• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Rumor: Wonderful 101 to launch on PS4/Xbox One/Switch via Kickstarter, announcement on Feb 3

Neff

Member
You ignorantly ignore that a company like Nintendo would gladly spend $20 million for a timed game

You're out of your mind. Nintendo isn't MS, they're as conservative as they come.

I'll say it again. Lack of proof doesn't negate common business sense, nor does it vindicate flights of fancy. There isn't a single instance of Nintendo funding a property they didn't have control over.
 

Neff

Member
Like Banjo?

I'm pretty sure they did have joint-control over Banjo, unless of course Rare funded it themselves. It's worth remembering that the 360 port of GoldenEye 007 got shut down because Nintendo wouldn't allow it.
 

DryvBy

Member
So on this one, it seems like they're releasing this game regardless and the Kickstarter is more for self publishing costs. Just a weird Kickstarter.
 

EDMIX

Member
You're out of your mind. Nintendo isn't MS, they're as conservative as they come.

I'll say it again. Lack of proof doesn't negate common business sense, nor does it vindicate flights of fancy. There isn't a single instance of Nintendo funding a property they didn't have control over.

? Nintendo had a bunch of timed games. Daemon x machina going mulitplatform is proof of that, same with Octopath. Clearly they paid to have those titles FIRST on their system. So Nintendo isn't MS, but like MS and Sony alike, they will pay for timed things. No reason to seriously try to argue against that fact. Nintendo has funded MANY IPs they had zero right to, same with MS and Sony.

JAMMA JAMMA THANK YOU! Nintendo was funding so many Rare games and when MS bought Rare, they took all those IP. So Nintendo clearly didn't own them if they were even bought when Rare was purchased, it means Nintendo didn't own them, but Rare owned those IP.

I don't even know why anyone would try to argue anyone in the big 3 don't have timed stuff lol On a day after 2 damn Nintendo exclusives go multiplatform. Too funny.
 
Last edited:

Alexios

Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
Platinum has been quoted directly here and elsewhere during all the Q&As about this development essentially saying Nintendo did have control but they asked and they were nice enough to give it to them and let them do it. So, not every published game implies control of the game's or IP's future (not m/any people claimed this anyway), but not every published game implies 0% control beyond a definitive timed deal or no deal as you want to claim when you propose Bayonetta 2+ and Astral Chain are just as likely next, which Platinum has also been quoted shooting down saying they consider this a rare exclusive situation they're thankful for and those games are up to Nintendo who co-own them. It's really not hard to grasp that deals and contracts vary per title/developer/ip/publisher/situation/deal but it seems too hard for you when you make such blanket statements that go directly against the developer (so according to you the one who holds the ip, who says otherwise).
 
Last edited:

Neff

Member
Clearly they paid to have those titles FIRST on their system.

If you only make a game for one system, it doesn't 'clearly' mean a publisher paid you to exclusively make a game for their system.

it means Nintendo didn't own them, but Rare owned those IP.

Nintendo sold their half of Rare back to Rare, including all IPs which didn't use their own characters.

You don't understand how this works.

A rational, logical, informed post

Exactly. To suggest that Star Fox Zero of all things might be coming to other systems because ill-informed fantasy logic and flying pigs could make it happen willingly rejects everything we know about the games industry and Nintendo specifically.
 
Last edited:
Platinum has been quoted directly here and elsewhere during all the Q&As about this development essentially saying Nintendo did have control but they asked and they were nice enough to give it to them and let them do it. So, not every published game implies control of the game's or IP's future (not m/any people claimed this anyway), but not every published game implies 0% control beyond a definitive timed deal or no deal as you want to claim when you propose Bayonetta 2+ and Astral Chain are just as likely next, which Platinum has also been quoted shooting down saying they consider this a rare exclusive situation they're thankful for and those games are up to Nintendo who co-own them. It's really not hard to grasp that deals and contracts vary per title/developer/ip/publisher/situation/deal but it seems too hard for you when you make such blanket statements that go directly against the developer (so according to you the one who holds the ip, who says otherwise).

Businesses make blanket statements all the time, this is nothing new. They purposely mislead people in believing something is true, whether for financial gain or simply not ready to reveal all the facts. I always take these statements with a grain of salt, because it's been proven time and again that the market changes and businesses change along with it. Look around you, who would've guessed we would've gotten all these ports from first party publishers a few years back?
 

Alexios

Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
That's not a blanket statement, it's a very specific statement. That's the second time you say that, I don't think it means what you think it means. Why was it so hard for Platinum to say, yes, we controlled the IP if they did rather than claim Nintendo gave it? Why throw Nintendo a bone over Wonderful 101 by clearly stating they went to them to ask for this and they surprisingly allowed them to proceed when, according to nobodies, Nintendo had absolutely nothing to do with any of this? If they could have just said a timed exclusivity deal expired, or not even comment on the past of the game but just say it's theirs now and that's all that matters so they do it because they want to, what reason did they have to even bring up Nintendo at all as, clearly, if you're right and there was a timed deal and nothing more, it has obviously expired? Why do I have to believe you and the other troll who want to claim Platinum and every other developer has all the power all the time regarding all their games but for some inexplicable reason when asked about it they tell people otherwise? Yes, some times this company has all the power, some times the other company does, some times there are timed contracts, others it's more complex than that. You're the ones making blanket statements regarding all first party published games (and nobody has ever said every first party published game is 100% owned by the first party considering first parties have many times in the past stepped in to publish other companies' games in this or that region just because they weren't interested in doing that, ie Dragon Quest games in previous generations, nobody said Nintendo owns Dragon Quest, Square clearly didn't say that, fans clearly didn't say that, but here it's clearly said Nintendo had a say in Wonderful 101's future and they specifically co-own Astral Chain and Bayonetta 2+ directly from the horse's mouth. No, other games aren't owned, yes, other games have timed deals, but at the moment the facts are that the people who know the contracts you will never see, and in fact the developers you so favor in your arguments rather than the publisher, say the publisher had control which they kindly relinquished to allow this but they maintain control of the other specific games mentioned. Simple facts.
 
Last edited:

EDMIX

Member
If you only make a game for one system, it doesn't 'clearly' mean a publisher paid you to exclusively make a game for their system.



Nintendo sold their half of Rare back to Rare, including all IPs which didn't use their own characters.

You don't understand how this works.



Exactly. To suggest that Star Fox Zero of all things might be coming to other systems because ill-informed fantasy logic and flying pigs could make it happen willingly rejects everything we know about the games industry and Nintendo specifically.

"If you only make a game for one system, it doesn't 'clearly' mean a publisher paid you to exclusively make a game for their system." just stop bud, its clear they have some timed deals. I see reason to now try to pretend they have no deals, yet when a game is announced, suddenly that "deal" is for the game to not appear anywhere else or something.

"To suggest that Star Fox Zero" Never said anything about Star Fox bud....

MS bought Rare as in they paid money to Rare to be owned, they didn't PAY NINTENDO FOR RARE CAUSE RARE WAS NEVER 100% OWNED BY NINTENDO! At the end of the day, IP like Conker, Banjo, Perfect Dark, are owned by Rare, then owned by MS.

Thats it.

S sid2vicious Agreed. Remember when Ken Levine was like Bioshock wasn't being made for PS3? Or when Shinji Mikami was saying he'd cut off his head if RE4 came to the PS2? lol

So when I hear folks say "oh but this guy said this" or "he said that", I think of those moments.
 
Last edited:
unknown.png


First part is a blanket statement, They claim the IP is owned half by them and half by Nintendo. But also proceed to say "It's too early to say" and "we'll see how it goes from there". The interviewer realized this is a blanket statement and calls them out on it, basically asking them if its a possibility. Inaba realizes he said too much, and follows up with another blanket statement. He says it's Nintendo's call, but he said previously that they "Platinum" owns half the IP. He follows up and says he has no say in that matter, I call bull on that, I'm sure he can convince Nintendo to publish the game themselves like the did with Wonderful 101, he also said before "It's too early to say" (talking about sales) and "we'll see how it goes from there", implying depending on circumstance there's a chance, but if he said he has no say on that matter, how could he make that previous claim? Again blanket statement, says The Wonderful 101 is an "exclusive case" but doesn't mention why, what makes it "exclusive"? Blanket statement.
 

Neff

Member
Never said anything about Star Fox bud....

Another way to look at it is if Nintendo themselves didn't want to fund some port. Lets say you are right and Nintendo makes them crowd source, it means they have something to do with those other 3 titles, if so...it could be Star Fox Zero, Guard and Astral Chain

No?

RARE WAS NEVER 100% OWNED BY NINTENDO!

Correct, it was 49% owned by Nintendo, since the Stampers wanted to retain ownership. But that 49% entitled Nintendo to part-ownership of games made during their relationship and beyond. I'll point to the 360 GoldenEye 007 situation again.

If you're going to continue to make broad assumptions on my part then I'm simply going to leave you to have an uninformed debate with yourself.

what makes it "exclusive"?

It sold like shit and has been dead for 6 years would be my guess.
 
Last edited:

Alexios

Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
Lol? You can't be serious, neither of you, this is clearly trolling.
 
Last edited:

EDMIX

Member
No?



