[oniony]

By restricting access to their classic portfolio, it inflates the value of it so they can periodically release it on new platforms in a time limited fashion.

Disney did the same thing with their classic movies during the VHS/DVD era. If they were all available all the time then nobody would even think to watch them. But by creating scarcity and then periodically releasing them in a time limited special edition they can eke out more money.

So Nintendo do not want everyone to be blasse about their back catalogue. They want the nostalgia to build and then release some of these titles every so often so you buy them over and over again.

[selfmodruntime]

> By restricting access to their classic portfolio, it inflates the value of it so they can periodically release it on new platforms in a time limited fashion.

One would think so, but there are incredible games in their portfolio that have never seen a single re-release - on any platform. The old Pokemon games are among it, as is A link to the past.

[rimunroe]

> One would think so, but there are incredible games in their portfolio that have never seen a single re-release - on any platform. The old Pokemon games are among it, as is A link to the past.

Maybe you're using a different definition of re-release than I am, but I recently played A Link to the Past on the Switch virtual console. I also played the Game Boy Advance re-release of it in the early 2000s. Apparently it's also been released for the Wii, Wii U, New 3DS, and Super NES Classic Edition.

A quick check of Wikipedia shows that in addition to their remakes, Pokemon Red/Blue/Yellow were also released on the 3DS virtual console.

[selfmodruntime]

You did? I'm in Germany and I don't see it. Is it the one where you need a subscription?

[rimunroe]

It was the Switch Online one, yeah. I'm in the US but haven't run my Switch in a while so can't easily check atm