Speculation Game Freak Removes Creatures Inc. from Major Business Partners on its Website

[Bolt Strike]

Game Freak Removes Creatures Inc From List Of Major Business Partners | NintendoSoup

Game Freak has recently updated their website, and strangely, Creatures Inc. has been removed as one of their business partners. For those not aware, Creatures owns a 1/3 share in The Pokemon Company (and consequently, the Pokemon IP) and are primarily responsible for designing the models in the games, managing merchandise for the series, and some spinoff games. So this is a pretty striking omission on Game Freak's part. Could a shakeup in Pokemon's business structure be on the way or is something else going on? Discuss.

 

[Kallyle]

I have a sneaking suspicion that this might be the real reason behind Dexit.

 

[Phosphene]

Game Freak has recently updated their website, and strangely, Creatures Inc. has been removed as one of their business partners... Creatures owns a 1/3 share in The Pokemon Company (and consequently, the Pokemon IP) and are primarily responsible for designing the models in the games... Could a shakeup in Pokemon's business structure be on the way...?

I remember one of the developers for SwSh said that they had to remake the models from scratch. I wonder if that has anything to do with this.

 

[Silktree]

Creatures is still very much behind the TCG while co-owning TPC, so this seems like an oversight. How is it not a partner while Shogakukan is?

I remember one of the developers for SwSh said that they had to remake the models from scratch. I wonder if that has anything to do with this.

It's hard to say because Ohmori wasn't telling the truth, or at least he was misunderstood. We all know that only the textures underwent any (somewhat) noticeable changes.

 

[Bolt Strike]

Creatures is still very much behind the TCG while co-owning TPC, so this seems like an oversight. How is it not a partner while Shogakukan is?

If it's an oversight, why hasn't it been corrected by now? This story is two weeks old and it's been reported on by multiple news sources. If they weren't aware they forgot to list a major partner, they should be well aware now. Their reasons for removing Creatures seem to be very much intentional.

What I think might be happening is that Nintendo is making a move to acquire Creatures' share in TPC. Despite the high sales of SwSh, Nintendo cannot be happy with what's transpired for this game's development and reception. Nintendo highly values quality and is very gamer friendly, so they don't really want Pokemon to continue pushing out cyncial, low budget entries as they are. If Nintendo gains majority control over the brand, then they can go about fixing the issues with Dexit and pour more time/resources into the games. I wasn't really sure Nintendo had the means to do this, but this might be evidence that they're actually doing this.

 

[Silktree]

I think that's wishful thinking, and Nintendo certainly isn't replacing Creatures as far as the TCG is concerned (which is reason enough for Creatures to be considered a partner).

If Nintendo bought out Creatures' shares, wouldn't that make a bigger splash than this news about Game Freak's website? Shareholders would want to know about it. More likely than not, the page omitted Creatures because it's already included in TPC, which is listed (the page also dropped one of Shogakukan's subsidiaries). Nintendo is listed separately, but well, it's a bigger company than TPC.

Also, Creatures really shouldn't be a scapegoat for Dexit. The decision was made by TPC as a whole, including Nintendo.

 

[Bolt Strike]

I think that's wishful thinking, and Nintendo certainly isn't replacing Creatures as far as the TCG is concerned (which is reason enough for Creatures to be considered a partner).

Eh, I don't really think the TCG is significant enough to warrant being a "partner" especially when Game Freak's role is focused on the games. If need be though, don't rule out the possibility of Nintendo taking over the TCG. Remember that Nintendo got its start selling hanafuda cards, and it still considers itself a toy company even when its focus has shifted to video games. Furthermore, they're eager to come up with new ways to leverage their brands and come up with new ways to play, and taking over the TCG could offer a unique way to tie it in with the Pokemon games. Maybe they could make Amiibo compatible Pokemon cards that would work with the games?

If Nintendo bought out Creatures' shares, wouldn't that make a bigger splash than this news about Game Freak's website? Shareholders would want to know about it.

They might not be ready to announce the acquisition yet.

More likely than not, the page omitted Creatures because it's already included in TPC, which is listed (the page also dropped one of Shogakukan's subsidiaries). Nintendo is listed separately, but well, it's a bigger company than TPC.

Bigger company or not, it's pretty redundant and contradictory to list them twice.

Also, Creatures really shouldn't be a scapegoat for Dexit.

