Maybe Rare didn't want to give Nintendo Banjo Kazooie.
I'm sure they didn't.
Are you saying you wanted Nintendo to sell Rare off with nothing or atleast without there biggest IP?
I'm saying it was an option.
I am sure MS, Activision and other brands saw the IPs like Banjo Kazooie and that alone would have raised interests in knowing that IP was included with the purchase.
Yes, businessmen like to know what they are purchasing.
It doesn't seem like Nintendo cared and neither did Rare,
I'm sure Nintendo cared. They owned 49% of a valuable IP. If the right offer were available, they likely would have kept it.
All I know is Rare wanted to be moved on and Rare as a package with all there IPs is what made the sell a lot easier.
Yes, keeping all of one's property does raise one's value.
Much like Bungie holding onto Destiny, keeping the IPs keeps the brand strong and makes it easier for others to pick them up etc.
Yes. IPs are worth money.
Also what would Nintendo do with Banjo Kazooie? They own so many platformers and I highly doubt they will set there big AAA Mario Team developers to make it.
They would presumably do whatever they wished. Maybe they do nothing like they did when they kept Eternal Darkness after the Silicon Knights breakup. Maybe they hand it off to someone like Retro. I'm not predicting an alternate timeline. Also, Nintendo only has one 3D platformer.
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.
Everything else is extraneous.Last edited by NightlyPoe - on 12 January 2019