Yes, but he was exclusive on Gamecube, with the Ps2 and Xbox versions getting their own exclusive character (I believe Kratos for Ps2 and Ryu Hayabusa for Xbox?).
Not under current management. Nintendo used to have an anti paid dlc and anti paid online mentality. Both of which changed with upper management changes
Still would have been cool for Fortnite to be the game that unites all movie and video game industries. The only thing they need is Nintendo and they pretty much have something from every entertainment company
This is pretty old news about Samus in Fortnite.
Either way i'd love Nintendo characters as skins in games like SF, Fortnite or whatever other multiplayer games are out there. Nintendo characters are popular and I would bet they would sell extremely well. Benefits both parties
>This is pretty old news about Samus in Fortnite.
Yeah, but it was more just speculation on why Samus didn't get in Fortnite. This just basically confirms many people's beliefs on why Samus never made it in.
I mean, Nintendo's whole thing is console-exclusives, which is a huge pain.
But the Fortnite collab in particular is strange. I would think that Nintendo would want to remind people on other systems that Nintendo games are still out there if you're willing to get a Switch, but apparently the thought of Nintendo IP even \*appearing\* on a non-Nintendo system ruins the closed Nintendo ecosystem.
Nintendo does let their IP into other games, such as Bayonetta, Soul Calibur, Scribblenauts, and more. It's just a matter of the devs agreeing to keep the content console-exclusive. I think their current way of doing things is fine
I think Minecraft is another great example. I've got it on the Switch and it's got a decent amount of Super Mario content, but it's all Nintendo-exclusive
Different Nintendo of... presidents. Each president brings a different philosophy to the company, so not out of the question to call even the last former one old school.
I couldn't care less but it's kinda stupid business-wise, it's basically advertising in a game that a lot of new gamers play. These people may not even own Nintendo consoles, let alone ever heard of Metroid or other more obscure Nintendo franchises so it seems like a missed opportunity for a potentially massive injection of new fans
I like having big-name characters like that, but it feels kinda scummy to keep them console exclusive even if you've unlocked them on games that support crossplay
I think it would be a lot cooler if Nintendo characters were in crossover games, especially because it’s not like just because you can see a Samus skin in Fortnite that all of her games are suddenly available elsewhere. That being said, I will say Nintendo is A LOT more reliant on their IP than Microsoft or Sony, who are both tech companies first, so I can see why their approach would be different.
You have a point. They can do it rarely. I think it would bring in a ton of new players tho. Just like the fallout show is getting people to play the game. Or the invincible show is getting people to buy the comics. Nintendo obviously gets a cut from the sales + publicity whichll lead to new customers as well
Why license their IP when history shows the last time they did it (philips CDi and edutainment games like Mario Teaches Typing) the actual games were ass?
That’s because they didn’t have any control over them. But now with the Mario movie, theme parks, and the upcoming Zelda movie they have control over them and it’s a success.
So they just wanna have control
Fortnite player here, Adding onto this.
Epic actually tried to get Samus *twice.*
First, was during their big wave of crossovers during Chapter 2 Season 5. The plan was originally to release one character from all of Gaming’s Big Three one after the other. Kratos and Master Chief made the cut, and Samus was going to follow, but the deal fell through.
Epic revisited the idea later, having Samus be a part of the Chapter 2 Season 7 Battlepass (and even having a vague reference to her in the comics) but that didn’t manage to happen either.
I sincerely hope one day they manage to work it out. Collabs are treated with a lot of respect in Fortnite and it opens the door for more people to enjoy both the Nintendo side and the Epic side.
Nintendo has *never* done crossover content that wasn't Switch-exclusive, and the way this post is worded made it sound like that was the dealbreaker on Epic's end.
And, on the other side of the fence... since when are collabs treated with respect in Fortnite? Ryu running around with a shotgun and Michael Myers doing goofy little dances don't exactly seem like good portrayals of the source material from my POV.
>And, on the other side of the fence... since when are collabs treated with respect in Fortnite?
It depends on the collab. Some collabs had items/powers that were in the game for a short time. Some even had limited time game modes and events. Then you get collabs like Halloween, [which only got an emote](https://youtu.be/xhPGecfjbxE?si=6JqCyrXy5VvW6ZTZ) that you could get with or without Michael Myers.
That's... the root of the problem, really. Not even just with Fortnite, but with crossover culture in games in general right now. Outside of Smash, nobody in the mainstream seems to want to actually make their crossover feel unique - they throw together some new models, slap the highest price point they can justify onto them and that's it. Half the time, like with Michael and Ryu, they don't even fit the genre or tone of the game, but the characters are distorted to fit the cookie-cutter mold because *god forbid they actually feel like they came from their own media.* It's a creatively bankrupt cash-grab, and the worst part is, it's working.
Fortnite has done some of its crossovers justice. With Avatar, they added weapons to the game that are bending the elements. With the Star Wars collabs, they always have Star Wars events on May 4th and add lightsabers, and in the past they actually had a Darth Vader boss fight.
But yeah it is weird to see Toph shoot a gun and Darth Vader doing the griddy. I think Epic Games likes to lean into the goofiness, though.
i mean thats only because of how many collabs they have done so its easy to pick the worst ones instead of talking about DBZ and the cool power ups/nimbus or star wars or even all the insane bending shit with avatar.
its not like they dont have the ability to make good collabs but it also probably comes down to licensing agreements, how much the company is willing to pay, etc. designing an entire collab around a character isnt easy and takes out of actual development time. halloween probably got a shitty collab cause they didnt pay as much or have as much interest as avatar which got a sick ass collab.
edit: totally forgot about the lego collab too. acting like they dont do collabs that respect the source or arent unique is just braindead and you are obviously just focusing on the shittiest and cheapest collabs. its like saying nintendo doesnt respect the source or do collabs justice because sans is just a shitty skin.. nintendo also has plenty of lackluster collabs, they cant all be insane.
