Dash Kappei
Not actually that important
Nvm
Out of mercy, if Micro$oft has a heart.So how/why did MS allow Rare to make GBA and DS games?
This is why it happened, in truth. The Stamper Brothers wanted out of video games period and wanted to sell up. They went to Nintendo and said this, and their asking price was far more than Nintendo was willing to pay.
Nintendo only owned 49% of Rare, so if one buyer was willing to purchase the Stamper 51%, their status as a (generally) Nintendo-only developer would be threatened. Because Nintendo wasn't willing to pay the price the Stampers asked for, Nintendo decided to sell their half as well.
Microsoft bought the lot - 49% off Nintendo and 51% off the Stampers. EA and Activision were both mooted for it at the time as well, initially when the Stampers were just selling 51% - but in that situation those publishers probably would've wanted games on more than Nintendo systems, and it would've been a fight with Nintendo still owning just under half - so that's why Nintendo sold.
I think had the Stampers not wanted to move on, Rare would still be with Nintendo to this day.
Remember this?
It gives a good idea of their (prior) success (data as of Jan 2007)
Blue=SNES
Yellow=GB
Green=N64
Pink=GBC
Purple=GC
Aquamarine=GBA
Lime green=XB/360
Silver=DS
Shouldn't the pink "Mickey's Speedway USA" be "Mickey's Racing Adventure"?
I thought Blast Corps for N64 was the fucking shit.
No, there were two GBC Mickey racing games.
Anyway, ideally, I think that Dinosaur Planet should have been left as an N64 game. In the US Nintendo gave up on the N64 (ie, stopped releasing first-party games for it) about six months before the Gamecube released, and I think that that was a mistake. They should have released a few more games for it, in the US particularly, including Dinosaur Planet, Sin & Punishment, and Animal Forest (Crossing).
Why did the Stampers want to move on from videogames so bad? Their company was producing some quality titles, they obviously were very skilled at what they did.
The fact that their company was locked in producing games for Nintendo probably played a big part; at the time of them selling Rare was essentially carrying the N64 by themselves, and the landscape for the Gamecube looked barely better.
The fact that their company was locked in producing games for Nintendo probably played a big part; at the time of them selling Rare was essentially carrying the N64 by themselves, and the landscape for the Gamecube looked barely better.
what?? what made up fantasy land did you pull this from?
the stampers were looking to retire. period. that's why they sold their shares.
retire and get even more filthy rich. it's pretty simple.
they stuck around a little bit longer in the buyout just to oversee the transition. then they left.
as for the original question; nintendo sold their 49% share because another hardware manufacturer came to own 51% of the same company. it didn't make sense to keep their 49%, so they made like bank robbers and sold their share for a ridiculous sum.
it's that simply, guys. no 'ulterior motives'. no fanboy 'backstabbing'. no 'stealing our games!!1" bullshit. it was simple business.
you are my rival. you now own more of a company i've worked closely with for years. This will jeopardise exclusivity to my products. here, by my share and let's call it a day.
what?? what made up fantasy land did you pull this from?
the stampers were looking to retire. period. that's why they sold their shares.
retire and get even more filthy rich. it's pretty simple.
they stuck around a little bit longer in the buyout just to oversee the transition. then they left.
as for the original question; nintendo sold their 49% share because another hardware manufacturer came to own 51% of the same company. it didn't make sense to keep their 49%, so they made like bank robbers and sold their share for a ridiculous sum.
it's that simply, guys. no 'ulterior motives'. no fanboy 'backstabbing'. no 'stealing our games!!1" bullshit. it was simple business.
you are my rival. you now own more of a company i've worked closely with for years. This will jeopardise exclusivity to my products. here, by my share and let's call it a day.
Remember this?
It gives a good idea of their (prior) success (data as of Jan 2007)
Blue=SNES
Yellow=GB
Green=N64
Pink=GBC
Purple=GC
Aquamarine=GBA
Lime green=XB/360
Silver=DS
Why did the Stampers want to move on from videogames so bad? Their company was producing some quality titles, they obviously were very skilled at what they did.
