Do you think Game Freak should go third party? Nintendo seems

>>26489475
Nintendo won't let go of it's Miltank until the frosty glaze of Mother Russia takes it. Nintendo would take Pokemon down with the ship at this point.

>>26489484
Nintendo doesn't own Pokemon, they just have an exclusive partnership with GameFreak for that ip. So if GF and Pokemon's dozen or so owners feel that it's time to sever ties, then they'll go third party.

>>26489523
>Nintendo doesn't own Pokemon.

Oh boy, here we go again...

>>26489523
>>26489532
Pokemon is a second party Nintendo franchise, like Fire Emblem and Xenoblade. Nintendo owns the IP, so, no, GF can't just fuck off and put Pokemon on the PS4 or whatever.

>>26489523
>So if GF and Pokemon's dozen or so owners
Nintendo is one of the three owners.
Nintendo owns the majority of the second of the three owners.

Learn facts.

>>26489523
Nintendo owns Pokémon, so they can't just put it on a different console if they wanted.

However, Gamefreak is free to develop games for other companies. Just with different games.

>Buried in reams of financial data is the revelation that Nintendo have 812.8 billion Yen (£6.7/$10.5 billion) in the bank – enough for it to take a 20 billion Yen loss (£163/$257 million) every year until 2052. Then there’s almost 469 billion Yen (£3.8/$6.0 billion) held in premises, equipment and investments. When that runs out – we’re in the year 2075 by this point – they’ve got some of the most valuable intellectual property in gaming to sell off before the company goes out of business.
From: http://www.gamesradar.com/nintendo-doomed-not-likely-just-take-look-how-much-money-its-got-bank/
Nintendo's gonna last a while.

>>26489475
Game Freak are already third party. Last year they put out Tembo on all non-Nintendo platforms.

>>26489584
It's already over a century old (though not as we know it). Somehow, it doesn't surprise me that they have longevity in mind,

I find it funny that people claim Nintendo are in an uncertain position now, just because of the Wii U. They always ignore the success of the 3DS in order to create their false narrative, and Nintendo are even back in profit now after only two years of loss.

>>26489475

I'd wish Nintendo would let another developer make another Pokemon game. If it sucked, we'd appreciate what GF does much more. If it was great, that'll force GF to to up the quality of the games and we might we have two developers making Pokemon games at the same time so more games (not sonic levels of over saturation, mind you). It'll never happen, however.

>>26489632
Because there's no reason to. The games still sell and review very well. Just because a few butthurt people here think they're bad doesn't mean they're bad

>>26489584
Yeah because costs aren't a thing. You know this article is stupid just as well as I do

>>26489625
>3DS
>Successful

Least selling Nintendo handheld ever. Wonder how well it'd sell without Pokemon.

>>26489523
You don't even know what an "IP" is let alone what it means to own one. GO back to FagFAQs.

No one else will take them, because they can't live up to the standards of modern gaming.

>>26490996
Costs come out of yearly profit. They're saying a loss of 20 mil+ an entire year's worth of profit, where the net income is negative instead of positive.

>spinoffs don't exist

Other companies HAVE made pokemon games, you just won't tear yourself away from the main series long enough to realize that other things exist.

I fear Pokemon would change dramatically if it went to a publisher that isn't Nintendo. As >>26492544 said it, even if someone would take them under, they'd be forced to restructure their entire development process and put more emphasis on graphics and a good multiplayer component.

I'd love it if game freak just died. They're incompetent as fuck and pokemon is literally the only thing keeping them alive.

>>26492591
Good, pressure those fuckers to do their best.

Not to mention I can only see anyone else interpreting trading and battling as "you must be online constantly"

>>26492519
It still outsold the Vita, so yes it's kinda successful.

The reason why handheld videogames don't sell so much nowadays is mainly (in my opinion) because of smartphones, Ipads, anything that let you play cheap games like Angry Birds and Candy Crush.