After the Great success of Paper Mario Run NINTENDO will release a Zelda for Mobile Phones

Is Nintendo dying? Is mobile the future of Nintendo? At this rate how long till we see ports to other consoles and pc?

Other urls found in this thread:

macrumors.com/2016/12/07/sony-games-ios-playstation-division-2017/
gamerant.com/pokemon-go-help-3ds-sales/
theglobeandmail.com/life/pokemon-go-boosts-real-life-merchandise-sales/article31376529/
usgamer.net/articles/pokemon-sun-and-moon-finds-sales-success-on-the-pokemon-go-train
nintendo.co.jp/ir/en/library/annual/index.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

No.
Yes, there's going to be a Nintendo mobile in a few years.
Never.

You should realize that basically everyone in the industry is pushing out some kind of mobile crapware, and that Nintendo only gets attention for it because they held out so long against it, despite the insistence of their shareholders.

macrumors.com/2016/12/07/sony-games-ios-playstation-division-2017/

Is mobile the future of Sony? Nope it's not, they have failed hard in the phone sector.

Nintendo is known for their games, not their hardware. And Sony is the exact opposite. It makes sense that a company known for their games publishing as a 3rd party is seen as a step towards their exit of the hardware sector. It's inevitable at this point. Not an "if", but a "when"

>Nintendo is known for their games, not their hardware. And Sony is the exact opposite.
This is utterly insubstantial. Please try to come up with some projection for the future without basing it on your gut and how you personally feel about a company's image.

Almost forgot about this gem

This will be a great E3

That Uncharted mobile game is a promotional thing for Uncharted 4. It wasn't made for any other reason than to market Uncharted 4.
You could get things for the game in the mobile app.

Keep thinking that

>That Uncharted mobile game is a promotional thing for Uncharted 4. It wasn't made for any other reason than to market Uncharted 4.
Well gee, what do you think Nintendo's mobile games are for?
Since day 1 of the DeNA collab, their mission statement has been to attract mobile users to Nintendo platforms.

what the fuck is this

>Release Pokemon Go right before SuMo
>SuMo becomes the fastest selling software launch in Pokemon and Nintendo history
I wonder if multiple companies could possibly be using this approach?

>Well gee, what do you think Nintendo's mobile games are for?
What Mario game did the IOS mario market?
Exactly what mainline mario content did playing the IOS game unlock?
Exactly what connection to what mario game are we talking about here?
>comparing Pokemon go with Uncharted mobile App
What did you get for SuMo by having Pokémon go?
Nothing? well then i guess that settles it.

>What Mario game did the IOS mario market?
All of them
>What did you get for SuMo by having Pokémon go?
14 million copies sold

You're really fixated on companion apps, as if they were the only way to market products using the app store.

It's a minigame collection based on 4 of the properties featured in PSASBR. It's pretty shitty and boring, but it stands out because everything is plastered in coca cola logos. It's hilariously blatant. It's also not a companion app, so I guess Sony is truly going mobile once and for all now.

>All of them
So literally no mario game was getting released to soak in the IOS game launch. Hmmm nice.
We at least know there is a difference now.
>14 million copies sold
So what do you get in SuMo for having Pokemon go i will ask again.

Thats right you get fucking NOTHING.

The games aren't connected in any way.

Jesus Christ Sup Forums stop being mentally challenged for one day

>The games aren't connected in any way
Does that mean somehow the mobile game isn't used for marketing?

We know there's a difference, but you haven't demonstrated that the differences mean anything. If anything, the big difference here is that Sony's companion apps were all utter flops, generating no more than a few thousand downloads, while Nintendo's apps have reached millions, and generated millions in revenue. Nintendo has very clearly chosen the superior marketing strategy here, and you can see it reflected in their sales and earnings.

It's just a quick money maker for them.

Your a fucking retard. There was a noticable upswing in Pokemon games and merch after Pokemon Go

gamerant.com/pokemon-go-help-3ds-sales/

Certainly not directly. The game may loosely be used for marketing but it is a standalone game. It isn't just made for marketing purposes only.
Especially the Mario game which literally cost money to play top kek.
>you haven't demonstrated that the differences mean anything
You should be old enough to deduce that a game that directly incentivizes getting a game is more of a marketing game than it is a standalone game capiche?
>while Nintendo's apps have reached millions
This is proof that the focus for Sony is the big game on the home console while Nintendo isn't even making an effort in getting the mobile players to jump onto the console. You get fucking 0 for having the app.
Proves that Nintendo is serious about their mobile shit while Sony is just using it to make their main thing bigger. Just goes to show that Nintendo couldn't resist the investor money in going mobile.
>Your a fucking retard. There was a noticable upswing in Pokemon games and merch after Pokemon Go
0 connection or incentive from getting Pokémon Go to getting SuMo. At best it spread the name out there which would mean the marketing benefits were indirect at best.

Imagine being so autistic you get triggered when someone post the mobile game of uncharted.

Nintendo is already dead my dude.

Fact: Nintendo hasn't sold a SINGLE Switch unit. All copies thus far have been given away as free promotionals, to buy off video game journalists. In reality, even your average dumb Chad consumer can easily see through the bullshit and has opted for better gaming options.

Nintendo is fucked rn

>Paper

Console and software companies can't make good mobile games. The japs absolutely one star'd Mario run to the point where they prefer a clone made by an indie that looks exactly like Mario over Mario run.

Fire emblem's appeal is its IPs. People in Japan admit that it's trash. Why do we need Zelda at this point?

>Vidya company starts releasing gaymes on mobile
>OMG GUYZ THEY'RE DONE ITS OVER
No, they're just tapping into a pretty big market to make a quick buck. Stop talking about shit you know nothing about.

So if Pokemon Go had no effect on Pokemon sales, explain the 200% increase yty in Pokemon XY sales and the 80% increase YtY in sales of the 3DS

thank you, i was honestly shocked when i only saw 1 result for paper (the OP)

Creating a crappy companion app that tells you to buy a specific game is awful marketing. You can't reach non-gamers with an approach like this, which is a disaster, because bagging all the non-gamers on iOS is unbelievably lucrative. You can see how this approach has failed just by looking at the stats for the companion apps.
>This is proof that the focus for Sony is the big game on the home console
This is proof that Sony had no idea how to approach mobile gaming. Nintendo has it right. You create a standalone experience strongly tied to your brand, and when it succeeds on its own merits (making you money directly in the process) it brings more users to your platforms. And in Nintendo's case, the brands are so ubiquitous that they don't need to instruct you to buy a single game. They have half a dozen Mario games they want you to buy, why would they tie you down to one companion release? We have seen the results in their earnings reports. This approach has succeeded.

>no source

Why the fuck would they make a shitty mobile game if the goal of the mobile games is to get more people to the brand? Why would someone, who plays mobile games mainly, want to play more of Pokemon if the mobile pokemon game is shit?

Mobile games earn a shitton of fucking money you loon.

If anything they want people to play the mobile game because they can nickle and dime everyone for ever.
>This is proof that Sony had no idea how to approach mobile gaming
No this is AGAIN proof that Sony has its focus on the big games while Nintendo is now spending time and resources on doing mobile shit.
Saying Sony doesn't know how to approach mobile gaming is the same as defending mobile as a gaming platform. Delusional to the core.
I said it doesn't have a direct link, it at best has an indirect effect as you talked about.

Sony at least makes it a direct link which shows that Sony puts its time and effort in the big games.
Also Nintendo has no games while Sony has tons. Go figure.

It's just easy money and increasing IP awareness. The normal Nintendo games aren't going anywhere.

It's like how Platinum has to make shitty licensed games to get enough money to make their quality game while remaining independent.

Sony's "direct link" didn't make them any money. It didn't boost the sales of their game, and they made nothing on the apps.
Meanwhile, Pokemon Go drastically boosted the sales of the 3DS, Pokemon merch, and every Pokemon game on the market.

Please tell me which of these two companies is focusing on bringing new users to its standalone platforms and games. All you're doing is demonstrating that the "indirect link" is the far superior marketing approach.

>Nintendo is now spending time and resources on doing mobile shit.
DeNA is who is doing the games though, not a Nintendo Dev team.

WTF Super Mario Run was so good that I downloaded it, and never bought it.

It's top tier Mario!

Imagine being this butthurt because someone pointed out that Sony makes phone apps

>Pokemon Go drastically boosted the sales of the 3DS, Pokemon merch, and every Pokemon game on the market.
What?

Source?
Keep telling yourself that
No i have no problems with phone apps. But to pretend that Sony is even half as invested in phone games as nintendo is, is flat out degeneracy.

>Releasing a Zelda for mobiles
>NOT ANIMAL CROSSING

Fucking hell, it's just begging for a ACLite

>NOT ANIMAL CROSSING
Animal Crossing is coming first. They've been working on it for a while

watch it be some Tingle adventure thing

See

>Sony is known for their hardware
TOPPEST OF KEKS

>Is Nintendo dying?
no, switch kinda makes this obvious.
>Is mobile the future of Nintendo?
yes, switch kinda made it obvious.
>At this rate how long till we see ports to other consoles and pc?
never, because nintendo doesn't want to share his trophy with his "friendly" rivals.

