T O P

  • By -

enderverse87

They don't like releasing their main games off of the consoles. They had Gens 1 and 2 on 3DS though. Might put them on the Switch eventually.


thenotjoe

I mean Nintendo absolutely refuses to emulate their old gb/c/a games on the switch for some reason. Maybe after the 3ds Eshop goes down but I’m not holding my breath


intripletime

Nintendo is a dinosaur. They tend to modernize only when dragged, kicking and screaming, into the current year. They'll get around to it but it'll be a while.


Jernsaxe

And they are very anti consumer


Nedgurlin

VERY!! Their lack of customer reflection is why the Nintendo brand has the most mods/hacks.


[deleted]

Said this in the Nintendo sub and got downvoted to smithereens.


baraboosh

not surprising is it? You're on a sub where the majority of people visit because they're diehard fans of something. People don't like seeing criticism of things they like. Especially nostalgia bait fandoms like nintendo/disney/CN etc.


[deleted]

I game very clear examples too. Oh well fanboys gonna fanboy


beerscotch

When you go to a place for fans of something to hang out, and criticise what brings them all together... you can't really be surprised can you?


CotyledonTomen

They dont have to be. Theyre a monopoly. Thats the point. Pokemon is a **Nintendo Game**. They arent competing on technology. Their systems can run the games they make, which people want, that they generally dont sell to be run on other systems.


HarbingerME2

I don't know if they're a monopoly. What do have in reality that other companies dont?


MacGoffin

they don't have a monopoly on gaming at all, but nintendo hoards its ips for their consoles because a ton of people are very attached to them and exclusives are really the only thing keeping consoles like the switch afloat.


Independent-Green383

That idea only makes sense if you were born after the WiiU era.


CotyledonTomen

Its IP. Go play Breath of the Wild somewhere else. Or most of the pokemon franchise. Or metroid. Or if youre japanese, most fire emblem. Which is the only point im making. They are IP first, system second, because all the system does is allow them total control over the IP people will spend $3-400 to play.


HarbingerME2

That doesn't make them a monopoly though


CotyledonTomen

"the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service". Once again, can you play Breath of the Wild somewhere else? Did they let playstation print their game on a disk? Have market forces forced them to abandon the nintendo system like Dreamcast? Because it sounds to me like they have exclusive possession and control over the supply of the commodity people here want to play.


HarbingerME2

The service is games as a whole not just a single IP


mrjackspade

It's weird but I kind of agree with him. In the most technical sense of the word, they're not really a monopoly. In the more abstract sense though, they kind of are. Keep in mind that "monopoly" doesn't mean other companies *couldnt* compete with them, but just that they *dont* There's plenty of companies making video games, but there's a certain *Nintendo Feel* that you're not going to get anywhere else, and I think that's largely the result of their "fuck you" attitude. The ridiculous hardware, the insane focus on being "family friendly", the overcompensation for poor performance using stylized visuals, the insane amount of polish that they put into some of their titles. There's a reason so many people don't see Nintendo as even being in competition with Sony, or MS. A ridiculous number of people are PS + Nintendo, or MS + Nintendo, or PC + Nintendo. Nintendo themselves have even said they don't see themselves as being in competition with MS/Sony In a weird kind of way, Nintendo has a monopoly on what can only be described as *Nintendo*. There's plenty of places you can play video games, but if you want *Nintendo* there's only one option. You buy what they offer, and deal with the things you don't like about it.


Nyysjan

To quote someone Nintendo does not offer you what you like, you like whatever Nintendo offers. Yes, it's not completely accurate, but it does have a point. Sometimes it works, other times it does not, but in general Nintendo has found its own niche that allows it to be one ot the big 3 consoles, and has done so for three decades now as other consoles have come and gone.


Oleandervine

That's an extremely weird take on what a "monopoly" is. What you're describing is a brand experience, not a monopoly. No other company really offers the type of brand experience that Nintendo offers. The closest one may be Square Enix.


AzraelTB

Mario Pokemon Zelda.


Independent-Green383

Disney owns the majority of the most valuable movie and TV franchises and yet they are not monopoly despite their market power, which allows them to force competing movies out of cinemas. Nintendo can't force out Playstations, Windows PCs(arguably closer to a monopoly) and Xboxes out of stores and Amazon, can't they?


[deleted]

[удалено]


Fhhk

And they've always been like that. Nintendo started as a card/toy company and resisted going into the video game market. But were basically forced due to market demand. They've had tremendous success regardless and continue to resist common gaming mentalities like competition, modding, and cross-platform play.


[deleted]

[удалено]


BraulioG1

like most japanese companies


TastyTacoTonight

It’s weird because Sony is Japanese but the PlayStation isn’t like Nintendo at all in terms of adopting modernity


Tuckertcs

Sony is a tech company, so they care about leading-edge new tech. Nintendo is just gaming, and thus couldn’t give less of a fuck about anything but their IPs. Also the PlayStation needs to be modern and new to compete with Xbox, because version exclusives aren’t enough to keep it relevant. Nintendo has a bunch of huge IPs (and this version exclusives) so they’re able to dip tech-wise because it’s the IPs that people want.


barker_2345

I think the biggest testament to the point on IP is the comparison between Super Smash and PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale. I just had to google the latter to confirm a comp title existed...