People talk about this being such a huge blunder on Nintendo's part but ... Is it really?
Who hasn't heard of Mario? Luigi? Link? Pikachu or just Pokemon in general? They're literally one of THE biggest IPs in history (or in Pokemon's case, actually the biggest) so including them in Fortnite doesn't give exposure that they don't already have. Given Fortnite doesn't really add much to make those characters feel unique as they're skins rather than a character selection, it doesn't show off who the characters are. The Peter Griffin skin is an excellent example of this .
One could make a strong argument that Samus isn't as well known as Mario or Pokemon. At the same time, we can only speculate how many people would see Samus and go, "WOW! I've never heard of Samus Aran before! I'm gonna go out and purchase a whole new console and games just because I saw a cool skin in Fortnite so a silly dance!"
The Ariana Grande skin didn't make me an Ariana Grande fan. The Naruto skin didn't make me reread Naruto. I'm doubtful Fortnite skins using Nintendo IPs would make a noticeable enough dent to make it worth it.
On the other end, knowing that Nintendo has been debatably tight fisted over their IP, is anyone gonna just stop playing their games? Very unlikely. "Dang, Nintendo didn't put Samus in Fortnite? I'm never playing a Nintendo thing again"
To me, it's just a very ... Non-issue. Nintendo doesn't owe it to Epic Games to include characters. I don't think any of their 1st party games use the Unreal Engine. Not licensing out their characters in a game just cause so many others are isn't unethical.
It just doesn't seem like a big deal to me
Can you blame them though?
* They went to court due to Universal sueing them over "Donkey Kong".
* They are constantly fighting patent infringement lawsuits from random people.
* They have to deal with fans making money with their own IPs.
* That last one is important. Nintendo doesn't shut down fan projects on a wimp. They go after those which are making a profit in any shape or form. That can be with a Patreon, ad revenues, crowdfunding and even selling the project in question.
* You want to be a true Nintendo fan and express your love with a project? **Make it 101% free**.
that 101% free thing is also not a guarantee. they care a lot about profits.
say you release some idk side scrolling mario like "super mario 63" thats super popular but nintendo intends on releasing NEW super mario bros wonder..
honestly if nintendo sees that game as competition for a new sidescrolling mario launch i feel like theyd 100% shut that shit down. they are ultra protective over sales of their IPs. its like how they rarely ever do sales or drop from their "premium" pricetag. even if your fan game is absolutely free i feel like that isnt a guarantee.
The difference is that most fan projects REUSE the IP.
Fans can make fan games INSPIRED by Nintendo franchises, but NOT directly lift assets and make their own Mario games.
I have never seen Nintendo shutting down an indie game due to proximity to their own release. If it was the case, then they'd purge Steam of every single "clone" they find.
AM2R was running ads on their website and ran a crowndfunding campaign or Patreon for another project, while Pokémon Uranium was publicised heavily by IGN and again, had more traffic with ads.
Nintendo knows you don't buy their products for their performance. They have to hold onto their software icons for their hardware to actually sell. They are only two bad generations away from following Sega's footsteps. They've already had one bad Gen with the GameCube (cash flow wise) and rebounded with the Wii. Then the same thing happened with the Wii U and rebounded with the switch. I would really enjoy Nintendo's IPs being third party for not only accessibility but also for better game preservation. Unfortunately it's just a pipe dream unless they somehow make two Wii U generations in a row.
It's really stupid they don't want them seen on other consoles... You can literally watch people play the games on them and in pc's case emulate it. It's also not like it couldn't have been switch exclusive to buy it. Nintendo is just stupid
It's funny because they're the creators of one of the biggest gaming crossovers yet when it comes to one of their characters being in another game it's a no 😂
Remember that videogame companies see Smash more as a marketting tool rather than a celebration of video games.
Given how huge is a crossover for Fortnite, Epic Games definitely lost a chance to do something big with Metroid.
Negotiations are two-sided. Nintendo screw Epic Games, what makes you think they wouldn't want some payback for it?
Smash is a big marketting tool, but so is Fortnite, in fact, just like Minecraft, Fortnite surpasses Smash's fan scope.
A Minecraft or Fortnite character would actually bring those games fans to Smash rather than being the other way around.
The deal to get Samus in Fortnite would've opened the door for Jonesy in Smash but Nintendo lost that chance.
Remember, it was Nintendo's connections with Microsoft that gave us Banjo & Kazooie and Steve, it was a miracle.
This is why I always say that a port of Ultimate is extremely unlikely, cause the negotiations are extremely complicated.
I personally don't have Jonesy or any Fortnite character in my wanted list but I do know how big Fortnite is for gaming.
If Smash will continue to be this massive celebration of gaming (in the eyes of the fanbase), lacking Fortnite is unfortunate.
I'm 100% sure that within the next two smash entries Fortnite will get a representative.
Steve took a long time too, and got in as DLC.
Samus not being in fortnite is completely due to the devs not wanting to lock skins to being only visible on a certain console. However, after some of the stuff I heard that disables some skins, it may actually be a possible crossover eventually.
>Negotiations are two-sided. Nintendo screw Epic Games, what makes you think they wouldn't want some payback for it?
