Nintendo was never surprized to see MIcrosoft buying out Rare. For Nintendo, Rare was not making enough to keep. Remember that Rare holds 200 emplyees and to pay for their salaries for a year, the technology needed to make the games, the location, buisinnes investment, game production, publishing, comercials, etc. for just one game a year just isn't profitable at the end of the day.

So Nintendo preffered not to keep anything Rare. THey could have kept the 49% shares they hold on Rare and profit from Xbox Rare games sales, but they know that Rare won't be that profitable on Xbox for quite a few reasons, and the money from the shares will get them to get other companies on GameCube that would make more games than Rare, and even if not the same quality, it would grow the library of the console, which is the main seller in this age, not quality, quantity.

Which is totally against what Nintendo says they are for, quality over quantity.

Small problem there.

Oh, I see... So it would be ok if say Burger King bought out Rare, but it's not ok if Microsoft does? I see, that makes a whole lot of sense. You blame Microsoft for buying Rare, but you don't blame Nintendo for taking the money. You have to realize Nintendo gave up Rare, they left it there open for people to buy. It does not matter if Activison or if Microsoft would have bought it, Nintendo gave up Rare. If you blame Microsoft for buying Rare, then you have to blame Nintendo for taking the money. It doesn't work that way man; both companies benefited leave it at that. You can't blame one another because each agreed and each benefited from the situation. Maybe in the end we'll see you made the smarter business move, but for now each company agreed to it fair and square. If you blame only one company than you are missing something.

Amazingly talented Rare? Hell no. I'd like someone to name one other game besides Goldeneye 007 that sold outstanding on N64?... exactly, theres none. PD was basically 007, Banjo and DK64 were just rip offs of Super Mario 64, Rare takes a ton of their ideas from Nintendo! Like look at SFA...not only does SFA have the same battle system, but the health system and the way Fox holds items that he finds is the same as Zelda on 64! CFBD was just horrible IMO...and Jet Force Gemeni? Dont even get me started... I've never liked Rare, besides 007 and the DKC games on SNES...all of their games were big dissapointments. It wouldnt surprise me if they take ideas from Pikmin, SMS or Metroid Prime...

MS can have them, Shiggy surpurvised all of Rare's games basically, who's gonna surpervise Rare's games now? Bill Gates?? LOL!!!

With major partnerships with Sega, Namco and Capcom, Nintendo does not need Rare, it is in no way a major blow to Nintendo.

amount of Rare games I have enjoyed: 1

amount of Rare games I have bought: 0

amount of Rare games I will buy: 1

amount of xboxs I will buy to enjoy Rare: 0

amount of xboxs I will buy to play other cool games: 1

do i see a pattern? hmmmm....boy does Rare suck, the only game i care about is SFA, and shiggy was the person who mostly influenced it. I shall say good day to Rare

i dont get how people say rare screwed nintendo fans. or MS screwed nintendo fans.

If nintendo goes out and says Here, take rare, we dont want them.

and MS says ok, we'll take them.


how is either MS or Rare screwing nintendo fans????

I've heard a number of people say that Conker was a very good game...

and that Jet Force Gemini is quite underrated... They made that, right?

I dunno...

Alls I know is, even if Rare's games don't come out too often, they normally do have at least a couple of great games on each system... N64 and SNES, that is...

And while some may argue that "that's not much" or something, it's at least something... Especially if they're like some of the BEST on the system (like 007 on N64)...

But yeah...

That's a fairly biased statement considering Rare has not even announced one game for the Xbox console. You are predicting the future which we all know you can not do. Please wait until the game is released, and you actually are able to play the game to make a fair judgement. I'm not saying you won't, I'm saying it's a very premature statement. And in any case, Microsoft doesn't care about customers such as you, they are wanting to give the Xbox owners Rare.

I think you hit the pin on the head there Null.

:unsure:
I understand now that Rare owes much to Nintendo when it comes to making good games. And a lot of ppl have already left Rare. Like that news on Cube-Europe, the supervisor of GE and PD is working on a game for (at least) the GameCube.

It will be very interesting to see what Rare can do on the X-Box. ;)

Wow, I won't name names, but I think a LOT of people have put their bitter grumpypants on over this whole ordeal.

