Author Topic: Should Nintendo Buy SEGA? (Read 23475 times)

Kytim89 · « **on:** July 23, 2012, 04:09:23 PM »

With the recent financial turmoil that SEGA has experienced their long term health is in question. So, would there ever be a chance that Nintendo would buyout SEGA? SEGA could still remain an independant company, but would have the financial backing of Nintendo. The QA from Nintendo assure that SEGA's IPs would get better iterations, and Nintendo themselves could benefit from having more hardcore franchises under their belt.

broodwars · « **Reply #1 on:** July 23, 2012, 04:20:20 PM »

I don't know if Nintendo would bother buying SEGA. Aside from Sonic, I'm not sure there's a franchise SEGA has that Nintendo would actually see value in. SEGA's mismanaged itself for too long, and its non-Sonic franchises have suffered for it so their value to prospective buyers could be suspect.

Should they buy SEGA, though? I'd rather they didn't, because I don't think Nintendo would have any interest in continuing most of SEGA's brands. There are franchises like Valkyria Chronicles or Sakura Wars that I could see Nintendo acquiring for the sheer purposes of making sure they don't exist anymore to compete w/ Nintendo's own (like Fire Emblem or Advance Wars). Square-Enix has followed a similar strategy with studios they have acquired.

I'd rather a company acquire SEGA that would actually do something good with their properties, though at the moment I'm struggling to think of one. Square-Enix already has its hands in too many projects; Atlus simply isn't big enough; and Sony has financial troubles of their own. Ubisoft would acquire SEGA's studios just to have more manpower to throw at Assassin's Creed, and EA probably wouldn't know what to do with all those non-shooter franchises.

It's probably best for all involved if SEGA just had completely new, different, and (most importantly) competent leadership for once, so they could have a chance to recover into a stable company again.

Chozo Ghost · « **Reply #2 on:** July 23, 2012, 04:47:20 PM »

Instead of buying Sega entirely, they should do what they did with Rare and buy a 49% stake and make them a 2nd party which makes games exclusively for Nintendo hardware and have Miyamoto and other Nintendo experts supervise them and ensure the quality of the games is of the utmost.

Khushrenada · « **Reply #3 on:** July 23, 2012, 05:01:38 PM »

It's an interesting idea. If the staff from Amusement Vision is still around, it might be worth it. They were responsible for the Monkey Ball series on Cube and in collaboration with Nintendo made my favorite cube game, F-Zero GX.

The Mario & Sonic at Olympics games are huge sellers so there's definitely an upside to collaboration with Sega.

While Sega's properities might not have the weight they once did, I think there would be an interest in them again after such a merger. Plus, they are of a real different nature to the Nintendo franchises instantly giving Nintendo a much wider diversity of more teen/adult fare in a way.

That said, the hardest part is how much influence should Nintendo then exert on Sega as they make their games? The point of acquiring them for the franchises would be because they are different from what Nintendo has. But if Nintendo doesn't think something is working and starts making suggestions of how to fix things, will it be for the best or could it end up turning away those original fans because now the games don't have the same attitude or feel as before? What if those franchises then become completely unpopular? Then was it worth acquiring Sega?

Ian Sane · « **Reply #4 on:** July 23, 2012, 05:03:11 PM »

If Nintendo bought Sega, someone would have to make the games that use Sega's IP. So who makes Sonic for Nintendo, then? The same dolts working on it now? It's not like Sega currently is very talented. They USED to be good and have some great historical IP but someone has to work on those games or there's no point, at least from our perspective (ie: Nintendo might like selling crap Sonic games to suckers). These games don't make themselves. Either Nintendo uses the existing Sega staff, hires more staff, or moves their staff to Sega IP (at the expense of Nintendo IP).

And even if it worked out and Nintendo had Sega back on track, it won't feel like Sega. The similarities between Nintendo and Sega was simply that they were the top videogame companies in the world for a while and they made really good games. But I could never see Nintendo making Sonic, Streets of Rage, Panzer Dragoon, etc. It's not Nintendo's style. It would be better for gaming if Sega just didn't suck anymore. I want other developers to make games as good as Nintendo but I don't want them to make games LIKE Nintendo's. I have Nintendo for that. Sega was probably never going to make Pokemon and Nintendo would never make Shenmue. That's good. The artform needs that kind of variety. I figure if Nintendo bought Sega, Sega's new games would just feel like Nintendo games. I would assume they would be good games but it would lack the Sega identity that made them matter in the first place.

It's like how Square Enix didn't create some super RPG company. All it did was take away two different approaches to the genre and replace it with one. You don't want Nintendo Sega. You want Nintendo AND Sega, two different companies with different approaches to videogame design both making great games. The constant mergers and acquisitions in this industry aren't something we should want as it will just result in safer homogenus game design.

ZabeMusic · « **Reply #5 on:** July 23, 2012, 05:06:00 PM »

I'm just trying to think who would buy Sega... Capcom perhaps?

stevey · « **Reply #6 on:** July 23, 2012, 05:07:10 PM »

**** no, they should wait till they bankrupt and buy all of Sega's assets and IPs like Playmore did with SNK. Far better (legally and publicly) than buying them now and firing everyone right afterwards. After that, Nintendo should finally start to expand its developing throughput and make a number of new "SEGA EAD" teams to keep those IPs alive as well as to work on new ideas.

Too bad it will never happen...

NWR_insanolord · « **Reply #7 on:** July 23, 2012, 05:23:59 PM »

If Nintendo could buy the company, and leave it structurally intact and able to do its own thing to a certain extent, except with Nintendo producers coming in and supervising projects and bringing up the quality like they always do when working with outside developers, it could be a really excellent move.

Shaymin · « **Reply #8 on:** July 23, 2012, 05:38:50 PM »

Should they? Yes. At the very least, they can justify it with the strong Japanese presence *coughyakuzacough* and finally print an insane amount of money with the inevitable Mario/Sonic platformer.

