# Capcom for sale



## Bryon15 (Jun 17, 2014)

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/219300/Capcom_shareholders...
http://www.capcom.co.jp/ir/english/news/html/e140616a.html

Apparently Capcom is open to being bought out. Time for Nintendo to make a move. Seriously, they would be foolish not to. They're the perfect fit for capcom. I think that they would do many of their franchises justice. Megaman would definitely make a comeback. We got the best resident evil games when they were gamecube exclusive. Capcom made the best 2D zelda games. Plus Nintendo has stated that they are looking torwards mergers and acquisitions. Plus out of the big 3, nintendo needs capcom the most. Since they aren't getting 3rd party support. Games developed by platinum games like okami, viewtiful joe, devil may cry, godhand, would also be revived. I mean since platinum has such a close relationship with nintendo. They need to make a move as soon as possible.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 17, 2014)

I reckon MS would do well to buy Capcom and that may be a pretty good in for Japan for them.


----------



## Arras (Jun 17, 2014)

FAST6191 said:


> I reckon MS would do well to buy Capcom and that may be a pretty good in for Japan for them.


That would either boost MS in Japan like crazy because Monster Hunter or cause Japanese people to stop caring about it and kill the series. Not sure which.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 17, 2014)

A haloification of the Monster hunter games.... I would actually like to see that. It might make it quite playable.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 17, 2014)

I would hate it if Nintendo took over Capcom - the company has many mature IP's like Resident Evil, Dead Rising, Devil May Cry etc. which would fall into the realm of obscurity or misuse with Nintendo's PC-friendly management looming over the developers. Microsoft is another poor candidate - they ran Rare into the ground with crappy avatar games and have thoroughly proven that they're too irresponsible of a kid to own a puppy. I'd be happier if Sony took them under their wing, that or a software-oriented company.


----------



## KingVamp (Jun 17, 2014)

FAST6191 said:


> I reckon MS would do well to buy Capcom and that may be a pretty good in for Japan for them.


As logically as that is, I rather see Nintendo get them or at least Atlus.



Foxi4 said:


> I would hate it if Nintendo took over Capcom - the company has many mature IP's like Resident Evil, Dead Rising, Devil May Cry etc. which would fall into the realm of obscurity or misuse


Like what they did with every other 3rd/2nd party?


----------



## Clydefrosch (Jun 17, 2014)

taking over capcom? capcom just isnt there yet.


----------



## Pedeadstrian (Jun 17, 2014)

inb4 Guild's Megaman senses start tingling

Ooh, yay, maybe less crappy games.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 17, 2014)

Clydefrosch said:


> taking over capcom? capcom just isnt there yet.



Not where it would be forced, however if the shareholders are presented with "take a buyout and possibly gain something or hope the bankruptcy courts (and Japan has some odd ideas here) give you something".

If we are wondering though I wonder what the Japanese equivalent of the monopolies commission would say about Square taking over.


----------



## TyBlood13 (Jun 17, 2014)

I kinda hope Sega takes them so their games would still be multiplat


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 17, 2014)

KingVamp said:


> Like what they did with every other 3rd/2nd party?


Absolutely - Nintendo is still crazy about censorship. Notice how in MH3U you can't kill Kelbi, only "stun" them - stars appear over their heads and instead of disappearing like the rest of monster corpses, they get up and run away. Why? Nintendo platform. It's okay to kill lizards, but goats are off-limits, apparently.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 17, 2014)

If Nintendo buys them out, they'll just die. And they probably won't anyway.

I'd just hope for Sega probably. Just some third party publisher so all the consoles can get Capcom titles.


----------



## Bryon15 (Jun 17, 2014)

I remember reading somewhere that there is a law in japan that prohibits an american company from buying a japanese one. This is why microsoft could not buy atlus, despite having more money then sega. And thank God. Look at what microsoft did to Rare. Why would you want them to have anything?



Guild McCommunist said:


> If Nintendo buys them out, they'll just die. And they probably won't anyway.


 
Why do you think that? Is it because they didn't buy atlus? Consider this. Nintendo has explicitly said that they are looking towards mergers and acquisitions. Here is a link:

http://mynintendonews.com/2014/01/3...ing-mergers-and-new-game-studio-acquisitions/

Nintendo said that AFTER atlus had already been sold and bought.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 17, 2014)

Bryon15 said:


> Why do you think that? Is it because they didn't buy atlus? Consider this. Nintendo has explicitly said that they are looking towards mergers and acquisitions. Here is a link:
> 
> http://mynintendonews.com/2014/01/3...ing-mergers-and-new-game-studio-acquisitions/
> 
> Nintendo said that AFTER atlus had already been sold and bought.


 

Because all of Capcom's titles are certainly not up Nintendo's alley. Only a few of the high selling IPs will live, the rest will be trashed. And they won't move development over to Nintendo first parties because what's the goddamn point when Capcom can just make them.

In the end all you did was make Capcom exclusionary and get less sales on Nintendo consoles. Why not want them to stay third party so every console gets a variety of Capcom games?


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 17, 2014)

Bryon15 said:


> I remember reading somewhere that there is a law in japan that prohibits an american company from buying a japanese one. This is why microsoft could not buy atlus, despite having more money then sega. And thank God. Look at what microsoft did to Rare. Why would you want them to have anything?



I recall similar things, however Japanese subsidiaries and the like face less restrictions. What did Microsoft actually do to Rare though? Everything I have seen said things were not especially good in house (something was set to explode and various people were otherwise considering leaving, or did leave in the case of the folks that did a lot of Goldeneye and Perfect Dark stuff, some time before the sale to MS too) when Nintendo let things go.


----------



## KingVamp (Jun 17, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> Absolutely - Nintendo is still crazy about censorship. Notice how in MH3U you can't kill Kelbi, only "stun" them - stars appear over their heads and instead of disappearing like the rest of monster corpses, they get up and run away. Why? Nintendo platform. It's okay to kill lizards, but goats are off-limits, apparently.


Apparently, this has nothing to do with Nintendo.


----------



## TyBlood13 (Jun 17, 2014)

Bryon15 said:


> I remember reading somewhere that there is a law in japan that prohibits an american company from buying a japanese one.


That seems like complete and utter bullshit. If anything it would be the other way around after the Americans occupied and completely restructured Japan. Microsoft didn't buy Atlus because they didn't want them, and why should they? Atlus isn't really that big and only makes RPGs for the most part, something Microsoft doesn't focus on


----------



## mightymuffy (Jun 17, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> I'd be happier if Sony took them under their wing


 
We never saw that one coming did we.....

Sega would be nice, but I think a few stockholders feathers got ruffled when they bought Atlus, not exactly in the best financial situation themselves are they.... Bandai/Namco would possibly be better, maybe Squeenix: one moaning, whining company buying another one out.... Where's Konami these days? Almost faded into obscurity, and last time I looked were still a big company - a merger of sorts between the two might put both back in the spotlight.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 17, 2014)

KingVamp said:


> Apparently, this has nothing to do with Nintendo.


I don't remember that happening on the PSP, but if you say so. My point is, Nintendo is PC-crazy, especially NoA, and they haven't done anything to instill my faith in them as far as mature content is concerned. Even recently the western releases of Bravely Default had altered costumes. Long story short, games on Nintendo platforms are censored, especially in the west.

I second the SEGA suggestion, Capcom content should stay multiplatform if possible.


----------



## mightymuffy (Jun 17, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> Long story short, games on Nintendo platforms are censored, especially in the west.


 
By your logic the RE games on GC should've had the Zombies bursting into pretty pink flowers when you finish them off.... and a 'kill' on N64 Goldeneye/Perfect Dark would've meant little yellow stars appearing over your characters heads instead of blood. Were Nintendo to buy Capcom, they'd keep the name, and the resulting games would be no different....(it's 1st party software that follows that idea, always has)
And do try to look at the Bravely Default censorship in more detail before jumping to that kind of conclusion sweetie - that sort of shit is fine in Japan but a big release like that in the West with that level of 'child pornography' (as the western media would've doubtless put it) wouldn't have gone down too well at all..... but yeah that was ALL Nintendo's fault - ohhhh kayyy...


----------



## KingVamp (Jun 17, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> I don't remember that happening on the PSP, but if you say so.


Looks like something Capcom did. You have to kill it a specific way.



Foxi4 said:


> My point is, Nintendo is PC-crazy, especially NoA, and they haven't done anything to instill my faith in them as far as mature content is concerned. Even recently the western releases of Bravely Default had altered costumes. Long story short, games on Nintendo platforms are censored, especially in the west.


 
Because 



Spoiler











Totally ruin the game.

Also, they don't censor everything. Link



Foxi4 said:


> I second the SEGA suggestion, Capcom content should stay multiplatform if possible.


 
Not that I disagree to this.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 17, 2014)

Kelbi *cannot* be killed in MH3U - there is no "special" way to do it. They fall over stunned, you carve them (which makes no sense as that would kill the animal) and then they run off, that's how it always works. It didn't use to on the PSP, so I'm blaming Nintendo's censorship department because it only makes sense. Neither this nor different costumes ruin the game, but they're unnecessary alterations and I dread to think how Nintendo would tackle something more explicit.

In any case, Capcom staying multiplatform is still the more preferable option, so I'm down with that.

mightymuffy 10-14 year old examples do not make a case - Nintendo's *recent* attitude is PC-friendly. I guess we'll see if that changed after Bayonnetta 2's release. As a side note I'll add that a chibi art style does not denote a young age of the character, but that's besides the point - it's merely an example, and one that I didn't particularly mind, I'm merely outlining the censorship trend.


----------



## KingVamp (Jun 17, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> Kelbi *cannot* be killed in MH3U - there is no "special" way to do it. They fall over stunned, you carve them (which makes no sense as that would kill the animal) and then they run off, that's how it always works. It didn't use to on the PSP, so I'm blaming Nintendo's censorship department because it only makes sense.


Foxi4, are you sure? Link


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 17, 2014)

KingVamp said:


> Foxi4, are you sure? Link


I am absolutely sure - you cannot kill a Kelbi in MH3U on the 3DS, whatever you do they are always stunned. I have longswords powerful enough to take them in a single hit and I'm yet to see a single one that was actually killed.

*EDIT:* To elaborate on the link you sent, you *can* KO the monster with a blunt weapon, but in that case it will get up and continue being a valid mob. If you kill it, the Kelbi looks as if it was stunned, gets up and runs off while gradually vanishing. The Kelbi has both states, but *no* death animation, you can't "kill" it.


----------



## Gahars (Jun 17, 2014)

So what does that make them, Scrapcom?


----------



## McHaggis (Jun 17, 2014)

Guild McCommunist said:


> If Nintendo buys them out, they'll just die. And they probably won't anyway.
> 
> I'd just hope for Sega probably. Just some third party publisher so all the consoles can get Capcom titles.


