Rare staff facing possible lay-offs

By Robert Purchese Published 17 February, 2009

Studio wants to speed up dev cycles.

Rare plans to restructure and possibly downsize in order to refocus on speedy, more simplified development cycles.

"As the entire industry struggles to address the increasing scale and cost of development, we too have felt a need to restructure our current approach so we can speed development and better manage the scale required to create high quality games," said Rare studio manager Mark Betteridge in a statement.

"With four projects recently under way, now is the right time to make this change. Throughout its history, Rare has demonstrated a willingness to embrace new approaches and commitment to delivering game-changing experiences to our customers.

"This announcement is no different and builds on that tradition as we work with MGS to make interactive entertainment as culturally relevant in people's lives as books, movies and television are today," he added.

Going forward, Rare will focus on three areas: expanding the Xbox 360 user-base through titles such as Viva Piņata and Banjo-Kazooie: Nuts & Bolts; help grow the New Xbox Experience after delivering the avatar feature; and "continue delivering AAA gaming experiences".

Betteridge said there may be a "small number" of redundancies as a result of all this.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (73) Latest comment 3 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Vice.Destroyer #1 3 years ago

    That's a shame for the guys. Microsoft should be ashamed, running a decent developer into the ground, by making it concentrate on games that just will not make any money.

  • LazyDan #2 3 years ago

    Such a shame. Banjo spent all that time getting his Engineering Apprenticeship and now the recession has meant he can't keep his job. Won't be long before he turns into a drugs and profanity obsessed wreck like his mate Conker.

    I heard Pipsy's working the streets now too.

  • DFawkes #3 3 years ago

    I for one appreciate them not blaming any economic downturn that wouldn't really effect them to this extent. Seems a bit backwards to use less people to do things faster, but if they say it'll work I'm sure they've thought it through.

    Always a shame to see anyone being made redundant though, and there's always the danger you could lose someone who did more for the games than anyone though.

  • Dizzy #4 3 years ago

    >by making it concentrate on games that just will not make any money.

    Are you insane? That is the dream of any dev.... having lots of money and make games that you actually want to make without worrying that they won't sell. Rare is in a good position. They are on of the only MGS divisions that have the task to expand the userbase of the 360. They can experiment will all kinds of stuff. (NXE for example).
    Edited by 2 at 17/02/09 @ 11:17

  • the_dudefather #5 3 years ago

    Hope banjo gets another game

    It was kinda sad sometimes in Nuts and bolts, there are a loads of jokes at how badly the game is going to sell :(

  • BillyBrush #6 3 years ago

    Shame if they make a few redundancies, Nuts & Bolts turned out being my fave game of the Xmas rush, twas brilliant. In fact they have produced 5 games on 360 all of which have been really good..

  • Vice.Destroyer #7 3 years ago

    @Dizzy

    The dream may be to make games without having to worry about potential returns.
    The reality is that the dream can turn into a nightmare.

    And I think it is fair to say that they didn't 'experiment' with the NXE. They put in a proposal, like they have to do with every idea, and Microsoft gave them the green light.

  • Dizzy #8 3 years ago

    >The reality is that the dream can turn into a nightmare.

    ???????

  • Darren #9 3 years ago

    Rare games have always felt out of place on the Xbox 360 IMO and I can't help feeling that they'd have had a lot more success if they'd stuck with Nintendo and released games for the Wii. Rare were at their creative peak on the N64 and have never achieved the same success or critical acclaim on the Xbox consoles.

    Personally, I love their games, they're fun and funny and colourful and very British. They're not always good granted, Grabbed by the Ghoulies was weak and Perfect Dark Zero was a rushed mess but their other Xbox games have been decent if not exactly outstanding. Still they haven't sold very well and that's not good for any games company in the long run...

  • keyboardmonkey #10 3 years ago

    Going forward

    Instant fail!

    You could have said in the future OR just had Rare will now focus.... but no, you had to come out with some management bullshit bingo words!

  • Darren #11 3 years ago

    I should add that I do blame Microsoft for not promoting Rare's games properly.

    For example, none of their games have had anywhere near the amount of promotion or hype that Gears of War 1/2 or Halo 3 have had. It's no wonder the Xbox 360 is labelled as a hardcore system. Microsoft should be doing far, far more to attract casual gamers to the system to appeal to a wider audience, the sort who might enjoy Rare's games. Gears of War and Halo need little marketing, they'd sell anyway through word of mouth and reviews.