Can they? Well, it depends on how much Sammy wants for it.

Kytim89 · « **Reply #9 on:** July 23, 2012, 05:44:14 PM »

Quote from: Shaymin on July 23, 2012, 05:38:50 PM

Should they? Yes. At the very least, they can justify it with the strong Japanese presence *coughyakuzacough* and finally print an insane amount of money with the inevitable Mario/Sonic platformer.

Can they? Well, it depends on how much Sammy wants for it.

I am sure that Sammy would be quick to get rid of SEGA and wash their hands of it considering how much SEGA has fallen from grace.

Chozo Ghost · « **Reply #10 on:** July 23, 2012, 05:56:26 PM »

Quote from: broodwars on July 23, 2012, 04:20:20 PM

Aside from Sonic, I'm not sure there's a franchise SEGA has that Nintendo would actually see value in.

Keep in mind Nintendo recently bought the Fatal Frame franchise, which seems to be at odds with what one would expect Nintendo to want ownership of because Fatal Frame is an M rated series. Sega owns a lot of stuff in a similar vein to Fatal Frame.

Spak-Spang · « **Reply #11 on:** July 23, 2012, 05:58:29 PM »

Actually I see at least 5-6 franchises that would be good for Nintendo. I would not keep the management structure, but independent development teams intact...and I would allow the Sonic Team to do anything BUT sonic.

Jet Grind Radio,
Sonic,
Panzeer Dragoon
Phantasy Star series
Eternal Champions revival
Space Channel 5 (A game that screams casual market)
Shinobi

And that is just off the top of my head. There is a good list of franchises that could be revived and renewed. And it would be good for Nintendo to keep those games and Retro games off of the competitors systems. I think it could be great.

Kytim89 · « **Reply #12 on:** July 23, 2012, 06:16:03 PM »

How hardcore is SEGA IPs? If Nintendo had exclusive control over them they could bring in even more hardcore gamers to the Wii U because those fans would have no where else to turn for SEGA game than Nintendo, or second hand retailers.

TJ Spyke · « **Reply #13 on:** July 23, 2012, 06:23:06 PM »

Quote from: Chozo Ghost on July 23, 2012, 05:56:26 PM

Quote from: broodwars on July 23, 2012, 04:20:20 PM
Aside from Sonic, I'm not sure there's a franchise SEGA has that Nintendo would actually see value in.

Keep in mind Nintendo recently bought the Fatal Frame franchise, which seems to be at odds with what one would expect Nintendo to want ownership of because Fatal Frame is an M rated series. Sega owns a lot of stuff in a similar vein to Fatal Frame.

Nintendo co-owns it, along with Tecmo Koei (they didn't buy it outirght).

Chozo Ghost · « **Reply #14 on:** July 23, 2012, 07:03:37 PM »

Quote from: TJ Spyke on July 23, 2012, 06:23:06 PM

Quote from: Chozo Ghost on July 23, 2012, 05:56:26 PM
Quote from: broodwars on July 23, 2012, 04:20:20 PM
Aside from Sonic, I'm not sure there's a franchise SEGA has that Nintendo would actually see value in.

Keep in mind Nintendo recently bought the Fatal Frame franchise, which seems to be at odds with what one would expect Nintendo to want ownership of because Fatal Frame is an M rated series. Sega owns a lot of stuff in a similar vein to Fatal Frame.

Nintendo co-owns it, along with Tecmo Koei (they didn't buy it outirght).

Okay, but my point still applies. They bought co-ownership which means they must have some sort of interest in expanding more into M rated hardcore style gaming. Sega has a large library of games like that which would help address weaknesses (perceived or real) in Nintendo's own library.

Its like in the movie Rocky where Rocky explains why him and Adrian were good for each other because they filled gaps that the other had. Sega and Nintendo would be a lot like Rocky and Adrian because they each have gaps the other could fill.

Kytim89 · « **Reply #15 on:** July 23, 2012, 07:21:36 PM »

Quote from: Chozo Ghost on July 23, 2012, 07:03:37 PM

Quote from: TJ Spyke on July 23, 2012, 06:23:06 PM
Quote from: Chozo Ghost on July 23, 2012, 05:56:26 PM
Quote from: broodwars on July 23, 2012, 04:20:20 PM
Aside from Sonic, I'm not sure there's a franchise SEGA has that Nintendo would actually see value in.

Keep in mind Nintendo recently bought the Fatal Frame franchise, which seems to be at odds with what one would expect Nintendo to want ownership of because Fatal Frame is an M rated series. Sega owns a lot of stuff in a similar vein to Fatal Frame.

Nintendo co-owns it, along with Tecmo Koei (they didn't buy it outirght).

Okay, but my point still applies. They bought co-ownership which means they must have some sort of interest in expanding more into M rated hardcore style gaming. Sega has a large library of games like that which would help address weaknesses (perceived or real) in Nintendo's own library.

Its like in the movie Rocky where Rocky explains why him and Adrian were good for each other because they filled gaps that the other had. Sega and Nintendo would be a lot like Rocky and Adrian because they each have gaps the other could fill.

Nintendo could publish mature titles under SEGA's logo to avoid them tainting Nintendo's family friendly name and hurting the sales of the game itself.

Pixelated Pixies · « **Reply #16 on:** July 23, 2012, 07:29:41 PM »

Short answer?

No.

My opinion is that Sega's franchises and IP would be more valuable sold/licensed individually or in bundles.

lolmonade · « **Reply #17 on:** July 23, 2012, 07:38:11 PM »

Should they buy Sega? I think them purchasing Sega would provide quite a diverse series library to produce new games from. I bet Nintendo could benefit from having the rights to Sonic exclusively (i remember reading somewhere that despite my generation's griping about them, that the 3D Sonic games are actually quite successful).

The question is "does Nintendo really want exclusive rights to sonic when they already have the sonic characters for their olympic games series?".

