• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Capcom share holders do not approve stock take over defense

Nirolak said:
Two notes:

1.) This is notable because it means investors no longer have faith in Capcom to keep growing the company, and thus are open to having the company bought (which usually happens at a share premium).

2.) Guessing a console vendor, or even a traditional game company, is a really bad idea when Capcom has already had a huge pivot to social, mobile, and online. You're more likely to see someone who is also interested in those fields consider picking up Capcom.
Click to expand...
I dunno about that. Imagine this scenario:

Nintendo buys a majority share in Capcom, effectively taking over the company without totally freezing out the other major shareholders, thereby avoiding bad feelings and discontent that might lead to rebellion.

They then announce that Capcom would be a wholly-owned but wholly independent subsidiary arm of the group, and recommit the company to multi-platform development of its own IPs (including Wii U and 3DS versions of all major releases, of course), with maybe a few surprise guest appearances by Nintendo characters or something similar.

Meanwhile, Nintendo and its second-party studios would continue business as usual, making exclusive content for Wii U and (sometimes, when they're in the mood) 3DS; the Capcom properties would be seen as an extra source of revenue, while mainline development would still be exclusive to Nintendo platforms.

This would effectively allow what many fanboys on the Internet have grinched and brayed about for years - "Nintendo" going third-party, without actually having to go third-party. It's geeeeeeeeeeenius, ah tells ya.






Realistically, though? Amazon gets first dibs.
 
SpacePirate Ridley said:
Umm, seems I know more than you with the response you've gave me. Not going to try to prove my point when the only thing you bring is a Kotaku statement you don't even understand and you being stubborn.
Still, im going to explain this:
Of course there's more than one person making the game, and part of it is Namco, but the director is still the director (and game designer) and is the one that decides absolutely the majority of the game. Yes, that means characters, designs, stages, movesets, game modes, menu and options. Other studios may work different (having more people for decisions), but we know from interviews with him that he is the one that decides all this stuff.
Click to expand...

It's not a one-person job. Sakurai doesn't build everything from the ground up. He can make decisions and direct staff on how to proceed.

Your entire argument is based on an assumption that Sakurai decides everything. And it's especially troubling for you to assume this over a third party character that Nintendo no doubt had to obtain licensing agreement for use in their game.

So explain me. When he did the same thing with Sonic and there was no namco present during the brawl develpment, was still Nintendo or not? To make it clear, Namco isn't doing anything creative on the game, they haven't design absolutely anything of it and just act as workers that HELP in the development, and probably the online infrastructure. Nintendo pays Sakurai, Sakurai does a game for them, its a Nintendo game. Plain and simple.
Click to expand...
Wow, the amount of assumptions here. Without having any direct knowledge of the development staff, you are just making shit up. lol.

Stop comparing Brawl's development to Smash 4.


Yado said:
So do you think Namco is developing a smash game of their own volition and throwing in/designing characters as they please?
Click to expand...


When did I say that? Where did I say that? I would like you to point out specifically how you came to that conclusion.
 
This is sad. It's just like the Atlus threads where a bunch of Nintendo and Sony fans rub their hands at glee at the possibility of a companies games going exclusive to their platform of choice. Being Japanese companies not many MS fans show up, but some still find their way there

Yes there are posts that are actually thoughtful as to who may purchase Capcom (or more importantly why companies would not want to do so) and I'm grateful to read these. But there's too much fanboy dreaming to sift through
 
Louis Cyphre said:
Would anyone had thought 8 years ago that a dancing game would do well on the XBox? I'm sure you and many others would be very upset if Microsoft did purchase Capcom but one way to get more fighting fans on the XBox would be to make Street Fighter exclusive on it. There really is no magic formula to what genre is best suited to each platform other than we all know Japanese gamers have given a cold shoulder to the XBox platform and they are likely the most supportive of fighting games. It's also worth noting that DOA3 did very well on the XBox.