    Stupid, stupid Microsoft.

  • oreillymj #12 3 years ago

    Must use "going forward" in all press releases!! - Marketing c0ck

  • FreakyZoid #13 3 years ago

    No-one has enough money to not have to worry about their games selling. As Rare have just found out.

  • penhalion #14 3 years ago

    @DFawkes

    For a while now I've been trying to explain to people that more bodies doesn't speed up the process. It just creates more cost and actually slows things down (in some cases rediculously so!).

    The massive teams seem to have been some strange attempt to justify the rediculous dev budgets for this generation. You ended up with a lead artist, who's vision for the look of the game was the holy grail, then 30 artists effectively copying his work onto the computer screen. You then have a programmer for every section of the game from a sound programmer, then a gui programmer, then a guy who just does animations programming etc. etc. All of whome then have to spend an absolute age integrating their work with each other.

    Some devs did the correct thing i.e. the pre-production, production and then post production thing and found that they saved millions on costs. They kept a core team and simply got people in as they needed them, releasing them after their task was done.

    At the moment the games industry is still in the stone ages when it comes to production. It's the equivalent of a rock band buying a studio and employing all the studio staff, album cover artists, costume stylists etc. etc permenantly rather than simply hiring them on an as needed basis. Seriously! Companies like EA and activisiton really do have rediculous idle teams all over the place! Simply waiting until their turn at the keyboard comes.
    Edited by 1 at 17/02/09 @ 11:39

  • Erinan #15 3 years ago

    Another Conker game pretty please?

  • Eraysor #16 3 years ago

    "expanding the Xbox 360 user-base through titles such as Viva Piņata and Banjo-Kazooie: Nuts & Bolts" and "continue delivering AAA gaming experiences".

    Are these mutually exclusive events?

  • Vice.Destroyer #17 3 years ago

    @Dizzy

    Redundancy can be a nightmare, no?

  • DFawkes #18 3 years ago

    @penhalion

    That actually makes a lot of sense, cheers :)

    Still sucky that people may have to lose their jobs, but I'm guessing there has been a lot of excess staff out there in the larger devs that aren't really needed. Counldn't they just become more efficient and put them to use on other things though?

  • sifujames #19 3 years ago

    I was always a huge Rare fan, but I do think they seem to be misfiring at present. They had a great run of games on the N64 (GoldenEye, PD, DKR, Banjo, Blast Corps, Jet Set Gemini) but seem to be having difficulty matching that. Whether that's due to changes in the market and audience, or just that Rare had hit a rich vein of form during the N64 years that could never last. I think actually MGS have been very patient with them. Anyone think EA would have kept them around as long?

  • kangarootoo #20 3 years ago

    "As the entire industry struggles to address the increasing scale and cost of development"

    I am always slightly puzzled by that sort of talk. Specifically, people referring to the increasing cost of development as if it is some separate entity, like a dying species or the annual flooding of the Nile.

    We are making the games, we are setting the agenda, we are essentially dictating the costs. Its not really a case of struggling to "address" the increasing scale and cost, its a case of having to expand to keep up and not knowing how.

    Its a bit of a wakeup call for the industry I think. Making games used to be relatively low budget, and if things didn't work too well you could just chuck more man hours at the problem. We are now finding that things are happening on a scale that won't let us get away with that sort of thing. So we are having to become more organised, but that can only be a good thing in the longer term.

    We shouldn't talk in terms of upscaling and increased cost being a problem that needs addressing, but rather a natural evolution of a growing industry. The real problem that needs "addressing" is our ability to get sufficiently organised that we don't waste resources. We used to be able to get away with it, but those days are running out.

  • Xerx3s #21 3 years ago

    Dizzy: He's got a point. They can make awesome games but if they don't sell, sooner or later an investor or a new manager with a different vision will step in and start cutting what is not profitable. They key is obviously making games that you want while still hitting north of break even.

  • seasidebaz #22 3 years ago

    Hang on, Rare are incapable of being "speedy".

    Look how long it took them to make Kameo. And that was still shit.