Chozo Ghost · « **Reply #18 on:** July 23, 2012, 07:57:17 PM »

If Nintendo were to buy Sega they might as well buy what they can of Atari as well. That way they would become a one stop shop for all Retro fanboys.

tendoboy1984 · « **Reply #19 on:** July 23, 2012, 09:17:50 PM »

Quote from: Spak-Spang on July 23, 2012, 05:58:29 PM

Actually I see at least 5-6 franchises that would be good for Nintendo. I would not keep the management structure, but independent development teams intact...and I would allow the Sonic Team to do anything BUT sonic.

But then we would have never had the fantastic Sonic Colors (Wii) or Sonic Generations (Xbox 360/PS3).

You should be blaming Dimps for tarnishing the recent Sonic games. They're the ones that can't even get the Genesis physics right in their "Sonic 4" games.

TJ Spyke · « **Reply #20 on:** July 23, 2012, 09:21:43 PM »

Quote from: tendoboy1984 on July 23, 2012, 09:17:50 PM

Quote from: Spak-Spang on July 23, 2012, 05:58:29 PM
Actually I see at least 5-6 franchises that would be good for Nintendo. I would not keep the management structure, but independent development teams intact...and I would allow the Sonic Team to do anything BUT sonic.

But then we would have never had the fantastic Sonic Colors (Wii) or Sonic Generations (Xbox 360/PS3).

You should be blaming Dimps for tarnishing the recent Sonic games. They're the ones that can't even get the Genesis physics right in their "Sonic 4" games.

The Sonic Rush games (made by Dimps) got good reviews and were well received.

NWR_insanolord · « **Reply #21 on:** July 23, 2012, 10:42:35 PM »

I didn't care for the Dimps games at all. They were all about constantly running at full speed and random spikes. Contrary to what some people believe, that's not what the old games were like. They were fast, but they were still fairly traditional platformers. I liked what Sonic 4 was trying to do, it just didn't do it that well.

Kytim89 · « **Reply #22 on:** July 23, 2012, 10:44:17 PM »

How would SEGA'a IPs benefit from being owned by Nintendo and how much do you think that Nintendo would pay for SEGA?

NWR_insanolord · « **Reply #23 on:** July 23, 2012, 10:57:33 PM »

Sega's IPs would benefit from the fact that Nintendo makes every outside developer they work with perform at their best. Sega's a mess internally right now, and Nintendo would fix that (and if not, no one could). Nintendo is a fairly frugal company, though, so I can't imagine them getting into a bidding war, and if there's serious competition, as I imagine there would be, Nintendo won't be the ones that get them.

Kytim89 · « **Reply #24 on:** July 23, 2012, 11:16:31 PM »

Quote from: NWR_insanolord on July 23, 2012, 10:57:33 PM

Sega's IPs would benefit from the fact that Nintendo makes every outside developer they work with perform at their best. Sega's a mess internally right now, and Nintendo would fix that (and if not, no one could). Nintendo is a fairly frugal company, though, so I can't imagine them getting into a bidding war, and if there's serious competition, as I imagine there would be, Nintendo won't be the ones that get them.

A new Shenmue, Shinobi and Panzer Dragoon would go a long way as being exclusives to the Wii U.

NWR_insanolord · « **Reply #25 on:** July 23, 2012, 11:24:41 PM »

Shenmue is niche as ****. There aren't many people who would really care about a new game in that series. I would, and would immediately buy whatever platform they made one for if I didn't already own it, but I'm in a very small minority. Shinobi and Panzer Dragoon are also far from mainstream properties, although they have a bit wider reach. Having them would be nice, but it wouldn't "go a long way."

Kairon · « **Reply #26 on:** July 23, 2012, 11:44:54 PM »

Quote from: Kytim89 on July 23, 2012, 07:21:36 PM

Nintendo could publish mature titles under SEGA's logo to avoid them tainting Nintendo's family friendly name and hurting the sales of the game itself.

Yeah, I would be interested to see if Nintendo could somehow use Sega, or something else, as their "mature/indie" label, probably run with some modicum of independence but also kept small, lean, and hungry so that the bureaucracy for it doesn't interfere with the edgy-ness of the products.

ThePerm · « **Reply #27 on:** July 24, 2012, 01:08:07 AM »

Yes, and thats because Nintendo would handle Sega Franchises better than Sega currently is. Also, it would really help Nintendo's imagine. It would add several series to Nintendo's lineup that would enrich it. I would even go as far as to say if Nintendo had sega there would be even less need for third parties. Remember how Rare enriched Nintendo? Sega would be like Rare, but better. I used to own(well actually still do) Sega consoles, i got everything that Sega made except master system. So, they did something right. And also what a way to solve software droughts?

Sonic, Nights, Shenmue, Jet Grind Radio, Altered Beasts, Flicky, Space Channel 5, Panzer Dragon, Shining Force, Monkey Ball, Virtual Fighter, Virtual cop, house of the dead, crazy taxi, rez, golden axe, yakuza, phantasy star, shinobi

combined with

Mario, Metroid, Zelda, Kirby, Wii Sports, Donkey Kong, Fire Emblem, Wars, Pikmin, F-zero, Star Fox, 1080, waverace, animal crossing, pokemon.

also a good move for virtual console because then they have more titles to make money off of.

if you took any one of those games and released 5 of those heavy hitters every year for 5 years, it would be a great console, and thats not even counting 3rd party support.

Spak-Spang · « **Reply #28 on:** July 24, 2012, 01:27:55 AM »

Actually, there are a lot of good ideas here...that point to Nintendo being able to open themselves up to more opportunities using Sega.

1) Sega IPs Sega has plenty of great IPs and classic games. Yes, these games have been mishandled, but that doesn't mean there isn't value in them...it also doesn't mean there is value in very IP of Sega's. However, there are plenty that can grow and broaden Nintendo's market appeal.

