Viva Pinata was a poorly designed game from start to finish. Not because the game itself was bad, but because the way it was conceptualised and positioned from the very beginning screamed "We don't want to do this."
I mean, this is how Viva Pinata went down:
MS execs: "So Rare, we're trying to grow the family/children audience of the 360. We know you're good at making games with bright and colourful graphics, please make us a game."
Rare exec: "Ok. So here's our idea. We're going to make a game with funny characters and really beautiful, bright, vivid graphics. It'll look great."
MS execs: "Ok, so what type of game is it?"
Rare execs: "Oh, it's a really deep gardening simulator."
MS execs: "Sounds great! Because if there's one thing kids love, it's gardening simulators!"
So, not only was the whole thing wrong from the beginning, the actual design of the interface was woeful. I mean, for its intended audience. I struggled to come to grips with that game after 5 hours and all the options. And I'm 21. 6-10 would have no damn clue. That game, funnily enough, was in desperate need of Nintendo to come in, create a better interface and simplify it a bit.
I also contend that Rare was never really a good choice to develop 'expanded audience' games. Their highest selling game was Goldeneye.
( I want an adventure!