HipHopGamer Hears from E3 Reps: Nintendo has Considered Purchasing SEGA

[Stacy]

You'd buy a Nintendo console if the Saints Row game was good enough and you know it. It's fun, silly, completely absurd violence - quite a good fit for Nintendo, if you think about it..

No I wouldn't I would be pissed that I would have to buy a system a don't want or need to just to play a game that would do better on other systems. Violation. Inc would probably split from THQ if it was bought by Nintendo as I think they prefer to kept it multiple systems they learned this from the first Siants Row game which was Xbox 360 exclusive and Saints Row 2 wasn't exclusive.

Edited December 7, 2012 by BW199148

[Barry the Nomad]

Having rewatched the video, the guy appears to be kind of an idiot when it comes to the inner workings of SEGA. Is he even aware of how SEGA functions and the goings ons in Japan?

Basically, at E3, he was like "yo, Mario & Sonic games, couple a other things I can't remember... why not buy SEGA?" and Nintendo were like "We're always up for discussing things like that. Of course it would benefit us greatly." Holy shit! This means... nothing.

Nintendo isn't going to say "we can't discuss that", would only add fuel to some crazy "Nintendo might be buying SEGA" rumor fire. And saying outright "No, we'd never buy SEGA" would just be a slap in the face to SEGA. Again, fueling flames but this time the old Nintendo vs. SEGA rivalry. So best answer to give? The one they gave. Thing is, a few Nintendo reps at E3 are not the same as the real people in charge of Nintendo. So really, this is nothing for than a crazy dude speculating and Nintendo giving a friendly reply that didn't shoot him down.

[Patticus]

No I wouldn't I would be pissed that I would have to buy a system a don't want or need to just to play a game that would do better on other systems. Violation. Inc would probably split from THQ if it was bought by Nintendo as I think they prefer to kept it multiple systems they learned this from the first Siants Row game which was Xbox 360 exclusive and Saints Row 2 wasn't exclusive.

Let's just make console exclusive games illegal then, have every game on every format, just to appease people who insist on only owning one system.

Oh wait no, that'll never happen. As long as there is more than one console manufacturer, there will be console exclusives, and knowing Nintendo, games it produces using any IP, studio or publisher it buys are probably going to be pretty high grade.

If Nintendo bought Sega or THQ or some other floundering publisher with decent IPs and studios, that'd be that and you wouldn't have a say in it at all. You'd buy Nintendo's warez if it had software you gave a toss about, and you wouldn't if it didn't. Any potential backlash would be a storm in a teacup, blowing over within a few days or weeks and a year or two or three later we'd all be jizzing ourselves over newly announced software from these developers commissioned by Nintendo. The world would keep on turning. Some developers might leave and set up shop on their own, or join the ranks of other companies, but that happens all the time and still the big boys put out the good stuff. It'd just be that Nintendo would have a few new franchises to put to good use.

[Stacy]

Let's just make console exclusive games illegal then, have every game on every format, just to appease people who insist on only owning one system.

I own two systems I struggle enough to keep up with them I don't want to buy another system so yes it would piss me off if that happened.

Exclusives don't bother me if they stay exclusive to that system and that system only.

Console exclusives mainly piss me off if they were a multi-platform publisher that gets bought out or decide to go exclusive.

Ubisoft are notorious for it, especially with exclusive DLC like you pointed out in the ACIII thread.

This had better be a fucking timed exclusive, because this one was one of the events I had hoped to see in the game and like fuck am I buying the PS3 version of the game when all the rest I have are on 360.

So yeah it bothers me.

Edited December 7, 2012 by BW199148

[Barry the Nomad]

Nintendo buying SEGA, and in turn putting Nintendo staff to work on SEGA games, would cause SEGA to lose everything I love about their games. The idea is sickening. I love Sonic games because SEGA and Sonic Team are behind them. Last thing I would ever want is Nintendo developing Sonic games. Essentially SEGA as we know it would be dead. Like I already wrote, I don't see Nintendo buying SEGA, but hypothetically if they did they would have to go the Disney/Pixar or Disney/Lucasfilm route. Otherwise they'd just lose a majority of SEGA's fans.