For example: Virtual Fighter, Shenmue, Afterburner, Outrun, Crazy Taxi, Golden Axe, Streets of Rage, Phantasy Star, Jet Set Radio, Sakura Wars, Shinobi, Sonic, Skies of Arcadia...and more.

These games are not typical franchises for Nintendo and would be perfect to be under a different label but still exclusive to Nintendo.

2) Branding Issues. Just like Disney doesn't release rated R movies under the Disney label...it uses different film studio name...even though it is basically Disney. Nintendo could do the same. Keep many of Sega's best development teams and have them work on Sega IPs and new IPs that will fill the gap in Nintendo's own gaming catalog. This includes many franchises and genres, and some may be niche, but that is also the point.

3) Keep the games from the competition. Sega has many franchises that can still be profitable, but more importantly still have huge fans. Why not grab those franchises and keep them yours. Virtual console: Yeah, Nintendo is the only place to get Sega legacy system and arcade games...as well as Nintendo's legacy systems. That means Sega Master System, Genesis, Saturn, Game Gear, Dreamcast games will all become exclusive...I know the cats outta the bag on many of these games, but with newer systems and rights to games could expire...then Nintendo has full control of them.

The only question is can it work? Would some of the teams stay? Could Nintendo do it cheap enough and profitable enough? And will the game community embrace it?

Sarail · « **Reply #29 on:** July 24, 2012, 02:11:43 AM »

I'd love if Nintendo could finish off the Shenmue story...

ThePerm · « **Reply #30 on:** July 24, 2012, 02:28:49 AM »

i would like to think of a console year like making a movie. A popular movie has 2-3 leading stars, and a phenomenal supporting cast. So lets plot out what would be a great console life cycle. And we'll assume this starts 2013

year 1
Star 1: new 3d Mario
Star 2: Shining Force
suporting cast: Mario Kart, 1080°, Smash Bros.

year 2
star 1: Sonic
star 2: Metroid
star 3: Shenmue
supporing cast: Virtual Fighter, House of the Dead, Daytona USA

year 3
star 1: Zelda
star 2: Phantasy Star
Star 3: Donkey Kong
supporing cast:Monkey ball, Kirby, Wars

year 4
star 1:That Pokemon MMO we've always wanted
star 2:Shinobi
supporting cast:F-zero, Fire Emblem, Altered Beasts

year 5
star 1:NiGHTs
star 2:Star Fox
Star 3: Panzer Dragon
supporing cast:Wave Race, Virtual Cop, Space Channel 5

of course all games in the star cast should be plotted out well in advance to be the biggest best versions of the game, and not cookie cutter sequels.

NWR_insanolord · « **Reply #31 on:** July 24, 2012, 02:31:24 AM »

**** that, I don't want to wait another 5 years for Star Fox.

ThePerm · « **Reply #32 on:** July 24, 2012, 02:33:30 AM »

well of course you could re-arrange that list, its hypothetical lol, but you get the point? **** Droughts...and also

the best way to do this would be to divide the company into 12 studios. Games would all take 2 years to make a piece, but the entire effort is spent making the best games possible. Games would release on a regular schedule where 5-6 games come from first party a year. Though the idea of handhelds throws that out the window. You could do that with 24 studios and smart asset sharing though

Chozo Ghost · « **Reply #33 on:** July 24, 2012, 02:41:14 AM »

What if instead of buying Sega, Nintendo just bought some of their franchises? Namely the ones which Sega isn't really even using, which they should be able to procure for cheap. Shenmue for example is a franchise Sega hasn't done anything with in nearly 10 years. If they aren't doing anything with it, what point is there in them keeping it? That's just one example. I'm not really too familiar with Sega's really old and obscure franchises, but surely there is a ton of stuff just collecting dust that they should have no problem parting with. Toe Jam and Earl? Ecco the Dolphin? Altered Beast? Are any of these franchises Nintendo might want to snag up or at least go co-owner with?

Kytim89 · « **Reply #34 on:** July 24, 2012, 02:47:35 AM »

If SEGA were to fall into the hands of Sony or Microsoft then think about what would happen to Nintendo's Virtual Console. There are many good non-SEGA games on the VC, but keep in mind that SEGA has and always will contribute games to Nintendo's online services. If they can no longer do this then that is a significant loss for Nintendo fans who like the Virtual Console.

ThePerm · « **Reply #35 on:** July 24, 2012, 02:47:56 AM »

also should buy rare, maybe they should just go on a license buying fest with their war chest. The other reason I would like them to buy off Sega is because someone else could, and I dont have the money to buy more than one console.

NWR_insanolord · « **Reply #36 on:** July 24, 2012, 02:48:29 AM »

The Shenmue guys are on the record as really wanting to do another one, the problem is they don't have the money. I believe Sega has openly offered to make the game as an exclusive for whoever would pay for it. The fact that nobody has taken them up on that is indicative of the demand for it.

Kytim89 · « **Reply #37 on:** July 24, 2012, 02:50:35 AM »

Quote from: Chozo Ghost on July 24, 2012, 02:41:14 AM

What if instead of buying Sega, Nintendo just bought some of their franchises? Namely the ones which Sega isn't really even using, which they should be able to procure for cheap. Shenmue for example is a franchise Sega hasn't done anything with in nearly 10 years. If they aren't doing anything with it, what point is there in them keeping it? That's just one example. I'm not really too familiar with Sega's really old and obscure franchises, but surely there is a ton of stuff just collecting dust that they should have no problem parting with. Toe Jam and Earl? Ecco the Dolphin? Altered Beast? Are any of these franchises Nintendo might want to snag up or at least go co-owner with?

Why not whole sale the entire lot of SEGA IPs, their corporate logo, and their workforce?