If Microsoft wants to get serious about Japan they would need a powerful arsenal and what better way than to gain all those Capcom ip's. The fact is Sony doesn't have that kind of money to throw out there at the moment and Nintendo is cheap. I personally wouldn't want to see any of them buy the company and if one did they would gut the company anyways. I get the suspicious feeling you wouldn't want Microsoft to buy any worthwhile publisher or any worthwhile developer regardless of the genre and would rather have Sony buy them.
Click to expand...

The reason why we're against Microsoft obtaining companies, is because they won't do anything worthwhile with them or their IP's. Microsoft obtained Rare, & look at what happened to them.

They were much better with Nintendo. Japanese gamers would also be offended if Microsoft were to get something that they like.
 
My preference would be for Sony or Konami to buy them but to me the worst case scenario is nintendo buying them.

If anyone is doing to buy them its probably going to be a company not related to gaming mainly.
 
skatebored said:
Street Fighter going exclusive with any console would irreversibly hurt the franchise. Going exclusive with Nintendo would be straight up suicide.
Click to expand...
Not for Nintendo. It would help Nintendo a whole lot. Part of Nintendo's problem is that alot of must have games aren't on their systems. They need a few outside of their own franchises. Street Fighter 5 and a good RE can provide that for them if they play it right. Monster Hunter can do it in Japan.
 
Sayah said:
Do a little reading so I don't have to waste my time.

Outside of the very original post comparing NIntendo's treatment of third party characters vs. the third parties themselves in a Capcom takeover thread, you also have:
Click to expand...

They aren't saying Nintendo is any more likely to acquire a third party studio because of that.
 
Capcom should be bought by a company that would invest more in titles produced by Kobayashi and Niitsuma. Specifically people who believe in the unrivaled fighting system in DMC4 and MVC3.


I earn for DMC5 and MVC4 or a game that uses that combat engine
 
While i think Nintendo would make good uses of Capcom IPs i don't think they'd ever buy them, they are extremely cheap and careful with acquisitions.

Sony would benefit alot aswell, just imagine Vita becoming the MH machine and all the other big IPs becoming PS4 exclusives (not MegaMan though, i feel Sony would leave him dead and push more for SF, RE and maybe even DMC).
However, can Sony afford it right now and make a profit out of it? I have my doubts about that.

If anyone would ever buy Capcom it will probably be some big firm.
Would that be good for us gamers? Sadly we can't really know.
 
Biker19 said:
The reason why we're against Microsoft obtaining companies, is because they won't do anything worthwhile with them or their IP's. Microsoft obtained Rare, & look at what happened to them.

They were much better with Nintendo. Japanese gamers would also be offended if Microsoft were to get something that they like.
Click to expand...

You know what's really odd is how people call out Microsoft for using the same old IP's like Halo and Forza and go on and on about how deep Sony's IP's are. Or they talk about how Japan doesn't support the XBox because they don't have much software for them. Yet when someone proposes something like this other issues pop up and why that's not good. Never ever giving a solution to something Microsoft should do.
 
Oswen said:
While i think Nintendo would make good uses of Capcom IPs i don't think they'd ever buy them, they are extremely cheap and careful with acquisitions.

Sony would benefit alot aswell, just imagine Vita becoming the MH machine and all the other big IPs becoming PS4 exclusives (not MegaMan though, i feel Sony would leave him dead and push more for SF, RE and maybe even DMC).
However, can Sony afford it right now and make a profit out of it? I have my doubts about that.

If anyone would ever buy Capcom it will probably be some big firm.
Would that be good for us gamers? Sadly we can't really know.
Click to expand...
Sony has a net worth of $18.6 Billion so they're far from poor (and their liquid assets stretch further into that). But approving such a thing would require a lot of internal discussion and decision making. That's doing something on top of their other every day business plans.
 
Sectorseven said:
If they're scared of a takeover, can't they just buy back their own shares?
Click to expand...

They can, but it would likely be at great cost when Capcom doesn't have much money available.

They can decreases the chances by buying back some stock, but unless they hit over 50%, they will still be at a risk for being bought out.
 
I'm really scared about this honestly.

Microsoft really wants to hold on to Dead Rising and has the money to throw down for Capcom. Nintendo on the other hand has let studios slide away in the past.
 
