY COMPANY .
Are they going to acquire any game studios? Not likely. They treasure their unique culture and generally only integrate new studios slowly over time.
Is Nintendo the toy company going to use the insane amount of cash on hand they have to buy companies that support other entertainment verticals, like manufacturing, movies, TV, ect?
Yes. They do that all the freaking time. So the answer is absolutely not "nobody". Just no game studios.
Buy Konami and resurrect Castlevania!!!
I don't want a Castlevania game once every 100 years
Part of me wants them to buy Capcom what with all the franchises that they love to put on Switch and other Nintendo consoles like Monster Hunter, Mega Man and of course my beloved Ace Attorney, but I would much rather them stay multiplatform so we can keep getting the insanely highly detailed experiences and collections like the Resident Evil games and more without them having to be crutched by hardware limitations.
Nintendo doesn't need to embrace this dystopic arms race, since they're by far the strongest in terms of first-party appeal of the big three. People buy Nintendo consoles for Nintendo games, right? So goes the familiar refrain. And there's still a lot of truth to that. It's why they're largely immune to the industry-shaking effects of these crazy acquisitions.
@Anti-Matter Unfortunately, Konami is thoroughly unattractive outside of the slew of iconic IPs they're squatting on. I don't see anyone buying them, unfortunately.
Another reason why Nintendo doesn't buy developers is because usually those whose names people throw around that Nintendo could buy also have ties with other entertainment industries. Sega for example also owns more anime studio TMS. Nintendo is one of the very few video game companies that ONLY does Video Games.
Though if they were to buy someone out, I would place bets on MercuryStream or Level 5.
Nintendo doesn't need to buy up studios to be successful
I don’t see them doing it, but if they bought Capcom, they’d have all the win.
@Yomogi Plus, Nintendo already has a good majority percentage share in multiple of companies (HAL, Intelligent Systems, etc.) along with Japan's very strict foreigner buyout laws means that Nintendo doesn't have to worry about any corporate raiders trying to yoink Kirby or Fire Emblem away.
One last thing that people seem to forget. You can buy a company without needing to buy the whole of it. I can see Nintendo buying like 25% or 30% of a company to keep it afloat and keep it close in its orbit, but them going all Pac-Man like Microsoft and Sony are doing is as likely as a Yo-Kai Watch 4 English release.
Q_Q
@Ralizah
I keep following the latest news about DDR and I found DDR was slowly going downhill when one by one the artist of BEMANI games started to quit from Konami. I heard Yasuhiro Taguchi (TAG in his alias) has already quit from Konami last year and left his last song to be used for upcoming DDR A20+ song. It was sad to see peoples got threatened by toxic relationship and black mailing when they work at Konami from what I heard about Konami company situation. Now DDR have no Naoki Maeda, no Yasuhiro Taguchi, no Junko Karashima, they are the biggest role BEMANI artist for major BEMANI games and without these peoples, DDR and other BEMANI games songs start to get downhill as I keep finding more disappointing new BEMANI songs that sounds awful than before. Some of BEMANI artist moved to other company like Jimmy Weckl made his song for MaiMai SEGA, Naoki Maeda made his songs for Cross x Beats Capcom, some other BEMANI artist became freelancer to make songs for other rhythm games, some of them quit from their job as musician like DJ nagureo (Reo Nagumo).
Oops.. Sorry for too many information about Konami rhythm games situation.
@Deepdoop This take always seems out of place, to me. They're in literally the same industry, making the same things. Yet they aren't direct competitors? MS and Sony entered console gaming to compete with Nintendo and Sega.
Is this some safety bubble that people put around themselves as a consolation: "don't worry, son. Nintendo will be okay."
Buying publishers definitely isn’t Nintendo’s style. Buying the odd development studio like Rare or Retro Studios is if they see them as critical to the success of a game series.
That said, I don’t think they’d see Mercury Steam as indispensable to Metroid and I don’t think Platinum would want to sell, so I’d be surprised if Nintendo does anything other than carry on being Nintendo.
I don't think Nintendo is really interested in buying any large publisher. The only I could see them being really interested in is Capcom and that's mainly because of Monster Hunter (and to much lesser degree Resident Evil). But I'm not sure Capcom are even interested in being bought as they seem to be doing just fine on their own (at least at the moment).
It would be pretty cool if they got sega ngl.