ThePerm · « **Reply #38 on:** July 24, 2012, 02:58:26 AM »

bah the only reason shenmue did bad to begin with was because

1. it was on a doomed console that nobody but hackers believed in
2. It was probably ridiculously pirated
3. when shenmue 2 came out, they decided to go multi console and put it on xbox outside of europe and japan. Sega wanted it on Xbox only because they thought Microsoft would spend a bunch of money advertising for it, which they didn't. Not only that...people were pissed at Sega for NOT releasing it on Dreamcast in North America
4. They spent too much damn money on it.

it was a universally critically acclaimed game, it actually sold 1.18 million. Had it been released on a system where it had the right audience like a Nintendo system, or had it been advertised properly it would have done much better im betting. Things are different now, and it is possible for an obscure game to suddenly become popular. Look at the Fallout series for example. Big boost in popularity,

Chozo Ghost · « **Reply #39 on:** July 24, 2012, 03:00:58 AM »

Quote from: Kytim89 on July 24, 2012, 02:50:35 AM

Quote from: Chozo Ghost on July 24, 2012, 02:41:14 AM
What if instead of buying Sega, Nintendo just bought some of their franchises? Namely the ones which Sega isn't really even using, which they should be able to procure for cheap. Shenmue for example is a franchise Sega hasn't done anything with in nearly 10 years. If they aren't doing anything with it, what point is there in them keeping it? That's just one example. I'm not really too familiar with Sega's really old and obscure franchises, but surely there is a ton of stuff just collecting dust that they should have no problem parting with. Toe Jam and Earl? Ecco the Dolphin? Altered Beast? Are any of these franchises Nintendo might want to snag up or at least go co-owner with?

Why not whole sale the entire lot of SEGA IPs, their corporate logo, and their workforce?

The reason not to buy the whole company comes down to cost. Old unused franchises can probably be snatched up for a few million dollars, but to buy the whole entire Sega company wouldn't that cost a billion or billions of dollars?

I'm sure Nintendo COULD afford to buy all of Sega if they wanted to, but even with as much money as Nintendo has the price tag for Sega might be more than what they would be willing to spend. Remember, their goal is to make a profit. If they spend say $2 billion to buy Sega would they be able to profit off this investment? Buying a few obscure franchises for cheap isn't a very risky move so I could see that happening. But buying Sega wholesale might open a lot of worms that come with it.

ThePerm · « **Reply #40 on:** July 24, 2012, 03:03:22 AM »

i think if nintendo announced that they were buying sega they would skyrocket their stock 3 fold

Kytim89 · « **Reply #41 on:** July 24, 2012, 03:13:11 AM »

SEGA-Sammy's stock price index:

http://www.segasammy.co.jp/english/ir/stock/stockprice.html

ThePerm · « **Reply #42 on:** July 24, 2012, 04:08:49 AM »

id imagine it be easier to buy the company if another company bought it first and that company provided a padding for losses, and then sold the company over an 8 year period.....it would be even easier if the company was a subsidiary of an even larger Japanese conglomerate owned by Yakuza......

like a huge house flip mixed with a hedge-fund

and or because theres a larger holding company, selling one companies assets without a merger would be beneficial for all three companies because it would create a false book. That is if company a buys company b from company c it negates losses for that year.

an odd note Sega by itself is up 4.9 billion while Sega sammy is down 4.5 billion....

TJ Spyke · « **Reply #43 on:** July 24, 2012, 07:15:22 AM »

Quote from: ThePerm on July 24, 2012, 04:08:49 AM

an odd note Sega by itself is up 4.9 billion while Sega sammy is down 4.5 billion....

Sammy is not doing so hot, which is why they plan to cut their number of employees from 1,000 to about 500 over the next couple of years.

Adrock · « **Reply #44 on:** July 24, 2012, 07:40:20 AM »

Teams within Sega would probably welcome an acquisition so long as they were given a measure of autonomy. Nintendo coming in and micromanaging would complicate the transition. Still, becoming part of the Nintendo family would give them stability and a parent company that cares about the products that are released more than simply turning a profit. Don't get me wrong, turning a profit is extremely important to Nintendo, but their philosophy has always been to use quality products (despite a few slip-ups here and there) to turn a profit. Sega, on the other hand, just wanted to **** out as many Sonic games as possible.

Still, I don't know if Nintendo really needs to buy Sega. Sure, like the rumored Rare re-acquisition (or whatever you want to call that), such a move would strengthen their IP portfolio. I don't know if that's a good enough reason. Nintendo has arguably the strongest IP portfolio in the business.

Should a deal go down, I would hope that Nintendo would buy the entirety of Sega, logo, back catalog and all. It would cost them more initially, but keeping Sega and its assets together is worth it to me, especially with all of the crossovers Sega has released over the years. Some titles would be stuck in limbo like Goldeneye and if Nintendo ever decided they wanted the rest of Sega, it'd turn into a complicated mess like Atari. Considering all the downsizing and restructuring at Sega, the price for a buy-out has probably never been lower. Nintendo would be inheriting a metric ****-ton of headaches in the 1st couple years. If Nintendo was patient, they stand to make out like bandits.

shingi_70 · « **Reply #45 on:** July 24, 2012, 08:35:18 AM »

Always assumed that Microsoft would buy Sega after last gennor at least had some interest before the Rare deal went bad.

Wouldn't it be cheaper to let Sega did and just pick of the IP and studios

And even if someone outright bought the studio wouldn't the company be sued if the newly purchased Sega went exclusive only. That and it would be boiled down to justa few studios.

Sonic Team
Yakuza Studio combined with NE RD department
All of the WM software teams combined
All the Sega sports teams combined
Creative assembly

Ceric · « **Reply #46 on:** July 24, 2012, 09:25:49 AM »

A little late but

Quote from: NWR_insanolord on July 23, 2012, 11:24:41 PM

Shenmue is niche as ****. There aren't many people who would really care about a new game in that series. I would, and would immediately buy whatever platform they made one
...

All the Shenmue fans I've met are the same. They buy whatever platform it came out on. Panzer Dragoon I've heard similar. That would be the draw. The amount Sega is even discussed today means the name has power to this day.

