What was the bigger loss for the gaming industry? | |||
| Crash Bandicoot / Spyro | 12 | 19.67% | |
| Rare | 49 | 80.33% | |
| Total: | 61 | ||
What was the bigger loss for the gaming industry? Playstation losing the Crash Bandicoot and Spyro license or Nintendo losing Rare as developers?
| Ka-pi96 said: PlayStation never had the Crash or Spyro licences in the first place, so they didn't "lose" them. Besides, neither was a loss for the industry. Nintendo losing Rare was probably a gain actually. I know Rare have been pretty shit since they've been owned by MS, but they did make Kinect sports and the Kinect did help drive quite a few extra consoles which is definitely a gain for the industry. |
I knew that somebody would mention that... lol
You are right but I just wanted to keep it more simple for this thread.
Considering Rare's incredible output on N64 and their increasingly worsening output on XBOX-consoles i would say Nintendo losing Rare.
Well Nintendo never lost Rare, Rare wanted to be sold off due to the lack of funding in there later years under Nintendo. Nintendo actually sold there 51% shares of Rare to MS who brought the entire 100% of the company. Activision were also front runners to obtain Nintendo's company.
To Nintendo is wasn't a loss as they were the ones to make the call and agree in selling them.
Nintendo weren't interested in owning Rare outright.
Stamper is at a loss as to why Nintendo didn't step in and open up its chequebook:
Stamper - "I've no idea why they didn't do that. I thought we were a good fit."
In terms of content, Crash and Spyro hold no light on Rare and there games. So Rare would be a huge loss in terms of games if I understand the comparison correctly.
Last edited by Azzanation - on 19 December 2018
Square and Enix fusion.
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."
Sony losing exclusivity of Spyro and Crash wasn't "a loss for the industry". Rare not having Nintendo's guidance and hand-holding was a loss for Nintendo in terms of non-1st party software support, a loss for Rare itself, and a loss for the gaming industry as a whole.
Like others mentioned previously Sony never had any rights to either Crash or Spyro ...
If I had to say given that both Crash and Spyro see value today while Rare was in decline before Microsoft even purchased them, I'd say Playstation "losing" Crash and Spyro was the bigger loss since Rare probably won't have any lasting legacy to remember them by any longer ...
| Mar1217 said: Squaresoft becoming Square Enix. |
That one is my runner up to Microsoft letting Bungie go and thus ruining Halo campaigns forever.
Rare becoming what they are today is the biggest loss for the industry imo, their glory days they were untouchable.
NND: 0047-7271-7918 | XBL: Nights illusion | PSN: GameNChick
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