 
Setting aside the first statement for a moment, the second would be a win for everyone, so I'm down with that.  In any case, Sega has a good working relationship with Nintendo, so I don't think much would change from how things are now.  Sega might be a little strapped for spare cash after that Atlus purchase though, and a lot of cash would be needed, especially given all the high profile IPs Capcom own.  I do think Nintendo would be more likely to revive _Megaman_ than Capcom are at the moment, and the Wii U would certainly benefit from some of Capcom's more mature titles as exclusive games like _Devil May Cry _or _Resident Evil_.  I doubt they'd try stifle Capcom and make the games less mature, either.  I guess _Bayonetta 2_ (keeping the 'M' rating from the first installment) would be the proof in the pudding, as Nintendo have had so much input with that it may as well be a second party game anyway.

Whatever happens, Nintendo's priority should be making sure Sony, Microsoft, and possibly EA _don't_ get Capcom.  _Monster Hunter_ has moved a lot of hardware in the past and I don't think the Wii U could survive losing another big third party right now.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 17, 2014)

Gahars said:


> So what does that make them, Scrapcom?


"In 2014 a crack developer unit was sent to an auction house by a board of investors because their games are shit as of late. These developers promptly escaped from a maximum security stockade to the Los Angeles underground. Today, still wanted by the government, they survive as soldiers of fortune. If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire the C-Team."


----------



## KingVamp (Jun 17, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> I am absolutely sure - you cannot kill a Kelbi in MH3U on the 3DS, whatever you do they are always stunned. I have longswords powerful enough to take them in a single hit and I'm yet to see a single one that was actually killed.
> 
> *EDIT:* To elaborate on the link you sent, you *can* KO the monster with a blunt weapon, but in that case it will get up and continue being a valid mob. If you kill it, the Kelbi looks as if it was stunned, gets up and runs off while gradually vanishing. The Kelbi has both states, but *no* death animation, you can't "kill" it.


Oh, you are right, but do you have any proof Nintendo did it and not Capcom? It's weird to censor that and not censor the others. It's usually known when Nintendo does it.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 17, 2014)

McHaggis said:


> Setting aside the first statement for a moment, the second would be a win for everyone, so I'm down with that. In any case, Sega has a good working relationship with Nintendo, so I don't think much would change from how things are now. Sega might be a little strapped for spare cash after that Atlus purchase though, and a lot of cash would be needed, especially given all the high profile IPs Capcom own. I do think Nintendo would be more likely to revive _Megaman_ than Capcom are at the moment, and the Wii U would certainly benefit from some of Capcom's more mature titles as exclusive games like _Devil May Cry _or _Resident Evil_. I doubt they'd try stifle Capcom and make the games less mature, either. I guess _Bayonetta 2_ (keeping the 'M' rating from the first installment) would be the proof in the pudding, as Nintendo have had so much input with that it may as well be a second party game anyway.
> 
> Whatever happens, Nintendo's priority should be making sure Sony, Microsoft, and possibly EA _don't_ get Capcom. _Monster Hunter_ has moved a lot of hardware in the past and I don't think the Wii U could survive losing another big third party right now.


 

...So everyone else should suffer because "muh Nintendo needs Capcom titles"? Why not let a third party whose responsible take them over so everyone gets Capcom titles?


----------



## McHaggis (Jun 17, 2014)

Guild McCommunist said:


> ...So everyone else should suffer because "muh Nintendo needs Capcom titles"? Why not let a third party whose responsible take them over so everyone gets Capcom titles?


 
Hmm... that's not really what I said.  You might want to take another shot at reading my post, rather than knee-jerk replying with some trollish comment.  If it's really so tl;dr that I need to summarise it for you, I said that I think a 3rd party like Sega buying them would be a win for everyone, and I only mentioned reasons that Nintendo would benefit from purchasing them or ensuring they don't get snapped up by someone that's likely to prevent their IPs from returning to Nintendo consoles.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 17, 2014)

McHaggis said:


> Hmm... that's not really what I said. You might want to take another shot at reading my post, rather than knee-jerk replying with some trollish comment. If it's really so tl;dr that I need to summarise it for you, I said that I think a 3rd party like Sega buying them would be a win for everyone, and I only mentioned reasons that Nintendo would benefit from purchasing them or ensuring they don't get snapped up by someone that's likely to prevent their IPs from returning to Nintendo consoles.


 

It just seemed you favored a Nintendo buyout because they'd benefit from Capcom's "mature" titles and would revive Megaman.


----------



## Skelletonike (Jun 17, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> I don't remember that happening on the PSP, but if you say so. My point is, Nintendo is PC-crazy, especially NoA, and they haven't done anything to instill my faith in them as far as mature content is concerned. Even recently the western releases of Bravely Default had altered costumes. Long story short, games on Nintendo platforms are censored, especially in the west.
> 
> I second the SEGA suggestion, Capcom content should stay multiplatform if possible.


 

Most of the censoring fault lies with NoA, heck, Fire Emblem Awakening had that stupid censor of Tharja's butt (the hottest chick in the game btw), whereas NoE didn't censor it.

As for the Bravely Default censoring, people might sugar coat it all they want, saying that it made sense since the characters were minors and blablablah, if they censored it though, why would they also change the ages of the characters? The english version of the game had older characters, most of them over 18, so censoring on top of that was pretty lame (not to mention that the super perverted bikini doesn't become all that perverted in the end, making it look like the characters are all way too conservative.

Anyway, I have my doubts that capcom will be bought by anyone anytime soon, they are a pretty huge company and they'll most likely be much more expensive than Atlus was (heck, Street Fighter alone is a huge cashgrabber).


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 17, 2014)

Skelletonike said:


> Most of the censoring fault lies with NoA, heck, Fire Emblem Awakening had that stupid censor of Tharja's butt (the hottest chick in the game btw), whereas NoE didn't censor it.
> 
> As for the Bravely Default censoring, people might sugar coat it all they want, saying that it made sense since the characters were minors and blablablah, if they censored it though, why would they also change the ages of the characters? The english version of the game had older characters, most of them over 18, so censoring on top of that was pretty lame (not to mention that the super perverted bikini doesn't become all that perverted in the end, making it look like the characters are all way too conservative.
> 
> Anyway, I have my doubts that capcom will be bought by anyone anytime soon, they are a pretty huge company and they'll most likely be much more expensive than Atlus was (heck, Street Fighter alone is a huge cashgrabber).


 

tl;dr: I want sluttier characters!

Like holy shit who cares if some skin is covered, this is a game not porn.


----------



## Skelletonike (Jun 17, 2014)

Guild McCommunist said:


> tl;dr: I want sluttier characters!
> 
> Like holy shit who cares if some skin is covered, this is a game not porn.


 
I didn't say that. D<
They're chibi characters, a few extra clothes or less won't make a dif. I was just pointing it out, I played the game when it came out without reading anything about it (to avoid spoilers), however once I got to the part where Edea decided to wear the bikini (that no one else dared to) in order to be bait, what was shown and what had been previously describe didn't really make sense, while after looking at the japanese one, it did make sense.


----------



## lampdemon (Jun 17, 2014)

Guild McCommunist said:


> tl;dr: I want sluttier characters!
> 
> Like holy shit who cares if some skin is covered, this is a game not porn.


 

Sluttier characters with a personality to match are always welcome 

Also, nudity does not equal porn.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 17, 2014)

Skelletonike said:


> I didn't say that. D<
> They're chibi characters, a few extra clothes or less won't make a dif. I was just pointing it out, I played the game when it came out without reading anything about it (to avoid spoilers), however once I got to the part where Edea decided to wear the bikini (that no one else dared to) in order to be bait, what was shown and what had been previously describe didn't really make sense, while after looking at the japanese one, it did make sense.


 

But it's like who cares if characters wear slightly more clothes. It's a video game.


----------



## lampdemon (Jun 17, 2014)

Guild McCommunist said:


> But it's like who cares if characters wear slightly more clothes. It's a video game.


 
Censorship is bad, even minor stuff, stop supporting censored media so we don't get more of it.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 17, 2014)

lampdemon said:


> Censorship is bad, even minor stuff, stop supporting censored media so we don't get more of it.


 

Censorship has its purposes at times, not all of it is bad. I'm not going to get into a philosophical debate here but my point is that complaining about censorship just to see a little more skin is pretty stupid.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 17, 2014)

lampdemon said:


> Censorship is bad, even minor stuff, stop supporting censored media so we don't get more of it.



Though I usually go in for the tireless enemy of censorship side of things I dare say you missed the point.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 17, 2014)

KingVamp said:


> Oh, you are right, but do you have any proof Nintendo did it and not Capcom? It's weird to censor that and not censor the others. It's usually known when Nintendo does it.


No proof whatsoever other than the fact that the change miraculously popped up when Monster Hunter switched from Sony platforms to Nintendo platforms. I don't work for Capcom or Nintendo, but I'm not five - it's Capcom who had to adjust the game to Nintendo standards, not the other way around.

I still can't believe that I spent the afternoon arguing about killing goats.


----------



## GameWinner (Jun 17, 2014)

God. Everytime a company is mentioned, everyone here always wants Nintendo to buy it. 
"Oh, Nintendo should buy Atlus!"
"Oh, Nintendo should buy SEGA!"
"Oh, Nintendo should buy Capcom!"
And so on.


----------



## lampdemon (Jun 17, 2014)

I know why censorship is used, and I think most of the reasons for it are stupid, we have rating systems for a reason.


----------



## McHaggis (Jun 17, 2014)

Guild McCommunist said:


> It just seemed you favored a Nintendo buyout because they'd benefit from Capcom's "mature" titles and would revive Megaman.


 
Nah. I've never been into Megaman all that much, to be honest, but I know that there's enough of a market out there for a new game that it seems stupid of Capcom to keep ignoring the fans. I own a PS3 and a Wii U and intend on buying a PS4 next year when I'm less strapped for cash and, to be honest, most of the Capcom games I'm into would probably be better on the more powerful PS4. I wouldn't say no to a new Breath of Fire for the 3DS, though.

Don't get me wrong, I'd like to see Nintendo take some kind of industry-shaking action to Wii U's fortunes turn around too, since my entire household is heavily invested in the platform with the number of games and accessories we have.



lampdemon said:


> I know why censorship is used, and I think most of the reasons for it are stupid, we have rating systems for a reason.


 
Sometimes the ratings system is part of the reason for censorship.  For instance, covering up a bit of side boob can make a difference with a large number of additional gamers in the target audience by lowering the age rating.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 17, 2014)

lampdemon said:


> I know why censorship is used, and I think most of the reasons for it are stupid, we have rating systems for a reason.


 

...And you realize that the rating system, which is created to restrict content to users of certain ages, is censorship?


----------



## XDel (Jun 17, 2014)

Capcom would be at home in Nintendo's hands. Both companies have a great and long history together, not to mention a lot in common spiritually/creatively.

Capcom in the hands of Microsoft on the other hand would be like a soulless being baring only the likeness of the franchises we once knew and loved.

Capcom in the hands of Sega...

