Could Nintendo possibly want the rights back to Rare's franchises?

Now, recently (started about a month ago) there's a rumor going round that Nintendo may be trying to buy back Rareware. I think very much they wouldn't want to buy them back, 1 because it wouldn't make sense and 2 all the talent from Rare has been sucked dry. But what about their franchises?

Link

The rumor even goes as far to say that Retro is currently working on something Rareware related, which seems to clash with all the Star Fox talk.

In any case, the only reason I even start to think this could really be, is that former employee's of Rare have been speaking about this or that, like Nintendo's views on Conker or what Rare really wanted to work on despite Microsofts iron fisted rule (Even though it's obvious they wouldn't want to work on what MS wanted).

It's only a very, very slim chance, but every part of me wishes this were true. Rumors like this have been around Since Rare's departure, but anything can happen.

I guess it would be a great idea since it gives Nintendo the rights to include Rare's games to the Virtual Console. Other than that? Meh...I only see Killer Instinct being an important asset.

1. Nintendo doesn't have the money

2. Microsoft wont allow it's own properties to decrease in value

3. Microsoft doesn't need the money

1. Nintendo doesn't have the money

2. Microsoft wont allow it's own properties to decrease in value

3. Microsoft doesn't need the money

Jaysonguy

1. They're rolling in it. And keep in mind, they wouldn't be buying the studio, just their franchise rights specifically for the classics through the 64 days.

2. Rights which MS won't use in any worthwhile way that will get them significantly more money. The only thing i've seen lately is Banjo in Sega racing. Rare's a Kinect and avatar studio.

3. All giants love money!

1. Nintendo doesn't have the money

2. Microsoft wont allow it's own properties to decrease in value

3. Microsoft doesn't need the money

Jaysonguy

They could definitely afford to buy the IPs. Nintendo could work wonders with Rare's old franchises. Perfect Dark on Wii U has the potential to be amazing with the tablet, and I can only imagine the voodoo magic Retro Studios could work on Banjo Kazooie. Whether it WILL happen(or already has), who knows, but I hope it does.

lol microsoft loves money!

and dont say nintendo dont have enough , they are rolling in profits from even the gc era!

so dont even go there and the wii made gc look like a dreamcast in terms of sales if any ones got money its nintendo , and since ms loves the money theyll probably easily sell at least one or two of their franchises they have 0 use for - perfect dark being the first canidate because they have 2 fpses already -halo and gears ,

its easy to see why perfect dark 2 on the u would be great , another is banjo kazooie

Doesn't nintendo own a piece of the rare games, anyways?Heirren

[QUOTE="Heirren"]Doesn't nintendo own a piece of the rare games, anyways?Sepewrath

^this easily. There is really nothing for them to gain out of getting those franchises back at this point.

why would nintendo do that , they have mario , zelda , pikmin , even donkeykong , why would they need rare's dead IPs that anyone can barely remember?

Give me Banjo Threeie, Rare! I will gladly buy an Xbox 360 if you don't go back to Nintendo, JUST to play it!

While I wish it could be true theres no way I could see this happening.

DK is probably the only important franchise to Nintendo and Retro showed that it is still possible to make a superb game excluding the crocs and beavers - even though I wish this didn't have to be the case *sniffles*

What I don't understand about this licensing issue is in the game Mario supersluggers we saw most of the cast from the DCK games. It confuses me why they are able to be used there. Could they have used them if they had not gone under the name Donkey Kong Country Returs? Or can Nintendo still use them but 3rd parties can't? Whats the deal.

While I wish it could be true theres no way I could see this happening.

DK is probably the only important franchise to Nintendo and Retro showed that it is still possible to make a superb game excluding the crocs and beavers - even though I wish this didn't have to be the case *sniffles*

What I don't understand about this licensing issue is in the game Mario supersluggers we saw most of the cast from the DCK games. It confuses me why they are able to be used there. Could they have used them if they had not gone under the name Donkey Kong Country Returs? Or can Nintendo still use them but 3rd parties can't? Whats the deal.

knuckl3head

Huh?

Donkey Kong is Nintendo's, they've always owned it.

The only reason Nintendo doesn't make games with Donkey Kong is because they don't want to.

Huh?

Donkey Kong is Nintendo's, they've always owned it.

The only reason Nintendo doesn't make games with Donkey Kong is because they don't want to.

Jaysonguy

I'm not talking about DK himself, I'm talking about the villain cast in the DKC series. I thought they couldn't use King K. Rool and the kremlings in the DKC Returns game because they were licensed to rare. My question is why are they allowable and playable characters in the game Mario Super Sluggers then? What allows them to be in that game and not the other?

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

Huh?

Donkey Kong is Nintendo's, they've always owned it.

The only reason Nintendo doesn't make games with Donkey Kong is because they don't want to.

knuckl3head

I'm not talking about DK himself, I'm talking about the villain cast in the DKC series. I thought they couldn't use King K. Rool and the kremlings in the DKC Returns game because they were licensed to rare. My question is why are they allowable and playable characters in the game Mario Super Sluggers then? What allows them to be in that game and not the other?

[QUOTE="Heirren"]Doesn't nintendo own a piece of the rare games, anyways?Sepewrath

I so agree with what this discussion is saying, Nintendo should buy back Rare and the franchises we love back from Microsoft.

Please, don't bump old threads.