Microsoft Developing Games For Nintendo DS 53
DerekJones writes "This week, evidence surfaced confirming that Microsoft is indeed developing games for the DS. It came in the form of two job listings on the official Web site for Rare Ltd., the Britain-based developer of Conker: Live and Reloaded for the Xbox and Perfect Dark Zero for the Xbox 360. Given that Nintendo's handhelds are its main source of revenue, Microsoft creating new content for the DS would be giving ammunition to its archrival in the current- and next-generation console wars."
Sounds good to me (Score:2)
Archrival? Hardly. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Archrival? Hardly. (Score:1)
Re:Archrival? Hardly. (Score:2, Informative)
This isn't that surprising. (Score:2)
MS sees a potential source of profit with the DS, they don't have a competing portable to push, and if they can make things a little tougher for Sony and their PSP, then that's just a bonus.
MS has been making software for Macs for a long time. They rarely pa
Re:This isn't that surprising. (Score:2)
It's mostly conjecture at this point, but if the rumors on PS3 pricing are true, then Sony's probably going to be boning themselves instead of MS.
Are You Experienced? (Score:5, Insightful)
At the moment, Nintendo is the leader in the portable market. The road is littered with machines made by Nintendo's competitors that failed. Microsoft, at the moment, knows nothing about portable consoles, and has no experience. If they were to try right now to produce a handheld X-Box, the attempt might be successful, but it would more likely end in miserable failure. By working with Nintendo, they are gaining experience regarding how running a portable console works. And they're making a profit while they're doing it. In 2-3 years, they'll know quite a bit about how and why GameBoy and the DS are successful. Then, if they feel like it, they can use their knowledge to produce their own handheld. Combine the knowledge they'll have gained with Microsoft's resources and ability to tie into the X-Box and PC market, and they stand a good chance of succeeding where Sega, Atari, and many others have failed.
Re:Are You Experienced? (Score:2)
I just find it hard to believe Microsoft can make anything in a portable size.
I present you Exhibit A [imageshack.us]
Remember The Dreamcast (Score:2)
Re:Remember The Dreamcast (Score:1)
The lesson I've learned is that any Microsoft release tends to be highly exploitable. What I remember most about the WindowsCE on the Dreamcast was it made the box easy to exploit and run other software (DreamSNES emulator being of particular note).
Like the Dreamcast, now Microsoft's own console is also easy to exploit. An old copy of MechAssault or Splinter Cell (the original) and a special save-game mod you can patch Xboxen all day long -- without any special chips or anything. Those of us suffering u
Re:Are You Experienced? (Score:2)
This is not that big of a deal (Score:3, Insightful)
However, it now appears that Microsoft may be crazy like a fox. This week, evidence surfaced confirming that the company is indeed developing games for the DS.
One word: No. Microsoft is not crazy. Considering that Microsoft is not in the handheld business producing games on a handheld system of a competitor does not hurt them any. This only can add a little bit of profit for them if the game does well.
Additionally, Microsoft gets to choose which handheld they want to support. Since Microsoft seems to be gearing up for a direct confrontation between the Xbox 360 and the PS3, they obviously do not want to support Sony. Since Nintendo has a lower market share in the console division, Microsoft wouldn't feel as threatened by them.
Also, Rare developed a fair share of games for the Nintendo 64. While not all of these were the IP of Rare, I could easilly see a few DS rehashes of Conker's bad fur day and Perfect Dark on the DS. They've still got the code for the 64 versions of those games and a little bit of reworking could get them two games that are likely to do well. Considering their recent dry spell and their lack of any other exciting titles coming out (the next Perfect Dark doesn't look very good at the moment) they need to put something out the door to make some money.
I think this works out well for everyone involved. Rare gets to produce some games that have the potential to sell well. Nintendo gets some games that might sell more DS systems. Gamers get some more games that have the potential to be worth buying.
Re:This is not that big of a deal (Score:2)
Re:This is not that big of a deal (Score:1)
I don't understand what you're saying?
First. Making money IS the benefit. It's their whole purpose for existing in the first place.
Second. Why wouldn't having no competition result in selling more games?
Re:This is not that big of a deal (Score:2)
Making money is the purpose of corporate existing, yes. My point is that if another company goes under, you making more money is a side-effect, not a definite result of that failure. For instance, Atari dying and causing the first videogame crash didn't result in everyone else making more money - it nearly resulted in total industry collapse.
Second. Why wouldn't having no competition result in selling more games?
Re:This is not that big of a deal (Score:1)
Re:This is not that big of a deal (Score:1)
Wasn't the industry already dying around the time Atari died anyway? I mean, it's not like they died because Nintendo came along and took all their market right? If that is what happened, then Atari dying might not have caused the industry to nearly collapse.
On the second point. I see what you're saying, but maybe Microsoft vs Sony would be a better example.
Nintendo doesn't seem to be competing for the same type of gamers that Sony and MS are competing for.
