View Full Version : Is Rare really that great?
05-04-2002, 02:49 AM
Personally Rare not being a Nintendo only devoloper really means nothing to me. The only games I really liked by Rare was Goldeneye and Perfect Dark. Their other games were ok at best. And their latest project (SFA) was supposed to be out next month and now we won't it in our GC's until fall! So what are we really missing if Rare leaves? And besides it's not like they won't makes games for the GC anyways. So let them leave. Then maybe they'll release games when they say they will... bastards.
05-04-2002, 03:46 AM
I liked the Donkey Kong Country series on the SNES, but as far as the N64 goes, I was never able to get into any of the Rare games I tried (DK64, Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Conker). Just didn't do it for me, I guess.
05-04-2002, 07:49 AM
Rare is good, but not that great. Their games mimic Nintendo's quite often in the past.
05-04-2002, 06:44 PM
Rare is starting to look like Square to me...
Think of it. They both we under Nintendo. Both made AWESOME games. Both released games late. And now, both are trying to merge onward to make better games for bigger audiences.
I say, let them do what they wish, as long as they don't start making remakes like certain other companies. :rolleyes:
05-05-2002, 01:36 AM
How is Rare one of the the greatest game designers in the world? Every game they make is just a re-hash of a previous game. Sure they've made some quality games like the first DK country game on the snes and goldeneye, but every other game they've is just an "improvement" or sequel of a game. Perfect Dark was a great game, but just a better version of Goldeneye.
I'm not saying that Rare sucks, far from it. I'm saying who cares if they leave. They leave then maybe they'll start working harder to release games on time and will have less delays. Which we'll all benefit from.
05-07-2002, 07:22 AM
I really don't know why people love RARE so much, I think they're okay, nothing more. I've never been into FPS games, but I can see that Goldeneye and PD are good, though jerky. But as for their other games, they pretty much sucked. I've always thought of them as wannabe NCL games, but no where near as good. Just compare Mario 64 with Banjo. Mario is infinitely better.
Just my opinion, but I really don't think RARE are good, and if they leave I think Nintendo now has many more great partners in software development, like Sega's Amusement Vision for F-Zero and Namco for Starfox.
DKC2 was a great game, Blast Corps was genius, and Goldeneye was a revolution but other than those three, Rare's work of the last ten years has been mediocre, generic and highly derivitive. There is no doubt that this company was once great, but the Stampers' influence responsible is no longer felt.
Bring on Cobra Triangle NGC.
05-07-2002, 02:36 PM
I don't particularly like Rare either. I liked them during the SNES era for the DKC games, and I liked Goldeneye, but that was it afterwards. I don't see what was so great about PD either...it seemed like a less fun version of Goldeneye to me.
05-07-2002, 07:43 PM
The Square and Rare comparison is valid. Both have made one great game since the 16-bit days: Final Fantasy Tactics for Square and Goldeneye for Rare. If I play one more cookie cutter 3D platformer from Rare, I may burst. :mad:
05-15-2002, 10:45 PM
Personally, I would like as many GCN exclusives as I can get...and just seeing the story behind Kameo and screen shots. That looks like a great game. Okay, they might not be as great as some people make them out to be, but Rare is still a great company. I think the new Star Fox looks awesome. I'm willing to wait for a good game....I really have no choice. They delayed Eternal Darkness almost a year and is everyone complaining about Silicon Knights?
05-16-2002, 01:31 AM
I think they're average. They made, MADE some pretty hot games before (DKC1,2 (3 blew) Snake, Rattle and Roll, Goldeneye, R.C. Pro AM) but other than those few, I could care less about them. And, since I pretty much despise 3-D, I really don't care what they do.
05-16-2002, 01:26 PM
Rare is indeed one of the best game develloper in the videogames industry. Maybe not the greatest, but they aren't the worst either.
If you guys feel that Rare isn't that great ,that might due the fact that they've been exclusive to Nintendo and maybe their creative freedom have been cut down a little bit. (i mean they are the one who created Battletoads and R.C Pro-Am)
If they become a third party develloper, this can only be a good thing . The ultimate creative freedom!
05-17-2002, 02:24 PM
I hope Rare doesn't go anywhere, as they are a strong shining force in the Nintendo camp.
Besides, I though this whole Rare leaving the big "N" thing was over, didn't Planet Gamecbe run a story with Rare basically comfirming they weren't going anywhere a while back!? Something to do with that card picture with all the consoles under a tree.. omg wasn't that a christmas tree? Why is this rumor still around!? -_-*
05-17-2002, 03:31 PM
...cause guys like yourself doesn't tell us this kind of info sooner ^-^...!
Yaaah.. Does that mean Diddy Kong racing still on track...joking ...joking!
05-17-2002, 05:01 PM
Rare needs to stop making games with animals, its really annoying in a way. I want realistic games like Perfect Dark. The only franchise Rare should keep that has animals are BK and Conker and all future's franchises need to step away from the jungle's world.
05-21-2002, 08:23 AM
You mean DK.. right, right? ^_^*
Anyhow.. is this rumor still out there!?
Stupid rumors.. no <3 for them...
They wear you down after a while.
It'd better not be true..
01-05-2004, 04:15 AM
BlueBlackRed wrote ~ "I really don't know why people love RARE so much, I think they're okay, nothing more. I've never been into FPS games, but I can see that Goldeneye and PD are good, though jerky. But as for their other games, they pretty much sucked. I've always thought of them as wannabe NCL games, but no where near as good. Just compare Mario 64 with Banjo. Mario is infinitely better.
Just my opinion, but I really don't think RARE are good, and if they leave I think Nintendo now has many more great partners in software development, like Sega's Amusement Vision for F-Zero and Namco for Starfox."
My thoughts exactly.
Since they've left Nintendo and lost the rights to use their franchises they've been even worse than before. They went from Nintendo-wannabe to "Hi, we're a boring developer." They used to sell their games on graphical merit and borrowing Nintendo game engines, but they've yet to come up with any particular mascot worth note. Banjo Kazooie? Give me a break. Conker? Who cares? Perfect Dark? Just another FPS. Sorry guys; I'm sticking with Nintendo.
01-05-2004, 07:43 AM
What the.... Is this ''revive 2 year old thread day'' or something?
01-05-2004, 09:23 AM
01-05-2004, 11:20 AM
why? are you bored? :o
I'll always hold Rare in high regard just for RC Pro Am, Wizards & Warriors, and Blast Corps.
Actually, Blast Corps is the only Rare N64 game I actually like.
01-05-2004, 01:15 PM
I used to love rare games, but after games like conker on the N64, I didn't care anymore, Jet force Genimi was bad IMO
and I'm probably the only one to think this, but I didn't like Perfect dark either, and I was wanting that game bad when it first came out
even after it came out, I just went back and played Goldeneye more then anything
and I wanted Star Fox Adventures, dear lord I hated that game, and I love SF games too
heres hoping Namco's SF is good :D
01-05-2004, 01:32 PM
Whether Rare left or Nintendo bought them didn't matter to me much. However, I they still had some games that brought gamers in, even if they had a Nintendo feel. The main problem inside Rare seemed to be bad management of the games, hence long development times. Maybe Nintendo should have agreed to buy the rest of the company and then cleaned house a little. Of course, Nintendo may have had a part in some of the problems.
01-05-2004, 03:08 PM
Rare is good, they are just lazy. Almost want to call them underachievers nowadays.
Like a certain Halo-making company if those Fall 04 release date rumors are true....
01-05-2004, 09:48 PM
I've always thought of them more as an SGI workshop of some sort moreso a game company.
You know Icarus, for someone that seems to know an extensive amount of history behind Nintendo and Tecmo, I'm surprised you're being very forgetful of everything that Rare has done in the last fifteen years.
Actually, I'm not really surprised ;)
01-05-2004, 10:33 PM
What am I missing? That they went from Battletoads to SGI workshop masterpieces with tame gameplay like DKC and Banjo? Spare me. I don't care if you're just going around saying stupid things just to show that you're 'against me' or whatever reason you're doing it. Rare sucks ass and Nintendo dropped them because of that very reason. They're nothing more than a SGI workshop, as I've stated.
01-06-2004, 03:01 PM
RC Pro Am Racing and Battletoads are excellent games. end.
01-06-2004, 05:52 PM
and to answer this thread question.......
its all depend of the next perfect dark..... whenever it'll be out.
01-06-2004, 11:11 PM
Wow, so you mean that Rare can make another FPS just like 100 other companies out there...? Weak.
Rare did have some good games in their older catalog of software (most notably on the NES). But they've changed, and not for the better.
I must confess I did enjoy the Killer Instict franchise.
01-07-2004, 10:44 AM
i wouldnt mind some rc pro am 3 action or blast corps 2
but with a bit more persective on ms picking up rare:
did nintendo know what they were doing (or not doing)? i think yes, they were aware that rare would not be coming out with a game anytime soon and that nothing exceptional was at that point guranteed.
what ms got was a high profile developer that had been exclusive to nintendo and been a keystone during the lean n64 days, they have money to burn and were able to purchase some exposure and appear to stick it to nin
both companies won because they approached the deal with different goals and different understandings of what they would need.
If rare were to close up shop now, ms would still have gotten what they paid for (the "shock" of taking some of nin away) based on the subpar sfa and the reworking of conker's, rare is not performing as well as its past games have shown its potential to be, the industry is volatile and companies peak and fall all the time, for the good of ms particularly and gaming in general, it would be great if rare got back in form, but as it now stands they remain a question mark
01-07-2004, 10:45 AM
It only proves how little M$ knows about the gaming business. They only speak in dollars.
Game Master Z
01-08-2004, 08:49 AM
Let Eco tell it, M$ knows what their doing. :rolleyes:
01-08-2004, 09:14 AM
Well for a company that doesn't know how to make games there've been doing it for along time and have been pretty damn succesful.
01-08-2004, 10:51 AM
Who Rare? If so in the terms of succesful are you talking about buy out succesful?
01-08-2004, 01:14 PM
Nay, we were talking about Microsoft.
01-08-2004, 05:03 PM
Ah, then yeah a opinion on success will no doubt differ here. Loosing 2 billion on it alone plus what ever else the company may be loosing recently wouldn't count much as being successful IMO.
01-08-2004, 05:40 PM
Which has zero to do with them making games and more to do with there hardware.
01-08-2004, 05:50 PM
I assume it comes from the same pocket but for the must part your right about that.
01-09-2004, 03:44 PM
Well, I have to say that I was a bit miffed to hear Rare leave, but I can't say I've seen any good come from it. And I really enjoyed Conker and DK Country. Ah.. the simpler days.
01-09-2004, 04:15 PM
Let's not harp on how much MS may or may not have lost launching the Xbox, all of the console makers have hit snags this gen. Sony had a one billion dollar loss just last year, Nintendo had troubles earlier in 2003. In the end, it's irrelevant because all three companies are here to stay.
01-09-2004, 05:09 PM
Maybe. All I know is there are a lot of games on the PS2 that I wish I could play on my GC. But it works out, because otherwise I'd be poor- so I guess what I'm saying is, "Be careful for what you wish for.."
01-13-2004, 12:14 AM
Rare WAS great. Not anymore.
See Grabbed by the Ghoulies.
My 2 cents on Rare. In thier early years they were quite the developer. They made games that were fun to play. But, later on, flashyness that came along with new technology took hold on the company's will. Towards their ending with Nintendo, they would only put enough attention on gameplay for the big name titles(DK64, Banjo Kazooie, Killer Instinct). Then in the final year or so, hardly any effort was put into gameplay on a big franchise(Starfox). They decided to borrow a (stripped down) gamplay engine from a classic of the prior generation of gaming(LoZ: OoT). Nintendo got fed-up with their approach to gaming, and decided it best to cash in on the RARE name. Simple as that.
Now if RARE finds a way to rise from the the funk they find themselves in, good for them. I don't like their chances though.
01-14-2004, 04:39 AM
I don't get how a company like Microsoft can be considered smart when they haven't even made one good game worth owning.
01-14-2004, 05:30 AM
They are smart businessmen, and are giving Nintendo a run for their money as far as sales go. Its the kinda "smart" that Nintendo are currently lacking, and will need to come out tops in the next generation of console wars.
01-14-2004, 05:40 AM
I don't see things the same way. Look, anybody with a purse that big can invest in making powerful hardware - it's not the hardest thing to do. Then they went around pretending they were Sony, trying to kiss up to the developers and found some who were willing and paid off a few as well. That doesn't require much intelligence in my opinion. All they tried to do was mimic Sony.
As a gamer I look for intelligent game design so that I can have fun, not sales or anything else. And even though Nintendo has made mistakes (some big ones, like trying to rely on GC/GBA connectivity as the 'wave of the future') they're still a great game company. Sony has Gran Turismo 4 and Microsoft has, well, actually I don't know. I guess you could factor in stuff from second-parties if you're feeling kinky, and you may as well because the first-party stuff is so bland.
01-14-2004, 06:32 AM
See that's the thing Nintendo has more titles as there a strong developer. Where as Sony/MS are more publishers even more so in Sony's case. They seem to go with a lot of developers that are just starting out helping them get afoot.
01-14-2004, 06:46 AM
Microsoft cannot distinguish quality software from filler and that's why most everything out for X-Box is unimpressive and not fun. They're are a few good titles of course such as Prince of Persia but the overall X-Box lineup is terrible. I'm also disappointed in GC because aside from some Nintendo games and a select few third-party titles it just doesn't grab me. Even Sony's PS2 is no match for their predecessor but its lineup is bigger than GC which is ironic when you consider how the GC seems to be a much better system than the N64 was in many ways, especially once the newer titles hit the market.
Saturn vs Playstation vs N64 was more exciting than this generation.
01-14-2004, 07:07 AM
Well to be honest Microsoft have made more good games then Sony has. And I'm not counting all the companies Sony bought in the last couple years or so.
01-14-2004, 08:38 AM
If that's the way you feel about it. I hope that with the next generation consoles we see more exciting releases like in the 16/32-bit days. I'm not ruling out that MS can or cannot meet this goal, but if they or anybody else do they cannot do it alone. Why can't they meet this goal? It's feasible. Thinking more straightforward with good hindsight is all that's required. In other words, companies should look to the future while remembering their past accomplishments so that they may do it like they did before when, incidentally enough, most of them had better offerings.
We live in our desires rather than our accomplishments.
01-14-2004, 10:01 AM
I've prefered the XB line-up to the GC's but that's not only including MS games as they don't really make/pub that many or need to.
01-14-2004, 10:44 AM
Might want to browse the history of Microsoft's video game history, which extends into pc gaming going back years before making uniformed comments.
01-14-2004, 11:17 AM
MS has made some of the biggest titles in the past, just one of them being Age of Empires. That series is disgustingly popular. Surpases Warcraft I would say.
01-14-2004, 11:51 AM
DBJAY, show me their intelligence with developing on the X-Box if you would. I don't see it. And just because they made a popular PC game doesn't suddenly make them a great developer.
01-14-2004, 12:06 PM
They made MANY popular PC games, not only one. And if you can't see their list of games ont he XBox then you're ignoring it or those games 'aren't for you'. I'll let the more passionate xbox lovers argue cause I'm a Konami whore. This aint my fight!
01-14-2004, 01:25 PM
No point, fighting about it if he can't see them for himself then that's his problem "or as you said" those games aren't for him.
Didn't Konami bring Age Of Empires to the PS2 aswell once "scratch scratch"?
01-14-2004, 01:37 PM
Ok, they are popular on the PC - point taken. But where's the great CONSOLE software?
01-14-2004, 01:45 PM
Crimson Skies, Blinx, Brute Force, Halo, MechAssault, Midtown Madness 3, PGR, PGR 2, Rallisport Challenge, Voodoo Vince
they have all been pretty good so far, maybe not the best but this is the first console and there building upon it and with
BC, Conker, Perfect Dark Zero, Fable, Sudeki, True Fantasy, Kameo, Castle Of Shikigami (NA according to gamefaqs) on the way things are looking pretty good.
Plus they helped release Dead Or Alive 3, Project Zero, Ninja Gaiden, Steel Battalion, Shenmue 2 in EU cutting down the wait of finding another publisher that could take even longer or not at all.
01-14-2004, 01:46 PM
Hold it. I said Microsoft, not any second-party or companies they paid off.
01-14-2004, 01:51 PM
and as I've said before MS are more a publisher as anyone should know by know geez...just like Nintendo are becoming more and more like. . . :)
As for buying off I very much doubt MS brought SEGA, Capcom and Tecmo. :sweat:
01-14-2004, 01:53 PM
I said 'pay off', not buy them. They paid Sega to try and create their mascot (which turned out rather poorly - Blinx :crazy: ) and they've paid companies like Tecmo to make games exclusive. I didn't say were wrong for trying to do that. Hell, everybody does it. I simply brought up their own games. Most all of those games aren't exactly genre-defining, if you know what I mean. Or, you may disagree but hey... that's your right.
01-14-2004, 01:57 PM
Most all of those games aren't exactly genre-defining, if you know what I mean.
Neither were SMS, MK:DD or Zelda:WW. Games nowadays aint genre-defining anymore, they are mostly rehashes of previous titles. So the flaw you point out in MS, is one shared by both Nintendo and Sony as they have stood int he past few years.
01-14-2004, 01:59 PM
Blinx was actually made by "Artoon" (a crazy little japanese developer) not Sega though. . .:)
01-14-2004, 02:01 PM
Well Nintendo's games are far better than those by Microsoft. If MS wants to make their console stand out then they have to do things that are significant as are Marios and Zeldas. And they can even point towards some very unique console software and open the doors to the depth which some games contain exclusively on PC by melding the two styles - something I would admire. They cannot (or shouldn't) try and be just another Sony or whatever the hell it is they're trying to establish themselves as.
01-14-2004, 02:08 PM
Standout I believe the XB has sold more overall in NA/EU then the Gamecube hasn't it so it stands out quite abit already.
Nothing wrong with Sony either they publish some very good games and even have 3 pretty good RPG's series's under there belt.
01-14-2004, 02:09 PM
They can and already have made their console stand out better than the Cube with exclusives along the lines of Tecmo, Rare and Bungie. Not to mention quality racing games like PGR and Rallisport.
As said before, developing quality titles yourself isnt a guarantee of good sales. Microsoft are just better publishers and businessmen than Nintendo, and that's why the Xbox is more of a hit.
01-14-2004, 02:10 PM
I thought that I heard the GC has surpassed the X-Box in console sales worldwide.
01-14-2004, 02:16 PM
Worldwide yes, but I said NA/EU as can be seen by there line-up there games are aimed towards the western audience so they clearly think there more important.
Of course Japan is important place to sell your console, especially if you want japanese developers making games for your console but the XB seems to be doing fine so far without there super surport aswell in it's own right.
01-14-2004, 02:19 PM
Tecmo had a huge hand in that. Japan isn't too keen about FPS as is known by now, but Halo did well enough.
01-14-2004, 02:21 PM
Yeah, nothing to argue there. :)
01-14-2004, 05:56 PM
Why are you people all of a sudden ranting about exclusives for cube and tecmo?This thread is about Rare which I think they've gone pretty crappy/lost most of it's talent.You guys need to start a thread for this stuff instead of using every thread in the GC section for debate.:too mad:
01-14-2004, 05:59 PM
2 threads is hardly every thread
Originally posted by Escaflowne2001
BC, Conker, Perfect Dark Zero, Fable, Sudeki, True Fantasy, Kameo, Castle Of Shikigami (NA according to gamefaqs) on the way things are looking pretty good. Hasn't Kameo been cancelled? Besides, I think it wasn't expected to be that good.