...come on, Sega hasn't been great since the early 90's. Well there was Shadow of the Colossus but other than that, Sega no longer stands out like it used to.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 17, 2014)

Guild McCommunist said:


> ...And you realize that the rating system, which is created to restrict content to users of certain ages, is censorship?


I would argue that censorship implies alteration of the original work while age brackets are merely a suggestion.


----------



## KingVamp (Jun 17, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> No proof whatsoever other than the fact that the change miraculously popped up when Monster Hunter switched from Sony platforms to Nintendo platforms.


 
Honestly, no proof nor see a reason for Nintendo to do this, so I'm going chop that up as coincidence.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 17, 2014)

XDel said:


> Capcom would be at home in Nintendo's hands. Both companies have a great and long history together, not to mention a lot in common spiritually/creatively.



I was about to say something but then I sat down and thought about it.

Once legendary powerhouses, creators of some of the iconic parts of earlier gaming, both caught near fatal cases of sequelitis, both seem to be hounded by fans of earlier years (and possibly even the sequelitis mad phase) that think returning to their infancy would somehow make the megabucks. About the only difference is Capcom probably got a case of grim und gritty where Nintendo just got a case of the raging stupid.

Seeing there is nobody left for them, most of their friends have gone and their addled minds make it unlikely there will be anybody new then the logical conclusion to shack up together and spawn a few rat babies before death... hopefully we can throw some peanuts.


----------



## emigre (Jun 17, 2014)

XDel said:


> Capcom would be at home in Nintendo's hands. Both companies have a great and long history together, not to mention a lot in common spiritually/creatively.
> 
> Capcom in the hands of Microsoft on the other hand would be like a soulless being baring only the likeness of the franchises we once knew and loved.
> 
> ...


 

Capcom, who have been criticised for anti-consumer practices in recent times, would be a bad fit for Microsoft, who have been criticised  for anti-consumer practices? 

btw SotC is a Sony gaem.


----------



## Social_Outlaw (Jun 17, 2014)

Today in the latest news of June 17, 2014, today Capcom's shareholders have decided by voting to end their takeover defense today. It was created in 2008 to prevent outside companies from buying most of their stock, but most of the shareholders voted against renewing in their latest investor meeting, which is now (currently) available to buyers.

Finally, I've been waiting on this for a while, this is now your chance Nintendo! this would be great for you since all of Capcom's titles are widely known, and also is a third party company. But again if you think about it, Sony has (PS4 Exclusive) Deep down, and own the rights to the Resident Evil movies, so It might not go well with Nintendo, anyhow I hope it goes between these two great companies.




> In an interesting twist, Capcom shareholders have voted to end their takeover defense. Set up in 2008, the takeover defense was a series of strategies designed to prevent outside companies from buying up a majority of Capcom’s stock, but shareholders voted against renewing it at their latest investor’s meeting, which opens the company up for potential buyers.
> 
> 
> This by no means signifies an end to Capcom as a third party developer – an outside company would still have to pay a hefty sum to acquire over 50% of Capcom’s stock – but it’s now a distinct possibility. Capcom is no longer the lucrative giant it once was, but any potential buyers would gain exclusive rights to important franchises like Street Fighter, Ace Attorney, Resident Evil, Monster Hunter, Mega Man, and many more. What company, if any, will make them an offer they can’t refuse?


 
Source


----------



## the_randomizer (Jun 17, 2014)

As long as Microsoft or EA don't buy them out, I'll be fine


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 17, 2014)

Damn it, screwed up the merging and now the original thread has the new one's title. Anyway it is all together now. Normally lock and redirect would have been done but Logan97 actually made the effort to do a news post so that did not quite feel right.


----------



## the_randomizer (Jun 17, 2014)

GameWinner said:


> God. Everytime a company is mentioned, everyone here always wants Nintendo to buy it.
> "Oh, Nintendo should buy Atlus!"
> "Oh, Nintendo should buy SEGA!"
> "Oh, Nintendo should buy Capcom!"
> And so on.


 

Would you rather Microsoft buy it and jack it up like it did with Rare?


----------



## natkoden (Jun 17, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> I would hate it if Nintendo took over Capcom - the company has many mature IP's like Resident Evil, Dead Rising, Devil May Cry etc. which would fall into the realm of obscurity or misuse with Nintendo's PC-friendly management looming over the developers. Microsoft is another poor candidate - they ran Rare into the ground with crappy avatar games and have thoroughly proven that they're too irresponsible of a kid to own a puppy. I'd be happier if Sony took them under their wing, that or a software-oriented company.


 
GC: RE Zero, RERemake.

Post Nintendo: RE 5 and RE 6.

No, thank you.

I don't know what people still think that Nintendo puts rainbows and cute mushrooms in every game. Look at Bayonetta, TLS, Xenoblade, Madworld, etc.

Btw, I'll give them 2 dollars for the company. Is it enough?


----------



## GameWinner (Jun 17, 2014)

the_randomizer said:


> Would you rather Microsoft buy it and jack it up like it did with Rare?


Never really cared for Rare.
*prepares flame shield*


----------



## XDel (Jun 17, 2014)

emigre said:


> Capcom, who have been criticised for anti-consumer practices in recent times, would be a bad fit for Microsoft, who have been criticised for anti-consumer practices?


 
Ok, that IS pretty funny! 



FAST6191 said:


> I was about to say something but then I sat down and thought about it.
> 
> Once legendary powerhouses, creators of some of the iconic parts of earlier gaming, both caught near fatal cases of sequelitis, both seem to be hounded by fans of earlier years (and possibly even the sequelitis mad phase) that think returning to their infancy would somehow make the megabucks. About the only difference is Capcom probably got a case of grim und gritty where Nintendo just got a case of the raging stupid.
> 
> Seeing there is nobody left for them, most of their friends have gone and their addled minds make it unlikely there will be anybody new then the logical conclusion to shack up together and spawn a few rat babies before death... hopefully we can throw some peanuts.


 

If they teamed up, I'd hope they did not just remain in the past...
...sure, pay homage to the past, polish it off a bit, add a little innovation here and there, but for God's sake, push ahead, be creative, don't play it safe, be innovative and ignore the marketing charts most of all!


----------



## Arras (Jun 17, 2014)

XDel said:


> If they teamed up, I'd hope they did not just remain in the past...
> ...sure, pay homage to the past, polish it off a bit, add a little innovation here and there, but for God's sake, push ahead, be creative, don't play it safe, be innovative and* ignore the marketing charts most of all!*


somehow I doubt that would save capcom


----------



## the_randomizer (Jun 17, 2014)

GameWinner said:


> Never really cared for Rare.
> *prepares flame shield*


 

Well, the older Rare was much better anyways


----------



## XDel (Jun 17, 2014)

Arras said:


> somehow I doubt that would save capcom


 

All right then, here's an alternative...

Call it a day, be happy with the money they have made, then release everything they have produced freely to the public along with sources.


----------



## Nathan Drake (Jun 17, 2014)

Okay, guys, guys, let me clarify your thought process here:

You only want Nintendo to buy Capcom and all of these other developers that have gone up for sale the past few years for one reason: the only way Nintendo can get third party games is by buying the companies and turning them into either first or second party titles. I get it; you really, really don't want the Wii U to fail. Trust me, acquiring Capcom in its current state won't necessarily be a boon to anybody.

Now, Nintendo is a god awful fit. Quoting some projects from around the start of this millennium does not a good case make. Capcom's mature IPs in no way belong in the hands of a company so heavily invested in creating a family friendly system that the abomination known as Miiverse exists. That would pretty much put Capcom in the grave. But oh, you might get MML3, so it's totally worth killing off every other franchise with bad sales, right? Right guys? Right?

When it comes to Microsoft or Sony acquiring, I dunno. Microsoft might be the most likely of the three based on releases from Capcom these past few years, but we've already seen what happens when Microsoft takes over what was once a pretty good game development company. Sony, I honestly have no idea how they would handle it. Regardless, it might get more games on the PS4, but then you still fall into the trap of limited exposure to series by exclusionary exclusive rights, removing the competition from the equation. Arguably, these sales issues wouldn't be as big of an issue, as the types of games Capcom's markets these days are certainly more suited to Sony's or Microsoft's consoles, but there is a pretty great risk of sales taking a large hit if Capcom goes exclusive with any one of the big three.

Thus, the conclusion and most likely outcome: a third party should buy Capcom. Sega seems likely since their holding company would certainly have the funds to make it so. Regardless, as long as a third party gets it, Capcom can probably keep operating as they want to with hopefully some minor tweaks from above telling them that eighteen versions of the same Street Fighter game is overkill.


----------



## Vipera (Jun 17, 2014)

KingVamp said:


> Looks like something Capcom did. You have to kill it a specific way.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I can't be the only one that HATES this style of graphics in RPGs. I fucking hated the Final Fantasy III remake for the Nintendo DS because I wasn't playing with heroes, I was playing with a creepy chibi thing with white hair. And they kept this fucking style for the 3DS. Seriously? I CAN'T enjoy the game like this. I don't care about the graphics, but I do care if you stick a needle in my damn eye.
And now I feel like I'm in a list by letting that image filling my internet cache.


----------



## Social_Outlaw (Jun 17, 2014)

Nathan Drake said:


> Okay, guys, guys, let me clarify your thought process here:
> 
> You only want Nintendo to buy Capcom and all of these other developers that have gone up for sale the past few years for one reason: the only way Nintendo can get third party games is by buying the companies and turning them into either first or second party titles. I get it; you really, really don't want the Wii U to fail. Trust me, acquiring Capcom in its current state won't necessarily be a boon to anybody.
> 
> ...


 
Speaking of Microsoft, just letting you know American companies cannot buy Japanese companies so that is out of the question (Correct me anyone if I'm wrong or if something has changed).


----------



## Nathan Drake (Jun 17, 2014)

Logan97 said:


> Speaking of Microsoft, just letting you know American companies cannot buy Japanese companies so that is out of the question (Correct me anyone if I'm wrong or if something has changed)


Based on the extrodinary lack of information I could find on Google that could even confirm this in part, as well as conflicting articles actually acting as an aid advising American company owners on how to go about looking at buying a Japanese company, I'd say that this information is either a relic of the past, or bs all around.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 17, 2014)

natkoden said:


> GC: RE Zero, RERemake.
> 
> Post Nintendo: RE 5 and RE 6.
> 
> ...


Good job not reading the thread and presenting a 10+ year old example to prove your point in 2014. 

Bayonnetta isn't out yet so you don't really know if it was made PC or not, I'll give you credit for Madworld though. I guess we'll see - I'd rather if Capcom stayed multiplatform.


----------



## Vipera (Jun 17, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> Good job not reading the thread and presenting a 10+ year old example to prove your point in 2014.
> 
> Bayonnetta isn't out yet so you don't really know if it was made PC or not, I'll give you credit for Madworld though. I guess we'll see - I'd rather if Capcom stayed multiplatform.