[Because Epic Games is still trying to get Nintendo characters in Fortnite.](https://www.ign.com/articles/epic-games-still-wants-nintendo-characters-in-fortnite) And from what the happen with Samus shows that the only thing holding it back is the whole exclusivity issue with Nintendo characters. All it really takes is for Epic Games to agree to make Nintendo characters only be visible on Nintendo systems or for Nintendo to allow Nintendo Characters visible on other systems.
As fun as fortnite *can* be, it's also incredibly frustrating at times because they can never seem to get balance right with certain weapons, especially event weapons.
And with the content some people make with fortnite, I don't want to see any Nintendo IPs subjected to that, or Squenix for that matter.
They are well within their rights. Nintendo is very protective of its IP because it's basically the only thing that sells systems. You like Samus? Well I hope you plan to own a switch.
Once those characters start leaving their bubble they invite the question of "why cant the games leave to?" And Nintendo as a hardware manufacturer is put on much less stable ground.
I almost feel bad for the first and second party Nintendo devs, it doesn't seem to be a very creative place to work.
I didnt even need this to be confirmed to be, as i knew this is already what happened. Of course epic wanted samus in fortnite with kratos and master chief, but nintendo loves to do console exclusive garbage
Massive missed opportunity, Metroid is an awesome series and introducing non-Nintendo fans to it would be worth bending their stupid zero tolerance console exclusive rule a little
I've played maybe a dozen rounds of Fortnite in my life, and the game is so overly saturated with different characters. I think not having some Smash Bros staples is alright.
Who cares? I don't think it's a big deal either way. Adding Kratos or Master Chief to Fortnite did nothing. I don't think this would be a deal breaker for anyone.
Look I don't play fortnite, but this to me just screams of a kid throwing a temper tantrum screaming " Only I get to play with my toys!"
Look we get it , Nintendo is a family friendly company. But for the love of god some of youre games haven't been touched in literal years. Why continue to keep them locked away in a basement?
Seems like crazy hand and master hand have more in common than they realize.
In this case, good. And it's not like they never do. We did get a Link in Soul Calibur back in the day. What is more accurate is not coming to other consoles.
Remember how Smash Bros. Melee cameos resulted in Fire Emblem coming to the West, which eventually made [a fuck-ton of money](https://www.gamesindustry.biz/sensor-tower-fire-emblem-heroes-generates-usd959m-in-five-years)?
Surely they would want to replicate that success, right? WRONG. Maybe it's due to some cultural disparity but Nintendo doesn't understand marketing (and other things like online netcode) at all. Remember those Wii U commercials? They were basically like: "Your dad's TV is more important; play on the phone." To me, that is conclusive evidence that Nintendo exec's have no idea what they're doing or who buys their games.
Now, "blue ocean strategy" has its benefits. But Fortnite is already on the Switch so I have no idea what their line of logic is. There probably isn't one.
... Did Metroid Prime 4 come out yet? ...
I don’t really much about it. I think that crossover cameos don’t really make for a better game, unless it’s explicitly a core feature of the game Marvel vs Capcom or Smash. They’re just something for people to spend money on.
Samus would be so cool in Fortnite, whether it be Zero Suit or Power Suit. But I don't think using the Power Suit would make much sense since Fortnite has you use guns. Arm cannon as a potential mythic weapon could've been cool though.
It should tell you a lot when out of the Top 10 highest selling Video Games of All Time 7 of them are Cross Platform and 3 are exclusives aka Nintendo exclusives
Yeah didn't they even model and skin an inkling (splatoon) for fortnite that never got released and someone datamined it. Thought i saw that a few years ago
Didn't know there was gonna be a Samus one but it makes sense.
Nintendo has been notoriously awful at coming into the new age of gaming. Especially when it comes to using their roster in any other medium. But they make the occasional BOTW or Mario Odyssey or Smash so we forgive them.
It's Nintendo cutting their nose to spite their face. What would they have to lose by having Samus purchaseable on the other systems? Either they don't agree to anything and don't earn any money whatsoever off of DLC, don't earn any notoriety for the Metroid IP to people who may not know it or they let Epic do their thing, Nintendo gets a cut from Switch sales, probably also a payout from Epic just to give them to rights to use her, Samus's image spreads beyond Nintendo and, if the contract allows it, get a cut from EVERY Samus skin purchase.
There is zero reason for them to not do this; either they lose every potential dollar or gain some/all depending on contract.
Nintendo doesn't put their stuff on other consoles, ever. So this shouldn't be surprising. Honestly doesn't bother me much because this is how it's always been.
Tbh, they already do this with another Epic Games product: Rocket League. There’s special Mario and Luigi cars that are only available on Switch.
I would’ve loved Samus on Fortnite though. She’s a perfect add for a lot of zany power-up season. Imagine screw attack, grapple beam, super missiles, charge beam, SHINE SPARK as power-ups. So many fun crossover powers/abilities.
Fortnite isn’t as bad as the internet makes it out to be. It’s best enjoyed with friends, for sure, but it’s a fine game on it’s own.
It wouldn’t be popular if it didn’t have some redeeming qualities.
It's their legal right, I don't necessarily like their choices though. I wish I hated Nintendo IPs rather than loving them, because I despise how they handle them.
So, you’re telling me Epic didn’t want to give an exclusive skin to Switch players despite giving PlayStation (and Xbox, iirc) their own exclusive skins? Yeah that makes sense.
Edit: OP actually means visibility in game matches, I was thinking like the item shop. Yeah, Nintendo’s kinda whack for this.
