The Shady Side Of Nintendo

We may receive a commission on purchases made from links.

Through its use of creative worlds, the lack of first-party games rated T or M by the ESRB, and the vast assortment of toys associated with its most popular characters, Nintendo has successfully cultivated a family-friendly image over the years. Unfortunately, the company's higher-ups aren't literal Jim Henson Company puppets. Like Sony, Microsoft, and every other player in the video game industry, Nintendo is staffed by ordinary people. This means that, despite its friendly facade, Nintendo isn't exactly perfect, as some may believe.

As a company that has been involved with video games since the late 1970s, Nintendo has a long, storied history that could fill several books. As such, the company is liable to have encountered a controversy or two. Not all of Nintendo's dust-ups have been the result of malintent, but others don't exactly paint the company in the best of lights, either. Here's a list of potentially shady incidents that may interfere with the wholesome image that Nintendo has maintained over the decades.

Nintendo made headlines in late 2020 after YouTuber and artist CptnAlex ran a successful Indiegogo campaign to sell Etika-themed Joy-Con shells to raise money for charity. The shells were designed in honor of YouTuber Etika, and the proceeds were meant to go to the non-profit JED Foundation. Despite the campaign's altruistic intentions, a cease and desist letter was sent to CptnAlex by Nintendo. Speaking to The Independent, CptnAlex clarified that the letter was not solely in response to the "Etikons" that had been crowd-funded, and that some of the violations had to do with other Nintendo-themed products he was selling in his Etsy store. 

Nintendo's letter meant that CptnAlex could not continue to sell any of the Nintendo-themed products without provoking a lawsuit. Despite his frustrations with the situation, CptnAlex recognized that he "infringed on Nintendo Copyrights and Trademarks." While trademarks must be protected according to law, Nintendo's targeting of individual creators over large-scale companies that infringe on their IPs hasn't gone unnoticed. Though the company may be upholding its trademark, the entire situation has stirred a fair amount of negative sentiment regarding how Nintendo seemingly values its fans.

Limited digital releases have garnered Nintendo a bit of negative publicity. Though the company dabbled with the concept with the free-to-play title Jump Rope Challenge, the idea of limited runs for big-name titles has not been met with enthusiasm.

Super Mario Bros. 35 adds a competitive spin to the classic title in the vein of Tetris 99. The game is exclusive to the Nintendo Switch Online service but is not a permanent fixture. According to Nintendo's Direct presentation, the game is only playable from Oct. 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021. 

Perhaps more significantly, Super Mario 3D All-Stars – a collection celebrating the 35th anniversary of Super Mario — will also be delisted from the eShop on March 31, 2021. Even more shocking is that physical copies of that title will be pulled from physical retail locations on the same date.

The Washington Post speculated that limiting sales for these games could be a tactic to bolster subscriptions to Nintendo Switch Online. Or perhaps the three games included in the bundle will be resold individually at a higher price point later on. Whatever the reason, limited availability doesn't seem to sit right with many Nintendo fans.

Animal Crossing: New Horizons was one of the most highly anticipated games of 2020. But despite the excitement surrounding the drop of a new Animal Crossing title, a critical piece of information served as a painful reminder that Nintendo is not exactly living in the modern era when it comes to online functionality. 

At launch, cloud saves for the title were unsupported. Not only that, but New Horizons only allowed for one island per console, regardless of how many accounts were on the Switch. Not only did players feel restricted, there was a genuine fear that if something happened to their Switch, there was nothing they could do to retrieve their progress. Considering that the Animal Crossing series is built around customization and putting in long hours of personalized, often tedious touches, a lost save file would serve as a devastating blow to any player. 

Cloud saves and an island recovery option were eventually added in a July 2020 update, but by this point, the game had already been out for months. For players who'd already lost their islands because of problems with their Switches, the damage was already done.

For content creators, navigating copyright laws is already a tricky affair. Throw in the added stress of Nintendo's aggressive restrictions on the usage of its properties, and it's enough to make most people shy away from streaming or making Nintendo-focused content.

