Support NeoGAF

[XANDER CAGE]

Watch it be a goddamn Kinect title.

I doubt we're going to see many more of those ever again, really.

 

[Yoshi]

See, that's the best time to try and develop a spin off. There aren't any pre-set expectations, you can go wild and develop whatever you want and that's exactly what RARE did. I do agree that the 'bait and switch' wasn't great, but I'd argue the teaser was vague in the first place.

I disagree, if you have a fanbase waiting for a sequel for years, fans due to a specific style of gameplay and gamedesign, it's not the best time to give them something totally different. If the franchise is strongly supported and fans can be sure to get what they love, then it's fine to also produce a spin-off with different gameplay. As it stands now, Banjo Nuts & Bolts was totally different from Banjo and many fans didn't like it nearly as much as Banjo-Kazooie and Tooie, on top of it, Nuts & Bolts also flopped and killed classic Rare for years. How much worse could it have gone for Banjo fans?

 

[REMEMBER CITADEL]

While I can understand some of your points, I find it offensive that you continue to blame more positive opinions of the original's design on nostalgia. I'd even say that it's way of using the collectibles to structure the game world, the semi-open, mid-sized, but densely packed levels are the best way of designing a game world and the fact that camera control is a bit weak does not really count here, because it was an N64 game where there was no second analog stick. This is something that obviously would get fixed in a Banjo-Threeie without much hassle.

It's a shame that you're finding it offensive, but I know first hand how nostalgia works, and that's my opinion. 4J Studios already improved it in its XBLA version, and there is plenty of room for further refinement. In fact, I wouldn't mind if the next Banjo dropped the collectathon aspect altogether, but that's unlikely to happen if the game is supposed to appeal to fans of the series, and that's probably the main reason they're bringing it back.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

I disagree, if you have a fanbase waiting for a sequel for years, fans due to a specific style of gameplay and gamedesign, it's not the best time to give them something totally different. If the franchise is strongly supported and fans can be sure to get what they love, then it's fine to also produce a spin-off with different gameplay. As it stands now, Banjo Nuts & Bolts was totally different from Banjo and many fans didn't like it nearly as much as Banjo-Kazooie and Tooie, on top of it, Nuts & Bolts also flopped and killed classic Rare for years. How much worse could it have gone for Banjo fans?

That's fair enough, but MS did release remastered (or HD ports) of the first two Banjo games (with cut content making a return), so it's not like those fans were left entirely out in the cold.

I do understand your point though.

 

[TI82]

I disagree, if you have a fanbase waiting for a sequel for years, fans due to a specific style of gameplay and gamedesign, it's not the best time to give them something totally different. If the franchise is strongly supported and fans can be sure to get what they love, then it's fine to also produce a spin-off with different gameplay. As it stands now, Banjo Nuts & Bolts was totally different from Banjo and many fans didn't like it nearly as much as Banjo-Kazooie and Tooie, on top of it, Nuts & Bolts also flopped and killed classic Rare for years. How much worse could it have gone for Banjo fans?

Maybe they thought it would be good like donkey Kong country > Diddy Kong Racing?

 

[Yoshi]

It's a shame that you're finding it offensive, but I know first hand how nostalgia works, and that's my opinion. 4J Studios already improved it in its XBLA version, and there is plenty of room for further refinement. In fact, I wouldn't mind if the next Banjo dropped the collectathon aspect altogether, but that's unlikely to happen if the game is supposed to appeal to fans of the series, and that's probably the main reason they're bringing it back.

I stand by the point that the collection aspect is not optional, but crucial to the game design and world design and while you might know how nostalgia works, youare wrong in continuously stating that nostlagia is the reason people love Banjo's game design. Banjo-Kazooie used the notes in order to guide the player through the unkown levels, pointing towards points of interest (in a way more clever and natural way than a compass that is being used nowadays). The size of the levels worked especially well with that way of structuring the game, because the player did not need a map to conveniently remember what he saw at an "earlier trail of notes". New moves and transformations offered a nice sense of wonder to the world in that the player couldn't reach everything on first sight, but could already imagine how to do it in the future. Basically, collectathons like Banjo-Kazooie offer a fourth way of structuring a game, and imo it's the best way of structuring a game that is not all about motor skill (of course F-Zero or Monkey Ball would be ill-fit for that), it has to be compared with linear world design, open world "let's just throw the player in there" world design and open world gps-line-design. None of these other structures could capture the essence of Banjo. This specific style of world structuring is essential.

That's fair enough, but MS did release remastered (or HD ports) of the first two Banjo games (with cut content making a return), so it's not like those fans were left entirely out in the cold.

I do understand your point though.

It wasn't really cut, at that time there already were cheat codes available to access said content. And I can tell you, I'd much rather not have had Banjo-Kazooie, Banjo-Tooie or Banjo N&B on 360 but Banjo-Threeie instead, because I already owned B-K and B-T before, selling me games I already own is not a good way to make me happy, obviously.

 

[crap monkey]

I don't understand why anybody is getting excited for a new Rare game. Rare is a shell, of a shell, of its former self. Almost everybody who worked on games that were actually any good have left. All that's left are the dregs and people who were hired to create Kinect games. And if Rare is simply being used to dredge out old IPs, why would anyone be happy about that? Having familiar faces show up in a pile of garbage doesn't make for a fun experience, it's playing off the nostalgia of people who loved those IPs back when they were developed by a talented group of game developers. Rare is a different beast and it's better to let the cherished franchises of the past be remembered for what they were rather than being dug out of the ground and paraded around as sad, broken facsimiles of their former glory to make a quick buck. Let their tombstones stand proudly, marking their place in gaming history for those who were able to enjoy them and appreciated them for their time. Banjo is dead, Battletoads is dead, Perfect Dark is dead, Conker is dead, Rare is dead. It's better that way.

 

[jesu]

I don't understand why anybody is getting excited for a new Rare game. Rare is a shell, of a shell, of its former self. Almost everybody who worked on games that were actually any good have left. All that's left are the dregs and people who were hired to create Kinect games. And if Rare is simply being used to dredge out old IPs, why would anyone be happy about that? Having familiar faces show up in a pile of garbage doesn't make for a fun experience, it's playing off the nostalgia of people who loved those IPs back when they were developed by a talented group of game developers. Rare is a different beast and it's better to let the cherished franchises of the past be remembered for what they were rather than being dug out of the ground and paraded around as sad, broken facsimiles of their former glory to make a quick buck. Let their tombstones stand proudly, marking their place in gaming history for those who were able to enjoy them and appreciated them for their time. Banjo is dead, Battletoads is dead, Perfect Dark is dead, Conker is dead, Rare is dead. It's better that way.

Viva Pinata devs are still there.

 

[Yoshi]

I don't understand why anybody is getting excited for a new Rare game. Rare is a shell, of a shell, of its former self. Almost everybody who worked on games that were actually any good have left. All that's left are the dregs and people who were hired to create Kinect games. And if Rare is simply being used to dredge out old IPs, why would anyone be happy about that? Having familiar faces show up in a pile of garbage doesn't make for a fun experience, it's playing off the nostalgia of people who loved those IPs back when they were developed by a talented group of game developers. Rare is a different beast and it's better to let the cherished franchises of the past be remembered for what they were rather than being dug out of the ground and paraded around as sad, broken facsimiles of their former glory to make a quick buck. Let their tombstones stand proudly, marking their place in gaming history for those who were able to enjoy them and appreciated them for their time. Banjo is dead, Battletoads is dead, Perfect Dark is dead, Conker is dead, Rare is dead. It's better that way.

Is it an epidemia, the need to blindly go into a Rare thread and shit on Rare? As a Rare- and Sonic-fan I feel extremely annoyed by these dumb drive-by-postings.

 

[REMEMBER CITADEL]

I stand by the point that the collection aspect is not optional, but crucial to the game design and world design and while you might know how nostalgia works, youare wrong in continuously stating that nostlagia is the reason people love Banjo's game design.

First of all, there are plenty of non-collectathon 3D platformers with great game and world designs (and no reliance on maps either), so no, it's not crucial.

Secondly, I'm not stating that nostalgia is the only reason why people love Banjo's game design, I'm stating it's one of the reasons why some of them (well, mostly you) think it's pretty much perfect in that regard, and not improvable in any significant way.

Banjo-Kazooie used the notes in order to guide the player through the unkown levels, pointing towards points of interest (in a way more clever and natural way than a compass that is being used nowadays). The size of the levels worked especially well with that way of structuring the game, because the player did not need a map to conveniently remember what he saw at an "earlier trail of notes".

And then upon dying or leaving the world the notes reset. Thankfully, 4J Studios changed that in the XBLA port. Still, there are other ways to guide the player through a 3D world. One that is popular nowadays is with relatively subtle (Ryse) or not so subtle (Mirror's Edge) color coding, and there are others still. But I'm not against collecting objects per se (there don't have to be as many different things as there are in Banjo, however) or even against Banjo-style collectathons, I'm merely stating that it's not the only way of designing a satisfying 3D platformer.

And by the way, I had plenty of problems remembering where I saw certain things in Banjo, be it what was inside each of the pyramids in the desert level or where in the swamp I saw a certain object. Banjo's levels were still pretty labyrinthine. And don't even get me started on the hub world.

New moves and transformations offered a nice sense of wonder to the world in that the player couldn't reach everything on first sight, but could already imagine how to do it in the future.

Sure, I love getting new moves and abilities as I progress. On the other hand, I'm really not a fan of the metroidvania school of design, with all the backtracking. Seeing something you can't reach just to figure out that you should return once you gain a new ability is only revelatory and really satisfying the first time it happens, and for most of us that was probably many, many years ago. Now when I encounter something like that, my reaction is "oh fuck, so I'll have to return here". It's artificial, and very gamey in the worst way.

I like having optional objectives I can't easily reach, but I prefer if I need to use my problem solving skill (especially if there's room for creativity and experimentation, like in Nuts & Bolts) or exploit the physics engine to get to them, not to play for a while and then simply unlock the ability which will enable me to reach them with little to no fuss.

 

[MCD]

as a kid, I thought banjo was excellent because I didn't have to go back to the hub world after getting every "star".

 

[Yoshi]

First of all, there are plenty of non-collectathon 3D platformers with great game and world designs (and no reliance on maps either), so no, it's not crucial.

Of course there are, Super Mario Galaxy 1&2, Super Mario 3D World and the (good) Sonic games are great examples for that. But they use linearity as a way to structure the game world. Mirror's Edge does that, too, by the way, it's an extremely linear game.

Secondly, I'm not stating that nostalgia is the only reason why people love Banjo's game design, I'm stating it's one of the reasons why some of them (well, mostly you) think it's pretty much perfect in that regard, and not improvable in any significant way.

And I'm stating that you're wrong with that assessment. It's just a matter of different taste.

And then upon dying or leaving the world the notes reset. Thankfully, 4J Studios changed that in the XBLA port.

There are advantages and disadvantages to that, definitely. To reset the notes can help if you get stuck, it can also make (low-level) speed runs more interesting and it raises the difficulty. However, I think the optimal way to treat this would be to replace the notes that were already collected by a shimmer.

Still, there are other ways to guide the player through a 3D world. One that is popular nowadays is with relatively subtle (Ryse) or not so subtle (Mirror's Edge) color coding, and there are others still.

Yeah, you can use that, but as I said, ME is super linear, I don't know Ryse though.

But I'm not against collecting objects per se (there don't have to be as many different things as there are in Banjo, however) or even against Banjo-style collectathons, I'm merely stating that it's not the only way of designing a satisfying 3D platformer.

I never said it's the only way to design a satisfying 3D platformer, I personally think Super Mario Galaxy 2, and not B-K, is the best 3D platformer. However, it then ends up being a completely different style of game and I like that specific sub-genre a lot, I don't want Banjo to change the sub-genre, just because other sub-genres work, too. Nuts & Bolts worked, too, you know. Regarding the number of collectibles, there are basically three very important things, notes, puzzle pieces and Jinjos, you could maybe argue that the cheato pages (completely optional), mumbo tokens (there are way too many in the game, they are not supposed to be all collected) and supply (eggs, feathers) should count, too, and I don't think mumbo tokens or supply are all too relevant, they can be dropped. Notes and puzzle pieces are the essentials, Jinjos nice, but ultimately optional. I'd be mad if notes or puzzle pieces would be dropped though. Of course it's not important if they are really notes and puzzles pieces, but in function they should remain.

Sure, I love getting new moves and abilities as I progress. On the other hand, I'm really not a fan of the metroidvania school of design, with all the backtracking. Seeing something you can't reach just to figure out that you should return once you gain a new ability is only revelatory and really satisfying the first time it happens, and for most of us that was probably many, many years ago. Now when I encounter something like that, my reaction is "oh fuck, so I'll have to return here". It's artificial, and very gamey in the worst way.

I like games, I see gamey not as a negative connotation. In fact, I want my games as gamey as possible, fuck any sort of realism.

I like having optional objectives I can't easily reach, but I prefer if I need to use my problem solving skill (especially if there's room for creativity and experimentation, like in Nuts & Bolts) or exploit the physics engine to get to them, not to play for a while and then simply unlock the ability which will enable me to reach them with little to no fuss.

Of course, problem solving skills should be demanded by the game a lot, but I don't think Banjo was particularly lacking in that regard, it was difficult and varied enough. The fact that certain things are locked away for a short while (but not for half the game of course, a while within a given level) can be motivating, too, though.

 

[REMEMBER CITADEL]

Yeah, you can use that, but as I said, ME is super linear, I don't know Ryse though.

There's no reason why linearity should be a prerequisite for that technique to be used. Again, there are other possible solutions, including orientating yourself by the landmarks, similarly to what you'd do in real life.

And just for the record, I'm not of the opinion that there's anything inherently wrong with the map or compass systems either.

I like games, I see gamey not as a negative connotation. In fact, I want my games as gamey as possible, fuck any sort of realism.

There's room for both, but perhaps that was a poor choice of words. Still, it's formulaic, and recognizing it as a typical video game concoction kills immersion and the sense of wonder. If there are also negative connotations to it - and I don't think that I've ever met a person who enjoys backtracking - all the worse.

But you're right, Banjo wasn't a bad offender in that regard.

 

[Yoshi]

There's no reason why linearity should be a prerequisite for that technique to be used. Again, there are other possible solutions, including orientating yourself by the landmarks, similarly to what you'd do in real life.