Want to know something painful? Nintendo actually owned all of Rare's IPs (the ones created while they were together). If you're aware of some games that claimed to be owned by Rare, those are really just a lie. Nintendo owned a completely different company that was also called Rare, and that company owned any Rare IP that wasn't owned by Nintendo directly.Ah. Sort of sucks that Nintendo let go of Rare's ips like that. I mean the talent were leaving, but they still had quite a bit of people when MS took over. Would have been nice if Nintendo secured an IP or two. I mean, MS sure ain't doing shit with them.
goldeneye sold 8.09 millions globaly:
North America: 5.80m 71.7%
+ Europe: 2.01m 24.8%
+ Japan: 0.13m 1.6%
+ Rest of the World: 0.15m 1.8%
= Global
Poor Blast Corps. That game was awesome. Europe's numbers are even more horrible.
Total Units
North America: 0.39m 55.2%
+ Europe: 0.09m 12.9%
+ Japan: 0.17m 24.1%
+ Rest of the World: 0.06m 7.8%
= Global 0.71m
When Rare became a "second party", Nintendo initially only bought around 10% of the company, not 49%. Every time the Stampers needed more money, they sold a few more percentage points to Nintendo. Eventually the Stampers ended up having sold 49%.
The Stampers needed another hit of cash, but they didn't want to sell 2% of the company and become "minority shareholders" in a company that was not owned by them. Rare's stock price was at an all-time high, so they decided it was time to cash out.
Nintendo had been willing to spend a few thousand here, a few thousand there, but they weren't willing to spend $500 million all-at-once. They would rather gain $500 million all-at-once. Nintendo asked the Stampers to find a new buyer.
Microsoft was willing to buy, but they didn't want to become partners with Nintendo, so Nintendo sold their 49% back to the Stampers on credit, and the Stampers sold the whole thing to Microsoft.
Want to know something painful? Nintendo actually owned all of Rare's IPs (the ones created while they were together). If you're aware of some games that claimed to be owned by Rare, those are really just a lie. Nintendo owned a completely different company that was also called Rare, and that company owned any Rare IP that wasn't owned by Nintendo directly.
When Rare was packing up to leave, Nintendo sold them a rights package containing some specific IPs that the Stampers wanted to own. NOA did this because Arakawa/Lincoln and the Stampers are buddies. That's why, for example, Nintendo owns Krystal (a character Rare created for a Starfox game), while Rare owns Conker (a character Rare created for a Donkey Kong game). There was no ruleset for the divorce, NOA and Rare just worked it out like gentlemen.
That's why they remained close enough to work on handheld games.
Nintendo wasn't concerned with Rare's output at the beginning of the gen. Their output dropped near the end, and their returns on games weren't worth the long development times. Conker in particular was a massive bomb relative to how long it took to make.
Massive bomb? It sold close to a million with hardly any marketing because Nintendo refused to market it. If it didn't meet Nintendo's sales expectations, then it's no one's fault but their own. Plus, Nintendo wouldn't even publish it in Europe. Rare had to reach out to THQ for that.
Massive bomb? It sold close to a million with hardly any marketing because Nintendo refused to market it. If it didn't meet Nintendo's sales expectations, then it's no one's fault but their own. Plus, Nintendo wouldn't even publish it in Europe. Rare had to reach out to THQ for that.
Damn. This is absolutely fascinating.
Where is Banjo-Kazooie Gruntys Revenge?Remember this?
It gives a good idea of their (prior) success (data as of Jan 2007)
Blue=SNES
Yellow=GB
Green=N64
Pink=GBC
Purple=GC
Aquamarine=GBA
Lime green=XB/360
Silver=DS
When Rare became a "second party", Nintendo initially only bought around 10% of the company, not 49%. Every time the Stampers needed more money, they sold a few more percentage points to Nintendo. Eventually the Stampers ended up having sold 49%.
The Stampers needed another hit of cash, but they didn't want to sell 2% of the company and become "minority shareholders" in a company that was not owned by them. Rare's stock price was at an all-time high, so they decided it was time to cash out.
Nintendo had been willing to spend a few thousand here, a few thousand there, but they weren't willing to spend $500 million all-at-once. They would rather gain $500 million all-at-once. Nintendo asked the Stampers to find a new buyer.
