"I'm getting the feeling Nintendo would rather I play Ultra on a PS4 rather than Melee on a GameCube." Why would they care, in neither of those you are giving them money. They are a company
Melee being around, getting more attention, more positive responses from competitive players, getting more viewers, and getting more players than Smash 4 at nearly every event (especially majors) could be a perceived threat to Smash 4.
Again, a ex-Nintendo marketer said competitive Melee is often viewed as a bad thing.
Here's the quote:
From a Promotional perspective the game is almost always a guaranteed victory, it’s easy mode. People love Smash, period. In this respect, it tends to swallow nearly all other titles it’s placed alongside. Even during the Wii launch, Smash Melee would still draw huge crowds at events if it was fired up, pulling eyes and critical impressions away from newer Wii and DS titles. As that relates to EVO, the decision doesn't really seem to make much sense and from what I've heard it was more a miscommunication between the parties involved. On the other hand, highlighting a 12 year old game from a console two full generations ago isn't exactly going to lead to improved sales numbers. People always say “It’s free promotion!”, but that’s like using a Game Boy Advance SP to promote the 3DS. It was great at the time, but it’s not doing you any favors in 2013.
From a Marketing perspective, Smash is dangerous because of the content/playstyle of the game. Iconic Nintendo mascots beating the hell out of each other is an awesome gameplay experience, no one will challenge that fact, but from an overall Marketing view it’s, well, dangerous. The popular image of Mario, the widely publicly recognized one, can never be of him beating the hell out of Princess Peach or, say, of Link tossing Zelda into the fires of Brinstar, Pikachu hitting Jigglypuff with a baseball bat, so on, so forth. Unlike most other fighting game characters, the Nintendo mascots have far-reaching brands and franchises unto themselves that have to be considered and protected in a bigger picture view. EVO would have taken the character representations out of the hands of Nintendo’s control, boiled them down to pure violence, and broadcast it directly to 125,000 people. It’s not hard to see why Nintendo would be a little gun-shy.
Don’t get me wrong, I was thrilled to see Super Smash Bros Melee at EVO 2013 (full disclosure, I was a Judge at EVO this year), but the outcry against Nintendo at the initial decision was so one-sided, so inconsiderate of what the company has to deal with to protect their brands, and just generally uninformed. Gamers want what they want, but there is always more at stake than we know.
What I'm getting from that is he's telling us is that Nintendo thinks the corporate line is more important than the players. He's calling us "inconsiderate" for hating on the decision to block streams of Melee at EVO 2013, when we have full 1st Amendment rights (at least in America; other countries have similar rights) to dispute that.
We all paid the $50 for the game, up to $250 for the GameCube, as well as money for the TV's, recording setups, and controllers just to even play and broadcast the game.
I don't know about you, but from that statement and Nintendo's avoidance of ever saying the word Melee (hint: marketers never mentioned Melee and neither do Nintendo employees), I think my statement is entirely accurate.