Yes I’d like to see them buy Capcom and Sega but small development teams like Playtonic would definitely benefit coming in under the Nintendo wing……sadly tho Tencent seem to have started investing in this company, which would prevent Nintendo from doing so.
@Gwynbleidd Considering their recent Bungie acquisition was in the works 5-6 months before MS's bigger acquisition, I'm not so sure about that.
Activision selling is not a big shock considering the amount of bad press it has gotten in recent memory.
What really dooms many of these companies to be sold out to bigger fish is not satisfying their customers. It’s really the number one rule of business. My opinion is Sega will be the next to sell out hopefully to Nintendo. The closure of its iconic arcades and other business reports showing them losing money. If they would give in to popular consumer demand and port games to other platforms (yes Persona included because honestly let’s be real here if there was a contractual obligation for exclusivity it would’ve been made public knowledge long ago). Persona 5 has choked all the sales it’s going to get out of Sonys platform. Pc, Switch and Xbox are untapped markets just screaming for a piece so do it! The stupidity or lack of basic common sense in the business world really has me bewildered.
@westman98 Fully agree that Nintendo should buy at least a stake in KT. Them and Bandai-Namco have been major development partners in many of their AAA franchises, from Smash Bros to Fire Emblem to Mario Kart and everything between. I really hate this trend but I don't want to see Nintendo play another catchup game (like the Wii U dark days) if they don't jump on this ship with Sony & Microsoft.
Microsoft: You better release MLB The Show 22 on Nintendo Switch!
Sony: Yeah right LOL
Nintendo: Well I might Just Buy Konami, Sega, and Capcom then!
Sony: No Wait! Here, just leave them be.
Nintendo: Thank you 😊
Microsoft: About Spider-Man.....
@Damo
If you look back it was a very smart sale on Nintendo’s part. They sold rare for close to $400M back in 2002. If they spent $1M to acquire Retro Studios it’s a ridiculous return. Also a portion of that $375M likely went into DS development which was yet another brilliant investment on Nintendo’s part. Everyone knows Retro was never the same since 2002, that “magic” just isn’t there. Its almost as if Nintendo made Rare relevant even though Rare had its own talented core of devs in house.
Nintendo need urgently to increase the size of it development divisions/studios, not buy a companie such as Capcom/Sega, beside Nintendo is not rich enough to buy this companies.
Nintendo buying out Sega would be poetic, but I can't see it happening.
@Zuljaras
Be reasonable. There's not much that Konami can do about it, if Dracula can only be resurrected once a century.
@Ooyah Soma proved that the Resurrection is not 100% needed for a good Castlevania game
Also Lords of Shadow saga
Nintendo, go buy Level 5, please. Thank you.
Also Playtonic and Shin´en would be nice.
It'll be funny that after all of this Nintendo will end up buying something anyways, lol
They should buy a company that can handle their online systems.
Mario and Zelda are worth more than all other videogames combined.
Doubt Nintendo will buy anyone. But if i had to put money on them buying anything it would be Capcom. Monster Hunter sells real well on the Switch and if it starts to look like Sony or Microsoft might buy up Capcom and keep Monster Hunter as a exclusive Nintendo might want to buy that up. Don't think they will or that Capcom would want that. They have invested allot in ultra hd gaming and all of that would be wasted just working for Nintendo. I doubt the second gen switch will be on par with the current generation systems.
@anoyonmus - Well, that's heavily reliant on whether or not Nintendo sees a future in the studio or IP.
Honestly, Sonic Team with just Sonic would probably be huge in statement alone. Whereas the other two are adopting major studios with a catalogue of the cool games they worked hard to make popular.
With Sonic, people won't be seeing it as, "Crash exclusively on Xbox," but moreso as Sonic may just been saved.
@Damo it did not harm Nintendo... but it sure did harm my heart.
Hang on. Nintendo OWNS Monolith? Yeah, I know they make Xenoblade and do tons of support work for other in house games like Animal Crossing, Zelda, etc. but like, I could've sworn they had made games for Playstation as well. Am I misremembering things?
For me personally would love to see Nintendo and Sega work together again. Or even better colaborate on new Hardware, just a big pipe dream that one!! But a new F-zero would be great 👍
Nintendo should buy the gaming division of Sega or Konami. Though, I would like Konami to bury themselves more because of their terrible mistakes. Capcom don’t need a buyout; they can still handle themselves well.