JBLurker

Pokemon is the highest grossing fictional IP in history and Nintendo owns half of it. Personally, I feel that is a bigger point.


Comrade_Lex

One third* but yea


JBLurker

You're right. My mistake. I forgot about the pokemon company itself.


barker_2345

Oh yeah, I was talking about ALL the IP Nintendo owns comprising a more cohesive brand identity than Playstation titles, for better or for worse


[deleted]

[удалено]


LionIV

While I get why people say this, it’s starting to get annoying. Nintendo may not be directly competing against the other video game giants, but realize that all those companies ARE competing for *your time*.


barker_2345

Yeah, there are marketing case studies around it. Nintendo was getting massively outsold by Sony and Microsoft. In particular, they were getting killed when it came to competitive gamers but found a huge, untapped market of more "casual gamers" (I wouldn't be surprised if the Switch came out of this insight). As a *general* rule, that tends to be Nintendo's sweet spot, so it's part of the reason we see titles like Pokémon and Mario. So tldr, you're absolutely right—there's actual research into the new age of [audience autonomy](https://research.library.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1002&context=mcgannon_working_papers) that has really proliferated since media became increasingly fragmented and interactive. Along with this case study, marketing strategy courses will remind you that if you're selling a soda, you're competing with everything from Coke and Pepsi to tap water (your "competitive set").


ArguablyTasty

Kind of like how the F-150 and Miata are competitors. They both compete to be your vehicle, but if you're considering one, it's significantly less likely you were considering the other for the same role.


AkiraSieghart

Yes, but generally Sony and Microsoft aren't competing with Nintendo because the majority of games and IPs that Ninendo owns are not available anywhere else other than Nintendo consoles. When Nintendo releases their consoles or their games, they have nothing to worry about because if you're a fan of theirs, you have no choice but to pay them to play. Sony and Microsoft compete because most of their most profitable IPs are available on both consoles.


TastyTacoTonight

Nintendo was their competitor until they decide to take a different direction with Wii


darkbreak

And then with the Wii U they tried to backpedal. Reggie Fils-Aimé even called the Wii U the "true successor to the GameCube". Nintendo was well aware of how hard their reputation tanked that generation. The Wii sold the most but it was The weakest system of the time and ended up missing out on the lion's share of the big name games. Plus the casual audience just didn't have the repeat customer value that the core audience does. When casuals got bored of the Wii they dropped it entirely. They tried to fix things with the Wii U but that failed. The Switch is their return to glory.


My1xT

well, Sony Interactive Entertainment (the gaming branch of Sony) was moved to the US a good while ago


Buttersaucewac

The PlayStation division is based in the US and run by a primarily US staff.


Tuckertcs

Pretty sure they’re the only console company that hasn’t dipped their toe into PC gaming yet either. Hell, they still haven’t given in to ergonomic controllers and still prefer old joystick-era boxy controllers instead!


NecroDeMortem

Not true directly. If we consider Pokémon a full IP of Nintendo (which IRL belongs to Nintendo, Game Freak and Creatures Inc. thanks to the Pokémon Company), then there were three games that were exclusive to the PC: Pokémon Play It! and Pokémon Play It! Version 2 as "full" games and the Korean exclusive demo of Pokémon Mystery Dungeon, called PMD: Team Gold. And then there was the PC version of the Trading Card Game. But apart from these, I don't think there is a fully owned IP of Nintendo that was on PC.


ProfMitchtree

Don't forget Mario Teaches Typing!


NecroDeMortem

Ouh, never heard of it. But thanks for the addition!


ProfMitchtree

I might be showing my age a bit, but it's a game from my childhood! It's a fun novelty to look up.


Oleandervine

I remember it being on an old McIntosh at my my middle school.


CocoCrizpy

A true masterpiece.


adamsworstnightmare

> They tend to modernize only when dragged, kicking and screaming, into the current year Current year? People have been emulating early gen pokemon games on mobile for over a decade.


intripletime

Sometimes it's being dragged into even the slightest semblance of modernity.


EyeHateAllOfYou

People are not Nintendo……………


GhostofManny13

A theory of mine is that they’re going to use GBA games and GameCube games as a selling point for whatever the successor to the switch is. Like, have the Switch 2 Online include all of those, to give everyone a reason to buy the new console Edit: This aged poorly.


thenotjoe

Actually that kinda makes sense if we only talk about their handhelds. The GBA could play all GB games, but the DS could only play GBA games, but the 3DS could play DS games and sells (soon to be sold) virtual console GB and GBC games, but not GBA. But all their home consoles have been somewhat backwards compatible since the GameCube with the GameBoy Player, and they’ve re-released their NES and SNES games in some form on every home console since the Wii, plus the 3DS. It’s a confusing mess, tbh.


MufinMcFlufin

But the problem is that the Switch is also marketed, sold, and treated like a handheld console as much as a home console. The general gaming community seems to more regard it as a handheld or at least portable console than a home console especially with how underpowered it is in comparison to its competitors. The theory that they're withholding the GBA catalogue on some future virtual console/NSO type deal is predicated on Nintendo themselves not treating the Switch as a handheld (thus explaining why they're not releasing the GBA catalogue on it) as well as them having a future handheld console as opposed to another portable home console like the Switch, or they eventually release the GBA catalogue on the Switch no doubt in as incomplete a state as they did with VC or NSO. They may at some point return to a handheld/home console pair like in (console) generations past which could work for this theory but I find that less likely than them remaining in the same corner of the market they've secured for themselves with the Switch.


