When Nintendo Fumbles the Bag Harder Than We Thought

[@ArloStuff]

WHEN THIS COMMENT GETS PINNED HARDER THAN WE THOUGHT Head to www.squarespace.com/arlo to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain using code "arlo"

[@badasahog]

First

[@Matanumi]

Going Indie JUST did a video and posted this a half hour before this one on this very topic what happened today?

[@NovaMaster375]

Yeah as a Nintendo fan idgaf about Samus not being in fork-knife. It's a good thing even. Metroid is a largely serious franchise, and is generally light on comedic moments. Fortnite is the clown show of video games. Why would they want Samus breaking it down on Darth Vader's corpse? Also the cross-over with franchises that are waaay above the age ratings Nintendo normally shoots for, and they avoid associations like that

[@badasahog]

@@NovaMaster375 100% agree

[@darcidious99]

Because having Samus and master chief and kratos all in the same game would be awesome. Granted I'd prefer it to be in an actual fun game like smash bros, but still having all of the big 3's iconic characters in one game is just cool.​@@NovaMaster375

[@Ihasnotomato]

Just fyi: it’s believed that when they say samus would be exclusive to switch versions of Fortnite, they didn’t just mean availability, they also meant that if you owned samus and played online, only people who were also playing on switch would see samus. If they played on any other console, samus would appear as a default character.

[@ThisAnimeFOXGirlLovesToDraw]

And tbh, she wouldn't be the first system exclusive skin in Fortnite. If I remember correctly, depending on what you play Fortnite on you could get exclusive skins on PS4, Switch, Galaxy phone, ect.

[@meee_5155]

@@ThisAnimeFOXGirlLovesToDrawhuh?

[@godofthecripples1237]

​@@meee_5155he's explaining that skins you could only get on a certain device wouldn't be a new thing. There's been skins that you could only get through the mobile version of the game on specific phones, for example. But then you would have them on your account and could use them as you please. Nintendo could have done something similar, where you can only get Samus on switch but then you have it on your account and can use it anywhere

[@griffinbaxter4754]

@@ThisAnimeFOXGirlLovesToDrawno actually, while some skins were only sold on specific platforms once you bought them you could still use them on any version of the game so long as it used the same epic account, ie if you bought Kratos on PS5 you could still use him on the switch version. Nintendo wanted Epic to code an entirely new system to not only prevent Samus from being seen by anyone not on the switch but also not allow anyone who bought her on the switch from using her despite the fact that that all the other exclusive skins could be used/seen on all other consoles. So basically Nintendo wanted special privileges while literally everyone else was fine with it.

[@Dakress23]

So just like Rocket League handles Nintendo stuff then?

[@TheSixthSLoT]

Nintendo: We don't want the integrity of our IP's to be compromised. *Samus in Fortnite getting T- bagged by another Samus, while a third Samus dances over her corpse*

[@chibi2239]

Honestly, based on what happens with certain female skins in the game....they're more worried about Zero suit Samus than their character getting T-bagged 😀

[@griffinbaxter4754]

@@chibi2239Considering this is the same company that repeatedly made the best item collection results screen for her games be her getting in very skimpy/skin tight outfits, I very much doubt Nintendo cares about what THAT side of the internet does with her.

[@zackswitch9656]

There isnt corpses in fortnite.

[@ryandemboski6313]

@@chibi2239this is japan we are talking about here, they are definitely not worried about that

[@chibi2239]

@ryandemboski6313 no, this is nintendo, who does care about their family friendly image to some degree. That doesn't mean anything

[@gLoveofLove89]

The Soul Calibur 2 example isn't a good fit. All three console versions had their own unique character. Gamecube had Link, PS2 had Heihachi, and Xbox had Spawn. It's not like Nintendo was screwing the other versions over.

[@AsilarWindsailor]

I thought that example wasn't the best as well

[@pommer2128]

Eventually a definitive versions of the game was released that contained both characters, but not Link.

[@Artista_Frustrado]

@@pommer2128 said definitve version was not on Nintendo systems

[@mjc0961]

It's a perfect fit. The reason each platform has an exclusive character instead of all platforms having the same character is likely because Nintendo refused to let Link be in the PS2 and Xbox versions.

[@gLoveofLove89]

@@mjc0961 I mean, that's just speculation though

[@lovelydumpling]

The problem is branding. It's Nintendo's most powerful asset. Their IPs are considered premium, Nintendo is a premium brand in gaming. That scarcity is intentional in keeping its premium reputation. Handing over Samus to Fortnite without any caveats in regards to Nintendo's platforms makes Fortnite appear bigger than Nintendo. Especially as them being the first to accomplish this. This news would be big for Epic... and would start rumors for Nintendo. "Wow, Nintendo actually let Epic have their character? That's new for them. Are they struggling or something? Are they going to go multiplatform?" This strict control of their IP as a premium brand ensures things are always on their terms, and it's part of what makes their brand so coveted in the first place. There's a reason why folks at Epic consider a Nintendo collab to be the biggest deal, despite all of the much larger properties they've collab'd with in the past. It's precisely because of that premium reputation Nintendo has for their brands, and they've built that reputation through their strict control of it. Getting a Nintendo character off the Nintendo console is harder than getting Sora into Smash, and that's very intentional for them.

[@thatoneXman]

To add onto this, the branding is also important because people know Nintendo for THOSE characters. Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, Metroid, etc and etc. There's such a huge amount of exclusives under their belt and that's REALLY BIG for Nintendo, because they know that people would play their games and systems for the exclusives alone. Folks play your games simply because they've come to expect *those series'* to be represented with your famous seal of quality, and forking over the rights to other publishers to pass around Captain Olimar like he's a hot potato would put a damper on how special that is. And there's no doubt that other publishers like Sony or Microsoft would KILL to have something like that.

[@farter-hall9681]

This line of logic is entirely absurd. While Nintendo is unique in its age and legacy in gaming and is (or was) known for its top-quality products Sony is also right there. While Sony doesn't have the "luxury" branding of Nintendo it has a long list of exclusives that they refused to let go for a very long time. God of War for example was made multimedia only recently and only for it's 2 latest releases. I don't remember a word being said about how Sony was desperate because they released GoW on PC. If Nintendo let Fortnite have the Samus skin I could only see a future that would have endless hype for the future of Nintendo. Because Nintendo showed it is willing to step out of its comfort zone and experiment. This is on top of Samus not just being on a different game but being on the single largest advertising forum today. Samus being on Fortnite would expose her to millions of kids that would recognize her and want other pieces of media with Samus in it. This is just my anecdotal experience, but I have had a 7-year-old kid point at my Family Guy shirt and say, "I know who that is!" If that kid can point out Peter Griffen on a shirt I'm sure he could point out any other character that's been in Fortnite. Even if they gave Epic the ok to make a skin of Samus or any character, Nintendo would still have final say in how that character is portrayed. Rather famously Nintendo dictated exactly how Bowser would sit and hold a cup in Wreck-it Ralph. The thing with rumors is... there's already a lot of them for Nintendo and none of them have been good rumors for years. You got to any space that mentions the Switch, and you'll eventually hear "At this point Nintendo is purposefully keeping drift so they can milk money from people having to buy new controllers." or how about the rumor a few years ago that suggested one of the Cooking Mama games for the Switch was a trojan horse for bitcoin mining. Again this is all on top of all the times Nintendo has shut down fan projects, attacked KZbinrs for just having Nintendo stuff in their videos, or very recently where Nintendo forced Gary's Mod to remove all Nintendo related content from the community workshop. Modern Nintendo has the reputation in gaming spaces of being not just being a greedy company with a death grip on it's IP but is also vindictive and malicious actors who hate their fans. Nintendo loosening that grip even a tiny bit would bring waves of good publicity and might even bring more people into the Nintendo ecosystem. Ignoring all of that though, Nintendo needs to look at its future as a company. Its market share is shrinking slowly but surely while heavily relying on its name that is bleeding prestige and relevance. They're not doing anything to actively get into the next generation of gamers and are keeping themselves walled off in their own area. Nintendo as it exists today is threading the rope that will hang it.

[@weebcraft6829]

Meanwhile Nintendo puts all its stuff into Fall Guys?

[@lovelydumpling]

@@weebcraft6829 There have not been any official collaborations between Fall Guys and Nintendo. Just fan-made content using Fall Guys's creative mode.

[@James_Dawg]

Can't agree with the "premium brand" angle ever since Nintendo let joy con drift last for so long.

[@Satellaview1889]

Your comment about how your Nephew laments his seemingly "niche" tastes is a sentiment my mother would probably share. She is a teacher, and she to laments the fact that kids only seem to talk about Fortnite, although she has a distaste of it for other reasons.

[@julianx2rl]

Samus and Link almost made it into Ultimate Alliance, yes, Marvel's* Ultimate Alliance. But Activision fucked up and showed them footage of Samus running on the PS2 version. The dev team tried to explain that the content was exclusive to Wii, and they just showed them on PS2 for a development convenience. But Nintendo was apparently so offended regardless that they pulled the plug anyway, they're DAT adamant and that petty about their exclusivity.

[@VnVnV-893]

​@@runicex2310 I agree that Activision wasn't professional in their actions but saying that having IP on PS2 vs IP on gamecube would in any way put the IP in jeopardy is insane.

[@mystrenula3911]

​@@runicex2310 That's not how ip works, and I agree that it was unprofessional

[@jibjibs9401]

@@runicex2310 No, that's not how that works and you don't seem to understand the difference between trademark and copyright. In this specific case it was literally behind the scenes.

[@jibjibs9401]

@@mystrenula3911 Not really, it's a fairly common practice

[@redring4083]

It's not like Microsoft and Sony weren't the same back then. Kratos was exclusive on the PlayStation version of Mortal Kombat 9.