I remember someone (either Miyamoto or the other dude from Sega) said that Madworld was just an experiment, that's why it's the only real example of gruesome game for the Wii.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 17, 2014)

Vipera said:


> I remember someone (either Miyamoto or the other dude from Sega) said that Madworld was just an experiment, that's why it's the only real example of gruesome game for the Wii.


 

Aaaand it flopped and we basically saw no more mature titles on the Wii after that minus like... Call of Duty.

Mature games continually flopped on the Wii, the only ones that did decent were the Call of Duty titles.

Maybe Nintendo is a bit more open to having diversity on their system but the audience certainly didn't.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 17, 2014)

Vipera said:


> I remember someone (either Miyamoto or the other dude from Sega) said that Madworld was just an experiment, that's why it's the only real example of gruesome game for the Wii.


Well, there's also No More Heroes, but that was bastardized in some regions. Some Resident Evil games were released on the Wii too, it's not completely devoid of adult-oriented games.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 17, 2014)

Nathan Drake said:


> but we've already seen what happens when Microsoft takes over what was once a pretty good game development company.



I went through MS' list of stakes, mergers and acquisitions.

FASA, later made mechwarrior and some other mech games. Now I dislike most mech games but they have their fans.
Bungie, almost vapourware Apple dev to making Halo.
Rare, then floundering Nintendo captive dev to some half interesting things at least. Viva pinata might not be the next perfect dark (though they did make the definitive version of the one that first appeared on the N64)
Lionhead. Whether that was to get Peter Molyneux or not remains to be debated. Anyway black and white and Fable to... well sequels to those games. Personally I am not a fan of any of them but that might just be me.

They also nabbed a controller company, right about the time their sidewinder got good and they presumably went on to make the original xbox controller (the s version was good) and even later the 360 controller. Though that last one might be a stretch as more of that seems to have come from their mouse/keyboard/input devices division.

So far that seems a better track record, percentage wise anyway, than EA, Square or possibly even Ubisoft (I have not gone through theirs). Speaking of EA though Microsoft also sold off one of their joint ventures to EA (was then a Dreamworks studio, one that did technically make medal of honor). They later went on to make GoldenEye: Rogue Agent, Medal of Honor sequels, some command and conquer sequels and Boom Blox.
Edit. Forgot to mention MS game studios too. They do some good stuff.


----------



## natkoden (Jun 17, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> *Good job not reading the thread and presenting a 10+ year old example to prove your point in 2014.*
> 
> Bayonnetta isn't out yet so you don't really know if it was made PC or not, I'll give you credit for Madworld though. I guess we'll see - I'd rather if Capcom stayed multiplatform.


 
What did I miss?

btw, chill man, we're cool now.

WATER UNDER THE BRIDGE

And I don't think RE6 can be categorized as an adult game. It's just a bunch of explosions and zombie shooting with a very stupid plot (probably written by the same guys that did Lost). On the other hand, playing Super Mario Galaxy (the game with cute mushrooms and rainbows) it's super adult. It takes a man to admit he can enjoy the level of emotional satisfaction that game offers.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 17, 2014)

natkoden said:


> What did I miss?
> 
> btw, chill man, we're cool now.
> 
> ...


I wouldn't necessarily blame the quality of RE5/6 on which platforms the games were released for, rather on the fact that creativity simply dried out in numerous Capcom offices - good games from Capcom are few and far between these days.


----------



## GameWinner (Jun 17, 2014)

I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft bought Capcom. I wouldn't even be mad either. Not sure about Sony. They seem content with their current studios, they also recently opened a new studio too.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 17, 2014)

GameWinner said:


> I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft bought Capcom. I wouldn't even be mad either. Not sure about Sony. They seem content with their current studios, they also recently opened a new studio too.


Essentially Microsoft obtaining Capcom would equal a barrage of Dead Rising titles and negligence of almost everything else while Sony obtaining Capcom would mean the end of Monster Hunter on Nintendo platforms _(or rather, on the 3DS, since MH4 isn't coming to the Wii U anyways)_. In both cases, everybody loses, so it's best if SEGA or some other third-party bids on Capcom.


----------



## natkoden (Jun 17, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> I wouldn't necessarily blame the quality of RE5/6 on which platforms the games were released for, rather on the fact that creativity simply dried out in numerous Capcom offices - good games from Capcom are few and far between these days.


 
I'm not blaming the quality on the platform. Of course it's Crapcom's fault.

But Nintendo had something to do with RE0 and RE Remake being released on their console. It's not like Capcom approached them... much less with the poor sales of the Gamecube at that time. So saying Nintendo will kill those IPs/ruin the maturity of the games is not entirely true.

Btw, look at that new Wii U game that's similar to Madworld. Looks super cheap but it's "mature".


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 17, 2014)

natkoden said:


> I'm not blaming the quality on the platform. Of course it's Crapcom's fault.
> 
> But Nintendo had something to do with RE0 and RE Remake being released on their console. It's not like Capcom approached them... much less with the poor sales of the Gamecube at that time. So saying Nintendo will kill those IPs/ruin the maturity of the games is not entirely true.


Nintendo secured the exclusivity of those titles on their platform in an attempt to raise sales within the core sector - something they _should_ be doing with third-parties now but don't seem to be in a hurry about it. It's thanks to games like RE:Remake and MGS:Twin Snakes that the Gamecube wasn't a complete waste of time, first-party titles aside.


----------



## Nah3DS (Jun 17, 2014)

I hope Nintendo buys Capcom just to piss off "mature gamers"


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 17, 2014)

NahuelDS said:


> I hope Nintendo buys Capcom just to piss off "mature gamers"


All it would amount to would be Capcom releasing games for a home console nobody owns.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Jun 17, 2014)

ITT Nin10yearolds scrambling to make up reasons as to why Nin10doh should purchase Capcom.

10/10, would laugh at again.

On topic, I would much rather some third party buy out Capcom than anyone else.


----------



## AceWarhead (Jun 17, 2014)

It seems like the people who want Nintendo to buy Capcom are rather selfish.
I don't see anything good coming out of such an acquisition. In fact, any sort of 1st party buying them out would be bad.
Like many others have said, a 3rd party acquisition would be ideal.


----------



## the_randomizer (Jun 17, 2014)

Tom Bombadildo said:


> ITT Nin10yearolds scrambling to make up reasons as to why Nin10doh should purchase Capcom.
> 
> 10/10, would laugh at again.
> 
> On topic, I would much rather some third party buy out Capcom than anyone else.


 

Anyone but EA that is, they would ruin the IPs.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 17, 2014)

the_randomizer said:


> Anyone but EA that is, they would ruin the IPs.


Everyone keeps saying that and yet EA's doing perfectly fine and they're releasing fantastic games like Battlefield, Dragon Age, Need for Speed and their popular range of sports titles. You can rag on their customer service and business practicess, not really on their games.


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Jun 17, 2014)

Man, ever since E3 the Nintendo fanboys have been fiercer than ever. Or maybe I've been away from GBATemp for too long and it has always been this bad.


----------



## emigre (Jun 17, 2014)

Hyro-Sama said:


> Man, ever since E3 the Nintendo fanboys have been fiercer than ever. Or maybe I've been away from GBATemp for too long and it has always been this bad.


 

They have discovered hope Hyro.

Little do they know, hope can kill a man.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 17, 2014)

emigre said:


> They have discovered hope Hyro.
> 
> Little do they know, hope can kill a man.


As the proverb says... _"Hope is the mother of fools"_.


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Jun 17, 2014)

emigre said:


> They have discovered hope Hyro.
> 
> Little do they know, hope can kill a man.


 
Hope? The only remotely interesting game that was shown was Bayonetta 2 and that alone cannot save the Wii U. More like delusional then hopeful, if anything.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 17, 2014)

GameWinner said:


> [Sony] seem content with their current studios, they also recently opened a new studio too.



Generally in business if you are content, and are not a one man band or rough equivalent just working to retirement, then you have failed, worse you have failed and you probably do not know it yet. You can coast as a market picks back up or develops but never be content.


----------



## jacksprat1990 (Jun 17, 2014)

Hyro-Sama said:


> Hope? The only remotely interesting game that was shown was Bayonetta 2 and that alone cannot save the Wii U. More like delusional then hopeful, if anything.


 
Yeah, the only interesting game was Bayo 2...


----------



## Zizzy13 (Jun 17, 2014)

Keep it third-party. I'd hate to see them drop a good game series because it clashes with their demographic or some shit.


----------



## the_randomizer (Jun 17, 2014)

Hyro-Sama said:


> Man, ever since E3 the Nintendo fanboys have been fiercer than ever. Or maybe I've been away from GBATemp for too long and it has always been this bad.


 

Because calling them fanboys really helps discussions. Sony and Microsoft has fanboys as well and they're not exactly angelic either. The one-sided Nintendo fanbois bullshit is just ridiculous. Just saying.


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Jun 17, 2014)

the_randomizer said:


> Because calling them fanboys really helps discussions. Sony and Microsoft has fanboys as well and they're not exactly angelic either. The one-sided Nintendo fanbois bullshit is just ridiculous. Just saying.


 

You can't deny they're quite bad though. Especially on GBATemp. There's proof to support this a la Golden Threads.


----------



## the_randomizer (Jun 17, 2014)

Hyro-Sama said:


> You can't deny they're quite bad though. Especially on GBATemp. There's proof to support this a la Golden Threads.


 

Nevertheless, not all of them are like that, the ones that are, are. When all Nintendo fans are lumped together as one virulent entity, that's when things go bad. I could conversely state that the anti-Nintendo bias is bad, but it's not, so I won't.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 17, 2014)

Hyro-Sama said:


> You can't deny they're quite bad though. Especially on GBATemp. There's proof to support this a la Golden Threads.


Besides, it's a general rule that the jocks beat up the dorks, not the other way around. Think about it, it's only natural. _;O;_


----------



## the_randomizer (Jun 17, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> Besides, it's a general rule that the jocks beat up the dorks, not the other way around. Think about it, it's only natural. _;O;_


 

In other words, one-sided bullshitting fights that don't end well and will never end well. Got it.





Foxi4 said:


> It's all in good spirits. There's no improvement without criticism.


 
Sometimes I wonder...


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 17, 2014)

the_randomizer said:


> In other words, one-sided bullshitting fights that don't end well and will never end well. Got it.


It's all in good spirits. There's no improvement without criticism.


----------



## AngryGeek416 (Jun 17, 2014)

Nintendo needs to make a move.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 17, 2014)

the_randomizer said:


> Because calling them fanboys really helps discussions. Sony and Microsoft has fanboys as well and they're not exactly angelic either. The one-sided Nintendo fanbois bullshit is just ridiculous. Just saying.



Whoa, when did we get to lumping fanboys in with fans?


----------



## the_randomizer (Jun 17, 2014)

FAST6191 said:


> Whoa, when did we get to lumping fanboys in with fans?


 
You mean that _doesn't_ happen on this site? That's sure as hell the vibe I've been getting from many individuals. If I'm wrong, prove me wrong.