Tamazoid · « **Reply #47 on:** July 24, 2012, 11:17:10 AM »

If Nintendo was going to buy any Japanese third party publisher in the near future it will most likely be Tecmo-Koei. Nintendo seems to be building strong ties with them, farming out Other M to Team Ninja, publishing Samurai Warriors 3 and Ninja Gaiden 3 and by the looks of it funding the Fatal Frame series.

I doubt Sega will be for sale anytime soon, that's why Sega-Sammy is bothering with the restructuring and refocusing on key franchises, they still think Sega can be profitable.

What i'd like to know is how much both Sega and Tecmo- Koei are worth. I doubt Nintendo would pay excessive amounts of money to buy one of the publishers out.

Chozo Ghost · « **Reply #48 on:** July 24, 2012, 03:42:00 PM »

$4.9 billion is a hefty price tag. I don't see that happening... maybe if Sega imploded and went bankrupt then Nintendo would want to buy it, but right now at $5 billion its just too much.

Spak-Spang · « **Reply #49 on:** July 24, 2012, 06:06:53 PM »

4.9 Billion is a lot...but I do not think they have to spend all of that to get Sega. I could see Nintendo picking up Sega for half that. And that would be a steal for the instance classic franchises they would gain control over. Hell. 4.9 billion is a steal for what could potentially be acquired.

The problem is also remembering Nintendo if they bought the company would take on all the debt...which is why Nintendo doesn't want to buy everything...just the Sega portions...and not Sammy.

tendoboy1984 · « **Reply #50 on:** July 24, 2012, 07:25:45 PM »

Quote from: shingi_70 on July 24, 2012, 08:35:18 AM

Always assumed that Microsoft would buy Sega after last gennor at least had some interest before the Rare deal went bad.

Wouldn't it be cheaper to let Sega did and just pick of the IP and studios

And even if someone outright bought the studio wouldn't the company be sued if the newly purchased Sega went exclusive only. That and it would be boiled down to justa few studios.

Sonic Team
Yakuza Studio combined with NE RD department
All of the WM software teams combined
All the Sega sports teams combined
Creative assembly

Sega Sports doesn't exist anymore. The "2K" brand was sold to Take Two.

Kairon · « **Reply #51 on:** July 24, 2012, 07:33:54 PM »

Franchises aren't worth anything if you don't have the manpower to develop games in them. I'm skeptical of this whole "buying IP" thing because as it stands Nintendo is having a ton of trouble supporting the IPs they already have.

tendoboy1984 · « **Reply #52 on:** July 24, 2012, 07:37:06 PM »

Quote from: Kairon on July 24, 2012, 07:33:54 PM

Franchises aren't worth anything if you don't have the manpower to develop games in them. I'm skeptical of this whole "buying IP" thing because as it stands Nintendo is having a ton of trouble supporting the IPs they already have.

If Nintendo buys the Sonic franchise, they might as well buy Sonic Team too. And where did this whole rumor come from? No one is buying SEGA because they aren't for sale. SEGA isn't auctioning any of their IP's.

Louieturkey · « **Reply #53 on:** July 24, 2012, 07:44:17 PM »

Quote from: tendoboy1984 on July 24, 2012, 07:37:06 PM

Quote from: Kairon on July 24, 2012, 07:33:54 PM
Franchises aren't worth anything if you don't have the manpower to develop games in them. I'm skeptical of this whole "buying IP" thing because as it stands Nintendo is having a ton of trouble supporting the IPs they already have.

If Nintendo buys the Sonic franchise, they might as well buy Sonic Team too. And where did this whole rumor come from? No one is buying SEGA because they aren't for sale. SEGA isn't auctioning any of their IP's.

Kytim wants it to happen, so he starts threads pertaining to that. This is all hypothetical.

Chozo Ghost · « **Reply #54 on:** July 24, 2012, 08:07:06 PM »

Quote from: Kairon on July 24, 2012, 07:33:54 PM

Franchises aren't worth anything if you don't have the manpower to develop games in them. I'm skeptical of this whole "buying IP" thing because as it stands Nintendo is having a ton of trouble supporting the IPs they already have.

I agree. Nintendo needs more studios and more talent than it needs more franchises. Owning all the franchises in the world and not being able to do anything with them is the equivalent of starving to death on a mountain made out of solid gold.

ThePerm · « **Reply #55 on:** July 25, 2012, 12:53:53 AM »

Quote from: Chozo Ghost on July 24, 2012, 08:07:06 PM

Quote from: Kairon on July 24, 2012, 07:33:54 PM
Franchises aren't worth anything if you don't have the manpower to develop games in them. I'm skeptical of this whole "buying IP" thing because as it stands Nintendo is having a ton of trouble supporting the IPs they already have.

I agree. Nintendo needs more studios and more talent than it needs more franchises. Owning all the franchises in the world and not being able to do anything with them is the equivalent of starving to death on a mountain made out of solid gold.

thats what sega is doing. However, I still think Nintendo are more competent hands than Sega. key word Compete.

Chozo Ghost · « **Reply #56 on:** July 25, 2012, 01:43:54 AM »

It would be cool if Sega and Nintendo teamed up, because then they could show these young whimper-snappers (Microsoft and Sony) how things are done Old School. It would be like the Expendables movie with Arnold and Stallone taking on the new blood.

Kytim89 · « **Reply #57 on:** July 25, 2012, 03:48:59 AM »

Quote from: Chozo Ghost on July 25, 2012, 01:43:54 AM

It would be cool if Sega and Nintendo teamed up, because then they could show these young whimper-snappers (Microsoft and Sony) how things are done Old School. It would be like the Expendables movie with Arnold and Stallone taking on the new blood.

I just had a quick idea for my next forum thread topic...

nickmitch · « **Reply #58 on:** July 25, 2012, 04:08:18 AM »

I hope you're happy, Chozo.