[@beetlebat.]

I think too many IPs get skins in fortnite for it to drive people to Metroid. If it was a more prestigious thing to become a fortnite skin maybe people would think "oh wow this must be a big deal for it to be in fortnite!" But there are so many skins that I think it would just be viewed as a cool looking skin for most people.

[@Wingsaber]

Hard agree, I remember so many people picked up fortnite to try the DBZ skins, and then less so for the Family guy one, and now most people I know don't really care at all unless they already play Fortnite actively.

[@KingAgniKai]

The last big one was Naruto since it was the first anime/manga skin and event

[@pro-toman]

If it was JUST a skin in the shop, yes, I agree. But if there was an event associated with it, paired with other exclusive gear and weapons modeled after the Metroid series? There’s no way it would just be seen as some cool looking stuff to even most people. It would stand out as its own series and at least some people will be curious. That said, would Nintendo let that happen? Nahhh lmao

[@dexchampion2128]

You also have to consider the time frame she was planned to be released. She was planned to be released immediately after Kratos and Master Chief. This was the start of the huge collaboration effort for Fortnite, so it would have been early enough that it would have been a big deal. But it ALSO would have been Gaming History in the making. A major character from all of Gaming’s Big Three in one game, in the span of one month. Even if you weren’t a fan, that would have been huge.

[@beetlebat.]

​@@dexchampion2128 even then I think that would've driven people towards fortnite, rather than fortnite players towards Metroid.

[@LARAUJO_0]

I think Nintendo just has PTSD from putting Mario and Zelda on the CDI

[@Duskool]

Every time they get offered some lucrative crossover with another console or such and such "Yeah! That old Ganon's no match for the King!" Echoes thru their office

[@MoonyTheBat]

A year ago I went to a convention and met the voice over director for Breath of the Wild, James Mortellaro. I mentioned I was studying audio engineering and he said to shoot him an email and that he wouldn't mind passing around my resume to "his peeps." When I got home and stared at my unfinished resume, I was so afraid that it would never be good enough or that I wouldn't hear back, or they would tell me that it was bad, so I just... never sent him my resume. I heavily regret that lol. Great video Arlo!

[@Artista_Frustrado]

16:56 yeah... about that, there's ample evidence that the IP Owners do NOT have full control of their depictions, starting with the inoffensive Dabbing Thanos, to "we need to explain in a comic why Batman uses guns now", to Indiana Jones craking his whip in the Black History Museum map

[@SdudyoyO]

Nintendo's control over their IP's is what's kept them relevant, they don't sell consoles because of which third parties support them, it's because their IP's are valuable and recognized. If they sacrifice control over how a character is presented--They risk damaging that IP's reputation. It's not just about competing consoles, but I also imagine not wanting Samus to floss next to Rick Sanchez, was a reason why they were afraid to go forward with the deal. Most people who play Fortnite are kids, Metroid is aimed for Teenagers/Adults. Characters are popular in Fortnite _because_ they're recognized, Peter Griffin isn't more popular now than he was before Fortnite, he was already popular and that's why people were excited to see him in Fortnite. Most kids who don't already know Samus, wouldn't see her as anything more than a Master Chief clone. Those that would be excited to play her, most likely already own a Nintendo console, and those that don't know her, wouldn't be able to get an understanding of her character in Fortnite. Many Nintendo fans would LOVE to play Samus in Fornite, I'm sure. But I can't say that it counts as free advertisement, when the character in question looks a bit like a generic Sci-Fi Space suit wearing character in a fast paced battle royale where you may or may not see the skin of your opponent. Then you have the terrible monetization and the horrid environment at Epic--They refused Nintendo's proposal, and so Nintendo saw them as a company that didn't respect them. What reason _would_ they have to work with them? I agree that Nintendo should focus on advertising Metroid better -- But if Smash Brothers, one of the most popular fighting games of all time, that attracts Gamers from across all consoles, a game that already exists on the Switch, so everyone who plays it, _could play Metroid,_ can't bring more people to be interested in Metroid, then I sincerely doubt Fortnite would reach that many more players to look into the series. It's not like Samus isn't well recognized among gamers either, it's simply that Metroidvania's, don't have a large audience to attract, and Nintendo hasn't been doing much to breach out of the box containing the genre. I just don't see a Samus skin in Fortnite as being all that beneficial for Nintendo themselves, they don't need the cut of skin sales, they already make enough money. It wouldn't be popular enough amongst Non-Metroid fans to really bring in new fans, and the only people who might learn about Metroid through Fortnite, are kids who are outside the target audience of Metroid anyway. This deal stands to benefit Epic, more than Nintendo. Maybe I'm wrong, but I just don't see this as a fumble on Nintendo's part, more-so on Epic's side.

[@SimeonJester]

all of this is extremely correct

[@TravisSheflin]

Expertly worded. I can’t believe our man made a 20+ minute video about this.

[@SimeonJester]

​@@TravisSheflin yeaaa lol sometimes our favorite content creators just super miss the point about stuff - Although I am floored by how realitively nicely everyone has been dissagreeing with Arlo here - like, everyone is just unanimously dissagreeing and nobody is getting really nasty and mean about it. which is nice to see

[@mikaelamonsterland]

Nintendo shitty dinosaur company and you are silly if you can't see that.

[@punkydudester3]

Very good points.

[@Wippipippi]

The problem with these arguments is that people always go. "That darn greedy company, all they care about is money!!" Then when company doesn't do something customer wants them to do "Company so stupid, they would make SOO much money if they just did what I want" Nintendo is just doing as they always do, maintaining their brand image and IP, even if it would "make them more money" to sell you a 20 dollar skin in a live service game mind you.

[@BowserEditz]

It's hilariously Hypocritical how this fanbase is when something doesn't fit there own agenda

[@Bashfluff]

What’s hypocritical about it? We’re not against the concept of Nintendo making money. We’re against the concept of Nintendo making money at the expense of its customers. I want Nintendo to be successful, and when they make bad business decisions for silly reasons, I don’t really like it.

[@BowserEditz]

@@Bashfluff It's not hard to understand

[@Alex_1A]

​@@BashfluffThat's how *we* are about it, not the Internet at large.

[@Adamtendo_player_1]

I like the fact that Nintendo guard ther IP so rigourously it shows that they care about their IP where is if you asked me Sony and Microsoft do not care about as much.

[@firstprimehunter]

You know from the thumbnail I thought you were going to say the fumble was *including* samus in fortnite. You had me scared for a second there. Thank god they backed out of the deal. Good on them.

[@Xalerdane]

Wouldn’t Fox have been a better choice? Samus only has the one gun bolted to her arm, while Fox has canonically carried a bunch of guns at once.

[@AJHornet1]

I don’t see Samus going into Fortnite and then Fortnite players coming over to Metroid. I think that ‘upside’ is a fantasy.

[@PunishedDad]

arlo said it himself, those kids are just talking about fortnite adding crossovers doesn't get them not talking about fortnite I really don't understand the logic leaps

[@mjc0961]

100% a fantasy. They'll play Fortnite as Samus and then when the next skin comes, they'll play Fortnite as that and forget all about Samus.

[@michanowak7060]

Well, people can enjoy different type of gameplay. I do like soulslikes for their slow methodic combat and I like doomer shooters for their chaotic carnage. I can easily imagine people who enjoy both battle royale and alone metroid gameplay. Especially with scale of how many people are into fortnite

[@FrahdChikun]

@@mjc0961 and when a new Metroid game comes out, they'll say "oh it's that skin from Fortnite!"

[@dexchampion2128]

As someone ON the Fortnite side of things, people began playing Metroid after the rumor of her getting in came out. People were hugely excited for her and to experience playing as Samus without the huge Nintendo price tag. Combined with the fact that several other series, creators and even forms of media saw huge jumps in their respective fields after collaborating with Fortnite, and this opinion you have is the real fantasy.

[@billybilly3511]

Idk how to feel about seeing Arlo talking with Fortnite playing in the background

[@billybilly3511]

@@dorian6021it’s just not a game I’d expect to see Arlo talk about ever lmao. I have nothing against the game.

[@TheSixthSLoT]

@@dorian6021 I don't think it's odd. Arlo branded himself primarily as a Nintendo Tuber. It's not all he does, but it's so much of what he does that it is a little jarring to see him cover something that's in the zeitgeist of pop culture outside of Nintendo, like Fortnite.

[@Broswald_Inc]

Tru

[@TheSixthSLoT]

@@dorian6021 I literally said that it's not all he does dude.

[@PowerGem3000]

@@dorian6021why are you being such a buzzkill

[@MalzraAirwynn]

To be perfectly honest, my reaction to 'Samus didn't get into fortnite' is just that clip of Zelda from wand of gamelon saying 'Good!'

[@julianburrell5058]

I think that not wanting Samus on other consoles is just the beginning of what Nintendo would have wanted. I can't imagine Nintendo being okay with Samus doing certain dance moves or being T-bagged or modded or any number of other things that Fortnite is known for. No amount of publicity is worth the company not directly controlling their character's presentation to Nintendo. It is what it is.

[@frazercowan4030]

But that's not the reason. They were perfectly happy with having Samus in Fortnite if she was Switch exclusive.

[@JG_Wentworth]

That's such disgusting, corporate reasoning. Are you on their payroll?

[@bigshrekhorner]

@@JG_Wentworth Reread the comment again. They're presenting Nintendo's view on the matter, not their own.

[@dexchampion2128]

@@bigshrekhornerand Nintendo’s view on the matter is incredibly backwards easily countered. If Nintendo doesn’t like what people do with Samus in Fortnite, all they have to do is say “Samus in Fortnite isn’t canon”. Boom. Done. Any and all “damage” that could be done is immediately fixed.

