The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I was just thinking, is it possible for rare to us all thegay donkey kong charichters(?) they created, into their new X-box games? this occuredd to me when i thought that chunky kong, from DK64, would make a good sort of style platformer for their new home console. I cant imagine nintendo wanting any of those stupid zoo rejects, but it's a thought.
Page:
*can not reply unconscious*
wait i just did :S
wait i just did :S
Who cares, Rare suck!
:P
:P
Boz wrote:
> *elbows dark mark*
*
*knocks Boz unconscious*
Tsk!
> *elbows dark mark*
*
*knocks Boz unconscious*
Tsk!
shhhhhhhhh, they made the game possible, with out them its bad.
isnt it dark mark.
*elbows dark mark*
isnt it dark mark.
*elbows dark mark*
Boz wrote:
> And didnt THQ play a part in the making on conkers bad fur day? there
> name is printed on it and stuff :S
*
THQ published it, but had nothing to do with its' development.
> And didnt THQ play a part in the making on conkers bad fur day? there
> name is printed on it and stuff :S
*
THQ published it, but had nothing to do with its' development.
Dringo wrote:
> Nintendo held all Licenses!
> Yep Perfect Dark and Banjo included.
> Nintendo sold 'em back.
> Except the Donkey Kong and Diddy Kong licenses.
> Because Donkey Kong was developed by Nintendo.
That always had me thinking becuase it was always copyright of nintendo/rare, also are those the only titles they sold back? just the only big ones ive heard of are banjo, conker and perfect dark..
perfect dark wont be as big becuase FPS games are being made by nearly every company so they have more games to contest with, instead of having about 5 they will have 20+, banjo i think wont be welcomed to the xbox as we al have said its for "mature" gamers. And didnt THQ play a part in the making on conkers bad fur day? there name is printed on it and stuff :S
> Nintendo held all Licenses!
> Yep Perfect Dark and Banjo included.
> Nintendo sold 'em back.
> Except the Donkey Kong and Diddy Kong licenses.
> Because Donkey Kong was developed by Nintendo.
That always had me thinking becuase it was always copyright of nintendo/rare, also are those the only titles they sold back? just the only big ones ive heard of are banjo, conker and perfect dark..
perfect dark wont be as big becuase FPS games are being made by nearly every company so they have more games to contest with, instead of having about 5 they will have 20+, banjo i think wont be welcomed to the xbox as we al have said its for "mature" gamers. And didnt THQ play a part in the making on conkers bad fur day? there name is printed on it and stuff :S
Now..........that......... is very...................annoying..... grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.............. Indeed. Ah well. :)
GnomeKiller wrote:
> Nintendo wouldn't have to buy the rights for Donkey Kong because they
> already have them. Shigeru Miyamoto made Donkey Kong 20 years ago,
> therefore Nintendo own the rights. Plus DK isn't a reject where'd you
> get that from?
Oh yes sorry I didn't mean to say bought.
Nintendo held all Licenses!
Yep Perfect Dark and Banjo included.
Nintendo sold 'em back.
Except the Donkey Kong and Diddy Kong licenses.
Because Donkey Kong was developed by Nintendo.
> Nintendo wouldn't have to buy the rights for Donkey Kong because they
> already have them. Shigeru Miyamoto made Donkey Kong 20 years ago,
> therefore Nintendo own the rights. Plus DK isn't a reject where'd you
> get that from?
Oh yes sorry I didn't mean to say bought.
Nintendo held all Licenses!
Yep Perfect Dark and Banjo included.
Nintendo sold 'em back.
Except the Donkey Kong and Diddy Kong licenses.
Because Donkey Kong was developed by Nintendo.
?!
Page: