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

Has Retro Studios replaced Rare?

Yahoo! (Yes it has) 19 48.72%
 
D'oh, I missed! (It has not) 20 51.28%
 
Total:39
Veknoid_Outcast on 13 December 2017
Cobretti2 said:
Veknoid_Outcast said:
I've long thought the transition from Rare to Retro was amazingly smooth and successful.

Rare was hemorrhaging talent in 2000-2002, and was proving too expensive to fund or to buy. So Nintendo strikes a deal with former Iguana employees to satisfy the market Rare had previously served. The result: one of the best games ever made in Metroid Prime.

I never understood why folks bemoaned Nintendo passing on Rare in 2002, when Retro proved a perfect substitute. Seriously, Nintendo went from Banjo-Tooie and Perfect Dark in 2000, to Conker in 2001, to Metroid Prime in 2002. That's amazing.

Retro has proved remarkably durable over the last 15 years, producing great game after great game. Meanwhile, Rare has become mired in mediocrity. I think it speaks volumes to Nintendo's stewardship, and how it's essential for Retro's success and how it was vitally important to Rare's golden age -- along with, of course, the leadership of the Stampers and some of the best game designers, programmers, and composers in video game history.

The IP alone is what made RARE. Nintendo could have bought them out and hired new talent to continue those franchise. Microsoft effectively killed them off. Nintendo on the other hand needed more games during the Wii / Wii U era. Those franchises are still classics (especially on the N64) and Nintendo would not have left them to die like Microsoft did.

I disagree. Nintendo has more IPs than it knows what to do with. I really don't think Banjo and Joanna Dark are worth $375 million -- even though I love them dearly.

Do I wish Nintendo could have cut some kind of deal to secure the rights to a few virtual console games? Yes. Is the lack of a virtual console and/or remastered GoldenEye 007 a consistent thorn in my side? Oh hell yes.

But you only need look at something like Super Mario Odyssey to tell Nintendo doesn't need Rare or its IPs to be successful.



Around the Network
Luke888 on 13 December 2017

It hasn't yet. Rare's software output was insane back in the days, Retro should become far, far bigger to be considered as such, that's also one of the reasons why I say Nintendo should invest in new development teams in America/Europe and/or expanding those that already exist



leedlelee on 13 December 2017

As much as I love what Retro has given us, they haven't done what Rare did...
Yet...



Have a nice day...

Jumpin on 13 December 2017
mZuzek said:
Jumpin said:

Not even close. GE007 and DKC were both groundbreaking and generation-defining games; Metroid Prime and DKCR were not.

If anything, DKCR was more of a retro revival game, not even close to the revolutionary and cutting-edge masterpiece that the original DKC was. DKCR's sales success is mostly owed to the series reputation Rare established 15 years earlier, not Retro. Metroid Prime lacked the multiplayer, lacked the success, and lacked the influence on the genre that Goldeneye 007 had; and it also lacked industrywide recognition as the best game of the year of its release (which AIAS awarded to GE007 even though it was up against incredibly stiff competition that year, which included FF7). GE007 was the second highest unbundled game of the 32/64-bit generation (below FF7) while DKC was the highest selling unbundled game of the 16-bit generation. They were basically to the 16 and 32/64-bit generation that GTA was to the PS2 generation.

Another way to put it is that Metroid Prime and DKCR could vanish from history; it wouldn't have much to any effect on Nintendo or the industry; they are, at best, minor classics. If DKC and GE007 disappeared from history the loss from Nintendo, and the whole of the industry, would be nothing less than profound. 

That's why I was talking about quality and not importance. You do seem to think of those two very similarly though, with many of your seemingly favorite games being also very successful and prominent.

I'll be honest I haven't played too many Rare games, but the ones I did play didn't impress me too much. I'm not a fan of GoldenEye or Conker's Bad Fur Day, and Star Fox Adventures has to be up there among the most insufferable games I've ever played. Even the best game in the original DKC trilogy (2, of course) is not a lot better than DKCR (which is by far Retro's worst game), never mind coming close to Tropical Freeze which is by and large the best DKC game ever.

Also, just because Metroid Prime didn't win all sorts of GotY awards and sell 8 million, it doesn't mean it wasn't relevant. It is to this day a very cherished game that did leave a mark on the industry, it's just stupid to say it had no impact. Maybe it wasn't "generation-defining" like GoldenEye, but that's because it is still a great game almost 2 decades later, unlike GoldenEye which has dated horribly and is definitely only a product of its own generation. If anything, even from Rare fans I hear GoldenEye is way overrated and nowhere near as good as Perfect Dark, so... yeah.

1. What is Metroid Prime's impact? You have to clarify this.

2. You're also going to have to clarify "better" - if your argument comes down to using more up to date development techniques and more up to date hardware, then it is altogether meaningly - on those metrics, newer studios are always going to have the advantage. Can you argue that DKCR, DKC:TF, and Metroid Prime were better in their times than GE007 and DKC?