[@chiquita683]

​@@dexchampion2128Does anyone think The Rock in Fortnite is his real life? 😂 Does anyone think in Halo you build forts in combat? Do people think Optimus is about 6 ft tall? 😂

[@SuperPaperPokemon]

A small comment on Arlo's burrito analogy: getting Samus as a skin on Fortnite, and played on other consoles wouldn't really be equivalent to a burrito restaurant opening up a pop-up store in a con or making a food truck out of their restaurant. It would still be _themselves_ selling their own product. It would be more equivalent to a burrito restaurant letting their own burrito recipe be sold by a different restaurant as a collaboration. Or maybe, creating a line of frozen burritos to be sold in supermarkets, outside of their control. Someone else is selling their own product.

[@nicobane]

this whole video is countered by a simple question: "are kids buying sf6 after the sf skins were constantly popular on fortnite? or are they just making chun li twerk?" pretty easy to see why nintendo wouldn't care to pass this up.

[@ZorusSerif]

if this does happen, I can just see it now Kids: you mean samus from fortnite?

[@sirraven_]

Literally no one says this.

[@ZorusSerif]

@@sirraven_ I'm referencing a meme :/

[@SakuraAvalon]

Correction. Metroid from Fortnite. Don't know who this Samus fella is.

[@darcidious99]

​@@SakuraAvalonspoilers for metroid dread: well that's the neat thing about metroid, is that that isn't even a meme anymore... Its canon now

[@kyurei4478]

​@@SakuraAvalonIt's kinda true now anyway.

[@calvinbrinenestoris2357]

On one end, there goes all the free marketing to Fortnite's massive playerbase... On the other end, THANK GOODNESS the Fortnite kids can't ruin Samus.

[@Sir_Psych]

Interigrity seems to confuse people

[@dmclsl03]

How exactly are they gonna ruin her

[@calvinbrinenestoris2357]

@dmclsl03 I mean, maybe it'll be nothing, but... Fortnite kids are really annoying. I was in middle school when it first got popular, and it was excruciating being around all that. Couple that with the fact that I've seen posts about people who thought that all the characters who have skins in fortnite were just fortnite characters (There's that one famous post about the guy who thought "Stormtrooper" was just a skin from fortnite and DMed a random Star Wars fan because they thought he was talking about a Fortnite skin. Obviously, this is an extreme example, but Samus is also far more obscure than any Star Wars character). So combine the skin confusion with how annoying Fortnite's fanbase can be, and... I mean, idk if it would really be that big of a deal, I might just be paranoid because of middle school PTSD, but if Samus became super known for just being a cool space-marine fortnite skin with the ball and the arm cannon and her players would try to start Fortnite convos with Metroid fans while having no idea what Metroid was... It might boost sales considerably, but idk if it's worth it. That's a lot of shit I'd rather not have the Metroid fanbase deal with. Plus, any new players coming in from Fortnkte, excited to play a shoot-shoot game that lended their character to another more popular shoot-shoot game, then it's not impossible that they would not be so happy to find out that some of Samus' games are 2d or that the 3d games aren't very combat heavy. And, although I don't think this outcome is at all likely, it IS possible that it could lead to new players outside the fanbase pressuring Metroid games to become more traditional shooters. Now, my judgment in this scenario is most likely clouded due to me absolutely hating Fortnite and its fandom. But... man, I just don't want to see my poor Samus tainted by that beast. It might lead to more popularity, but at what cost?

[@StardustWhip]

@@calvinbrinenestoris2357 Your judgement is _definitely_ clouded by you hating Fortnite. Fortnite wouldn't ruin Samus. Kids coming in from Fortnite wouldn't be any more disappointed that Metroid isn't Fortnite than they would be disappointed that Spider-Man isn't Fortnite. You're getting paranoid and creating make-believe scenarios because you hate the thing that kids these days are into. Like most of the people in this comment section are.

[@calvinbrinenestoris2357]

​@@StardustWhip Hey I hated Fortnite when I was a kid, too. It's not like I'm hating on some NEW game that kids freak out over. Although yeah, it probably is stupid of me to think that Fortnite players coming to Metroid would be angry about it not being a traditional shooter. I'm still definitely concerned about some of those other worries with Samus and the Fortnite fandom, though.

[@kitrawr6992]

Wait, I thought we liked that Nintendo is less involved in microtransaction stuff...?

[@PunishedDad]

this ^ I am so confused why people are upset that nintendo isn't going to contribute to the predatory monetization targeted at children in fornite what kind of cope is this actual brainrot

[@pastqr]

Bro come on that's not even the same thing....

[@-lord1754]

​@@pastqrlol how

[@pastqr]

@@-lord1754 For one these are two different games. Epic can charge whatever they want for their FREE game. You know what Nintendo game isn't free and still has microtransactions? Smash Brothers Ultimate. On top of a fighter pass and all type of Mii microtransactions. Other Nintendo games with Microtransactions: Pokémon Café Mix, Pokémon Quest, Pokémon Shuffle/Unite. Mario Run, and Mario Kart Tour.

[@TextileGeorge]

Yeah but Arlo needed something to make a video about and there's no other news so....

[@TCOFFICIAL01]

I agree with Nintendo on this. I would be very disappointed if my metroids and marios ended up in such an extremely monetized game.

[@Celebee]

uhh mario kart tour..?

[@lucg4005]

Bruh you even taken a glance at any of Nintendo’s mobile games? Mario run, Feh, animal crossing, and others I can’t think of. All were or still are extremely monetized, published by Nintendo companies themselves.

[@TCOFFICIAL01]

@@lucg4005 Good point. I was thinking along the lines of console games, forgetting about mobile monetization because of how normalized it has become. You are very correct in this statement of yours.

[@Retro6502]

There's little upside for Nintendo to put Samus in Fortnite or any of their characters in a non-Nintendo game. They have some of the most recognized IPs in gaming. What you seem to be missing is that keeping things on their platform drives demand for their stuff. No company gets it right all the time, but Nintendo's successfully run a video game business for almost 50 years and the company itself is 134 years old. Now look at their competitors...

[@unfunny5928]

Yeah, they're vastly more successful in a far shorter period of time, what's your point?

[@Traveler_of_the_Stars]

For someone who often talks about gaming companies' scummy business practices, I'm surprised you are this upset about this. You mention this, but regardless, it sounds like by you "setting aside" your distaste for Fortnite and Epic, you think the scumminess of the two things should be ignored. You are saying the morals you often preach about can be overlooked if enough publicly is gained. Yeah, exposure is great and it would've been great for Metroid to have more exposure, but I'm happy that Nintendo didn't let one of their characters go to Fortnite/Epic. Nintendo can be frustratingly stubborn and old-fasioned at times, but yeah, I *do* think you're making a mountain out of a mole hill. I love you Arlo (been subscribed since 2016), but this video was just overblown in my opinion.

[@markigirl2757]

Not necessarily people need to take more responsibility for themselves with their money and how they spend it. Not saying those companies should do it but they did it bc of business reasons and Metroid really needs something to justify making any future games tbh

[@AndrewChumKaser]

On the other hand: Perhaps we should in fact applaud a company willing to stick to its laurels, informally telling us that making more money is not their one and only goal. I'm not suggesting that's what's going on, but it's a possibility I suppose.

[@ryanmatthew3740]

You’re talking about Nintendo?? The company that sells skyward sword for $60? The company that refuses to fix their online services at absurd prices? The company that refuses to rework their controllers instead of paying millions of dollars to improve the consumer experience? The company that consistently takes people to court for emulating a game they refuse to sell? Open your fanboy eyes. You sound like the CEO from smiling friends “ITS MY IP TO SIT ON NOT THEIRS” shut up man.

[@davetheimpaler204]

I mean, if you're naive enough to believe Nintendo would ever let their IP appear on a competitor's console as long as they have their own on the market, I don't know what to tell you. Lol Unlike Microsoft, or Sony to an extent, who consider their brand or subscription services to be the real "platform", Nintendo is still fully invested in HARDWARE as their platform.

[@goldenninja9053]

Yeah, and it also seems that Xbox and Playstation don't care about their exclusivity for anything since 2020, given their original stuff can be found on other things nowadays.

[@RippahRooJizah]

@@goldenninja9053 Do keep in mind we're in an environment where plenty of people decry exclusive games as always anti-consumer. Sony does care about exclusivity but will go on PC (for better and for worse) because there's demand for it.

[@pinappizzayumyum6390]

When I was younger, I genuinely thought Reggie Fils-Aimé was your dad

[@FaytShadowGamingDeveloper]

I think what really happened is that ever since they released IP's of mario and zelda to phillips for the CD-I. The games were so hated that ever since Nintendo has never released rights ever since...

[@PamonhasDePiracicaba]

7:17 - Strong Disagree. Being in Fornite is extremely overrated. Street Fighter sales were barely affected by Ryu and Chun-Li in Fortnite. I doubt Samus being added would’ve improved Metroid sales. The pros do not justify the cons.

[@tloz171nfs]

Nintendo would also have either gotten paid a lump sum and/or per skin sold.

[@StardustWhip]

Here's a question: What cons? Like Arlo said, the worst case scenario, even if we assume that absolutely 0% of the Fortnite-playing kids even consider playing Metroid after seeing Samus... is that Nintendo makes money off of kids buying a cool skin of a bounty hunter with a cool mech suit.

[@capgangchannel6309]

@@StardustWhip the downside to Nintendo would be that they would have no control over how Samus would have been portrayed in fortnite. Every emote works for all skins so that would mean Samus would be able to do all those emotes including emotes released in the future. Nintendo doesn’t know what Fortnite will add into their game in the future either, what sort of guns will they add, or gameplay elements. All things Nintendo would have no control over. So in this way Samus could be portrayed in Fortnite in a way that Nintendo wouldn’t want it to. So ultimately Nintendo chose to not do it in order to keep complete control of their characters. This is something Arlo conveniently ignores in his argument.