01-14-2004, 06:35 PM
Well if those statements made not to long ago about rare were true. It should have been canned. :P
01-15-2004, 12:02 AM
Originally posted by Escaflowne2001
2 threads is hardly every thread
Actually it has been 3 recent threads.See the konami thread,res evil thread and the supposed rare thread that I post on now. :P What games do Rare have planned for XBOX that are of interest anyhow?
01-15-2004, 04:11 AM
two seem pretty good, the other don't know enough.
01-15-2004, 06:51 AM
Vert1, I revived your thread from the depths of despondency. And yes, I did talk about Rare.
01-15-2004, 07:19 AM
To be honest Microsoft is a better first party developer than Sony is. They fall short of Nintedo because nintendo just keeps rehashing their characters and games. Pimping Mario and Zelda. Microsoft is totally building their first party offerings by having Bungie, Rare, and some others. If you want to know how good Rare is, ask anyone who owned a super nintendo and N64.
01-15-2004, 08:16 AM
To be honest Microsoft is a better first party developer than Sony is. They fall short of Nintedo because nintendo just keeps rehashing their characters and games. Pimping Mario and Zelda.
Microsoft rehash too. Its just that people dont hear about it so much since the games arent as popular or as well known as the Mario and Zelda games.
If you want to know how good Rare is, ask anyone who owned a super nintendo and N64.
I owned both a SNES and N64 and Rare were great for the SNES. Battletoads is like a personal fave of mine. They were good for the N64 but all thier hits came from clones of Nintendo's games - except for Goldeneye of course. All the original games were left in the cold - Blast Corps and Jet Force Gemini for instance. Hopefully they will work on more original titles for Xbox like they used to.
01-15-2004, 05:07 PM
Originally posted by Icarus4578
Vert1, I revived your thread from the depths of despondency. And yes, I did talk about Rare.
Umm i'm sorry but when did I make my own a thread?:sweat: :confused:
01-15-2004, 08:51 PM
I meant to say "the" instead of "your". Sorry for the screw-up.
01-16-2004, 05:16 PM
Originally posted by Escaflowne2001
two seem pretty good, the other don't know enough.
Meh Kameo looks like a lame pokemon rip off and conker is just a remake of the first game with on-line multi-player.PD Zero has also been rumored to be put off to the next XBOX.
01-16-2004, 08:38 PM
Originally posted by Vert1
Meh Kameo looks like a lame pokemon rip off
But like in the case of Demikids by Atlus, if it's done well givin a pretty good story Pokie rip-offs can be better then the original. :)
01-25-2004, 02:22 AM
You could sit here and gab and gab about how great RARE'S installments to each system has improved them more then others. But in the end people will be always dissapointed at them for becuse scum suckers working for Microsoft. But i guess u go where the moneys good, right? And i bet the money at Microsoft is tasty, real tasty.
01-25-2004, 06:42 AM
Yep, alot of people are sore because they left Nintendo. It was the same with the PS2 users when Resident Evil was announced GC exculsive "Suddenly" Resident Evil became crap until Outbreak was announced on the PS2.
Both of these are pretty sad really.
01-25-2004, 06:58 AM
You know, you can blame die hard fans and console specific magazines for those situations. They praise the hell out of something, then when they cant have it they bag the crap out of it.
01-25-2004, 09:11 AM
I'm not really a Rare fan the DKC series and Goldeneye/prefect dark where super.But SFA,Banjo,....all boring as hell (at least to me)I thinking nin let them go because they were such money suckers and all the talent people had already left ...
01-25-2004, 02:00 PM
On the subject of Free Radical I here there getting cozy with EA for Timesplitters 3. EA need to make better bond games. . . hint hint EA.
vBulletin® v3.7.4, Copyright ©2000-2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.