Correct, it was 49% owned by Nintendo, since the Stampers wanted to retain ownership. But that 49% entitled Nintendo to part-ownership of games made during their relationship and beyond. I'll point to the 360 GoldenEye 007 situation again.

If you're going to continue to make broad assumptions on my part then I'm simply going to leave you to have an uninformed debate with yourself.



It sold like shit and has been dead for 6 years would be my guess.

Smh...did you even read that post? This is why you need to read man. The point was that if Nintendo was the reason why its crowd funded, it would only support that number 4 as it would be Nintendo's idea, thus would likely be their IP involved as its the only way to support that Nitnendo had some deal where it HAD to be crowd sourced. They have no done enough games for Nintendo for them to tell them ALL 4 GAMES must be done this way, unless its referring to Baoyonetta 2, 3 etc. Which wouldn't make sense considering one of them isn't even out.

Thus...if it was Nintendo, then part of those other 3 announcements could be Star Fox Zero, Guard or Astral Chain. NEVER did I state that IP going mulitplatform, you either can't read, or you didn't fully read or understand what was being stated. You ASSUMED it was asking or saying they'd put it on many systems.

Where on earth did I say that? smh.

READ THE POST! Stop cherry picking to emotionally rage post...

Here is the post I'm responding to and the FULL POST!

"Something about this arrangement with Nintendo predating the cash influx by Tencent. If I had to guess they have a contract that laid out exactly how the funding would be acquired, including how much was needed for steam and ps4."


"Maybe, could be, but consider it has 3 other announcements. So why would Nintendo have an arrangement for them to get funding this way on those other 3 games we don't know about? So even if we look all the games they did for Nintendo that are THEIR games, that only applies to Wonderful 101 and Astral Chain, even if we squeeze in Bayonetta 2 and for some reason Nintendo and not Sega has for it to be funded this way, it still leaves out a 4th game. So I don't know that this has anything to do with Nintendo as I don't know what they'd make some clause to them have them port other titles thru crowd funding as this number 4 would apply to 3 games, that of which clearly Nintendo had no part of.

I could agree with you that maybe Nintendo has something to do with it being funded this way if it was JUST this game, but 3 others?

Another way to look at it is if Nintendo themselves didn't want to fund some port. Lets say you are right and Nintendo makes them crowd source, it means they have something to do with those other 3 titles, if so...it could be Star Fox Zero, Guard and Astral Chain"

No where does it state anything about Star Fox going multiplatform bud, its stating that if the game is on kickstarer because of some arrangement by Nintendo , it likely means its cause it involves their IP or stuff they've published. So....if the person who questioned that feels Nintendo maybe had some deal where it MUST be Kickstarter, it means the other 3 games clearly have to do with that actual deal.

No where did I say anything about Star Fox going multiplatform, you just rage post too much and don't read enough of people's post.

You fight and assume too much..

S sid2vicious Pretty much, I expect Astral Chain next tbh
 
Last edited:

Alexios

Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
You're projecting bullshit theories on clear statements clearly said by those who know, not you. As for the future, they can be under negotiation. Maybe they're working to regain full control rather than just this allowed remaster hence his hesitation, if he said they have full control already, even if they're working towards that and Nintendo has been gracious and receptive as said, it could ruin the deal if they take it the wrong way. But again, that's speculation so I'll stick to facts. Nintendo allowed this, hence they had control. Nintendo maintain co-ownership of Astral Chain and Platinum's hands are tied regarding that as they've said for Bayo 2+ before.

unknown.png

unknown.png

unknown.png

unknown.png

unknown.png

Now it's established Nintendo has control, is it theoretically possible they could decide to relinquish control and allow them to remaster Astral Chain 7 years post-launch as they surprisingly did for W101? Anything is, theoretically. Is it likely? Platinum don't bet on it, because that shit's rare in the industry, and neither should you.
 
Last edited:
Huh, that is unusual.
Sony music always had interests in gaming, however relationships between divisions in Sony are a mess lol
Sony Music actually makes a lot of money from mobile thanks to their subsidiary Aniplex (their Fate game prints money, highest grossing mobile game of 2019), but they also founded console studios indipendently (they developed an Advace Wars clone on PC and Switch, not PS4 lol. Also they announced two PS4 games a while ago).
On other hand, the PlayStation division founded a mobile studio, ForwardWorks trying to develop on mobile.
Also Sony Pictures has a subsidiary that publish games indipendently for mobile.
Sony also had an indipendent PC division from 1997 to 2015 named Sony Online Entertainment (EverQuest, PlanetSide, Star Wars Galaxies, Champions of Norrath and more) that developed a lot of PC MMOs and some WRPG for Sony console. They sold the division in 2015, now they are called Daybreak.

Yeah, yeah. I know.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom