Forum > Gaming Discussion > Rare's next projects will be very different? What are your thoughts?
Rare's next projects will be very different? What are your thoughts?
next >>
avatar
Country: GB
Comments: 46392
News Posts: 59731
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Sun, 26 Apr 2009 10:32:22
0

I remember a few months ago they said that their new projects would be aged up and very different to what people expect from them.

At this point is the classic Rare cutesy formula just not working on their host platform? Do Rare need a reinvention and if so what form would you like that to be.

Yes, I know in a perfect world there are people that would want them to stay the same and keep making the games they do, but that doesn't seem to be working.

Is it time that they just ditched their old franchises from the N64, because the couple of sequels to those franchises weren't that successful.

If they started making realistic racers and fighting games or sandbox games. Is that the way to go?

Is there the argument to be made that games like Viva Pinata and Banjo would have done better on consoles like the PS2 or Wii? What are your thoughts?

And yes, this is the obligitory Rare thread. Nyaa

avatar
Country: CY
Comments: 7370
News Posts: 30
Joined: 2008-06-24
 
Sun, 26 Apr 2009 10:46:17
0
i would be among the people who would say their games would be better on consoles like the PS2 and Wii than the 360.  Viva Pinata, Banjo, even Kameo would all have been better and have done better.

i understand it's a bit romantic but i think their partnership with Nintendo worked in a way that their partnership with Microsoft hasn't done so far.  people keep saying how gamers don't buy games on Nintendo consoles unless they are made by Nintendo, well those gamers did buy games made by Rare because Rare knew how to make them for that audience.  they don't seem to have connected as well with the xbox gamer demographic.

as to where they go from here ... it's a difficult question.  maybe dissolving the studio and forming smaller independent development teams with freedom to work on games for all consoles wouldn't be such a bad move

___

Listen to Wu-Tang and watch Kung-Fu

The VG Press

avatar
Country: UN
Comments: 18098
News Posts: 8761
Joined: 2008-08-18
 
Sun, 26 Apr 2009 10:49:43
0

They need to take a hard look at the talent in their company and build around those individuals.

What I get from them is that they are company of hangers-on who feel obligated to continue what the Stamper Bros. started.  Well, guess what?  No-one gives a shit about the Stamper Bros so MOVE ON.  Their two most popular franchises are based on IP's they do not have access to (DK and 007).  KI is dead, BK never was and Viva Pinata is a very good game, but it is what it is.

So, back to my opening point, they need to find some people in their company that have some drive and creativity and do what they want.  

avatar
Country: US
Comments: 14685
News Posts: 2158
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Sun, 26 Apr 2009 10:51:09
0

In my opinion, Rare is working on the wrong console. I honestly believe all of their 360 games would've sold far better on Wii. Rare just isn't a blood-n-guts action developer, which is primarily what the 360 userbase enjoys. Their most violent games like Perfect Dark and Killer Instinct are really more cartoony and/or surreal than say Halo or Gears of War. Personally, I'd hate it if Rare stopped making their classic franchises, but they may have to if they can't turn a profit on their games; and that's sad because all of their 360 games have been great, IMO.

The VG Press

avatar
Country: UN
Comments: 18098
News Posts: 8761
Joined: 2008-08-18
 
Sun, 26 Apr 2009 10:56:03
0

The did handle the Avatars for XBLA though huh?  Maybe that's more their speed these days.

avatar
Country: UN
Comments: 15766
News Posts: 1041
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Sun, 26 Apr 2009 10:58:50
0
What we don't expect from Rare?

So that means we might finally see a good game? Nyaa

    Children, our lives have been gongs striking; clamour and boasting; cries of despair; blows on the nape of the neck in gardens.

avatar
Country: GB
Comments: 46392
News Posts: 59731
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Sun, 26 Apr 2009 11:08:01
0

All these replies in a few minutes. What's going on here?

So how many of their 360 games have been put on PC, because I get the feeling that with some promotion, something like Viva would do well on PC.

It seems from your replies that they are in a tough spot, they have to change and yet a change would be out of spirit with their style. They have franchises to cling onto, yet they aren't doing too well. They are making great games, but they aren't capturing peoples imagination.

It's a tough one. What if their new projects are more like, say an Epic made game? Would that be welcomed or not? Would it reinvigorate and change people's expecations of them?


avatar
Country: UN
Comments: 18098
News Posts: 8761
Joined: 2008-08-18
 
Sun, 26 Apr 2009 11:18:45
0
gamingeek said:

It seems from your replies that they are in a tough spot, they have to change and yet a change would be out of spirit with their style.

They can hang onto their style and be like Disco Stu, or they can become relevent.  