And just for the record, I'm not of the opinion that there's anything inherently wrong with the map or compass systems either.

It's fine if you personally prefer other forms of structuring, but why do you insist on that my preference for this form of structuring (by the way, I like it in Vexx, Mario 64 and Sunshine a lot, too and I've played Vexx for the first time last year)must be the result of nostalgia? Since there is an abundance of games with maps and compasses or color-highlighting, I think it's fair to ask specifically for the form of game structure that Banjo-Kazooie perfected in a new Banjo.

There's room for both, but perhaps that was a poor choice of words. Still, it's formulaic, and recognizing it as a typical video game concoction kills immersion and the sense of wonder. If there are also negative connotations to it - and I don't think that I've ever met a person who enjoys backtracking - all the worse.

But you're right, Banjo wasn't a bad offender in that regard.

I enjoy backtracking, if it is either filled with meaningful new gameplay content (Skyward Sword), or involves just a few steps in a mid-sized world with a low frequency (Banjo).

 

[DSix]

 

[abadguy]

I don't understand why anybody is getting excited for a new Rare game. Rare is a shell, of a shell, of its former self. Almost everybody who worked on games that were actually any good have left. All that's left are the dregs and people who were hired to create Kinect games. And if Rare is simply being used to dredge out old IPs, why would anyone be happy about that? Having familiar faces show up in a pile of garbage doesn't make for a fun experience, it's playing off the nostalgia of people who loved those IPs back when they were developed by a talented group of game developers. Rare is a different beast and it's better to let the cherished franchises of the past be remembered for what they were rather than being dug out of the ground and paraded around as sad, broken facsimiles of their former glory to make a quick buck. Let their tombstones stand proudly, marking their place in gaming history for those who were able to enjoy them and appreciated them for their time. Banjo is dead, Battletoads is dead, Perfect Dark is dead, Conker is dead, Rare is dead. It's better that way.

Again, can't call it a Rare thread without shitposts like this one.

 

[Sponge]

I don't understand why anybody is getting excited for a new Rare game. Rare is a shell, of a shell, of its former self. Almost everybody who worked on games that were actually any good have left.

Retro didn't start being terrible when most of the Prime devs left to form their own studio. Besides, most of the Viva Pinata team is still there. As long as they can get good talent at the studio it doesn't matter if old talent is there.

 

[Sydle]

I very much disagree, that perception hasn't been justified for many years now. Games like Kinect Sports and Minecraft had a huge audience on Xbox 360, and the platform was defined by Halo, Gears, Fable and Forza (all quite different series, mind you, even Halo and Gears) just as much as it was by the likes of Geometry Wars, Uno, Castle Crashers, Braid, Fez and Limbo.

I also don't think that a potential Banjo reboot should blindly adhere to the first game's blueprint. Having played it for the first time several months ago, and thus having approached it without the rose-tinted glasses of nostalgia, I found it to be a very good game, but not some holy grail that any potential sequel should strive to reach, certainly not in this day and age.

My point was that Microsoft hasn't developed a reputation for servicing IP outside of Halo, Gears, Forza, and Fable. I loved all the diversity introduced by MS on 360 such as Lost Odyssey, Blue Dragon, Viva Piñata, Banjo, Kameo, and Perfect Dark, but they didn't stick with any of them. It's like a person you know who is trying new things, but you know them for their core characteristics and what they do. Microsoft tries lots of things, but commits to very few. They absolutely deserve the reputation they have for being a bro box because its those genres and IPs that they have persistently developed as part of their identity.

I think Spencer has a different mindset now, or at least his expressed admiration for how Nintendo services its IP, coupled with his goal to develop and reboot owned IP, leads me to believe there is hope they will stick with some IP outside of the four mainstays and truly broaden their portfolio.

I think a new Banjo game should be both familiar and new, with a clear identity to fans of the original and with something fresh about it that makes people say wow. If an idea completely changes the identity of the game (e.g., disabling one of the two main characters) then it should be saved for a new IP.

See, that's the best time to try and develop a spin off. There aren't any pre-set expectations, you can go wild and develop whatever you want and that's exactly what RARE did. I do agree that the 'bait and switch' wasn't great, but I'd argue the teaser was vague in the first place.

8 years wasn't enough for anyone to forget the original games just like 17 years wasn't enough for fans of KI to forget the original games. Those games have an identity comprised of their characters, worlds, presentation, and mechanics. I don't agree developers can go wild with those things without alienating fans.

 

[Labrynian Rebel]

Banjo-Threeie: Microtransation Open-World Exclusive Kinect Experience Act 1 Episode 1

 

[CADgamer]

Banjo-Threeie: Microtransation Open-World Exclusive Kinect Experience Act 1 Episode 1

With 10 dollar Toys to unlock new characters.

