Nope, that's been known for a while. IIRC, it has something to do with the tech used for making the DKC games.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Kotaku interview with XBox's Phil Spencer reveals that MS is one of Nintendo's biggest third-party publishers, easy to make deal for Banjo in Smash
- Thread starter jbug617
- Start date
Nope, that's been known for a while. IIRC, it has something to do with the tech used for making the DKC games.
That, and there are a few references to other Rare games that Microsoft now owns, like Jet Force Gemini in DKC2 and Jetpac in DK64.
Next thing Phil/Rare need to do is allow Nintendo to oversee the development of the next Banjo Game which will obviously be headed to Switch and Scarlet.
In this Kotaku article, it talks about an E3 2019 interview they had with XBox's Phil Spencer where he revealed that Microsoft is in fact, one of Nintendo's biggest third-party publishers for the Nintendo Switch and as a result, it was actually easy for Microsoft to make the deal to put Banjo in Smash, Phil Spencer also reveals that the licensing relationship between Nintendo and Microsoft "are kind of ongoing," I wonder if that could mean that Banjo could make a return to Nintendo.
kotaku.com
Xbox Boss Phil Spencer Says Banjo In Smash Was An Easy Deal To Make
Nintendo’s penultimate E3 announcement today involved the addition of a Microsoft-owned character to Smash Bros. This kind of company crossover between two platform holders might seem extraordinary, but Xbox boss Phil Spencer said that it was actually a pretty easy deal.
kotaku.com
Sucks that they couldn't get Goldeneye in Rare Replay in exchange.
I think he means what he said it means. If Nintendo wants to release an older Rare game, they talk to MS about it and MS is fine with it.
I think he means what he said it means. If Nintendo wants to release an older Rare game, they talk to MS about it and MS is fine with it.
If Phil Spencer can beat Miyamoto in smash, then he gets to add Goldeneye to the digital release.
This seems weird to me. As an owner of Donkey Kong I'd assume Nintendo owns the rights to DKC, and that it's not really about Microsoft "letting them release it".
I don't think it's just between Microsoft and Nintendo to make a GoldenEye 007 rerelease happen, though. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Nintendo owns the rights to the Donkey Kong IP, but Rare owns the game code. Neither Microsoft nor Nintendo can do anything with the games without each other's permission. (unless Microsoft wanted to completely re-skin the game and remove all references to Donkey Kong, they could do that lol)
There is probably something to this because the DKC games vanished off the Virtual Console for a bit of time.
Nintendo owns the Donkey Kong character, but Rare made the game so they own that. MS can't release it because they don't own DK, but Nintendo needs MS's permission to release it since Rare owns the code.
It's interesting to see that it was up and running on the Xbox 360 at some point:
Activision lost the James Bond license, so... Nintendo, Rare, and... EON Productions? And maybe Activision too if they own some parts of the game?
Cuphead seems to be a big success also looking at the eshop best selling category.
And Age of Empires: Mythologies. Whoever did it, they converted RTS style gameplay to TBS perfectly. I want AoE Definitive games on Switch too.
I loved Blue Dragon Awakened Shadow and Zoo Tycoon on DS too.
Goldeneye is a licensed game that uses the actors likenesses in it, might be pretty complicated to re-release that game.
The DKC games have always been fully owned by Nintendo. The thing is that the code was not well preserved so Nintendo can't modify the games to remove the Rare logo from them, which is the latter's trademark.
Those factors were all settled for the remaster until Iwata allegedly killed the deal by leveraging Nintendo's relationship with Activision. It's not an impossible problem to resolve.
That's something I kept reminding people of (especially during the crazy rumors at the beginning of the year), Microsoft is first and foremost seen as a third-party partner by Nintendo.
Wake me up when Nintendo allows Gamepass on Switch or when they offer something to Microsoft.
Wake me up when Nintendo allows Gamepass on Switch or when they offer something to Microsoft.
Nintendo, activision and rare all couldn't come to an agreement however
Cuphead is self published. Game is just partly funded by MS. MDHR owns the IP.
This seems to be the most likely explanation to me.
It's not as if Microsoft will gain anything by saying no, so I guess it's really not a big deal.
Wake you up when Nintendo allows Microsoft to get a cut of their own games? Or wake you up when Nintendo adopts Microsoft's vision of putting their software on as many devices as possible. Quite a high bar you set there.
I know, only then it would be a megaton. I'm implying that the current relationship between the two isn't surprising to the least.
It's a normal third party to platform holder relationship.
Microsoft is a platform holder so their approach isn't normal. They're the only one of the three doing it. You're downplaying things for no reason.
I imagine this looks like bait but it truly isn't I just find it hard to understand:
N64 games on a potential Classic system - known to be somewhat difficult to emulate so 'something' (whatever that may be) has to happen. Right now that something is 'no N64 Mini'. And a dearth of virtual console news that could mean emulated N64 titles on modern systems.
Rare Replay had a mix of emulated N64 titles plus previously 'remixed' games that also could be ported elsewhere, theoretically.
Are these two things mutually exclusive?
Can we straight up ask if this issue can be solved if all these parties address it?
Years ago this was of course a pipe dream but with so much collaboration and cross play now especially, there's a lot of smoke but no fire.
I still remember Peter Moore giving an interview recounting his time at Xbox not even considering Nintendo in the competition during his tenure, but of course that changed during it.
Couldn't have predicted this level of friendship and amicable behaviour during those times.
N64 games on a potential Classic system - known to be somewhat difficult to emulate so 'something' (whatever that may be) has to happen. Right now that something is 'no N64 Mini'. And a dearth of virtual console news that could mean emulated N64 titles on modern systems.
Rare Replay had a mix of emulated N64 titles plus previously 'remixed' games that also could be ported elsewhere, theoretically.
Are these two things mutually exclusive?
Can we straight up ask if this issue can be solved if all these parties address it?
Years ago this was of course a pipe dream but with so much collaboration and cross play now especially, there's a lot of smoke but no fire.
I still remember Peter Moore giving an interview recounting his time at Xbox not even considering Nintendo in the competition during his tenure, but of course that changed during it.
Couldn't have predicted this level of friendship and amicable behaviour during those times.
Perfect example of two different companies that can both work together and compete in the same market, at the same time. The next generation will laugh at the archived threads and posts of the "console wars".
But also, I'm trying to catch up on what's been happening in the world of Halo for the past decade or so. I hear there's a cool collection floating around these days...
But also, I'm trying to catch up on what's been happening in the world of Halo for the past decade or so. I hear there's a cool collection floating around these days...
Well we've known Microsoft's approach and I'm not downplaying it, it's one of the greatest things that could happen this gen, but about this specific deal though, I'm just depicting it as Phil Spencer does.
It's not a special thing since they've been a third party partner since the Wii U days.
Technically they've been a third party partner since the GBA days. Gamecube and Wii are the only Nintendo systems to lack a Microsoft game since the Xbox released.
I guess, but nonetheless the relationship was revived with Spencer in charge and Mojang's acquisition that initiated this whole strategy.