TheCrapgamer of GamerXchange.net writes:
Game developers Rare have been in the news quite a bit lately and I always click to see what they have to say, after all I grew up playing Rare made games on Nintendo platforms back in the day. When the original Xbox was out and Microsoft started acquiring studios I never thought they would purchase one of my all time favorite studios, yet in 2002 that is exactly what happened. Not only did Microsoft pay $375 million for the company itself, they also acquired the rights to all of Rare’s original intellectual properties. I was very excited to see what Rare could do with backing from Microsoft, to date I have not been disappointed, but there seems to be a backlog of anger from Nintendo fans or just non Microsoft fans that try to demean what Rare has done thus far at Microsoft.
Rival companies, including Sony and Ubisoft, are being good sports by congratulating Nintendo on Zelda: Tears Of The Kingdom's launch.
Well deserved and how AAA is done. 96 meta score...please be inspired other AAA companies lol.
I'm having a blast with this game. I love the fact that you can add different things to your sword and shield
While Sony doesn't have 96+ metascore game other than UC2, they are much more consistent in releasing 90+ metascore games than Nintendo.
Individual studio wise Rockstar beats any other studio though in releasing 95-96+ meta games.
@sadraiden
Metroid Dread was a bit disappointing to me those robot chases got old after the first one. Well made game but the robots were tedious more than fun and it ruined the game for me.
The rest of the game was really good but the robots played such a big part unfortunately.
Dread was fitting name when I saw them I dreaded another stupid robot to take down.
It’s like the weapon breaking in Zelda. Tedious.
Mario’s for my kids and Zelda for me.
I like games like Fire Emblem and Xenoblade.
Hopefully they make a mature RPG someday but Nintendo doesn’t do many new IP especially geared towards adults but I can hope. I want Sony to do the same thing
The 96 is because it has Zelda in the title and made by Nintendo.
I played 20 hours yesterday, and this is no way near 96 for ME. Journalists are to scared to judge games for what they are.
If another AAA game was missing voice acting, had long loading screens, up to 30 fps, non compelling story, annoying controls during puzzles, a unnecessary complicated way to go through your weapons and what to combine etc, that game would've been slaughtered.
Not gonna take anything away for TotK, it's a great game, but journalist are to scared to actually talk about what doesn't make it perfect, even if they give a perfect score.
So far for me, a strong 8, a little bit better than BotW, mainly due to what crazy combinations you can play around with.
You played 20 hours yesterday? That’s impressive for a game to keep you glued to a screen for 20 hours in a day. But don’t forget to take care of your health.
There’s several Zelda titles that had scored much lower. Most of the 2D / top down zelda games says hi. And Skyward Sword.
I agree, have the same feeling.
If games on the other consoles has some of what was present or lack of in TotK, I'm sure it would be marked down. Just the muddy texture in some area/jaggy lines/shimmering would be points deducted.
But some how TotK seems to be immune to these technical issues and lack of extras.
Seems like a two tier scoring system. iI's a great game but if it's technical flawed, so score accordingly.
These kind of action by game journalists (cough), just makes people trust them less. Granted most people fear a raging fan mob!!
"I played 20 hours yesterday, and this is no way near 96 for ME. Journalists are to scared to judge games for what they are."
So it sounds like you establish this is your opinion, then proceed to say journalists are not being honest (i.e., a 96 is not real based on your time with it). By the way, I really don't understand why people make this distinction between scores like 96 and 88. Both are extremely good scores and the point is that they are great games and highly recommended.
"If another AAA game was missing voice acting, had long loading screens, up to 30 fps, non compelling story, annoying controls during puzzles, a unnecessary complicated way to go through your weapons and what to combine etc, that game would've been slaughtered."
Okay....I have strong disagreements here. First, VA is not "missing". That would mean it was fully intended to have it and it launched without it. Second, I find it interesting that anyone would say any other game would be slaughtered for long loading screens, frame rates up to 30fps, or non-compelling story, when you have examples of games with that criteria doing exceptionally well. Metal Gear Solid 4 was excellent, but you literally had to install on a chapter by chapter basis (which, by the way, it is well known reviewers were not allowed to talk about it—no such restrictions for TotK). Demon's Souls actually had long loading times AND frequently ran sub-30fps and barely missed 90+ aggregate score. Then, of course, we cannot disregard Shadow of the Colossus. All phenomenal experiences, but would you be inclined to say they do not deserve their acclaim?
Regarding narrative, I genuinely hate how gamers feel that story is a necessity in modern gaming. Maybe I'm old, but I don't see why that's needed in a game. It can help with making sense of your actions in a game and give a sense of purpose and immersion, but really, that's not a must for game enjoyment. I'd go as far as to say I don't find it necessary in reviews.
Controls and complicated weapon mechanics are fair criticisms. The other stuff I don't agree with.
Play it longer than 20hrs. I get it, you are a busy family man, you don't have 40-60hrs to get "into the zone", but some games just need it. Just like some book series' and tomes of the past. Heck, some albums take 5-6 listen throughs to get the jist of it (especially classic Jazz or Classical music albums). It's just as is.
Zelda TotK is incredible, there's no denying it. Personally, I find the sound design and music the most impressive aspect of the whole thing. Second comes the creativity. Third all of those things the reviews write about it, game systems, story, puzzles and other "game stuff". I like the "art" stuff the most.
And that brought them to 100+ million plus Switch sales. I’m sure Nintendo is crying over having only 100+ million fan.
Of course they aren't. That's why they make the same games with minimal effort because they know you all will buy it with no resistance. They even charge $70 even though it's last gen.