Rare on Nintendo: "GREATEST... DEVELOPER... EVER... All other consoles must bow DOWN to Nintendo for having the mighty Rare... MWAAAA HHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAAAA!!!!"

Rare on the XBox: "Rare SUXXORS11!!1!1!! They never release games on time, they haven't made any good games since Goldeneye (complete boldfaced LIE) and they are completely WORTHLESS!!!! ARRRRGGGHH!!!!"

:D

But then you see it from the opposite perspective. XBox fanboys would say rare sucks, they are the suckiest bunch of sucks that ever sucked...suck.

Then they are like: Whhha! Rare, Best news EVAR!!!!!!111

Yes, the fanboy pendulum does swing both ways. I have always seen the value of Rare, even though Conker wasn't really my type of game. I'm not a big fan of platform heavy games.

But Goldeneye and PD? Yessssssssssss......

Plus Kameo looks really good from what I've seen. Nintendo still gets Star Fox, which will be a bigger seller than Mario Sunshine IMO.

*shakes head*

How can you guys hate on Rare? They are Nintendo's best second party if not best developer. Check this out:

Rare's top 7 games (IGN Scores):
-Perfect Dark (9.8)
-Conker's Bad Fur Day (9.9)
-Goldeneye 007 (9.7)
-Banjo Kazooie (9.6)
-Banjo Tooie (9.4)
-Donkey Kong 64 (9.0)
-Blast Corps (9.0)

Total Score: 66.4

Nintendo's top 7 games (IGN Scores):
-Zelda: OoT (10.0)
-Zelda: MM (9.9)
-Mario 64 (9.8)
-Wave Race 64 (9.7)
-F-Zero X (9.1)
-Paper Mario (9.0)
-Star Fox 64 (8.7)

Total Score: 66.3

Scores don't prove anything, but still, Rare got better overall scores than Nintendo's enternal studios on N64... what does that say?

Plus, Only one game on Nintendo's list required/used the expansion pack, While 3 of Rare's required it and 4 used it. That should clear up why the game didn't sell so well. They risked sales for quality.

I'm not saying cry over the fact that they are gone, but please don't act like they are just the crappiest developer ever. According to scores they are just as good or better than Nintendo themselves.

Ummmm.... I have went to an Xbox site longer than I have been here at Gametavern and I have never seen them call Rare crap. In fact, they always had respect for Rare and N64's WWF games. Those were the only two things respected, anything else is uncivilized.

I have never seen a developer e turned on so fast at a forum.

Its all opinions, I dont like Rare, and thats me. I ve only owned 5 Rare games, 3 on SNES, 2 on N64...which one was a major dissapointment (DK64). SFA looks awesome, and since Kameo has not even been playable by IGN or anyone else, I wont judge it. But really though, IMO, this is in no way a major blow to Nintendo, with Sega and Capcom support (SOnic, RE, PSo, Monkey Ball etc.), and plus Namco developing an original SF shooter, Rare is not needed, Capcom, Sega, and Namco can come up with more good games than Rare ever could. even if they still were Nintnedo 2nd party, I doubt I would buy any of their games other than SFA, but then again, thats an opinion...some might say Rare is good others say no, but I will never see why this will hurt Nintendo in any way.

Also...IMO..HAL is Nintendo's best 2nd party...I mean like come on, SSBM, SSB, Kirby, Pokemon on GBC.... they didnt make many games compared to Rare, but the SSB games and the Pokemon RPG ones a FAR better than anything Rare can do IMO

i'm not saying Rare wont make good games for xbox, i'm just saying that as of now i'm not going to buy an xbox just because MS bought Rare. Maybe i should have made that clearer before

:lol:

If Nintendo were to lost HAL they would lose what???

First of all, Pokemon was made by Gamefreak (or whatever) an exclusive handheld developer. That leaves SSB and Kirby... :unsure:

yep better than Rare all-around :rolleyes:

Rare is Nintendo's best second party. They are the only ones wh stepped out on N64 and made somthing called origanal content. Hal can feed off of the Nintendo brand name games, but give them somthing origanal and I doubt they will do near as good as Rare. That's why I'm pretty sure Rare will succeed with MS.