For instance most of the popular g
Re:This is not that big of a deal (Score:1)
Re:This is not that big of a deal (Score:1)
There are a ton of reasons why MS wants to make games for the DS and there's nothing to say they won't make games for the PSP in the future. Perhaps they are scared of the fact that games haven't been selling so well on the PSP compared to the DS?
Re:This is not that big of a deal (Score:1)
Re:This is not that big of a deal (Score:1)
Other games I'm looking forward to...
Nanostray [ign.com]
Viewtiful Joe [ign.com]
Metroid
Castlevania [ign.com]
New Super Mario Bros. [ign.com] (side scroller!)
Re:This is not that big of a deal (Score:2)
True. What if..say..MS and Sony decided to make the next GTA a 3-part game where the first two parts could be completed in either order, but the first would only be on the Xbox 360 version of the game and the second only on the PS3 version (the third would work on either console)? And if they d
Re:This is not that big of a deal (Score:1)
An FU to Sony (Score:2)
Re:An FU to Sony (Score:1, Insightful)
Seeing what Rare has since put out, I can't say that Nintendo made a bad decision.
Re:An FU to Sony (Score:1)
Are you thinking of a different Rare? This is the company that spent nearly three years developing a Zelda clone for the N64 that, after being moved to the GameCube, was widely considered to be a flop. This is the Rare that, after being owned by Microsoft for two and a half years delivered one sub-par kiddie ghost-hunting game. (Ironically enough, Rare has released more games for the GBA than the Xbox after being purchased
Re:An FU to Sony (Score:2)
Heaven forbid the company that brought us a gem like Donkey Kong 64 would stop making games for Nintendo. Rare is also responable for classics such as: WWF Wrestlemania Challenge (NES), and Mickey's Racing Adventure (GBC)
That said, Rare has generally made very good games. Jet Force Gemini is one of my favorite N64 games, and Goldeneye is always a classic.
Blurring the lines between consoles (Score:1)
Microsoft has to learn the difference between total market penetration, and targetted penetration. Rather then dominating the entire market (as they are always intent on doing), they need to learn how to carve out their own niche, and excel in it.
The XBOX has way too many gam
Re:Blurring the lines between consoles (Score:1)
It's pretty simple, really. Sony, the current home console leader and the only company to dethrone Nintendo in the past, is having trouble entering the portable market. If this experienced maker of personal tech (with ten years
Re:Blurring the lines between consoles (Score:1)
PMC's using CE are all the rage right now. Give it a few years.
MicrosSOFT is and always will be a software company. Consoles are a software delivery method. More consoles = mor
Procedure: (Score:2, Insightful)
2) Nintendo again has no competitor in the handheld market
3) Microsoft enters the handheld market
Re:Procedure: (Score:1)
5)Profit!
The DS is becomming Unstopable (Score:1, Insightful)
"Few could have imagined it, but the DS is becoming the most significant new console in Japan since the PS2. What started as a rumbling -- with great novelty games such as Wario and XX/YY -- has recently turned into a full-scale dual-screen uprising led by Electroplankton and Nintendogs. For the past month or so, the DS has been outselling all other hardware (incl
Not All Shocking Though (Score:2)
1. Microsoft actually isn't a game "developer", they're a game "publisher". The actual developer in question here is Rare, and they've worked with Nintendo oh so famously in the past as a second party. It's all a matter of Microsoft giving an OK and making some bucks off of the Conker, Dark and Banjo games. Why WOULDN'T they do this?
2. Microsoft does have a "handheld" but it's the PocketPC. Being Nintendo has no intentions to e
Isn't this how they got Apple? (Score:3, Insightful)
This whole thing reminds me of how M$ originally got Apple. They come along offering to make software for their hardware just to get a good peek inside and then take all the info they need and then use it to make a competing product.
Re:Isn't this how they got Apple? (Score:1)
In fact, Microsoft probably has very little involvement with this. MS only owns 49% of Rare, IIRC. There are a lot of guys at Rare that probably still have a strong affinity toward Nintendo, and de
Re:Isn't this how they got Apple? (Score:1)
My guess is that if MS does make a portable, it will be licensed similar to pocket pcs. Probably a mobile phone with a strip down version of mobile windows, like an Ngage but with more processing power.
Revolution game downloads (Score:1)
Re:Revolution game downloads (Score:1)
Re:Revolution game downloads (Score:1)
Re:Revolution game downloads (Score:1)
According to Nintendo.com [nintendo.com], Nintendo owns the publishing rights.
I would suspect that Goldeneye can be downloaded on the Revolution... regaardless of Rare's blessing.
Of course, this is merely speculation.
Re:This is Rare, not MICROSOFT (Score:2)
Oh, Rare, not Microsoft... (Score:2)
Rare developing for DS is hardly unexpected - they have produced GBA titles too (umm, Sabrewulf or whatever it was called?) since the Microsoft bought them!
Rare switched from GameCube to XBox because their owner made it and could also sell it too (<fangrumble>to ignorant sheep</fangrumble>); I guess Rare folks just told Microsoft "nobody buys WinCE devices for gaming, so we'll do handheld games for Nintendo platforms, until you can make something more popular". Microsoft hasn't made anything e