TheEnigma313,
"Of course they aren't. That's why they make the same games with minimal effort because they know you all will buy it with no resistance. They even charge $70 even though it's last gen."
¿Que?
Please explain what you mean by minimal effort. Last I checked, their games run very well. The most recent Pokemon is the only exception to this that I can think of.
What do you mean same games? Same franchises? Some play in a very familiar way and some are even remakes, but it's amazing to see anyone complain about Nintendo making "the same games", yet remakes and sequels dominate the industry where mechanics that work aren't overtly revised. Why should they be if they work? To Nintendo's credit, I would say they do the most to change their games between entries. Splatoon feels largely stagnant, as does Pokemon, however.
Then you've got the bloody argument of Nintendo charging $70 for last gen. I think it's BS for them to charge $70 now—they're basically doing what Activision did with MW2: "because we can and you'll buy it anyway." The problem I have with this argument is that I swear to God it is impossible for haters to decide what generation Switch is. When Switch outpaces PS4/Xbox One, the argument was that Wii U was competing with gen 8 and Switch is gen 9. Now, you argue that Nintendo is charging $70 for a last gen game? Can we get a little consistency from you lot? Pick a lane and stay in it, please.
Plenty of reasons to go after Nintendo. Plenty. This just feels like nonsense.
"same games with minimal effort"
I'm pretty sure they would had ran these franchises into the ground already if that was true, but it's not and that's why their IPs continue to sale.
The same game? Have you honestly played it yet? There is a huge world on the sky and in the underground, along side the normal map from BOTW but with so many changes as well.
And why wouldn’t people pay $70 for a 96% Metacritic game? Or would they rather pay $70 for a “next gen” game like Redfall instead?
How this is a totally new game the IP might be old but realistically it's only the character names that link this game with the 80s and 90s Zelda games.
That's like saying you'd hate to see another Spyro
funny you said that when you talked about sea of thieves and Everwild on your profile. but want to play like you didn't know they've still around . you played yourself
@mjchitown I think you’re the only that played yourself. Lol He obviously knows they’re still around. He just said that because he’s sarcastically calling them irrelevant. Which they’re, compared to what they used to be.
Mjchitown,
Gotta learn a little sarcasm buddy. Read hofs post again a little slower
I own both PS5 and Switch and I am really enjoying BOTW for the moment so I am not ready for Tears of the Kingdom, but I'll get it eventually.
It's a quality game and I wish Nintendo were a cross platform developer and not a hardware specific one. as can you imagine this on series x or Ps5. Just look at the ue5 stuff people have done, hope there next hardware is extraordinary.
It's been a few years since we last heard from Rare about its new IP Everwild, but executive producer Louise O'Connor says the team is looking to "warm up... for our year ahead.
I feel like its been 10 years since they announced everwild...I wonder if they've figured out what the game will actually be yet lol.
Good to know it's still in development but weird we know nothing about it years from when it was announced.
Hopefully will see it at e3 this yr.
Don't worry, when we all died our grand kids will get to see this game reveal with a teaser trailer.
Kotaku: “It's been 20 years since British developer Rare was acquired by Microsoft. Join us as we have a look at what those 20 years have brought.”
Pretty sad Rare an industry leader at one point, and the best game they've made in 20 years is Viva pinata.
Viva Pinata is actually a really good game, too.
The problem is MS and everyone else thought the best thing to do was make sequels and remakes of existing IP’s, but the studio itself wanted to make new ones. I still maintain if Nuts and Bolts wasnt a Banjo game, it would’ve been a modern classic.
At least Sea of Thieves turned around and became a success.
Totally agree about nuts and bolts. Banjo was never really my thing, but I absolutely loved nuts and bolts
@bathy
Rare became a shell of itself shortly after the acquisition as all those legendary developers left the company for other studios. No freedom no motivation to create greater new thing 🤷🏿
Wait I thought killer instinct was made by rare and they didn’t mentioned it on the article 🤦🏿
It really bugs me that they couldn't even be bothered with making a proper Battletoads revival.
They outsourced some indie company that made basically a mobile phone game out of it. They butchered the artstyle, nerfed the Dark Queen. Gameplay-wise it's okay.. but just okay. This is Battletoads, and deserved better.
That's Rares fault. They're the ones who didn't want to work on their old games and outsource Battle Toads. They're also the ones who actually WANTED to work on Kinect games. They sabotaged themselves.
The game looks horrible I hate the art style. They basically took a bunch of mini games and tried to make into one singular game and it just makes no sense .
"but there seems to be a backlog of anger from Nintendo fans or just non Microsoft fans that try to demean what Rare has done thus far at Microsoft."
It's not just them even MS fans are disappointed too. I think it's because they use to make games for the hardcore and now MS have them making Kinect games, not saying the kinect games they make are bad but a lot of people think it's a waste of talent especially when they have a few RARE IP's to work with.
Also like the article says few if any of the original staff are still with them.
I did like Kameo and Perfect Dark Zero, those are the types of games I think they should be making...or a Killer Instinct I'd go re-buy a 360 if they made an epic KI game.
This is just my opinion though, but I have seen comments that say pretty much the same thing.
Because they used to be an amaing games developer in the old days and latley they've been Microsofts b*tch and produced shovelware crap. I mean ok...fair enough it's not their fault they canceled the Conker sequel, the Kameo sequel and the Perfect Dark sequel but still, you would think that because gamers want these games they would give the rights to Nintendo or Sony, I mean MS owns Rare but I don't know if it means they own the games rights which wern't even produced for their system like Conker and Perfect Dark.
I would love to think of what Rare would be like if they were bought by Sony....Sony is pretty open to new ideas and at least gives developers a chance with new projects.