HAL made one good game, Super Smash Brothers, which used all Nintendo ideas and franchises, and then they made a sequel. That's it... not a whole lot.

Exactly... HAL is a nobody compared to Rare. Rare is innovative, Rare makes origanal content without stealing or using and Ideas from old Nintendo franchises.

Hmm I could say 'Star Fox' here, but I know they didn't 'steal' it from Nintendo. But neither did HAL. Anyway that's not the topic.

I like Rare, they've made some super games. But now I'm starting to wonder how much of that was thanks to Nintendo. I mean, Shigeru Miyamoto is in most of the credits of Rare games (I think...)!! With Miyamoto, anyone can make good games! (ehm :unsure: )

And Justin, how can you say that Rare is better than Nintendo?? So IGN rated the 7 best N64 Rare games better than the 7 best Nintendo games. You know that Nintendo has made a lot more games, plus the games on the GameBoys. And now on the Cube!! How can you say that Rare is better??? :mad:

He took the highest rated Nintendo games from Nintendo, and compared them to the same number of highest rated games from Rare. Rare came out on top, even if just by the smallest of margins Thats how. And its the only fair way to really compare the two using solely reviews.

Its unfair to take the total number of games into consideration while making the comparison because Nintendo has been making games for a lot longer than Rare.

For me, Rare makes games that appeal to me more, like Goldeneye and Perfect Dark. They tend to be a little edgier. I'm no longer a fan of the Nintendo franchises except for possibly Star Fox and Metroid.

I could say 'Dinosaur Planet' here too... Rare would have released the game with or without Star Fox.

Hal Made SSB with the sole purpose to sell off of Nintendo franchises. If the game didn't have Mario and friends, we wouldn't be talking about this game right now would we?

If Star Fox adventures didn't have Star Fox, we would still be talking about it.

Luigi's Mansion was a real blockbuster wasn't it? Miyamoto at work.

Also, I doubt he had anything to do with Conker, Goldeneye, or Perfect Dark... Rare's 3 highest Rated games. The reason I doubt this is because generally Myamoto focuses on gameplay and not the "coolness" of weapons and disgusting story-lines.

Stop right there. I'm not saying Rare is better than Nintendo. Nintendo has seniority over Rare in the buisness. Plus Nintendo still does hold the 2/3 of the top games on the list.

But what I was saying is that Rare was competitive with Nintendo in terms of game content on N64. Nintendo fans had no problems with the scores until now. Now that Rare is gone, everybody's opinion about them changed, and it got a lot easier to say they are crap.

I'm giving them equal opprotunity. Both of them supported N64 just as good. As far as Gameboy, Nintendo supports it well with re-hash after re-hash. GCN, well, GCN got one Rare game... if it gets a 9.7 r better it's going to out rate all the GCN games to date :unsure:

well for one: HAL did do some production with Pokemon games...on the opening screen it says : Game Freak, HAL Labrotories, Nintendo.

I said it was my opinion, I did like SSBM better than any Rare game, and thats me. And also, lets not forget Earthbound...they were also in full production of the N64 Earthbound...

Also dont forget Silicon Knights, Eternal Darkness is awesome, and they're prolly working on Too Human now...which was first announced for the PSX in 1998, and also sounds very cool, from what info was revealed anyway. Plus theres also NST...well...meh.

ANd dont say that Rare is better than Sega, Capcom or Namco. the RE series alone is better than any Rare game I've played IMO. Soul Calibur was WAY better than whats it called....Killer Instinct? I believe that was made by Rare...I could be wrong.



Also I dont see why you are using IGN's opinions, there a tons of other sites that you could use, IGN's opinions never affect my decision to buy a game, if they dont like a game that I like then too bad for them....why dont you try combining scores from several sites, that will give a much better perspective...


EDIT: and one more thing...

Some other people were talking about Rare being a big part of Nintendo's sales in like...2000. Well guess what? Back in the day of N64 Nintendo had little to no third party support. Capcom only released like... 3 N64 games, by the end of this year, there will already be 3 Capcom games on GCN...and Sega has almost (or maybe more than) 10 games that will be out by this fall...

