Activision bought out Rare!!!!!?!?!?!?!
 

http://www.gamesradar.com/news/game_news_3055.html

I really don't know what to say... in a way, I hope it's true, in a way, I hope it's not.

PLEASE BE TRUE!!!!!

Then I won't have to buy a Gamecube :D

*crosses fingers*

http://www.computerandvideogames.com...y.php?id=27795

Seems as if C&VG caught wind of this as well.
Funny how Games Radar omits a source from their article. C&VG isn't exactly dependable in this area of news, though I wouldn't hold it to them - they are an exquisite resource for anything gaming-related. Yet, if this "rumor" turns on its belly, it could be a devasting blow to Nintendo and the Cube.

Be nice Stu... this is a very sensitive subject for Nintendo fans :p

You still won't see Star Fox or any other Nintendo-owned franchise on the PS2 or XBX.
Keep in mind, those jewels are owned by Nintendo.

Yeah, but Rare's FPS system isn't... So if they make an All new FPS I'd be happy.

There's just one thing I find a little odd about this article.

"....it seems that games giant Activision stumped up the necessary cash in order to take control of Rare."

And Nintendo or Microsoft didn't have the money......how? :unsure: It just seems a little odd especially since Nintendo and Microsoft would most likely be more than willing to pay a huge sum of money to buy out Rare and more than Activision would ever be willing or able to pay. The only way I could see Rare being bought by Activision is that the Stamper Bros. weren't totally concerned with the amount of money they'd get. They must have also had certain preferences that Nintendo or Microsoft just couldn't meet such as allowing them to go multi-platform, etc. Anyways, right now it's only a rumor so........

:unsure:

Quite frankly, I think they can do better things with their own original ideas...I mean they could make a Star Fox Adventures game that is just as good or better with different characters...

And as for their FPS's....let's just say they own me

Yeah, they are probably eagar to be a 3rd party.

We'll see at e3

Did you read the whole thing? Your still not going to be able to get any games like starfox or DK or anything bc those are nintendo franchises so they will never be anywhere but on a nintendo system.

Oh, this rumours still doing the rounds is it? Mark my words: Nintendo will not sell Rareware, as they hardly need the money,($2.9 for 2001.) and it's still too valubale an asset to Nintendo. Nintendo also owns all of Rareware's propetys since it's buyout in 1993. Besides, Activision probably doesn't have the financial muscle to do this sort of thing.

I wouldn't believe anything from GamesRadar. Wait until you hear it from a reliable source.

But I hope it's not true. For one, Rare would kinda go down the ****ter. There's a reason they've become so good, and that's because of Nintendo. Without their help, Rare wouldn't have become what they are. And if Rare decides to leave, they will end up with cheesy ass games since they no longer have a Bond license, a DK license, a KI license, or anything else like that (Star Fox, PD, JFG, etc.).

It's like when Rare leaves, they lose everything that made them into a great company. It would be like someone buying Microsoft, and in the process they lost Windows and Office. Rare would not be the same Rare anymore, and they would be much worse. Nintendo basically gave Rare everything they could possibly want to make the best games. Now they lose everything, and are going to make games without the great help of Nintendo, and without a franchise name to sell it.

Hell, why doesn't Activision buy out Polyphony Digital and leave the Gran Turismo rights to Sony. Really would benefit them, huh? :rolleyes:

Rare can always make an All new FPS...

If they can swicth from Goldeneye to Perfect Dark, they can swicth from Perfect Dark to somthing else.

Nintendo does not own Rare... they just own thier franchises.

Actually gekko, quite a few of us wouldn't mind losing Microsoft Office...

Imagine the repercussions if this is indeed proven true.
An unsavory relationship between Rare and Nintendo.
Ouch.

noooo...

perfect dark 0 better come to and stay with the cube.:(

Office for Windows sucks. Office for Mac is a work of art.

And PD blew chunks. Also, searched around. Activision Press Releases, anything? Notta. Now if Rare just invested all this money, they would release a press release because it's critical to their stock holders. And since they didn't, chances are they haven't bought out Rare. Also, they would want to promote a new purchase, wouldn't they?

Also, IGN doesn't have it, and they at least confirm their news before posting it (unlike GamesRadar).

...

what does pd stand for?:)

Ummmm doesnt nintendo own like 23% of rare or am i just an idiot?

Anyway i dont think rare will leave nintendo they'll have nothing left and have to start over again.

Perfect Dark.... :hmm:

Sony owns some of Square too... but neither Sony or Nintendo own enough of either company to stop them from developing for another console.

and what's wrong with Starting over?

how did pd blow chunks, that game is gonna be the best fps ever.

sony owns 19% of square

nintendo owns 23% of rare

:)

This would be awesome news if it is true. Now it's just a waiting game.

First of all, GamesRadar isn't exactly what you would call a reputable source. At least I don't consider them to be. They posted a story yesterday which was actually Nintendojo's April Fool's Joke (somehow, GamesRadar failed to realize that news posted on April 1st should be taken with a grain of salt. They also don't seem to realize that Nintendojo is rather sketchy as well).

Secondly, I don't think Rare is for sale. The other major owner of Rareware aside from Nintendo is the Stamper brothers (the guys who founded it). For Activision to buy out Rareware, the Stamper brothers would have to give up their share.

Thirdly, sit down and think about this for a second. Rareware is a huge development house of over 200 employees. Activision is not only much less well known but also smaller. Do you really think Activision can afford Rareware?

Fourthly, Activision is a publicly traded company. They would not be able to secretly purchase another company. Since the purchase of Rareware hasn't appeared on any company reports, it's highly unlikely that it ever happened. In these days with the collapse of Enron, companies are being especially careful not to hide their business deals.

Fifthly, Activision's sales were $748 million last year, with profits of $42 million. Nintendo is expected to post over $1 billion in just profits. All of this is publicly available information. Nintendo is not stupid enough to let some other company buy one of their second parties, and Nintendo wouldn't have any trouble at all outbidding Activision for Rareware.

wow, nice post. ur so right too. everyone listen to this, for this is tru. why would activision want to buy rare anyway. there is no reason for it. i dont think rare is leaving nintendo. thats all jus bull. besisdes i never heard it anaywhere esle besides here and afew non official junk sites.

That's a very good point. If Rareware was for sale, which it probabaly isn't, Nintendo would definetly be able to bid more than Activision. I think it's possible for Rare going 3rd party, but I highly doubt Activision would be able to buy it.

That is such a preposterous rumor!

How likely it is for Rare to leave the biggest international console games publisher in the world, to go with Activision(not saying they aren't big too)?

At this point onward, Rare's objective will most likely to move UP in the industry...not take a backward step.

If Rare goes any where, they'll most likely go the independent route, and expand from there.


PS: I suppose if they HAD to go the multiplatform route, Activision is a good resource supplier to have. However, this is Rare we are talking about, they have a name and will be more than willing to expand on it... meaning; Acquisition are out of the mix!.

Xantar, your point is invalid...

1) Nintendo will post 1 billion in profits because they make consoles... and they have the handheld market on lock.

2) What would make RARE more money (not Nintendo)... think about it. Rare could continue making exclusive games for Gamecube plublished by Nintendo and make all the money they made as a 2nd party.... and on top of that they would be able to port (new) games to every system and make a lot of extra $$$.

5 years down the line, Rare being a 3rd party would be a LOT more smart. I'm not even going to touch on the fact that GCN might fail (stping Nintendo from buying Rare)... and Xbox might fail (stoping Microsoft from buying Rare)...

IMO this news makes perfect sense... Rare wants to make more money in the long run.

Justin, I think you missed my point. I wasn't saying that Rareware could make more money off their relationship with Nintendo than they could being a third party. I was focusing solely on the possibility of Activision buying Rareware, and in my view, it's impossible. As I already said, even if Rareware were up for grabs, Nintendo (or Microsoft, for that matter) would be able to outbid all contenders. The amount of money Activision, in particular, could bring to the table is just laughable compared to what Nintendo could offer.

You also still haven't addressed my other points (namely Activision's failure to report this buyout, if it actually happened).

I never said in my post that it is not in the best interest for Rareware to become a third party. I don't really understand the business well enough to make that kind of claim. For all I know, it might be in their best interests eventually. But being bought out by Activision is certainly not the way to do it. The only thing that's going to accomplish is give part of the profits from Rareware games to Activision instead of Nintendo. If Rareware goes third party, it will be to publish their own games, not to simply have Activision doing it instead of Nintendo.

Finally, Rareware wouldn't really be in any trouble if Nintendo went belly up (never mind how implausible that is). If Nintendo fails and can no longer afford to keep Rareware, somebody else will buy them. This does not affect Rareware's financial well being. Anybody given the chance would jump at the opportunity to buy them.

You haven't looked at my point either then... because what I'm saying is that Rare is trying to make the most money for themselves.

If Nintendo or Microsoft bought out Rare, they couldn't possibly spend enough money to equal the amount of money Rare would make over the next 5 years as a 3rd party.

Like I said before, they could supply Nintendo with 2nd party games and make all the software $$4 they used to make, and they could stack 3rd party games for all 3 systems on top of that.

But if Rare goes 3rd party thier games sales will go to every platform. That just made a userbase to sell to 4x as big! They would be giving activision $$$, but they would walk away with at least double the profit themselves and and probably make as much as 5x as much $$$. Also, take into the account that ports cost less to make... and they they could still make 2nd party games for Nintendo, there is no way possible they could make less money than they make now.