----------



## Taleweaver (Jun 17, 2014)

Personally, I think it's hilarious. I can only imagine board meetings the last couple of days/weeks went something like this:

*Capcom shareholders:* guys...you need to do something. Capcom was already known of producing more DLC than actual games and this extra DLC on top of the "ultimate" street fighter game hasn't helped. We need to improve this company's reputation FAST! 
*Capcom board:* don't worry. Trust us. We'll have a trick up our sleeve. 
*Shareholders:* okay...but you better show it at E3!

(a bit later, after the meeting)
*one director:* so...I didn't say anything, but really. How the hell ARE we going to solve this?
*another one:* simple. We'll reclaim the negativity that surrounds it, embrace dlc as something that's absolutely beneficial. After all, who will hate us for our policies if we're downright in their face with it? 
*one director:* hmm...sounds logical. All right...As usual, I'll ignore all warnings from our game creators, pitch this to our marketing guys and blindly use what they come up with. 

(later, at E3)
*Capcom representative:* coming soon: Super Ultra Dead rising 3 arcade remix hyper edition EX+ Alpha! 
*Shareholders:* 
*Shareholders:* that's it. We're selling this dump!


On a more serious note...I really wish capcom will consider selling their IP's individually rather than letting companies attempt to gain market share. No matter who ends up buying, there is simply no way one of the big three can use all those IP's to produce games. Let alone quality games that do the originals justice.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 17, 2014)

the_randomizer said:


> Because calling them fanboys really helps discussions.


 

Depends on your definition of "helping".


----------



## the_randomizer (Jun 17, 2014)

Guild McCommunist said:


> Depends on your definition of "helping".


 

As in, for people not being arrogant or demeaning to other people with different tastes, in this case, preferring Nintendo over another company. It's one thing to point out a company's flaws, it's quite another to treat Nintendo fans like they're some virulent disease and treat them like shit.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 17, 2014)

It is funny to do it from time to time. It is usually only when people get defensive when people suggest the N64 might have been a failure or we get threads like "OMG only 7/10 for [less than great handheld entry in a less popular Nintendo series that had a good game on the NES/SNES]" that it gets ugly.

Few would argue that Nintendo did not make good games at one point in time, or at least did not provide an environment in which good games could happen and there may even still be lessons to learn from that era (not many as game design is rapidly evolving into something respectable but hey). Being fans of that is fine, it is the full nostalgia goggles (including nostalgia for an age that never existed*) bit that grates.

*other than the N64 my favourite is when people try to claim third parties are not needed, because that basically never happened (certainly not on the NES, SNES, GBA or DS, not even really on the GB/GBC) and in this multimillion selling world that could ever happen again.


----------



## the_randomizer (Jun 17, 2014)

FAST6191 said:


> It is funny to do it from time to time. It is usually only when people get defensive when people suggest the N64 might have been a failure or we get threads like "OMG only 7/10 for [less than great handheld entry in a less popular Nintendo series that had a good game on the NES/SNES]" that it gets ugly.
> 
> Few would argue that Nintendo did not make good games at one point in time, or at least did not provide an environment in which good games could happen and there may even still be lessons to learn from that era (not many as game design is rapidly evolving into something respectable but hey). Being fans of that is fine, it is the full nostalgia goggles (including nostalgia for an age that never existed*) bit that grates.
> 
> *other than the N64 my favourite is when people try to claim third parties are not needed, because that basically never happened (certainly not on the NES, SNES, GBA or DS, not even really on the GB/GBC) and in this multimillion selling world that could ever happen again.


 

The N64 didn't really have that great of third party support either.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 17, 2014)

the_randomizer said:


> The N64 didn't really have that great of third party support either.



Indeed it did not and if it was not implied in that then hopefully it could have been inferred; lack of third parties and/or the exodus to the PS1 being one of the main reasons it failed (or at the very least cost Nintendo its industry leading position and that is as good as failing).


----------



## Dork (Jun 17, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> I would argue that censorship implies alteration of the original work while age brackets are merely a suggestion.


If only game retailers felt that way.


----------



## Ergo (Jun 17, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> I would hate it if Nintendo took over Capcom - the company has many mature IP's like Resident Evil, Dead Rising, Devil May Cry etc. which would fall into the realm of obscurity or misuse with Nintendo's PC-friendly management looming over the developers.


 

Yes, because Monolithsoft has clearly suffered under Nintendo's heavy hand.

And has it occurred to you that they wouldn't buy CAPCOM unless it meant exploiting those franchises properly? CAPCOM has a billion-dollar market cap--they would not buy them and then bury or minimize the only reason you'd actually buy them, which would be the 'mature' titles they possess, i.e. ain't nobody buying CAPCOM for hundreds of millions to get Megaman and then jettisoning RE and co. in the process.

Furthermore, considering Nintendo's lack of bandwidth to pursue such games in-house, CAPCOM is a much more sensical buy than it would be for MS or Sony, who both have such games in *droves* and would stand to gain far less in the transaction than Nintendo would.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 17, 2014)

Dark S. said:


> If only game retailers felt that way.


Around here, provided you have the parent's permission, you can purchase any video game, even if you're a minor. I think that's the way it should be. The only reason why stores can't sell _"mature"_ games to minors is that the clerk has to be sure the parent is okay with it.


Ergo said:


> Yes, because Monolithsoft has clearly suffered under Nintendo's heavy hand.
> 
> And has it occurred to you that they wouldn't buy CAPCOM unless it meant exploiting those franchises properly? CAPCOM has a billion-dollar market cap--they would not buy them and then bury or minimize the only reason you'd actually buy them, which would be the 'mature' titles they possess, i.e. ain't nobody buying CAPCOM for hundreds of millions to get Megaman and then jettisoning RE and co. in the process.
> 
> Furthermore, considering Nintendo's lack of bandwidth to pursue such games in-house, CAPCOM is a much more sensical buy than it would be for MS or Sony, who both have such games in *droves* and would stand to gain far less in the transaction than Nintendo would.


When was the last time you've played a good Camelot game? Do people even remember that Camelot is a developer? They used to make Shining Force games on an almost yearly basis, guess how many Shining Force games they made since they were acquired by Nintendo? Provided anyone even remembers what Shining Force was.

Acquisition of a company doesn't mean that the IP's will be _"exploited"_ by proxy - often times there are long-term license agreements that prevent that from happening. It's quite a complicated matter, which is why it would be best if Capcom remained a third-party developer.


----------



## Dork (Jun 17, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> Around here, provided you have the parent's permission, you can purchase any video game, even if you're a minor. I think that's the way it should be. The only reason why stores can't sell _"mature"_ games to minors is that the clerk has to be sure the parent is okay with it.


It's annoying in U.S. territories as they are always asking for ID. Even if you clearly are over 18 they won't sell you the game unless you can prove it. It's a pain in the ass, I wish they would just leave it to parents. Not that I care that much anymore since I just buy shit online, the only reason I go to Gamestop is to get a steam giftcard.


----------



## TheCasketMan (Jun 17, 2014)

Don't worry guys, Facebook will buy it!


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 17, 2014)

TheCasketMan said:


> Don't worry guys, Facebook will buy it!



You say that as a joke but that might actually work. Maybe not facebook per se but a company like that and dealing in web/mobile.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 17, 2014)

FAST6191 said:


> You say that as a joke but that might actually work. Maybe not facebook per se but a company like that and dealing in web/mobile.


So...

Resident Evil: Oculus Edition?


----------



## grossaffe (Jun 17, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> So...
> 
> Resident Evil: Oculus Edition?


Nope, Resident Evil: Zombieville


----------



## chavosaur (Jun 17, 2014)

Did everyone completely forget that Resident Evil revelations was originally a 3DS exclusive? And Arguably one of the best Resident Evils we've had in a long time in the franchise, and Nintendo has almost no hand in censorship or making the title lackluster. The dialogue was as cheesy and ridiculous as ever, the deaths were still graphic and the horror was not worried down by any means. 

I get having a shitfest with Nintendo is entertaining at times, and believe me I'm my one to play defense here, as I strongly side that Sega would be a great purchaser of te company so I can enjoy their games on all platforms. But do we really have to nitpick so hard that Nintendo would bring the games down so much? 

They obviously knew resident evil was a fan favorite and secured it as a game for their handheld before it went multi platform so they know fans love the games. They obviously know fans have a glorious love of Megaman hence his inclusion in Smash bros, and if anything with Capcom under Nintendo and Nintendo's strong love of games for a younger audience that aren't just horror and boobs galore, Megaman could see a glorious return under them. 

Not to mention the great success Monster Hunter has had on BOTH Sony and Nintendo consoles, securing MH is securing decent sales. Add in the above, and it would be a very nice acquisition. Nintendo isn't going to Kill Capcom. I feel like they could really help some dead Capcom titles flourish, and push further other franchises that already exist.


----------



## spotanjo3 (Jun 17, 2014)

*Keiji Inafune *should buy Capcom so he can continue to make Rockman games as well as Might No 9.


----------



## WoJjTeK (Jun 17, 2014)

If Nintendo did this right it could actually work ( not that I believe they will buy CAPCOM ). Think about it : they could keep some franchises exclusive , like Monster Hunter , Ace Attorney, revived MegaMan - that would attract the fans to their platforms BUT i think some of the franchises should stay multiplatform , and Nintendo should just make sure the games are of sufficient quality , f.e Street Fighter, Devil May Cry or Resident Evil. This way Nintendo could have games they want exclusive on their consoles and at the same time have a source of additional income from multiplatform releases. Multiplatform for some of those games that would also be released on Nintendo consoles would make multiplayer experience better, as there's a lot of players to play with. And let's not forget that there's indeed wider mature audience on MS & Sony's platforms - bigger install base for mature games.
I don't have anything against CAPCOM being bought by for instance SEGA - some of CAPCOM's games really should stay multiplatform.
Of course it's not going to happen, but one may dream...


----------



## Windaga (Jun 17, 2014)

Yeah.....here's hoping that a console manufacturer doesn't buy them. I'm all for bringing back Mega Man, and I think a Retro made Mega Man would be great (or a Japan Studio's made Monster Hunter, for that matter), but that doesn't mean that it'll happen if Capcom is bought by Nintendo or Sony, respectively. Not only that, but titles like Street Fighter and the V.S series staying locked to a single console? That'd suck hard core. Here's to hoping that, if they do get bought, they get purchased by a neutral third party.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 17, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> So...
> 
> Resident Evil: Oculus Edition?



First person resident evil....

*has flashbacks to gun survivor*

Is this because I reminded you of zip drives the other month?



chavosaur said:


> securing Monster Hunter is securing decent sales.


Maybe in Japan.

As for Resident Evil avoiding the censor's pen I dare say one instance does not a pattern make, not to mention extremes (as much as RE counts as extreme anyway) might not be the best case study. I am with the others on the "did it hurt the game?" front mind you, though some of the SNES/NES era stuff seems pretty quaint nowadays


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 17, 2014)

FAST6191 said:


> Is this because I reminded you of zip drives the other month?