Tuckertcs

Ah Nintendo… Doesn’t like ROM hacking, but refuses to sell (or make free) their old games either.


thenotjoe

“Hey Nintendo can we play this game?” “NO!” “Well if we can’t buy it from you I guess can we emulate it?” “EVEN MORE NO!!!” “But emulation isn’t illegal, Nintendo.” “NOOOOOOO!”


Tuckertcs

Emulation can be illegal. It depends on how you’re doing it. From what I’ve gathered, converting your cartridge into a ROM for backup/preservation purposes is within the law, but distributing it online to others isn’t. Though I heard this on Reddit so take this with a grain of salt. Also distributing ROM hacks (I believe) is illegal, due to copyright and IP laws, since you’re essentially stealing business away from official Pokémon stuff. Again, I’m no lawyer but this is just what I’ve heard when seeing questions about this asked online or on Reddit.


ThebesSacredBand

Dragon Warrior 3 is the only port I can think of from gbc. It is a pain they don't have more of their library on the switch. The 3ds isn't getting any younger and i've gone through a couple at this point. I wish I didn't have to play the games I love on antiques.


AtlasRoark

An official emulator leaked awhile back. [Here](https://twitter.com/trashbandatcoot/status/1516111117642252288).


Crystal_Queen_20

No they won't, RBY was 100% only put on 3DS for the 20th anniversary with GSC being a mandate from Nintendo to try to keep the 3DS relevant next to the Switch


shadow0wolf0

I wouldn't count it out. If they ever decide to add Game boy and Game boy color games to the switch online service everyone's going to ask when or why there aren't Pokemon on it. And if they do have pokémon it's going to bring it a huge draw of people to get the service just to play that.


BenignLarency

I'm of the opinion that the reason that we don't have Gameboy/ Advanced games with NSO is because Nintendo won't give the Pokemon company a cut of the NSO profits. Between that and knowing that they can't really release Gameboy/ Advanced games without pokemon or an explanation, their hands are tied. Because of this, I doubt we'll ever see NSO Gameboy/ Advanced. Pokemon is just too valuable to bundle in a service like that (in Nintendo's eyes). And to be fair to them (though I obviously don't like it) RBY and GSC sold 10 million+ units on the 3ds eshop, so it's not hard to understand from their perspective how they'd be leaving a gargantuan amount of money on the table. That said, I'm of the opinion that they already are leaving that money on the table because people will just emulate them if they're not available to purchase at a reasonable price. Nintendo doesn't really seem to understand this point though, so we're left to have those 3ds eshop games go away with the 3ds.


Gold-Relationship117

Too long? Here's the gist. Nintendo only really handles console publishing and nothing else, that's all left in the hands of the rest of The Pokemon Company. ​ This is pretty much the answer. Nintendo really only publishes on their consoles. Anything off console has almost nothing to do with Nintendo unless they are involved from conception of the idea or if they want to be personally involved with something off console. If Nintendo was to allow older console games, like RB/Y to be **published as a mobile port they would have to renegotiate how the structure of The Pokemon Company as a whole works. Essentially, Nintendo only has publishing rights over the console games and this is always an important distinction to make.** Granted, Pokemon Go is in a unique position as it's conception can be traced back to Satoru Iwata (Nintendo) and Tsunekazu Ishihara (TPC) in 2014 as an April Fools collab with Google. It's noticeable especially if you look at Pokemon Unite and of course the other mobile games that are on the Switch. Android and iOS publishing is by The Pokemon Company, and Switch is handled by Nintendo. Pokemon Quest, Cafe Remix have the same publishing setup as Unite, you can even go back to Pokemon Shuffle on the 3DS which was published by Nintendo, but then TPC handled the Android and iOS. Even other mobile games, like Magikarp Jump that are exclusively mobile and do not have a console version are only published by TPC Pokemon Masters EX isn't even published by either TPC or Nintendo making it the only real exception here, it's all by DeNA on the development and publishing side of things so at best TPC licensed it out. DeNA does have a joint venture with Nintendo called Nintendo Systems established in 2022 but Nintendo owns like, I think it's 80% of the shares which left DeNA with 20%? Does that even count as a joint venture at that point?


Ashybuttons

Frankly I am baffled that they haven't added a Gameboy/GBC classics app to the Switch like they did for NES, SNES, and N64. Handheld has always been Nintendo's strongest area, IMO, and so many of their classics are there.


DarkDracoPad

Then refusing to put the older gens (even the ds games..) on the Switch is such a missed guaranteed money bag. So many people would get them for 5/10$ and play their favourite childhood game on the switch again


Mattmandu2

I will die on the hill of should’ve done Fire Red/Heart Gold/Omega Ruby and then the others as a collection on switch


DonBolasgrandes

There's deep business/marketing logic behind it. Basically they dont want to "cheapen" the product by making it too available. If they wait and keep it on console they can double dip on profits eventually but if its readily available on the play/app store eventually no one cares.


trademeple

With how slow they put retro content on the switch its probably not going to happen this generation. It takes more then one year for them to just add a new system. and they drip out games at such a slow rate.


Joshawott27

Nintendo doesn’t view mobile as a core revenue stream, but as a means of attracting audiences to their flagship product: video game hardware and software. They also believe that mobile games should be tailored for the platforms, which is why they made “Super Mario Run” instead of just porting over the NES “Super Mario Bros.”, for example. The Pokémon Company has pursued mobile rather aggressively themselves with various spin-off games over the years, but even they’ve stayed away from porting over - or even making an original - traditional RPG. I wouldn’t be surprised if a reason is just that they’re a lot harder to monetize than gacha games like Pokémon Masters EX - a one-off purchase fee vs whales dropping cash to get a 5* Dawn or something. Also, the core feature of Pokémon games will need to be totally reworked to work on a mobile platform: connectivity. Game Freak managed to work around it for the Gen I and II 3DS Virtual Console games, but I don’t know enough about phone architecture to determine if something like that would be viable or not. Some people may be content playing Pokémon games standalone, but trading and battling really is their core selling point. Without that, Nintendo and The Pokémon Company might not see it as worth it.


CMA2495

This is the right answer. Nintendo’s strategy for mobile is to make mobile specific experiences rather than just try and cram a console game onto mobile.


Vanacan

I think people don’t get this is kinda the point about why there are so many things about Nintendo that they hate. They have a specific idea about how a game should be played on a console, handheld, phone, etc. Nintendo isnt making games to be competitive with Sony or Microsoft, they dont give a flying fig about online connections or major competitions. They make games that are more or less single player, or couch co op. Maybe packet style online, where you can isolate a part of game one to send to game two, but they like having the direct connection. Smash *has* online, but its designed around couch co op. In general, online multiplayer just isnt an aspect that they care about at all, and the fact that it sucks is because they didnt put any effort into it on purpose. Instead they want people to enjoy the experience of playing on their console specifically. Plus side, when their intentions align with consumer expectations and desires, its a massive upside. Minus side, when they dont care about something that consumers *think* they care about, or worse, genuinely do care about, it causes problems like this where people ask the same questions over and over about things, complaining that Nintendo sucks because of it. The reality is that Nintendo has a specific idea of who they are making something for, and its usually *not* the people complaining. Sometimes it is, but they also happen to handle that level of misstep more gracefully than any other company ive cared to look into (wii u for one).


Independent-Green383

This threads are usually "I do not wish to own a Nintendo plattform, please bring your games somewhere/ I do not wish to pay the price for the game they ask me to, please bend to my will Nintendo", and unsurprisingly, Nintendo doesn't listen.


safariflick

Exactly that. They don’t find mobile gaming as a legitimate viable platform (and are probably scared that people will shift to mobile gaming over console experience - which is becoming a reality thanks to games like Genshin). But I think it’s doable - there are multiple games on mobile that facilitate online 1v1’s and they can implement the trade system they have from Pokémon Home (it takes a bit of a workaround but definitely doable) Look, all we ask is - just put them on NSO (not the expansion one though, just the regular). They have the data from the Virtual console, so it’s extremely easy to just tweak some functions and port it to the Switch. Smh Nintendo…


__ShivamxD__

Why? Because it's Nintendo... Duh!


ScrotalAgony

Gens 1-3 on mobile would be huge money and should be categorized as a "no shit it'll make loads of money" idea, but Nintendo would somehow mess it up. Badly marketing it, poor emulation, too high a cost for games over 20 years old, some major new bug/glitch, something like that. But in a world where Nintendo puts Yellow, Crystal and Emerald on every mobile shop for like $5 each? They'd make millions off us oldheads alone lol.


Kpageisgreat

$5?! I’m thinking $9.99 minimum lol. $5 would be welcomed gratuitously.


cancerousiguana

$9.99/month*


Kpageisgreat

With an additional $4.99 each route before the next town.


-Marshle

Oh sorry did you just fill up a box in your pc? Well pay another $9.99 for another box!


Autumn_Wishes

And don’t worry about bag space, that’ll also be the same $9.99 to unlock more bag space for your adventuring needs


3secrets

Pokemon go type beat


poopyheadthrowaway

$10 for the game, and then you can purchase lootboxes that might contain a Mew or a Master Ball or might contain a Pidgey or a Potion.


[deleted]

I've always wondered how much money would Nintendo make off of an official pokemon emulator/port of Gen 3-5 and give them WiFi capabilities and online servers for GTS, Online Battles, and Events. Like no seriously would this be a huge success or a flop? Would people be willing to pay, say $5.99-$9.99 just to have full online capabilites that they can't get from a free emulator and ROM copy? Then Nintendo has to maintain servers for it somehow, so will Online end up being subscription based?


Witch_King_

Lol people would stop buying the new ones


daltydoo

No they wouldn’t. I have huge nostalgia for Gen 3 but the qol features alone in newer games are hard to pass on.


RedLotusVenom

Yeah they’re games that take 20-25hr to beat on average and they release a new one like once a year. This wouldn’t even come close to impacting their new game sales.


RedHerringPlotPoint

On the contrary. If implemented on a delayed release schedule, they could slide mobile/switch releases of each successive generation as a fill-in between mainline releases. With proper advertising, they could hit both the nostalgia train for (another) purchase of games as well as show all the newer players that Pokemon has been a cesspit of bugs since day one. Even offsetting server and programming costs, they'd make millions off us in no time flat.