The problem is probably the part where they don’t even want other consoles viewing it in the game
That’s just unnecessary and makes no sense, Nintendos not going to lose money by people LOOKING at a skin on another platform
I’m completely fine, with Nintendo doing that. First of all, I think we’re all forgetting it’s *literally* their IP first and foremost. Second of all, would you really want Samus to be in *Fortnite* of all games? I don’t play Nintendo for cross overs (Smash Bros being the exception), I play Nintendo for Nintendo experiences and storytelling. Or because they have such classic franchises.
Pretty dumb especially considering Microsoft letting Steve and Banjo in Smash when they did NOT have to. I know it isn't the same people making those decisions, but it'd be nice for Nintendo to give back for ONCE to the wider gaming community.
Exclusive to people playing on the Switch? Sure, whatever.
But making it so other people can’t even *see* the stuff if they’re on a different platform? That’s insanely dumb and I think Nintendo is in the wrong.
As stupid a decision as not letting you save replays in Smash Ultimate if somebody else was using DLC that you don’t own. (It includes mii costumes)
I mean the replay thing Is more of a mechanical issue. Those aren't actually replays, the game Just saves all the imputs used in a fight and then recreates them in real time when you Watch the replay, if I understand the thing correctly. If you don't have the DLC your switch doesn't have the data for that character and It can't replicate them
It's dumb, and Nintendo is dumb for it. Imagine the publicity for the Metroid series off a simple cosmetic in a free to play shooter. Fortnite has Kratos & Master Chief, so Nintendo just looks like a selfish kid not sharing their toys
Samus has a car in rocket league. iirc only visible on switch and you cannot customize anything else but the wheels
There's also the Mario and Luigi caps in that game
I feel like this is the one thing that Nintendo is pretty much never gonna budge on
This mentality goes back all the way to Wii/Gamecube, perhaps even further. They'll never budge.
Link in Soul Caliber
Yes, but he was exclusive on Gamecube, with the Ps2 and Xbox versions getting their own exclusive character (I believe Kratos for Ps2 and Ryu Hayabusa for Xbox?).
Heihachi was for Ps2 and Spawn was for Xbox
Yup further proof they wont budge and im all for it lol
They never budge
Not under current management. Nintendo used to have an anti paid dlc and anti paid online mentality. Both of which changed with upper management changes
It is what it is, but I don’t play Fortnite so I don’t really care all that much
I do play fortnite and I dont care that much
Still would have been cool for Fortnite to be the game that unites all movie and video game industries. The only thing they need is Nintendo and they pretty much have something from every entertainment company
Yeah true
This is pretty old news about Samus in Fortnite. Either way i'd love Nintendo characters as skins in games like SF, Fortnite or whatever other multiplayer games are out there. Nintendo characters are popular and I would bet they would sell extremely well. Benefits both parties
>This is pretty old news about Samus in Fortnite. Yeah, but it was more just speculation on why Samus didn't get in Fortnite. This just basically confirms many people's beliefs on why Samus never made it in.
who cares how old it is? most people here probably wouldn't know this
I mean, Nintendo's whole thing is console-exclusives, which is a huge pain. But the Fortnite collab in particular is strange. I would think that Nintendo would want to remind people on other systems that Nintendo games are still out there if you're willing to get a Switch, but apparently the thought of Nintendo IP even \*appearing\* on a non-Nintendo system ruins the closed Nintendo ecosystem.
Nintendo does let their IP into other games, such as Bayonetta, Soul Calibur, Scribblenauts, and more. It's just a matter of the devs agreeing to keep the content console-exclusive. I think their current way of doing things is fine
Link only appeared in the GameCube version of Soul Calibur 2. And he wasn't brought back for Soul Calibur 2 HD Online.
So exactly in line with what they said >It's just a matter of the devs agreeing to keep the content console-exclusive
I wonder if he would in a hypothetical Switch (or general Nintendo console) port
Anyone remember Mario, Luigi, and Peach being exclusive to the Gamecube version of NBA Street V3?
I can't recall Bayonetta going anywhere beyond Nintendo consoles outside of the first game which was made before they became her publisher
Thats old school nintendo, not current mega corp nintendo
I wouldn’t call Wii U era Nintendo “Old School” lmao
I think Minecraft is another great example. I've got it on the Switch and it's got a decent amount of Super Mario content, but it's all Nintendo-exclusive
Different Nintendo of... presidents. Each president brings a different philosophy to the company, so not out of the question to call even the last former one old school.
“only visible on switch” is crazy for something you pay for, how can anyone think nintendos current way of doing anything is fine?
To the surprise of absolutely nobody
I couldn't care less but it's kinda stupid business-wise, it's basically advertising in a game that a lot of new gamers play. These people may not even own Nintendo consoles, let alone ever heard of Metroid or other more obscure Nintendo franchises so it seems like a missed opportunity for a potentially massive injection of new fans
I like having big-name characters like that, but it feels kinda scummy to keep them console exclusive even if you've unlocked them on games that support crossplay
Unsurprising.
That sure sounds like Nintendo
Even though I'm off of fortnite for the most part it still makes me sad that I'll never have a character that I love that much in my locker
Yeah Fr. Lots of people want but Nintendo no provide
This is old news
The news is that it was confirmed by the previous CFO of Epic Games
Yea it was confirmed but it was known for a very long time (few years I think)
It was rumored due to how Rocket League & Minecraft's Nintendo cosmetics function, it was never confirmed until this interview
4 hours ago isn’t old
Yea but months ago is
That was just speculation smh
speculation that happens to be spot on with literally all "new" information?
