Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Developing Games For Nintendo DS

Zonk posted more than 9 years ago | from the cross-platform-craziness dept.

Nintendo 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."

cancel ×


Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Sounds good to me (1)

vga_init (589198) | more than 9 years ago | (#13016160)

Sure, I'm anti-microsoft, but that's me as a programmer and system adminsitrator. As a gamer, however, I kind of like what Microsoft does. I'm glad to see them supporting the DS, because it seems to me that the handheld seems to be a little underrated, having been eclipsed in the press by the PSP. Which is a better handheld, I'm not sure, but my wallet says that the DS is more attracitve. ;) Also, two screens is a novel concept, and I'd want to play with it just for that.

Archrival? Hardly. (3, Insightful)

SeekerDarksteel (896422) | more than 9 years ago | (#13016178)

I'd wager that MS would consider Sony its primary adversary, not Nintendo. That's probably why they're supporting the DS. It doesn't hurt them because they don't have a portable system, but I bet they'd love it if this hurt Sony (by influencing people to favor DSs over PSPs). In a heads up fight between MS and Nintendo, MS is probably sure they would dominate so they'd like to see Sony as weakened as possible even if it means Nintendo gains a little ground.

Re:Archrival? Hardly. (1)

saphint (668126) | more than 9 years ago | (#13017242)

MS still needs to make good games for the DS, or if what you are saying is true then it will be a wasted effort. MS is probably supporting the DS or infact getting into the handheld market as they probably see them selves with their own handheld in about 3-6 years.

Re:Archrival? Hardly. (2, Informative)

iocat (572367) | more than 9 years ago | (#13017680)

Microsoft already is licensing games for the DS. Majesco is bring out Age of Kings [] this Christmas.

Re:Archrival? Hardly. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13023170)

More over the lessons learned, and paid for by consumers, can make their way into making their third version of XNA studio something of *the* way to make a commercial game. Sony only starts to look like a pretty crappy choice if Microsoft can reasonably deliver on a write once, target anything promise. Maybe our OpenBSD toaster ovens will be able to run Commander Keen X courtesy of Microsoft.

This isn't that surprising. (1)

cowscows (103644) | more than 9 years ago | (#13016192)

I don't think this is too surprising. MS isn't too worried about Nintendo right now, they're really just fighting with Sony in the console domain. Nintendo is out doing their own thing, and even if they weren't, the DS isn't all that connected anyways.

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 pass up a market that looks like it could make them some money.

Re:This isn't that surprising. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13016606)

"they're really just fighting with Sony in the console domain"


Other than being ass-raped in public by Sony last generation, is there any evidence that Microsoft is anything more than a nasty bit of roadkill on the great console highway?

The Dreamcast 360 looks like Microsoft is even pulling their pants down and bending over for Sony this time around.

Re:This isn't that surprising. (1)

cowscows (103644) | more than 9 years ago | (#13016725)

Well, the massive marketing campaign that we're going to see for the 360 shows that they're going to fight pretty hard. You seem to believe that they're wasting their time, but that's ok.

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? (4, Insightful)

voice of unreason (231784) | more than 9 years ago | (#13016206)

This seems like it might be a smarter move for MS than one might think. Consider this:

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? (1)

Soul-Burn666 (574119) | more than 9 years ago | (#13016314)

I'm sorry.
I just find it hard to believe Microsoft can make anything in a portable size.
I present you Exhibit A []

Re:Are You Experienced? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13017813)

Yeah, um, whatever. You're aware that the XBox was in fact not meant to be a portable console, aren't you? Guess what neither was the PS2. Big farking deal.

You carry it from the store to the car. And from the car to the living room. Then you don't move it in ages unless you (a) move, (b) clean your living room or (c) replace your XBox with something new and move the old Xbox to the basement/bedroom/whatever.

How is weight or size a factor there? Do you routinely carry around your Xbox? Maybe on a chain around your neck? Yeah, that's what I thought. (It's not 2000 any more. DVD players are $30 a pop. Everybody and their mother has either a PS2 or an Xbox. I sure as hell am not going to bring my console to a friend's house to play some damn Madden.)

Re:Are You Experienced? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13018730)

Oh gimme a break. The Xbox is a huge big console. Don't defend it. It's bigger than a lot of DVD players in terms of volume. The PS2 was a sleek device by nearly all accounts and the GameCube was a great small portable console for those SSMB games.

And you obviously do not play 16 player Halo, go to college, or have LAN parties. And no, the majority of homes do not have an Xbox or PS2. It's not that big of a deal, but it sure is inconvenient.

Remember The Dreamcast (1)

blueZhift (652272) | more than 9 years ago | (#13016673)

Microsoft has made this move before. They teamed up with Sega on the Dreamcast, which despite eventually losing the war to Sony was a pretty decent machine. The DC pioneered online console gaming with its built in modem and ran a version of Windows CE [] . I suspect that Microsoft took a lot of lessons from the DC into the Xbox later.

Re:Remember The Dreamcast (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13017243)

"I suspect that Microsoft took a lot of lessons from the DC into the Xbox later."

Was that supposed to be a joke?

I don't think MS appreciates the Dreamcast 360 name that seems to have sprung up for their next console...