That is why Rare seemed to have a huge role in N64 game sales, but with other MUCH bigger developers stepping in, those sales wouldnt have been as good as before I dont think.

Nintendo said Rare did not account enough for their profit or whatever. HAL has made around 5 games. Give me a break... Rare was the best second party of Nintendo, they had the most production and the best overall games. Period.

It's also not fair to compare HAL with Rare considering HAL has made only a few games, and has used basically all Nintendo ideas, whereas Rare has not. I'm not the biggest fan of Rare, but they are by far much better than HAL.

wut? look at SFA, that game is so much like Zelda is unbelievable (not that its a bad thing). HAL may not have made too many games but they sure as hell sold better than most of Rare's crap (ie Conker's Bad Fur Day).

yeah...okay you're right, I wasn't being fair....

but on to a new subject: like you said, Rare did not account for enough profit, on N64 they made some good profits, but on SNES...they were really only known for DKC games...which even then werent THAT great...say that now, Nintendo has bigger 3rd party support, and if they were still 2nd party to Nintendo, would their sales have been as much as big factor for the GCN like they were on N64? No, Nintendo relied on Rare in teh N64 days, they would not need to rely on them in the GCN days, so they are kinda useless...well not useless, thats a bit harsh, but....they wouldnt have mattered much, not to me, and not to many others I dont think.

My opinion of Rare has not changed, I still think they make great games, and hope that even without the help that Nintendo offers Rare, they can maintain these high standards. It will be tough though, not just because Nintendo won't be backing them (hey can make great games without them), but because many key members have left, and are leaving. Reports suggest that some members now work at Retro (1st party of Nintendo), while others are gaining jobs at places like Capcom, which probably isn't a surprise seeing that Capcom are developing a ton of exclusive software for the GC...

Rare can always hire new and talented workers, and maybe Microsoft can switch a few key members from other development house to Rare.

Either way, both companis have gained alot. Microsoft, while having to pay 3 times the stock worth of Rare to Nintendo, gain not only a big name in the gaming world which could attract some gamers, but also some talelnted people. Nintendo on the othe hand, have gained a **** load of cash, with can not only be used in the fund Q project, but also be useful in securing more exclusive content from companies like Square, Enix, Sega, Rockstar/Remedy and maybe Konami.
Furhtermore, Nintendo have managed to nab a few Rare employees (such as the Retro example) for use in their internal development houses.

And alot of 'current' Rare employees have expressed anger at the fact that they have spent atleast 2 years on learning the ins and puts of the GC hardware, and that having to go to waste. These are the ones which are leaving to form separate development teams.

But who developed the game?

It doesn't matter if they helped, whoever gets the main credit as the developer is the developer.

Yeah, what makes your opinion any better than mine?

Silicon Knights made one game for GCN that didn't even get as high of marks as The top 3 games Rare made for N64.

:lol:

First you say it's your opinion, then you tell me not to state mine? I could care less about comparing Rare to Sega, Capcom, or Nacmo. Although I think Rare is better than Nacmo and Capcom I see no point in comparing them. You guys are just turning on Nintendo's best 2nd party because they joined Microsoft.

Read what I posted right after I gave the scores.

And? Little to none of the games Nintendo is getting from Sega, Nacmo, or Capcom is exclusive. They are either ports from older systems, or ports from other systems. Rare would have been exclusive, no ports, all for Nintendo, just like in the N64 days. Rare is probably the biggest reason N64 didn't flop.

What FPS would out-sell Perfect Dark or Goldeneye??? Timesplitters? :lol:

Agent under fire? :lol:

Give me a break, Rare's game sales wouldn't have done any worse than they did on N64.

Because Rare's "crap" required an expansion pack... if "Rare's crap" didn't use an expansion pack I'm positive it would have sold better. SSB didn't out-sell Goldeneye... so now what?

Not to mention it came out when N64 was like... dead...

And yeah it sold like crap, but it got really good reviews, and I heard many people who liked it...

I bet Crono and his lil' friend DarkMaster don't like Conker just cuz it sold bad... *realizes they hate GTA3 too, which sold good*... Ok nevermind, but you're both idiots....

