Rareware... I mean Rare vs Retro Studios

The current Rare vs the current Retro Studios. I personally find Retro Studios to be blowing Rare out of the Water this generation and last generation. Nuts and bolts was a let down, Kameo I heard was pretty good but nothing compared to the N64 days. And the prime games were great. I'm looking forward to Donkey Kong Country Returns, can't say the same about Kinect Sports...

To me Retro Studios is the new Rareware.

Geeze, why is it so rare for Rare to make a great game?

Retro Studios. There game are in development for quite awhile, and they have unrivaled, polish, and attention to detail in their games.

Retro Studios they made the Prime trilogy enough said.

Right now I'd pick Retro over Rare any day of the week.

Back in the N64 days however...

Retro Studios. There game are in development for quite awhile, and they have unrivaled, polish, and attention to detail in their games.

AmayaPapaya

this. this.

Retro IS the new rare

the MP series is amazing and now they have taken control of the DKC series which mind you was made by none other than "rareware"

Retro Studios. There game are in development for quite awhile, and they have unrivaled, polish, and attention to detail in their games.

AmayaPapaya

Old Rare>>Retro>>>>Current Rare.

[QUOTE="AmayaPapaya"]

Retro Studios. There game are in development for quite awhile, and they have unrivaled, polish, and attention to detail in their games.

Nedemis

Old Rare>>Retro>>>>Current Rare.

St_muscat

Retro by a landslide

Rare once was comparable to them but now they are a sad joke

I'm going with Retro simply because the last RARE game I even played more then one day was Conker's Bad Fur Day. The Prime Trilogy however is the main game that has been in my Wii for the last 5 months. :PNedemis

[QUOTE="St_muscat"]

Old Rare>>Retro>>>>Current Rare.

110million

Retro have made 1 AA this gen. Rare has made 1 AAA and 4AAs, theres no competition.

Overall however i like the direction Retro is heading in. Im not saying Rare are better but theyve just had more time and im sure over a longer period of time, we'll see more amazing games. We've seen only 5 Retro games (1 cancelled and one not released) against Rares 10+ AAAs.

But like the topic says, its rare vs retro but il still have to give it to rare. The games are coming guys, just be patient.

Retro have made 1 AA this gen. Rare has made 1 AAA and 4AAs, theres no competition.

Overall however i like the direction Retro is heading in. Im not saying Rare are better but theyve just had more time and im sure over a longer period of time, we'll see more amazing games. We've seen only 5 Retro games (1 cancelled and one not released) against Rares 10+ AAAs.

But like the topic says, its rare vs retro but il still have to give it to rare. The games are coming guys, just be patient.

Oonga

When the topic comes up, Retro vs old Rare, it is hard. TBH, everything that Retro has put out to me is better than anything Rare has. But Rare has put out a huge amount of quality AA-AAA games. Some of them (for their time) weren't that far away from Retro's games.

I'll say then old Rare=Retro. Which is a huge accomplishment. In this day and age, Games take a lot longer to make than the N64 games. Rare themselves haven't released too many games at all.

Retro have made 1 AA this gen.

Oonga

True, but it goes much deeper than just 1 AA game. They made what was arguably the best game last gen, a sequel to it which to some was even better, and if not, still an outstanding AAA title. MP3, was an outstanding game also. The review from GS is full of praise, and a good tone. It sounds like an AAA game from the review. From what I have been told, the only reason it got AA, was because the Reviewer really disliked the fetch quest toward the end of the game.

I'm judging them as they are now... because thats all that really matters. So Retro >>> Rare.... but RARE in their prime were awesome!

I loved Rare, but even in their glory days they never made a game as great as Metroid Prime.

And now, it isn't even close. Retro >>>>>>>>>>>> Rare

[QUOTE="Oonga"]

Retro have made 1 AA this gen. Rare has made 1 AAA and 4AAs, theres no competition.

Overall however i like the direction Retro is heading in. Im not saying Rare are better but theyve just had more time and im sure over a longer period of time, we'll see more amazing games. We've seen only 5 Retro games (1 cancelled and one not released) against Rares 10+ AAAs.

But like the topic says, its rare vs retro but il still have to give it to rare. The games are coming guys, just be patient.

farnham

Why dont you include New play metroid prime 1 and New play metroid prime 2 whilst you're at it. A little bit silly putting trilogy up there.

