I think I'll miss Ensemble Studios more than Rare if Rare were to get shut down.

I don't understand the point of this comment and how it disproves anything anyone on the offense (the "Rare got raped" PoV).

I would expect people get pissy when not only did Rare get owned by excessively capitalistic mentality, but that there are fans or defenders (you) of such practice.

It would be one thing to defend some points, but to defend all, *what's wrong with you - Reggie.gif*

im sorry you fail to comprehend what im saying.  almost every single whiner in this thread is talking out of their ass.  because they are so butt-hurt that its the only hole of their body capable of releasing so much bull shit at a single time due to the gaping remains of the orifice.

Why dont you actually just try some of their games?  (dont bother responding to this with a lie that you already have.  i dont believe you and quite frankly...i dont give a fuck)

and no.  my thoughts arent all sunshine and rainbows on this topic.  but these topics are never about having a real discussion about rare.   its a place for fanboys to come and cry about nintendos loss of rare and then try to make themselves feel better by bashing rare incessantly and for the most part nonsensically. 

Sorry but above and beyond reporting you, I'd like you to know you're wrong.

First of all, this forum is a place to discuss the marketplace, business decisions, vg history and many such related topics. If we talk about them, it doesn't mean we are butthurt. If we advocate for less capitalism in the industry, it doesn't mean we are butthurt.

I will agree with you I haven't spent the time to play Rare's games after Kameo on the 360. It sucked so much that I wasn't interested in anything else. Grabbed by the Ghoulies looked not really interesting so forgive me if I didn't pick it up.

Had I bought a 360, I admit I would have played Nuts & Bolts, but from what I heard it sucked.

Regardless, what does any of this have to do with the multiple interviews we've read telling us the true story of what happened with Rare?

Not only are you wrong, but you didn't understand how you were wrong in the first place, and I have little hope you'll understand how more wrong you'll strive to be in the future.

To that, I give you many an applause. You deserve it.

We already know that.

Rest in Peace RaRe.

you can report me all you wish.  it wont change that the butthurt from nintendo fanboys in this thread, and all others regarding rare, is quite palpable.  

im sure you heard that about the game from other people who never played it, of course.  ;)  so have fun circle jerking each others jealousy that rare isnt with nintendo anymore.

i forgive you for your ignorance on  this matter, however.  im sure it must be difficult to be so blinded and completely unaware.  you have my sincerest sympathies.

This just in....

former employee mad at their boss.

Could be true, but I take it with a grain of salt...

I mean... Rare wasn't the BEST or most established company before they joined MS in the first place.

They had a few big hits.... pretty much built off other peoples ideas.

They executed DK well, and then Golden eye was great.... an Perfect Dark was great... when it was a female clone of James Bond... and went downhill fast as soon as the aliens and alien weaponry came in to play.

I actually did a comparative analysis of Rare a couple years ago, and I would rather not do so again. I have far more productive things I could be doing with five or six hours of my life. Then running down decade old ratings. Followed by tedious number crunching. That said if memory serves me right, and it usually does serve me right. The Rare of the 64 generation had a average score in the mid eighties, and in Xbox generations it has had a averages score in the low eighties.

Microsoft basically still has what it got when it bought Rare. A slightly above average to good developer. The only real change has been in the area of volume, but that is explained by the fact that Rare doesn't just develop games for their platforms. They aren't simply a dedicated game developer anymore, and it is likely that Microsoft always intended to have them doing more anyway.

Rare started out strong in the 64 generation, but as the tempo increased the quality decreased. This isn't any kind of a opinion on my part. If you want proof go pull up a release list, and go down it chronologically cross checking the review scores for the games. This is a developer that went from making a Blastcorps early in a generation to making a Mickeys Speedway near the end of the same generation. My point being that Microsoft had nothing to do with that at all.

Look I was a avid Rare gamer, and I can tell you those reviewers weren't wrong. The games near the end of that generation were not as good as earlier in the generation. Hell in a lot of ways they were pretty bad, and yeah at the time I was pretty disappointed in Rare. You can argue it was Nintendo that caused the problems, or Rare did it all to itself, or even in some twisted way it was the press and players that were wrong. What is not right however is blaming the guys who weren't even remotely involved.

I suspect that a lot of this commentary is coming from players that only played the early games on the 64, and for whatever reason didn't stick around to watch the second half. I also suspect that most commenting in this thread were oblivious to the fact that Rare was still developing games for Nintendo platforms as late as 2008. I am not saying these things to defend Microsoft, but I am sick of the rose colored glasses some members on this forum insist on wearing. Microsoft didn't destroy Rare. The studio was pretty much destroyed by the time they got there.

The Rare you adore wasn't there anymore when the company changed hands. That isn't saying it cannot become something great in the future. It just hasn't been great for a time longer then Microsoft has owned it outright. It also should be said you probably shouldn't put too much stock into what former employees have to say, because chances are a lot of them had a lot to do with bringing the developer down in the first place. If you were likely a big part of that. Wouldn't you try to distance yourself from your own personal failures, or even try to blame that other guy for what went wrong. It is kind of strange that it is always somebody else who is at fault.

Anyway yeah Rare is just one great game from being back, but that has less to do with a fair appraisal, and more to do with the attention span of gamers. How many times do we read comments like this developer is just a great developer. Even though they have only made all of one game. I mean as a group we don't necessarily have the highest of standards.

But you're wrong. I personally knew that rare worked on a few games for GBA after the split, these being iirc Sabrewulf, Diddy Kong Racing (GBA) and Banjo Kazooie (GBA). These were needless to say way inferior to their N64 counterparts where applicable.

Also, no I personally was there from the beginning to the end watching their every release. You can be certain their last AAA games did not stumble in quality way on the contrary. Perfect Dark, Donkey Kong 64 and Conker's Bad Fur Day are some of my most beloved memories of the era. Also, Dinosaur Planet was in the works and it looked very promising for an N64 game. Things changed there. I remember seeing the screens of Dinosaur Planet early on and being very excited. It just never got finished and instead turned into Starfox Adventures.

Kameo Elements of power looked great for a Gamecube game, but it never followed through I find to deliver the classic Rare charm. It's no surprise since the project was not completed with Nintendo.

I think your disregard for some of us is what's backfiring on you. You think you're on some other untoucheable cloud but little do you realize many of us were avidly following the news when it actually happened back then. Me, I'm 27. You can be sure I was on ign64 just as much as I'm on vgchartz today.

So most of your post has just been demolished, I think it's time you changed your stance and actually debated rather than talking from bias.

That's the ironic thing, Microsoft did what every big company buying a smaller developer normally should do; leave them to continue their smaller creative culture. Unfortunately, it sounds like creative input/partnership was part of that culture and Microsoft were inexperienced in the video game industry at the time.

It's worth remembering that this same process of leaving a small developer to their own creative culture worked very well with Ensemble Studios and the Age of Empires/Mythology series... at least until they closed them.