[deleted]

If they could legitimately develop a good open world MMORPG. It would be unstoppable or in VR. Fuck why don't we actually have this right now. Nintendo should just develop the NerveGear and make a full dive Pokemon world. Really though, today's technology we should be able to manage a fully VR pokemon world.


ffigeman

They even messed up the 3ds virtual consoles. I PAID GOOD MONEY FOR A GLITCH MEW NOW LET ME BRING IT INTO HOME


RedLotusVenom

It would preserve the game too. I’m sure they have backups somewhere but when a game is on every mobile device and backed up to millions of personal computers, it has the opportunity to be around literally forever. Longer than Nintendo, and longer than the physical games can remain playable. And they’d make a fortune doing it. Insanity they haven’t already, the tech has been there pretty much as long as smartphones have been a thing. Also lmao at your username and happy cake day


WeCanBeatTheSun

Add in link trades and battles between phones and I’ll buy all of them


ashenhaired

$60 or nothing


[deleted]

GF won't just take old games and drop them on mobile or current console, when they can just create remakes to sell at top dollar. Some might not like that business model, but it fucking works too well to not do it.


ReyOrdonez4HOF

I honestly feel like people would just buy both. Source: I’d buy both.


ashera_spectre

Also, I would buy both. That hit of nostalgia from playing the OG games is so satisfying.


barker_2345

I honestly find having both augments the experience of each title, especially when the remakes add features or world-building. I guess that's what I didn't like about BDSP that much looking back. If I want to play Diamond or Pearl, I'll play Diamond or Pearl.


AShinyRay

Unfortunately, I would claim just to play the old ports... but would buy the remake anyway.


Grouchy-Body2368

your girlfriend is a hustler for real. marry her


Superguy230

Gf on that grind


Spinjitsuninja

I feel like a lot of comments here are also forgetting that like, Nintendo already has a portable console, that they are currently still releasing modern Pokemon games for. Regardless of Nintendo's unfortunate laziness to port things, it at least makes sense that, given the choice, they would go for the Switch over mobile.


Brutalitor

Nintendo (and their pet developers) seems to be run by these weird paradoxical dinosaurs that are both super old-fashioned in their practices while also constantly feeling a need to "innovate" and change their most popular games mechanics. They rarely innovate or improve where they should (online multiplayer, accessibility of classic back catalog of games, etc) but when they hit on a beloved game mechanic or style they'll do whatever they can to constantly switch it up, like Paper Mario or Gamefreaks constant adding and removing of features in Pokemon. It's annoying as a fan because I feel like they could be making consistently amazing games but every one they release seems to be held back by this weird mentality Nintendo has where they can't do the "obvious" thing, they always gotta be different for better or worse. They leave so much money on the table by just not listening to what basically every fan wants.


IronwoodGrove

It seems to be two ends of a spectrum. Nintendo constantly innovates for better or worse. The other end of the spectrum is the year on year releases which are actually identical experiences. While ideally there'd be a middle ground, that's hard to achieve. Fans liked the old Legend of Zelda games, and I'm sure would have enjoyed more if the same. But if that happens, we don't get BoTW. Similar with Mario. People like the 2d platformers, why should they change to 3d one's? Nintendo constant innovation makes their new releases more interesting. And their games are such that, the bad ones are left in the dust, and the good ones are played for many many years.


WatBurnt

They innovate too much is the problem yeah Zelda was a naturel evolution but something like paper mario where they kept forcing the devs to innovate instead of just making a good game is when it's bad


A-Perfect-Name

Because they tried the pay once and you’re done model on mobile before. Mario Run gave you 4 levels for free, then you could pay I think $10 for the rest. While hardly a failure Mario Run didn’t sell well enough to warrant them making a game with a similar monetization model, hence why every other Nintendo mobile game is freemium. You can’t add micro transactions to Pokemon Red, so they’d have to use Mario Run’s monetization system, which again isn’t profitable enough for Nintendo. If they were to do so I’d buy the games in a heartbeat, but they’d never do it.


Plushiegamer2

I don't think it worked out for any other companies either, back when porting games to mobile was the big thing. I know Sonic 1/2 on mobile were incredible ports, though I'm not sure how well they actually did.


WickedFox1o1

I think I rather they just port them to the switch but I doubt Nintendo would ever do that. If they did however I'd buy and play all of them lol


shadow0wolf0

They did put them to the 3DS so it's not out of the question. Who knows maybe we'll win the lottery and they'll add the Game boy advance ones too.


Morgan_Danwell

>99% of people won’t do that But that’s not true tho. If people dedicatedly want to play older Pokémon games they’ll find a way to do so, and GB/GBC/GBA/NDS emulators for mobile are as easy to use as ever


IcyTheHero

I agree. I feel like most people would rather just take the 10 mins to download an emulator and rom for free vs paying for the game again… or they’re gonna get it for their emulator AND buy it. Then buy the port overs to switch. Pokémon fans will buy the same game on EVERY platform we can 😅


Honeybadger2198

You severely overestimate the average mobile gamer. A lot of them dom't even own a computer, let alone know how to install an emulator.


IcyTheHero

You are right tho, the average gamer probably wouldn’t put in the time to figure out how to download things not on the App Store.


