Has Rare Lost Touch With The Gaming Industry?

In an interesting interview this week at 1up.com, Peter Moore, now at Electronic Arts, believes the skillset that Rare holds is a bit dated for our gaming industry. Moore, best known in his role of VP at Microsoft in their Interactive Entertainment Business division, understands how great Rare and their games once were but seems to believe the industry has passed them by.

Looking at their latest Microsoft titles, mainly Perfect Dark Zero, Viva Pinata and Kameo: Elements of Power, it’s not hard to believe his statements as fact. None of the titles have blown away a market full of Grand Theft Autos, Halo’s and other top selling titles. None of their games hit the epic review scores of Bioshock or Crysis. It’s not all first person shooters are taking the big sales numbers; Spore was given rave reviews by online review sites (sans Amazon) and that’s a completely different style of game.

Popcap’s Peggle has had more fame and glory than some of the bigger titles from Rare, probably made with less money. Is Rare a dying breed of developers with no good direction to react to the changing ways of the game industry?

No. Peter Moore is missing a big part of the changes in Rare since their 2002 purchase by Microsoft. The major difference is… Microsoft. Microsoft had plans to make Rare Ltd as successful on their own console as Rare had with the Nintendo 64. Moore says:

“I thought ultimately [Viva Pinata] would be very successful — and you know, Microsoft, we’d had a tough time getting Rare back — Perfect Dark Zero was a launch title and didn’t do as well as Perfect Dark… but we were trying all kinds of classic Rare stuff and unfortunately I think the industry had past Rare by — it’s a strong statement but what they were good at, new consumers didn’t care about anymore, and it was tough because they were trying very hard — [original Rare founders] Chris and Tim Stamper were still there — to try and recreate the glory years of Rare, which is the reason Microsoft paid a lot of money for them and I spent a lot of time getting on a train to Twycross to meet them. Great people. But their skillsets were from a different time and a different place and were not applicable in today’s market.” (1up)

Perhaps if Rare had the ability to pick and choose their own platform for their own desires and innovation they’d have a killer Wii game for the market. Nintendo and Rare had a great partnership in the making of Donkey Kong Country, a product they couldn’t do on their own due to the intellectual properties but managed to create a memorable franchise when combining forces. Imagine, taking Donkey Kong to such awesome levels with a ground breaking and well crafted title with high quality graphics on a low quality system.

What about GoldenEye 007? A game that changed the first person shooter landscape on the console and sold over 8-million copies on a Nintendo platform. Along with their hot back log of titles is that of BattleToads, a game which was well received by reviewers but insanely difficult for gamers to master. Of course, Banjo-Kazooie was another great title from the folks at Rare, most of which was made famous on a non-Microsoft console.

What’s the lesson? Don’t point fingers at the creative talents behind the projects and future decisions when you’re boxed into a single console under someone elses name. For a developer to thrive and grow they need space to do it, they need to be fully able to access all the gaming hardware in the industry. Microsoft tried to fit a round peg and a square hole and paid $375 million to figure it out.

0 thoughts on “Has Rare Lost Touch With The Gaming Industry?”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Post

Episode 353: E3 Swag BagEpisode 353: E3 Swag Bag

Jonah returns from attending E3 last week, as Jordan is a sick latecomer into the podcast. Jonah and Paul relate his near-disaster loss of his iPad Air, while Jordan does his best Don LaFontaine impressions in this episode which is 50% longer than normal.

The news discussed includes:

  • Hirshberg: Console transition pains not a bad problem to have
  • Destiny may possibly come to Windows PC
  • Nintendo’s top designer has “uneasiness” about virtual reality
  • How the Xbox One’s 10% GPU increase works without Kinect
  • PS4, Xbox One seeing much higher digital download attach rates

In addition to the news, there’s Listener feedback, and even better, a new contest to win an E3 Swag Bag – listen in to find out how to win (US listeners only, sorry.)

Smart Business Choices During Economic DownturnsSmart Business Choices During Economic Downturns

Many game studios are being dropped following a bit of an economic downturn in the United States and globally. Activision has to deal with being agile enough to survive the economic times like anyone else and has dropped a few games that had great potential.

Gamers continue to ask the question, “why?” when some of their highest potential games were dropped to the floor. Ghostbusters and Brütal Legend are a couple examples of games with eager fans already salivating prior to its launch. Some of these fans are a bit ticked off that Activision named them as dropped franchise opportunities.

People ask why a company holds one “mediocre” title while getting rid of other potentially awesome ones. Don’t forget, this is a business and a good studio/publisher is going to make good business decisions without emotional attachments – those that bring emotions into play may end up with a highly valued product (to them) with no additional potential and lower revenue. This isn’t to say developers cannot be passionate about their games and their industry, they just have to build games gamers will buy and continue to fall in love with release after release.

Activision CEO Bobby Kotick is one of these business savvy individuals who knows where investors will find profits for the future, and he also know how to manage employees, with the use of software like this sample pay stub for payments and more.

“[Those games] don’t have the potential to be exploited every year on every platform with clear sequel potential and have the potential to become $100 million dollar franchises. … I think, generally, our strategy has been to focus… on the products that have those attributes and characteristics, the products that we know [that] if we release them today, we’ll be working on them 10 years from now.” (1up)

Ghostbusters is a great example of a title which could be well received and fun to play but probably wouldn’t be an exploitable franchise. The game, based on a popular movie, has limited potential for yearly releases and huge franchise success. Ghostbusters fans would probably disagree, but that’s when emotion comes into play. Think dollars and cents, not awesome fun gaming.

Oddly enough many of these business decisions from Activision, Electronic Arts and other big publishers arrive when the economy is in free fall and investors are eying your revenue potential. People make their most important and, usually, unfriendly business decisions when their company is at risk.

It’s sad to think money comes first and entertainment value comes second but we’re not the ones trying to make a profitable living in the industry. Put yourself in Kotick’s shoes as he walks into a board meeting to discuss future plans, road maps and profitability – you’d do what you have to do to keep your job, right?

Developer Wants License Keys For Console GamesDeveloper Wants License Keys For Console Games

UK developer David Braben from Frontier Developments believes smaller development studios are in the worse position when it comes to re-sale of “pre-owned” video games. Since a developer only gets their cut of the profits when a game is sold new, pre-owned titles allow gamers to play games without paying the developer for the effort.

This also hurts larger publishers, but they’re able to recover because of the sheer volume of games and game titles. One idea David had, was to code each game with a unique license key like a PC game that gamers must enter before playing. This would kill the ability to re-sell video games back to the market for others to buy at a cheaper price (translation: better value).

The future shows a higher degree of downloadable games, which cannot be re-used or sold back to the market, but for now, developers have to deal with pre-owned video games cutting into their profit. Presumably you could have a great game with smaller sales and a high degree of resale in the pre-owned market.

Problem with this take on development? Besides large scale video game sellers like GameStop making 80% profit margins on resold games (rather than a 10-15% on new), gamers want a way to make back some of their money on expensive titles. When you’re paying $60 for a game and you beat it in a week or two, you want to resell it so you can invest in a future title.

My theory… make games more affordable so we don’t feel gouged on the price. We may decide to hold on to it longer and tell our friends about it. A good game reference and a reasonable price will increase sales every time. Don’t try to solve pre-owned problems when the problem is the publisher and the industry making huge game prices.

(Thanks, Kotaku)