THQ To Release Rare GBA Games

Thanks to GameSpot for their news that THQ has acquired the worldwide rights to distribute a number of GameBoy Advance games from Microsoft's Rare studio. Although the famous English developer was acquired by Microsoft last year, they're still making games for Nintendo's handheld, and according to GameSpot, "The games included in the agreement are Banjo-Kazooie: Grunty's Revenge, Sabre Wulf, Banjo Pilot (formerly Diddy Kong Pilot), and a previously unannounced game entitled It's Mr Pants - no doubt starring the bowler-hat-and Y-fronts-wearing moderator of the reader's letters-style "Pantsboard" on Rare's official Web site."

Comments

Banjo Kazooie on the GBA?

[GregThePaladin]

Now you really CAN have a bird in your pocket!

Too Little, Too Late

[shadowcabbit]

To be honest, I'm not entirely sure I trust Rare as a developer anymore... After the travesty that was Star Fox Adventures, I'm seriously considering just plain passing over any of their GBA releases without a second glance. They had their time in the sun, and now it's time for them to move on.

That said, a GBA port of Killer Instinct probably would tempt me.

Re:Too Little, Too Late

[Dot.Com.CEO]

How is Star Fox Adventures a travesty? OK, fair enough, it is not the embodiment of gaming perfection but it was an enjoyable game. Not very original, but it copied Zelda admirably. I don't really think it is fair for Star Fox Adventures to be put in the same league as, say, Daikatana.

Re:Too Little, Too Late

[shadowcabbit]

When you take a franchise known for space combat and dogfighting, and turn it into an adventure/platform/collect-the-shiny-unpronounceab le-thing-quest-- throwing in maybe a handful of extremely short space flight segments that offer no challenge whatsoever-- there're really only two ways it can turn out. Groundbreaking and innovative, or utter crap. Rare was not groundbreaking or innovative with Star Fox Adventures.

You mentioned the other reason I hate the game-- it's a copy of Zelda with a Star Fox skin thrown on. And I'm probably one of the seven people out there who hated the 3-D Zelda games.

But you're certainly right. SFA is nowhere near as bad as Daikatana.

huh?

[fireduck]

microsoft buys rare, hoping to add another one of the better known development houses to their xbox exclusive list and the first game said developer releases is for a competitor's product?

did someone not read the fine print somewhere? obviously its about profit. gba games are probably easier to develop, were probably in development when the acquisition took place, and don't technically compete with the xbox. but it just sees odd.

Re:huh?

[YomikoReadman]

Come on, if you really are a /. reader, then by now you should know how these things work.

1. Buy Something having to do with leading Competitor.
2. ???
3. PROFIT!!!!

I mean come on, we've already seen this formula acted out a hundred times if we've seen it once. Reference SCO if you still have questions about that.

Re:huh?

[lightspawn]

microsoft buys rare, hoping to add another one of the better known development houses to their xbox exclusive list and the first game said developer releases is for a competitor's product?

Rare develops software both for consoles (a market where Microsoft compete with Nintendo) and handhelds (a market which Nintendo owns and where Microsoft do not compete).

Surely you're not suggesting that Microsoft-owned companies should refuse opportunities in one area because they'd be doing business with a company that competes with their parent company in another area? This kind of behavior may be expected of individuals, but companies simply do not, as a rule, hold a grudge that way.

Re:huh?

[PainKilleR-CE]

Not to mention that these were all titles either in development or planned before Microsoft bought them. Microsoft isn't going to tell them to dump existing projects unless there's good reason to do so (ie shifting those projects to XBox, such as in the case of Bungie).

Strange...

[kmak]

Anyone else finds this strange? Not the fact that Rare is developing for GBA, but the fact that Nintendo is _letting_ Rare develop for the GBA...

I remember how Nintendo just refused to let Squaresoft to make GBA games until Square make some Gamecube games for defecting earlier..

Maybe it's just me..

Re:Strange...

[PaleZer0]

The difference is, square publicly put the N64 down, which is said to have persuaded other developers away from it. It literally PISSED Ninty's old pres off. Rare on the other hand, wanted nintendo to buy them out, but nintendo passed, so microsoft did. There doesn't seem to be any hard feelings.

