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

Tagged games:

d21lewis on 10 February 2012
RolStoppable said:
d21lewis said:
I kinda want to play "Grabbed by the Ghoulies", now. Never played it before.

The game is like Onechanbara, only without blood and boobs; and with worse gameplay.


WORSE GAMEPLAY?  NO BOOBS!?  Oh, fuck that.



Around the Network
NintendoFanDj on 10 February 2012

Rareware killed themselves. StarFox Adventure showed Nintendo they weren't talent anymore so Nintendo sold them. Nintendo doesn't want developers who lose talent. This is why Retro Studio, Hal Laboratory(Project Sora), Gamefreak, Intelligent System, and Nintendo themselves are still developing they don't lose their talent in developing.



"Nintendo fan for life"

IIIIITHE1IIIII on 10 February 2012
NintendoFanDj said:
Rareware killed themselves. StarFox Adventure showed Nintendo they weren't talent anymore so Nintendo sold them. Nintendo doesn't want developers who lose talent. This is why Retro Studio, Hal Laboratory(Project Sora), Gamefreak, Intelligent System, and Nintendo themselves are still developing they don't lose their talent in developing.

If anything, Star Fox Adventures proved that there was still some great petential in Rare even after some great staff had left.

 

Read the article, the lack of Nintendo's directions were a big reason for the direction Rare has been forced to take.



Dark_Lord_2008 on 10 February 2012

Microsoft buying up Rare for around for $100 million was a very bad investment. Rare has only published a few games since Microsoft bought it from Nintendo around 10 years ago. Rare's best days were on the SNES with DKC series and N64 with: Banjo Kazooie, Banjo Tooie, Perfect Dark and Goleneye.

Microsoft buying up Rare one of of Nintendo's best developers was a cycnical move to sabotage Nintendo's future success in the video game industry. Along came the Wii in late 2006 and proved to be a huge commercial success for Nintendo.



Mr Puggsly on 10 February 2012
Jumpin said:
Mr Puggsly said:
Jumpin said:

The issue was that Rare was really only great under Nintendo's guidance. They were the hottest developer in the world (even outshining Nintendo and Square), but they got cocky. Without Nintendo, Rare didn't have that guiding force to keep them on top of the industry.

I don't think they needed Nintendo's guidance per se, they needed Nintendo's audience. Rare is more in touch with what Nintendo fans want than Xbox fans. Everything Rare has put out post Nintendo hasn't been bad. In fact, I think all their Xbox games would have sold significantly better on Gamecube and Wii. Those are consoles where casual games and platformers are in demand.

Basically, Rare was great at selling games to the audience Nintendo built. But they couldn't bring a casual audience to the Xbox.

I don't see the connection between simply having Nintendo's audience, and all of the creative breakthroughs Rare had which led to massive industry trends and Rare being an industry leading force.

They made no technological or innovative breakthroughs after Microsoft bought them out; at least none that I can think of that became Industry leading forces like they had before. On SNES, Rare became the first company to use pre-rendered 24-bit graphics, and on a console that was supposed to have only a 16-bit output - this essentially started a revolution, Square would follow with Mario RPG, followed by a couple of other games, and eventually their Smash hit Final Fantasy 7, and Capcom brought Resident Evil 2. Not to mention they took the FPS genre, and brought it to a whole other level with GE007 on the N64 introducing things such as reaction zones, stealth combat, sniper rifles, and the most popular multiplayer mode in a game to date. They didn't really make any further breakthroughs after the N64 era; they certainly weren't leading the industry. This article really covers why that was the case when they discuss the positive morale, the cashflow, and the freedom which the company had in those days when they were under Nintendo's wing.

Well it was a lot easier to be cutting edge in 90s than the 2000s. The bar was raised significantly and Rare couldn't keep up.

GE007 was very cutting edge when it released. But just a few years later Halo was released and made GE007 look perhistoric.

Even under Nintendo's wing I doubt they would be very cutting edge today. Especially since they would have been working on technically inferior hardware.



Recently Completed: 
River City: Rival Showdown for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

Around the Network
Conegamer on 10 February 2012

No-one killed Rare. Rare's games are still awesome; they're simply being suppressed by Microsoft and Kinect IMO.



 

Here lies the dearly departed Nintendomination Thread.

IIIIITHE1IIIII on 10 February 2012
Conegamer said:
No-one killed Rare. Rare's games are still awesome; they're simply being suppressed by Microsoft and Kinect IMO.

Suppressed would be to say the least... Their early X360 titles were enjoyable but nowhere near masterpiece status like their early titles.

 

With more kinect-centric staff from MS and less remaining staff from their glory days (although some are still there, like Robin Beinland), chances for a great revival of any of their old IPs does decrease with time.

 

It's a good thing though that their kinect titles are very successful. Otherwise, their IPs probably would've died with them...



