Author Topic: Should Nintendo Buy SEGA? (Read 23464 times)

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.

News:

Author Topic: Should Nintendo Buy SEGA? (Read 23464 times)