....you did it again!


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 17, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> ....you did it again!



We appear to be at a junction then. On the one hand we can say we both caused some measure of hurt and carry on with life, on the other we can go nuclear.

Granted at some level I actually liked Gun Survivor, in some ways the PS1 was probably my NES despite my owning a NES when current.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 17, 2014)

FAST6191 said:


> We appear to be at a junction then. On the one hand we can say we both caused some measure of hurt and carry on with life, on the other we can go nuclear.





Spoiler










Magneto-optical Drive. Now hit me with your best shot, buster! _;O;_





> Granted at some level I actually liked Gun Survivor, in some ways the PS1 was probably my NES despite my owning a NES when current.


Survivor was... pretty funny. They tried to make it _"scary"_ like Resident Evil, but ended up with something more along the humorous lines of The House of the Dead - unintentionally, of course. Never had the time to play the PS2 games though - I'll have to give them a crack as I've heard they're better than the PS1 original.


----------



## Joe88 (Jun 18, 2014)

FAST6191 said:


> First person resident evil....
> 
> *has flashbacks to gun survivor*


dead aim was decent compared to survivor


----------



## vayanui8 (Jun 18, 2014)

I think a buyout by Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft would be bad. Sony would take away some of the support that nintendo so desperately needs from some of capcoms games, microsoft has no handheld and their lack of focus on the Japanese game market would mean then end of numerous franchises, And nintendo could potentially end some franchises that didn't match their target demographic or change them. If one of the three had to buy them I'd personally prefer Sony or Nintendo, but I think a strong third party company would be the best option since then the titles could stay matched with the platforms they currently are available on.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 18, 2014)

vayanui8 said:


> I think a buyout by Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft would be bad.
> 
> Sony would take away some of the support that nintendo so desperately needs from some of capcoms games
> 
> ...



I am not sure I would be any kind of worked up about the Sony one. Nintendo seems to be the games equivalent of film remakes right now -- sometimes good but generally it does not mean your earlier memories are now somehow invalid.

Microsoft has no handheld? Did I miss the part where they had a slightly struggling tablet and phone OS? Also the part where they published games on Nintendo's handhelds for quite some time before then. Likewise would it mean the end of things in the Japanese market if buying such a company was the way into the Japanese market?

I already went on Nintendo and the above probably says just as much again.


----------



## vayanui8 (Jun 18, 2014)

FAST6191 said:


> I am not sure I would be any kind of worked up about the Sony one. Nintendo seems to be the games equivalent of film remakes right now -- sometimes good but generally it does not mean your earlier memories are now somehow invalid.
> 
> Microsoft has no handheld? Did I miss the part where they had a slightly struggling tablet and phone OS? Also the part where they published games on Nintendo's handhelds for quite some time before then. Likewise would it mean the end of things in the Japanese market if buying such a company was the way into the Japanese market?
> 
> I already went on Nintendo and the above probably says just as much again.


Playing games on a tablet/phone is far less comfortable and efficient than using an actual handheld with physical buttons. While I suppose you could argue for the odd accessories that are available, few are very good and the fact remains that handhelds are less expensive and will remain compatible with all of the software. Personally I don't see them putting software on nintendo's handhelds, or at least focusing most of the content to the Xbox One. As for the Japanese market, Microsoft has no real experience with them, so its safe to assume that a big company like capcom probably wouldn't be the best start in the case they fail, like they have in the past.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 18, 2014)

vayanui8 said:


> Playing games on a tablet/phone is far less comfortable and efficient than using an actual handheld with physical buttons. While I suppose you could argue for the odd accessories that are available, few are very good and the fact remains that handhelds are less expensive and will remain compatible with all of the software. Personally I don't see them putting software on nintendo's handhelds, or at least focusing most of the content to the Xbox One. As for the Japanese market, Microsoft has no real experience with them, so its safe to assume that a big company like capcom probably wouldn't be the best start in the case they fail, like they have in the past.



Less comfortable and less efficient or just that (traditional?) games have not been adapted to the control method yet? Such a statement seems just short of "dem casuals" or "mobile games are not real games". That said yeah MS doing things on Nintendo handhelds will probably not happen so much any more now they have their own platform they want content for.

As for real experience they have done a few things starting in the xbox era and going from there, moreover though MS' (and basically every other company ever's) method of choice when encountering something they do not know but feel the need to get into is "buy someone in that does understand it". Now whether they feel the need to (the fertile places of not Japan seem to be doing OK for them, to say nothing of Japan's relevance slowly fading or at least becoming harder to define) and whether Capcom would be a good candidate (and I could see failing but not so debt encumbered company without many real assets but lots of IP assets as a reasonably easy sell) can still stand to be debated but I am not sure about the rest.


----------



## Bladexdsl (Jun 18, 2014)

cmon ninty their ripe for the picking. DO IT


----------



## vayanui8 (Jun 18, 2014)

FAST6191 said:


> Less comfortable and less efficient or just that (traditional?) games have not been adapted to the control method yet? Such a statement seems just short of "dem casuals" or "mobile games are not real games". That said yeah MS doing things on Nintendo handhelds will probably not happen so much any more now they have their own platform they want content for.
> 
> As for real experience they have done a few things starting in the xbox era and going from there, moreover though MS' (and basically every other company ever's) method of choice when encountering something they do not know but feel the need to get into is "buy someone in that does understand it". Now whether they feel the need to (the fertile places of not Japan seem to be doing OK for them, to say nothing of Japan's relevance slowly fading or at least becoming harder to define) and whether Capcom would be a good candidate (and I could see failing but not so debt encumbered company without many real assets but lots of IP assets as a reasonably easy sell) can still stand to be debated but I am not sure about the rest.


Not all game can be adapted to that platform. I don't think we will ever see a monster hunter game running solely on touch controls, and that arguably capcoms biggest ip at the moment. It also happens to be very successful on handhelds. In regards to them not going for the japanese market, while it may not be a business loss, its certainly a loss for anyone (myself included) who happen to like those games. Many franchises would certainly  be shut down that didn't cater to other audiences and it would be a real loss.


----------



## BrightNeko (Jun 18, 2014)

Lot to read here o-o;

After skimming the thread I'd say nintendo wouldn't be a bad fit. The concern for censor ship and how they might handle mature properties came up a large number of times. Nintendo however when they get a new company is pretty good about just letting them do what they want. It is when a company starts to not bring about hits that nintendo looks over and considers taking control or outright shutting them down. This is at the very least what all past examples point to, where acquired companies more act like they would under a publisher deal.

That said should nintendo get them? Probably not it would deal a great hit to capcom as a whole, and we probably wouldn't see what we as fans want for a very long time. Much like Konami's hudson soft buy out, Nintendo at first probably would have no idea how to utilize the majority of their properties. An most likely end up resorting to their older gameplay styles after not figuring out what to do with them. At first this would seem awesome, but would leave the franchises in sever decay till left alone.

So who should, would, could buy capcom? I'd personally prefer square-enix. They have handled eidos and crave interactive very well, and have shown they know when to back off when it comes to development. Them or sony would be lovely because sony is delightful at funding devs even when things don't turn out amazing. They are always willing to give a series at least one more go.

An on nintendo and censorship, for monster hunter. Portable 3rd on PSP would not allow you to kill kelbiis, you could only stun them. The bravely default thing was the developer not nintendo's doing. Plus they published the wonderful 101, and developed kid icarus uprising. Two games that get pretty dark, and show a lot of it on screen. To the extent of the player even causing some of the death in the games.


----------



## lufere7 (Jun 18, 2014)

Ugh I hope no console maker buy them, it would mean even less Capcom games for PC. The trend should be moving towards less exclusives not more dammit. If Nintendo wants they should just buy Megaman and Monster Hunter, those franchises are almost always exclusives anyways.
I wonder what would happen if Valve bought them, we'd finally get all Capcom games on Steam (MvC3, Dragon's Dogma, etc.) and they did release most of their games on consoles, it probably isn't a good idea though since they could keep them as exclusives for their Steam machines and Valve have a slowish release schedule. They would also have to nuke Dead Rising and Marvel vs Capcom, with them having a three and all.


----------



## Blindfoldedchaos (Jun 18, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> Absolutely - Nintendo is still crazy about censorship. Notice how in MH3U you can't kill Kelbi, only "stun" them - stars appear over their heads and instead of disappearing like the rest of monster corpses, they get up and run away. Why? Nintendo platform. It's okay to kill lizards, but goats are off-limits, apparently.


 
To be fair in MH3 they made it so knocking them out gave more than killing them, and it was changed to stun in 3G to suit the lore of cutting the horn while its alive, and if they were really censoring, then Kirin would be a K.O as well



lufere7 said:


> Ugh I hope no console maker buy them, it would mean even less Capcom games for PC. The trend should be moving towards less exclusives not more dammit. If Nintendo wants they should just buy Megaman and Monster Hunter, those franchises are almost always exclusives anyways.
> I wonder what would happen if Valve bought them, we'd finally get all Capcom games on Steam (MvC3, Dragon's Dogma, etc.) and they did release most of their games on consoles, it probably isn't a good idea though since they could keep them as exclusives for their Steam machines and Valve have a slowish release schedule. They would also have to nuke Dead Rising and Marvel vs Capcom, with them having a three and all.


 
Capcom can't legally make MvC3 anymore anyway


----------



## WiiCube_2013 (Jun 18, 2014)

Foxi4 said:
			
		

> I would hate it if Nintendo took over Capcom - the company has many mature...





Foxi4 said:


> Absolutely - Nintendo is still crazy about censorship.


 



Sure Nintendo is so kiddy that they don't allow bloody violent games.. right? Oh wait.

Edit: Just because it's a mature game doesn't mean it's actually good (Resident Evil 5, 6).


----------



## p3rand0r (Jun 18, 2014)

well , for my point of view it would benefit nintendo if they buy capcom 
Nintendo has some great games, but we have to admit that nintendo ...well ....they lacks some M rated games , and capcom has some great one!
also i think that the next nintendo console would be a powerfull one to become appealing to some graphic/power hungry gamers , and all they need is M rated games and some mature IP..


----------



## anhminh (Jun 18, 2014)

The problem isn't who will buy it. The problem is who can buy it.
Capcom is a famous game company (or at least used to be) so the price won't be cheap. Sony still have a big debt so buying Capcom is almost impossible. Microsoft doesn't seem to interest about console gaming anymore. Sega just buying Atlus recently so it will take a while for them to think about buying another one.
So in the end it will be Nintendo who buy Capcom or no one will buy Capcom.


----------



## Clarky (Jun 18, 2014)

I would love Nintendo to buy out Capcom just to watch the pure nerd rage similar to Bayonetta 2 again


----------



## WiiCube_2013 (Jun 18, 2014)

clarky said:


> I would love Nintendo to buy out Capcom just to watch the pure nerd rage similar to Bayonetta 2 again


 
Those fucking fanboys asking for Bayo 2 on PS/Xbox.. who was the one that funded Bayonetta 2 to be developed? Nintendo.