Still, its 1 AAA versus 5 AA games. Im sure the majority of people will side with the 5 AAs.

Im not trying to say Retro is worse than Rare. I actually think theyre equal and very similar to one another. It just comes down to who has put out more titles and that would be Rare.

True, but it goes much deeper than just 1 AA game. They made what was arguably the best game last gen, a sequel to it which to some was even better, and if not, still an outstanding AAA title. MP3, was an outstanding game also. The review from GS is full of praise, and a good tone. It sounds like an AAA game from the review. From what I have been told, the only reason it got AA, was because the Reviewer really disliked the fetch quest toward the end of the game.

AmayaPapaya

I understand where you're coming from and me putting 1 AA sort of underplays Retros work. But everything you said apart from the last part can be applied to Rare. With more examples.

Ah system wars, the only board were the both suck option can get any votes :lol:... anyway I choose retro but then again I choose them over pretty much everyone ever since they released the first prime. I have a few Rare games this gen though and they are still really enjoyable, I think their best work this gen was viva pinata which is unfortunatly not to suit all tastes :?.

[QUOTE="AmayaPapaya"]

Retro Studios. There game are in development for quite awhile, and they have unrivaled, polish, and attention to detail in their games.

Half-Way

this. this.

I don't know if I can compare them both because Retro only made the Prime trilogy and currently working on DKCR while Rare has a rich history of games. But I will compare Rare's SNES days to Retro's GC and today's. I say Retro is better.

Retro has released a single AA game this generation. Rare has released many AA games and one AAA game. I don't think its fair to even compare the two, as Retro has been dedicated to a particular project for quite a while, and doesn't have the resources to produce many quality games at one time. I also think the criticism put against Rare is unfair, solely because it focuses on comparing new Rare to old Rare and doesn't account for the fact that Rare has produced just as many quality titles as they were producing back in the day... and that standards for game reviews have changed so much, that the scores they were getting on the N64 are basically the same ones as they are getting now. They only appear lower because game reviews have become more harsh and not given out 10/9.9's like candy.

I'd pretty much say that old Rare > current Retro and current Retro > current Rare. BUT, Retro are still building their portfolio, so at this rate future retro could potentially > old Rare, but we just have to wait and see what Retro come up with after Donkey Kong Country Returns. What makes me say Old Rare > Current Retro is simply because Rare had so many great games during the 64 era. But who's to say Retro won't develop great game after great game. They've already done the Prime series and now Donkey Kong looks promising.

Only time will tell.

Final answer though:
Old Rare>Current Retro>Current Rare (we'll just have to wait and see what future Retro has to offer before I can give my full answer!)

[QUOTE="farnham"][QUOTE="Oonga"] uh according to gamerankings Retro - 2 AAAs Metroid Prime 3 - 90 AAA Metroid Prime Triology 93 AAA Rare - 5 AAs Perfect Dark Zero - 81 AA Kameo - 80 AA Viva Pinata - 85 AA Viva Pinata Paradise - 82 AA Banjo Nuts and Bolts - 80 AAOonga

Why dont you include New play metroid prime 1 and New play metroid prime 2 whilst you're at it. A little bit silly putting trilogy up there.

Still, its 1 AAA versus 5 AA games. Im sure the majority of people will side with the 5 AAs.

Im not trying to say Retro is worse than Rare. I actually think theyre equal and very similar to one another. It just comes down to who has put out more titles and that would be Rare.

True, but it goes much deeper than just 1 AA game. They made what was arguably the best game last gen, a sequel to it which to some was even better, and if not, still an outstanding AAA title. MP3, was an outstanding game also. The review from GS is full of praise, and a good tone. It sounds like an AAA game from the review. From what I have been told, the only reason it got AA, was because the Reviewer really disliked the fetch quest toward the end of the game.

AmayaPapaya

I understand where you're coming from and me putting 1 AA sort of underplays Retros work. But everything you said apart from the last part can be applied to Rare. With more examples.

