I have to base my point off something. Metascores can give us guidance on what was critically acclaimed.

But nothing wrong with you loving Timesplitters more but to the critics and im sure many others out there would not say those games were better.

I did enjoy Timesplitters aswell.

But it sold like shit.

What do you mean they gave them no creative freedom? Under Nintendo's reign, Rare operated mostly as an independent company. For example, when Nintendo had lost interest in continuing with Goldeneye, the staff at Rare continued working on the game anyway. Nintendo's role within Rare was mostly giving creative suggestions and to handle marketing. There were times when Nintendo had requested that Rare add or remove something from their games, but Nintendo never told Rare what games they could or could not do.

The truth behind Rare is that Nintendo could have bought them at anytime. Even at the 11th hour when the Microsoft deal was almost signed, Nintendo could have swooped in and purchased Rare for less money than what Microsoft was paying. The reason Nintendo did not purchase Rare was because they thought the Stampers were asking for too much money. Back then, this would have sounded ludicrous, but when looking back at it all, Nintendo was right. Nintendo doesn't buy studios for IPs. They buy studios for talent. Rare lost a good portion of its talent back in 1998. They still had good people by 2002, but a large investment would need to have been made in order to get the resources necessary to have a studio who could make games for next generation hardware.

The truth behind Microsoft's acquisition of Rare is that Microsoft had no idea what they were getting themselves into. They thought they were buying a mini Nintendo. They had no idea how vital Nintendo was to Rare's success and Microsoft had no idea how to market Rare's games. Microsoft was still new at the console business and for the first few years, they took a lets throw anything at the wall and see what sticks method. When that didn't work, we got Kinect.

Well actually Nintendo did, Games like DK64 was one of them and so was Star Fox Adventures that turned what looked to be a new promising IP in Dinosaur Planet and become a forced marketed Star Fox game which changed and ruined the game we were all promised in the magazines. Nintendo is not as innocent as many like to believe. They weren't looking after Rare at there end of there reign with Nintendo, and Rare weren't getting what they needed anymore and its clear with the link I provided that Rare was looking elsewhere, basically wanting out.

I love Nintendo and there a very smart and passionate company but Rare's downfall was happening internally while under Nintendo not under MS, MS was just letting them do what they do, and after awhile when it wasn't working they shuffled them to Kinect which is where Rare found mild success.

Lets all be thankful that Activison didn't purchase Rare. We can all imagine how that would have turned out.

I was talking about how Nintendo didn't fund or give creative freedom to Rare in the GameCube years. They definitely had freedom and funds during N64. During GameCube times Myamoto came along and insisted that their new adventure title be a Starfox game. 

You are right about how overvalued Rare was at the time. 

You are using a lot of speculation here. We dont know what would have happened if MS hadnt bought Rare and maybe Nintendo had. Or if Activision perhaps.

The point is that we dont know and your suggestions about MS doing the best with a failing studio is just that - speculation.

Also i see the point you are making about their subsequent games but ultimately my point still stands. If leadership is weak at the top, the oness is on the owner to provide the drive and leadership which is where MS failed. Yes MS was new in the gaming space and were just starting out but that is what you have to do. Perhaps Rare needed LESS creative freedom instead of more?

Kinect Sports - more speculation on your part. Perhaps you are right this game saving Rare. Perhaps not. Personally I find it hard to believe that MS would ever have considered shutting Rare. Not just because they have had a reasonable output of decent (but not great) games. But also because the backlash feom outraged Rare fans would have been a PR nightmare. Also again we dont know what would have happened if Rare didnt make KS. Peehaps they would have been given permission to make a Sea of Thieves like MP game last gen or something else equally creative. We wil never know. 

Wait. Hold on a second. Microsoft paid a whopping $375 million for them? That's a huge amount and they've not worked out well for them.

I'm not gonna argue which is better. We are talking about games from different eras, the genre evolved, etc. But I think its fair to say the N64 era shooters they did were more innovative. The Timespliiters games were essentially ignored by other shooters of the time.

$375 million isn't that much compared to some other purchases they've made. They probably paid more for the Gears IP.

In theory, a few hits like Kinect Sports 1+2 (8+ million sold), Rare Replay, Killer Instinct, and Sea of Thieves could have recouped much of their investment.

I'd argue it has worked out well for them given they have a large library of content, IPs, and potential content for the future.

This is already well documented, Azzanation. When Microsoft bought Rare it had already lost some of its best talent; there's a reason Nintendo didn't want to subsidize the studio. Breaking from Nintendo's orbit and then losing the Stampers' leadership only accelerated the decline. Microsoft's laissez-faire management probably made things worse.