Quote:
Originally posted by Xantar
You don't know that Rareware would cost less to Activision than to Nintendo or Microsoft. Besides, I don't think Rareware would make themselves 20 times cheaper for Activision, and that is the difference between the amount of cash Activision has and the amount of cash Nintendo has.
|
*sigh*
Please Xantar, you have no clue what you are talking about.
Rare would make themselves cost more to Nintendo because the future potiental cash would be cut WAY down. Use common sense. Limiting development to one console can only hurt the all around games sold from Rare.
Is Rare a software developer or a hardware developer? Rare's money is made from Software, and by becoming a third party they would sell more software.
Quote:
|
If Rareware were making games for other platforms, they wouldn't be giving second party titles to Nintendo any longer. The relationship would be broken off. Rareware may make exclusive third party games as Capcom and Factor 5 do, but Nintendo would not defray publishing and most development costs. Besides that, there is most certainly a point to keeping ownership of Rareware: to keep their games off of other platforms. That's a pretty valuable commodity.
|
1) Rare would be making 2nd party games for Nintendo. Perfect Dark and Conker will become like Mario Golf and Tennis, and Zelda Oricle of seasons for GBC, and Mario RPG for SNES... a 2nd party game made by a "3rd party developer" (even though I still believe developrs can't be classified by party)
2) The only console they would worry about is Gamecube (as a third party developer) Because it would get the most exclusive games. The other Games can be developed for Xbox, and ported by other companies under Activision.