What are Nintendo's qualification for "New IP's"?

#31Tsutarja495Posted 1/26/2013 10:45:41 PM
KONGAKREW posted...
xenoblade chronicles, endless ocean, fling smash many others including the wii series


Endless Ocean and Fling Smash aren't first party. Xenoblade and the Wii series is though.
#32gamebuyer22Posted 1/26/2013 10:57:19 PM(edited)
Most of Nintendos new IPs start with Wii in the title and are awful. Wii play, wii party, Wii music, Wii fit, Wii suck etc.
#33_Taidow_Posted 1/27/2013 1:07:08 AM
Isn't The Wonderful 101 an IP?
---
"The answer to a question I never asked."
#34ChargrilledPosted 1/27/2013 1:08:31 AM
Anything that is low risk.
---
GT : DeadJericho / PSN/Wii-U : Focalpoint /
Correct terminology is 'Could NOT care less'. Learn English!
#35Banjo2553Posted 1/27/2013 1:10:41 AM
_Taidow_ posted...
Isn't The Wonderful 101 an IP?


Not from Nintendo though. It's an exclusive third-party title.
---
Come see my game collection: http://www.backloggery.com/bakonbitz
#36ArturiaZweiPosted 1/27/2013 1:43:05 AM
As far as Nintendos new IPs go:

Warioware
Eternal Darkness (needs a sequel)
Golden Sun
Advance Wars
Baten Kaitos
Pandoras Tower
The Last Story
Soma Bringer
Endless Ocean

But honestly though, Nintendo doesn't have to try very hard to create anything new. People gobble up their IPs as is.
#37PedroMontanaPosted 1/27/2013 2:23:24 AM
IP means Intellectual Property. So a "new Nintendo IP" is something new that is new and OWNED by Nintendo, it is NOT necessarily something created by an internal Nintendo team.

Making up artificial rules for what "counts" is fanboy nonsense and makes people sound like preschoolers.

Banjo2553 posted...
_Taidow_ posted...
Isn't The Wonderful 101 an IP?


Not from Nintendo though. It's an exclusive third-party title.


It is a Nintendo IP if Nintendo OWNS it, the question if a third party studio created it doesn't matter.

The people who try to prove that Xenoblade and X are Nintendo IPs by showing that Monolith is a Nintendo owned studio are wrong and directly falling into the trolls/haters trap by following wrong, artificial rules.

Xenoblade is NOT a new Nintendo IP because it was made by a Nintendo development studio.
Xenoblade is a Nintendo IP because it is a PROPERTY owned by Nintendo - just like Battallion Wars, Chibi Robo, Sin & Punishment, Endless Ocean, The Last Story, Pandora's Tower, Fling Smash and so on.
---
No More Heroes
#38poo111111111111Posted 1/27/2013 2:44:20 AM
Some more from recent years:
Steel Diver
Dillon's Rolling Western
Pushmo/Crashmo (I think?)
Nintendogs
Elite Beat Agents/Ouendan
Rhythm Paradise
Endless Ocean
Starfy
Magical Starsign
Wii Music/Party/Sports/Fit
Meteos
Tingle's Rosy Rupeeland (counts as much as a new IP as Luigi's Mansion does I guess)
Nintendoland (dunno if it counts or not)
Brain Training(?)
Chibi Robo
Odama

A lot of the other companies have had newer IPs in thie time too (Uncharted, Little Big Planet, Infamous, Gears of War, Assassin's Creed etc) it just seems like we've seen them a lot more in such a short time
#39kdognumba1Posted 1/27/2013 2:46:46 AM
I don't understand these stipulations on what is considered Nintendo's "IP" as when people bring up Microsoft Halo is their IP though it was made by Bungie and when people bring up Sony Uncharted is their IP though it was made by Naughty Dog. I mean, Monolith isn't like Mystwalker where their game was just published by Nintendo. Nintendo bought Monolith, doesn't that mean all IP created by them is Nintendo owned?
---
backloggery: http://backloggery.com/kdog254 twitch: http://www.twitch.tv/kdognumba1
3DS: 1676-3698-5986 PSN: jotaroxtreme NID/XBL: kdog254 Steam: kdognumba1
#40PedroMontanaPosted 1/27/2013 3:33:08 AM
kdognumba1 posted...
I don't understand these stipulations on what is considered Nintendo's "IP"

People don't understand what the term "IP" means, they just want a term to throw around in fanboy discussions.

as when people bring up Microsoft Halo is their IP though it was made by Bungie and when people bring up Sony Uncharted is their IP though it was made by Naughty Dog.

The whole IP argument is usually being brought up by Sony fanboys who somehow want to sell the fact that non of their 90's franchises became a sustainable success as a strength of Sony, and the fact that Nintendo has over a dozen IP that have fanbases that demand continuation as a weakness of Nintendo.

In these discussions someone usually brings up the fact that there are always a lot of new Nintendo IPs on top of the continuations of the classics.
That's the point when the anti-Nintendo people start to make up sets of artificial rules f what counts as a "Nintendo IP", which usually boils down to ridiculous stuff like "download doesn't count, handheld doesn't, it has to sell a certain amount, it has to get good reviews, it doesn't count if it might be aimed at the expanded audience, it has to be developed by certain internal studios...".

Because the Nintendo fans/fanboys only care about defending Nintendo instead of actually understanding what IP means, they accept the fake "rules" and play by them (by bringing up nonsense arguments like "Xenoblade is a Nintendo IP because Monolith is owned by Nintendo").


I mean, Monolith isn't like Mystwalker where their game was just published by Nintendo. Nintendo bought Monolith, doesn't that mean all IP created by them is Nintendo owned?

No, it doesn't matter for the individual IP that Monolith is owned by Nintendo.

Xenoblade is a Nintendo IP because Xenoblade is owned by Nintendo. That's it.


It doesn't matter that Mistwalker created TLS if Nintendo owns it.
It doesn't matter that Clover created Viewtiful Joe and Okami, Capcom owns the IPs.

In theory, Monolith or Nintendo EAD or any other Nintendo team could create a new IP that is NOT a Nintendo IP if they'd create it for someone else. For example, Capcom could pay Nintendo to make EAD create a Capcom IP (in theory, as this wouldn't make much sense from a business petspective in practice).
---
No More Heroes