3 ms·

Pokemon Go was not Ninetendo, just Nintendo IP. There was an interesting market reaction once people realized this: http://www.polygon.com/2016/7/25/12270074/

Pokemon Go was not Ninetendo, just Nintendo IP. There was an interesting market reaction once people realized this: http://www.polygon.com/2016/7/25/12270074/pokemon-go-nintendo-stock-price http://www.polygon.com/2016/7/25/12270074/pokemon-go-nintend... That's not to say that Nintendo did anything to mislead the public, they didn't, it was just a widespread misconception. As a gamer, Nintendo is somewhat "brilliantly innovative" but they also appear to be somewhat disconnected from their market. Pokemon Go is actually a good example. The Nintendo fan base is positively starving for content and Nintendo seems to consistently underestimate demand. Or as you suggest, perhaps they are more interested in being innovative rather than servicing their fan base. So while I think they should be praised for being innovative I would also say two things: * Pokemon Go is not at all their innovation * They definitely have problems

hackuser 10y ago
Thanks for the clarification. Do they at least get credit for backing and popularizing Pokemon Go? Where would it be without Nintendo? (Real questions; I'm not advocating for Nintendo.)
- cbhl 10y ago
  Well, that would just be Ingress: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingress_(video_game) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingress_(video_game)
- gshulegaard 10y ago
  As I understand it, not really. Niantic took their Ingress platform and modified it slightly to work with Pokemon IP with a minigame (casting poke-balls) inside. The original PokeStops were actually Ingress points of interest :)
  - hackuser 10y ago
    EDIT: Per Wikipedia, the idea for the game came from a Pokemon Company employee (owned 33% by Nintendo [0]), inspired by Ingress, and the game was developed at the Pokemon Company. Another link says "The Pokémon Company... and Nintendo jointly developed the app". Where does the story that it was all Niantic come from? Per Wikipedia: * Ingress: It was downloaded 8 million times "as of" 2015, about a year after its release, and claimed 7 million players in 2015. * Pokemon Go: 130 million downloads in its first month, 650 million within 8 months. PG was "the most active mobile game in the United States ever with 21 million active users" within a week of its launch; note that is in only one country. From a software development perspective Nintendo might not have done anything, but who had the vision to invest in bringing this to such a huge market? That also is an investment in creativity and innovation. (That's not meant to be a rhetorical question; I don't know the answer.)
    - gshulegaard 10y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pok%C3%A9mon_Go https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pok%C3%A9mon_Go As shown, the developer and publisher is Niantic which is also the developer of Ingress. Perhaps you are referring to this snippet: > The concept for the game was conceived in 2014 by Satoru Iwata of Nintendo and Tsunekazu Ishihara of The Pokémon Company as an April Fools' Day collaboration with Google, called the Google Maps: Pokémon Challenge.[21] Ishihara was a fan of developer Niantic's previous transreality game, Ingress, and saw the game's concept as a perfect match for the Pokémon series.[22] Niantic used the crowdsourced[23] data from Ingress to populate the locations for PokéStops and gyms within Pokémon Go, and data from Google Maps to spawn specific Pokémon on certain terrain or environment.[24][25] So for background, The Pokémon Company is more or less a licensing body for handling licensing of the Pokémon IP and franchise. They collaborated with Niantic to meld an Ingress inspired augmented reality game with the Pokémon IP. Yes The Pokémon Company is a subsidiary of Nintendo so in a way Nintendo had a hand in the collaboration...but I would probably classify it as a 2nd or even 3rd order relationship. But that is a personal judgement call I suppose. In my mind, the augmented reality game design was wholly pioneered and executed by Niantic (not once but twice). The idea for melding said design with Pokémon IP came from the franchise licensing entity of The Pokémon Company which is a joint subsidiary of Nintendo, Game Freak, and Creatures who were the three businesses holding copyright on Pokémon at the time of its founding [1]. But again, somewhat of a personal view point. To me, I wouldn't necessarily attribute much related to Pokémon Go to Nintendo. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pok%C3%A9mon_Company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pok%C3%A9mon_Company
marrone12 10y ago
I bet Nintendo is just waiting until they can make a true Pokemon game the way it deserves. It was such a magical experience that anything less than that would be a disappointment.
viraptor 10y ago
I wonder if they really underestimate the demand, or just are happy to keep people hungry. Compare this to Mario that I hate, because he's absolutely everywhere. Why is he racing or fighting anyone outside of Mario land? It's a cash cow and nothing is safe from those characters.
BoorishBears 10y ago
I think they fully realize that the fan base is starving for that content, but they have no real reason to dilute their IPs with games on mobile. They have a giant war chest, and 2 portable consoles out right now. Mario Run was an interesting, polished foray into mobile, but I'm also getting it's as far as full content from them will go on mobile. The form factor isn't ideal for their games the gameplay model (short bite sized bursts) isn't ideal, even the pricing isn't ideal (look at the outcry over paying for Mario Run, I've heard people dismiss Mario Run immediately over the fact it wasn't 99 cents).
- pshc 10y ago
  What are your thoughts on Fire Emblem: Heroes?
  - BoorishBears 10y ago
    I don't know it well, but at the surface it seems to follow the formula Mario Run did, present the IP in a polished but pared down experience that won't compete with the main content. The pricing is more traditional, but the IP is also not as sensitive as mario imo, I don't think Nintendo would involve Mario in that type of FTP structure
modeless 10y ago
That article is essentially wrong. The run up in Nintendo stock was not based on a misconception about the ownership of Pokemon Go, and the fall was not a "realization". Contrary to what journalists would have you think, investors are not usually stupid. The run up in Nintendo stock happened because investors have been after Nintendo for years to start making mobile game versions of their crown jewel IPs, believing (rightfully I would point out) that this would be an absolute gold mine. When Pokemon Go became an unprecedented blockbuster success, investors reasoned that it would convince Nintendo to change course and make more mobile games. The fall in Nintendo stock happened after their earnings call. On the call, Nintendo said that despite the success of Pokemon Go they were not changing their plans to increase their investment in mobile games. That's why their stock fell (to "only" a 60% gain).