 

[The Flash]

Banjo-Threeie: Microtransation Open-World Exclusive Kinect Experience Act 1 Episode 1

Developed by Ubisoft

 

[Murder. She Wrote]

Everytime I see this thread it's like "Wow, Phil Spencer is playing a new game from Rare everyday!"

I wonder when we'll see it. Probably E3 :l

 

[Raven77]

I disagree, if you have a fanbase waiting for a sequel for years, fans due to a specific style of gameplay and gamedesign, it's not the best time to give them something totally different. If the franchise is strongly supported and fans can be sure to get what they love, then it's fine to also produce a spin-off with different gameplay. As it stands now, Banjo Nuts & Bolts was totally different from Banjo and many fans didn't like it nearly as much as Banjo-Kazooie and Tooie, on top of it, Nuts & Bolts also flopped and killed classic Rare for years. How much worse could it have gone for Banjo fans?

I think saying that it "flopped and killed classic Rare for years" is incorrect. Rare was going to make Kinect games no matter how well Banjo performed (see article here). As of 2011 the game was estimated to have sold around 700,000 copies. Not a best seller but not a disaster. Additionally, who knows how many digital sales it's achieved, it has over 28,000 reviews on the marketplace. At a lower price, sure.

In retrospect, this game is one of the few 360 games I still go back to play. Banjo is one of my favorite franchises of all time, and yes, this game is a bastardization of Banjo and the Banjo formula, but the game is also creative, beautiful, and fun as hell.

I believe Rare can return to its former glory. Bioware seems to be on the right track after several poor quality games. No reason Rare can't find there way back to the light as well.

 

[BKSmash]

I'll try to keep this thread updated with all the latest teases and smal news we get..

Spoiler

I'm too god damn invested in this..

 

[Steverulez]

Again, can't call it a Rare thread without shitposts like this one.

Its the token shit point. Because the people that worked at Rare and left were obviously the only talented people in the industry and now they're left with the shitty scraps.

 

[REMEMBER CITADEL]

My point was that Microsoft hasn't developed a reputation for servicing IP outside of Halo, Gears, Forza, and Fable. I loved all the diversity introduced by MS on 360 such as Lost Odyssey, Blue Dragon, Viva Piñata, Banjo, Kameo, and Perfect Dark, but they didn't stick with any of them. It's like a person you know who is trying new things, but you know them for their core characteristics and what they do. Microsoft tries lots of things, but commits to very few. They absolutely deserve the reputation they have for being a bro box because its those genres and IPs that they have persistently developed as part of their identity.

I think Spencer has a different mindset now, or at least his expressed admiration for how Nintendo services its IP, coupled with his goal to develop and reboot owned IP, leads me to believe there is hope they will stick with some IP outside of the four mainstays and truly broaden their portfolio.

It's definitely true that they could use more mainstay franchises (even though people are always clamoring for new IP), but it's not like Microsoft have only had those four series and a bunch of one-offs. They gave multiple franchises a fair chance, but the audience either outright rejected them or grew cold over time. Apart from their four main franchises (let's lump Forza Motorsport and Horizon together, even though they're pretty distinct), on consoles they've published:

• two Amped games
• two Fusion Frenzy games
• two Blinx games
• two MechAssault games
• two Rallisport Challenge games
• three Kingdom Under Fire games
• two Crackdown games, with the third one on the way
• four PGR games
• three Viva Pinata games
• a new Banjo game and a remaster of the first two titles
• a new Perfect Dark game and a remaster of the original
• two Alan Wake games
• two Scene It? games
• four Lips games, plus some regional releases
• three Kinect Sports games
• two seasons of Killer Instinct, plus remasters of the first two games
• some multiple-title XBLA series (it's hard to give an exact count considering that some of those would've likely been self-published providing that was an option)

The ones that were proven to be popular remained. Now, it can be argued whether they should have stuck with some of them for longer, and they've certainly made marketing and other mistakes when it comes to some of those titles, but it's not like they haven't been trying. I don't see how that's much different from what other platform holders are doing - all but the million+ selling franchises are commonly put on the back burner after one or at most a few entries. Regardless of the commitment to specific franchises, they've always had a diverse portfolio, so I maintain that the reputation of a bro box is unjustified (and frankly, I don't think that Xbox consoles have that reputation anymore, certainly not after Kinect).

 

[Yoshi]

They have only published two Viva Pinatas, the DS one was published by THQ, no? And I think mainstay franchises are necessary for an identification of the system with said franchise. Banjo for instance could very well be one that would broaden the appeal. Halo / Gears / Forza / Fable / Banjo / some random games reads way more friendly than Halo / Gears / Forza / Fable / a lot of random games for instance. Conker as a one-per-generation deal could also help a lot (and there should be enough material once in 6 years). In gameplay-oriented games, new franchises are not really all too important, playing the tenth Banjo couldn't be compared to playing the tenth Uncharted.

 

[Steverulez]

They have only published two Viva Pinatas, the DS one was published by THQ, no?

