No Rare on Nintendo Revolution?

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2006-03-28 04:39pm

http://www.nintendoplayers.com/article. ... icleID=179

First bit of bad news relating to the Revolution VC.

No Rare on Revolution's Virtual Console
According to sources from the GDC last week.
by Robert Hiskey

March 28, 2006 - Over the weekend, Matt Cassamassina of IGN Revolution (and IGN Cube) posted in his blog that he had talked to some "Rare / Microsoft people" who confirmed to him that Rare's classic titles will not appear on the Revolution's Virtual Console. That means no Jet Force Gemini, Perfect Dark, Banjo-Kazooie, Banjo-Tooie, and (gasp) GoldenEye 007 will NOT be downloadable for play on Revolution. The GoldenEye situation is a little different than the rest, as it needs approval from both Rare and Electronic Arts, who currently owns the rights to the James Bond franchise, in order to appear on the Virtual Console. While EA would likely give its approval, Rare will not.

Not all is lost, however. Rare-developed games to which Nintendo owns the rights will still appear on the Virtual Console. That means you can expect to see games like the Donkey Kong Country trilogy, Donkey Kong 64, Diddy Kong Racing, and others. There are also a few franchises whose statuses are unknown (it is unclear whether Nintendo or Rare owns the rights), such as Blast Corps..

While it's certainly sad that we won't get all of our favorite Rare titles on the Virtual Console, it's not surprising, as Rare is now owned by Microsoft. It's not hard to imagine that Microsoft will offer Rare's games via Xbox Live Arcade in the future. Also worth noting is the rumor that Rare is in development with a new Banjo-Kazooie title for the Xbox 360.

Source: Matt-IGN's Blog

Crap... I'm happy Donkey Kong Country 1, 2, and 3, and Donkey Kong 64 will be on there. Overjoyed in fact. But I never did get to play Banjo-Kazooie and wanted to try it. And a lot of people were looking forward to GoldenEye.

I wonder, though, since EA owns the franchise, if Nintendo could get EA to release it, perhaps Rare would have to...

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2006-03-28 04:43pm

DKC 1-3 are frankly all I care about regarding the Revolution, so I'm not very disappointed by such news.

Duckie · Post by **Duckie** » 2006-03-28 04:52pm

Noooooo!

I looked forward to all of those games.

Damn you, Microsoft! Daaaamn you!

TheBlackCat · Post by **TheBlackCat** » 2006-03-28 04:52pm

Those three and diddy kong racing are all I really care about, so I am not particularly dissapointed. I did want to try Blast Corp, but its status is still unknown.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2006-03-28 05:08pm

No Goldeneye or Perfect Dark? Well fuck you, Rare, and by extension Microsoft.

NeoGoomba · Post by **NeoGoomba** » 2006-03-28 07:28pm

I'm with Spanky, the DKC games were the best Rare had to offer, so I'm happy we get them.

However, if I'm in a crazy, no-holds barred button mashing mood, I would have liked Killer Instinct Gold.

Anarchist Bunny · Post by **Anarchist Bunny** » 2006-03-28 10:26pm

NeoGoomba wrote:I'm with Spanky, the DKC games were the best Rare had to offer, so I'm happy we get them.

However, if I'm in a crazy, no-holds barred button mashing mood, I would have liked Killer Instinct Gold.

Hardly, the Banjo Kazooie/Tooie, Conker's Bad Fur Day, Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Starfox 64(which won't be effected by this) were all great games.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2006-03-28 10:37pm

What the hell did Rare have to do with StarFox 64?

Dominus Atheos · Post by **Dominus Atheos** » 2006-03-28 10:51pm

Anarchist Bunny wrote:Hardly, the Banjo Kazooie/Tooie, Conker's Bad Fur Day, Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Starfox 64(which won't be effected by this) were all great games.

First off, it's Affected. Second, why even mention it if it won't be affected? All you're doing is confusing Spanky. Shame on you for confusing Spanky! He's Special and you need to be nice to him!

TheBlackCat · Post by **TheBlackCat** » 2006-03-28 11:24pm

I honestly can't really blame Microsoft, nor am I the least bit surprised. I think this is just officially confirming what was already known. Seriously, if I were Microsoft I wouldn't let my competitors use my first-party titles, either. Why would I go out of my way to help a company that is directly competing with me? This will likely be a big selling point for the Revolution, especially amongst older gamers, so why would Microsft help their competitor succeed at taking money and market share away from them?

It may suck for people buying the Revolution (as I probably will at some point), but it is a perfectly logical, and fully anticipated, move by Microsoft. I would have been shocked if Rare games DID appear on the Revolution, just as I would be shocked if Nintendo suddenly decided to let Microsoft freely distribute Super Mario Bros. on the XBOX 360. I am no XBOX fan, I never have and never will buy an XBOX, but I can't really blame them for making a pretty straightforward business decision that I would have made if I were in their shoes.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2006-03-28 11:31pm

Dominus Atheos wrote:
Anarchist Bunny wrote:Hardly, the Banjo Kazooie/Tooie, Conker's Bad Fur Day, Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Starfox 64(which won't be effected by this) were all great games.
First off, it's Affected. Second, why even mention it if it won't be affected? All you're doing is confusing Spanky. Shame on you for confusing Spanky! He's Special and you need to be nice to him!

I'm not "special," God damn it, I'm just stupid!!

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2006-03-28 11:34pm

TheBlackCat wrote:I honestly can't really blame Microsoft, nor am I the least bit surprised. I think this is just officially confirming what was already known. Seriously, if I were Microsoft I wouldn't let my competitors use my first-party titles, either. Why would I go out of my way to help a company that is directly competing with me? This will likely be a big selling point for the Revolution, especially amongst older gamers, so why would Microsft help their competitor succeed at taking money and market share away from them?

It may suck for people buying the Revolution (as I probably will at some point), but it is a perfectly logical, and fully anticipated, move by Microsoft. I would have been shocked if Rare games DID appear on the Revolution, just as I would be shocked if Nintendo suddenly decided to let Microsoft freely distribute Super Mario Bros. on the XBOX 360. I am no XBOX fan, I never have and never will buy an XBOX, but I can't really blame them for making a pretty straightforward business decision that I would have made if I were in their shoes.

It's not exactly 'helping'; every person who buys a Rare title off the Revolution is putting money in Microsoft's pocket. Not including a couple games out of THOUSANDS isn't going to put off that many people from buying the system but it'll mean Microsoft makes quite a bit less than it would of if the millions of Rev owners could download Rare titles. Not to mention that buying Perfect Dark would encourage people to buy a 360 for the new title.

Dooey Jo · Post by **Dooey Jo** » 2006-03-29 04:40am

But the really old Rare titles will still be there, right? Right?

I'm talking about Snake Rattle n' Roll, and Cobra Triangle, etc...

Archaic` · Post by **Archaic`** » 2006-03-29 07:29am

If Nintendo owns the property, then yes. Otherwise, expect them on XBox Live sometime in the next year.

Andrew J. · Post by **Andrew J.** » 2006-03-29 08:38am

Thankfully I still have my N64. Goldeneye is one have the games I wouldn't have had to download anyway.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2006-03-29 09:37am

TheBlackCat wrote:I honestly can't really blame Microsoft, nor am I the least bit surprised. I think this is just officially confirming what was already known. Seriously, if I were Microsoft I wouldn't let my competitors use my first-party titles, either. Why would I go out of my way to help a company that is directly competing with me? This will likely be a big selling point for the Revolution, especially amongst older gamers, so why would Microsft help their competitor succeed at taking money and market share away from them?

It may suck for people buying the Revolution (as I probably will at some point), but it is a perfectly logical, and fully anticipated, move by Microsoft. I would have been shocked if Rare games DID appear on the Revolution, just as I would be shocked if Nintendo suddenly decided to let Microsoft freely distribute Super Mario Bros. on the XBOX 360. I am no XBOX fan, I never have and never will buy an XBOX, but I can't really blame them for making a pretty straightforward business decision that I would have made if I were in their shoes.

What kind of crack are you smoking? All of the titles formerly developed by Rare are in no way shape or form a Microsoft first party title. As Microsoft had no hand in developing any of the games on the list above. An example of a first party MS title would be something like Morrowind or Halo. Not Donkey Kong 64 or Perfect Dark.

Vendetta · Post by **Vendetta** » 2006-03-29 11:52am

General Zod wrote:An example of a first party MS title would be something like Morrowind or Halo. Not Donkey Kong 64 or Perfect Dark.

Perfect Dark is IP owned by Rare themselves, as are Goldeneye, Banjo Kazooie and Conker. Which is why Nintendo have to ask Rare if they will please lisence them for distribution on the Revolution. (in the case of Goldeneye they would have to ask EA as well, and both would have to agree to terms for distribution).

Other games Rare have worked on (Donkey Kong & Starfox Adventures) are IP owned by Nintendo, even if Rare did all the grunt work, so Nintendo can do with them what they like.

Whilst this is, technically speaking, a pity, I still have Goldeneye and Perfect Dark for the N64, and they still work, so I'm not going to cry my eyes out.

Plus, of course, Microsoft could always throw an N64 emulator out for the Xbox 360. (someone's already made a NES emulator for it, which works through the XP Media Centre extender)

(Oh yeah, and Morrowind isn't an MS firstparty title either, it was published in house at Bethesda.)

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2006-03-29 12:00pm

Vendetta wrote:
(Oh yeah, and Morrowind isn't an MS firstparty title either, it was published in house at Bethesda.)

Oh, well, close enough then. I don't really have too terribly much interest in most MS first party gaming titles as it is. So the occasional slip up in that area's expected. But my general gist should've gotten across.

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2006-03-29 01:54pm

Archaic` wrote:If Nintendo owns the property, then yes. Otherwise, expect them on XBox Live sometime in the next year.

Whether they will be on Live is questionable. Can they publish it themselves without Nintendo's permission (as Nintendo's logo is in the game, and Nintendo is the original publisher), and can Microsoft legally emulate Nintendo's systems? Or will Rare re-code all the games?

I don't know if the topic of emulation has ever really been brought up in court. Other than Bleemcast which didn't have enough money to support the lawsuit and gave up IIRC.

TheBlackCat · Post by **TheBlackCat** » 2006-03-29 03:46pm

General Zod wrote:What kind of crack are you smoking? All of the titles formerly developed by Rare are in no way shape or form a Microsoft first party title. As Microsoft had no hand in developing any of the games on the list above. An example of a first party MS title would be something like Morrowind or Halo. Not Donkey Kong 64 or Perfect Dark.

They became first-party titles when microsoft completely bought-out rare. Rare is now a first-party developer within microsoft, therefor all title that were owned by Rare are now owned by microsoft. Their ownership status when they were originally devloped is irrelevant to their ownership status now.

Pezzoni · Post by **Pezzoni** » 2006-03-29 05:03pm

Why the hell did Nintendo sell their stake in Rare in the first place

That was by far the worst news I had ever had regarding a Nintendo console.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2006-03-29 05:22pm

Pezzoni wrote:Why the hell did Nintendo sell their stake in Rare in the first place
That was by far the worst news I had ever had regarding a Nintendo console.

If I recall, the conclusion of Rare and Nintendo's contract was rather ugly.

Pezzoni · Post by **Pezzoni** » 2006-03-29 05:24pm

I never read any more than was covered in a games magazine ("It's over") - Could you point me towards some specifics?

Dooey Jo · Post by **Dooey Jo** » 2006-03-29 05:32pm

Vendetta wrote:Plus, of course, Microsoft could always throw an N64 emulator out for the Xbox 360. (someone's already made a NES emulator for it, which works through the XP Media Centre extender)

No, Microsoft couldn't do that, not officially. They'd be in really deep shit if they would do it, and even if they could prove that the emulator itself was legal, they would not be able to legally distribute any games for which they weren't the sole copyright holder (ie, at most Rare's games).

It would be interesting, but I cannot imagine that MS could win the lawsuit that Nintendo would inevitably file against them. And I'm sure MS knows this too, so I really doubt there will be an "official" N64 emulator for the 360, ever.

Maybe they'll make a MS-DOS emulator though, so you can download old PC games and play

Trogdor · Post by **Trogdor** » 2006-03-29 06:31pm

Dooey Jo wrote:Maybe they'll make a MS-DOS emulator though, so you can download old PC games and play

Oh man, Oregon Trail and Number Crunchers for the win.