[@kryzethx]

@@tloz171nfs Nintendo doesn't really care about money, if it means watering down their IP; they value that more than anything

[@knatkniht]

​@@StardustWhip It's about integrity. Fortnite just wants to consume more and have more. The deal only serves that greed.

[@CarrsonCarr]

It’s an unfortunate reality, I know for rocket league Nintendo made Mario, Luigi, and Samus cars, but they’re exclusive to Switch versions of the game.

[@kamenraider1175]

Yeah, but if memory serves, each console had exclusive cars

[@vegancarnotaurus8216]

I think you meant fortunate reality

[@JJAB91]

@@vegancarnotaurus8216 How is it fortunate?

[@knatkniht]

Why is it unfortunate?

[@JJAB91]

@@knatkniht Because Samus in Fortnite would be fun?

[@Spider-Dude_Handle]

Can guarantee you Samus in Fortnite would not help the series 1 bit. Example: Isaac in Fortnite when they released the Dead Space Remake. Great game, representation in Fortnite. Still flopped. Kids will just see it as another cool Fortnite skin and will never even have ANY passing thought as to where it came from. A perfect meme example of this: "oh look! It's Aang from Fortnite!"

[@DS9TREK]

No, you can't guarantee that. There's no counter factual for you to use to prove your opinion

[@Spider-Dude_Handle]

@@DS9TREK Well if I'm right, then I'm right and if I'm wrong, it helps the Metroid series. So it's a win-win either way. 👍

[@MoxStash]

Hey its Samus from Fortnite!

[@gaylordpickmang2076]

Maybe it wouldn’t help A TON but it’s not like every fortnite player who doesn’t know Metroid doesn’t have the brainpower to understand where the skins come from lol

[@thelegendofstonecoldstevea3205]

@@DS9TREKsure he can. Prove him wrong then.

[@Ramiel1point0]

Good. Personally really glad I don't have to see Samus dancing over shooting people in the head on top of tons of other fictional characters for whom it is disgustingly out of character.

[@WadeSilver]

I think 13:17 is the part my mind sticks on most. Getting Samus from Nintendo would be "their biggest collab yet." But why is that? Why would getting this character from a series that doesn't sell great and that most of Fortnite's core audience don't even know exists be more valuable than the myriad of others with much larger impact they've pulled in? From my perspective, that is because all Nintendo characters have innate value that others don't, all *because* of how exclusive they are. I think if you take one of these characters and drop them onto someone's PlayStation or Xbox you immediately lose that innate value. Will you get money? Sure. Publicity? Of course. But they will instantly become another video game character, whereas they used to be a *Nintendo Character* , and thus it's to me as though compromising on this front would genuinely be killing off the very reason she's a desirable character for them in the first place. I know that if you dare to take Nintendo's side on the internet you're immediately seen as a neckbearded white knight, but I share my honest thoughts, and I kinda think they made the right decision here, at least as far as the long-term is concerned.

[@anglure3617]

the anecdote about your nephew's schoolmates only wanting to talk about fortnite hits me harder than it should. well, that and the amongus butts

[@SharpEdgeSoda]

The Worst Case Scenerio is Metroid gets an audience that wants Metroid to become a big dumb shooter and remove all the ambience, atmosphere, and exploration for big dumb shooting time.

[@khanhnguyen-tt3ff]

Lol they did try that with federation forces

[@ace9950]

💀i doubt that would happen, worse case scenario is that ppl try out metroid n dont like it

[@AsilarWindsailor]

Exactly. Metroid isn't about being a shooter. It's about being on an adventure exploring places in a heavily isolated atmospheric experience. Not a mindless shooter with silly dances

[@teenageapple3788]

@@ace9950 Their loss. Metroid is a gem of a franchise

[@StardustWhip]

I don't think that's happened for any other series that's crossed over with Fortnite. Like, do you really think that the kids who play Fortnite and went to go see Spider-Verse got disappointed because Miguel didn't shoot Miles and start disco dancing? Do you think they watched Avatar and went "man, this sucks, I can't believe Aang didn't use a gun!"? No, they didn't, because kids are smart enough to understand that the franchises which cross over with Fortnite aren't the same thing as Fortnite itself. I mean, by this logic, kids who learned about Fire Emblem or Xenoblade through Smash Bros. would want them to turn into four-player platform fighters.

[@JubbiHubbi]

There's no evidence that these crossovers help IP growth. Bayonetta was huge for Smash Brothers and the games didn't benefit at all sales wise

[@shanedestroyer]

idk i feel from what ive heard its basically undeniable that smash boosted fire emblem and earthbound, maybe the later games have done it less with so many characters but really as arlo said the downsides are even more miniscule

[@JG_Wentworth]

So what exactly is the consequence? You can't give a straight answer can you?

[@bulb9970]

Third party characters in Smash aren’t included to give their franchises more exposure. On the contrary, the most requested by fans are the chosen ones. Banjo was obviously not chosen to boost sales, it was only because fans liked him. That’s how Bayonetta got in, she won the Smash ballot. So a lot of people already knew who she was and sales wouldn’t get boosted by them. And for the people who didn’t already know her, it can’t be ignored that Bayonetta killed the competitive scene of Smash 4 and left a sour taste on their mouth. Even though the casual audience is much bigger than the competitive one, Bayo is still the most infamous character in Smash history and what she did negatively is common knowledge by now.

[@JubbiHubbi]

@@JG_Wentworth That you give up control of your IP to a third party without receiving a viable benefit in return? Why would Nintendo want Samus to hit the griddy with Kratos instead of mantaining their own control

[@flow185]

​@@shanedestroyermelee defo helped fire emblem for sure

[@Surkk2960]

As someone who suffers from both decision and task paralysis, I can understand why Nintendo probably did this. Big N seemed to be following the "give em and inch" mindset, which is not the worst mindset sometimes. A lot of people have a tendency to want to play Nintendo games, but not on Nintendo products, thus why there are so many people with eye-patches "swabbing the Deck on a Steamship". If Nintendo did say yes to this, it would give this non-system side of the argument more firepower to demand Big N to go multi-platform, which for them is a net-negative as a hardware developer. Also, by the way Sony and Microsoft are going, trying to keep to their own ship for now might not be the worst decision.

[@MikePhantom]

but the literally have to. they are not the securest company possessing IPs. they do not have the resources, man power or knowhow to stay save against companies that are several times bigger than them. "but they have so much money" money is NOT none of the things i listed.

[@zanderxadvancesp284]

I don't think Arlo realizes that the Fortnits & Nintendo audiences are so different that it actually makes sense why they didn't let Samus go. I've seen a similar type of argument with PS not doing smaller scale games more often but then you see that even their experimental AAA stuff sell worse than Nintendo's AA & A output that's still 60$-50$.

[@emmanuelgonzalezcaseira9141]

Well, I get it, I get what you are saying... but... Nintendo has the business high ground. They have such weight that they don't need this move. I mean, the Switch is such a success that by itself, Metroid Prime 4 will be a franchise best seller.

[@boredhuman6512]

gonna be real at this point it reversed to me like... everything is in fortnite by now, nintendo getting a skin there would just be a tiny thing up on a pile. Don't know why I should care for a bigger "advertising opportunity" for them, I care for their games not their buisness strategy

[@CheesyLizzy]

I care cause it'd get more people to care about their games and make it easier for Nintendo to make more games like Metroid Prime 4 for example If demand goes up and things are more well known in the public eye, it makes it easier for Nintendo to take risks and produce stuff

[@FenexTheFox]

If the series becomes more successful, it means we get more games. It's a win for everyone.

[@tloz171nfs]

It's not just advertising, I'm sure they get $ for each skin sold and I would've bought it the second it was available...if I could use it on ps5. I ain't playing Fortnite at 480p 30fps with low settings just to see Samus.

[@alanhardy7024]

@@CheesyLizzy Fortnight does so many colabs that Samus would not actualy end up making a difference. The kids who play fortnight arent gonna be like "oh that character looks cool Im going to google it", because it would just be one of many games they would not know about. And anyone who already knows who Samus is not gonna just decide to buy it because they saw it in fortnight.

[@CheesyLizzy]

@@alanhardy7024 Simply seeing the character is still impactful though Kids might later see a Metroid game at Walmart or somewhere and be like, "Oh! I recognize that character. I wonder what their game is." There's many franchises that I've discovered over the years simply by recognizing characters from Smash

[@TheOjamaYellow]

I saw GameXplain complain about this too. I don’t quite get it. Indiana Jones in Fortnite didn’t translate to massive ticket sales or popularize the IP for kids. If it’s true that Fortnite is the only game the kids play, why would this change that behavior? In terms of “what do you have to lose?”, I agree. But because of the reasons I listed earlier, I don’t really think of it as a major missed opportunity.

[@AJMegaScizor]

well i mean indy is already pretty popular? I think it obviously wouldnt translate to game sales directly but just getting the franchise known is always beneficial

[@pommer2128]

Indiana Jones was put into Fortnite when no major Indiana Jones movie/game/media was released. He's a Battle Pass exclusive skin that can never be obtained ever again. They couldn't re-release him for Dial of Destiny because the only way to get him was to be there for that 3 month period when he was available. This isn't the best example.

[@napoleonfeanor]

Disney did their hardest to chase away Indy fans

[@mjc0961]

Agreed, this is a complete nothing burger.

[@Tribdinosaur]

@@mjc0961 Double agree. Everyone is outraged that it didn't happen, but...why.