  • kangarootoo #23 3 years ago

    @penhalion

    +1

  • sneetch #24 3 years ago

    @DFawkes
    Seems a bit backwards to use less people to do things faster, but if they say it'll work I'm sure they've thought it through.

    I guess their new plan is "work smarter not harder" or maybe they'll "leverage synergies"? ;)

    No company ever shrank its way to greatness. Sometimes to profitability but not greatness. This might just be an excuse for Rare to ditch some turkeys, every company has them.

    That said, changing the team structure to, for example, create a core tools/technologies group (if they don't have one) so they can create and then use a core tool/technologies/functionality set in those titles might save a lot of time and money with fewer people working on it.

    Software engineers tend to want to do everything themselves (well, the interesting things) which is somewhat inefficient, I'm always surprised to learn that companies don't have a core tools/technologies group. Mind you, I've been surprised at the number of companies that don't have anything approaching proper development procedures, maybe I'm still naive.

    @Vice.Destroyer
    Microsoft should be ashamed, running a decent developer into the ground, by making it concentrate on games that just will not make any money.

    Microsoft are picking up the tab on all that and it no doubt hasn't affected their stock adversly, MGS won't be so stupid as to complain that the games they direct them to make (like Viva Pinata) don't do as well as they would like, they know that selling cute to blood crazed teens is a risky and difficult prospect but MS have stated in the past that they're in this for the long haul, look at their dogged persistence in their attempts to build a base in Japan (all those JRPGs): they know that they won't win in Japan this iteration, but maybe next or the one after that.

    The reality is that the dream can turn into a nightmare.

    Is it the one where your socks come alive and eat your toes? I hate that one. ;)

    Anyway on Rare's performance this generation I really liked BK N&B and Viva Pinata, I'd have preferred a "proper" Banjo though.

  • JeroenZM #25 3 years ago

    Could they please concentrate on making a new DK game for the DS?

  • sifujames #26 3 years ago

    @seasidebaz

    I thought the same too - Rare and Speedy don't belong in the same sentence

  • BillyBrush #27 3 years ago

    @Seasidebaz & sifu james

    Name a single other dev that has put out 5 full disc releases this generation? i don't beleive there are any others, and they've done an XBLA release too

    Most first party devs have managed 2 full games this gen, some just the one.

    So speedy they would seem to be..

  • RobotRocker #28 3 years ago

    A couple of other websites suggested that Rares lay offs wont be as bad since they do a lot of R&D for the 360 and occasionally assist other studios doing first party stuff for Microsoft. (A small Rare team helped Bungie with parts of Halo 3).

    Losing jobs in this climate sucks anyway so hopefully the damage wont be too bad.

  • seasidebaz #29 3 years ago

    @BillyBrush:

    Kameo was an N64 game. Viva Pinata was too, IIRC. VP2 is VP1 with extras. VP Party Animals is pure tripe. PDZero was awful, and it still took them ages to make. And BK Nuts & Bolts is.... OK, I suppose. Still, took them long enough.

  • Daikon #30 3 years ago

    What would it take for somebody at Rare to wake up and say: "Hey! I know! Let's make Goldeneye 2!"?

  • IronCladChicken #31 3 years ago

    Bah! Since the Ultimate guys left Rare it's just another games developer - Like when Molyneux left Bullfrog.
    & I suspect those guys where cruising along after they sold Rare to Microsoft - They probably just stuck around becasue it was in the contract.

  • sifujames #32 3 years ago

    @ BillyBrush

    Fair point, I guess that they have put out more then others, unfortunately the games haven't been all that memorable - I'd could only remember PD Zero, BK Nuts and Bolts and Viva Pinata off the top of my head, I actually had to go to their website to look up the others...

  • BillyBrush #33 3 years ago

    @Daikon

    probably the Bond liscence, which Activision have

    @Baz

    Kameo was a 360 game, sure it's development may have started back on Xb, but it is a 360 game...personally with the exception of Party animals which i'd not counted, i think all their 360 games have been good uns, N&B being the best....either way, 6, or 5 cutting one out, is pretty prolific this gen, there's no one else who'se put out that much stuff (Nintendo in house aside), Rare really are in an unenviable position of getting stick from all angles apart from 360 owners who find time to do things other than shooting, which cuts 2/3rds of them out instantly....myself, i likes the Rare of the last few years, much better than the 'cube' years

  • Darren #34 3 years ago

    @BillyBrush - Kameo was originally conceived for the N64 before moving to the GameCube then Xbox and finally appearing on the 360.