I wouldn't complain if a game I wanted was released on a different platform, I'd just buy it at some point later on. Either they don't have anything else to do other than bitching on the internet or they prefer it over playing, you know... their PS/Xbox consoles.

It's 2014 so they just need to shut the fuck up already, it's getting really tiresome and around September the game's coming out so they'll either buy it or ditch it.


----------



## Ace Overclocked (Jun 18, 2014)

I love how SEGA is treating atlus and its IPs after buying the company, but capcom doesn't deserve that kind of freedom. They'd just fuck up.


----------



## KingVamp (Jun 18, 2014)

Ace Overclocked said:


> I love how SEGA is treating atlus and its IPs after buying the company, but capcom doesn't deserve that kind of freedom. They'd just fuck up.


Sadly, you are right about that. Anyone that buys them would have to change Capcom strategy.


----------



## Social_Outlaw (Jun 18, 2014)

Okay, I just heard that some Japan laws restrict some American companies from buying Japanese companies, so *if* Microsoft can buy Capcom, I just don't see it? That is like putting Acid on Smooth butter. Now if Nintendo buys Capcom, the only problem with that will be the Marketing the titles. Sony on the other hand will cater to their fans, but it will pay a big price in the end.


----------



## Qtis (Jun 18, 2014)

WiiCube_2013 said:


> Those fucking fanboys asking for Bayo 2 on PS/Xbox.. who was the one that funded Bayonetta 2 to be developed? Nintendo.


Just like Mass Effect 1 never went multiplatform when Microsoft funded the development? 

I personally don't see the high interest in Bayonetta 2, but the gameplay isn't my personal favorite anyways. 

As for the topic, there are a ton of other companies that could easily buy Capcom without any major problem. An easy example would be GungHo/Softbank. 

Also a good point to consider in the discussions: if  Nintendo needs third party developers, wouldn't it be better to get the devs onboard instead of creating an even larger amount of exclusive games that eat the possible third party revenue even further? The Wii had a large amount of games released for the platform, but a challenge was trying to compete with the amount of first party games on the platform


----------



## Gahars (Jun 18, 2014)

WiiCube_2013 said:


> Those fucking fanboys asking for Bayo 2 on PS/Xbox.. who was the one that funded Bayonetta 2 to be developed? Nintendo.
> 
> I wouldn't complain if a game I wanted was released on a different platform, I'd just buy it at some point later on. Either they don't have anything else to do other than bitching on the internet or they prefer it over playing, you know... their PS/Xbox consoles.


 
Well, considering that the original Bayonetta was only released on the PS3 and 360, is it such a surprise that many of its fans are on the successor platforms? People may be fans of the original, but most aren't going to buy a console for one game. Is it really hard to figure out why people may be disappointed?

I don't care about Bayonetta one way or the other, but I think people wishing it was multiplatform is understandable. I mean, if the next main Ace Attorney game was announced as a Vita exclusive after years of being on Nintendo fans, would it be unreasonable for fans to want it on the 3DS as well? Could you honestly blame them for wanting to access the game without having to buy a whole nother handheld?

I'll leave the question to you, but the answer is "Of course not."



WiiCube_2013 said:


> It's 2014 so they just need to shut the fuck up already, it's getting really tiresome and around September the game's coming out so they'll either buy it or ditch it.


 
I haven't really seen many people talking about this since the announcement, so... well, there you go.

Honestly, I still think Nintendo's funding of Bayonetta 2 is a mistake. I mean, I appreciate that they were trying to appeal to an outside demographic here, and they could always use the third party support, but, well, people as a whole don't care about Bayonetta. The original only sold around a million or so copies. At best, it was a very cult hit. That's not the sort of thing that sells consoles, certainly not enough to really justify the investment. A niche franchise entry from a niche developer on a very niche console doesn't equate to a smash hit.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 18, 2014)

Gahars said:


> Well, considering that the original Bayonetta was only released on the PS3 and 360, is it such a surprise that many of its fans are on the successor platforms? People may be fans of the original, but most aren't going to buy a console for one game. Is it really hard to figure out why people may be disappointed?
> 
> I don't care about Bayonetta one way or the other, but I think people wishing it was multiplatform is understandable. I mean, if the next main Ace Attorney game was announced as a Vita exclusive after years of being on Nintendo fans, would it be unreasonable for fans to want it on the 3DS as well? Could you honestly blame them for wanting to access the game without having to buy a whole nother handheld?
> 
> ...



There is disappointment and then there is the levels of cretinism that the Bayonetta 2 announcement saw happen. At points it would have been enough to make a megaman fan say "steady on there", fortunately it fizzled out at bit as the world can only take one fanbase as awful as megaman's.


----------



## Bryon15 (Jun 18, 2014)

Wow at what happened in this topic. How did the title change? Anyway I'd like to list more reasons why I think Nintendo should be the ones to get Capcom.

1. Many of capcom's franchises that they have neglected would be revived. This includes megaman, breath of fire, resident evil, bionic commando. Plus the IPs that were created by platinum games would also be revived. Like viewtiful joe, okami, devil may cry, godhand. Since platinum games works close with nintendo now.

2. Nintendo and capcom have had a good relationship that goes all the way back to the 80s. megaman, street fighter, bionic commando, ghosts and goblins, they all debuted on nintendo systems. Plus we got the best resident evil games when they were gamecube exclusive (RE1 remake, RE0, RE4). Capcom also made the best 2D zelda games.

3. Perhaps most importantly, Nintendo knows that they are not getting third party support. This is the problem with Wii U. This is why we have these long game droughts in between new releases. Acquiring capcom would be a major help with that. Because they wouldn't just be getting capcom's IPs. They would get their development teams as well. Nintendo said that they wanted to expand. And this is the best way to do so. Who wouldn't want to buy a system that was the exclusive home to both nintendo and capcom franchises? I sure would.

4. To people saying that microsoft, EA, activision, could buy capcom and thus ruin them. Stop worrying. There is a law in japan that prohibits an american company from buying a japanese one. This is why microsoft could not buy atlus, despite having more money then sega.

5. To people saying that nintendo flat wouldn't buy capcom. Why do you thing that? Is it because they didn't buy atlus? Read the above link I posted. Nintendo has explicitly said that they are looking towards mergers and acquisitions. Capcom would be the best acquisition they could ever make. Plus consider the alternative. If they loss capcom to someone like sony, or a third party who hated them, that would be the end of ace attorney, and monster hunter exclusivity. Megaman would be pulled out of smash bros, plus we'd never see another megaman game. In short, it'd be terrible. Nintendo wouldn't let that happen when they aren't getting exclusives from anyone else.

6. Nintendo needs some extra manpower and exclusives. In other words, they need to expand. Gaining the capcom development teams as well as their IPs would be a huge boost for them. And would fill in what nintendo is currently missing.

7. To people saying that Nintendo would kiddify capcom's mature IPs. Consider this. Bayonetta 2 and devil's third. Nintendo knows that they need mature franchises so adults will buy their system. They won't down tone resident evil or devil may cry.

8. To people saying that nintendo would ruin street fighter because of their online infrastructure. Go play mario kart 8 online. It's pretty much flawless. If you're worried about the controller gimmicks, use the pro or gamecube controller instead.

9. Finally, Sony wouldn't really be hurt too much by this. Remember, nintendo would still not be getting support from other third parties. This includes Konami, square-enix, EA, rockstar, bethesda, bungie, insomniac, activision, and so on. All of these developers will still flock to Sony to put their games on their system. So there wouldn't be a shortage of games for PS4 by any means. It would balance out.

10. In closing, this just flat out needs to happen. I can't see anything bad coming from this. It would help nintendo and it would help capcom. Plus Nintendo is the only company I trust enough to fully revive Capcom into the fantastic company they used to be.


----------



## jonesman99 (Jun 18, 2014)

What do you guys think if Bandai-Namco were to buy Capcom?


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 18, 2014)

Bryon15 said:


> Wow at what happened in this topic. How did the title change? Anyway I'd like to list more reasons why I think Nintendo should be the ones to get Capcom.
> 
> 1. Many of capcom's franchises that they have neglected would be revived. This includes megaman, breath of fire, resident evil, bionic commando. Plus the IPs that were created by platinum games would also be revived. Like viewtiful joe, okami, devil may cry, godhand. Since platinum games works close with nintendo now.
> 
> ...



The title change was my fault, I merged a USN thread on the same subject and it got lost in the shuffle.

Anyway.
1. Why would they magically get revived? It could happen but historically takeovers tend to see staff and the odd series/IP cherry picked. At best you might get some virtual console type arrangements.

2. Many of those had versions of Nintendo systems, sometimes quite notable ones, but other than megaman most of those were arcades first of all. On Resident Evil, I could see calling those the best, were they the best because of Nintendo or in spite of it?

4. Perhaps, however this is why companies have very expensive lawyers and accountants on staff/retainer and why they make significant contributions to retirement funds of politicians. Likewise it could possibly go like how THQ went and all their various IPs get auctioned off. Maybe something called Capcom would might survive but it would be in the same way Atari, Commodore and Interplay still survive.

5. Is ace attorney an exclusive franchise? I see it on windows and mobile phones these days. Also why would there be no more megaman should Sony get their paws on things?

6. Dev teams are nice, how much they have already done though is a different matter. If you have to wait three years for them to get the games flowing then that might not be ideal.

7. This is an interesting debate to have, censorship is not an all or nothing thing though and I would put reasonable money on Nintendo perhaps not taking risks with such content where the old Capcom folks might have.

8. Having not played MK8 I can not say there but one game does not an online infrastructure make.

9. Not sure what relevance it has -- the fortunes and failings of one megacorporation or another are not so interesting.


----------



## WiiCube_2013 (Jun 18, 2014)

> Well, considering that the original Bayonetta was only released on the PS3 and 360, is it such a surprise that many of its fans are on the successor platforms? People may be fans of the original, but most aren't going to buy a console for one game. Is it really hard to figure out why people may be disappointed?


Those pricks knew from day one of its announcement that Bayonetta 2 was funded exclusively by Nintendo and no one else, so by that alone they could figured it out that it'd never be released on PlayStation, Xbox or PC.

I keep reading "Platinum Games plz release Bayonetta 2 on Xbox (or PlayStation)!!" regardless that they're fully aware unless they've been away from the internet for ages and didn't know about it.

Anyway, I agree that Nintendo should purchase Capcom and then those franchises that they wouldn't make use of they could always put up for sale.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 18, 2014)

WiiCube_2013 said:


> Sure Nintendo is so kiddy that they don't allow bloody violent games.. right? Oh wait.
> Edit: Just because it's a mature game doesn't mean it's actually good (Resident Evil 5, 6).


Both of the examples you've given were covered earlier in the thread. Nobody says that mature games are automatically better than non-mature games, we're discussing Nintendo's attitude towards mature games and whether or not they even sell on Nintendo platforms.