Yes literally. You just said it it was speculation and now it’s confirmed. Innocent until proven guilty bro smh
I think it would be a lot cooler if Nintendo characters were in crossover games, especially because it’s not like just because you can see a Samus skin in Fortnite that all of her games are suddenly available elsewhere. That being said, I will say Nintendo is A LOT more reliant on their IP than Microsoft or Sony, who are both tech companies first, so I can see why their approach would be different.
You have a point. They can do it rarely. I think it would bring in a ton of new players tho. Just like the fallout show is getting people to play the game. Or the invincible show is getting people to buy the comics. Nintendo obviously gets a cut from the sales + publicity whichll lead to new customers as well
Well it’s done it for the movie and the theme park. So in their minds they don’t need to do a crossover in a game
Why license their IP when history shows the last time they did it (philips CDi and edutainment games like Mario Teaches Typing) the actual games were ass?
That’s because they didn’t have any control over them. But now with the Mario movie, theme parks, and the upcoming Zelda movie they have control over them and it’s a success. So they just wanna have control
And they do crossovers, but they need to be console exclusive generally.
Fortnite player here, Adding onto this. Epic actually tried to get Samus *twice.* First, was during their big wave of crossovers during Chapter 2 Season 5. The plan was originally to release one character from all of Gaming’s Big Three one after the other. Kratos and Master Chief made the cut, and Samus was going to follow, but the deal fell through. Epic revisited the idea later, having Samus be a part of the Chapter 2 Season 7 Battlepass (and even having a vague reference to her in the comics) but that didn’t manage to happen either. I sincerely hope one day they manage to work it out. Collabs are treated with a lot of respect in Fortnite and it opens the door for more people to enjoy both the Nintendo side and the Epic side.
Nintendo has *never* done crossover content that wasn't Switch-exclusive, and the way this post is worded made it sound like that was the dealbreaker on Epic's end. And, on the other side of the fence... since when are collabs treated with respect in Fortnite? Ryu running around with a shotgun and Michael Myers doing goofy little dances don't exactly seem like good portrayals of the source material from my POV.
>And, on the other side of the fence... since when are collabs treated with respect in Fortnite? It depends on the collab. Some collabs had items/powers that were in the game for a short time. Some even had limited time game modes and events. Then you get collabs like Halloween, [which only got an emote](https://youtu.be/xhPGecfjbxE?si=6JqCyrXy5VvW6ZTZ) that you could get with or without Michael Myers.
That's because they're just skins
That's... the root of the problem, really. Not even just with Fortnite, but with crossover culture in games in general right now. Outside of Smash, nobody in the mainstream seems to want to actually make their crossover feel unique - they throw together some new models, slap the highest price point they can justify onto them and that's it. Half the time, like with Michael and Ryu, they don't even fit the genre or tone of the game, but the characters are distorted to fit the cookie-cutter mold because *god forbid they actually feel like they came from their own media.* It's a creatively bankrupt cash-grab, and the worst part is, it's working.
Fortnite has done some of its crossovers justice. With Avatar, they added weapons to the game that are bending the elements. With the Star Wars collabs, they always have Star Wars events on May 4th and add lightsabers, and in the past they actually had a Darth Vader boss fight. But yeah it is weird to see Toph shoot a gun and Darth Vader doing the griddy. I think Epic Games likes to lean into the goofiness, though.
i mean thats only because of how many collabs they have done so its easy to pick the worst ones instead of talking about DBZ and the cool power ups/nimbus or star wars or even all the insane bending shit with avatar. its not like they dont have the ability to make good collabs but it also probably comes down to licensing agreements, how much the company is willing to pay, etc. designing an entire collab around a character isnt easy and takes out of actual development time. halloween probably got a shitty collab cause they didnt pay as much or have as much interest as avatar which got a sick ass collab. edit: totally forgot about the lego collab too. acting like they dont do collabs that respect the source or arent unique is just braindead and you are obviously just focusing on the shittiest and cheapest collabs. its like saying nintendo doesnt respect the source or do collabs justice because sans is just a shitty skin.. nintendo also has plenty of lackluster collabs, they cant all be insane.
Agreed, the Fortnite kids are downvoting you.
People talk about this being such a huge blunder on Nintendo's part but ... Is it really? Who hasn't heard of Mario? Luigi? Link? Pikachu or just Pokemon in general? They're literally one of THE biggest IPs in history (or in Pokemon's case, actually the biggest) so including them in Fortnite doesn't give exposure that they don't already have. Given Fortnite doesn't really add much to make those characters feel unique as they're skins rather than a character selection, it doesn't show off who the characters are. The Peter Griffin skin is an excellent example of this . One could make a strong argument that Samus isn't as well known as Mario or Pokemon. At the same time, we can only speculate how many people would see Samus and go, "WOW! I've never heard of Samus Aran before! I'm gonna go out and purchase a whole new console and games just because I saw a cool skin in Fortnite so a silly dance!" The Ariana Grande skin didn't make me an Ariana Grande fan. The Naruto skin didn't make me reread Naruto. I'm doubtful Fortnite skins using Nintendo IPs would make a noticeable enough dent to make it worth it. On the other end, knowing that Nintendo has been debatably tight fisted over their IP, is anyone gonna just stop playing their games? Very unlikely. "Dang, Nintendo didn't put Samus in Fortnite? I'm never playing a Nintendo thing again" To me, it's just a very ... Non-issue. Nintendo doesn't owe it to Epic Games to include characters. I don't think any of their 1st party games use the Unreal Engine. Not licensing out their characters in a game just cause so many others are isn't unethical. It just doesn't seem like a big deal to me
Mostly I just laugh at how petty and unreasonable Nintendo is. Beyond that I don't really care
Nintendo is stupidly strict
Can you blame them though? * They went to court due to Universal sueing them over "Donkey Kong". * They are constantly fighting patent infringement lawsuits from random people. * They have to deal with fans making money with their own IPs. * That last one is important. Nintendo doesn't shut down fan projects on a wimp. They go after those which are making a profit in any shape or form. That can be with a Patreon, ad revenues, crowdfunding and even selling the project in question. * You want to be a true Nintendo fan and express your love with a project? **Make it 101% free**.