  • Entity #35 3 years ago

    Damn you Darren! Beaten by seconds.
    F5 saved me some face.

  • seasidebaz #36 3 years ago

    Kameo was a 360 game, sure it's development may have started back on Xb
    No, it started on the N64...

    And that's the thing. Most of these games were probably going through concept stages while Rare were still Nintendo, and as most of the time making a game comes from design etc they should have been out sooner. I've not been blown away by any of their current gen games, N&B was OK but later on just became a chore to play. Save with VP: Starts off great, then becomes a chore.

    I'm not saying that an output of 5 games is bad, it's just Rare aren't exactly quick at making games. Or keeping consistent with their earlier catalogue in terms of quality.

  • BillyBrush #37 3 years ago

    @Sifu

    Yep, i think in the current market it would be fair to say not all of the titles have been memorable, you've got to put a bit of that down to the amount of good games nowadays and level of marketing EA, Ubi, and Activision can give their games in addition to the competing first party stuff both MS and beyond. But i'd accept that's quite true.

    Quality wise they have been pretty good though and i think given Rare's position of being in the centre of two firing lines and an audience not in tune with their games, it's not horrendous of me to make a dreaded list...see comments re Perfect Dark was awful get bandied about with reckless abandon....assuming we can trust critics, the following averages are not exactly as shameful as some would have you think

    all metacritic:

    PDZ - critic avg 81%
    Kameo - critic avg 79%
    Viva Piniata 1 - critic avg 84%
    Viva P 2 - critic avg 82%
    Banjo Kaz Nuts & Bolts - critic avg 80%
    BK - arcade - avg 79%
    Party Animals -56%

    Soo, apart from the one, it's really 'teh internets' not games reviewers that have decided Rare are off form...sure those %ages don't mean everything, but they mean more than comments threads methinks, and if you can't trust reviewers with Rare games, which games is it you can trust them with? on an even playing field Rare do pretty well imo

  • Flabio #38 3 years ago

    Rare didn't do Party Animals anyway, it was done by a third party company in Australia that I forget the name of.

  • rhubarbandcustard #39 3 years ago

    When will publishers, developers, game stores etc accept that in today's economic climate the RRP and actual selling price of new games need to fall massively?

    I love gaming, buy a couple of games a month and would love to treat myself to the new AAA release of the moment.

    But why pay almost Ģ80 for the privilege when I can pick up a couple of games I missed six months ago for Ģ30 combined instead.

  • BillyBrush #40 3 years ago

    @Kameo

    fair enough, it is however still a 360 game, that being the platform on which it was released

    ...but i get your point, not knowing the exact history of Kameo, it can't have gone into full blown production on N64 and gone through 3 platforms without them basically redoing the whole thing, as in it looks frickin good for an N64 title, and essentially i'm thinking like Duke Nukem forever they must have basically still made a full 360 game there sans having to come up with a game design/story etc...basically aside from sketches i doubt the 360 release bears much in common with an N64 incantation

  • GreyBeard #41 3 years ago

    I really don't think the film model is an ideal solution, the differences in production methodology are far too great to make it an ideal fit.

    For a start, there's a far greater need for continuity of staffing in games development than film due to the nature of the medium. Any experienced editor can quickly assemble something workable provided the raw footage is available, integrating code/assets is far more difficult as it involves a whole lot more than arranging elements along a time-line!

    No matter how skilled the workforce, presenting them with an unfamiliar code-base, tool-chain, or assets is a major headache. Middleware isn't an ideal solution either as there is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all solution, ask anyone who's worked with UE3 and they'll tell you that its level of usefulness really depends on how closely the target project resembles Gears Of War! Midway tried to base their core development strategy around it, and the results were disastrous.

    This type of thing has no equivalent in film production. There they don't reinvent the camera every 5 years, which is precisely what happens with games. And that in turn has a knock-on effect on everything else because the vast majority of software is bound to a particular hardware configuration.


  • ccfb #42 3 years ago

    "there are a loads of jokes at how badly the game is going to sell"

    Those poor developers must have laughed their Credit Crunchies right out of their faces in a fountain of milk.

