Nintendo sold Rare and thought "let others take advantage of them, we are too envious for this"
Indeed
Nintendo should track down all the talented ex-Rare staff they can and form a new studio for them to make Wii U games and content.
Zelda and Mario were also on the GC. Rare wasn't. There was a 15 million unit dive between the N64 and GC, despite the GC having FAR better third party support.
Three guesses why that is.
Nintendo's never made a game as good as Rare, though.
I actually wonder if Microsoft would be willing to sell. Obviously Killer Instinct is in use, but the rest are just collecting dust right now.After this throw some cash at MS and get the ips...
The controls were fluid, the races had a lot of dynamics, different types of races with different controls, an actual overworld, characters were kinda fun, had some challenge to it, and was gorgeous.
Nintendo sold Rare and thought "let others take advantage of them, we are too envious for this"
Indeed
Nintendo SHOULD HAVE bought Rares IP, but they simply weren't interested. At that point they had no interest in making games like perfect dark, killer instinct, or conker which went over like lead balloons in jp
I can see how that makes sense. I mean, If Nintendo ever had the feeling that their capabilities were unique, and only they could make those "magical" games, Rare was right there saying nope, anything you can be we can do, sometimes better.
'94:
'95:
I actually wonder if Microsoft would be willing to sell. Obviously Killer Instinct is in use, but the rest are just collecting dust right now.
But it runs like shit. It should've been pushed back and polished to be a Gamecube launch title.Perfect Dark is easily the most impressive N64 game. Especially with the RAM pack.
Perfect Dark is easily the most impressive N64 game. Especially with the RAM pack.
The top looks worse to me.
Tossells comments came about when asked if Nintendo ever shared code with Rare considering the Big N had a large stake in the company.
He said:
No, we never had the Zelda engine or any code they did! We did see an early version of Zelda and that was a big influence on Dinosaur Planet, though. Nintendo were often quite envious of us. I got the feeling they thought our games were technically and artistically superior to theirs. Miyamoto would visit regularly and I heard a rumor they redid all of the textures on Zelda after theyd seen our work on Banjo-Kazooie because our game looked better!
http://nintendoeverything.com/nintendo-were-often-quite-envious-of-us-says-former-rare-staffer/
Now that's a presumptuous thing to say, while most of Rare games were graphically very impressive in N64 they often suffer from serious frame rate problems, and no, no game from Rare came to the artistical degree to Majora's Mask, Ocarina of Time, Mario 64 IMHO.
The N64 in general is overrated. Both the GameCube and the SNES had much better libraries.Rare's games on N64 are so overrated, it's ridiculous.
Yoshi's Island looks amazing. Far better than any other game on the SNES.I can see how that makes sense. I mean, If Nintendo ever had the feeling that their capabilities were unique, and only they could make those "magical" games, Rare was right there saying nope, anything you can be we can do, sometimes better.
'94:
'95:
Because GC's Mario, Zelda and Mario Kart entries were relatively lacklustre efforts?
Because GC launched late into the 6th generation? Because PS2 nuked the earth from orbit?
Don't get me wrong, N64 era Nintendo/Rare was a match made in heaven, to a point, but there are other factors impacting GC's sales against its predecessor.
Zelda and Mario were also on the GC. Rare wasn't. There was a 15 million unit dive between the N64 and GC, despite the GC having FAR better third party support.
Three guesses why that is.
Agreed. I even think the Wii U is already better. The 64 is totally overrated, and it's usually, IMO, because of nostalgia for Rare's releases.The N64 in general is overrated. Both the GameCube and the SNES had much better libraries.
Funny how each of those third parties is now dead. But then non-Japanese third parties were decimated over the last two generations, and it's not as if there wasn't damage on their end either.Rare was a big supporter for N64 for sure but don't say silly things.
Nintendo, Rare and a few other third parties (Lucasarts, Acclaim,Midway, THQ etc.) is what gained N64 the second spot.
Sure. don't want to oversimplify, but losing rare as a first party developer (for volume reasons alone if nothing else) as well as literally giving microsoft the FPS audience and not even trying to retain it were huge, huge reasons for the N64 to GC drop.
Rare carried the N64 to what little success it had almost entirely by themselves.
The N64 with no goldeneye, banjo, etc would have done worse than GameCube numbers coming off the SNES
"Can Nintendo Survive Without Rare?" a Rare-centric site argues a decade later Rare was sold to MS and many talents left the company.I'll just leave this here. Sums up some things quite well I think
http://www.rarefandabase.com/exclusive-can-nintendo-survive-without-rare/
And no, no game from Rare came to the artistical degree to Majora's Mask, Ocarina of Time, Mario 64 IMHO.
VS[
I'll just leave this here. Sums up some things quite well I think
http://www.rarefandabase.com/exclusive-can-nintendo-survive-without-rare/
Yoshi's Island looks amazing. Far better than any other game on the SNES.
Rare games looked really nice on N64.
Diddy Kong was really fun, but it was no Mario Kart.
Goldeneye was straight-up groundbreaking.
But I cannot imagine a universe where any Nintendo staffer would be jealous of such efforts as Banjo-Kazooie, Donkey Kong 64, or Jet Force Gemini. Has Nintendo ever made games that mediocre?
Sorry but not even close. Besides the graphical capabilities of their titles, every single game they released similar to the ones Nintendo made was absolutely inferior in terms of gameplay.I can see how that makes sense. I mean, If Nintendo ever had the feeling that their capabilities were unique, and only they could make those "magical" games, Rare was right there saying nope, anything you can be we can do, sometimes better.
'94:
'95:
http://www.n-sider.com/gameview.php?gameid=82&view=dev
An interesing few comments about DKC vs Yoshis ISland, I knew I recalled hearing rumours about Nintendo being annoyed that YI wasnt as visually impressive as DKC
Well, Yoshi's Island actually holds up much better than DKC, and not just visually.
True, but that may have been fluke, given how DKC3 and DK64 are.DKC2 is a better comparison. That has aged much much better and is quite simply a superior game to DKC1 in every single way.
That article fails to mention that Rare was dropping in quality or the fact that key members were leaving prior to being sold off.
That article seem to value quantity over quality something that Rare was guilty of doing.
True, but that may have been fluke, given how DKC3 and DK64 are.
Hahaha
Not at all. The N64 failed completely in Japan. Almost all of its sales were US based.
The N64 only sold about 36 million units, but 8 million copies of JUST GOLDENEYE.
unlike the rest of Nintendos franchises, theres no
crossover between Mario, Zelda, etc. Those were new gamers, and goldeneye was the first viable FPS on console, opening up the gates for Turok, Doom 64, Quake 64, mission impossible, duke nukem, etc.
No goldeneye and the N64 loses the shooter audience. Now toss in diddy Kong racing, dk64, the banjo games, Conker, jet force Gemini, etc.
The droughts the n64 had were bad enough. Without rare it would have been doing sub GC numbers.
and no, no game from Rare came to the artistical degree to Majora's Mask, Ocarina of Time, Mario 64 IMHO.
[IM
G]http://static.fjcdn.com/gifs/Let_8bea3c_1486839.gif[/IMG]
Mario 64 can't even touch Banjo-Kazooie when it comes to graphics.
Donkey Kong 64.When was any of Rare's games not of good quality? Aside from some framerate issues at times, they have always released good quality games.