And sorry, Delusphere, but I gotta completely disagree with your comments. High quality, well made Sonic games? Points to Sonic Colors and Generations. Awful realism and (I assume just as awful) gimmicks? Points to Sonic Colors and Generations having neither of these. Simple, colorful and in its own world? Sonic has been in his own world since 1991. Simple and colorful? Again, points to Sonic Colors and Generations. Needs cleaning up? Sonic Colors and Generations cleaned up and simplified the Sonic universe giving it a unique and colorful world that has remained consistant since 2008 (Unleashed laid the groundwork, Sonic Colors and Generations refined it).

Really, you're saying that Nintendo needs to make SEGA games because they'll bring Tails, Knuckles & Amy back into the main series as playable characters? Since when is that a Nintendo thing? If anything, you're describing Sonic '06 which was anything BUT simple.

Edited December 7, 2012 by Barry the Nomad

[Blue Blood]

High quality, well made Sonic games? Points to Sonic Colors and Generations.

Not to hijack the topic into some Sonic discussion we've had a thousand times already, but Colours and Generations weren't high quality, well made Sonic games. They're certainly passable, and they're definitely quite good. But high quality they are not. They're one track games with corner cutting budget constraints showing up everywhere. And actually that extends beyond just Sonic games to a great number of games and ports that SEGA makes nowadays (or even the very fact that many games that don't get made any more).

It's blatantly obvious that SEGA is a struggling company. Being bought out by the right company could really improve the quality of their titles. Budget and dedication would be one thing, but then you also get the added benefit of fresh ideas being pumped into existing series. There'd be drawbacks somewhere- buyouts never go without some kind of sacrifice. But like I say, the right company could be golden for SEGA. Nintendo could very likely be that company if a buyout was ever actually considered.

Edited December 7, 2012 by Blue Blood

[Barry the Nomad]

My bad, I resend my previous posts (from now to as far back as 2010). Colors and Generations are passable games at best, they are not great and at best are "quite good". Apparently I didn't get a PM about this.

[Blue Blood]

My bad, I resend my previous posts (from now to as far back as 2010). Colors and Generations are passable games at best, they are not great and at best are "quite good". Apparently I didn't get a PM about this.

Oh, sorry you missed that. Yeah, you're not allowed to like Colours or Generations any more. We all agreed upon this in the January 2012 Referendum of the 'Opinions and Fact Bill 199-never'. Your voting slip must have got lost in the mail.

Sonic was merely one example, and not really the point of the entire post. I absolutely adore SEGA IPs. As a fan of theirs, nothing is more painful than their huge fall from grace that's now looking to be a plummet to oblivion.

When you play new SEGA games nowadays, Sonic, ports or otherwise, do you not feel that they're lacking in any way? Especially when compared to the quality of the competition? A good majority of what they release feels cheaply made to generate a quick buck because they really, really need it. I can rave about how fantastic titles like Bayonetta are until the cows the come home. I then have to consider that SEGA is finding it hard to survive in the current climate. They ceased production on Bayonetta 2 and many other titles, they've limited their development to only a handful of guaranteed sellers and they're shifting their focus toward cheaper digital gaming. SEGA can't afford to make the fantastic titles they used to. We're not going to see anything of the calibre we expected from SEGA in the past for a long time, if not ever again.

EDIT: Perhaps I should note that I actually think the industry as a whole is a horrible mess with what things cost and how it all works. Sadly though that's not going to change any time soon.

Edited December 7, 2012 by Blue Blood

[goku262002]

I'm actually going to agree with L for once. I'd rather have high-quality console-exclusive Sonic games every four or five years than average-to-mediocre Sonic games every one or two years.

you guys were starting to pull your hair out for not hearing anything before that "new sonic next year!" tidbit.

You really think this fanbase can last a 5 year wait for a Sonic game?!

[Shane]

I don't really think the fanbase's patience of all things has anything to do with game quality, so none of what you just said matters to me in the least.

[Barry the Nomad]

Ever since SEGA turned publisher in 2001 I've felt something was missing, but I very much disagree with the idea that being sold to Nintendo, Sony or Microsoft would fill that void. In fact, after ten years of being third party I've pretty much acclimated to the new SEGA and 2010-now has been some of my favorite years. The aforementioned "don't-call-them-great" Sonic titles, the All-Stars games, the many Nagoshi games (Yakuza series, Binary Domain), the Platinum Games titles, the third party digital and packaged titles (Crush 3D, Hell Yeah), the rereleases (especially ones like Guardian Heroes, NiGHTS, Sonic CD, the recent Vintage Collections, Space Channel 5 Part 2), Virtua Fighter 5: Final Showdown, Outrun Online Arcade, Afterburner Climax, SEGA Rally Online Arcade.