3. You state that more people play Metroid Prime today than Goldeneye 007. Fair enough, but GE007 is currently only available on N64, if it were re-released, I can guarantee you MANY more people would be interested in it than Metroid Prime - even the shoddy attempt at a remake by Activision outsold Metroid Prime. Also through that argument thread, I can claim that MANY more people are playing Donkey Kong Country today than DKCR or Tropical Freeze simply due to much wider availability; also, looking up let's play for the franchise on youtube shows many many times more let's plays than DKCR or TF: https://www.youtube.com/results?sp=EgIIBA%253D%253D&search_query=Donkey+Kong+Country+Lets+Play
Incidentally, running a similar investigation, despite GE007's handicap. It seems that almost as many people are let's playing Goldeneye 007 than Metroid Prime 1 and 2 combined
https://www.youtube.com/results?sp=EgIIBA%253D%253D&search_query=Let%27s+Play+Metroid+Prime+Gamecube
https://www.youtube.com/results?sp=EgIIBA%253D%253D&search_query=Goldeneye+007+let%27s+Play+N64
And splitting out Echoes: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Let%27s+Play+Metroid+Prime+Echoes+Gamecube&sp=EgIIBA%253D%253D
It seems that GE007 is actually being played MORE than Metroid Prime alone, and more than Metroid Prime 2 alone

4. If you're claiming that people playing Metroid Prime today mean its better (despite the fact that GE007 hasn't been available on any new platforms) then similarly, DKC from the SNES is played by MANY more people today than DKCR and DKCTF combined thanks to millions of Virtual console sales and millions of SNES Classic sales. Also, top videogame lists of all time never have DKCR or Tropical Freeze on them, but many have games from the original trilogy including

5. Where are these so-called Rare fans saying GE007 is overrated and sucks? Where is this majority of people saying Perfect Dark is better than GE 007? A quick google search isn't showing this at all:
https://www.destructoid.com/20-years-later-goldeneye-007-is-still-the-greatest-nintendo-64-game-454953.phtml
https://www.ranker.com/list/rare-games-list/reference
http://www.craveonline.com/entertainment/884153-rare-replay-top-10-best-rare-games-ever#/slide/10
http://www.digitalspy.com/gaming/feature/a661811/ranking-rares-10-best-games-from-goldeneye-to-donkey-kong-country/
http://time.com/4458554/best-video-games-all-time/
6. Similarly, who is saying DKCR and Tropical Freeze are the best of the franchise? No one seems to be saying this.
https://www.thegamer.com/ranking-every-donkey-kong-game-from-worst-to-best/
https://kotaku.com/the-best-donkey-kong-country-ever-made-1683495417
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.946436-Poll-Whats-the-best-Donkey-Kong-Country-game

You have to back up your statements, otherwise, your argument falls apart.

In Summary (or TL/DR)
* More people play DKC today than DKC:R and DKC:TF combined
* Despite not having a re-release since the N64, Goldeneye 007 sees more people playing today than Metroid Prime
* Rare did better with GE007 in 1997 than Retro did with Metroid Prime in 2002.
* Rare did better with DKC in 1994 than Retro did in 2010 and 2014.
* Accepted point: GE007 and DKC by Rare are more important games than Metroid Prime or DKC:R & DKC:TF
* Accepted point: Rare made A LOT more games than Retro did.

In closing: Retro is a great studio! No denying that. But Rare was outstanding, an industry leader in both quality and sales, and a major support pillar of Nintendo from 1994 until around 2000. During that time, most gamers were trying to decide who they liked more between Rare and Square as their #1 non-first party. Rare was arguably as important as Nintendo EAD during many years of the later SNES and N64 lifecycle. Can the same be said about Retro? The answer is no.
Has Retro replaced Rare? Maybe a small percentage of Rare; but overall? no.

Last edited by Jumpin - on 13 December 2017

I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Cobretti2 on 13 December 2017
Veknoid_Outcast said:
Cobretti2 said:

The IP alone is what made RARE. Nintendo could have bought them out and hired new talent to continue those franchise. Microsoft effectively killed them off. Nintendo on the other hand needed more games during the Wii / Wii U era. Those franchises are still classics (especially on the N64) and Nintendo would not have left them to die like Microsoft did.

I disagree. Nintendo has more IPs than it knows what to do with. I really don't think Banjo and Joanna Dark are worth $375 million -- even though I love them dearly.

Do I wish Nintendo could have cut some kind of deal to secure the rights to a few virtual console games? Yes. Is the lack of a virtual console and/or remastered GoldenEye 007 a consistent thorn in my side? Oh hell yes.

But you only need look at something like Super Mario Odyssey to tell Nintendo doesn't need Rare or its IPs to be successful.

What I meant was they could have bought RARE and boosted it with additional talent at the time.

RARE had plenty of other IPS which were fun/successful too.

I agree they don't need them to be successful, but it sure would have helped with the lack of quality games they had during the Wii era. Wii would have reached at least another 20million on top if it had those games. 