One of the most egregious examples of Nintendo's lack of leniency in this area is the controversial Nintendo Creators Program. Though the program was promoted as a way for YouTubers to advertise on videos featuring Nintendo content, they took portions of the profits made from channels and videos registered in the program, according to Kotaku. The registration process would also take up to three days, which could be disadvantageous to reviewers and those posting on deadlines. 

Of course, the program only further strained the relationship between Nintendo and YouTubers. In the end, the Nintendo Creators Program was shut down. Creators, as reported by The Verge, were finally able to profit from content like Let's Plays or livestreams without Nintendo stepping in to take a cut.

Xbox Live has existed since Microsoft's original Xbox. PlayStation Plus debuted on the PlayStation 3 in 2011. With these two services available to gamers, it only seemed like a matter of time until Nintendo offered something similar. That comparable online service came in the form of Nintendo Switch Online.

However, once details of the service were revealed in a Nintendo Direct, consumers openly questioned whether $20 a year was worth it for a small library of NES titles, limited cloud saves, and an external phone application for voice chat. Some websites, like The Gamer and Polygon, wrote that Nintendo wasn't providing a service worthy of its price.

Nintendo later added free-to-play titles such as Tetris 99 and Super Mario Bros. 35 to the service, which helped boost its value. Years later, however, Nintendo Switch Online still didn't provide a good online multiplayer experience, and still lacked the free monthly games Xbox Live and PlayStation Plus subscribers had grown accustomed to.

When it comes to mobile gaming, microtransactions and gambling mechanics have become par for the course. It was only a matter of time before Nintendo and its developers jumped on the free-to-play mobile bandwagon, as well.

The first Nintendo mobile game to use microtransactions was Super Mario Run. Players could complete the first three levels for free before the game forced them to pay $9.99 for the rest. While this may not have seemed egregious at face value, as Paul Tassi at Forbes explained, the price point was not clearly stated to players up front. The game was located in the "free" section of the iOS store, easily leading to confusion. After the release of Super Mario Run, Nintendo went on to add microtransactions to even more of its mobile games.

According to a 2019 report from The Wall Street Journal, Nintendo asked developers working on its mobile titles to back off of the microtransactions a little bit. The reason? Nintendo didn't want to be criticized as greedy by consumers. Unfortunately, games published after that, such as the particularly cash-grabby Mario Kart Tour, Dr. Mario World, and Pokemon Masters EX, complicated that message with their not-so-subtle reliance on microtransactions and Gacha mechanics.

In April 2016, Nintendo fired Allison Rapp, who worked in marketing for Nintendo Treehouse. Her dismissal followed a monthslong campaign from participants in GamerGate and, according to Kotaku, frequenters of the neo-Nazi website The Daily Stormer. Her detractors had been both harassing Rapp personally and reaching out to Nintendo with numerous complaints.

Why were people rallying to get this member of Nintendo's marketing team fired? Rapp had used her sizable online following to talk about feminism and adjacent social justice issues, a common precursor for women facing Gamergate ire. In a statement, Nintendo claimed that Rapp was fired for holding a second job that clashed with Nintendo's values. As quoted in a Polygon article, Rapp said on Twitter, "Do you think that if the industry wasn't afraid of women, sex-positivity, etc. that the [anonymous] moonlighting I did would have been a problem?"

Many were quick to criticize the company. Frustrations were encapsulated in an article on Uproxx that claimed the company's actions made them look "callous, and ... like Nintendo had something to hide."

The Wii mostly targeted casual gamers, and for that reason, it played host to a lot of party games. Some might argue, however, that the console responsible for making these games popular was the Nintendo 64. Mario Party was the title that put the party game genre on the map, kicking off a long-running franchise that still gets new entries. Mario Party on the N64 also injured quite a few of Nintendo's fans. 

Mario Party's mini-games had very simplistic control schemes, sometimes using just a handful of buttons. A few games tasked players with quickly rotating the control stick to win the match. To accomplish this, many players placed their palms over the control stick and moved their hands in a circular motion. Unfortunately, some who employed this tactic wound up with injuries to their palms.

Once enough players and concerned parents complained, Nintendo was taken to court by the Attorney General of New York. As a remedy, Nintendo settled out of court, paid the attorney fees for the State of New York, and promised over $80 million to provide padded gloves that affected families could claim.