So in that regard, I don't see a huge fall from grace nor do a see a plummet into oblivion. I see a company that made a difficult, but necessary decision in 2001, they had a string of hits (the PS2/XBOX years) they had a strong of misses (the early HD era) and have in the past few years found their groove as a third party company. The firings and restructuring that took place recently were a long time coming, and while I hated to see people lose their jobs, I think it was again the right move. Their recent digital titles, including the upcoming The Cave, and their recent business deals, such as partnering Creative Assembly with Warhammer, are great signs for the company. And while they shifted focus to only a few packaged games per year, I think this is something that ALL third party publishers will need to do to survive.

What I think is nonsense is this notion that being bought up by Nintendo will lead to SEGA's second coming. As though we will all of a sudden see endless sequels to old SEGA franchises, and that Nintendo will begin to develop games with and for SEGA. Is it really in Nintendo's best interests to take on the burdon of defining and developing Sonic titles, or releasing sequels to Jet Set Radio, Shenmue, Phantasy Star, etc? That is probably not what you (Blue Blood) think, but I get the feeling thats what others think and honestly it's a pretty crazy pipe dream. Nintendo doesn't appear to be a company that cares about SEGA's arcade business, PC games or their mobile business. If anything I see a lot of downsizing, a lot of gamers losing access to SEGA games, and SEGA potentially being pulled out of the PC, Arcade and mobile markets.

---

lol, and all that I wrote was because this dude in a youtube video spoke to Nintendo reps and they gave a polite stock PR reply...

Edited December 7, 2012 by Barry the Nomad

[goku262002]

I don't really think the fanbase's patience of all things has anything to do with game quality, so none of what you just said matters to me in the least.

Quality, no. Wasn't talking about quality so much.

Patience is a big factor and this fanbase is very impatient and gets VERY BITCHY when we don't start hearing anything new about a new Sonic game within a years time of a previous release. patience can make or break a fan and its potential sale. it doesn't matter how good the game is if the person who was waiting is soo fed up that they don't even care anymore.

Zelda and Mario's fanbases are used to waits like those but not us. were used to our 1-2 year spans since SA1 started the trend back in 1998.

[Badnik Mechanic]

I've not read all the topic so forgive me if this has already been confirmed as bollocks.

Asdie from this being a bad idea, I'm actually struggling to believe any of it.

The biggest reason is that, when people say 'Sega' they just think about videogames, what they fail to think of and from what that guy said, he's also not considered this one. Is that in Japan/the East, Sega is an absolute megaton when it comes to arcade units, and by arcade units, you can include in that the following.

UFO Catchers.

Gambling machines/fruit machines.

Ticket redemption machines.

Those random novelty games that you see (think of those horse racing games you see at seasides to get an idea.)

Kiddy rides (put in 20p and enjoy being rocked forwards and backwards for 60 seconds as music plays).

Sega absolutely dominates the arcade scene in Japan, why else do you think out of all the places in the world, Japan still has a Sega World of sorts (Joypolis), the only other place is Dubai, and that one like the majority of Dubai's business model doesn't make a profit as much as it's just done for the tourism.

So realistically, to buy Sega, you would need not only the millions if not billions for it's console gaming side and all the licenses it owns, which are worth a fortune by name alone. You would also need the billions (there is no way this isn't a billion), for the arcade side which isn't known that well here in the west.

On top of all this... you are also investing millions and billions into this...

As well as a completely new online infrastructure, the maintenance for that and all the other expenses which are in the millions alone....

STOOOOPPPP!!!!

Now... Nintendo may have the money to do that... if they really wanted to they might be able to do that. But the risk factor assosciated with buying a company like Sega as well as producing a new console in the same period of time in a global recession!? Ho Ho Ho Nooooooway!!!

This isn't the same as saying 'EA has just bought Westwood studios' or EA has just bought up Bioware or... Whatever else EA buys up. The thing with Sega that you have to remember is that Sega has a ton of franchises in it's vaults which on their name alone are worth millions. But added on that which very few other studios have is their arcade division in Japan, this is fucking massive. There is a topic somewhere on SSMB that was about an arcade event in Japan last year and Sega's presence there utterly dominated it. But if you go to any airport or any seaside town here in the west, go into the arcades and chances are you'll find a Sega brand UFO catcher or the majority of the arcades will be Sega machines.