Retro has released a single AA game this generation. Rare has released many AA games and one AAA game. I don't think its fair to even compare the two, as Retro has been dedicated to a particular project for quite a while, and doesn't have the resources to produce many quality games at one time. I also think the criticism put against Rare is unfair, solely because it focuses on comparing new Rare to old Rare and doesn't account for the fact that Rare has produced just as many quality titles as they were producing back in the day... and that standards for game reviews have changed so much, that the scores they were getting on the N64 are basically the same ones as they are getting now. They only appear lower because game reviews have become more harsh and not given out 10/9.9's like candy.

foxhound_fox

wow some people actually believe Perfect Dark Zero is AAA :lolfarnham

[QUOTE="farnham"]wow some people actually believe Perfect Dark Zero is AAA :lolfoxhound_fox

Gamespot once was creditable. but after gerstmann wars its just laughable to defend Gamespots credibility. Posting in SW doesnt mean that you have to be blind. they received a big check from MS to get an launch AAA game.. great.. the general gaming press rated it as an AA game (80 at gamerankings)

farnham

wait a sec you include viva pinata paradise which is basically viva pinata with some additional features and wont include MP Triology which contains 3 but also the remake of 1 and 2 ? also New Player Controll MP 1 and 2 is included in MP Triolgy those games were never released as NPC Mp 1 and 2 outside of japanfarnham

Viva Pinata 2 is universally regarded a full-fledged sequal. Theres a long list of features i can give but i have to go in a bit. Just think of it like SMG to SMG2, same idea but better.

The rest im not going to argue with anymore, i dont want people to think of me as a Retro hater. The bottom line is, Retro have only released one game this gen.

I haven't played PDZ beyond the demo, but I think a lot of people over-exaggerate its "badness."

foxhound_fox

Its so sad, i don't ive ever seen a greater case of jumping on the hate bandwagon than PDZ. First fact is, its not better than PD64. It never was going to be and every knows this. But the idea that its actually a bad game baffles me.

The game has 32 player multiplayer including many modes including something very similar to left 4 dead. You can have bots to fill in the missing places (useful a.i.) and when a person leaves, they are replaced with bots. You can do this both offline, online and system link. The story mode had full online/offiline co-op with many missions. It had all the amazing gadgets from the first game including jetpacks, something all games are quickly jumping on. Oh and there was also a 1st-person cover mechanic, another thing a certain game seems to have borrowed. I havent played it since 2009 but overall it was an great game and was filled with content.

People saying PDZ is a bad game is the equivelant of someone saying nuts and bolts is crap. Its just absurd. You also have to consider that this released in 2005 and understanding that, its easy to see why Greg thought it deserved AAA. People like to bring up PDZ and compare it to the most recent games and use that as a justification of why it didnt deserve its score. Funny thing is, it still has all these games beat in a straight features list.

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]

Retro has released a single AA game this generation. Rare has released many AA games and one AAA game. I don't think its fair to even compare the two, as Retro has been dedicated to a particular project for quite a while, and doesn't have the resources to produce many quality games at one time. I also think the criticism put against Rare is unfair, solely because it focuses on comparing new Rare to old Rare and doesn't account for the fact that Rare has produced just as many quality titles as they were producing back in the day... and that standards for game reviews have changed so much, that the scores they were getting on the N64 are basically the same ones as they are getting now. They only appear lower because game reviews have become more harsh and not given out 10/9.9's like candy.

farnham

Oh, and it was a lot more fun that the original IMO... if you people actually played it now instead of in your memories of 10 years ago, I'm sure most would agree with me. N64 shooters aged TERRIBLY.

[QUOTE="farnham"]Gamespot once was creditable. but after gerstmann wars its just laughable to defend Gamespots credibility. Posting in SW doesnt mean that you have to be blind. they received a big check from MS to get an launch AAA game.. great.. the general gaming press rated it as an AA game (80 at gamerankings)

foxhound_fox

well its still ironic that those so called AAA games from RARE are scored lower then RETROS MP3 which has AAA on MC and GR aswell as Metroid Prime Trilogy

N64 shooters aged TERRIBLY.Guppy507

[QUOTE="farnham"]wow some people actually believe Perfect Dark Zero is AAA :lolfoxhound_fox

[QUOTE="Guppy507"] N64 shooters aged TERRIBLY.foxhound_fox

What content are you talking about? PDZ had more modes, more players, and more weapons.

Guppy507

[QUOTE="Guppy507"]What content are you talking about? PDZ had more modes, more players, and more weapons.

foxhound_fox

if we were comparing today's retro with the past's rare, this matchup would be a bit more fair!!