Microsoft was willing to buy, but they didn't want to become partners with Nintendo, so Nintendo sold their 49% back to the Stampers on credit, and the Stampers sold the whole thing to Microsoft.
Want to know something painful? Nintendo actually owned all of Rare's IPs (the ones created while they were together). If you're aware of some games that claimed to be owned by Rare, those are really just a lie. Nintendo owned a completely different company that was also called Rare, and that company owned any Rare IP that wasn't owned by Nintendo directly.
When Rare was packing up to leave, Nintendo sold them a rights package containing some specific IPs that the Stampers wanted to own. NOA did this because Arakawa/Lincoln and the Stampers are buddies. That's why, for example, Nintendo owns Krystal (a character Rare created for a Starfox game), while Rare owns Conker (a character Rare created for a Donkey Kong game). There was no ruleset for the divorce, NOA and Rare just worked it out like gentlemen.
That's why they remained close enough to work on handheld games.
Poor Blast Corps. That game was awesome. Europe's numbers are even more horrible.
Total Units
North America: 0.39m 55.2%
+ Europe: 0.09m 12.9%
+ Japan: 0.17m 24.1%
+ Rest of the World: 0.06m 7.8%
= Global 0.71m
Remember this?
It gives a good idea of their (prior) success (data as of Jan 2007)
I think MS overpayed, and Nintendo knew that, that is why they let them go.
It pains me to see that by then Kameo only sold 270.000 copies.
Such a wonderful game.
I've read this before too. I wish Ninty kept BanjoI read once that iwata wanted to keep the banjo ip at the time. But i dont know if that is true...
I think the deciding factor was that Chris Stamper, Tim Stamper, Howard Lincoln and Minoru Arakawa were all leaving at pretty much the same time and Iwata was just taking control. Rare was less it's leadership team and its two biggest supporters at NOA and NCL was also transitioning its leadership.
When Rare became a "second party", Nintendo initially only bought around 10% of the company, not 49%. Every time the Stampers needed more money, they sold a few more percentage points to Nintendo. Eventually the Stampers ended up having sold 49%.
The Stampers needed another hit of cash, but they didn't want to sell 2% of the company and become "minority shareholders" in a company that was not owned by them. Rare's stock price was at an all-time high, so they decided it was time to cash out.
Nintendo had been willing to spend a few thousand here, a few thousand there, but they weren't willing to spend $500 million all-at-once. They would rather gain $500 million all-at-once. Nintendo asked the Stampers to find a new buyer.
Microsoft was willing to buy, but they didn't want to become partners with Nintendo, so Nintendo sold their 49% back to the Stampers on credit, and the Stampers sold the whole thing to Microsoft.
Want to know something painful? Nintendo actually owned all of Rare's IPs (the ones created while they were together). If you're aware of some games that claimed to be owned by Rare, those are really just a lie. Nintendo owned a completely different company that was also called Rare, and that company owned any Rare IP that wasn't owned by Nintendo directly.
When Rare was packing up to leave, Nintendo sold them a rights package containing some specific IPs that the Stampers wanted to own. NOA did this because Arakawa/Lincoln and the Stampers are buddies. That's why, for example, Nintendo owns Krystal (a character Rare created for a Starfox game), while Rare owns Conker (a character Rare created for a Donkey Kong game). There was no ruleset for the divorce, NOA and Rare just worked it out like gentlemen.
That's why they remained close enough to work on handheld games.
really cool stuff, but do you have a source on this?Want to know something painful? Nintendo actually owned all of Rare's IPs (the ones created while they were together). If you're aware of some games that claimed to be owned by Rare, those are really just a lie. Nintendo owned a completely different company that was also called Rare, and that company owned any Rare IP that wasn't owned by Nintendo directly.
When Rare was packing up to leave, Nintendo sold them a rights package containing some specific IPs that the Stampers wanted to own. NOA did this because Arakawa/Lincoln and the Stampers are buddies. That's why, for example, Nintendo owns Krystal (a character Rare created for a Starfox game), while Rare owns Conker (a character Rare created for a Donkey Kong game). There was no ruleset for the divorce, NOA and Rare just worked it out like gentlemen.
That's why they remained close enough to work on handheld games.
I've read this before too. I wish Ninty kept Banjo