Serebii

They don't make the decisions. They don't make the calls. It is run by Game Freak with the spin-offs etc. dealt with and greenlit by The Pokémon Company. That's what I was saying. Creautrs Inc. being owned by Nintendo isn't quite clear, anyway. We've had conflicting reports, it's not listed as a subsidiary so technically they don't own 66%

Are you actually being serious? I thought this was common knowledge. The Pokémon franchise is co-owned by three companies. Game Freak, Creatures Inc. and Nintendo. Game Freak owns approx. 34%, while the other two own 33% each. (Technically, Creatures Inc. is owned by Nintendo, though) The trademarks for the games, Pokémon, items etc. are registered by Game Freak, Creatures Inc. and Nintendo at the same time. In the west, however, localisation duties go to Nintendo of America which is why you may see them doing the trademark. However, in recent years, they typically just have The Pokémon Company deal with it. In regards to game releases, Nintendo is the publisher in all regions. The Pokémon Company was set up by Game Freak, Creatures Inc., Nintendo and 4kids Entertainment (4Kids has since sold its stake to the other three) is responsible for dealing with licensing. The licensing is in regards to merchandise, but the head of The Pokémon Company is responsible for greenlighting all projects, including games. The recent Japanese television show, The Professionals, showcased this process. It showed Ishihara greenlighting Battle Trozei, and working with some developers of Genius Sonority on working out what to do with the top screen. It also showed the greenlighting and conceptual development of Great Detective Pikachu. The Pokémon Company runs independantly of Nintendo, which is why it was able to put out things such as Pokédex for iOS http://www.giantbomb.com/articles/nintendo-of-america-dont-even-think-about-pokemon-/1100-3463/ Here's further details http://www.pokemon.co.jp/corporate/en/history/ That wasn't part of my argument at all. My argument regarding handheld has always been the fact that Game Freak has said repeatedly that the idea of it is to take it with you.

No, it really is and they're good with years. They technically started it on March 20th 2013 with the release of Luigi's Mansion 2, and continues on until the "end" of it on March 18th 2014

Deja vu. This is what happened with Aliens...

Wii U may be "handheld "in that you can play it without the TV, but it is not handheld in the sense that you can take it out with you, which is the entire thing they're getting behind. Again, I quote Also, again, Pokémon has very little to do with Nintendo. Nintendo don't make the decisions, they don't decide what game gets greenlit or for what console. As for Colosseum/XD, I don't know as they never revealed why. However, if they found it a successful experiment, then they wouldn't have gone back to simple Battle Sim. It's also worth noting that Game Freak consider it a spin-off

I'd class it as a spin-off

I'll try and grab some figures off Nintendo. All I know is that the older portion is big, but isn't bigger than children.

Yeah, and those ideas are good, and a good spin-off idea that I will support and do want. However, main series with main series mechanics? No, and I have explained why the developers and heads of the franchise have shot it down countless times @Zechs Merquise, you say that Nintendo are behind the times with gimped online, and that they should get with it for Pokémon. So, I must ask, have you seen the online functionality in Pokémon X & Y? Just because it's on the 3DS does not mean it's gimped. While yes, you are older and so won't carry it around, you forget that you and people your age aren't the only audience for Pokémon. It would be negligent of them to remove the main aspect of Pokémon and put it on a home console with no possible additional connectivity features just because people feel they should

That would be like Nintendo handing off the mainline Mario to another developer. It'd never happen. Spin-offs, sure, main stuff? Hell no. You need to remember that Pokémon is not a Nintendo franchise that they let GameFreak develop. It's a GameFreak franchise that Nintendo has a stake in, not a majority stake. Those people run the franchise. They are the Miyamoto, the Aonuma, the Tanabe etc. of the franchise.

If the gameplay is the same, then it's no different. There's an severely decreasing difference between handheld and home console devices in terms of capabilities. Just because a game is on a home console does not make it different to its handheld brethren. Masuda, Ishihara, Tajiri, Sugimori etc. have all stated that the core of Pokémon is the fact you take it with you to battle/trade socially in the real world. They have also all stated that a main game on a home console is not going to happen. At most we'll have side games like Stadium, but we'll never have a full RPG. Never. Then what you're asking for is a big spin-off game, which is different to what others, and most proponents of a home console game have been desiring. As such, it wouldn't be embraced well because it's not a main game. If, howver, it had the mechanics of the main series, then it'd be a main series one regardless of intent.

Ah, but the social experiences won't be different due to being on a home console, they'll be less. The 3DS and X & Y have all the possible online things; constant connections, voice chat, interactions, instant battle & trade etc. What could a home console bring to this social experience that doesn't already exist? I also don't see how the gameplay could be different. Change it too much and it'd not be a main Pokémon game.