Jumpin on 11 February 2012
Mr Puggsly said:
Jumpin said:
Mr Puggsly said:
Jumpin said:

The issue was that Rare was really only great under Nintendo's guidance. They were the hottest developer in the world (even outshining Nintendo and Square), but they got cocky. Without Nintendo, Rare didn't have that guiding force to keep them on top of the industry.

I don't think they needed Nintendo's guidance per se, they needed Nintendo's audience. Rare is more in touch with what Nintendo fans want than Xbox fans. Everything Rare has put out post Nintendo hasn't been bad. In fact, I think all their Xbox games would have sold significantly better on Gamecube and Wii. Those are consoles where casual games and platformers are in demand.

Basically, Rare was great at selling games to the audience Nintendo built. But they couldn't bring a casual audience to the Xbox.

I don't see the connection between simply having Nintendo's audience, and all of the creative breakthroughs Rare had which led to massive industry trends and Rare being an industry leading force.

They made no technological or innovative breakthroughs after Microsoft bought them out; at least none that I can think of that became Industry leading forces like they had before. On SNES, Rare became the first company to use pre-rendered 24-bit graphics, and on a console that was supposed to have only a 16-bit output - this essentially started a revolution, Square would follow with Mario RPG, followed by a couple of other games, and eventually their Smash hit Final Fantasy 7, and Capcom brought Resident Evil 2. Not to mention they took the FPS genre, and brought it to a whole other level with GE007 on the N64 introducing things such as reaction zones, stealth combat, sniper rifles, and the most popular multiplayer mode in a game to date. They didn't really make any further breakthroughs after the N64 era; they certainly weren't leading the industry. This article really covers why that was the case when they discuss the positive morale, the cashflow, and the freedom which the company had in those days when they were under Nintendo's wing.

Well it was a lot easier to be cutting edge in 90s than the 2000s. The bar was raised significantly and Rare couldn't keep up.

GE007 was very cutting edge when it released. But just a few years later Halo was released and made GE007 look perhistoric.

Even under Nintendo's wing I doubt they would be very cutting edge today. Especially since they would have been working on technically inferior hardware.

Of course GE007 looked out of date compared to Halo, Halo came out four and a half years later and on significantly more powerful hardware.

But the question was why Rare was no longer the one raising the bar? Simply saying that it "got harder" is not an adequate statement, because it would have been harder for everyone else too. Since Rare was one of the major companies raising the bar initially, and were the most foreward progressing developers in the industry, a logical conclusion would be that they would be in the best position to continue with that position. The key difference is that Nintendo was no longer guiding them, according to the people interviewed in this article, that is the reason for the comany's collapse.

Had Rare been intact, considering their experience in both first and third person shooters - it is likely we would have got something very much superior to Halo in the form of a Metroid Universe game. Afterall, the remnents of Iguana (the Turok creators), with some added some other development they created Metroid Prime with Nintendo's guidance - imagine what a superior developer like Rare could have been capable of.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Mr Puggsly on 11 February 2012
Jumpin said:

Of course GE007 looked out of date compared to Halo, Halo came out four and a half years later and on significantly more powerful hardware.

But the question was why Rare was no longer the one raising the bar? Simply saying that it "got harder" is not an adequate statement, because it would have been harder for everyone else too. Since Rare was one of the major companies raising the bar initially, and were the most foreward progressing developers in the industry, a logical conclusion would be that they would be in the best position to continue with that position. The key difference is that Nintendo was no longer guiding them, according to the people interviewed in this article, that is the reason for the comany's collapse.

Had Rare been intact, considering their experience in both first and third person shooters - it is likely we would have got something very much superior to Halo in the form of a Metroid Universe game. Afterall, the remnents of Iguana (the Turok creators), with some added some other development they created Metroid Prime with Nintendo's guidance - imagine what a superior developer like Rare could have been capable of.

Why wasn't Rare raising the bar? I don't know. I'd argue a lot of studios haven't been raising the bar. Some of which no longer exist.

Nintendo's guidance doesn't guarantee success. Even the mighty Nintendo has published some disappointing or crap.



Recently Completed: 
River City: Rival Showdown for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

Khuutra on 11 February 2012
Mr Puggsly said:

Why wasn't Rare raising the bar? I don't know. I'd argue a lot of studios haven't been raising the bar. Some of which no longer exist.

Nintendo's guidance doesn't guarantee success. Even the mighty Nintendo has published some disappointing or crap.

Wait, Rare couldn't keep up technically in the sixth gen?

One could make a cogent argument that Starfox Adventures is the best-looking sixth-gen game ever released, and it was released in 2002. Four years they had to top it, and no one ever did (except maybe Factor 5).

Edit: I tell a lie, I can think of one game that seriously outstripped SFA last gen, graphically.

That was Conker: Live and Reloaded.