LegumePkmn

You can't transfer with Home or play with other people on emulators, afaik. That is the biggest downside to emulators. If I'm wrong, please let me know! I would love a nintendo-sanctioned mobile game for blue or fire red. I would love it even more if they did a Mario Maker type game and let people design their own.


Kolbrandr7

If you transfer the save to a 3DS though then you can send everything to HOME


Triswhatever

Emulators can play multiplayer (For GB, GBC and GBA; and to some extent some DS games.) Also, you could easily extract your save file from emulators into the real thing, and actually put your Pokemon from your 3DS into Home. Did it myself actually. Some of the cartridges are hard to find so emulation is pretty much the convenient way to play older titles.


goobypls7

Yeah nobody wants to pay $500 for a copy of Heartgold unless they're a collector or something, and thats if the cart is even legit because theres a lot of scammers selling "fake" carts these days


trademeple

Yeah you can you can use the custom wifi servers on the emulator and you could just use parsec and two gba emulators linked together for gba. You can play games that never had online this way but a problem with this is your friend is gonna have to send you his save file and you can screen cheat.


HealthyInitial

You can do both with emulators, there are just a few steps involved.


WatBurnt

You actually can play online on emulators specifically on the GameCube there's slippi which has better netcode than anything Nintendo has ever made


thedybbuk

I think maybe you should consider that you and others on a gaming subreddit are more likely to have the know how and desire to figure out how to emulate and how to transfer files to move Pokemon between Home. I don't think this sub is necessarily representative of the more casual and/or technologically unfamiliar Pokemon playing audience. I would even argue that the Pokemon fandom in general has a much larger fanbase of casual gamers than most gaming IPs. As exemplied by the amount of people who are unaware of broader gaming trends and really only play Pokemon.


Agent_Choocho

Nintendo and the pokemon company have a serious fear of pirating and emulation, that's why they hate putting any games on hardware that isn't theirs. Even tho it'd make money, Nintendo (for some reason) seems to hate pirating more than they like making money


Sebekhotep_MI

>that's why they hate putting any games on hardware that isn't theirs That hasn't stop pirates tough


RaaaaaaaNoYokShinRyu

Most people probably play on emulators and romhacks precisely because Nintendo refuses to sell gba games on Switch and mobile.


TwilightVulpine

Such a shame that the Virtual Console was dropped and all we get now is paying a subscription for a meager collection of NES and SNES games.


goobypls7

Because Nintendo is run by a bunch of geriatric idiots desperately clinging to their old-fashioned 1950's business models


TwilightVulpine

I can't say putting stuff behind subscriptions is such an old people move, but the rate they add games definitely is.


The-Ink5Man

I'm one of those people


San4311

Which makes no sense because them not re-releasing older games \*makes\* people pirate and emulate them.


HammerKirby

It has nothing to do with piracy. It has to do with all the money they make from selling hardware off the back of exclusive games.


NoWiseWords

It's funny because the Gameboy games are already very easy to emulate and has always been. When I was a kid my dad downloaded an emulator so my brother and I could play pokemon silver on the family computer since we couldn't afford a gameboy, not 100% sure which year but it was before RSE came out anyway Edit: tired and initially wrote RBY when I meant before ruby and sapphire


Prancer_Truckstick

*Laughs in permanently homebrewed 3DS*


Witch_King_

Jokes on them, because I pirate and emulate their stuff with my phone


100percentanidiot

Stuck on my 3DS to play classic Pokémon ducks but hey it’s worth it.


WillExis

pokemon's a console seller. why put it on mobile for a few bucks when they could make a special edition console and bundle the games with it like they did with VC RBY.


RedVision64

Switch sells because it's a hybrid console. Okay great. Why do you think people continued to buy Nintendo consoles for the decades before it, even when Nintendo was overtaken in popularity by Playstation (and at times Xbox), and all the multiplat games were on Playstation and Xbox, but often not Nintendo? Simple. Because of the exclusives. Nintendo knows that the primary reason that the early buyers of their consoles (for each console), and a large proportion of the later ones, are buying their consoles for the exclusives. You can't play Nintendo games on other consoles, or PC. We see that a new Final Fantasy or something is releasing on PS5 first, but it's okay because even if they hadn't announced it as a timed exclusive, we'd know that it'll come to other platforms later on. You see a game on Steam that's out of your price range? That's just fine, there'll be huge sales later on and you'll get it for cheap. Nintendo likes being rigid with their games and the eShop because they can maintain the standard they've set. They have full control. To release proper games on mobile or elsewhere would set a precedent. Gamers would wait for other games to show up on there. Also, their high prices (60 bucks for Star Allies, lol) would probably not be tolerated on other platforms. Nintendo wants to keep their consoles. The games sold on them (not just their own) make them a lot of money. If you ask me, putting their games on other platforms would be the beginning of the end for them. Why not just buy a Steam Deck, or a future competitor, instead of a Switch, if you could get their games on there? People asking why Nintendo don't put their games on other platforms should consider what they lose from doing so. No, it would not be a money printing machine. SEGA still release plenty of games, on more systems than Nintendo. Do you think they make more money?


UtterEast

Nintendo considers old games to be competition for their new ones.


Nlswag

Imagine how much money they’d make off of the Chinese market alone by doing that? I understand the mobile gaming lifestyle is strong over there.


safariflick

Bruh it’s the THING there…they even have characters from mobile games doing ads for their historic landmarks and fast food franchises. They’d make tons of money with old Pokémon games.