Only because THQ were licensed DS publishers and MS weren't... it was still a Microsoft game and IP, they just let THQ publish the spin off

 

[Riky]

Is it an epidemia, the need to blindly go into a Rare thread and shit on Rare? As a Rare- and Sonic-fan I feel extremely annoyed by these dumb drive-by-postings.

You see it every single Rare thread, it's as if these people believe that employees stay at one company for decades and nobody else can ever have any talent.

I can only think it's people still bitter about Microsoft owning the company.

 

[REMEMBER CITADEL]

They have only published two Viva Pinatas, the DS one was published by THQ, no?

Three, remember Viva Pinata: Party Animals? Yeah, not many people do.

 

[Yoshi]

Three, remember Viva Pinata: Party Animals? Yeah, not many people do.

Oh yes, sorry. I do remember it, I have played through it. I did not remember before you posted about it though .

 

[Salty Hippo]

I don't care how many Banjo hints they throw, it could mean fuck all. I'll believe it when I see it announced. And I won't hype it before making sure it's a proper platformer.

So many burns.

 

[The Flash]

I don't care how many Banjo hints they throw, it could mean fuck all. I'll believe it when I see it announced. And I won't hype it before making sure it's a proper platformer.

So many burns.

Everything about this appropriate.

 

[-MD-]

I don't care how many Banjo hints they throw, it could mean fuck all. I'll believe it when I see it announced. And I won't hype it before making sure it's a proper platformer.

So many burns.

Yep. I was such a big Rare fan before but they strung me along year after year for so long that I will not start to care until I see something happen.

Cryptic tweets and teases aren't gonna do it anymore when it comes to Rare.

 

[PanicFreak]

Perhaps, but more recently there was this.

Nice find

I always viewed it as a spin off within the IP. Like ODST and Horizon. It's using the big name brand to try and attract gamers to something new.

It's beyond heartbreaking the market rejected it. Such an incredible game. Still looks damn good for a mid generation 360 game too...

RARE's artstyle is timeless.

I support trying new things with IP and I think most gamers feel the same. The difference with Forza and Halo is that you know a mainline game is coming every few years. Banjo was gone for 8 years, with a fan base wanting a great platfomer and with certain expectations based on previous Banjo games. We got a game with Kazooie completely disabled and Mumbo as a mechanic (i.e. no transformations). Rare should have released a proper sequel before experimenting on it with new ideas that drastically changed the game.

I'm going to piggy-back off of Paco here a bit. With ODST and Horizon, the game mechanics stayed true to the mainline series. Halo is about shooting aliens in a large war to save humanity, same as ODST. Forza is about racing exotic cars, same with Horizon.

Nuts and Bolts is about building. I think it would have been better off as a new IP.

 

[Sydle]

It's definitely true that they could use more mainstay franchises (even though people are always clamoring for new IP), but it's not like Microsoft have only had those four series and a bunch of one-offs. They gave multiple franchises a fair chance, but the audience either outright rejected them or grew cold over time. Apart from their four main franchises (let's lump Forza Motorsport and Horizon together, even though they're pretty distinct), on consoles they've published:

• two Amped games
• two Fusion Frenzy games
• two Blinx games
• two MechAssault games
• two Rallisport Challenge games
• three Kingdom Under Fire games
• two Crackdown games, with the third one on the way
• four PGR games
• three Viva Pinata games
• a new Banjo game and a remaster of the first two titles
• a new Perfect Dark game and a remaster of the original
• two Alan Wake games
• two Scene It? games
• four Lips games, plus some regional releases
• three Kinect Sports games
• two seasons of Killer Instinct, plus remasters of the first two games
• some multiple-title XBLA series (it's hard to give an exact count considering that some of those would've likely been self-published providing that was an option)

The ones that were proven to be popular remained. Now, it can be argued whether they should have stuck with some of them for longer, and they've certainly made marketing and other mistakes when it comes to some of those titles, but it's not like they haven't been trying. I don't see how that's much different from what other platform holders are doing - all but the million+ selling franchises are commonly put on the back burner after one or at most a few entries. Regardless of the commitment to specific franchises, they've always had a diverse portfolio, so I maintain that the reputation of a bro box is unjustified (and frankly, I don't think that Xbox consoles have that reputation anymore, certainly not after Kinect).

They put a lot of development and marketing muscle behind their mainstay IP/genres and they have from day one on each of them. I didn't see the same kind of push for their other IP/genres.

Some of those games you listed were not afforded time like Crackdown 2, some were sent to die amongst huge releases (PGR 4, Alan Wake), stuff from Rare was poorly promoted, JRPG support died off, et al. Then it seemed like as the years went by they stopped trying for certain genres all together. The games from Rare and Mistwalker weren't rejected, I think the audiences for them were just warming up to the idea they could get good games like those on Xbox.

I know the sharp turn towards Kinect and blockbuster's only is Mattrick's fault, but that doesn't change how I feel about the brand. I believe Spencer will change it.