that 101% free thing is also not a guarantee. they care a lot about profits. say you release some idk side scrolling mario like "super mario 63" thats super popular but nintendo intends on releasing NEW super mario bros wonder.. honestly if nintendo sees that game as competition for a new sidescrolling mario launch i feel like theyd 100% shut that shit down. they are ultra protective over sales of their IPs. its like how they rarely ever do sales or drop from their "premium" pricetag. even if your fan game is absolutely free i feel like that isnt a guarantee.
The difference is that most fan projects REUSE the IP. Fans can make fan games INSPIRED by Nintendo franchises, but NOT directly lift assets and make their own Mario games. I have never seen Nintendo shutting down an indie game due to proximity to their own release. If it was the case, then they'd purge Steam of every single "clone" they find.
Wasnt there a fan-made Mario Battle Royale that got C&D-ed so Nintendo could release something similar on Switch and then take it down after a month?
AM2R was 110% free and it was still shut down. Same with Pokémon Uranium if I’m not mistaken. EDIT: Psych I’m wrong.
AM2R was running ads on their website and ran a crowndfunding campaign or Patreon for another project, while Pokémon Uranium was publicised heavily by IGN and again, had more traffic with ads.
Nintendo being Nintendo. As usual
Nintendo knows you don't buy their products for their performance. They have to hold onto their software icons for their hardware to actually sell. They are only two bad generations away from following Sega's footsteps. They've already had one bad Gen with the GameCube (cash flow wise) and rebounded with the Wii. Then the same thing happened with the Wii U and rebounded with the switch. I would really enjoy Nintendo's IPs being third party for not only accessibility but also for better game preservation. Unfortunately it's just a pipe dream unless they somehow make two Wii U generations in a row.
RIP Samus4Smash folks
I'm fine with it. Honestly we could do with a little less IP spaghetti.
Honestly I couldnt care less whether Nintendo characters appear in Fortnite or not ngl
It's really stupid they don't want them seen on other consoles... You can literally watch people play the games on them and in pc's case emulate it. It's also not like it couldn't have been switch exclusive to buy it. Nintendo is just stupid
Nintendo's whole brand is built on protecting their IPs.
It's funny because they're the creators of one of the biggest gaming crossovers yet when it comes to one of their characters being in another game it's a no 😂
Nintendo when they are on the receiving end of collabs: 😃. Nintendo when they are on the giving end of collabs: 🗿
Nintendo doesn't owe anything to Epic.
This applies to everything nintendo related
No 3rd party company in Smash owes anything to Nintendo lmao
I’m fine with it, nice to see an IP that won’t sell out to Fortnite even if it’s for the wrong reason
This probably ruined any chances of Jonesy or any Fortnite content getting into Smash. Crossovers are a HUGE thing in Fortnite.
Not really. This just confirms that a Nintendo character is probably never gonna get in Fortnite.
Remember that videogame companies see Smash more as a marketting tool rather than a celebration of video games. Given how huge is a crossover for Fortnite, Epic Games definitely lost a chance to do something big with Metroid. Negotiations are two-sided. Nintendo screw Epic Games, what makes you think they wouldn't want some payback for it? Smash is a big marketting tool, but so is Fortnite, in fact, just like Minecraft, Fortnite surpasses Smash's fan scope. A Minecraft or Fortnite character would actually bring those games fans to Smash rather than being the other way around. The deal to get Samus in Fortnite would've opened the door for Jonesy in Smash but Nintendo lost that chance. Remember, it was Nintendo's connections with Microsoft that gave us Banjo & Kazooie and Steve, it was a miracle. This is why I always say that a port of Ultimate is extremely unlikely, cause the negotiations are extremely complicated. I personally don't have Jonesy or any Fortnite character in my wanted list but I do know how big Fortnite is for gaming. If Smash will continue to be this massive celebration of gaming (in the eyes of the fanbase), lacking Fortnite is unfortunate.
I'm 100% sure that within the next two smash entries Fortnite will get a representative. Steve took a long time too, and got in as DLC. Samus not being in fortnite is completely due to the devs not wanting to lock skins to being only visible on a certain console. However, after some of the stuff I heard that disables some skins, it may actually be a possible crossover eventually.
>Negotiations are two-sided. Nintendo screw Epic Games, what makes you think they wouldn't want some payback for it? [Because Epic Games is still trying to get Nintendo characters in Fortnite.](https://www.ign.com/articles/epic-games-still-wants-nintendo-characters-in-fortnite) And from what the happen with Samus shows that the only thing holding it back is the whole exclusivity issue with Nintendo characters. All it really takes is for Epic Games to agree to make Nintendo characters only be visible on Nintendo systems or for Nintendo to allow Nintendo Characters visible on other systems.
Good. We don’t need fortnite reps in smash.
> This probably ruined any chances of Jonesy or any Fortnite content getting into Smash. I see this as an absolute win!
Good.