[@Tazer_Silverscar]

Yeah, you really are overthinking this. Nintendo do not see benefit on having Samus be present *at all* on other platforms. And I'm fine with that. She doesn't NEED to be. And really, her being on Fortnite would feel like cheaping out because they're already working on a bunch of stuff involving her. And well, they insisted on having Samus be an exclusive because Rocket League was able to oblige their requirements, so Fortnite should be able to too. They obviously did not. I would call this Fortnite's loss, not Nintendo's. I think you're so up to your eyeballs trying to pretend you aren't upset over how long MP4 is taking that you suddenly believe that any Samus content is better than none. Take a breather, have a rethink. Nintendo are not losing out on this. YOU are not losing out on this. You're fine. And Nintendo are fine. They don't need or want Samus in Fortnite on other systems, and that's fine. 3 million copies for Metroid Dread is a success! And that's why there's no point in worrying about it. By the way, if they make that exception for Samus, then that means the gloves are off. They'd be getting more demands than ever for ALL games to be officially available off Nintendo platforms. And that doesn't sit right with them when they're selling the most commercially available and viable console. There's no point. 17:00 - No, you can't. You REALLY CAN'T. Fortnite has a certain way it works, and Epic are quite insistent on doing things their way. If they didn't come up with it, it isn't happening. There's a reason why the game allows everyone to do the same stupid dances, why everyone uses the same weapons, and why the only people who ever seem to be excited about skins on Fortnite are the terminally online players and pre-pubescent teenagers who should not be introduced to a gun, but are because LOOK AT THE PRETTY COLOURS. Ick. Also Fortnite players typically don't tend to play other types of games. No IP has ever benefited from being on Fortnite for the last... 5 or so years.

[@infrasoundthelostsoul8830]

Wait ‘till Arlo hears about all of the player-made content of Nintendo IPs getting removed from Gmod’s workshop on Steam. Tens of thousands of player models, maps, custom weapons and items, you name it. Gone.

[@nirvan4307]

3:23 As a native East Asian, I'm actually getting a vibe that Nintendo actually didn't mean that. I think Nintendo was practically saying "No" in a different way, knowing Fortnite would not accept the offer.

[@Sir_Psych]

That's the way I would understand it too. I don't think there was a chance of it happening and dude from Epic just wanted to flex ideas he had

[@SharpEdgeSoda]

Oh my god this. This is part of the game is if your going to say "No", don't say "No." Make an absurd demand where you win extra hard and see if they take it.

[@FenexTheFox]

​@@SharpEdgeSodaWasn't asking for Samus to be console-exclusive already the absurd demand?

[@lonecom685]

​@@FenexTheFoxit IS the absurd demand.

[@cherubin7th]

@@FenexTheFox Yes, that is the point, they demanded console exclusive because they knew this would not be accepted. Better than outright saying: No your game is cancer and we will not touch that pile of garbage.

[@pobbityboppity1110]

I dunno, it just doesn’t seem like it would matter more than a few weeks. It would be a $20 skin and it just wouldn’t really make a huge dent in anyone’s awareness of Metroid. The downside is to make Nintendo’s IP seem cheap, just another thing in Fortnite’s discount DVD bin of IP junk in a bad art style.

[@tpspeed]

Im honestly fine with Samus not being in fortnite. Like, i get it. The cultural significance of Fortnite is there, and it's a good sales pitch to get eyes on a franchise. For me personally, though, im just so exhausted with the all-encompassing nature of Fortnite. Like it just wants to BE everything, HAVE everything. Concerts, movie teasers, a rhythm game, racing, a pseudo crafting survival game in Lego Fortnite, and every character from every franchise ever, even characters from books like Mistborn are in the game. On paper, thats cool as hell. In practice, it feels so shallow and corporate and more like a play to get everything associated with the game rather than the other way around. It just feels like epic wants to monopolize everyones time and that sucks Now if Nintendo actually DID ANYTHING WITH SAMUS

[@Sqwivig]

Yeah for real. Fortnite just REEKS of corporate greed. It's Nintendo's fault for not using the Metroid IP THEMSELVES. Why are we blaming Epic for not promoting Metroid? That's NINTENDO'S JOB! If they actually cared about Samus, they would make more games for her! Simple as.

[@Seoul_Soldier]

I'd be less anti-Nintendo if some Nintendo fans were more consistent. The stuff that they excuse Nintendo for would have them boycotting other companies over.

[@plainstupid]

Then you missed the point of the video. It’s their business principles that’s the problem, not Fortnite.

[@NuiYabuko]

​@@Seoul_Soldier Like, what exactly?

[@nesraspongx58]

@@Seoul_Soldier i mean, the problem with boycotting games is the company won't see it as the action, but as the game, so if the game was good that would hurt it, or even if just an installment in the series was bad but they want the series in a different way, they'll say it's with the whole series i think if we boycott them for things like their copyright state, well, you boycott pokemon, they won't say it's with the current games and their philosophy being bad, or that it's because they closed fangames people have been working on for over a decade, they're gonna say pokemon games aren't profitable or aren't worth making ofc pokemon is so big it wouldn't matter and they wouldn't stop it, but for smaller series that would be the case

[@comrade_snarky]

Counterpoint: Fortnite is lowest common denominator sludge and it's a good thing that Samus hasn't been crudely plastered into it along with 8 million other licensed characters.

[@JojoTheVulture]

Not a legitimate reason not to have a character in fortnite.

[@comrade_snarky]

@@JojoTheVulture Not a legitimate comment. Boy, what a fun game you've come up with!

[@dexchampion2128]

Genuine Question: If Fortnite is low brow sludge, why has it succeeded as one of the most popular games of all time for 6 (almost 7) years straight, and other companies that would, in theory, do the job better, flipping and dying basically on arrival? You don’t have to enjoy Fortnite, but to imply the game itself is bad simply because you don’t like it is a slippery slope. How many people don’t enjoy Metroid? Does that mean Metroid is absolute gutter trash and no one should play it? Hell no! The “popular = bad” mentality really goes out the window when you’re trying to defend Nintendo of all people.

[@False_Monado]

@@dexchampion2128 my opinion, but simply put, there is a large portion of people who look for something mindless and exciting for entertainment as mainly a way to check out from real life for a while. Strictly speaking, this isn’t a bad thing, nor is it terribly different from how (in my experience) people enjoy a series like Metroid that requires a bit more problem/puzzle solving and a certain type of attention. Problem is, and I won’t go into detail as to societal reasons why, the group of people into the lowest common denominator junk food games is larger than those wanting creative games with complex and rewarding gameplay, or stories, or what have you. The issue comes that many companies see “X is huge” and think “we should copy X” or “Let’s make our stuff more like X”. So I personally I don’t point at Fortnite as some worthless trash, I do consider it a plague on the gaming space threatening to cannibalize what I consider more intelligently designed and more satisfying games. Rather than existing as a separate genre of game. That tends to be where the vitriol seeps out.

[@comrade_snarky]

@@dexchampion2128 "if it's low brow sludge, why is it so popular" is not the gotcha you think it is. It is popular precisely *because* it appeals to the lowest common denominator. Metroid necessarily appeals to a smaller audience because it has an actual identity.

[@Maroxad]

Joke's on Nintendo. RPGs, Mods, Emulation and Sackboy have been around for ages. People have been playing as Nintendo characters on non nintendo systems for decades now.

[@BowserEditz]

I honestly don't even see how nintendo Would get a benefit from Samus being in fortnite besides "HEY my Fav Charecter is in a game i play" People also forgot that unlike Nintendo. Sony and Microsoft have multiple IP brands Nintendo only has their games without them Nintendo is finshed. Which were definitely explained why Nintendo is much more strict with their Ip

[@BowserEditz]

Which is another reason why nintendo was reaching out to other types of brands such as Movies with their new studio Nintendo Picture's and Amusement Parks like Nintendo World

[@pakaman9101]

Why are people acting like Metroid would gain massive popularity if they put it in Fortnite. What franchise clearly benefited from collaborating with Fortnite? Can anyone confirm?

[@kitkatrina1337]

the saints over at epic turned a lot of small unknown indie films such as "Star Wars" and "The Spider's Man" into big box office hits

[@Pioxys]

New younger audience, new curiosity. If I want to speak “Nintendo.” Same as how people learned about Fire Emblem through Smash. (Which Arlo mentions)

[@internetguy7319]

people know what metroid is, the gameplay is just nicher than people want to accept. ​@@Pioxys

[@steveqi9309]

@@Pioxys smash is different, it’s a “king maker”, it makes the franchises that it collaborate with more popular. Fortnite is kind of the opposite it siphons popularity from the franchise it collaborates with, I have never seen a franchise get more popular because their characters were in Fortnite.

[@Hyper_Drud]

@@steveqi9309Also I get the feeling that the majority of people who buy skins of characters in Fortnite were already fans of the franchises they came from.

[@NSJ90]

I have to disagree. Metroid in Fortnite would be a drop in the bucket. I don't think it would've been special beyond the "Nintendo is letting us do this", and everyone would forget about it in a minute. What Nintendo would lose is intangible, the "wow" factor. Take the SC2 Link collab for example, Link was the absolute highlight of the 3 systems.

[@sgtdrfunk]

I think that's a good point In a game where Peter Griffin and Darth Vader can shoot guns at Goku and Iron Man, how special really is Samus? People remember Link in Soul Calibur because it was unexpected and it just worked. Soul Calibur provides us with a great counterexample too: Look at how people received Link in 2 vs Darth Vader/Yoda in 4. One just worked way better and is remembered fondly for it. Samus would be a cool addition, but yeah, it'd be a flash in the pan. Heck, it's not even Nintendo sending their biggest icon in where so many other franchises have their main characters as skins.

[@pakaman9101]

Arlo has been having bad takes for a while.

[@flarestorm9417]

@@sgtdrfunk Speaking on that point, the reason why crossovers in Smash are so exciting is because Sakurai and his team go above and beyond with them. It's not just a character, it's a faithful move set (usually), a stage, trophies/spirits, music, and easter eggs. Fortnite just looks like a hodge-podge of everything under the sun, plus whatever companies want to advertise for that month. And correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Fortnite just skins most of the time? Do kids really try out other games, movies, etc., because they appeared in Fortnite?