theglobeandmail.com/life/pokemon-go-boosts-real-life-merchandise-sales/article31376529/
gamerant.com/pokemon-go-help-3ds-sales/
usgamer.net/articles/pokemon-sun-and-moon-finds-sales-success-on-the-pokemon-go-train
>Pokemon apparel sales are up 64 per cent, gifts and collectibles sales (such as toys, plush and blankets) are up 150 per cent and Pokemon series and movie sales (DVDs and Blu-ray discs) are up 100 per cent since the game’s launch.
>the [3DS]’s sales have increased 80% year-on-year
>Pokemon X and Y sales have raised 200% year-on-year over July 2015
>Alpha Sapphire and Omega Ruby, the latest main series remasters, are also up 80% year-on-year.
>Sun and Moon fastest selling game launch in Nintendo history

So tell me again who is focused on marketing their product? Nintendo, who revived Pokemania with an Ingress clone, or Sony, who wasted money on unsuccessful companion apps?

>Sony's "direct link" didn't make them any money. It didn't boost the sales of their game, and they made nothing on the apps.
source?

Btw those links just show an indirect influence nothing concrete.

The only way to make it concrete is to give every single person a questionnaire whenever they buy a Pokemon product. Nintendo will happily make mad bank on these "indirect and not concrete" influences while you will still insist that these games don't accomplish anything.

Never said they didn't accomplish anything but it is not secret that Sony's games aren't made because they want to succeed in the mobile market. They are made so that the main games on their homeconsole gets lifted up.

You can go ahead with your mental gymnastics and fuck off. Besides Pokemon is only one of the mobile games but you have no argument for why that Mario IOS game was made. It was literally made as a mobile only game and it costs money to boot.

>Btw those links just show an indirect influence nothing concrete.
Nintendo themselves told their investors that the sales increases were a direct result of Pokemon Go's success. What more do you want? Apparently, "indirect non-concrete influence" makes you many millions of dollars, boosts brand recognition, and makes sales go way up across the board. Surely you can see that a "direct link", which seems to be your way to describe targeted product promotions, is a far less viable approach, and Sony are not maximizing their marketing potential by going that route.

>Apparently, "indirect non-concrete influence" makes you many millions of dollars, boosts brand recognition, and makes sales go way up across the board
Why do you care about that?

Regardless those games were made for Mobile gaming. They weren't made to market SuMo. They had a completely seperate marketing campaign for that. You have to be delusional if you think otherwise.

If you stopped being underage and stopped participating in childish console war nonsense, you can see the mobile games are in fact glorified ads that help the mainline Nintendo games sell.

nintendo.co.jp/ir/en/library/annual/index.html

If you stopped being underage you would notice that the question was what the consumer got not what Nintendo got.

Exactly who here is participating in brand loyalty? Fucking you.

>but you have no argument for why that Mario IOS game was made. It was literally made as a mobile only game and it costs money to boot.
Because there are 2 billion smart phone users out there. Mario Run generated 78 million downloads. That's 78 million people who are probably going to show slightly more interest in future Mario games. And since Nintendo puts out multiple Mario games every year, there is no need to make Mario Run a promotional release for a specific game. Its job is to market the entire Mario franchise.

>They are made so that the main games on their homeconsole gets lifted up.
That's the same exact reason Nintendo made the partnership with DeNA you dipshit, marketing theconsole games to people who don't play games on console anymore.

>the question was what the consumer got
That's not the question at all. Marketing is a question of what the consumers do as a response to your publicity. Nintendo released a standalone Pokemon mobile game, and promptly experienced skyrocketing sales of all Pokemon products and the 3DS. We know this is good marketing BECAUSE it worked. If it doesn't work, it's bad marketing.

>Exactly who here is participating in brand loyalty?
The guy that got triggered by a mobile uncharted game.

You are so fucking focused on what Nintendo gains from this and not what the consumer gains from this.
jesus christ you guys are insufferable.
But it is just marketing in general. It isn't part of some big games campaign. As a consumer you get fucking nothing from having the mobile game.

right, go be dumb somewhere else.
You already got corrected, now youre still trying to continue with your stupid logic that your favorite Sony app is not the same as Nintendos.

>As a consumer you get fucking nothing from having the mobile game.
What do you get as a consumer from having a console game?

You're so autistic it hurts. Having mobile games tie into other software or "give you something" doesn't matter at all. That's just one marketing approach out of many, and it doesn't really seem to work that well.

Sup Forumstendogaf everybody.

You are so goddamn set on proving that Nintendo gains something from mobile games which is useless for the consumer.
At least Sony makes mobile games where you get something for the actual console game.

That was my whole point all along.

This will be my last post for you autistic Miyamoto shit eaters ;^)

See you around, Sony nigger.

Ah so you were baiting for attention. Well not surprising. What else can you do, while GREATNESS AWAITS?

>And Sony is the exact opposite.
???