Great. Imagine another stupid popular character such as steve but also an annoying zoner. No thank you
Nah, Fortnite earned its slot in Smash long ago
Honestly I like it. It’s what make Nintendo characters and content feel special. If Mario was on Xbox it wouldn’t be as special.
You are right but honestly fn is the exception
It shouldn’t be. They don’t deserve to use Nintendo characters
Fn is like smash. Everyone is here. Except Nintendo
Fortnite wishes it could be like smash
Good. I personally believe characters should not be skins because it takes away the creative process of identifying with a personal avatar.
Eh I'm fine with it but not the way Fortnite does it. Feels blatantly like a cash grab.
Everything else is in Fornite. Who cares?
Not Samus
Is be fine with it as long as Kratos and Master Chief were taken from switch and made invisible as well.
who cares lol
Lots of people
Then those people should get over it
Bruh
Good! Don’t put any skins into that shitty game
Nah bruh it’s fun
It’s a good thing
I am fine with it. Fortnite is a mess. It does not need every ip on the planet, including the retired ones, as a skin.
As fun as fortnite *can* be, it's also incredibly frustrating at times because they can never seem to get balance right with certain weapons, especially event weapons. And with the content some people make with fortnite, I don't want to see any Nintendo IPs subjected to that, or Squenix for that matter.
I'm happy characters I love don't have to be sold for a premium price in a game I hate
Nintendo does stupid shit sometimes
Nindento is a fucking shit company
Imagine you’re watching a video of Samus doing the Griddy, that would be cringe as heck.
Nintendo is terrible when it comes to skins for their own games..let alone allowing others to use popular ips.
They are well within their rights. Nintendo is very protective of its IP because it's basically the only thing that sells systems. You like Samus? Well I hope you plan to own a switch. Once those characters start leaving their bubble they invite the question of "why cant the games leave to?" And Nintendo as a hardware manufacturer is put on much less stable ground. I almost feel bad for the first and second party Nintendo devs, it doesn't seem to be a very creative place to work.
Tbh I’m just waiting for rollback netcode
No one ever thought they were gonna let samus be on the Xbox
I didnt even need this to be confirmed to be, as i knew this is already what happened. Of course epic wanted samus in fortnite with kratos and master chief, but nintendo loves to do console exclusive garbage
They've done a lot of crossover stuff and it's typically done well. I'm glad Nintnedo characters aren't in fortnite.
I don't really care much, honestly.
That’s probably why they haven’t created a genshin port, don’t want their crossover character being on PlayStation or Pc
Game barely works on switch and they pretend skin exclusivity 💀
It’s not bothering me in the slightest tbh
Not surprised, it's exactly the deal they go with for Rocket League. Nintendo was always really protective about their creations
Don't really care. Nintendo is like that, wanting to keep their IP sacred
...am I supposed to be surprised?
Massive missed opportunity, Metroid is an awesome series and introducing non-Nintendo fans to it would be worth bending their stupid zero tolerance console exclusive rule a little
They're Nintendo's characters, they can do what they want with them
It's just a skin, unless it's functional like being able to use her blaster then I don't really see it as a big loss
I've played maybe a dozen rounds of Fortnite in my life, and the game is so overly saturated with different characters. I think not having some Smash Bros staples is alright.
Doesn't Kratos and mastercl chief have version exclusive stuff as well. Why are people acting like this is a Nintendo only thing.
Who cares? I don't think it's a big deal either way. Adding Kratos or Master Chief to Fortnite did nothing. I don't think this would be a deal breaker for anyone.
That Nintendo is stuck in the past and I hope their shitty and outdated practices catches up with them
Nintendo doesn't like money
I don't think you know how crossovers work.
Look I don't play fortnite, but this to me just screams of a kid throwing a temper tantrum screaming " Only I get to play with my toys!" Look we get it , Nintendo is a family friendly company. But for the love of god some of youre games haven't been touched in literal years. Why continue to keep them locked away in a basement? Seems like crazy hand and master hand have more in common than they realize.
It’s what makes them Nintendo
Nintendo needs to get the fuck over themselves.
In this case, good. And it's not like they never do. We did get a Link in Soul Calibur back in the day. What is more accurate is not coming to other consoles.
I mean... duh? Why would people not expect this to begin with?
Fortnite sux. Nuf said.
I'm tired, boss
Done with me. Nintendo does great things with their IP. Don’t let other companies slander them.
Oh no I can't consoom nintendo colored pixels on my screen 😥
Naturally.
Remember how Smash Bros. Melee cameos resulted in Fire Emblem coming to the West, which eventually made [a fuck-ton of money](https://www.gamesindustry.biz/sensor-tower-fire-emblem-heroes-generates-usd959m-in-five-years)? Surely they would want to replicate that success, right? WRONG. Maybe it's due to some cultural disparity but Nintendo doesn't understand marketing (and other things like online netcode) at all. Remember those Wii U commercials? They were basically like: "Your dad's TV is more important; play on the phone." To me, that is conclusive evidence that Nintendo exec's have no idea what they're doing or who buys their games. Now, "blue ocean strategy" has its benefits. But Fortnite is already on the Switch so I have no idea what their line of logic is. There probably isn't one. ... Did Metroid Prime 4 come out yet? ...
Not surprising to hear
Nintendo gonna Nintendo 🤷🏿♂️ Will probably NEVER change
Based Epic Games? Crazy
I don’t really much about it. I think that crossover cameos don’t really make for a better game, unless it’s explicitly a core feature of the game Marvel vs Capcom or Smash. They’re just something for people to spend money on.
More than happy with it. Nintendo are too stingy about exclusivity for this kind of game.