Anyway, say what you want about the "talent" at Sega, but man power is a great resource. Nintendo has talent. All you need is a good IP, a talented director, and skilled programmers. There's probably a million little things I'm not thinking of, but I don't make video games. Sega's IPs under Nintendo's direction can't be anything short of pretty damn good. (Trying to be realistic)

Tamazoid · « **Reply #59 on:** July 25, 2012, 12:04:10 PM »

Nintendo should just headhunt current and ex Sega talent. Drag Yu Suzuki out of Sega's basement and make a spiritual sequel to Shenmue. Buy out Prope and make it a first party developer, from the few trailers they released Rodeo had potential. Instead of Nintendo buying publishers outright they should just do what they have done in the past, ND Cube is basically home to ex Hudson employees. Brownie Brown is made up of ex Square employees. I'm pretty sure Nintendo headhunted some Capcom developers after they worked on the Gameboy Zelda games.

Hell this strategy could apply to other Japanese developers. Igarashi is in a similar position as Suzuki at the moment. Get him to make a 2D Metroid game.

In my opinion this is a much better and a more Nintendo like approach of poaching talent.

Stogi · « **Reply #60 on:** July 25, 2012, 12:15:19 PM »

Short answer: No.

Long answer: Hell No.

Kairon · « **Reply #61 on:** July 25, 2012, 04:54:41 PM »

Better than buying Sega: Buying Atlus and Natsume.

broodwars · « **Reply #62 on:** July 25, 2012, 08:24:46 PM »

Quote from: Kairon on July 25, 2012, 04:54:41 PM

Better than buying Sega: Buying Atlus and Natsume.

I really wouldn't care if they bought Natsume, but I don't want Nintendo ever touching Atlus. Atlus has such a unique style and makes games so unlike what Nintendo makes that I fear Nintendo would drain all the energy and creativity out of them.

Kairon · « **Reply #63 on:** July 25, 2012, 08:39:13 PM »

Well, then Tecmo-Koei-ing them then, &P.

Honestly, the whole reason I said both Atlus and Natsume is that they serve vastly different segments of the market. I like to imagine that Harvest Moon secretly has an unsung following of gamers who will follow that franchise to wherever.

Luigi Dude · « **Reply #64 on:** July 25, 2012, 08:50:58 PM »

Quote from: broodwars on July 25, 2012, 08:24:46 PM

I really wouldn't care if they bought Natsume, but I don't want Nintendo ever touching Atlus. Atlus has such a unique style and makes games so unlike what Nintendo makes that I fear Nintendo would drain all the energy and creativity out of them.

Yeah because Nintendo totally drained all the creative energy out of Monolith Soft after they bought them as well.

Chozo Ghost · « **Reply #65 on:** July 25, 2012, 09:11:15 PM »

Quote from: Luigi Dude on July 25, 2012, 08:50:58 PM

Quote from: broodwars on July 25, 2012, 08:24:46 PM
I really wouldn't care if they bought Natsume, but I don't want Nintendo ever touching Atlus. Atlus has such a unique style and makes games so unlike what Nintendo makes that I fear Nintendo would drain all the energy and creativity out of them.

Yeah because Nintendo totally drained all the creative energy out of Monolith Soft after they bought them as well.

I'm pretty sure Brood doesn't genuinely believe that. He just doesn't want Nintendo buying Atlus because then he wouldn't be able to play Atlus games on his PS3 and Vita anymore because they would be Nintendo exclusives from that point on.

Kairon · « **Reply #66 on:** July 25, 2012, 09:13:27 PM »

Quote from: Chozo Ghost on July 25, 2012, 09:11:15 PM

He just doesn't want Nintendo buying Atlus because then he wouldn't be able to play Atlus games on his PS3 and Vita anymore because they would be Nintendo exclusives from that point on.

That's...sort of the idea isn't it? @_@

broodwars · « **Reply #67 on:** July 25, 2012, 10:07:45 PM »

++

Quote from: Chozo Ghost on July 25, 2012, 09:11:15 PM

Quote from: Luigi Dude on July 25, 2012, 08:50:58 PM
Quote from: broodwars on July 25, 2012, 08:24:46 PM
I really wouldn't care if they bought Natsume, but I don't want Nintendo ever touching Atlus. Atlus has such a unique style and makes games so unlike what Nintendo makes that I fear Nintendo would drain all the energy and creativity out of them.

Yeah because Nintendo totally drained all the creative energy out of Monolith Soft after they bought them as well.

I'm pretty sure Brood doesn't genuinely believe that. He just doesn't want Nintendo buying Atlus because then he wouldn't be able to play Atlus games on his PS3 and Vita anymore because they would be Nintendo exclusives from that point on.

Monolith Soft is pretty much the only example you could pull. I don't care where I can play Atlus games. I have Devil Survivor Overclocked on my 3DS; quite a few Atlus PSP RPGs on my Vita; and Persona 3 FES on my PS3 (and I used to own Catherine as well). You may have forgotten that I OWN ALL THE CONSOLES AND BOTH MODERN HANDHELDS. I don't have a stake in the exclusivity.

However, I firmly believe that Atlus makes the games that they do because they are independent. They make risky ventures that may or may not pay off, but because of the kind of company they are they know how to make them successes with niche audiences. Nintendo, on the other hand, is a massive company that (with very few exceptions) thrives off exploiting the Safe, largely new iterations of ancient franchises. These two philosophies are not compatible with each other. You'd NEVER see Nintendo release a game like Catherine, and I doubt they'd be too thrilled tarnishing their family-friendly image with occult series like Persona or Shin Megami Tensei (yes, I know they're technically the same franchise, but at this point they're practically different brands. And let's see what they do with Fatal Frame, which is much less extreme than MegaTen). And even if they did, I doubt NoA would release them here (see Zengeki no Reginleiv and Pandora's Tower).