Spin-off being any non-main series game

Hey, nobody mentioned it being a spin-off. Spin-off titles I can see working on home consoles brilliantly well. However, what was being put forth was a main series game on a home console, and that has been shot down countless times

http://www.polygon.com/gaming/2012/9/17/3348288/pokemon http://gamerant.com/main-pokemon-games-home-consoles-riley-84028/ http://www.whattheyplay.com/features/meeting-the-creators-of-pokemon-platinum/ http://mashable.com/2013/09/20/pokemon-x-y-director/ http://nintendoeverything.com/masuda-still-not-in-favor-of-a-mainline-pokemon-rpg-for-wii-u/ “The series was built around the idea of trading Pokemon, trading these creatures, and everything we designed about the games was based on that concept. That trading aspect was also to promote communication between people, and really, you need the handheld to be able to go places in real life, meet people, easily trade and battle with them. I think that’s the reason we designed them on the handheld; it’s really important to Pokemon.” Can't provide a link to about Nintendo not deciding, but the decision about what games to proceed with is dependant upon Junichi Masuda, who directs and runs the main series, and Tsunekazu Ishihara, who is the CEO of The Pokémon Company. This was recently confirmed during the Japanese television programme "The Professionals", which focused on him. That special was the first to actually reveal Pokémon Battle Trozei and Great Detective Pikachu. Both of them have spoken out about making Pokémon a console game, and have said that it will remain handheld. Nope. Masuda is completely against having people "buy Pokémon" outside of the purchase of the main title. A companion app or "meter" would also create an issue. First, that would mean that they'd have to know specifically what Pokémon to transfer to it ahead of time, which is a bit ridiculous. It would also prevent battling if on a meter. See above ==== Come on guys, you can question my statements about Wii U easily, but with Pokémon there is no greater authority on the Internet. I have to know all this, I have to know what the developers say, how they think, how things are decided etc.. It's essentially my job. I live and breathe Pokémon.

I know that they won't though.

- That's not relevant. Just because they need people to buy a console has no bearing on whether or not a different company is going to develop a game for a series they control - Not entirely. Sure, the "scope" could be bigger, but it wouldn't be that much - Colosseum, PBR etc. did not sell nor review well - Not likely - No, it really hasn't been the same game since it's conception. I hate it when people say that. You could say the same for absolutely every game series using that logic. Also, cinematic games are awful, in my view, so I will never support that A large reason of why Pokémon is so popular, why it took off and what it was designed around, is the aspect of carrying the games withyou, making it a very social experience. While online has aided this, that aspect has remained and is still very big with the younger audience, and huge in Japan. A home console game would lack this main feature. It'd be like a Mario game without the jump button. 1. No. GameFreak are highly against forcing kids to buy Pokémon for their games. This is why we won't be seeing paid DLC 2. Colosseum, Stadium and Battle Revolution were built around the idea of battling with your Pokémon in 3D. That is now standard in the games so is no longer relevant 3. Yeah, I was actually expecting this with X & Y. === This argument is moot anyway, as the people who run the entire franchise have outright said on countless occasions that it is not happening. Even if Nintendo wanted it to, it's not their decision.

Increased development costs with reduced userbase due to lacking a core feature? Ok.

From the press release In addition to that

Because that would then warrant people having to purchase multiple games. With the Pokémon versions, they don't actually want you to buy it. There is literally ZERO reason for Pokémon to go on home console other than "Oh it should be...it'd be cool". Want online features? Well X & Y have that, fully. As did Black & White, Black 2 & White 2, Diamond & Pearl, Platinum, HeartGold & SoulSilver. The only thing a home console can offer that handheld cannot is shinier graphics, at the expense of portability, which is not a valid, nor logical tradeoff. Well, thankfully, this isn't Nintendo's decision. Even if it was, they wouldn't do something that would fundamentally go against the entire point and premise of the franchise.

Interesting enough to offset the fact that it would kill one of the major facets of the game? I'm intrigued.

See your Pokémon in HD! :p Your second paragraph is another reason why it's a bad idea, though it's less of an issue with off-tv play. No, because they'e still separate games and they still cut off a major part of the entire point of the franchise.

Perhaps, but the social aspect of taking it with you is still ridiculously strong. That's why the games have both rather than one or the other. Cutting it out would be disastrous.

I just see no reason to waste resources on that. The development costs would drastically increase for very little returns. It makes no business or logical sense. Plus, surely people would then complain about it being the same game, not built for a console etc. The thing with MH3U is that the home console one provided online, which the 3DS one lacked. With Pokémon, it has that on the 3DS, so why bother with a home console version? It would bring NOTHING to the table except potentially placating internet hysteria demanding Pokémon deviate from its entirce concept

If a game is designed around being on a handheld, what logical reason is there to shift it to a non handheld device and kill one of the major points of it, though? It's not them going the way of the dinosaur, it's them doing what's best for the franchise. Plus, considering they sold 11.6 million units in just two months on a console with an install base of 42 million, what they're doing is fine and is indicative of the inverse of going the way of the dinosaur. Very, very, few other games reach those heights, and typically they only do when the install base is higher. There's also not fewer new Pokémon. In X & Y, there were: 71 new Pokémon 30 Mega Evolutions (new concept, essentially new Pokémon; new designs, stats, types abilities etc.) 101 new Pokémon with 30 being un-numbered. That's the second lowest amount.

Pokémon is not controlled by Nintendo. They have little say in it. Pokémon isn't just only released on a handheld only, but it's designed for it. A large part of why it's so popular is the social aspect, taking the game with you to battle and trade. People our age tend to not see it as much, but the younger portion of the audience, as well as the Japanese side. It's still huge. Releasing a console version would destroy this. Yes, the game could have online, but so does the 3DS and it's not a substitute. Essentially, they would be shrinking their audience (even if the Wii U was successful) while severely increasing the development costs. It is not worth it, especially as a home console game would only bring shinier graphics will losing this main component of the game. In the past, they could have argued giving online via home console before it was handheld, but now? Nope. Nothing. I do agree that we should get a Stadium-esque game though