Actually Creatures is a perfectly sensible scapegoat for Dexit. The main excuse given for Dexit was needing to create high quality models. Who makes those models? Creatures. They're probably also the ones pushing for a yearly release schedule as well since they make more money on merchandise and spinoffs and they would benefit more from having frequent releases constantly giving them new material on the cheap.

The decision was made by TPC as a whole, including Nintendo.

Remember that TPC is made up of three separate entities. Just because Nintendo is one of them doesn't mean they agreed with the decision. Most likely they were overruled by Creatures (who doesn't really seem to care about the quality of the games and just wants to make money) and Game Freak (who doesn't want to scale up because they want to operate like an indie company). Look at how Nintendo operates with the IPs it fully owns and the way Pokemon is being treated goes against their MO, so they're probably not the ones driving these decisions.

 

[EncyExit]

This could lead to a lot. Can't wait to see what happens

 

[Poke Dragon]

I do hope that Nintendo does buy Creatures Inc., but whether that's what happened remains to be seen. Pokemon is not the only franchise that will benefit from that, the ever-elusive third game in the Earthbound/Mother series, Mother 3 would actually have a better chance to come out in the west. In terms of what Pokemon can benefit from, Nintendo would have the larger say and actually make Creatures Inc. and Game Freak actually take much needed years off in order to better develop the games. Remember, Animal Crossing New Horizons was originally a 2019 release, but the game was delayed to 2020 so it can become a much better product in the end. That's the mindset that TPC should have with Pokemon.

 

[prog rocker]

I do hope that Nintendo does buy Creatures Inc., but whether that's what happened remains to be seen. Pokemon is not the only franchise that will benefit from that, the ever-elusive third game in the Earthbound/Mother series, Mother 3 would actually have a better chance to come out in the west. In terms of what Pokemon can benefit from, Nintendo would have the larger say and actually make Creatures Inc. and Game Freak actually take much needed years off in order to better develop the games. Remember, Animal Crossing New Horizons was originally a 2019 release, but the game was delayed to 2020 so it can become a much better product in the end. That's the mindset that TPC should have with Pokemon.

Aside from not trusting Nintendo with RPGs (thanks Sticker Star!), I don't think it will lead to better chances for a localized Mother 3, specially seeing how it was Brownie Brown (now 1-Up Studio) the one that handled those games and even rejecting Clyde Mandelin's help. The fact that they have not even tried to translate it even after Mother and EarthBound proved to be successes in the Virtual Console doesn't help.

...This comes from a Mother fan that has been disappointed time and time again (the corycory2000 incident was the worse).

 

[Yami-no-Game]

I've never even known how Creatures Inc. relates to Gamefreak and the game development overall. Like, should I blame them for how crappy the recent Gens have been?

 

[Silktree]

Just to be absolutely clear, Creatures are still working on the TCG.

Eh, I don't really think the TCG is significant enough to warrant being a "partner" especially when Game Freak's role is focused on the games

Explain Shogakukan. They're behind CoroCoro and books, not game production.

The main excuse given for Dexit was needing to create high quality models. Who makes those models? Creatures.

Masuda: I think it’s fair to say that both are involved. I mean, in any design situation, resources and time are always a constraint on what you can do in a project. But at the same time from a creative perspective, it’s part of a discussion we’ve had at Game Freak with Nintendo and The Pokémon Company, and we came to the decision that, at some point, we need to be able to prioritize new gameplay ideas. We need to be able to find a way to balance the right number of Pokémon and also still introduce new ways for players to enjoy the game, new gameplay ideas to keep the series fresh and enjoyable far into the future.

Considering that Creatures have never been involved with "new gameplay ideas", you can read between the lines that Masuda isn't being sincere. They made a decision with Nintendo and TPC (so yes, Creatures too), but it probably had to do with Home and forcing people to buy yearly games rather than just one entry per generation.

Nintendo would have the larger say and actually make Creatures Inc. and Game Freak actually take much needed years off in order to better develop the games. Remember, Animal Crossing New Horizons was originally a 2019 release, but the game was delayed to 2020 so it can become a much better product in the end. That's the mindset that TPC should have with Pokemon.

Nintendo are the ones benefitting the most from SwSh right now due to the increased hardware sales. Do you really believe they would have two delayed two big games in the same year? And Metroid to boot... They probably delayed both that and Animal Crossing because they knew they had Pokemon to fall on, their only near-annual series that affords them the luxury of pouring more love into other franchises.

I've never even known how Creatures Inc. relates to Gamefreak and the game development overall. Like, should I blame them for how crappy the recent Gens have been?