[@BeyondTrash-xe1vs]

@@pakaman9101 Breaking news: KZbinrs have their own opinions may not agree with.

[@bravetree]

I agree that Metroid in Fortnite would be a drop in the bucket, but Nintendo would lose nothing. In my experience(I work at a Daycare), when a character gets into Fortnite, kids become super interested. I've seen kids who know nothing of Street Fighter buy SF6 because of Fortnite, and I've had kids ask to watch Avatar after those characters got into Fortnite. It does more than you think.

[@Jbluejake]

Honestly, this video just ends up being a PSA for putting Nintendo games on other platforms. Once you open that door, it’s hard to close, Arlo. It’s not like Metroid is going to die because they didn’t do something as small as put Samus in Fortnite. Chances are, they took notes from Dread and are working on something that’ll do even better in sales, so Nintendo is not concerned! Part of Nintendo’s success is their IPs. Imagine if they put Mario on the PS5. It’s more powerful and more graphically impressive, so what would be the point of ever putting Mario on a weaker and less graphically impressive Nintendo system?? And honestly Arlo, after what’s been going on with Sony and Xbox recently, do you really want that to happen???

[@linkl1ng]

To be honest, I don't think any fortnite kids would go out of their way to get a nintendo system and play metroid of all things. Fortnite kids are used to hyperactive and bloodpumping action, they seek the easy reward. And metroid is far away from that type of game. Im 100% with nintendo on this one, having samus one of their most serious characters do the griddy and dancing with ariana grande would be just weird. All this to say it would never translate with a significant increase of box copies like the example of "chun-li from fortnite" I can bet that no kid knows what street fighter actually is and if they played it they would get bored and go back to fortnite.

[@adamsexton8194]

To be fair soul caliber 2 had a version exclusive for each company as well…

[@AshkarBehek0]

The game had a deluxe version with every characters. Except you know who.

[@HealyHQ]

This was literally mentioned in the video.

[@Settyness]

An astute, strategic game reference given that Nintendo is stuck in 2002.

[@lonecom685]

​@@AshkarBehek0 Stalin?

[@lonecom685]

Selling each version of the game with a different cool character that represents the system it's on was such a nice thing to do. Kind of reminds me of MK9, which had Kratos on the PS3 version

[@whysitthat3515]

Hey, Arlo. Thank for putting something of a theme into this video. I just graduated college and hearing someone I respect talk about the benefits of taking risks and not always playing it safe was really nice right now. “Just try” and just taking shots was something I guess I kinda needed to hear. I’d love to see more stuff like this!

[@gmoney9469]

I almost respect them for not jumping that shark.

[@gamejitzu]

These comments are kind of insane. Tons of people are projecting their opinions and thought processes onto millions of players. Most of the arguments I'm seeing basically boil down to, "I don't think that would happen". "So isn't the opposite true?" No, because there plainly is money and attention to gain from a crossover. It's inherently beneficial, I think the burden of proof goes to those making counter-arguments

[@shun2232]

the people in this comment section are just a very loud minority that want to gatekeep from the new generations

[@oakalquine5484]

even though the reason for it is just more soulless, corporate baboonery, i'm glad samus is not in fortnite. it's not a zeitgeist in a good way, and people are going to remember its outrageous roster with shame. to many fans of franchises that have been added, encountering their beloved characters in the exploitative mess of that zombified game is as disappointing as encountering them in porn.

[@SatoshiEK]

I really miss Arlocast. It almost feels nostalgic to me at this point. I understand it had to stop, but I hope it comes back someday.

[@Weirdman3214]

Am I the only one who feels that Nintendo's reluctance to have their IPs on other systems with other devs is tied to the horrors of the CDi and the PC games from that era? The one time they let their IPs out of their total control it ended with games that are despised and mocked even 30+ years later. Not that that excuses them being so hard about it, but it's all I can think of when a story like this comes out.

[@ausgod538]

Its not, nintendo simply wants their IP to be in their control in their own platform.

[@FenexTheFox]

I don't doubt that's a huge factor, yes.

[@gregvs.theworld451]

I'd still argue Arlo's point that it'd be awesome free promotion for Nintendo in the no-publicity-is-bad-publicity sense, but there would probably be some inevitable memes clowning on Fortnite skins of Link or Samus dropping it low or Link using a sniper rifle to shoot people, but those memes are usually made endearingly and they spread like wildfire. Want to make sure people know Nintendo did a promotion with Epic (If they do in the future), let people make a thousand Tiktok's and Twitter videos of Link spraying people with guns and driving sports cars with "LOL LINK DOESN'T DO THAT. SILLY EPIC." captions everywhere.

[@darthsnarf]

It's why they can sell people out of date hardware to play their games on. Their entire business is built on being stingey with their IP

[@Wingsaber]

That's definitely not the case. It's very clear that Nintendo wants to hold onto their console exclusivity for as long as possible. While Microsoft fully embraces console and PC ports side-by-side and Sony releases their games on PC eventually, it's a pipe dream for PC gamers to hope for Mario or Zelda on the PC (without stuff like emulators) for DECADES to come. Nintendo is all-in on their consoles and will do anything to force anyone who likes their IPs to have to buy and play their console.

[@FletcherReedsRandomness]

If you’ll allow me to play devil’s advocate, let me ask a question: why would people want to see Samus in Fortnite? Sure, some of them are people who enjoy playing Fortnite who would like to see Samus in the game, but from what I’ve seen, most Nintendo fans don’t care about actually playing Fortnite. From what I can tell, most people want to see Samus in Fortnite because they just want Metroid to get more attention, they believe it deserves as much attention as Zelda or Mario, and putting the main character in a game played by practically everyone on Earth has a possibility of achieving that. So my question is: do you REALLY want Samus in Fortnite because you want to see or play as her in the game, like a guest character in a fighting game, or do you want it because you’re a Metroid fan who really badly wants Metroid to get as big as Nintendo’s most successful franchises? (speaking as a Metroid fan here) Sorry for this long-ass comment/rant, I’ve been feeling this for a while now and kinda wanted to this off my chest.

[@tloz171nfs]

Yes, because I want to play as Samus in another game I enjoy

[@pastqr]

I want to see Samus in Fortnite. She's literally a perfect fit she has a gun she has to zero suit why wouldn't you want to see that? It's become so trendy and cool to not like Fortnite. People literally start hating when things become mega successful. Also you cannot say Nintendo gamers don't care about Fortnite because I'm sure it's been downloaded millions of times on the switch. It's not even like Metroid is a huge series, if anything Fortnite will be doing them the favor especially with MP4 coming out. This will bring a lot of attention to the Metroid brand... But you know Nintendo going to Nintendo

[@korneel2816]

As someone who doesn't really care THAT much about metroid. (I think the designs and world is really cool but haven't really played the games) I would still buy a samus skin just to let nintendo and epic know "YES i want more of this" and maybe they would add even more nintendo related items into the game. Anything Nintendo in fortnite would be HUGE. I don't even care if they only ever do this with Fortnite. Even if nintendo had an exclusivity deal to let everyone know "this is only happening in fortnite and we will be protective about our IP in any other situation" That would still be gigantic

[@arjanzweers6542]

@@korneel2816 And that would probably be a bit of an issue. You want more skins in Fortnite, but Nintendo wants you to play Metroid (and Fortnite) on the Switch. If that does not happen if they would have added Samus to Fortnite, then they won't be putting any more character skins in a game like Fortnite.

[@korneel2816]

@@arjanzweers6542 i don't understand what you are saying? Theres not a nintendo skin in the game rn either? how would adding samus make it so nintendo wouldn't possibly add more

[@MetroidFusion5044]

I don't think it would advertise for Nintendo. More than anything it would go like this: "Oh look! It's Samus, the guy from Fortnite!"

[@Masaim6]

To be fair Nintendo doesn't really need more notoriety to their ip's. Sony and Microsoft would kill for their games to sell as much as Nintendo's do and like 90% of those sales are at full price.

[@54321jcc]

The Mario's, Link's sure, Samus not sure they actually have that widespread notoriety.

[@Guy-cb1oh]

Yeah, they would kill for the games to sell as much as Nintendos but they don't want to put in the time, money or effort to make it happen...

[@Masaim6]

@@Guy-cb1oh Nintendo's Games a 100% cost less to make than the other big 3 especially Sony.

[@PurpleColonel]

Im more than happy for Nintendo characters to feel special tbh. Star wars has completely lost all of its value because of how they sell it out to literally anything and now its just annoying to see them.

[@franciscozamorano3896]

Now ?! Star wars have been doing that for years, even before Disney bought them. Lucas didn't care unless he saw a check.

[@PurpleColonel]

@franciscozamorano3896 Yeah I know, it was dumb in the 90s too.

[@pikagammerpluspizza7478]

Can an also see that maybe Nintendo didn't want to deal with Samus doing meme dances.

[@chiquita683]

Did you miss the Princess Peach game?

[@TotisTurnOfficial]

​@@chiquita683wtf did she hit the griddy or something?

[@magic2546]

​@@chiquita683Please explain

[@WatchingWeasel]

Yet they worked with Robot Chicken to do a comedic Link bit where he speaks and shuns toon link

[@Luc_ienn]

I’ve got Metroidhunter’s videos for that already and tbh they’re top tier, I pop on the phendrana drifts dance vid every now and then

[@lavendeerpuyotet4813]

I can't find myself to give a single hoot about this. Honestly I'd probably be more mad if Samus did get in. Though the reasons are kinda awful, 1 less addition to that microtransaction ridden pop culture sludge for the sole purpose of turning art into a product is a win for me.

