Support NeoGAF

[HyGogg]

It's ok to focus on new IP. Treasure generally steered clear of sequels (and when they did them they were usually really different). Sega for a long time put most of its weight behind new IP, especially when moving to new systems.

But for that to work you need ideas and shit. People want to see Rare do throwbacks because no one really cares about anything they've done in the last decade (at least).

 

[platina]

Goodbye perfect dark?

 

[Synth]

From the Boss of Rare about a response to the IGN article about this topic


https://twitter.com/Gamerboss/status/911312292834430978

*lights up Salty Hippo signal*

Great, now give me PDZ and Kameo please.

You realise that PDZ means Pefect Dark Zero, right?

 

[NimbusD]

Crash was a remake. How many of the people who actually made Banjo Kazooie (Tooie already fought with game design problems) are still with Rare? Good platformers take expertise.
If they made a Crash-like remake for BK then sure, but otherwise I just don't see it.

The crash game being a remake disqualifies it from being an IP revival?

You also don't need the original team to make new games. Dunno what that argument is supposed to be.

 

[Soapbox Killer]

Conker could work today, just need really good writers and some guts to do it in an increasingly fickle gaming climate.

 

[slorelli]

Most of the talent who had a hand in creating the legendary games in Rareware's catalog have moved on to other things. Rare is a shell of it's former self.

 

[blakep267]

Goodbye perfect dark?

Rare probably wouldn't work on a PD reboot. MS would likely rather give it to another studio established more with action games

 

[daTRUballin]

Conker could work today, just need really good writers and some guts to do it in an increasingly fickle gaming climate.

Conker has some awesome potential to be a great franchise. Especially in the Xbox ecosystem. But Rare and MS will just continue sitting on it and only bringing it back for stupid shit like Conker's Big Reunion and Young Conker. Ugh.

Or they'll bring it back with some "new" and "innovative" idea that'll miss the point of why people loved Conker in the first place.

 

[Platy]

From the Boss of Rare about a response to the IGN article about this topic


https://twitter.com/Gamerboss/status/911312292834430978

Cover mechanics
Active Reload
Horde Mode

JET FORCE GEMINI

 

[Synth]

Cover mechanics
Active Reload
Horde Mode

JET FORCE GEMINI

The Coalition would make a killer Jet Force Gemini imo.

 

[MegaManTrigger]

What if I told you N&B was the best Banjo game?

There's nothing about NB that warrants giving it the "best Banjo game" title. Especially considering it's Banjo-in-name compared to Kazooie and Tooie.

Banjo's gameplay has aged and I don't think a new one should copy every aspect of the original. It would need to be modernized for today's standards, but it should definitely still resemble the old premise, unlike the bizarre N&B. Add more platforming, make traversal more fun and dynamic, maybe go crazy with transformations to add a ton of variety and keep everything else mostly intact. Just look at Odyssey, that game borrows quite some design philosophies from Banjo and it's a blueprint for what a modern Banjo should be like. But Craig Duncan simply doesn't believe in the genre at all. He uses the baffling "we've already done a game like this, once" argument and puts a crazy idea as a condition to go back to it, "something so groundbreaking and innovative that nobody else in the industry is doing it!!!".

This is the difference between old and new Rare, and to an extent, the difference between old Rare and Playtonic as well. Old Rare was interested in existing games and seeing how they could one-up the game so to speak. Banjo Kazooie, and Conker were both Rare's response to the gameplay standards set by Super Mario 64 (BK emphasizing adventure + collecting, Conker using humour and narrative as the reward for the gameplay). Current Rare seems very apathetic and unimaginative about the direction of Banjo-Kazooie. Playtonic on the other hand seems too interested in capturing nostalgia that they lost sight of why people loved Banjo-Kazooie in the first place.

 

[Head.spawn]

From the Boss of Rare about a response to the IGN article about this topic


https://twitter.com/Gamerboss/status/911312292834430978

I'm drawing a blank but I remember them saying something similar and then tossed Killer Instinct XBO as a reference.

So, not so bad.

 

[daTRUballin]

This is the difference between old and new Rare, and to an extent, the difference between old Rare and Playtonic as well. Old Rare was interested in existing games and seeing how they could one-up the game so to speak. Banjo Kazooie, and Conker were both Rare's response to the gameplay standards set by Super Mario 64 (BK emphasizing adventure + collecting, Conker using humour and narrative as the reward for the gameplay). Current Rare seems very apathetic and unimaginative about the direction of Banjo-Kazooie. Playtonic on the other hand seems too interested in capturing nostalgia that they lost sight of why people loved Banjo-Kazooie in the first place.

Well, old Rare was still innovative and sometimes even groundbreaking. Look at Goldeneye and DKC for example. Two games that did something new and took the world by storm when they released. A lot of their games were just their own versions of existing formulas, but they still innovated here and there. Current Rare is definitely more "innovative" and takes more risks though.

Funnily enough, current Rare would've been more fit on Nintendo systems. The kind of risky hardware that Nintendo releases and the fact that Nintendo likes to experiment and do new things with their own IPs means that Nintendo probably would've been a better home for them. Kinda funny to think about.

 

[MegaManTrigger]

Well, old Rare was still innovative and sometimes even groundbreaking. Look at Goldeneye and DKC for example. Two games that did something new and took the world by storm when they released. A lot of their games were just their own versions of existing formulas, but they still innovated here and there. Current Rare is definitely more "innovative" and takes more risks though.

Funnily enough, current Rare would've been more fit on Nintendo systems. The kind of risky hardware that Nintendo releases and the fact that Nintendo likes to experiment and do new things with their own IPs means that Nintendo probably would've been a better home for them. Kinda funny to think about.

Yeah, I don't mean to suggest that adding their own spin to existing formulas is a bad thing because that's how some of their innovations came through, in addition to their own separate groundbreaking innovations like DKC and Goldeneye as you mentioned. It's just that I don't see the same kind of motivation to one up or have a "let's do it better" mentality from current Rare. Hell, the fact that the boss and the team seems to be struggling with the direction of Banjo Kazooie somewhat points to this in addition to other variables (sales, budgeting).

It's weird isn't it? Rare and Nintendo still would be a viable partnership given the similarities in approaches between the two developers. I wonder what it would've been like had Nintendo continued with Rare. Probably Banjo-Threeie if that old trailer was any indication. Plus Donkey Kong Racing.

 

[Salty Hippo]

From the Boss of Rare about a response to the IGN article about this topic


https://twitter.com/Gamerboss/status/911312292834430978

Doesn't change at all my interpretation of his words. "Find new gameplay innovation that fits IP" is a generic line that could easily describe N&B back then. Rare did believe a lego car concept fit the IP, so I'll only believe he doesn't mean a radical change in the same vein when he explicitly says it.

IGN made a click-baity headline and he's just correcting that in the tweet, even though I believe the headline is exactly what Duncan thinks deep inside. They won't bother brainstorming ideas for their old IP, they simply don't believe in them anymore. The whole mantra of "idea first, IP later" is enough to conclude that they won't go back to these games. Whatever idea they come up with from now on will be something that fits today's market and landscape, and a game like Banjo is basically the antithesis of it.

 

[MrBadger]

The crash game being a remake disqualifies it from being an IP revival?

You also don't need the original team to make new games. Dunno what that argument is supposed to be.

If the people currently at Rare have no experience making platformers, there's no guarantee that they'd make a good one unless they straight-up remade everything from the original like Crash. That's what the other poster is saying.