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

[Bolt Strike]

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.

Well I refuse to believe that Nintendo could've possibly wanted SwSh to be this rushed and unpolished. Nintendo may very well have agreed about Dexit (although do we even know that much? Nintendo didn't have to agree to anything if Game Freak and Creatures said yes anyway), it's hard to disagree with Masuda that Dexit was an inevitability (I mean who is going to be able to include 1000 high quality models). Still though, the issues go far beyond Dexit, Dexit is just the surface of the controversy. The larger issue is the lack of content and polish behind it and the general feeling that the game felt like one step forward and two steps back. Maybe Dexit would've been easier to swallow if they'd have improved something else to compensate, but little else in the game feels tangibly improved (except for the Wild Area, which still pales in comparison to open areas or even open worlds in other console games), and the whole game just feels like less bang for more buck. Now if Nintendo had handled the game themselves, sure you might still have Dexit, but Nintendo would be much better at softening the blow and improving the game in other areas to make it really feel like the best Switch Pokemon experience we could've possibly gotten in the same way that BotW feels like the best Zelda experience we could've possibly gotten, Super Mario Odyssey feels like the best 3D Mario experience we could've possibly gotten, Smash Ultimate feels like the best Smash Bros experience we could've possibly gotten, etc. Looking at how Nintendo's other IPs are approaching the Switch and how Pokemon are approaching the Switch, it's hard to believe Pokemon is significantly worse for any reason other than Nintendo not having full/majority control over Pokemon.

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

It's not a matter of faith, it's a matter of past precedent. Nintendo's made multiple moves that weren't necessarily the best business decisions but resulted in higher quality games, such as the examples cited in previous posts. So it's easy to draw a conclusion that Nintendo doesn't see the high sales of Pokemon as a deterrent to future changes.

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.

Most people are blaming Game Freak and TPC, but a few people do mention Nintendo. So there are some people who don't know that they're not the cause of the issue. Still though, Pokemon is a Nintendo exclusive IP, and one that's pretty close to being a first party IP (and it's very easy to mistake it for one). So Nintendo's reputation can still take a hit by virtue of this game being strongly associated with Nintendo.

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.

The last part of this statement explains exactly why a takeover from Nintendo is necessary. Because Game Freak and Creatures seem to have no interest in devoting more time and resources, Nintendo is going to need to muscle in on Game Freak and Creatures' share to make it happen. Otherwise they'll just overrule Nintendo.

 

[RileyXY1]

Well I refuse to believe that Nintendo could've possibly wanted SwSh to be this rushed and unpolished. Nintendo may very well have agreed about Dexit (although do we even know that much? Nintendo didn't have to agree to anything if Game Freak and Creatures said yes anyway), it's hard to disagree with Masuda that Dexit was an inevitability (I mean who is going to be able to include 1000 high quality models). Still though, the issues go far beyond Dexit, Dexit is just the surface of the controversy. The larger issue is the lack of content and polish behind it and the general feeling that the game felt like one step forward and two steps back. Maybe Dexit would've been easier to swallow if they'd have improved something else to compensate, but little else in the game feels tangibly improved (except for the Wild Area, which still pales in comparison to open areas or even open worlds in other console games), and the whole game just feels like less bang for more buck. Now if Nintendo had handled the game themselves, sure you might still have Dexit, but Nintendo would be much better at softening the blow and improving the game in other areas to make it really feel like the best Switch Pokemon experience we could've possibly gotten in the same way that BotW feels like the best Zelda experience we could've possibly gotten, Super Mario Odyssey feels like the best 3D Mario experience we could've possibly gotten, Smash Ultimate feels like the best Smash Bros experience we could've possibly gotten, etc. Looking at how Nintendo's other IPs are approaching the Switch and how Pokemon are approaching the Switch, it's hard to believe Pokemon is significantly worse for any reason other than Nintendo not having full/majority control over Pokemon.



It's not a matter of faith, it's a matter of past precedent. Nintendo's made multiple moves that weren't necessarily the best business decisions but resulted in higher quality games, such as the examples cited in previous posts. So it's easy to draw a conclusion that Nintendo doesn't see the high sales of Pokemon as a deterrent to future changes.



Most people are blaming Game Freak and TPC, but a few people do mention Nintendo. So there are some people who don't know that they're not the cause of the issue. Still though, Pokemon is a Nintendo exclusive IP, and one that's pretty close to being a first party IP (and it's very easy to mistake it for one). So Nintendo's reputation can still take a hit by virtue of this game being strongly associated with Nintendo.



The last part of this statement explains exactly why a takeover from Nintendo is necessary. Because Game Freak and Creatures seem to have no interest in devoting more time and resources, Nintendo is going to need to muscle in on Game Freak and Creatures' share to make it happen. Otherwise they'll just overrule Nintendo.

Sword and Shield sold very well so I think that they are just going to let Game Freak continue what they're doing because it makes money. I don't think that they would intervene unless a Pokemon main series game were to outright flop.

 

[PkmnTrainerV]

although do we even know that much? Nintendo didn't have to agree to anything if Game Freak and Creatures said yes anyway

Don’t they literally publish the games? There would've been issues if Nintendo didn’t like how things were going.

