Wall for Torym (page 4)

Ah also, another post. You're probably sick of hearing from me again.
To answer your question;
No, Nintendo does not own the rights to Monster Hunter. Monster Hunter is owned exclusively by Capcom, and if they wish, they can bring their game to any other Console provided they make a deal with the maker of that Console. In the same way they moved their game from Playstation to Nintendo, they can do it again. While I'm not fully aware of how the relationship between companies like Nintendo and developers like Capcom work, I'm fairly sure that the developers maintain the rights to the actual game, but do afford some liberties and have to pay some form of money to the company like Nintendo.

The chances of such a crossover are nearly impossible. The graphics and drawing techniques between the two are vastly different - Monster Hunter takes a more realistic feel, while Pokemon is a more animated, childish artwork. It would be difficult, if not downright impossible to find an art style/graphics design  that could be implemented in the crossover without completely ruining the look of at least one of the components. While it is true your Deviant Artist managed good representations, keep in mind that Pokemon is aimed at Children - his artwork is more of a teenager feel. Losing the Children factor of Pokemon would completely cut sales, as Pokemon itself has a target market of younger children, not teenagers/adults which is where Monster Hunter is more focused on. Developing such a game would also require a collaboration with the two developers as well as Nintendo, those two being CapCom and GameFreak.

Eh, I think I worded the previous response wrong. Here's a TL:DR

Your interpretation is correct, but the well-elaborated opinions must be backed up by solid evidence and information.

No problems.
Rules: No polls/opinion questions: Questions such as What is your favourite Pokemon? or Who is the best Water-type Pokemon are too open and vague to be useful. You can discuss things like that in Chat.

Just to clarify, asking a question like "Is this better than that" since it can be answered utilising information known about the Pokemon and evidence in terms of stats, movesets, tier etc (This is under the condition the two named Pokemon perform relatively similar roles and have some common traits. Something like Excadrill vs Sunkern can be thrown out the window since Sunkern is god.)

Your question unfortunately, like I said, was based on pure speculation and inspired by seeing a few artworks. The only link that could be drawn as answer was the company which held the licence.

Regardless, you can ask those things on other people's walls and in Chat.

Question was impossible to give hard evidence, based on pure speculation and opinion. HIdden for those reasons.

I fricking love the way you format your questions. Keep up the good work!

my code is 4742 - 6774 - 8652 so you can add me

>:)
Wheyheyhry

Nah it's fine. That's my own fault for handling it badly.
A gimmick team is basically one that follows a dumb strategy, theme etc. and limits options for teams as a result. While I personally disagree that a Gen 1 themed team fits into that category, it's his call not mine.

Hey no problem! I have the link here if you want it: http://pokemondb.net/pokebase/rmt/38948/rate-my-gen-1-team
It was hidden by a mod, adding images shouldn't hide your post like that. He told me he hid it because gimmick teams aren't allowed- apparently themed teams fall under that category. So yeah.

you live in the italian peninsula?