Or people need to read the article in the guardian.

He says that things changed when the two he'd guys left, and goes into that much more. The line about freedom shouldn't have been used for a title.

Question: Is this even the same team that worked at RARE when Nintendo held it?

Why not? The common perception here on VGC is that MS restricted their creative freedom.

In the article he mentions that. So here is an article debunking a fallacy.

lol "almost"

Thanks, Nintendo for making Rare put out quality games.

Yup, there is a ton wrong with that statement.   There is no such thing as a tangible 'almost more' because it is always less. I don't see how you can apply Super Position to this idea.   It like saying the Xbox 360 beat the PS3 last gen because it 'almost sold more'. 

What Rare might be making that got his interest piqued? I would love to have them do a collaboration and come up with a refreshing platformer.

It debunks it and legs to a new perception that's also wrong. Some in hear are saying they must have given to much freedom, others are saying what does almost more even mean.

I think it's best to say the why when it's known, instead of focusing on one of the why nots and leaving people still speculating on an answer that is there because it's not in the text quoted or the main link posted

It looks like people giving Microsoft a bad rep for Rare will have to eat their own words ...

How it says Nintendo gave them more freedom and they made better games for it.

"Meanwhile, Playtonic's technical director, Jens Restemeier, shot down that whole "Microsoft killed Rare" thing, stating that "It wasn't like that. They gave us freedom, almost more freedom than Nintendo gave us."  Last paragraph of the article.

It's an EX-RAREWARE EMPLOYEE statement, whether people want to believe this time or not, that's up to them. It's not what some of them want to hear/read.