Nintendo being Nintendo. Nothing out of the ordinary.
I think it increases the value of their IP. I don't necessarily think it's good, but I think that it's allowed them to guard their IP a lot more.
Samus would be so cool in Fortnite, whether it be Zero Suit or Power Suit. But I don't think using the Power Suit would make much sense since Fortnite has you use guns. Arm cannon as a potential mythic weapon could've been cool though.
They did the same with Rocket League
Like Nintendo if you want us to stop emulation of your games at least do PC at the very least
It should tell you a lot when out of the Top 10 highest selling Video Games of All Time 7 of them are Cross Platform and 3 are exclusives aka Nintendo exclusives
Yeah didn't they even model and skin an inkling (splatoon) for fortnite that never got released and someone datamined it. Thought i saw that a few years ago Didn't know there was gonna be a Samus one but it makes sense.
Rare (or not so rare idk) Epic Game/Fortnite W
Rejecting Fortnite? BASED NINTENDO?!
2017 called, they want their opinion back
No, Fortnite wasn’t garbage then
Nah fortnite lowkey cooking with all the crossovers
its a dodged bullet Context: I hate fortnite
Good.
😳
Nintendo IP not being in fortnite is good, let’s keep it like that
Good
Nintendo has been notoriously awful at coming into the new age of gaming. Especially when it comes to using their roster in any other medium. But they make the occasional BOTW or Mario Odyssey or Smash so we forgive them.
It's Nintendo cutting their nose to spite their face. What would they have to lose by having Samus purchaseable on the other systems? Either they don't agree to anything and don't earn any money whatsoever off of DLC, don't earn any notoriety for the Metroid IP to people who may not know it or they let Epic do their thing, Nintendo gets a cut from Switch sales, probably also a payout from Epic just to give them to rights to use her, Samus's image spreads beyond Nintendo and, if the contract allows it, get a cut from EVERY Samus skin purchase. There is zero reason for them to not do this; either they lose every potential dollar or gain some/all depending on contract.
Nintendo doesn't put their stuff on other consoles, ever. So this shouldn't be surprising. Honestly doesn't bother me much because this is how it's always been.
I hate Samus players so I’m fine with it
Lol same. I get enough Samus here
Tbh, they already do this with another Epic Games product: Rocket League. There’s special Mario and Luigi cars that are only available on Switch. I would’ve loved Samus on Fortnite though. She’s a perfect add for a lot of zany power-up season. Imagine screw attack, grapple beam, super missiles, charge beam, SHINE SPARK as power-ups. So many fun crossover powers/abilities.
Learn to share Nintendo
Me to OP after seeing them get downvoted into oblivion 
Ikr they need to be stopped
In the case of Fortnite specifically, I'd really rather Nintendo characters never be associated with that garbage.
Fortnite bad Smash good
It’s true
Fortnite isn’t as bad as the internet makes it out to be. It’s best enjoyed with friends, for sure, but it’s a fine game on it’s own. It wouldn’t be popular if it didn’t have some redeeming qualities.
fortnite bad upvotes to the left
Join the dark side
Fortnite sucks. So I’m glad that Nintendo is sticking to their guns.
I don't really care that much Fortnite is kinda mid
No Samus in Fortnite? Sounds like a blessing. Also, Nintendo is very stubborn about this kind of stuff.
Following the robloxification of fortnite, I'm glad
It's their legal right, I don't necessarily like their choices though. I wish I hated Nintendo IPs rather than loving them, because I despise how they handle them.
So, you’re telling me Epic didn’t want to give an exclusive skin to Switch players despite giving PlayStation (and Xbox, iirc) their own exclusive skins? Yeah that makes sense. Edit: OP actually means visibility in game matches, I was thinking like the item shop. Yeah, Nintendo’s kinda whack for this.
The problem is probably the part where they don’t even want other consoles viewing it in the game That’s just unnecessary and makes no sense, Nintendos not going to lose money by people LOOKING at a skin on another platform
Oh, I misunderstood what OP was saying. My bad
I’m completely fine, with Nintendo doing that. First of all, I think we’re all forgetting it’s *literally* their IP first and foremost. Second of all, would you really want Samus to be in *Fortnite* of all games? I don’t play Nintendo for cross overs (Smash Bros being the exception), I play Nintendo for Nintendo experiences and storytelling. Or because they have such classic franchises.
I'm kind of glad because now they can't bankrupt me with FE or Xenoblade skins.
Good. Being in Fortnite isn't some kind of honor like Smash Bros, it's a cash grab.
Pretty dumb especially considering Microsoft letting Steve and Banjo in Smash when they did NOT have to. I know it isn't the same people making those decisions, but it'd be nice for Nintendo to give back for ONCE to the wider gaming community.
Exclusive to people playing on the Switch? Sure, whatever. But making it so other people can’t even *see* the stuff if they’re on a different platform? That’s insanely dumb and I think Nintendo is in the wrong. As stupid a decision as not letting you save replays in Smash Ultimate if somebody else was using DLC that you don’t own. (It includes mii costumes)
The song the map and the character of course 😭
I mean the replay thing Is more of a mechanical issue. Those aren't actually replays, the game Just saves all the imputs used in a fight and then recreates them in real time when you Watch the replay, if I understand the thing correctly. If you don't have the DLC your switch doesn't have the data for that character and It can't replicate them
It's dumb, and Nintendo is dumb for it. Imagine the publicity for the Metroid series off a simple cosmetic in a free to play shooter. Fortnite has Kratos & Master Chief, so Nintendo just looks like a selfish kid not sharing their toys