@Fizza Monolith Soft wasn’t “purchased” per se. Nintendo bought the majority of shares, which is kinda the same. Monolith Soft made the Xenosaga games on the PS2 until they made Baten Kaitos on the Gamecube
@Savage_Joe Ah, understood. I had heard of the Xenosaga games before as a sort of precursor to Chronicles so that's what threw me off.
@Deepdoop Yeah its been said before even by those companies. Microsoft and Sony have been open about not competing with Nintendo. Its an alternative. Even Nintendo know they cant compete with them so it wouldnt make much sense.
They would be better off funding games with those studios. They would make the money back on a game but not buying a company.
I've said Sega makes the most sense to me before in recent times, as I feel like they are struggling probably the most out of all the companies that could be bought out.
And, if you look at Nintendo's and Sega's relationship, it makes the most sense with Mario and Sonic, imo.
They've been teaming up for the Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Games titles for a while, but Nintendo just added the Genesis section to the Switch's Expansion Pack online out of nowhere really (was anybody expecting that section?)?
I feel like Sega is probably struggling the most with being a publicly traded company, and keeping up the, "More profits. MORE profits. MORE PROFITS." game they must play.
I do think Nintendo could really help the Sonic games shine, and give them the development time they need, but I'm not 100% sure it makes sense if Sega's finances show the majority of the Sonic games sell better on the other platforms, as Nintendo likes to keep games exclusive to their systems.
So yeah, not entirely sure who Nintendo might look at buying next, but it's probably few and far between, and they seem to just be fine with working with companies to produce Nintendo games for their systems, like the Hyrule Warriors games.
If there's one thing Nintendo will buy though it's a life time supplies of free sushis for their employees for doing a freaking good job with the Switch.
@jwfurness Sega would be cool. Sega would also give them ATLUS, the people behind Shin Megami Tensei and Persona, as well as the Yakuza series. Unfortunately, even if Nintendo was looking to make such a purchase, I don't think Sony would let it happen. They seem to have some kind of exclusivity deal for the Persona series.
Nintendo doesn't need to buy anyone. They just need to increase the output of their first party. Seriously, their IPs rival that of Disney! Everybody in the fricking world knows who mario and donkey kong are. The switch is almost 5 years in and they just now had a new metroid and kirby. Where's a new Donkey Kong? A new Mario Kart? Or a brand new IP?
My worry is that there won’t be any third party support bc there is no third party left! Nintendo will be at the mercy of MSFT and Sony to a degree.
Platinum Games
@Savage_Joe Err, that's what purchasing a company usually means, purchasing the majority of shares. It's very rare that someone owns literally 100% of a major company.
@CoffeeWithGames Don't forget that Sega itself somewhat recently bought Atlus. They own lots of studios, including Creative Assembly and Sports Interactive in the UK. It's a rather large entity, I don't know if it's within Nintendo's reach. I mean, they could, but I don't think it would be smart, Sega is too expensive and owns too many "dead" IPs that are overvalued due to historical value.
Sega or at least sonic team. Ever since sega went third party sonic has felt like a Nintendo ip.
Can’t apple just buy everyone and everything and then we can move on with our lives? Xxx
@Troll_Decimator I just checked, and you’re right
@Williamfuchs420 and have Resident Evil locked up on Nintendo consoles? Held back on the weaker power of Nintendo consoles?
@Paraka exactly. Nintendo would be perfect for Sonic. I feel MS and PS might just ruin Sonic even further if either one of them buy Sonic Team
This is a bit difficult to choose. I like how companies are not tied to bigger ones so that they can make different games for different consoles. However, I do like the idea of Mega Man, Castlevania, Sonic, and even Final Fantasy to be tied to Nintendo due to the long history. I don't know. But reading this article and comments really makes me appreciate how Smash Ultimate have brought so many together.
@Axecon It would be so weird but SO COOL if Nintendo bought SEGA.
@anoyonmus ya if Nintendo hypothetically bought up Capcom and made its future projects exclusive. All the work Capcom has done developing for modern consoles would kinda be wasted given that most of that wouldn’t work on Nintendos current console at least. And based on history Nintendo rarely seeks out the latest greatest tech for its future consoles so i doubt even there next gen switch will be that powerful.