Re:Strange...

[Gr33nNight]

Anyways, most of the hardcore Nintendo fans at Rare left the company to form their own, which are still making Nintendo games. Of course being at work right now, the name eludes me.

Re:Strange...

[JGag21]

I don't find that strange. They seemed to part on good terms. Besides, if these titles were for a release on a hand-held system, where else are they going to go? Sega?(dead) Microsoft?(nothing) Sony?(not soon enough) Nokia(too risky). You really only have one choice to go with handheld games, and that's the GBA, baby. Who knows, maybe Rare noticed the decline in Cube sales, and got out when they could, while GBA sales are through the roof so they worked out a way to still develop for that. Of course I may know nothing at all.

Re:Strange...

[mdbales]

They moved to the company Free Radical Design, makers of Timesplitters 2.

Re:Strange...

[Gr33nNight]

Ah ha, yeah that was it. That game reminds me of Perfect Dark for good reason.

Re:Strange...

[grahamwest]

According to their site, Zoonami (www.zoonami.com) has some ex-Rare guys. They're working on some big GameCube project but I don't know exactly what.

Nintendo know that Rare's GBA titles will be profitable and as such make money for them too so there's no reason to cut them off. Hiroshi Yamauchi was the big grudge holder if the rumours are to be believed, and he's since retired to leave Satoru Iwata in charge.

The "It's Mr Pants" game is pretty mind-boggling to me. I'll certainly be interested to see what they come up with...

Banjo Pilot

[luekj]

Conker Pilot...now that has potential. Or Perfect Pilot....

Exclusivity a poop?

[skermit]

So now the way to get around exclusivity agreements (not saying that's what Microsoft and Rare have) is to sell licenses to other production companies to release? Nice. I just hope that Bungie ports Halo to GC now.

Re:Exclusivity a poop?

[PaleZer0]

Thats not it at all. Every company wants money. Microsoft themselves are making games for the GBA. They don't see it as a direct competitor to the X-Box. Its the same reason Sony allows square to port some of the FF games over to MICROSOFT windows.

Re:Exclusivity a poop?

[skermit]

Sony doesn't OWN Square though. It seems like a conflict of interests.

Re:Exclusivity a poop?

[Alaric42]

Sony did buy quite a bit of Square stock when they were really hurting, although the amount they have in Square-Enix isn't all that much, given the higher weight given to Enix in the merger.

Re:Exclusivity a poop?

[n0wak]

No. There are actually different "realms" of exclusivity. Microsoft, no doubt, has all the exclusive console rights -- but why would that stop Rare for making games for a completely different market? Console Exclusivity != portable exclusivity (especially when microsoft doesn't compete in that market). Of course, I imagine that things will get muddier once the PSP comes out, but for now that's the way it is.

For example, just because GTA is exclusive to the Sony consoles, that doesn't mean that Rockstar can't develop the brand on the PC or GBA or mobile phones or whatever else.

Re:Exclusivity a poop?

[PainKilleR-CE]

There's no conflict in interest when a developer releases planned or in-development titles on a system which lies in a market that the developer's owner does not compete in. It's not even a conflict of interest if they release games for other consoles, although that's less likely to happen unless the game is really far along.

Goldeneye Pocket

[xxltjx]

I can't wait to see "Goldeneye" for GBA.

Re:Goldeneye Pocket

[Mattb90]

There are a lot of reasons why we will [b]NEVER[/b] see a Goldeneye Pocket. One reason is the licence to the Bond brand - aside from being an old franchise now (and thus less disirable to the public) - it is also now owned by EA. There is also the fact that Rare are too busy creating new GBA titles than to port old ones. And not forgetting the fact that Goldeneye was an N64 - and its brilliance cannot be recreated on the GBA for so many reasons (power/graphics limitations, d-pad, lack of buttons, small screen). Just stop dreaming now.

Anyone know anything about these games

[N10sb2002]

I thought that they were quietly canceled since I haven't heard of any news about them in quite some time.

Consider your party officially pooped

[Anonymous Coward]

Jeez, take it easy Captain BringDown...