Qtis said:


> Just like Mass Effect 1 never went multiplatform when Microsoft funded the development?


Exactly. The IP belongs to Platinum Games, and unlike publishing deals, this ownership does not magically _"vanish"_ just because Nintendo funded the game. As soon as the publishing deal reaches its _"deadline"_, Platinum Games can do whatever they feel like with Bayonetta 2. When that time comes is a matter of the specifics of the deal they signed with Nintendo.


----------



## KingVamp (Jun 18, 2014)

jonesman99 said:


> What do you guys think if Bandai-Namco were to buy Capcom?


I guess that isn't too bad.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 18, 2014)

KingVamp said:


> I guess that isn't too bad.


Sure, if you want 90% of Capcom's content to become Japan-exclusive.


----------



## WiiCube_2013 (Jun 18, 2014)

KingVamp said:


> I guess that isn't too bad.


 
Turn games into Pay to Play games (Tekken, Soul Calibur, Ridge Racer), make dodgy devs (Dragon Ball Z: Battle of Z) produce the games and franchises which still have a good chunk of fans waiting to get a good game it always turns up a shit one (Dragon Ball -- at least in 2015 we'll have Dimps back for a new Dragon Ball game which is guaranteed to be with seal of quality).

So no, Bandai Namco wouldn't.


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Jun 18, 2014)

I hope Disney buys Capcom so MegaMan can join the Avengers.


----------



## BlackWizzard17 (Jun 18, 2014)

Hyro-Sama said:


> I hope Disney buys Capcom so MegaMan can join the Avengers.


 
'Joins Avengers, beats them all, gains all their powers, become a ultimate fighting robot and shit-stops on galactus'


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 18, 2014)

BlackWizzard17 said:


> 'Joins Avengers, beats them all, gains all their powers, become a ultimate fighting robot and shit-stops on galactus'


...unless he runs into Airman.


----------



## BlackWizzard17 (Jun 18, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> ...unless he runs into Airman.


;o; not Airman


----------



## GameWinner (Jun 18, 2014)

Hyro-Sama said:


> I hope Disney buys Capcom so MegaMan can join the Avengers.


Yes...YES.....YES!!!
Get on it, Disney!


----------



## WiiCube_2013 (Jun 18, 2014)

Hyro-Sama said:


> I hope Disney buys Capcom so MegaMan can join the Avengers.


 
The Mega Man that should join Avengers:


----------



## linuxares (Jun 18, 2014)

Valve will buy Capcom!


----------



## WiiCube_2013 (Jun 18, 2014)

linuxares said:


> Valve will buy Capcom!


 
Because they're doing such a great job with quality control on Steam, ain't it?


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 19, 2014)

Sega should just buy it so we can have Segaman this isn't hard guys.


----------



## Vengenceonu (Jun 19, 2014)

Facebook should buy it!!!



Flame shield activate...


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 19, 2014)

Guild McCommunist said:


> Sega should just buy it so we can have Segaman this isn't hard guys.


We've already had one SEGA man... 



Good night, sweet prince...


----------



## DiscostewSM (Jun 19, 2014)

BlackWizzard17 said:


> 'Joins Avengers, beats them all, gains all their powers, become a ultimate fighting robot and shit-stops on galactus'


 

Absorbs Aquaman's powers, and..........  

Anyways, whatever you feel about Nintendo, I feel they would benefit the most by purchasing Capcom.


----------



## natkoden (Jun 19, 2014)

DiscostewSM said:


> Absorbs Aquaman's powers, and..........
> 
> Anyways, whatever you feel about Nintendo, I feel they would benefit the most by purchasing Capcom.


 
Aquaman is DC...


----------



## DiscostewSM (Jun 19, 2014)

natkoden said:


> Aquaman is DC...


 

Well, now I feel silly....like Aquaman.


----------



## BlackWizzard17 (Jun 19, 2014)

DiscostewSM said:


> Well, now I feel silly....like Aquaman.


 
Don't worry when land gets destroyed and water rules all one man shall live and that man will be......... Auqaman 
Batman


----------



## Skelletonike (Jun 19, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> Both of the examples you've given were covered earlier in the thread. Nobody says that mature games are automatically better than non-mature games, we're discussing Nintendo's attitude towards mature games and whether or not they even sell on Nintendo platforms.
> Exactly. The IP belongs to Platinum Games, and unlike publishing deals, this ownership does not magically _"vanish"_ just because Nintendo funded the game. As soon as the publishing deal reaches its _"deadline"_, Platinum Games can do whatever they feel like with Bayonetta 2. When that time comes is a matter of the specifics of the deal they signed with Nintendo.


 

Well, Platinum has shown interest in becoming Nintendo's second party dev, and while they make pretty good games, they're usually niche games that don't sell a lot (I mean, I loved Infinite Space, but most people have a hard time getting into it). Due to Platinum not having a good sales history, I wonder if Nintendo would be actually interested in buying them out. .-.

Also, what's with that weird blue that I often see in your posts foxi? It makes it hard to read. >.>


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 19, 2014)

They got bought out by Tencent.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=798584

Hope is dead and over.


----------



## GameWinner (Jun 19, 2014)

Guild McCommunist said:


> They got bought out by Tencent.
> 
> http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=798584
> 
> Hope is dead and over.


 
Is Tencent bad or something? Lots of people complaining in the thread.

Edit: Oh, this was back in April.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 19, 2014)

Skelletonike said:


> Well, Platinum has shown interest in becoming Nintendo's second party dev (...)


That's not entirely true. Hideki Kamiya is not interested in becoming an exclusive developer, what he's interested in is working more closely with Nintendo, but of course some journalists like to put a spin on what people say.

Here's Kamiya saying that he's not interested in Platinum Games becoming a second-party developer: http://www.gengame.net/2013/07/kami...-becoming-exclusive-to-a-first-party-company/
Here's Kamiya saying that he would like to work more closely with Nintendo _(which implies funding from them)_: http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/08/29/platinum-games-expresses-desire-for-wonderful-101-sequel


----------



## Skelletonike (Jun 19, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> That's not entirely true. Hideki Kamiya is not interested in becoming an exclusive developer, what he's interested in is working more closely with Nintendo, but of course some journalists like to put a spin on what people say.
> 
> Here's Kamiya saying that he's not interested in Platinum Games becoming a second-party developer: http://www.gengame.net/2013/07/kami...-becoming-exclusive-to-a-first-party-company/
> Here's Kamiya saying that he would like to work more closely with Nintendo _(which implies funding from them)_: http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/08/29/platinum-games-expresses-desire-for-wonderful-101-sequel


 
The one saying he has no interest is nearly one year old though.
Also, being a second party isn't the same as a first party and they still get freedom.

Either way, Kamiya is prone to mood swings and Bayonetta's 2 fate will be a major factor in how this relationship goes.
I wonder who owns the Infinite Space IP though, since Platinum is able to make a new Bayonetta, maybe they could make a new Infinite Space too, despite being published by Sega. D=


----------



## natkoden (Jun 19, 2014)

They got bought for 10 cents

More likely.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 19, 2014)

Skelletonike said:


> Also, being a second party isn't the same as a first party and they still get freedom.


Sure. Freedom to develop Nintendo games and Nintendo games only. _;O;_


----------



## Skelletonike (Jun 19, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> Sure. Freedom to develop Nintendo games and Nintendo games only. _;O;_


If you mean for Nintendo systems, sure, but these second party dev's from Nintendo make some new IP's once in a while.


----------



## Dork (Jun 19, 2014)

Guild McCommunist said:


> They got bought out by Tencent.
> 
> http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=798584
> 
> Hope is dead and over.


OH GOD DAMMIT NO


Spoiler



What is Tencent?


----------



## Nathan Drake (Jun 19, 2014)

Dark S. said:


> OH GOD DAMMIT NO
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...


It doesn't really matter because that's an old, locked thread from April. From what I can gather though, Tencent is a cheap Chinese electronics manufacturer.


----------



## KingVamp (Jun 19, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> Sure, if you want 90% of Capcom's content to become Japan-exclusive.


 


WiiCube_2013 said:


> Turn games into Pay to Play games (Tekken, Soul Calibur, Ridge Racer), make dodgy devs (Dragon Ball Z: Battle of Z) produce the games and franchises which still have a good chunk of fans waiting to get a good game it always turns up a shit one (Dragon Ball -- at least in 2015 we'll have Dimps back for a new Dragon Ball game which is guaranteed to be with seal of quality).
> 
> So no, Bandai Namco wouldn't.


Never mind. lol


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 19, 2014)

Nathan Drake said:


> It doesn't really matter because that's an old, locked thread from April. From what I can gather though, Tencent is a cheap Chinese electronics manufacturer.



Tencent is a bit more than that... in basically the same way that google is just a little advertising company. Indeed money and clout wise they in the top five of internet companies (as in Google, Amazon, Ebay, Facebook and then tencent).

They run the Chinese equivalent of facebook (it is called qzone, though most confuse it with the IM client that is tied in with it), they run one of the more popular IM services (it is called QQ, and it is actually one of the best IM clients I have ever used) and they do a lot of things in between. They have a search engine but it is probably not the most popular (that is probably still Baidu). Oh and at least for a while they performed the miracle of getting people to pay for mobile access to qzone so they actually made profit on a social network. Technically there is still actually quite a bit of competition in China for internet services so I am pushing it by using terms like "equivalent of".

Lately, though technically for a long time they have been, they do the investment company bit and own a bit of Epic, a large chunk of the people that make League of Legends, possible still a bit of Activision Blizzard (they were an investor in their buyback) and quite a bit more besides. They do a lot of mobile and social games as well.


----------



## cracker (Jun 19, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> I would hate it if Nintendo took over Capcom - the company has many mature IP's like Resident Evil, Dead Rising, Devil May Cry etc. which would fall into the realm of obscurity or misuse with Nintendo's PC-friendly management looming over the developers.



QFT!


----------



## Gahars (Jun 19, 2014)

Nathan Drake said:


> It doesn't really matter because that's an old, locked thread from April. From what I can gather though, Tencent is a cheap Chinese electronics manufacturer.


 

IIRC, Tencent is the company that owns Riot, which is the company that makes League of Legends.

So ech.


----------



## TheCasketMan (Jun 19, 2014)

linuxares said:


> Valve will buy Capcom!


 

Megaman Legends "3" would stay dead.


----------



## Taleweaver (Jun 19, 2014)

natkoden said:


> They got bought for 10 cents
> 
> More likely.


Next up on humble bundle: get these awesome indie games (some of which debuting in linux)...and if you beat the average, you'll get one infamous game development company with it!


----------



## VMM (Jun 29, 2014)

I see a lot of people asking Nintendo to buy Capcom and I'm like: Really?!
Nintendo barely uses it's franchises, if uyou see already a lot of people complaining about no F-Zero,
imagine that together with Megaman.

The best would be if a third party company bought it,
but I would be fine if Sony bought it, their studios have shown how capable they are,
I think Sony would know how to treat Capcom IP's properly.


----------