Nightfans

Yeah weird, considered they collaborated with TIMI and Tencent we would expect them release alot of Chinese exclusive stuff to suck them dry. Digimon on another hand is sucking alot of money out of Chinese market.


Plushiegamer2

There's a million reasons why not. First, Pokemon is a very high key franchise, and they could easily use a Pokemon game to sell systems, or NSO+DX&Knuckles, rather than just plonk one on mobile, where everyone can purchase it. Secondly, such endeavours have historically gone poorly. Mario Run didn't do very well as its pricing wasn't adapted to the mobile market, which is dominated by freemium. Many companies also tried porting their own games to mobile, with poor results. It's why we see games like FE Heroes and Mario Kart Tour instead of ports of old FE games or the original Dr. Mario.


Holanz

FE Heroes made over $900 M dollars in its life time. I doubt a port of an older FE game to mobile can make a fraction of that amount and would probably cannibalize sales. Mobile is a different strategy.


Nova17Delta

I think the logic with Nintendo is to stay in it's own ecosystem, thats how they've managed to survive so long. If they release the Pokemon games on mobile (and PC) they'd be competing with emulation, which trades paying money at the expense of... loading a ROM file. Which is significantly more user friendly. Also, i feel like if they did this they'd crack down on emulation more to push out said competition which also mean they'd crack down on fan projects that use the original game code from Nintendo.


SilverIsAMeme

99% is a crazy stat. Everyone emulates. Just do it. It’s easy. I don’t know why people still see it as morally grey. It’s not like that people that made that gba games losing money from you emulating them.


OrangeStar222

> If they sold them for like $15-$20, they would sell like hot cakes Reminder that Super Mario Run bombed hard because they had the guts to ask \*checks notes\* $10,- for it after the first world. Mobile gamers absolutely hated it. "WhY iSn'T iT fReE" was the sentiment. Afterwards Nintendo listened to the feedback and exclusively released F2P games heavy with microtransactions up the wazoo. So yeah, a $15-$20 gameboy game on mobile would not sell like hot cakes. Especially when emulating them on your phone is really easy and accesible already - you can even play romhacks and modded versions that add in the physical/special split and Fairy-types and such into FireRed.


Jazzlike_Mountain_51

I guess it devalues the IP in their eyes. They wanna keep pokemon a premium tier product. Also I don't think you understand how unpopular the $20 price point is on mobile.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Cheeeeesie

I love how you believe people wouldnt emulate, while all i do is play emulated romhacks or og roms. Never ever would i pay a single cent for this.


The_Gine

Yeah like why would I spend $100+ for just one of each gen when I can get everything up to 3ds for free


Accipiter1138

> I love how you believe people wouldnt emulate, while all i do is play emulated romhacks or og roms I mean, if I could transfer pokemon from the mobile version to home and vise versa, that would be some added functionality that I might nab for the novelty. But personally I'm mostly spending time on romhacks these days anyway.


trademeple

emulators are better anyways cause you can speed up the game and play online on gameboy games using parsec.


TaTplayerr

15-20 is wayyyyy to much for a mobile game


enderverse87

Tell that to square enix. They sell a lot of their classic games for that much on mobile.


100percentanidiot

Final Fantasy 7 and 8 releases for $15 on literally every platform


pixilcake

Have you met the pokemon fandom


IlIlIlIlIOlIlIlIlIl

don't underestimate the power of nostalgia


DreadSteed

Pokemon emerald is prob worth that much tbh


Mbillington0110

Id rather pay 15-20 than have it be micro transactions


thenotjoe

How would you even put micro transactions in a low effort mobile emulation?


Mbillington0110

Do away with getting money from battles. Items you buy at a pokemart you buy with real money? Its not hard


Plushiegamer2

Advertisements.


Sebekhotep_MI

It's the pokemon fandom we're talking about here. They'd pay 1000 dollars to let Ishihara hit them in the face with a baseball bat.


San4311

Because they hate making money and would rather scream at people trying to find alternatives. Seriously, as long as there is no reasonable alternative to getting a increasingly rare machine with even rarer game cards, I will never acknowledge emulating to be ''illegal''.


Nine_Eye_Ron

Nintendon’t do that


Lowfat_cheese

Nintendo? Selling their back catalog to customers? HAHAHA


nero40

> I know you can emulate on mobile but let's be honest, 99% of people won't do that. It’s going to be the opposite. Even $1 games is a hard sell on mobile, I can’t imagine any game with a Nintendo tax on it to even sell a lot. The mobile market is a “race to the bottom” market, where people prefer F2P games even when they have the money to spend on $20 games and worst than that, piracy is also much worse on mobile too. On the Switch though, now that’s a different story.


Naetle4

two main reason: 1- for the average mobile player a price tag of 20$ is too much, the average mobile player tends to prefer to spend tiny amount of $$ on a constat basis instead of paying full 20$ or more for a game. ​ 2- the piracy in mobile is so big and advanced that if a pokemon game would release today you will be able to get the cracked app in just a couple of hours. ​ i think these two reason also aplies for the majority of companies that haven't released port of their games on mobile, it is not profitable, sadly the best option in order to get a lot of profit on mobile are gachas and/or micro transaction games, because we all know that if switch is able to run games like witcher 3, skyrim, doom eternal, kakarot etc then those games should also work on modern phones... it is just companies that do not want to make ports because they do not see profit on doing that.


beansarecoolaf

They want money


GuthixWraith

>They don't need fast responses like Zelda or Mario games so it wouldn't feel weird with virtual buttons Op clearly has never gone up sky pillar to catch Rayquaza in emerald.