Thats why I'm finding this hard to believe, not saying Nintendo don't have the money to do it, but on top of all the millions they've poured into R&D recently as well as the Wii-U. This would be just too big a risk.

[Chooch]

Why do people seem to think that Nintendo getting involved is going to immediately make the games better? Seriously, what the fuck makes you think that?

The next Sonic game can be just as shit as any other previous one, with or without Nintendo. And to all those people who hate the modern Sonic formula (which has garnered plenty of success multi-platform), what would you say to a series Nintendo exclusive Sonic games that continue to use said formula?

Doesn't sound very good, does it?

Edited December 7, 2012 by Chooch

[Barry the Nomad]

@Hogfather - pretty much what you said. I think people forget, or maybe they just don't know and I don't blame them, that SEGA is far more than a video game business. In fact, SEGA was bought by Sammy in 2004. Maybe back before 2004, Nintendo buying SEGA held some water, but now? Again, like Hog to the Father said, SEGA is "so much more" than Sonic and videogames. Just check out all the affiliated companies under the SEGA Sammy Holdings umbrella: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega_Sammy_Holdings

Could Nintendo seriously manage all of that?

[Badnik Mechanic]

Why do people seem to think that Nintendo getting involved is going to immediately make the games better? Seriously, what the fuck makes you think that?

It wouldn't and whilst we're all stuck focusing on Sonic. Sega do happen to make a lot of other franchises you know. The Yakuza series for starts, Binary Domain was also amazing, football manager is also incredibly popular and Total War is also a really popular franchise too.

But when you compare all these great games to everything that Nintendo makes, forget quality for just a moment, they don't make the same types of games that Sega does, and I can't see them changing that just because they would own the name. And considering Nintendo won't let Binding of Issac on their consoles due to religions reasons and how how overtly child friendly they're being... kiss goodbye to Yakuza, Binary domain and any other game series which would dare to say the word 'bum' in it.

[sonfan1984]

Quality, no. Wasn't talking about quality so much.

Patience is a big factor and this fanbase is very impatient and gets VERY BITCHY when we don't start hearing anything new about a new Sonic game within a years time of a previous release. patience can make or break a fan and its potential sale. it doesn't matter how good the game is if the person who was waiting is soo fed up that they don't even care anymore.

Zelda and Mario's fanbases are used to waits like those but not us. were used to our 1-2 year spans since SA1 started the trend back in 1998.

I have to agree with this. I can honesty wait 3 or 4 years for a great main series Sonic game as long as they give us spinoffs to keep us busy in the meantime. I think the fanbase does get really bitchy and impatient if we don't hear no Sonic news/announcements. This year has been really slow on Sonic games and some people is already getting bored and impatient. Other then ports and remakes, the only games we've got this year is Sonic 4: Ep 2, Sonic Jump and Transformed and people are so impatient that they're making up crazy rumors.

Edited December 7, 2012 by sonfan1984

[Semi-colon e]

I have to agree with this. I can wait honesty wait 3 or 4 years for a great main series Sonic game as long as they give us spinoffs to keep us busy in the meantime. I think the fanbase does get really bitchy and impatient if we don't hear no Sonic news/announcements. This year has been really slow on Sonic news/games and some people is already getting bored and impatient. Other then ports and remakes, the only games we've got this year is Sonic 4: Ep 2, Sonic Jump and Transformed and people are so impatient that they're making up crazy rumors.

The fanbases don't really affect it that much though, it's more of a vocal minority thing. We'd just sit and wait and ultimately fanbase explosion doesn't mean a great deal in the grand scheme of things.

Also in response to Chooch's post insert a joke about Sonic Colours here for being Modern gameplay and Nintendo exclusive.

Edited December 7, 2012 by Semi-colon e

[Chaos Warp]

I can't say I agree that the quality of the current games is merely passable (I think they are great) but I don't want to get into that debate again. What I really don't agree with is the notion that Sonic games will instantly get better just because they get sold to Nintendo. Chances are, Nintendo would just let the dev team make the games and just give them extra funding.

As for the exclusivity issue.....................I would be peeved, but not angry per se. I like my Sonic to be multi-platform, but I am a big enough fan of Sonic that I'd probably shell out the money for the console to play Sonic.

[Meow]

IF, and I mean IF SEGA was in the financial need to be bought out...just release their surprise moneymaker PSO2 in the west (which they are doing anyway) and hope for the best haha. Seriously from the sounds of it nobody was expecting that title to bring in quite the amount of revenue it has, and it is an extremely fun game. There is already a large portion of people playing the japanese servers who are western players, so opening that up to a wider market here could pull them enough $$$ that they don't have to solely rely on Sonic over here - which hopefully means they might start taking risks again with their other franchises too.