My hope is that this time some of the IP on the frontline of that effort to broaden the portfolio (again) are afforded the same muscle that something like Halo, Forza, and Gears are afforded. I especially want to see Banjo make it as a franchise, because it would likely mean we could count on more games such as Viva Piñata, Max and The Curse of Brotherhood, Ori and the Blind Forest, etc. and that those types of games can finally stand a chance at really thriving on the Xbox platform.

Nice find






I'm going to piggy-back off of Paco here a bit. With ODST and Horizon, the game mechanics stayed true to the mainline series. Halo is about shooting aliens in a large war to save humanity, same as ODST. Forza is about racing exotic cars, same with Horizon.

Nuts and Bolts is about building. I think it would have been better off as a new IP.

As much as I enjoyed N&B, I believe Banjo held back the concept. I can't help but imagine a big virtual Lego sandbox where I could build all types of objects and contraptions. It really should have been a new IP.

 

[Lakitu]

Is there a chance this'll be at E3?

 

[Steverulez]

Is there a chance this'll be at E3?

I think it is a guarantee that Rare will be at E3 with at least 1 game, if it even takes that long

 

[Yoshi]

I think it is a guarantee that Rare will be at E3 with at least 1 game, if it even takes that long

But when before E3 should they present the game, there's no big trade fair before and Microsoft does not have "Nintendo Directs", or do I forget about something?

 

[Steverulez]

But when before E3 should they present the game, there's no big trade fair before and Microsoft does not have "Nintendo Directs", or do I forget about something?

Well, I'm not sure what to expect from this Windows 10 event in a few weeks. Phil Spencer has said there will be stuff there for PC and Xbox gamers, I wouldnt be shocked if there was some sort of montage/tease for something.

They could easily announce something via IGN First, Game Informer or some other magazine. It is unlikely we'll hear from it before but I don't think its impossible, it depends how soon the game is due out and what else they have to show at E3, I would guess.

 

[REMEMBER CITADEL]

Some of those games you listed were not afforded time like Crackdown 2, some were sent to die amongst huge releases (PGR 4, Alan Wake), stuff from Rare was poorly promoted, JRPG support died off, et al. Then it seemed like as the years went by they stopped trying for certain genres all together. The games from Rare and Mistwalker weren't rejected, I think the audiences for them were just warming up to the idea they could get good games like those on Xbox.

Crackdown 2 and PGR 4 were mishandled, and so were Banjo, Trouble in Paradise and Shadowrun. Alan Wake wasn't, they supported its development for years, they promoted it with an original web series, they aired commercials for it in movie theaters. Alan Wake was not sent to die, but Rockstar screwed them over by changing RDR's release date. What were they suppose to do, delay Alan Wake again? No, that would have been terrible, and would've demonstrated a clear lack of confidence. After the lukewarm reception at launch, they did a lot to keep it in the limelight: they made it a part of their main holiday 2010 bundle, they allowed its release on PC, and they gave it another chance with American Nightmare. But nothing worked until the ridiculous Steam sales, and I really hope that we'll see Alan again.

Rare's games prior to Banjo and Paradise were not poorly promoted either. Perfect Dark Zero and Kameo enjoyed their time in the spotlight as two of their three launch titles. Microsoft were even commended by Rare for having the guts to launch the system with an all-ages title like Kameo. Viva Pinata was being pushed pretty hard as well: they promoted it with a tour that featured giant pinatas, among other things, they put the series on NDS and PC to give it more exposure, and they even gave it its own children's TV show. Yet again it received strong post-launch support through extensive bundling, a spin-off, and a sequel, but to no avail.

And JRPGs? They gave those more than a fair shake with (then) exclusive Enchanted Arms, Blue Dragon, Lost Odyssey, Vesperia, Star Ocean, Infinite Undiscovery, The Last Remnant, Kingdom Under Fire: Circle of Doom and MagnaCarta 2, last gen exclusive versions of Final Fantasy XI and Phantasy Star Universe, a bunch of smaller titles, some of which never got out of Japan, and plenty of multiplatform releases, including the giant that was (well, should have been) Final Fantasy XIII. When exactly do you think the audience would have finally warmed up to them?

No, sorry, I just can't see eye to eye with you on this.

 

[MCN]

As much as I enjoyed N&B, I believe Banjo held back the concept. I can't help but imagine a big virtual Lego sandbox where I could build all types of objects and contraptions. It really should have been a new IP.

Sounds like a plan for Minecraft 2.

 

[Nexus Arcade]

Given their streak... it's not really that exciting.