Now im all for it if anyone hypothetically buys up Capcom and makes it exclusive i hope its Nintendo its all i got right now and i dont want to overpay for a ps5 or xbox to play the next Monster Hunter
@Williamfuchs420 well I don't wanna pay for a PS5 or Xbox Series X if Sony or MS buys Capcom.
I just hope Capcom stays multiplatform
@Mikmoomamimocki well at least Nintendo could make Sonic better
I'd like if certain studios were left alone, some of those being Capcom, Bandai Namco and Square Enix. But if were to buy studios for their IPs and/or talent, I'd like it if they secured Mercury Steam, Platinum Games, SEGA and Koei Tecmo.
Of course there's always the ones that work even closer with Nintendo that they could pick up, like they did with Next Level Games, like Intelligent Systems, HAL, Sora Ltd, Grezzo, Feel-Good, Vitei, Camelot and GameFreak. GameFreak if solely to have more of an hand in Pokemon game development.
@locky-mavo im honestly surprised that disney hasn’t bought squareenix. They would have a in company game dev and access to a ton of ip
Listen, Konami needs to buy Konami. By that I mean they need to bring their IP catalog into play again. No investor cares about a franchise like castlevania because it was once cool, if it’s not making any money now. A buyout of Konami would plunge all that IP into a larger legal vault. A much larger business holding it would be harder for indie licencees to make deals with than Konami now.
Again, no company larger than Konami is itching to own Twin Bee to see if a small developer can make it make a lot of money for them
@Troll_Decimator Glad you mentioned Atlus, as that was years ago and I had completely forgotten about it.
The Persona series might be one of Sega's best-selling series right now then?
But, I agree on the "too many 'dead' IPs", I just think Nintendo has been teaming up with them for a decent while on the Mario & Sonic games, and I would imagine most of Sega's stuff like Sonic sells best on Nintendo platforms, but I could be 100% wrong there. Then there are things like the Bayonetta games that go back to Nintendo stepping in and helping fund the development of Bayonetta 2, and now 3, which makes them exclusive to Nintendo, while Sega still owns part of them? Or, something? Not sure the asking price for Sega, but I do think Nintendo just keeps partnering with Sega, until Sega can't play the publicly traded company game anymore because "investors" aren't seeing a return, and then Sega's like, "Hey Nintendo, would you like to own our IPs since we've worked together for a while now?"
Also, I literally learned of Sony buying Bungie from this piece, as that news went under my radar entirely...
Weird times.
They’re going to buy the Seahawks and get back into sports.
Frankly Nintendo doesn’t need to buy any 3rd party publishers. Because Nintendo’s own IP is so overwhelmingly powerful that development studios will jump over corpses to have a chance to develop a Nintendo IP for a Nintendo platform. It’s guaranteed to sell millions.
So Nintendo isn’t in the same position as Sony or Microsoft. Both of those companies have strong IPs (especially Sony) but they aren’t on the identification level of Mario or Zelda. Nintendo could survive off of just its IP. Making their own internal games and then licensing the IP out to developers to assist with titles. Their IP is that powerful.
Only Disney and Marvel (which is owned by Disney) has IP as powerful as the House of Mario.
The question is whether Nintendo would be willing to respond if Sony were to attempt an aggressive purchase of any of the more significant Japanese publishers like Capcom, Bandai Namco, Koei Tecmo, etc.
I don't think even Sony can swallow up Square Enix with cash alone, not unless Square Enix shareholders were to devolve into a sudden panic.
I don't see them buying anybody.
@Ralizah Unless Konami does the unthinkable, and teaches Nintendo the "delights" of Mario and Zelda pachinko machines.
(I'm only teasing, please don't hurt me.)
@BloodNinja "This take always seems out of place, to me. They're in literally the same industry, making the same things. Yet they aren't direct competitors? MS and Sony entered console gaming to compete with Nintendo and Sega."
It's just a business concept. They are technically direct competitors but Nintendo focuses on intangible ones like time (Time spent watching Netflix is time not spent gaming on a Nintendo device).
@jsty3105 They are literally all competing for your time and attention. That's the whole basis of the industry lol
@BloodNinja You might be shocked as to how few people/companies realise who or what they are actually competing it. Then again, it fluctuates and changes with technology etc. so it's not exactly a fixed concept.
The root concept is for companies to look further than their direct competitors otherwise they might get surprised by an unexpected entrant or something else. For example, Kodak and how they handled the emergence of digital photography
@jsty3105 I have no idea what you're trying to get at, there.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...