[@Sqwivig]

I fully agree that Fortnite is just a soulless cash grab. They just want us to CONSUME, not appreciate the art.

[@nickk3077]

I think the rational reason Nintendo would not want to do this is because firstly, putting Samus in Fortnight isn't a necessity by any means and although might benefit them, Nintendo is doing well enough to the point where they don't need to do this type of outside sponsoring. Secondly, and more importantly, I believe this could be a slippery slope. Sure, it's only Fortnight, but then they might make the exception with other third parties on Xbox and Play Station, to a point eventually where Nintendo can be seen all over these other consoles. I feel like Nintendo still really wants to stand out among its competitors by maintaining exclusive rights to their own franchises and I honestly understand that. I think what makes Nintendo games different on iPhone is that the phone audience is its own sort of market completely outside the traditional gaming sphere and I think that Nintendo understood that their home consoles or handhelds had no way of competing with that, so they gave in and decided to make games for it that better suited that audience.

[@thecrabman2074]

I feel like i understand where Arlo is coming from with this video. He loves Metroid as an IP and wants it to be much bigger than it is and believes that adding her to Fortnite would be the solution to the problem, however i think his desire might be clouding his judgement here. Adding Samus to Fortnite under the notion that it will increase sales for Metroid games is a very faulty premise. Metroid sales are the way that they are because metroidvania's are pretty niche as a genre, with Ori being the best selling one at 10 million (but that is a big outlier, other metroidvanias sale nowhere near that). This is because something like Fortnite is like McDonald's. You can do much better but it is such a safe option, where as Metroid is a lot more intimidating to a wider audience. Also to note Smash Ultimate has sold over 30 million (the best selling fighting game ever) and Samus is of course in that game. I also want to address the idea that they lose nothing by letting Metroid branch out to Fortnite and the the executives at Nintendo are just out of touch (I kind of wish we'd stop treating these people like they are stupid, but i digress). I would argue they would be at risk of losing something and that would be their control on how their IP are portrayed. To Nintendo their brand is everything and the security of that is worth much more than any amount of theoretical money to be gained. I feel nothing but apathy for Fortnite. Its a hollow corporate game that takes well known IPs and produces watered down, manufactured versions of characters people love with no care to the IP whatsoever. Having Kratos do the Pokimane dance, while The Weekend chases him down in a car, while Aang (THE PASCAFIST) shoots at them with an AK-47. Fortnite is where art goes to die. TLDR: I'm glad Samus isn't in Fortnite.

[@CappnRob]

I honestly think this is for the best. Nintendo values the brand integrity of their IPs. Fortnite’s aesthetics are so generic And boring it robs all the character out of whoever crosses over into it, it’s like the opposite of Smash Bros where they try really hard to keep the “vibe” of the characters involved in tact from their home series.

[@eliserss]

you are such a fun sponge

[@CappnRob]

@@eliserss fun is subjective and my subjective taste in it involves not selling out to Epic for cheap profits :)

[@-lord1754]

This is so real. My jawdropped at how bad Gojo looks then i looked up the others and its just embarassing. Fortnite is where a series identity goes to die

[@eliserss]

@@CappnRob sure they profit from it but like... how is that bad? like i'm definitely no supporter of capitalism by any means but seriously i fail to see how this is a 'cheap profit' it's just a cool thing that many fans want. if you don't want it, sure, but many people do and if they want to pay for it then why not? it seems so silly to be hung up on this

[@CappnRob]

@@eliserss It's about artistic integrity, I guess. Laugh all one wants over the value of that with regards to Nintendo games, but Fortnite really is devoid of any artistic merit with its crossovers. It features everyone, everything, everywhere, it's so vapid and silly. It's when a kid takes every toy out of their toybox and bashes them against each other, except mind you that's a child playing with their imagination and this is a multimillion dollar company selling skins to kids. It is vapid, and for lack of a better term if you'll forgive the buzz word, "soul less".

[@digitaltailsmon4096]

Ehh tbh I think it's better they didn't have Samus in Fortnight. Given Metroid has no real full blown identity to the general public as others in Nintendo do (Mostly cause it lacks the constant game trickle of most Nintendo IPS) it could have damaged Samus due to causing her to be scene as just another meme character or making her serious persona something less easy to see. Also the dances..good god the dances.

[@BoredKuro]

Tbh I dunno why everyone has to kiss the ring of Fortnite? It's kinda ridiculous.

[@Toonrick12]

Because it's a money printing machine.

[@PunishedDad]

we exist in capitalism brother

[@Tribdinosaur]

Yeah this whole Nintendo Fortnite skins is the most Non-issue "issue" I've ever heard gain this much traction.

[@Elevate388]

OMG that Mario flash animation reference in the beginning lol. I remember that from like nearly 20 years ago. "Shiggity shiggity swag" If you know, you know.

[@acudaican]

Arlo will always be too American to actually understand Nintendo

[@nawab256]

It has nothing to do with publicity and everything to do with opening Pandora’s box. Would their IPs do better if they had Fortnite sell Samus skins? Sure but once you do that, it becomes an expectation for all your IPs. Nintendo does not want to create that expectation so they would rather let their IP die from low numbers then have it appear on someone else’s console. They do not view phones the same way they view consoles.

[@-ak-634]

Arlo, this is not a first time that Nintendo requested that their characters or models be used exclusively on their console. Rocket League has Mario and Samus vehicles only for Switch, so I'm not surprised that Nintendo wants the same treatment for Samus character in Fortnite.

[@PikaPenny17]

Doesnt he mention Rocket League in this video?

[@TheCreativeType]

As a former Fortnite player, I don’t want Samus in Fortnite. It’s not worth it.

[@pastqr]

What's not worth it about it?

[@orangeslash1667]

@@pastqr Samus would not transfer well, to wield a rifle you need two arms. Samus does not have two arms, she only has one arm and an arm cannon.

[@Itookabathinibiza5624]

I’d like to think that Nintendo is scared out of their minds that a kid will know Samus as the character from Fortnite.

[@sergetell]

I beg to differ. Nintendo doesn't feel the need to lend an IP because they simply don't care and don't need it. they're fine sitting in a pile of money taking conservative risks at a time, they don't need to rush to get publicity on an IP if they can do it on their own eventually 5 or 10 years from now with a new game or movie or something. Meanwhile they're ok keeping in control of their IP, something that other companies don't have, there is no reason to buy a PS5 anymore, all their exclusives are released in steam eventually, there is no reason to buy an XBOX, you get all that in game pass. But there are tons of reasons to have a switch. So i think nintendo is right on keeping doing their thing. To many people it might be a wasted opportunity tp reach a wider audience and hopefully sell more, but if Nintendo is not desperate for money, they don't need to care.

[@4Clubs]

I do not care for Forknife.

[@tehbeernerd]

Counterpoint: screw Fortnite, it’s been such a bad influence for the video game industry

[@strggarchive]

What’s so bad about it? It’s no different than any other live service game.

[@jasonmitchell7550]

How so?

[@strggarchive]

@@jasonmitchell7550 you’re still playing a shooter that has you pay for multiple cosmetics while also having a battle pass, it’s not the best but so many other live services have shady monetization methods, even Nintendo isn’t safe from this.

[@jasonmitchell7550]

@@strggarchive I agree with you- I was asking “how so” to the OP. I think Fortnite is great in every way.

[@strggarchive]

@@jasonmitchell7550 ah I understand

[@youngbloodtx5073]

I don't care what anyone says, Samus not being in Fortnite Is a MAJOR W

[@Thee_Deputy]

No it's not lol. Such a dense viewpoint.

[@willcooper8028]

It would be incredible advertising

[@Barquevious_Jackson]

Yes King! 🎉🎊👑 WE HAVE SUCCESSFULLY GATE KEPT 🔒🗝️🚪OUR FRANCHISE! Just think, 🤔💭 IF IT WAS POPULAR OTHERS MIGHT LIKE IT 👍 IN THE WRONG WAY 👎 - 🗣️📈💥🔥 - NO FANS 🫀 NO CRINGE ! 😬 WE WIN! 🏆

[@-lord1754]

​@@Barquevious_JacksonStill baffles me that people dont understand the value of gatekeeping even given the circunstances for stuff like star wars and magic lol

[@orangeslash1667]

@@willcooper8028 If Samus were to be in Fortnite, she would not use her traditional weapons but instead a typical gun. The charm of Metroid is the power ups you find by exploring. The marketing of Prime 1, and Dread already to a decent job conveying what Metroid is about.

[@SherlockZ_001]

Honestly, I'm not sure that 'Fear and Discomfort' are behind this. My suspicion is that the thought process was something like this: "Having Samus on all systems in Fortnite wouldn't really help us because A. Most people don't play Fortnite on the Switch, and her not being exclusive to Switch wouldn't change that. And B. Samus is already known by most gamers, so it wouldn't really help from an 'advertising' perspective. It may not be great reasoning, but If I'm a big-wig at Nintendo, and am a little disconnected from whatever else goes on, I feel like that's my thought process.

