We're in an economic recession where money is no longer worth the paper it's printed on, and there are worldwide food shortages everywhere. They've approved shovelware from all sorts of developers for the Wii.
Nintendo could benefit from it far more than CN, have a look;
http://www.google.ca/finance?cid=685139
http://www.google.ca/finance?q=The Cartoon Network&ei=fsEBUpjrLcrx0gGmUw on the 5y scale. What ever they were doing might have worked before during the economic crash of 2008 but it's not going to work again. See also: Blackberry. And yes, I see that it is Time Warner, and they'll never go out of business, but all subsiduraries are like plants that need to be nurtured. The more they can be nurtured, the more money they can make.
If Nintendo decided for whatever reason to do this or something similar, there is no 'principle' that says they can't make a few dollars. Also, I did say both companies stood to gain something. Nielson ratings still count for something.
They're not compromising any sort of integrity; they put out a product and there is no set guideline for anything, ever. Otherwise, they wouldn't have allowed such shitty games to plague the Wii, or half-ass things like Pokemon Ranch.
We live in a capitalist society, the purpose of those actions were to try and generate profit.
By the way, why would you hope for that? So you get nothing more than the satisfaction of knowing you were right? If it doesn't work out, it doesn't work out. Something new can come from it if not the desired results.
If you were joking about it, you wouldn't have made two statements along the same the lines nor would you naturally assume that I knew nothing(or very little) about the intense work that goes into adding a character to a fighting game. I DID work with MUGEN (bush-league) and fooled around with the program. I'm also in Business Technology Management. No, I understand what you study and what you do, and that's great, but I also can see opportunities to make money. Again, there is DLC.
I knew you were putting that out there to trash the idea, and I gave you sound arguments about why that would work. Instead of looking at protocol about what is and what isn't with the series, I ask that you look at the larger picture; there are no deductive fallacies in my argument.
Does it make sense that the Muppets met WWE superstars on television? No. Did it give both products exposure? Yes. Did both mutually benefit from it? Yes. A case can be argued in which you're trying to establish that Adventure Time has no international appeal. "WWE will never be the product it once was, and is now 'fake wrasslin'" and "The Muppets hadn't made a movie in over 10 years.", were the two arguments that were made but WWE shares continue to rise and the Muppets was the highest grossing Muppets film, and one of the highest grossing ones at that time.
Similarly, you argue that there no international appeal-well then, let it be created. Marvel super heroes pale in comparison to the heroes of Japan, but Funimation created the Marvel anime series. That goal was to re-enter that market and reach that demographic.
When two corporations are willing to venture into something like that, there is potential. I've already given reasons as to why that worked. Why not let it get to that point and let THEM make that decision, because even if purpose of getting them in the game was not fulfilled, it might encourage CN to churn out more games with them in it.
Now, if you don't want to sign it, that's fine, but like I said, it could have easily been said before instead of trying to plague me with cynicism in an attempt to convince me why it won't work, because what might have started out as points from an actual article turned degraded into 'Why don't you add this random character too then?', at least from your side of things.
But I feel you're likening this to painting the Golden Arches on a Porche. There's no 'sanctity' that's being violated. At the end of the day, Miyamoto isn't Santa Claus making wishes comes true. He's a designer and visionary who had the idea to create a product and do business.
To conclude, no, I don't think the parties should do it for the purposes of making a profit alone, I think they should do it because the PEOPLE asked for it (or will ask for it) and if that's not enough, then what I said should be considered as well.