No. People are just looking for an easy scapegoat, but Creatures are the ones behind the fairly decent Pokemon models. They're also perfectly capable of handling 4-year generations as they keep doing new things with old Pokemon.

 

[Bolt Strike]

Nintendo are the ones benefitting the most from SwSh right now due to the increased hardware sales. Do you really believe they would have two delayed two big games in the same year? And Metroid to boot... They probably delayed both that and Animal Crossing because they knew they had Pokemon to fall on, their only near-annual series that affords them the luxury of pouring more love into other franchises.

Nintendo doesn't need Pokemon to sell consoles. It certainly helps, yes, but they don't need them. The Switch was selling like hotcakes even in 2017 before the main games made the jump. And no, the presence of other holiday titles has nothing to do with their decision to delay a game, they just delay a game when they don't think it's good enough to hit the market. We saw this with BotW on the Wii U, the Wii U was hurting for big holiday titles and Nintendo pretty much had nothing for the 2015 and 2016 season, but they delayed it anyway. So no, Nintendo doesn't operate purely on sales, and its actions back up the notion that it actually does care about quality. It's unlikely that this is how they actually want to handle the Pokemon series, they're probably only going along with it because this is what Game Freak and Creatures want and they'd rather go along with what they're doing and make the money they're actually getting than stir the pot, scare them off Nintendo, and lose out. However, if they had majority or complete control over the Pokemon IP, they'd probably treat this series VERY differently, probably closer to how they treat Mario and Zelda. With frequent releases designed to make money, yes, but also with creative, high quality games that push the envelope of what the series can do in a positive way. So they would definitely have motive to muscle in on Creatures' share of TPC, after the controversy behind SwSh they're probably itching to align Pokemon more with its core values.

 

[Poke Dragon]

If anything, Nintendo buying Creatures Inc. will also have the chance of Monolith Soft helping the development of some Pokemon games. I say that's a positive since Monolith Soft is the developer of the Xenoblade series and those games are known to be masterpieces, heck, Monolith Soft themselves were involved in the development of Breath of the Wild, Splatoon 2's Octo Expansion and other Nintendo games where characters have great interactions and storytelling. So really, Pokemon will only have good things if Nintendo has more control over TPC than Game Freak.

 

[Esserise]

Nintendo doesn't need Pokemon to sell consoles. It certainly helps, yes, but they don't need them.

Then why should they make any effort to get involved in Pokémon's development? If they're doing fine on their own, then what they get from Pokémon is just icing on the cake. Pokémon itself is, by the metrics that matter, doing perfectly fine as well, weathering any splash from the Dexit hashtag and cranking out yet another commercial/critical success while sticking to the exact same design ideology they've been operating on for at least six years now. Nothing about the situation has changed to such a degree that would prompt Nintendo to make such a brazen intervention. As long as they keep inputting their "values" into their own core IPs to keep fans of those games pleased, it doesn't really matter what they do with Pokémon, because the numbers say that Game Freak's approach to Pokémon is still working as well as it ever did.

 

[Bolt Strike]

Then why should they make any effort to get involved in Pokémon's development? If they're doing fine on their own, then what they get from Pokémon is just icing on the cake. Pokémon itself is, by the metrics that matter, doing perfectly fine as well, weathering any splash from the Dexit hashtag and cranking out yet another commercial/critical success while sticking to the exact same design ideology they've been operating on for at least six years now. Nothing about the situation has changed to such a degree that would prompt Nintendo to make such a brazen intervention. As long as they keep inputting their "values" into their own core IPs to keep fans of those games pleased, it doesn't really matter what they do with Pokémon, because the numbers say that Game Freak's approach to Pokémon is still working as well as it ever did.

Again, it's about more than just sales for Nintendo. Nintendo greatly values high quality, fun experiences and so they're very protective of the reputation of their IPs and care about gamer feedback. And as some of the situations I've pointed out above show, they're even willing to do this as the expense of profit. Nintendo is likely looking at this through the same lens many of us are, the games aren't getting the time/effort/resources even after the jump to the Switch and they really need a AAA look and feel to it to be the most fun and satisfying way to play Pokemon on the Switch. No, there's no business reason for them to do so, but there doesn't need to be in Nintendo's eyes. Even the massive controversy in the fanbase is enough for them to want to intervene.

