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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Banjo-Kazooie Level in Super Mario Odyssey

Cobretti2 on 12 January 2019

You both are missing the point here. All the talent was leaving Rare before the sale.

All Rare was good for was it's IPs.

Rare had more than Banjo (i.e. Perfect Dark, Killer Instinct, Jet Force Jemini). The question is why didn't Nintendo buy them up for those IPs? They could have used them during the GCN/Wii era.

Surely if you own 49% of a company you buy the other 51% for the IPs which have been good too you. I guess short term cash was what they wanted.



 

 

Around the Network
Cobretti2 on 12 January 2019
NightlyPoe said:
Cobretti2 said:
You both are missing the point here. All the talent was leaving Rare before the sale.

All Rare was good for was it's IPs.

Rare had more than Banjo (i.e. Perfect Dark, Killer Instinct, Jet Force Jemini). The question is why didn't Nintendo buy them up for those IPs? They could have used them during the GCN/Wii era.

Surely if you own 49% of a company you buy the other 51% for the IPs which have been good too you. I guess short term cash was what they wanted.

What is it with all this message board creep?  All I came in to say is that Rare leaving Nintendo wasn't the same as Sega quitting the console business.

Sorry referring to Captain and Azza here about keeping and not selling

All your comments made sense. There could have been plenty of options on how the sale went through in the end. i.e.e reduced cash some IP, more cash and no IP,  



 

 

Azzanation on 12 January 2019
NightlyPoe said:    

The problem with your post is that you're stating the obvious that the Banjo-Kazooie IP had value, but ignoring that the terms of Rare's sale were at one point up for negotiation.  You falsely compared the situation to Sega leaving the console industry.  A situation where they did not own anybody anything and simply changed their business model.  In Rare's case, they had to compensate Nintendo one way or the other in order to accept a sale to another company.

How do you know that Nintendo has the rights to Rare's IPs or some sort of leverage to hold Rare's IPs as hostage in a deal? They only owned 49% not 100% of Rare, clearly this shows when Rare were sold off they kept majority if not all of there IPs. That 49% Nintendo owned we have no idea on. I am not an expert when it comes to businesses owning other businesses and what rights they have when owning a certain % of another company. But I know this, Rare compensated Nintendo in earning them $300m for being sold to MS.



Azzanation on 12 January 2019

NightlyPoe said:

I'm not sure why you're having so much difficulty comprehending the concept that the parties involved could have come to a different agreement than the one that was finalized.

Why are we talking about something that didn't happen? Of course there could have been options, its like me saying, if only MS brought Sony 20 years ago.. but like iv been saying, Rare probably didn't want to let there flagship IP go and considering the lack of support by Nintendo at there end of years, I probably wont blame them either. There is no benefits for Rare losing Banjo Kazooie. 1 party wins and 1 party loses. That's not how fair deals are normally made. 



Azzanation on 12 January 2019
NightlyPoe said:

Because you said something silly comparing Sega leaving consoles to Rare leaving Nintendo.  And then have refused to back down by making banal statements about how IPs have value and companies like to keep them.

Problem is, companies like to keep money too and Nintendo was owed compensation.  So it's not like a mythical purchase of Sony.  It's an actual purchase that happened.

My point is, Rare giving up Banjo Kazooie is as silly as Sega giving up Sonic. It makes alot of sense to me regardless of both companies different fallouts. Its not a silly statement, thats why Rare kept there rightfully own IPs, Sega keeping theres and Bungie keeping theres. Im referring to the importance of the IP to the devs. That's why i made the Sega comparison.

Nintendo Owning 49% of Rare might not have included Banjo Kazooie. Or maybe Nintendo didn't have a say in the matter. Maybe the other 51% of Rare over powered Nintendos bargaining agreement. Who bloody knows.

Last edited by Azzanation - on 12 January 2019

Around the Network
Azzanation on 13 January 2019
NightlyPoe said:

Do you seriously not understand that Nintendo was going to profit from the deal one way or another?  Do you not understand that companies don't like parting with cash?  And that Sega didn't owe anyone anything?

All you do is keep repeating that all things considered, companies like keeping stuff.  Sheesh.

Y'know what, whatever.  Don't answer my questions.  Have a good night.  Have your last word where you again state the obvious that Rare would prefer to keep the IP and don't address that a company might consider parting with an IP in order to make a gigantic check somewhat smaller.

Angry much? I answered your post with saying Nintendo probably didnt have a say in trying to take Banjo Kazooie, it was never there IP. They only owned 49% of Rare so there are greater powers at hand here, maybe the other 51% of Rare had a say in the matter. Also i am pretty sure MS would have wanted Banjo Kazooie included in the deal.

Last edited by Azzanation - on 13 January 2019

zygote on 13 January 2019

Banjo Kazooie was definitely a creation by Rare but dang if they didn't have Nintendo quality written all over them.  I hope we seem them return to form in some way.  That music too... drool.