Mockingbird said:
How Nintendo treats third party characters vs how their own companies treat them. Give it to Nintendo:

Bp0kopxCQAAvMc_.jpg


Found this is the internet.
Click to expand...

Holy shit that's great!
 
If someone purchasing Capcom means that the Tsujimoto family and the old fashion board members will go away, them, I will bite the bullet but Capcom should be a multiplatform company forever.
 
Asking platform holder to buy a video-game company is pretty annoying. Almost like port-begging.

Luckily, none of the big three have the money to buy a large company like Capcom. (yeah, Microsoft has, however the game department doesn't).

If a platform holder wanna get a big exclusive, they can easily throw a moneyhat and sign a contract. It's more cheap and profitable although some fanboys rather their company to spend billions of the dollars.
 
Nirolak said:
Two notes:

1.) This is notable because it means investors no longer have faith in Capcom to keep growing the company, and thus are open to having the company bought (which usually happens at a share premium).

2.) Guessing a console vendor, or even a traditional game company, is a really bad idea when Capcom has already had a huge pivot to social, mobile, and online. You're more likely to see someone who is also interested in those fields consider picking up Capcom.
Click to expand...

And their exit from the games industry will be complete.
 
Sayah said:
THey don't have to take it seriously. The picture is out of context regardless.
Click to expand...

No, it's not. Namco isn't making the creative decisions here, Sora LTD is. Namco's involvement in getting Pac-man in Smash was at most a suggestion, though more likely it was just simply giving Nintendo permission (which wouldn't be up to the staff working on the game anyway). Sakurai ultimately made the decision whether or not any third party character would be considered for the roster.
 
Nemecyst said:
I agree. The IP's would hold more value than the entire company. Now I could see one the possibility of a platform holder purchasing a much-less-than-majority stake in Capcom in an effort to gain some favor in releases, ala Squaresoft. But that would only be advisable if the company wasn't already toxic and would only apply to certain IP's.
Click to expand...

Yep, and since I doubt Capcom is going to the chopping block anytime soon, I don't see much action happening.
 
Why would Nintendo buy Capcom? That's such an idiotic idea for both parties. Let's throw out half their business and greatly shrink markets because I like how third party characters look in Smash. Nintendo should only buy Capcom if they are considering exiting the console business.
 
-Facebook buys huge stock in Capcom.
Capcom becomes primary dev house for games for O.R.
My dream of ever seeing another Dragons Dogma dies.


Either way my dream of ever seeing another Dragons Dogma on console is dead.
 
Starfish Hero said:
No, it's not. Namco isn't making the creative decisions here, Sora LTD is. Namco's involvement in getting Pac-man in Smash was at most a suggestion, though more likely it was just simply giving Nintendo permission (which wouldn't be up to the staff working on the game anyway). Sakurai ultimately made the decision whether or not any third party character would be considered for the roster.
Click to expand...
Wow, you clearly need to get your reading comprehension up to par. I'm getting tired of having to explain things to you so this is the last time I'll do it.

1. Pac-Man franchise has had great games in the last gen (read: Pac-Man Championship Edition). Posting an exaggerated TV-show pac-man pic does not counteract that. So yes, the picture is out of context as far quality and brand power of third party-game development goes.

2. Namco is playing a lead role in the development of Smash Bros. with Sakurai as the director. They designed the prototype for Smash. Sakurai approved of it. They have a role to play in designing a lot of what you're seeing in Smash Bros. now. The pic again is out of context because it derides Pac-Man's TV-show design without realizing that Namco staff is also potentially responsible for designing the current Pac-Man and Megaman designs in Smash that the picture is applauding in contrast. Sakurai didn't build those characters from the ground-up himself, even if he made the decision that they need to be included. A lot of staff worked on creating their movesets and playstyles and accrediting all that to Sakurai alone is silly. It's a team effort.

Get that through your head and process it slowly so I don't have to explain it again.
 
I'm sure it's been mentioned, but I would prefer Disney purchasing the capcom outright
 
Biker19 said:
The reason why we're against Microsoft obtaining companies, is because they won't do anything worthwhile with them or their IP's. Microsoft obtained Rare, & look at what happened to them.