  • sifujames #43 3 years ago

    @ BillyBrush

    Good points. I think you're right, it's much more a perception that Rare have lost it, rather then any hard and fast evidence, and it's an image that's not helped by the low visibility of their games compared to others on the 360. But there was no advertising on the N64, and yet Rare games were always as eagerly anticipated as Nintendo's. You knew the game was going to be something special even on initial announcement, and I think Rare haven't come up with a game that has "must have" since the Nintendo days. Perhaps it's because all the games date back to then:

    PDZ - Sequel to N64 game
    Kameo - Gamecube game ported to 360
    Viva Pinata - Development began in 2002 while still with Nintendo.
    BK N+B - Sequel to N64 game

    Quite frankly I wouldn't have spent much on advertising any of those, as none of those titles really leapt out and said "Next big thing". I hope they've cleared everything out of the pre 2002 cupboard now, as it'll be interesting to see what they develop next. I don't for one minute want them to lose their Britishness, or trying to do a Gears or Halo clone (bye bye Free Radical...) but they need something that really grabs the attention of everyone and has us waiting again. I honestly think if they don't pull that off soon MSG will start handing them titles and just say "make this".
    Edited by 1 at 17/02/09 @ 13:19

  • Xerx3s #44 3 years ago

    seasidebaz: Rather peculiar comment. Rare usually has 4 or more games in development. I believe that they have released over 2 games each year on average for the past 25 years or something.

    Oh and kameo was awesome.

  • Xerx3s #45 3 years ago

    "But there was no advertising on the N64"

    Come again? That's rubbish, they where easily one of the most advertised companies.

  • the_mtfr #46 3 years ago

    Only a management asswipe could have come up with something like, downsizing the team while speeding up the dev cycle.

  • sifujames #47 3 years ago

    @ Xerx3s

    Really? I can't remember seeing much in the way of advertising for Rare games in the N64 days outside of the games mags.

  • bad09 #48 3 years ago

    "When will publishers, developers, game stores etc accept that in today's economic climate the RRP and actual selling price of new games need to fall massively?

    I love gaming, buy a couple of games a month and would love to treat myself to the new AAA release of the moment.

    But why pay almost Ģ80 for the privilege when I can pick up a couple of games I missed six months ago for Ģ30 combined instead."

    Shhh! They don't want to talk about THAT. They only want to stop the evil twisted 2nd hand market forever so they can continue selling at a high price......

  • seasidebaz #49 3 years ago

    @Xerx3s:

    I know they do, but it just takes them so damn long to bring out. It's all well and good having 4 in development, but when they take about 5 years each to make they're pretty out of date by the time they come out...

    Plus, I haven't enjoyed anything post-Blast Corps as much as I enjoyed Blast Corps. And I thought Kameo was rather poo.

    Just my thoughts, anyway.

  • merkdot #50 3 years ago

    I appreciate the humour of putting "continue delivering AAA gaming experiences" in quotes.

  • T4RG4 #51 3 years ago

    Some people still view Rare as though it's made up of the all the people that were around when it was a massive success. It isnt.

    This goes for almost all developers -> people come and go. Those that say Rare would be so much more successful on the Wii because of there Nintendo background, hmm. Not sure about that one. Refer to my point about staff turnover. I would not however be surprised to see their titles sell a little better on that format simply due to the style of game they tend to develop.

    Shedding people is something I can imagine many continuing to do for a while. It's the perfect time to do so even if they do not financially need to do so. Political spin, bury news day etc. It's fair to say that whenever a studio looks at how large it has become they realise they could do with reducing head-count in certain areas so as to become more efficient. Cutting those that you either don't need or wish you had not hired. Problem is you can often accidentally cut yourself and release some great people without realising it until they are no longer around to make stuff 'happen'.

  • kangarootoo #52 3 years ago

    @GreyBeard

    Any film that employs heavy use of CG is in the same ballpark as games, re moving technology. The film industry is huge and varied, so its risky to state that games do OR don't share much in common with it. Neither is really true.

    However, that shouldn't really matter. A lot of best practice does not depend on what tools you are actuallky using, but how you arrange them. A film production may use some permanent staff and some "work for hire" contractors, and a game may do too. When it comes to organising such an operation the two share a lot in common, even if the final product is not comparable.

  • barnard666 #53 3 years ago

    if you are reading this and you didn't buy banjo kazooie nuts and bolts - then shame on you!

  • kangarootoo #54 3 years ago

    shame on me :)

  • Quint2020 #55 3 years ago

    "Microsoft should be ashamed, running a decent developer into the ground, by making it concentrate on games that just will not make any money."

    To be fair to MS they've already stated multiple times that making money with Rare games is not their first priority, adding diversity to the 360's line-up on the other hand is.

  • metalangel #56 3 years ago

    This would be a great chance for DrZoidberg and I to continue our debate about whether or not Rare sucks... but you guys seem to have done it all for us!

  • ronuds #57 3 years ago

    "Microsoft should be ashamed, running a decent developer into the ground, by making it concentrate on games that just will not make any money."

    What's funny and sad about this comment is that they're making the same kinds of games they always have. If you're going to slander MS, try and do a better job than this.

    :p

  • Xerx3s #58 3 years ago

    Yeah, rare should make a sequel for blastcorps on xbla. JPR on xbla was awesome so I don't see why that shouldn't be up there.

  • Britesparc Verified Creative, ITV #59 3 years ago

    I appreciate that any job losses are bad, because some people will obviously be out of work, but I think this announcement could actually be good news for Rare. I was worried that, with slightly less than stellar sales of its recent games, MS would weild the Close Down Axe and Rare would go the way of Ensemble. However, it transpires that Rare will be tied even closer to Xbox than before, essentially creating all NXE-style iconography and content, as well as still making games (although perhaps not quite as many as before).

    I think Rare are at their best when making "fun for everyone" types of entertainment, and if they can pull out the stops with some cracking avatar-based games and other NXE concepts, as well as making a PROPER AND WORTHY sequel to Perfect Dark, then I for one will be well chuffed.

    That being said, I do feel sorry for anyone losing their jobs in this industry!
    Edited by 1 at 17/02/09 @ 15:06

  • Les #60 3 years ago

    "We shouldn't talk in terms of upscaling and increased cost being a problem that needs addressing, but rather a natural evolution of a growing industry. The real problem that needs "addressing" is our ability to get sufficiently organised that we don't waste resources. We used to be able to get away with it, but those days are running out."

    I think two things are being mixed together:
    1) Increase in scale as a natural evolution of a growing industry which of course increases the cost base but revenue side is also increased;
    2) Increase in development cost through ever more complex in-game assets, which are not off-set by increased revenues.

    The first one isn't a problem but something the industry has to learn to deal with through increased professionality. The second one is a problem though. Of course there too optimization opportunities exist but it still eats away at the bottom line.

  • kangarootoo #61 3 years ago

    @Les

    This is true. I guess what I am thinking is that example 1 is just the way things are when your industry grows, and example 2 is what happens when you aren't set up to deal with that expansion.

    I agree that a point comes where the cost of producing something may outstrip the return, and finding the balance (or rather not being able to find the balance) is where the problem lies.

    You mentioned increased revenues not offsetting the increasing costs - perhaps one of our issues is that we aren't able to predict revenue as accurately as we would like. Established franchises can probably hit the target more frequently, but I bet Valve had no solid idea how well Half Life 1 would perform, and the same could maybe be said for GTA3 and Halo. Subsequent versions of each of those franchises had huge budgets, but expected sales figures were easier to estimate so the invetment could be justified.

    I risk just kind of rambling and thinking out loud at this point, so I'll zip it for a bit :)

  • Vice.Destroyer #62 3 years ago

    "Microsoft should be ashamed, running a decent developer into the ground, by making it concentrate on games that just will not make any money."

    What's funny and sad about this comment is that they're making the same kinds of games they always have. If you're going to slander MS, try and do a better job than this.


    They're making the same sort of games they always have, may be broadly speaking true, but what was implied in my comment is that they are not making the sort of games that make any money, or in other words, appeal to as large a demographic with their content, quality and appeal.
    Edited by 1 at 17/02/09 @ 16:40

  • Xerx3s #63 3 years ago

    VD: I think that this has more to do with the fact that people are more looking forward to CODMC2 than a new BC or something original. TBF, I think that rare are not blind to this. They have four titles in development, I think that at least 2 aim for the more hardcore market (based on the rumours anyway).