 

[Bolt Strike]

Don’t they literally publish the games? There would've been issues if Nintendo didn’t like how things were going.

And what could they have done about it? They only have a 1/3 share in the IP, they can't force them to make the games better. The only thing they could've done is refuse to put the game on Switch if they don't improve, and if they did that they'd just go to PS4, Xbox, and/or mobile. And that would be even worse. Nintendo's caught in a no win situation by only having 1/3 share in Pokemon, they need majority or full control over the IP to really enforce changes in scheduling and budget. Just being the platform holder isn't enough leverage.

 

[Poke Dragon]

Developing is never the same as publishing, remember, Alpha Dream were the developers of the Mario and Luigi series, Nintendo was just the publisher of the games. This is the same deal with Kirby where another studious develop the games while Nintendo publishes them. It shouldn't come to a surprise that Pokemon is another one.

 

[RK9]

However, unlike Game Freak, Nintendo actually cares about the quality of their games.

Man, oh man.

GameFreak has already very vaguely implied on earlier occassions that if it were solely up to them, they wouldn't be doing annual releases. It's Nintendo and TPCi basically holding a gun to their head to get it out there every year for money.

That said, Dexit is likely something all 3 parties ultimately had a hand in. Question is more, is there one party that shoves it down the throat of the other 2 parties or 2 parties that force it on the minority party (In this GameFreak cause they've said on multiple occassions they'd find it hard to cut Pokémon out of the games on their own volition).

 

[Poke Dragon]

GameFreak has already very vaguely implied on earlier occassions that if it were solely up to them, they wouldn't be doing annual releases.

Try saying that when there has been countless pleas from fans to take a year off. And besides, Nintendo isn't aware about the development cycle of Pokemon games, so off course they don't know how complete the games are. Nintendo would've most likely told Game Freak to develop the game further rather than release it as soon as possible. Besides, Creatures Inc is likely the one forcing Game Freak to release a game every year, not Nintendo.

 

[RileyXY1]

Try saying that when there has been countless pleas from fans to take a year off. And besides, Nintendo isn't aware about the development cycle of Pokemon games, so off course they don't know how complete the games are. Nintendo would've most likely told Game Freak to develop the game further rather than release it as soon as possible. Besides, Creatures Inc is likely the one forcing Game Freak to release a game every year, not Nintendo.

Nintendo also is as well, to some extent. Sword and Shield needed to be out in November because Nintendo had no other big exclusive games to release in Holiday 2019.

 

[Poke Dragon]

Nintendo also is as well, to some extent. Sword and Shield needed to be out in November because Nintendo had no other big exclusive games to release in Holiday 2019.

Still doesn't make Nintendo aware of the Pokemon game development seeing they have many other projects to worry about all the time.

 

[Bolt Strike]

GameFreak has already very vaguely implied on earlier occassions that if it were solely up to them, they wouldn't be doing annual releases. It's Nintendo and TPCi basically holding a gun to their head to get it out there every year for money.

[citation needed]

That said, Dexit is likely something all 3 parties ultimately had a hand in. Question is more, is there one party that shoves it down the throat of the other 2 parties or 2 parties that force it on the minority party (In this GameFreak cause they've said on multiple occassions they'd find it hard to cut Pokémon out of the games on their own volition).

Considering how businesses typically work by majority rule, probably the latter. And no, it's probably Creatures and Game Freak vs. Nintendo.

 

[Daenerys]

I'm not sure if this is a good thing or not, but I can't believe some of y'all are pushing Gamefreak under the bus while praising Nintendo despite us knowing how greedy and unreasonable Nintendo has been regarding releasing Pokemon games as frequently as possible to make some quick cash. They're essentially slave drivers who keep pressuring Gamefreak to make the games quicker, which probably contributes to drastic decisions on Gamefreak's part like Dexit as a way to cut corners and make the games less tedious to produce.

 

[Poke Dragon]

Game Freak has been notorious for cutting content for the last few generations. The act of having only Kanto Pokemon + Meltan and Melmetal in LGPE usable should already show you how Game Freak refuses to just give us the ability to use every single Pokemon with each other ever again. If they couldn't be bothered with Pokedex entries, then they could've at least have given us the ability to use the Pokemon anyways. It's not a big loss if they would've only sacrificed the entries. Moreover, many other Nintendo games developed by other studious don't come out yearly, so this clearly isn't Nintendo's doing. Don't go automatically blaming the parent company for all of the excuses that the actual developer (Game Freak) keep pulling.

 

[prog rocker]

I'm still not convinced with Nintendo, again, thanks to what they did to the RPGs they had a direct hand in doing (the M&L and Paper Mario series).

 

[RK9]

It's a shame to see many people already have their minds set on GameFreak being the big bad here and use them as Scapegoat while Nintendo of all parties get off free.

Nintendo is centered around making money(Like every big company. What a surprise). They don't give a Raticate's ass about the quality of the games cause Pokémon makes them insane money, regardless of what's being put out in terms of content, why else would Pokémon need to be released annually.