I like Atlus where they are and doing what they do: making games that few others companies in the world would make for whatever platforms they want, with whatever subject matter they want and for whatever audience they please. Nintendo is a micro-managing company that sends in the likes of Miyamoto to reshape/destroy projects they don't like to fit their needs. Sometimes we get a Metroid Prime out of that, and sometimes we get Star Fox Adventures. I think I'll take Atlus as it is, thanks.

Addendum: Now, if Nintendo wanted to pay Atlus for Wii U / 3DS exclusivity over X number of titles, I'd be fine with that. Nintendo gets exclusive hardcore titles and Atlus gets lots of money to make interesting games. It's a Win-Win for everyone, and Atlus gets to maintain control over their games. I just don't want to see Nintendo owning Atlus and having control over what games they get to make.

Chozo Ghost · « **Reply #68 on:** July 26, 2012, 12:01:23 AM »

Brood, I know you own all the consoles. I just thought you might PREFER to have the games on Sony hardware because of the trophies.

broodwars · « **Reply #69 on:** July 26, 2012, 12:11:02 AM »

Quote from: Chozo Ghost on July 26, 2012, 12:01:23 AM

Brood, I know you own all the consoles. I just thought you might PREFER to have the games on Sony hardware because of the trophies.

Clearly you haven't seen Atlus' trophy lists for Catherine and Persona 4 Arena. They're among the more sadistically hard/tedious lists on the PS3, far beyond what even I will put up with for a good hunt. No, trophies have nothing to do with my wanting Atlus to remain independent.

Incidentally, I find the lack of Valkyria Chronicles love in this thread disturbing, especially given how much love there is for Shenmue here.

: :

Kytim89 · « **Reply #70 on:** July 26, 2012, 01:15:09 AM »

I have always wanted to see a Fire Emblem that plays either like Final Fantasy Tactics, or Valkyria Chronicles. Perhaps the developer that made Valkyria Chronicles and Intelligent Systems could co-develope the game for the Wii U?

Tamazoid · « **Reply #71 on:** July 26, 2012, 03:52:24 AM »

A better idea is that Nintendo get Headstrong back to make the medieval version of battalion wars they were making before Nintendo canned it.

Stogi · « **Reply #72 on:** July 26, 2012, 04:26:21 AM »

Can this be Broodywars new title "I OWN ALL THE CONSOLES AND BOTH MODERN HANDHELDS."?

NWR_insanolord · « **Reply #73 on:** July 26, 2012, 06:28:40 AM »

Quote from: Tamazoid on July 26, 2012, 03:52:24 AM

A better idea is that Nintendo get Headstrong back to make the medieval version of battalion wars they were making before Nintendo canned it.

If Nintendo canned it I don't think I want them to be back making it again. They don't usually go around canceling things for no reason. Except Penant Chase Baseball.

Tamazoid · « **Reply #74 on:** July 26, 2012, 09:42:57 AM »

Nintendo canned it during the years they decided to refocus to casual titles. Besides I doubt Battalion Wars 2 sold decently.

Regardless some of the assets look interesting [size=78%]http://www.unseen64.net/2011/06/14/knight-wars-wii-cancelled/[/size]

Zup · « **Reply #75 on:** July 26, 2012, 10:08:57 AM »

The thing that struck me while reading this thread is this: if Nintendo bought Sega, we could (in a million years) have a Monolith Soft produced sequel to Skies of Arcadia.

So therefore, BUY SEGA NOW NINTENDO DO IT NOW

Kairon · « **Reply #76 on:** July 26, 2012, 01:43:58 PM »

Quote from: Zup on July 26, 2012, 10:08:57 AM

The thing that struck me while reading this thread is this: if Nintendo bought Sega, we could (in a million years) have a Monolith Soft produced sequel to Skies of Arcadia.

So therefore, BUY SEGA NOW NINTENDO DO IT NOW

Best reason for Nintendo to buy Sega yet. SIGN ME UP!

Louieturkey · « **Reply #77 on:** July 26, 2012, 05:39:04 PM »

Quote from: Zup on July 26, 2012, 10:08:57 AM

The thing that struck me while reading this thread is this: if Nintendo bought Sega, we could (in a million years) have a Monolith Soft produced sequel to Skies of Arcadia.

So therefore, BUY SEGA NOW NINTENDO DO IT NOW

Or just buy the Skies of Arcadia IP. That's fine with me too. I'll take either.

And I'm another one who wants Valkyria Chronicles.

Chozo Ghost · « **Reply #78 on:** July 26, 2012, 06:44:20 PM »

Quote from: Zup on July 26, 2012, 10:08:57 AM

So therefore, BUY SEGA NOW NINTENDO DO IT NOW

tendoboy1984 · « **Reply #79 on:** July 26, 2012, 09:39:55 PM »

Quote from: Tamazoid on July 26, 2012, 03:52:24 AM

A better idea is that Nintendo get Headstrong back to make the medieval version of battalion wars they were making before Nintendo canned it.

Fire Emblem?

Spak-Spang · « **Reply #80 on:** July 27, 2012, 12:02:15 AM »

You know, if you want Nintendo to buy Sega for one game...it would have to be for me...Sonic and Mario World...or whatever they will call it...New Sonic & Mario Bros.

I want to see Sonic playing in a 2D mushroom kingdom and Mario blasting through Sonic like stages. That would totally be worth the price of admission as long as they had a good team develop it.

marty · « **Reply #81 on:** July 27, 2012, 03:37:36 PM »

I remember a few years ago being excited when IGN mentioned a possible Jet Set Radio game for Wii. Aside from that franchise, I really don't care much about Sega's offerings. And really, I can't think of any instance where buying an IP, especially any of Sega's, where it would actually be worth it, it seems to be a seller's market type situation. No company with a successful IP is going to give it away for less than what it's worth and the value of a dead IP seems pretty much worthless.

News:

Author Topic: Should Nintendo Buy SEGA? (Read 23475 times)