 

[Sydle]

Crackdown 2 and PGR 4 were mishandled, and so were Banjo, Trouble in Paradise and Shadowrun. Alan Wake wasn't, they supported its development for years, they promoted it with an original web series, they aired commercials for it in movie theaters. Alan Wake was not sent to die, but Rockstar screwed them over by changing RDR's release date. What were they suppose to do, delay Alan Wake again? No, that would have been terrible, and would've demonstrated a clear lack of confidence. After the lukewarm reception at launch, they did a lot to keep it in the limelight: they made it a part of their main holiday 2010 bundle, they allowed its release on PC, and they gave it another chance with American Nightmare. But nothing worked until the ridiculous Steam sales, and I really hope that we'll see Alan again.

Rare's games prior to Banjo and Paradise were not poorly promoted either. Perfect Dark Zero and Kameo enjoyed their time in the spotlight as two of their three launch titles. Microsoft were even commended by Rare for having the guts to launch the system with an all-ages title like Kameo. Viva Pinata was being pushed pretty hard as well: they promoted it with a tour that featured giant pinatas, among other things, they put the series on NDS and PC to give it more exposure, and they even gave it its own children's TV show. Yet again it received strong post-launch support through extensive bundling, a spin-off, and a sequel, but to no avail.

And JRPGs? They gave those more than a fair shake with (then) exclusive Enchanted Arms, Blue Dragon, Lost Odyssey, Vesperia, Star Ocean, Infinite Undiscovery, The Last Remnant, Kingdom Under Fire: Circle of Doom and MagnaCarta 2, last gen exclusive versions of Final Fantasy XI and Phantasy Star Universe, a bunch of smaller titles, some of which never got out of Japan, and plenty of multiplatform releases, including the giant that was (well, should have been) Final Fantasy XIII. When exactly do you think the audience would have finally warmed up to them?

No, sorry, I just can't see eye to eye with you on this.

Outside of the previews over the years, the only thing I ever saw around Alan Wake was the mini Web-isode series (which was great). I don't remember any TV advertising for it. Nothing on the magnitude of those Halo or Gears ads. I just watched the awful movie theater ad that looks like a TV show. Alan Wake was a slow seller, but it has a lot of fans now. There should have been a sequel. I really hope MS gets behind Quantum Break and commits to the proposed trilogy.

IIRC, Rare said Viva Pinata exceed their own sales expectations and was profitable. Pretty sure they said Kameo was profitable and it shows up on a lot of favorite 360 game lists. Both games had good design behind them and there is a lot that could be done with them. They should not have been shelved by MS.

They tried JRPGs and couple of them were well met critically. Lost Odyssey actually ended up being a favorite of the entire generation for quite a few people. Again, great game design from a promising developer that could have been tweaked in a sequel or a new IP, but no, MS gave up all together.

It's fine if we disagree. My point still stands that Microsoft needs to put some Gears-size muscle behind games like Banjo, Viva Pinata, Ori, and the like to build that audience up.

 

[Silky]

Viva Pinata was incredibly popular to the point where it got its own TV show.

 

[Surface of Me]

Outside of the previews over the years, the only thing I ever saw around Alan Wake was the mini Web-isode series (which was great). I don't remember any TV advertising for it. Nothing on the magnitude of those Halo or Gears ads. I just watched the awful movie theater ad that looks like a TV show. Alan Wake was a slow seller, but it has a lot of fans now. There should have been a sequel. I really hope MS gets behind Quantum Break and commits to the proposed trilogy.

IIRC, Rare said Viva Pinata exceed their own sales expectations and was profitable. Pretty sure they said Kameo was profitable and it shows up on a lot of favorite 360 game lists. Both games had good design behind them and there is a lot that could be done with them. They should not have been shelved by MS.

They tried JRPGs and couple of them were well met critically. Lost Odyssey actually ended up being a favorite of the entire generation for quite a few people. Again, great game design from a promising developer that could have been tweaked in a sequel or a new IP, but no, MS gave up all together.

It's fine if we disagree. My point still stands that Microsoft needs to put some Gears-size muscle behind games like Banjo, Viva Pinata, Ori, and the like to build that audience up.

It doesn't matter if you were aware or not, Alan Wake did have a lot of push from MS.

 

[A.D. Skinner]

Viva Pinata is totally where Microsoft could get a Skulander/Amiibo fix.

 

[Gonzo The Great]

Viva Pinata was incredibly popular to the point where it got its own TV show.

The TV show actually came out before the game, so no. They expected it to be the next Pokémon, and it failed miserably.

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

Viva Pinata was incredibly popular to the point where it got its own TV show.

I dont' think VP got a TV Show as a result of it's game popularity. It got the TV Show effectively as a marketing exercise, a la Sonic Boom.

 

[REMEMBER CITADEL]

Viva Pinata is totally where Microsoft could get a Skulander/Amiibo fix.

Oh please no! I don't want to see this nonsense happen to games that I want to play. I don't want to collect toys, I have no use (nor room) for yet more clutter. It really puzzles me, this trend. People tend to complain a lot about locking parts of games behind DLC paywalls, yet there doesn't seem to be must resistance toward locking parts of game functionality behind physical figurines.