Like, the fact people have GameFreak as their scapegoat and don't move away from it severely damages a potential discussion about it all cause it just boils down to "IT'S ALL GAMEFREAK. THEY ONLY WANT MONEY. THEY DON'T CARE." And it's just... tiring, to say the least.

 

[The Outrage]

Try saying that when there has been countless pleas from fans to take a year off. And besides, Nintendo isn't aware about the development cycle of Pokemon games, so off course they don't know how complete the games are. Nintendo would've most likely told Game Freak to develop the game further rather than release it as soon as possible. Besides, Creatures Inc is likely the one forcing Game Freak to release a game every year, not Nintendo.

Pleas from fans on online forums versus people continuing to spend actual money. They're gonna focus on consumer behaviour rather than a subset of qualitative online responses.

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.)

Game Freak has no other games that would keep them afloat and given how Little Town Hero is doing, and how Game Freak doesn't seem interested in hiring more people to work on the game (or even work on Pokemon along with other games they want to develop) I'm gonna say it's primarily Game Freak that's most financially motivated to push a new game out every year. Other aspects of the franchise like the TCG and the anime can sustain themselves longer within the same generation.

The 1-year cycle probably killed off any good non-mobile spin-off games too since Pokemon fans usually buy those during the down time between games. Now there aren't any and we're all expecting to save up for a new main series game each year.

 

[Deleted member 116266]

Too bad. It's a such good game. Yeah there are weak points, but still a solid game.

 

[Silktree]

I wouldn't go around assigning blame to any particular company rather than all three. They've all benefited from the current release schedule.

 

[Bolt Strike]

So many people here are quick to assume that Nintendo is responsible for this. Look around you at what they've done with their other IPs that they actually own and develop, like Mario and Zelda. Are they yearly releases with a decreasing amount of content? No. You might see Mario and Zelda very frequently, but they don't release them EVERY SINGLE YEAR and they don't cheap out on their flagship entries to make money. They go all out. They mix things up.

The closest Nintendo has ever come to what Game Freak has done was the NSMB games and 3D Land/3D World games in the early 2010s. Those games were extremely low effort/low budget games coming out on a yearly basis. You'd be forgiven for thinking that we'd be getting them from then until the end of time, they sold better than some of the more creative Mario games in the series so it certainly would've been the best business move for them. But guess what? Fans complained and despite the sales they stopped doing that. They mixed things up with Super Mario Maker and Super Mario Odyssey when they didn't need to, and we haven't seen a single NSMB or 3D series game aside from a Switch port of NSMBU. So if they went through the trouble of doing that for Mario, another of their extremely profitable IPs, it's hard to believe they wouldn't for Pokemon. Hence, this release schedule is probably not Nintendo's doing, it's probably Game Freak and Creatures.

I'm still not convinced with Nintendo, again, thanks to what they did to the RPGs they had a direct hand in doing (the M&L and Paper Mario series).

What exactly did they screw up with M&L? Are you talking about AlphaDream going bankrupt? Nintendo doesn't have much to do with that, if the company can't make money that's more their own fault. Paper Mario is a little more questionable, I'll give you that, Nintendo was probably being hands off with Intelligent Systems when they didn't need to be. But I have a feeling they'll step in for the next Paper Mario and make it more RPG focused like people want after all of the complaints over Sticker Star and Color Splash. Nintendo doesn't really have a "direct hand" in these IPs either. They have more ownership over them than Pokemon, but they don't develop them so the issues probably have more to do with AlphaDream and Intelligent Systems than Nintendo.

 

[Poke Dragon]

Why can't many people here draw the difference between Developer and Publisher? Game Freak and Creatures Inc. are the developers, Nintendo is the publisher when it comes to Pokemon. Just because the publisher's name is at one of the bottom corners of the box art doesn't mean they are the developer.

 

[KrisiChiki]

If anything, it's at least fun to speculate and discuss. Let's be honest, we don't have inside knowledge on how exactly Game Freak, Creatures, TPC and Nintendo work. We don't know exactly who or how many people are involved in making decisions over the games. We can only look at their past history and make a guess.

Having said that, I am, admittedly, inclined to believe @Bolt the Cat because I imagine Nintendo would like to have games with positive reception on their consoles, especially on the Switch. After the Wii U era, they made sure to reach out to various developers in hopes they will support and develop games for the Switch.

A part of me is surprised Nintendo didn't try to delay SWSH after the controversy it spawned. Maybe they really didn't care, maybe they knew SWSH will sell well regardless or maybe they did care but couldn't do anything about it because they were overruled by Creatures and Game Freak. It's all speculation, like I said, so this is just me choosing to believe one thing over another.

Just to make it clear; this isn't meant to be hate towards Game Freak or Creatures. I still respect their work and honestly? If they found out they can cut corners so they can afford yearly releases and the games still sell incredibly well, good for them. I don't agree with that and I will not buy the games that I consider lackluster, but good for them. Assuming this is their doing, but in reality I don't know who is at "fault". At this point we can only hope for the best and wait to see what will happen from now on.