  • kangarootoo #64 3 years ago

    @Vice.Destroyer

    I think MS were taking the longer term view with this one, and its not an unreasonable gamble to take.

    All console vendors want to sell games, but more than that they want to sell more consoles so that there are more customers out there who can buy games. If all a company does is make games to sell well to their existing audience, they risk waking up one day to find that everyone who wants one of their consoles already owns one and they aren't selling any more.

    MS have been stepping slowly in that direction for a while now. Its well known that the 360 has the highest attach rate (games sold per console owner), but their concern is that their console is viewed as "one of the hardcore gamers" and that one day their sales will suddenly drop off (they know this, and the rest of the business knows this, I'm not just pulling it out of the air).

    Now there are a lot more non-hardcore gamers out there than hardcore gamers (The Sims and the Nintendo Wii show us just how much dosh can be made when you appeal outside of typical hardcore circles), and naturally MS want to make sure they get a bit of that pie too (whiclst hanging on to their existing and profitable hardcore pie). So they make some games that have what suits might call "strategic value". They don't make money in the short term, but they do widen the appeal of then platform, which in turn (hopefully) makes more money somewhere down the road.

    So MS were right to take the approach they did, but equally they are right to keep examining the figures. They probably still want Rare to keep making those sorts of "platform widening" titles, but they are simply re-examining how much dosh they can put into that venture compared to how much they put into things they know will make money in the next two years.
    Edited by 1 at 17/02/09 @ 17:09

  • smelly #65 3 years ago

    "if you are reading this and you didn't buy banjo kazooie nuts and bolts "


    Well my kids didnt buy nuts and bolts.. because they CAN read this.. unlike the text in the demo version of nuts and bolts which was tiny and sped along at 500 miles per hour giving them chance to read 1 or 2 words of each sentence and having no clue what was going on...

  • pac666 #66 3 years ago

    Rare needs a reboot

  • bonker #67 3 years ago

    "Always a shame to see anyone being made redundant though, and there's always the danger you could lose someone who did more for the games than anyone though. "

    Not much chance of that.

    There's actually very little chance that Rare "need" to cap anyone.

    In my 20yr+ dev career, this is the 4th downturn I've experienced and I tell ya, companies lap it up as a period when they can chuck some of the dead-wood (and you gotta know that there's *always* dead-wood in a dev dept of any size) without worrying that they will look bad when they do it.

    IMO, it doesn't happen often enough, one of my major beefs with the industry is the number of feckless mofos that gain employment in it as they drain cash and enthusiasm from the people doing the real work ...

    That's not to say that "good" people can't get caught up in it too but that's usually when whole companies go under, not when they're just shedding the usual wankers from the place ...

  • ronuds #68 3 years ago

    "They're making the same sort of games they always have, may be broadly speaking true, but what was implied in my comment is that they are not making the sort of games that make any money, or in other words, appeal to as large a demographic with their content, quality and appeal."

    Well, they can't have all of their devs making Gears of War sequels. It's like Sony with the LBP devs - a lot of time and thought were put into the game, but it's not exactly something that appeals to a huge audience. The game is one they feel is needed on the console, though.

    I'm sure the guys at Rare get paid well no matter what. Well, the ones still with a job at least.

  • TRUTH #69 3 years ago

    I actually found Kameo really fun & enjoyable, also Viva Patna 2 was quality too!...I hope Killer Instinct, Blast Corps, & another Kameo, plus a proper not rushed squeal to Perfect Dark is next inline for Xb360

  • MrsPacMan #70 3 years ago

    Darren, oh Darren, the god that you are, the hero, the saviour of video games, I salute you. What you say makes so much sense, I love your comments, you say it like it is, I just can't fault you.

  • MrsPacMan #71 3 years ago

    Sorry, it was Darrell I was talking about in my previous post.

    Darren you are full of the smelliest kind of shite, you know fuck all, stick to wanking yourself off.

  • kangarootoo #72 3 years ago

    @bonker

    Glad to see your time in the business (considerably longer than me) hasn't dulled your spirit any ;)

  • bonker #73 3 years ago

    My spirit is unquashable :)