J/K :D

This is fanboy talk.

I'm sorry to say it so clear, but it is. Rare would have matterd.

I'm just thinking about all the Square vs Rare topics, and how Nintendo fans would defend rare to the death. Also I'm thinking about all the perfect dark cubed button layout threads. Not to mention, all the Star Fox Adventure threads.

They were sooooo hyped to see Rare on GCN, now it's hard to even find a positive comment towards Rare.

I dont HATE GTA...I did buy the game afterall, its just that there was no motive to play the game anymore...
and I dont say "hey look at that game it sold bad so I'll hate it" ...or some crap.

I admit sometimes in these debates I might spit out something stupid, but usually I'm just typing and thinking really fast and dont care what I put. :p

lol.. I forgot about all of that stuff... :D

I think a lot of people here are a bit more Nintendo fanboyish than they think...

:sneaky:

fanboy talk huh...

for one: If I'm biased in any way, it would be towards Sony, more than double the games I own are on PSX/PS2 than N64/GCN, and I happen to enjoy PS2 more than GCN at most times.

also, I dont see how anything I said has to do with biased towards Nintendo? If I was a Nintendo fanboy wouldnt I be going around saying "OMFG NINTENDO IS SO STUPID THEY SOLD RARE!!!" or like "NINTENDO IS STUPID THIS WILL HURT THEM BADLY."

Rare's top developers left a long time ago to form a group called NRD (New Radical Design)... Funny, because Perfect Dark and Conker, Rare's two top rated games, came after they left. Developers can always be replaced. For one guy on a team of 50, there is 10 guys who know the ropes just as good.

I'm not going to say Rare is going to be the greatist thing ever on Xbox, I'm just saying most people are disrespecting the best 2nd party Nintendo had.

lmfao

Are you serious? A fanboy wouldn't give the opposition that much respect. I would expect the opposite responce... like "they are crap anyway" or "it doesn't even matter"

Like when Sony boys heard that Square is making games for GCN... they made ever excuse to make it sound like it isn't that great.

The whole basis of my posts have been "it doesnt matter", that is why I said it wouldnt affect Nintendo much. I dont even know why I got into that other crap, I just should have said "like a give a rat's @$$" or something like that. I really dont care if Rare is with MS now, they deserve it, at least they dont have to support a consoles entire life like they had to do with N64. I am buying an Xbox in May anyway, and not because Rare is with MS now.

And really I'm not a Sony fanboy either, I was just kidding around, I'm pretty much an all-round gamer, I'll play anything that I like.

wut are you talking about? i dont like conker because i played it and i dont like it!! and i dont hate gta either, i never said i hated it. you think me a crono are siding up to make rare sound bad? i dont like rare because i dont enjoy most of their games, is that too hard to understand? i never really cared about rare, and i'm not a god damn fanboy either!!! you seem to get the wrong ideas when i say something, i dont like some games because i dont like some games!! simple as that. it has nothing to do with sales or wut console their on or wut company develops them. this rare crap is really starting to piss me off. i know you were just kidding DH, but that really pissed me off. you know i wish i never started this stupid thread, as always it turns into nothing but a senseless argument about nothing.

Then it shouldn't have pissed you off, cuz I didn't even mean it... :roll:

Now calm down and have a burger... :burger:

i'm not really mad, just kinda mad at wut you said (even though you were just kidding, its still the principle!) either way, a burger would be nice, thanks! :burger:

This is the funniest thread at the moment. :D It's great seeing everybody turn against Rare. Justin is right.
And I admit, I will miss Rare. But I realise now that Rare had some problems the last years. If they didn't, they would have had released quite a few games by now. I don't know what's going on there, but apperantly Nintendo did, and decided they weren't profitable anymore.
Too bad we'll never see any Rare games on the GC anymore. But hopefully some developer will make Killer Instinct 3 (it's not Soul Calibur, it's different, more variation in characters I think) and Perfect Dark 0/2. I never cared about Banjo-Kazooie.

Just a thought: what will happen if Rare, Microsoft and Nintendo announce that nothing of it all was true?? Would we all be happy to have Rare and start telling how good they are?? :D:D