They were much better with Nintendo. Japanese gamers would also be offended if Microsoft were to get something that they like.
Click to expand...

I see what you mean but in Rares case its not just them refusing to do it. The majority of the Rare staff that we loved back in the day is gone. I dont blame MS for not taking a great IP like Banjo and having either them or another studio make the game. Just like with Crackdown they will only do IP reboots when they have the right team to do it. Thats part of the reason why I resoect Spencer so much. He said this about Crackdown because the second one was so bad. What did he do? he went and got the original creators to do it. I prefer that gameplan
 
Sayah said:
Wow, you clearly need to get your reading comprehension up to par. I'm getting tired of having to explain things to you so this is the last time I'll do it.

1. Pac-Man franchise has had great games in the last gen (read: Pac-Man Championship Edition). Posting an exaggerated TV-show pac-man pic does not counteract that. So yes, the picture is out of context as far quality and brand power of third party-game development goes.

2. Namco is playing a lead role in the development of Smash Bros. with Sakurai as the director. They designed the prototype for Smash. Sakurai approved of it. They have a role to play in designing a lot of what you're seeing in Smash Bros. now. The pic again is out of context because it derides Pac-Man's TV-show design without realizing that Namco staff is also potentially responsible for designing the current Pac-Man and Megaman designs in Smash that the picture is applauding in contrast. Sakurai didn't build those characters from the ground-up himself, even if he made the decision that they need to be included. A lot of staff worked on creating their movesets and playstyles and accrediting all that to Sakurai is silly. It's a team effort.

Get that through your head and process it slowly so I don't have to explain it again.
Click to expand...

Sonic and Megaman have both gotten great games as well. That wasn't the point of the joke. The point is that unfavorable things are happening to these franchises now, compared to the fanservice in Smash.

Next, Namco is not the lead development team, Sakurai's studio is. I'm not saying Sakurai is doing it all himself, and I'm not saying his studio is doing it all now. What I am saying is that they are leading development, not Namco. Namco has not led this project since a couple months after Kid Icarus went gold.

If you are going to credit Namco with Pacman's design and moveset because they are doing the grunt work, that's admirable but inconsistent with pretty much how every gaming project is viewed. It's always the director's project, it's always their vision. Even if it wasn't his idea, Pacman's classic design is because of Sakurai's vision of the cast. As is Mario's and Mega Man's, and Sonic's being tweeked. There's no way to know for sure who came up with what idea in projects with teams this big, but the director get's credit because, ultimately, it's his decision whether or not the team goes with that idea.

Finally, since you want to be condescending, understand this: I'm not questioning you because I don't comprehend what you're saying, I'm questioning you because I think you're wrong. I know damn well what you are trying to say.
 
KojiKnight said:
They can, but it would likely be at great cost when Capcom doesn't have much money available.

They can decreases the chances by buying back some stock, but unless they hit over 50%, they will still be at a risk for being bought out.
Click to expand...

This and when you get in share wars like that the value of each share decreases in value each round. So if eventually you decide to stop and give in to the buyer your left with a lower price per share and cost yourself money

Also I see some people saying foreign companies cant buy Japanes companies. Thats not entirely true. But really aquiring through purchasing shares is the easiest way to do it. Amerger might be the hardest. This link explains in detail.

http://www.iflr.com/Article/2026998/How-to-buy-a-Japanese-company.html
 
As much as I would love to see Nintendo obtain Capcom and save Megaman, that isnt going to happen so I wont hold my breath. Though it would be nice if Nintendo could get their hands on Megaman.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Secondary game mode take over
24
281
kevboard replied
Should Capcom do a home arcade system?
Opinion 
18
206
LuxFixxins replied
Samsung raises DDR5 contract price by over 100% - "No stock"
2 3
123
1K
StereoVsn replied
Unity stock falls alongside Take-Two, Roblox after Google’s Project Genie launch
News Business 
43
857
YeulEmeralda replied
EA Company Shareholders Approve $55 Billion Sale
13
442
Venom Snake replied
Top Bottom