I am hoping that SEGA never falls into the hands of another company, least of all Nintendo, but that's just how I feel about it lol.

[-blank-]

And not all Mario stories have been lighthearted and childish. I mean, look at the Mario RPGs,

The storyline is one of the reasons I consider Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door to be the best game in the series.

Edited December 7, 2012 by Christmas Blaire

[Chooch]

Also in response to Chooch's post insert a joke about Sonic Colours here for being Modern gameplay and Nintendo exclusive.

Anyone remember when I argued that Sonic Colors could be ported to PlayStation 3 with Move support and thus reach a wider audience? Remember all the backlash that idea got from people? Now people are once again arguing against having the series be multi-platform.

Yeah no, no matter how I look at it, this is just Nintendo bias and extreme naivety. Nintendo's involvement does not guarantee higher quality games. Simple as that.

I think Sega is perfectly capable of making decent Sonic titles (and non-Sonic titles, for that matter) that can also be multi-platform. Shame on me, I guess.

Edited December 7, 2012 by Chooch

[goku262002]

Wasn't Paper Mario: TYD's plot going to be cut at 1 point?...

The fanbases don't really affect it that much though, it's more of a vocal minority thing. We'd just sit and wait and ultimately fanbase explosion doesn't mean a great deal in the grand scheme of things.

Not a whole lot of people have the patience to sit and wait around for something for 5 years or so if they are not used to it. and people = sales. so it would impact sales if Nintendo didn't have a plan to do something to compensate for the wait.

How does mario kill time? well rehashing of course! Hey guys, lets play New Sonic The Hedgehog Wii-U!! Same as New Sonic the Hedgehog Wii and 3/DS BUT WITH PRETTIER GRAPHICS!!!.

[The Kid]

The argument I'm hearing is getting stupid at this point. This whole thread has degraded into a discussion of Nintendo as a company, whether people are biased, and the Sonic formula being changed without anything that would indicate it as such.

I mean, even if Nintendo bought Sega (I'm not saying that is good or bad because I really don't care), they would most likely just let them keep doing their thing. It isn't as if Nintendo would take over development of all the games and somehow reinvent the formula. People just seem to be jumping to the farthest extreme.

And no, just because Sonic could potentially move to Nintendo consoles exclusively doesn't guarantee they'd be any better in comparison. It also doesn't mean they'd be any worse. So seriously, this is stupid.

But when you compare all these great games to everything that Nintendo makes, forget quality for just a moment, they don't make the same types of games that Sega does, and I can't see them changing that just because they would own the name. And considering Nintendo won't let Binding of Issac on their consoles due to religions reasons and how how overtly child friendly they're being... kiss goodbye to Yakuza, Binary domain and any other game series which would dare to say the word 'bum' in it.

Okay, to be fair, The Binding of Isaac isn't the same beast as Yakuza or any of Sega's other games. I know Nintendo is child-friendly in a lot of aspects but BoI isn't just another M-rated game. This has extremely controversial elements that could probably offend a good number of people. I mean, you play as a naked child running around in a basement after your mother heard God say she should kill you. I would have loved that game on the 3DS, but I understand the decision.

They reached out to Nintendo for the sequel; maybe seeing how successful the first was and how "hardcore" they're trying to be now, Nintendo might allow it on the Wii U eshop.

Edited December 7, 2012 by Rigbone the Kid

[Carbo]

And considering Nintendo won't let Binding of Issac on their consoles due to religions reasons and how how overtly child friendly they're being... kiss goodbye to Yakuza, Binary domain and any other game series which would dare to say the word 'bum' in it.

Straw man argument. Nintendo let ZombiU, MadWorld and other types of games with extreme content on it. That wasn't the problem BoI had behind it - the problem behind that game was because of it's blasphemous content that still makes a lot of people uncomfortable, and no amount of quirky art style behind it will change that the imagery and concepts portrayed are easily incredibly offensive to many. The physical release of the game got an insane age rating bump because of said content.

This isn't even something alien to publishers as a whole, Microsoft pulled the publishing of an XBLA title called Privates because of it's sexual implications, and that was supposed to be an educational title.

It's like the whole Violence Vs. Rape argument in terms of trigger warnings. They're not equatable.