Viewing Thread:
"Dear Bonus..."

IGN recently did their E3 awards. They are totally irrelevant (one year Blinx won an award) but the ones that are most interesting are best graphics and Technological Excellence. Well the awards are in and for best graphics it is not a surprise to see a the RARE X-box re-release of Conker's Bad Fur Day followed quickly by Splinter Cell 3 with Resident Evil 4 a single vote behind that. You remember Resident Evil 4 surly Bonus? The one with the dissapointing graphical effects?

Well it beat Doom 3 AND Halo 2 to the awards, you know the games with "better graphics". But hey maybe you just meant the lighting and shadow effects yes? Well then you'll be surprised to hear it won the "Technological Excellence" award with this small snippet of information from the IGN crew:

Capcom's latest entry into the survival horror genre not only arrives as the most ambitious Resident Evil yet from a gameplay standpoint, but it also blows the rooftops off everything else out there from a technical one. The game, which once again stars franchise hero Leon Kennedy as he explores dark and gritty locales in search of the President's daughter, features the best graphics yet seen on GameCube. Unbelievably beautiful art design mixes with a host of technical achievements, from environments and character models made using high amounts of polygons to an incredibly detailed lighting and shadow system, explosive particle effects, superb animation and more, all of which make for an end visual experience that will leave players speechless -- and scared.

Your brilliant "Doom III" did not even get a runners up medal, ROME and Half Life 2 won those!

Now shut the hell up.

:) *All in the spirit of friendly debate of course.

I did say that, look see.

Mav have you seen the videos to conker.

Ah - I thought it was a mistake there on Dringo's part - didn't like to say... :)

Dringo wrote:
> RARE own the Kong brand, RARE may have the character designs (I dunno)
> but there is no way they can be called Kongs.

You mean Nintendo own the Kong brand, right?

> As for Conker: Live and Uncut...
>
> That did have the best graphics at E3.

No way. Can never compete with Half-Life 2.

If that were the case, then Nintendo would have to have Rare's permission to release Donkey Konga - I seriously doubt we'll be seeing the Rareware logo on that.

The only Kong games Rare have any claim to are the ones they've already created - such as the Donkey Kong Country series.

Nintendo own the Kong brand, RARE may have the character designs (I dunno) but there is no way they can be called Kongs.

As for Conker: Live and Uncut...

That did have the best graphics at E3.

If they were Strafio, they wouldn't be able to use the name 'Kong'.

Resi 4 looks class.

Rome: Total War does also. Oh yes.

I heard that Lanky, Tiny and Chunky were left with Rare, although I probably mis-heard.

I just assumed that they were Nintendo's rejects! :-D

All franchises owned by Nintendo when Rare were making games for them are still owned by Nintendo.

Any that Rare created are kept by themselves.

For example, despite Banjo appearing in Diddy Kong Racing, he is a Rareware character and so is still a Rareware character.

Rareware however don't own the rights to any Kong related characters though. That would be like saying Namco own Starfox and Nintendo own Pacman.

Strafio wrote:
> Nintendo did try and claim ownership to all of Rare's franchises
> because Rare had them copyrighted under Nintendo.
> This didn't go down too well at Twycross though! :-D
>
>
> They came to an agreement though. :-)
> The only Rare-made character owned by Nintendo is Diddy Kong, and
> probably Crystal too, looking at Starfox 2...
>
> Lanky, Chunky and Tiny Kong?
> Rare would've been happy to let them go... if Nintendo had been happy
> to take them! :-D

Wasn't it that all characters in games that were big franchises of Nintendos like Donkey Kong and Starfox got kept by Nintendo. They own all the Kongs don't they? And the Dinosaur Planet original characters in Starfox 2.