Since (assumption coming) they are tied to MS, then they have to become relevent to the 360 audience, which is a western, white-male type demographic.  So that would put them in the third-person action, FPS area of gaming if they wanted to break through.  They did Golden Eye and Jet force Gemini, so it's in their DNA.

avatar
Country: GB
Comments: 46392
News Posts: 59731
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Sun, 26 Apr 2009 11:22:40
0

But disco can still come back Sad

So Jet Force Gemini only with a mature visual presentation?

Perfect Dark didn't work for them though?

avatar
Country: US
Comments: 14685
News Posts: 2158
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Sun, 26 Apr 2009 11:35:21
I guess all of this depends on what Microsoft wants out of Rare. I get the impression they bought Rare primarily to bring more family-oriented games to the 360 market. If so, then Rare has been very successful. However, if Microsoft were instead looking for a company to produce a lot of mega hits that appeal to their primary demographic, then they bought the wrong company. 

The VG Press

avatar
Country: GB
Comments: 46392
News Posts: 59731
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Sun, 26 Apr 2009 12:18:25

Ravenprose said:
I guess all of this depends on what Microsoft wants out of Rare. I get the impression they bought Rare primarily to bring more family-oriented games to the 360 market. If so, then Rare has been very successful. However, if Microsoft were instead looking for a company to produce a lot of mega hits that appeal to their primary demographic, then they bought the wrong company.

But didn't they expect those family orientated games to do well and actually make a difference? At the moment their games are like M rated games on Wii. Doesn't matter how good they are, they remain a niche and don't do much for the platform?

avatar
Country: US
Comments: 14685
News Posts: 2158
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Sun, 26 Apr 2009 12:29:10

gamingeek said:

Ravenprose said:
I guess all of this depends on what Microsoft wants out of Rare. I get the impression they bought Rare primarily to bring more family-oriented games to the 360 market. If so, then Rare has been very successful. However, if Microsoft were instead looking for a company to produce a lot of mega hits that appeal to their primary demographic, then they bought the wrong company.

But didn't they expect those family orientated games to do well and actually make a difference? At the moment their games are like M rated games on Wii. Doesn't matter how good they are, they remain a niche and don't do much for the platform?

 No, Microsoft always needed family oriented games, even during the Xbox 1 era, and they knew it. I vaguely remember Ed Fries talking about that back when they first bought Rare. Granted, they didn't know casual gaming was going to blow up like it has, but they knew they'd never have the # 1 console if all they did was appeal to young males and FPS nuts.

Rare's games remain niche on 360 because Microsoft hasn't been able to break though to the casual market. The perception of the 360 is that it's "hardcore-only." If Microsoft were able to breakout of that perception, then Rare would most likely be far more successful. I don't think this is Rare's fault; it's Microsoft's fault for marketing their consoles to only a select group.

Edited: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 12:34:25

The VG Press

avatar
Country: GB
Comments: 46392
News Posts: 59731
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Sun, 26 Apr 2009 12:39:52

Ravenprose said:

gamingeek said:

Ravenprose said:
I guess all of this depends on what Microsoft wants out of Rare. I get the impression they bought Rare primarily to bring more family-oriented games to the 360 market. If so, then Rare has been very successful. However, if Microsoft were instead looking for a company to produce a lot of mega hits that appeal to their primary demographic, then they bought the wrong company.

But didn't they expect those family orientated games to do well and actually make a difference? At the moment their games are like M rated games on Wii. Doesn't matter how good they are, they remain a niche and don't do much for the platform?

No, Microsoft always needed family oriented games, even during the Xbox 1 era, and they knew it. I vaguely remember Ed Fries talking about that back when they first bought Rare. Granted, they didn't know casual gaming was going to blow up like it has, but they knew they'd never have the # 1 console if all they did was appeal to young males and FPS nuts.

Rare's games remain niche on 360 because Microsoft hasn't been able to break though to the casual market. The perception of the 360 is that it's "hardcore-only." If Microsoft were able to breakout of that perception, then Rare would most likely be far more successful. I don't think this is Rare's fault; it's Microsoft's fault for marketing their consoles to only a select group.

MS are sort of doing the same thing with JRPGs on the system, despite them not being mega hits. But like Nintendo, they've had their fair share of Mature games, but still, after years of trying can't seem to break out of that mould. Will it be the same for Microsoft? Will family friendly forever remain a niche? And is Rare really the company to have a break out success in the genre on that system?

I almost feel like XBLA games serve that function without being high budget.

avatar
Country: UN
Comments: 13771
News Posts: 453
Joined: 2008-07-03
 
Sun, 26 Apr 2009 12:46:55
Banjo just wasn't a good game at all.  I hated the gameplay.  It might've sold better if it was a true sequel. I honestly tried to give it a chance, but every second I played I kept thinking about the old games and how much fun they were.
avatar
Country: GB
Comments: 46392
News Posts: 59731
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Sun, 26 Apr 2009 12:59:07

travo said:
Banjo just wasn't a good game at all.  I hated the gameplay.  It might've sold better if it was a true sequel. I honestly tried to give it a chance, but every second I played I kept thinking about the old games and how much fun they were.