 

 

Around the Network
Snoorlax on 13 December 2017
CaptainExplosion said:
Snoorlax said:

I know that Rare died a long time ago but how anybody can take this comparison seriously is beyond me... Kids these days.
Retro Studios is not even half of what Rareware used to be.

Rare CREATED Donkey Kong Country, Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Banjo, Battle toads, Killer Instinct, Diddy Kong, Conker, Star Fox Adventures (Dinosaur Planet) all by themselves that even Miyamoto felt challenged and pressured by coworkers to make games like Rare.

Retro Studios while a talented studio have yet to prove anything really, Metroid Prime was the idea of Miyamoto and produced by Miyamoto and Tanabe. DKCR was also the idea of Tanabe and a return of an already well established franchise by Rare and....... That's it, not one game of their own.

If anyone has replaced Rareware it's Nintendo itself, it's not Nintendo + Rare anymore just Nintendo.

Then why hasn't Nintendo given us a new GoldenEye?

Because of multiple reasons:

1.Nintendo doesn't own the rights to James Bond, neither does Rare.

2.Nintendo and Rare have parted ways.

3.Technically we did get new GoldenEye games on multiple platforms, the shitty 2004 Rogue Agent and the solid 2010 remake just not by Nintendo but EA and Activision.

4. Nintendo has moved on and is far too busy giving us better games like Mario Oddysey and Zelda.



Metroid33slayer on 13 December 2017

No, because rare released games.



Alkibiádēs on 13 December 2017
Metroid33slayer said:
No, because rare released games.

Development time takes considerable longer nowadays than during the N64 and SNES days. 

How's Sea of Thieves coming along? When was it announced again?



"The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must" - Thoukydides

Alkibiádēs on 14 December 2017
NightlyPoe said:
Alkibiádēs said:

Development time takes considerable longer nowadays than during the N64 and SNES days. 

That defense might work if they haven't been working on side-scrolling platformers for the past decade.  Hardly the most labor-intensive genre.

And what experience do you have in game development?

None?

What a surprise.



"The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must" - Thoukydides

Jumpin on 14 December 2017
mZuzek said:
Jumpin said:

You have to back up your statements, otherwise, your argument falls apart.

No.

First, because it's a freaking opinion, and one I strongly believe in. Personally I don't see any comparison between DKC 2 and DKCTF, the latter is just an infinitely superior game in pretty much everything (never mind Goldeneye vs. Metroid Prime, the former is an awfully dated mess whereas the latter is a timeless masterpiece).

Secondly, stop twisting my argument for your own benefits. When I say Rare fans prefer Perfect Dark to Goldeneye, I'm not talking stuff I read online and definitely not lists from official publications (which spoilers, always value importance a lot more than actual quality), I'm talking about real people I've talked to. Also, at no point did I ever say more people play Metroid Prime today than Goldeneye (or the same for DKCR/DKCTF over the original trilogy), I only stated those games aged much better (then again even as a kid in the early 2000's I didn't enjoy Goldeneye).

Seriously though, stop trying to debate opinions as if they were facts. If I say Rare is overrated that doesn't mean they factually sucked, it means I don't hold them in as high regard as most people, and my opinion won't budge just because you send me Destructoid articles or whatever stating otherwise - if anything, they strengthen my opinion, since that is exactly what "overrated" stands for.

When I state an opinion, and potentially a controversial one, the kind of discussion I'm looking for is the one where other people also talk about their opinions, not one where I get sent loads of articles as if those were some sort of undeniable proof that I'm wrong.

You're playing the victim here. And accusing me of something that you yourself are guilty of.

When I stated that Retro didn't have a GE007/DKC calibre game. You posted:
"Yet both their takes on DKC and FPS (first-person "adventure" okay, whatever) were a lot better than these." - stating an opinion as a fact.

You started the argument, and so I was forced to clarify what I meant by my initial statement with: sales figured, industry recognition, technological and design innovations.  This is not me stating my opinion as fact, this is me backing up my position with facts.

You then argued that more people are playing Metroid Prime today, that Rare fans are saying that GE007 is overrated and nowhere near as good as Perfect Dark. You're stating facts - it can't be your opinion since these are things we can verify as being true or false.

I then provided you with ample amounts of evidence which points out your points are probably not true; since it is clear more people prefer the original DKC games, and that more people (at least when it comes to lets plays) are playing GE007; despite the fact that the last time GE007 had a release was 20 years ago, and Metroid Prime has had two re-releases in the past few years - again, it's not me stating my opinion as a fact when I say "GE007 was last released in 1997 and Metroid Prime had rereleases on Wii and Wii U" - these are facts.

In short: If you're going to start an argument, don't make claims you can't back, don't backpedal and play the victim when you lose. Making yourself into the victim doesn't automatically grant any legitimacy to anything you've said.

Last edited by Jumpin - on 14 December 2017

I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.