Joelcool7 said:
palancas7 said:
pacman91 said:
Mostly I'd say go ahead and outsource with some amount of quality control. DKCR was given to Retro, but Miyamoto and others were checking in making sure the game was fun.
If any first party outsources a game, they should make sure innovation happens. Retro was able to create superb atmosphere with Primes, aswell as a fresh take on 2D platforming with DKCR.
On a rare occasion I'd say no. If the vision of the series is uniqely belonging to the first party, outsourcing might not work. Pikmin 3 has yet to reach its potential, and likely Miyamoto's vision of the series.
|
Retro doesn't count. It's a Nintendo first party studio. 
|
Exactly Retro doesn't really count. But what about Amusement Vision's F-Zero GX? Or Namco's StarFox:Assualt or Donkey Konga. Personally I loved all four out sourced games (Including DonkeyKonga2). In Japan Nintendo also out sourced Donkey Kong Jungle Beat 2 which was to Capcom and arcade exclusive. Or how about Namco's job bringing Mario Kart to arcades?
For Nintendo at least its worked out pretty well and I'd love to see Nintendo out source some more games this gen. P.S in every Nintendo outsourced product Nintendo did send producers like Miyamoto to ensure the products were up to snuff.
I personally would love seeing some less supported franchises out sourced. Microsoft hires developers to make many of its IP's but so far they are reluctant to actually out source development of their major franchises. Think of what other developers could do with Rare's IP's for example.
Also Jak from Sony unsupported all generation. Rather then allow the franchise to die. Don't you think Nintendo should liscense it out?
|
I see disaster more often then a good game, look at what actnivision is doing to spyro and they are semi-competent