Shush, don't upset Hampsters and Hobos.  

avatar
Country: US
Comments: 14685
News Posts: 2158
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Sun, 26 Apr 2009 13:02:17

travo said:
Banjo just wasn't a good game at all.  I hated the gameplay.  It might've sold better if it was a true sequel. I honestly tried to give it a chance, but every second I played I kept thinking about the old games and how much fun they were.

 I never played the earlier Banjo games, so I don't really know much about them. But I liked Banjo 3 because of the vehicle building. I love cars, planes, boats, and stuff like that, so building my own vehicles, and using them in the levels is a lot of fun to me.

Edited: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 13:08:44

The VG Press

avatar
Country: GB
Comments: 46392
News Posts: 59731
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Sun, 26 Apr 2009 13:12:27

Ravenprose said:

travo said:
Banjo just wasn't a good game at all.  I hated the gameplay.  It might've sold better if it was a true sequel. I honestly tried to give it a chance, but every second I played I kept thinking about the old games and how much fun they were.

I never played the earlier Banjo games, so I don't really know much about them. But I liked Banjo 3 because of the vehicle building. I love cars, planes, boats, and stuff like that, so building my own vehicles, and using them in the levels is a lot of fun to me.

Well I guess this makes my following point moot (I typed it before your post)

A point about Banjo though, I've yet to hear of someone who bought this game that didn't play the originals on N64. Which makes them quite old or older, which means they may have moved onto other genres. Or the N64 audience might still be with Nintendo?

Let's talk about future style. Should Rare games always be accesible? What if they started making sci-fi RTS games? What if they went and did puzzle games instead?

What do people expect from them?

Also its been said before that their games feature cute presentation that is at odds with the gameplay so the target audience finds it too complex to play? Viva and Banjo? I haven't played them I'm going off what others have said.

Is this a legitamate concern? Didn't Banjo launch at a lower price point?

Edited: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 13:14:42

avatar
Country: UN
Comments: 13771
News Posts: 453
Joined: 2008-07-03
 
Sun, 26 Apr 2009 13:15:19

Ravenprose said:

travo said:
Banjo just wasn't a good game at all.  I hated the gameplay.  It might've sold better if it was a true sequel. I honestly tried to give it a chance, but every second I played I kept thinking about the old games and how much fun they were.

I never played the earlier Banjo games, so I don't really know much about them. But I liked Banjo 3 because of the vehicle building. I love cars, planes, boats, and stuff like that, so building my own vehicles, and using them in the levels is a lot of fun to me.

I guess that's something I don't care about.  I also hated that about 60% of it was racing.  The others were carry this item from point A to point B.  I wanted more gameplay variety.

avatar
Country: CA
Comments: 12528
News Posts: 0
Joined: 2008-07-01
 
Sun, 26 Apr 2009 21:36:12

Yeah like Raven I think Microsoft needs developers like Rare. To me it isn't a question of is Rare developing games on the wrong system it's why aren't more people who enjoy those kind of games buying a 360. There seems to be, at least to me, a pretty good diversity in software for the system both on full-retail games and XBLA games so maybe it's just perception of the system that needs to be addressed through marketing or whatever. Banjo Nuts & Bolts is a fantastic game that has a lot of charm and character and is quite graphically impressive to boot. It also went for a bargain of a price at $40 and if you consider the pre-order offer of the original Banjo-Kazooie on XBLA it was essentially $30.

1176413.png

avatar
Country: US
Comments: 2590
News Posts: 64
Joined: 2009-03-24
 
Mon, 27 Apr 2009 01:52:10
I think Rare's in a tough situation. They imprinted their own image for so long I think it'd be tough for them to all of a sudden do mature games and find success. But I think it's Rare's own fault. One of my biggest beefs with Perfect Dark Zero is Joanna Dark's design. She looks like a Saturday morning cartoon character whereas during the N64, she looked more realistic. I think people were a little turned off by that. I know I was. Also, their game designing has been in a rut lately and I know many people were disappointed with PDZero.

And yes, they are on the wrong system. Games like Viva Pinata, Banjo, and Kameo aren't very good for 360's demographic. Is there any other kiddy friendly game on 360 that's successful? I can't think of any.

Rare's biggest problem is they're trying to be like Nintendo without Nintendo. I think Rare needs Nintendo more than they think.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now Playing: Golden Sun Dark Dawn, God of War Ghost of Sparta, and DKC Returns

next >>
Log in or Register for free to comment
Recently Spotted:
*crickets*
Login @ The VG Press
Username:
Password:
Remember me?