Nintendo has historically marketed itself as a family friendly video game company. This isn't to say that more adult-leaning titles like Doom or Resident Evil don't land on Nintendo consoles, but Nintendo heavily markets to children and families, and is a household name among gamers of all ages. When news came out that Nintendo partnered with Foxconn to manufacture the Wii U, a Chinese company in direct opposition to the child-friendly image Nintendo projects, people were understandably upset. 

Foxconn, best known as the company that manufactures iPhones, is rife with controversy. According to CNET, Foxconn has been accused of forcing excessive work hours on its staff and underpaying its workers. Reports indicate that the poor working conditions have resulted in riots and deaths by suicide among numerous Foxconn employees.

Kotaku reported in 2012 that the Wii U was manufactured by Foxconn using child labor. Interns between the ages of 14 to 16 were required to work overtime as a result of forced internships at secondary technical schools. Had they refused, they would have faced reprimands, would have lost class credits, and could have been potentially expelled. Nintendo eventually stepped in to investigate, but still — not great.

If you or someone you know is struggling with mental health, free and low-cost help is available. The Suicide Prevention Lifeline can be reached 24/7 at 1-800-273-8255.

Over the years, Nintendo has relied on actors in costumes to promote its games. Unfortunately, one character has caused real problems for the actors who've played him, causing multiple people who've donned the costume to sue Nintendo for alleged mistreatment. Which character has caused so much grief, you ask? Donkey Kong.

Parker Mills sued Nintendo in 2014 after working an event at the Los Angeles Zoo. Mills was asked to wear a Donkey Kong costume to celebrate the release of Donkey Kong Country Returns 3D. According to The Los Angeles Times, Mills' attorney said that his client was denied breaks and was not given the ice pack he required to stay cool in the suit. Mills ended up tearing his aorta walls, and also required surgery to implant a defibrillator due to physical stress.

Michael Oconitrillo, meanwhile, sued Nintendo in 2016 after performing as Donkey Kong in Culver City, Ca. mall. According to TMZ, Oconitrillo claimed that he was required by Nintendo to wear a Donkey Kong costume, which he said was "poorly ventilated and unreasonably and dangerously hot." Oconitrillo blamed the suit for causing "permanent damage, as well as mental and emotional distress." If you ever work for Nintendo someday, don't wear the Donkey Kong suit.

In 1989, Nintendo's legal department decided it had a bone to pick movie rental store Blockbuster. According to the Sun Sentinel, Nintendo claimed that Blockbuster was repeatedly violating its intellectual property rights when renting out Nintendo games. The issue wasn't that Blockbuster was making money by renting those titles out to customers, which is what you might assume. Instead, Nintendo was unhappy about a totally different thing Blockbuster was doing to help those renting video games from its stores.

Nintendo took Blockbuster to court after discovering the rental chain was routinely copying its game instruction booklets. Blockbuster wanted to make sure people could play the games they paid for, so it included copies of instruction manuals along with rentals as a courtesy. Nintendo and Blockbuster eventually settled the matter out of court, with Blockbuster promising to cease its copying of Nintendo's manuals. Blockbuster instead started including third party instruction booklets, ensuring players still had the information they needed to enjoy their rentals.

Sometimes you're playing a game and there's an obstacle that you just can't get past. Whether it's a challenging platforming stage or a particularly mean boss, constant failure can quickly become frustrating. After so many failed attempts, you might look for cheat codes, or perhaps search out a way to "cheese" the game.

Back in the 8-bit era, some companies began marketing new products that could create cheats for games, even if those games didn't have cheat codes. These devices manipulated a game's code to enable things like invincibility or extra lives. Nintendo didn't like the notion of other companies making a profit by modifying the intended functionality of its games. As a result, Nintendo took Galoob, the maker of the infamous Game Genie, to court in 1990. 

Nintendo argued that the Game Genie violated its copyrights by creating "derivative works." However, since the Game Genie couldn't change a game's code unless it was attached to the cartridge itself, the courts sided against Nintendo. This enabled the Game Genie and products like it to continue being sold to gamers around the world. You can bet Nintendo is thankful these devices aren't as popular today as they once were.