Do you anons care to discuss Nintendo's blatant attempt at pandering to casuals? Something that they have been doing since the Wii.
>>345165158
>Nintendo
You mean Niantic? Last I checked Ingress was pretty non-casual
Casuals are where the money is at, you can't make a successful phone app and not have it be casual as fuck
>>345165158
Nintendo has literally NO INVOLVEMENT with this game.
>>345165473
Yes they do.
>>345165620
they don't though
>>345165896
You can ignore facts all you like. But they have EVERYTHING to do with it. Face facts kiddo. Nintendo has sold out and is pandering to the degenerate casual mobile market.
>>345166378
They didn't make or fund it.
>>345165158
Nope! But I'm sure the anons over on the POKEMON BOARD would be delighted to discuss it with you: >>>/vp/
Goodbye!
>>345165158
>Nintendo
>blatant attempt at pandering to casuals
>Since the Wii
I've got some bad news for you, son.
>I don't know who created Pokémon Go, but I'm trying to figure out how we can have Pokémon Go to the polls