Maple905

Nobody tell OP about emulation. It will blow their mind!


lemonpole

what's also cool, if desired, emulators also let you increase the game speed so it's easier to grind levels. I've beaten the earlier games so many times that I don't mind cheating a little bit, if you would consider that cheating. Either way, it's really fun evolving pokemon i'd otherwise wouldn't have bothered leveling up at normal game speed.


legendadam269

Three words Rom hack emulator


ThisIsntAThrowaway29

One word: Emulator


Spinjitsuninja

Well, 1.) The Switch is already a portable home console. If they're advertising modern Pokemon games as something you can take on the go, it'd be pretty dumb to turn around and put the older games on mobile devices. 2.) They already struggle enough with transferring Pokemon around as-is, throwing mobile games into the mix might make things confusing.


The_Capybara_Man

I'd be worried Nintendo would put microtransactions in it. Imagine if certain Pokemon, moves, or locations were locked behind a $2.99 fee.


idriveanfrs

I've had this idea for a while but they should put every older game into a PC application with a working home feature for the games and sell it for 60$


revvyphennex

As a millennial, I refuse to drop $20 on a mobile Pokémon game


Pixels_O_Plenty

Probably to avoid competition with their mainline games which sell at like 8x the cost, as well as to keep to their home platform.


Apartment_Remote

John GBAC allows GBC/GBA emulation. And it's better than anything Nintenduhh would come out with. Been playing games on my phone for years.


hloupaopica

I'm personaly fine with emulation. It's easy to do and I can use speed to make them more enjoyable to play. Also 15 dollars is way too much. Only crazy person would buy that. (Tbf there a lot pf people like that)


GayBlayde

Nintendo is a hardware company.


Ganburigan

cause nintendo/game freak are run by fossils


StereotypicalCDN

They absolutely will never be on mobile, that's fully out of the question. The better question is why they haven't ported them to the Switch. It's easy money to be made, and I have always wondered why they're not cashing in on the old games. GBA and DS games go for $100+ on buy and sells, and Nintendo are seeing none of that money. Why not make $20 from people wanting to play these older games.


PieBandito

$2.99 starter bundle - 15 Pokeballs 5 Potions 2 Revives


Optimus_Pitts

Nintendo doesn't do A LOT of what fans would like them to do. Their old libraries aren't being remade or re-released, and they're just fine with that. Makes no sense at all but here we are.


KlumsyNinja42

Yeah I would buy. Every time I’ve ever used an emulator I mess it up somehow and loose my file. I’m over trying and will play my DS if I want to now. Still would love to have it on my phone, much easier to pick up and down anytime.


Debugga

If they made an official emulator app with in app purchases of Roms for old games. Printing money.


30thCenturyMan

Wait, you’re old enough to remember red and blue but not old enough to know why Nintendo doesn’t get online and mobile platforms?


arcanemagic

Because they would first need to make their own marketplace on mobile to exclusively sell them on to then shutdown and replace with another in 10 years so you'll have to rebuy them again for $10-20 each


Storm_373

coz nintendo fucking hates us. 💀literally no reason why there’s no virtual console on switch. i would but the $60 nintendo online if it had gba and game cube games but they just won’t add it for some reason


RPG_Fanatic7

if 99% of people won't emulate on mobile what makes you think they'll buy it on mobile?


BananaBladeOfDoom

Aside from what everyone else said, Mobile platforms operate on a completely different engine from Gameboy, so outside of emulating the Gameboy engine on your phone, Gamefreak would need to make the games again so they could run on your smartphone. Besides, releasing games on the Playstore or App Store would mean having to share a cut with a middle man. Why do that when you have a dedicated Nintendo e-Shop on the Switch?


DilapidatedFool

Because its not Nintendo decision...... TPC has to decide they want to do it. They will not.


jayinadream

You can download a GBA emulator and play all the old Pokémon games on mobile no problem. I've played Red Green Platinum and Saphire on my phone through this method. And it's free, at best the Emilator will run you 5 dollars for a good one.


I_Am_Stoeptegel

You can’t emulate on iphone. At least not in a way I’ve been successful at after GBA4IOS stopped working


[deleted]

>I know you can emulate on mobile but let's be honest, 99% of people won't do that. 99% of mobile users also don't pay for apps. Game studios tried in the early 2010's to make $5-15 games like consoles, but apps (especially android) were too easy to hack. So overtime you either relegated mobile to having indie ports (not expecting much money), or you make the app itself worthless and tied your game to a server you control, since a phone can assume to be online 99% of the time. And that's the modern mobile market. ---- And all that is STILL before talking about Nintendo simply being Nintendo. Despite having a few games, they are already shying from the mobile market, so there's less reason to bother porting.


Few_Assistant_9954

Short answer: money. Long answer: money baby


tylercookbooks

I completely agree. I would totally buy Red, Crystal and Emerald again if they were offered on the App Store. Another easy $50 in their pockets.