hackuser 10y ago

Thanks for the clarification. Do they at least get credit for backing and popularizing Pokemon Go? Where would it be without Nintendo? (Real questions; I'm not advocating for Nintendo.)

cbhl 10y ago
Well, that would just be Ingress: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingress_(video_game) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingress_(video_game)
gshulegaard 10y ago
As I understand it, not really. Niantic took their Ingress platform and modified it slightly to work with Pokemon IP with a minigame (casting poke-balls) inside. The original PokeStops were actually Ingress points of interest :)
- hackuser 10y ago
  EDIT: Per Wikipedia, the idea for the game came from a Pokemon Company employee (owned 33% by Nintendo [0]), inspired by Ingress, and the game was developed at the Pokemon Company. Another link says "The Pokémon Company... and Nintendo jointly developed the app". Where does the story that it was all Niantic come from? Per Wikipedia: * Ingress: It was downloaded 8 million times "as of" 2015, about a year after its release, and claimed 7 million players in 2015. * Pokemon Go: 130 million downloads in its first month, 650 million within 8 months. PG was "the most active mobile game in the United States ever with 21 million active users" within a week of its launch; note that is in only one country. From a software development perspective Nintendo might not have done anything, but who had the vision to invest in bringing this to such a huge market? That also is an investment in creativity and innovation. (That's not meant to be a rhetorical question; I don't know the answer.)
  - gshulegaard 10y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pok%C3%A9mon_Go https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pok%C3%A9mon_Go As shown, the developer and publisher is Niantic which is also the developer of Ingress. Perhaps you are referring to this snippet: > The concept for the game was conceived in 2014 by Satoru Iwata of Nintendo and Tsunekazu Ishihara of The Pokémon Company as an April Fools' Day collaboration with Google, called the Google Maps: Pokémon Challenge.[21] Ishihara was a fan of developer Niantic's previous transreality game, Ingress, and saw the game's concept as a perfect match for the Pokémon series.[22] Niantic used the crowdsourced[23] data from Ingress to populate the locations for PokéStops and gyms within Pokémon Go, and data from Google Maps to spawn specific Pokémon on certain terrain or environment.[24][25] So for background, The Pokémon Company is more or less a licensing body for handling licensing of the Pokémon IP and franchise. They collaborated with Niantic to meld an Ingress inspired augmented reality game with the Pokémon IP. Yes The Pokémon Company is a subsidiary of Nintendo so in a way Nintendo had a hand in the collaboration...but I would probably classify it as a 2nd or even 3rd order relationship. But that is a personal judgement call I suppose. In my mind, the augmented reality game design was wholly pioneered and executed by Niantic (not once but twice). The idea for melding said design with Pokémon IP came from the franchise licensing entity of The Pokémon Company which is a joint subsidiary of Nintendo, Game Freak, and Creatures who were the three businesses holding copyright on Pokémon at the time of its founding [1]. But again, somewhat of a personal view point. To me, I wouldn't necessarily attribute much related to Pokémon Go to Nintendo. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pok%C3%A9mon_Company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pok%C3%A9mon_Company

marrone12 10y ago

I bet Nintendo is just waiting until they can make a true Pokemon game the way it deserves. It was such a magical experience that anything less than that would be a disappointment.

viraptor 10y ago

I wonder if they really underestimate the demand, or just are happy to keep people hungry. Compare this to Mario that I hate, because he's absolutely everywhere. Why is he racing or fighting anyone outside of Mario land? It's a cash cow and nothing is safe from those characters.

BoorishBears 10y ago

I think they fully realize that the fan base is starving for that content, but they have no real reason to dilute their IPs with games on mobile. They have a giant war chest, and 2 portable consoles out right now. Mario Run was an interesting, polished foray into mobile, but I'm also getting it's as far as full content from them will go on mobile. The form factor isn't ideal for their games the gameplay model (short bite sized bursts) isn't ideal, even the pricing isn't ideal (look at the outcry over paying for Mario Run, I've heard people dismiss Mario Run immediately over the fact it wasn't 99 cents).

pshc 10y ago
What are your thoughts on Fire Emblem: Heroes?
- BoorishBears 10y ago
  I don't know it well, but at the surface it seems to follow the formula Mario Run did, present the IP in a polished but pared down experience that won't compete with the main content. The pricing is more traditional, but the IP is also not as sensitive as mario imo, I don't think Nintendo would involve Mario in that type of FTP structure

modeless 10y ago

That article is essentially wrong. The run up in Nintendo stock was not based on a misconception about the ownership of Pokemon Go, and the fall was not a "realization". Contrary to what journalists would have you think, investors are not usually stupid. The run up in Nintendo stock happened because investors have been after Nintendo for years to start making mobile game versions of their crown jewel IPs, believing (rightfully I would point out) that this would be an absolute gold mine. When Pokemon Go became an unprecedented blockbuster success, investors reasoned that it would convince Nintendo to change course and make more mobile games. The fall in Nintendo stock happened after their earnings call. On the call, Nintendo said that despite the success of Pokemon Go they were not changing their plans to increase their investment in mobile games. That's why their stock fell (to "only" a 60% gain).