So, if Activision did in fact buy them, they probably spent a lot less than what Rare wanted Nintendo or Microsoft to pay.

(plus, if Nintendo got second party titles from them with or without a buy, what would be the point of purchasing them?)

the sad part is, were probably just debating about a false rumor

That's really all I'm saying. Ok, I also said that Rareware wouldn't really gain anything out of being bought out by Activision. If Rareware were the size of Retro Studios or perhaps Silicon Knights, I might agree with you. But the fact is they are not. They are so big that they are capable of publishing some of their own games. They have, in fact, already done so on a few N64 games. Having all their games published by someone else would be a step backwards.

You are making all these claims that Rareware could make so much more money if they went third party, but you don't have a shred of evidence to back yourself up. And the real fact of the matter is neither you nor I knows how much money Rareware could make as a third party. There are all kinds of added expenses for that (not the least of which would be having to pay licensing fees to console manufacturers). And we have no idea how well their games would sell, especially since we don't know how well Rareware would be able to pump out the multiple games per year that a third party is required to make in order to survive.

You don't know that Rareware would cost less to Activision than to Nintendo or Microsoft. Besides, I don't think Rareware would make themselves 20 times cheaper for Activision, and that is the difference between the amount of cash Activision has and the amount of cash Nintendo has.

If Rareware were making games for other platforms, they wouldn't be giving second party titles to Nintendo any longer. The relationship would be broken off. Rareware may make exclusive third party games as Capcom and Factor 5 do, but Nintendo would not defray publishing and most development costs. Besides that, there is most certainly a point to keeping ownership of Rareware: to keep their games off of other platforms. That's a pretty valuable commodity.

*sigh*

Please Xantar, you have no clue what you are talking about.

Rare would make themselves cost more to Nintendo because the future potiental cash would be cut WAY down. Use common sense. Limiting development to one console can only hurt the all around games sold from Rare.

Is Rare a software developer or a hardware developer? Rare's money is made from Software, and by becoming a third party they would sell more software.

1) Rare would be making 2nd party games for Nintendo. Perfect Dark and Conker will become like Mario Golf and Tennis, and Zelda Oricle of seasons for GBC, and Mario RPG for SNES... a 2nd party game made by a "3rd party developer" (even though I still believe developrs can't be classified by party)

2) The only console they would worry about is Gamecube (as a third party developer) Because it would get the most exclusive games. The other Games can be developed for Xbox, and ported by other companies under Activision.

Never mind...just never mind. I've been reminded now why I try as hard as possible not to get into a debate with you. Let these posts stand as they are and the other members make their own decisions on the matter.

Ok... whatever you say

WTF are you talking about? The only reason Rare is picked on by Rumors is the fact that it IS possible.

You sound like a Sony fan when sombody would say Square is developing for Gamecube....

If it's impossible for Rare to leave Nintendo, tell us why it's so impossible.

Rare would not make more money by being owned by Activision. You think Rare sells their games alone? It's Nintendo that does the advertising for Rare, it's Nintendo that gives Rare the franchises to sell their games. Plus, Nintendo gives Rare more support than Activision ever could.

Nintendo basically funds Rare and everything they do. ActiVision doesn't have the same kind of money, and they can't give the same kind of help, support, and stuff like that. Look at StarFox 64, took off because it had a rumble pak. As a 3rd party, that wouldn't happen. They also wouldn't get the hardware as fast, and wouldn't have the help of Nintendo on their games, like the guidance of Shiggy and stuff. Hell, didn't Nintendo pay for Rare's facility?

Oh, and let's not forget, Rare can't leave until their contract is up ;)

Good point.

But there are 3 problems.

1) How much does Nintendo supply to Rare as far as $$$, and how do you know Activision can't support as good? (Nintendo may have a lot of money, but that doesn't mean they are giving it all to Rare)

2) How much money does Rare make Nintendo? If Nintendo were to have Rare as a "Camelot"developer for them (making 2nd party titles with franchises, and 3rd party titles for other consoles), would Nintendo walk away with more or less money?

3) If Rare were to remain independent, would they make more money? (not to start off, but 5-15 years down the line)

How do you know it isn't already up?

Your points on how Activision is a publicly traded company, and how if Rare was for sale Nintendo would be able to out bid Activision since they have more money, made total sense... to me atleast.

You and BigJustinW were debating 2 totally different things. You were debating about how the rumor wasn't true, and he was debating about how Rare could benifit if it were a third party. You never really said that Rare wouldn't benifit, all you said was that if they were heading in that direction, they wouldn't do it by being sold to Activision.