By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - There Was A 'Severe Culture Clash' Between Microsoft And Rare

Viper1 on 29 June 2013
techhunter80 said:

I want to ask something, why did Nintendo sell them in the first place? Were they not doing as well as they used to, did some key people leave, or did Nintendo just not want them. Really why did that happen?

As I noted above, Nintendo didn't sell the company itself.  They only sold back their 49% share to Rare themselves.

And they did this because they dropped way below their usual level of output and became just 1% of total revenue.   Knowing that several key employees have departed the company (they formed Free Radical of Time Splitters fame) and that their output level would nto pick up, they sold back their share to Rare.  Then MS bought up the whole thing after Activision and some others passed on the sale.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

Around the Network
pokoko on 29 June 2013
KungKras said:
pokoko said:
KungKras said:

There is thins thing called hostile takeover.

Which does not apply to the vast majority of privately owned development studios.

It's how they took out Westwood and Bullfrog.

  How could they have used a hostile takeover on Westwood Studios when it was already owned by Virgin Interactive?



KungKras on 29 June 2013
pokoko said:
KungKras said:
pokoko said:
KungKras said:

There is thins thing called hostile takeover.

Which does not apply to the vast majority of privately owned development studios.

It's how they took out Westwood and Bullfrog.

  How could they have used a hostile takeover on Westwood Studios when it was already owned by Virgin Interactive?

I don't know how it works, but according to the wiki page for westwood, it was a hostile takeover.



I LOVE ICELAND!

Zero999 on 29 June 2013
Viper1 said:
Zero999 said:
pokoko said:
You know, I'm still not quite sure why people always blame the parent company for buying and "ruining" a game development studio but never criticize the people responsible for selling, who usually then leave and form another studio. In most cases, it's not like that had to sell. They just saw dollar signs and lots of them. They picked money over controlling the future of their company. Do I blame them? No, not really, but I certainly think they bear as much responsibility for a studio's decline as anyone else. When you sell to an EA or an Activision, you know what might happen eventually.

Anyway, development studios rise and fall naturally as staff comes and goes. Many of the studios that have been around for a long time are no longer the same as they once were. It's not something I really stress about. The only real shame is when well-loved IP get mishandled or forgotten.

I love how everything is an oportunity for you to try and diminish nintendo, i guess haters gonna hate forever. M$ is the one who f#cked up rare in every sense of the word, period.

He's actually not talking about Nintendo but the Stamper Brothers.   Nintendo didn't sell Rare directly to MS like many people think.  Nintendo sold their 49% stake in Rare back to the Rare.  Then Rare sold 100% of the shares to MS.   Pokoko is putting the blame on the Stamper Brothers for selling the company and then bailing on them.

now that's an explanation. It really seemed like he was bashing nintendo wich is what he usually do.