 

[RileyXY1]

Again, it's about more than just sales for Nintendo. Nintendo greatly values high quality, fun experiences and so they're very protective of the reputation of their IPs and care about gamer feedback. And as some of the situations I've pointed out above show, they're even willing to do this as the expense of profit. Nintendo is likely looking at this through the same lens many of us are, the games aren't getting the time/effort/resources even after the jump to the Switch and they really need a AAA look and feel to it to be the most fun and satisfying way to play Pokemon on the Switch. No, there's no business reason for them to do so, but there doesn't need to be in Nintendo's eyes. Even the massive controversy in the fanbase is enough for them to want to intervene.

Sword & Shield sold very well despite the massive uproar that the games caused. If they flopped then it would be a different story.

 

[Poke Dragon]

Sword & Shield sold very well despite the massive uproar that the games caused. If they flopped then it would be a different story.

However, unlike Game Freak, Nintendo actually cares about the quality of their games. This can be seen even before that statement about Animal Crossing New Horizons being delayed to 2020 so it can be the best game it can so its quality would become much better in the end. It's the main and possibly the sole reason why Metroid Prime 4 restarted its development cycle and why Breath of the Wild took the entirety of the Wii U's lifespan to be released. Whether the game is successful or not is irrelevant when talking about the quality of Nintendo games.

 

[PkmnTrainerV]

I refuse to believe that Dexit was passed through without Nintendo wanting it to. Nintendo knew, and were a part of the decision and to believe otherwise is pretty ridiculous imo.

 

[Esserise]

Again, it's about more than just sales for Nintendo. Nintendo greatly values high quality, fun experiences and so they're very protective of the reputation of their IPs and care about gamer feedback. And as some of the situations I've pointed out above show, they're even willing to do this as the expense of profit. Nintendo is likely looking at this through the same lens many of us are, the games aren't getting the time/effort/resources even after the jump to the Switch and they really need a AAA look and feel to it to be the most fun and satisfying way to play Pokemon on the Switch. No, there's no business reason for them to do so, but there doesn't need to be in Nintendo's eyes. Even the massive controversy in the fanbase is enough for them to want to intervene.

That strikes me as an awful lot of faith to have in businessmen who just want your money.

For all that the online fandom constantly complains about the things that are frequently cited as problems with Game Freak's current approach to game design (linearity, lack of side-content, lack of post-game content, "handholding," games are too easy, etc. etc.), people have by now had no fewer than five opportunities to vote with their wallets, and have continued to tell Game Freak and Nintendo that what's being put out does constitute a fun and satisfying experience for the majority of them, and that what a lot of people on forums are looking for just isn't essential to that. Changes in how the games are constructed have not put a single dent in the games' profitability. Other than USUM, every new installment since 2013 has outdone previous entries or broken records of some kind. X & Y remain the second-best-selling 3DS games, followed immediately by Sun & Moon (which were the fastest-selling 3DS titles at their time) and Omega Ruby & Alpha Sapphire (which outsold all other remakes). Let's Go are the most stripped-down Pokémon games since then and they're still right beneath Breath of the freaking Wild. Pokémon games have continued to compete with the best that Nintendo has to offer even without a "AAA look and feel," which I would say is not something that Pokémon has ever been known for or really expected to have in the first place.

As far as reputations go, Dexit feels to me like the only issue worth considering, although we've actually had two games on the Switch now that were sold at a 50% price increase while offering only a playable fraction of the entire Pokémon roster, and the only group I've seen accused of anything particularly negative have been Game Freak, whom people seem to have finally correctly identified as the ones responsible for making the Pokémon games. All that Nintendo is doing is giving the games a platform - I don't think their reputation is the one at stake here, as long as their own products continue to meet the expectations that they've set for themselves. And even if Pokémon did reach a point at which the public view of it became overtly unfavorable or pessimistic, I doubt that the primary expectation for a resolution to that would be for a partial corporate takeover by Nintendo rather than a rearranging of Game Freak's schedule and resources with Nintendo perhaps providing some contributions. (Although as far as we've been told, they did greenlight Dexit. That said, does any one of us here actually know who has the most say when it comes to establishing Game Freak's budget and schedule for a game? Those seem to me like the main things to blame for Dexit, and I would sooner suspect TPC or Game Freak themselves than Nintendo when it comes to that. Nintendo might be okay with delaying a game, but maybe Game Freak (a relatively smaller studio who probably enjoy the regular income) or TPC (whose multimedia production cycle seems to have ossified into a steady three-year routine) are less comfortable with that prospect.)