[@aka_Ingmar]

I literally called it right before you said it in this video. I was like "lemme guess, cuz they wanted it to be only in switch" this is nothing new or something that couldn't be predicted. They are super predictable in this realm

[@luigitime202]

1. There are console-exclusive skins in Fortnite, but players on other consoles can *see* them. This is what Nintendo had a problem with. There are Nintendo-exclusive skins in the game that Epic have made themselves. Master Chief is an Xbox thing, Kratos is a PlayStation thing. 2. There were datamined Splatoon assets in Fortnite as well sometime around Chapter 3 I believe? I know you don’t play but that was quite a while ago, we’re on Chapter 5. 3. Rocket League and Fortnite assets now transfer actively between games. When you get a car in Rocket League there’s a heavy chance you’ll get it in Fortnite and vice versa. It’s a huge missed opportunity to not transfer those Mario and Metroid cars from RL. Overall, while I’m kinda mixed on the game I wish my friends on the other side could appreciate Nintendo IPs more and this is a huge missed opportunity for them

[@verticalsquare5933]

I personally wouldn't want people's first exposure to samus be her hitting the griddy

[@supershot9729]

Could be worse, they could play other M first

[@willcooper8028]

Better than never getting exposed to the franchise at all

[@orangeslash1667]

@@supershot9729 You see Yoshio Sakamoto makes more than just Metroid. Kousoku Card Battle: Card Hero, WarioWare, Rhythm Heaven, Miitomo, Famicom Detective Club and Tomodachi. The same thing can not be said for Zelda designer Eiji Aonuma.

[@TFenton95]

I'm going to hard disagree on Samus having an exposure problem, the problem is more that metroidvanias are a fairly niche game genre and Nintendo gives Samus good exposure when the games come out. Exposure can only do so much for niche gametypes. Open world Samus like Metroid Prime is going to do better, but it isn't an actual open world, Doom itself might be the best analog to Metroid Prime, and it only sold a couple million, which is nothing to sneeze at, but Metroid: Dread sold 3.07 million, and Prime remastered sold over a million, these genres just aren't everyone genres, they are niche

[@robotoboy30]

Here's the thing about branding, IP, and franchise management. Something a lot of people don't understand is the concept of diminishing value. Everyone thinks they understand how this works, but they really and truly don't. Do you know why God of War Ragnarok reviewed worse than 2018? Do you know why it needed such a hard reboot in the first place? Do you know why super hero movies (especially Marvel) have become some tired, and boring? Do you know why Halo is a shell of what it once was as far as being a gaming icon? Diminishing the value of the IP. Disney did this a lot too in the 90's. Mickey Mouse became a tacky emblem that moms had bumper stickers of. This happens when you flagrantly promote your IP's and franchises through every avenue available to you - you create brand fatigue... and when you create brand fatigue your IP's and iconic properties begin to lose their luster and value within the cultural cache. People argue that Fortnite does well even though it's a giant collab machine... but Fortnite is culturally foundational for an entire generation of people. Younger folks like Gen Z and so forth grew up with it. It doesn't matter what skins are in the game, they will play it regardless. It's the Minecraft of their generation. That's to say nothing about how Fortnite has essentially evolved in a platform rather than a game. Sony, and Microsoft fling their properties around like their nothing and devalue their own IP constantly. God of War Ragnarok for instance is currently on sale for $40... It was a $70 game on release. It's also coming to PC in a few months. The inherent value of Kratos as a Sony IP is heavily diminished. Nintendo does not put their games on hefty sale. They do not do collabs willy nilly without being under THEIR terms. They do this and it creates an ecosystem where their IP's and franchises are controlled wholesale by them. They say "our games are worth full price, take it or leave it" they say "you want Mario, or Samus? You play on our systems and platforms of choice" and when they do break that rule (Mario Kart, and Mario Run mobile for instance), they do so selectively. I realize that people think there is so much opportunity in collaboration, but Nintendo only got where they are today by not doing that. Sony and Microsoft do this and it's hurt their bottom line. Spiderman 2 was $300 million to make... WITH $100 MILLION BEING THE LICENSE FEE THEY HAD TO FORK OVER!!!... and it underperformed under their own metrics. Nintendo is able to maintain the value of their IP because they are highly selective and discerning in how they manage them. If they didn't - they wouldn't be where they are today, flat out. They have always been cautious in how they collaborate, and this was not a real opportunity to them. It has nothing to do with being "nervous" it had more to do with them wanting to force players into their ecosystem... which they are able to do via their IP's. And before you say "but exposure in Fortnite would have introduced people to Samus and Metroid!!" - No. It wouldn't have. People who play Fortnite do not get converted into consumers for other products because that character shows up as a skin in a game. Especially when that game is as amorphous as Fortnite. Heck honestly they probably wouldn't have been able to convert kids who already played on PC to move over to Switch,. The only thing it would have maybe done is convert some non-players into Fortnite players. Epic stood to gain far more from it, than Nintendo did. I wish people understood why Nintendo does what they do with their IP. It isn't for copyright protection. It's not because they're worried about the "integrity" of their IP's... it's because they're worried about the value of their IP's. This is a deeply complex issue that revolves around market psychology (which is a very complex field around studying consumer, and human behavior in regards to products, advertising, and manipulation of said consumers) There is a reason you can only really experience Mario on Switch. It's because Nintendo wants it that way, and it's why they are able to charge $60 for Mario Odyssey TODAY. A game that is 7 years old. People pay that because Nintendo tells them they're getting a premium experience, one designed by them that you can only find on their ecosystem. Saying they're backwards is hilarious when you look at how much of a financial mess Sony and Microsoft are in at the moment.

[@batmanbud2]

Wow. Just. . .WOW.

[@harrybenson3400]

I think another reason why Nintendo doesn’t want Samus in Fortnite is that while Samus does use guns, they don’t exactly look like the conventional guns in Fortnite. Nintendo might think that seeing Samus run around with an AK47 might damage their family friendly brand. Not the best excuse but another reason other than ‘we don’t feel like it’

[@billcook4768]

I kept watching to see what the issue was. But no, it really was just the Samus skin in Fortnite thing. I’m stunned that anyone would be upset about this for more than a couple seconds.

[@themustardman219]

I personally was hearing a lot more problems than that but ok

[@DGFTardin]

Whatever you say, I'm GLAD Samus isn't in Fortnite

[@ninochaosdrache3189]

Same

[@larry9351]

Fortnite skins are limited time, so the impact would be pretty limited outside a few days. To me it seems like a strange thing to completely shift their IP strategy for.

[@festimcocaj1269]

In what way are Fortnite skins limited time ?

[@SamTRC]

@@festimcocaj1269 when you turn on the game, there’s an in-game store. You go there and you can spend money directly on cosmetics. When you buy them, you have them forever. HOWEVEEEER, you can only get them for a limited time, and Fortnite never brings skins back unless it’s a special occasion. If you didn’t buy the skin you want in time, it’s gone FOR GOOD. It’s not only absolutely abysmal for preservation but Nintendo would get nothing out of putting Samus in Fortnite because she will just go away for all the players who didn’t buy her, and blend in with the thousands of other skins in your inventory if you did, and then new shit releases that makes more news headlines so she’ll only be relevant for like a week And all that would happen is everybody forgets about her, and Nintendo’s reputation goes down the gutter because they worked with Fortnite which is one of the most scummy games of all time.

[@aidenkt]

@@festimcocaj1269They’re only purchasable for a limited amount of time

[@GmNdWtchr96]

​@@festimcocaj1269I think he's referring to how the Battle Pass cosmetics never come to the item store, and how certain other cosmetics are way rarer in there.

[@steveqi9309]

@@festimcocaj1269 in the way that you often only have a limited amount of time to buy the skin before it goes out of rotation, and then you don’t know when, if ever it come back to the shop again.

[@Stargazing_night_sky]

10:01 i dealt with this back when cod was the big thing. I had a wii and just wanted to talk about mario, pikmin, sonic, etc but nobody would shut tf up about cod. It was all kids talked about at my school and it was so frustrating

[@lordtheodore13]

Has everyone forgotten about the time that Nintendo let SEGA put a Link costume and hairstyle in the Japanese version of Phantasy Star Online 2 back in 2018? It was even visible on PC and PS4. In that game you could be a gunslinger if you wanted to, all while wearing Link's BOTW outfit. I feel like a lot of people keep forgetting/don't know about that.

[@trainerbrendan969]

Probably a Japanese company thing, that or it was a called in favor.

[@TKDBoy1889]

Here's a spicy take: Nintendo's iron-clad protectiveness of their IP's is actually a GOOD thing. It shows how much their value their own brand. If Nintendo were to start just licensing their IP's out and let 3rd parties make all sort of spin-offs or whatnot, the value of the brand would go down because I can promise you, while our dreamy optimistic viewpoint is focused on the possibilities, the realities is that most of the content produced would just be low-effort mediocrity. Seriously, I'm okay with waiting a long time over letting the floodgates open and letting a bunch of trash flood the market.

[@thajocoth]

I don't think this would've effected anything really... There are SO many skins that it doesn't matter, and they're all just skins so they all play the same, no abilities. I don't think they should've even offered to allow it _with_ Switch exclusivity. The people who'd buy the skin would already be Metroid fans, and very few other players would really even see it. Samus wouldn't be using her arm cannon. She'd be using the same guns as everyone else in the game. No morph ball... Nothing at all that would actually advertise her in any way to convince these kids to try her games.

[@Nicky-zz8np]

Nintendo doesn’t need to throw their IP into the proverbial blender that is Fortnite. Idk why people are genuinely upset about this.

[@pacattack2586]

it's not that nintendo didn't throw IP into fortnite, it's the reason why. I mean I could totally be behind them if they said "We don't want to be associated with loot boxes in any way" for example. Asking it to be switch exclusive is just the wrong stand

[@Goldfire345]

That would be hypocritical of them to do in The first place when they're willing to have Pokemon unite on their platform and have gacha mobile games with loot box mechanics themselves

[@pacattack2586]

@@Goldfire345 I can only dream...

[@Nicky-zz8np]

@@pacattack2586its simple. They didn’t think loaning out their IP was worth it. They don’t need to explain why they did it. They don’t need to extend the olive branch. Same as how smash fighters don’t need to accept Nintendo’s invitation.

[@knatkniht]

​@@pacattack2586fortnite doesn't have loot boxes.

[@kevinrosario8363]

"Rules keep us safe" yeah that sounds about right. I love Nintendo but they make themselves look bad constantly by being militantly strict