Re:Remember The Dreamcast (1)

Generic Guy (678542) | more than 9 years ago | (#13026972)

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 under hope that Dreamcast's emulators would ever improve have mostly moved on to softmod'ed Xboxes, which do a darned good job in that respect.

Re:Are You Experienced? (1)

Elranzer (851411) | more than 9 years ago | (#13017256)

...and they stand a good chance of succeeding where Sega, Atari, and many others have failed.
Don't forget Sony.

Re:Are You Experienced? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13020792)

well there is that and the fact that the alternative is sony who they probably hate more than nintendo

This is not that big of a deal (2, Insightful)

alvinrod (889928) | more than 9 years ago | (#13016220)


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 (1)

Snowmit (704081) | more than 9 years ago | (#13016667)

Yes. I am brutally sick and tired of people talking about the gaming business as if the Console Wars was a real thing where each company actually cared whether or not their competitors were crushed out of existence rather than just cool marketing gimmickry that whips the faithful into a frenzy. Console ownership is not like real estate. If I own land and you want it, then going to war means something. Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony derive no benefit from the disappearance of any competitor aside from any side-effects ghat MIGHT result in them selling more games and so making more money.

But in some cases, such as selling your games on someone else's handheld, you might make MORE MONEY by cooperating with other companies. Apparently Microsoft has decided that in the case of the DS, this is the case.

Re:This is not that big of a deal (1)

PeelBoy (34769) | more than 9 years ago | (#13016814)

Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony derive no benefit from the disappearance of any competitor aside from any side-effects ghat MIGHT result in them selling more games and so making more money.

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 (1)

Snowmit (704081) | more than 9 years ago | (#13017072)

First. Making money IS the benefit. It's their whole purpose for existing in the first place.
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?
Because the market is not of a fixed size. If Nintendo goes under, then former Nintendo customers will not automatically buy Microsoft and Sony products. Some will stop buying games altogether and take up model railroading. Some will just spend less on games because they already owned the other consoles anyway. To be fair, some will migrate and buy Madden PS3 instead of Madden Revolution - these are the side effects.

On the other hand, if Microsoft convinces someone to buy an Xbox 360, this does not automatically mean that Nintendo or Sony lost a sale. In some cases it does - people do choose between consoles. But maybe the customer owns the other consoles anyway. Or maybe the customer is new to gaming entirely and would not have bought ANY games/consoles (think Nintendogs).

Re:This is not that big of a deal (1)

theREALMcCoy (817988) | more than 9 years ago | (#13017173)

Thank you for this insight. Too many people get into these gaming/business arguements and have no clue about business or economics. Its not about winning a war for the console makers, its about building market share.

Re:This is not that big of a deal (1)

PeelBoy (34769) | more than 9 years ago | (#13017212)

You're right.

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 games on Nintendo consoles are made by Nintendo, but say if Microsoft killed off Sony don't you think Rockstar and Squar Enix would start making their popular games for the Xbox?

Re:This is not that big of a deal (1)

richman555 (675100) | more than 9 years ago | (#13017238)

I don't know what your talking about. Nintendogs is going to be a great game and I'm not new to gaming at all. Heck it might even be game of the year after reading alot of rave reviews about it. I think the fact that MS wants to make DS games just shows that there is alot of interest in what Nintendo is doing. Alot of folks are becoming excited about Nintendo this time around, and its not just newbie gamers.

Re:This is not that big of a deal (1)

PeelBoy (34769) | more than 9 years ago | (#13017287)

Hmmm I don't think he was saying Nintendogs wasn't a great game just that it's a game which could appeal to a lot of non-gamers or new gamers.

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 (1)

richman555 (675100) | more than 9 years ago | (#13017366)

True. I do see that Nintendo has alot of momentum going with the DS these days although alot of people are downplaying it. I have enjoyed the new Kirby game as well as Meteos. I also know that there is alot more coming this year as well. I have never been the biggest Nintendo fan either (used to love all things SEGA), but their new innovative strategy really seems to appeal to me. Playing games on the DS is very different, new, enjoyable and overall a great value. I think Nintendo is going to be successful with the DS thats for sure.

Re:This is not that big of a deal (1)

PeelBoy (34769) | more than 9 years ago | (#13017426)

Kirby Canvas Curse is great. Meteos and Electroplankton both look awesome too.

Other games I'm looking forward to...

Nanostray []
Viewtiful Joe []
Castlevania []
New Super Mario Bros. [] (side scroller!)

Re:This is not that big of a deal (1)

Geoffreyerffoeg (729040) | more than 9 years ago | (#13018778)

But in some cases, such as selling your games on someone else's handheld, you might make MORE MONEY by cooperating with other companies. Apparently Microsoft has decided that in the case of the DS, this is the case.

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 did the same thing with a lot of games? Then fans of GTA (or whatever other game) would have to own or have access to an Xbox and a PS both. That encourages Xboxers to buy a PS, and PSers to buy an Xbox, resulting in 3. increased profit! for both companies.

Re:This is not that big of a deal (1)

scabb (670114) | more than 9 years ago | (#13023682)

More DS's = bigger market, more gamessold. I'd say that's how MS are mostly thinking, mostly.

An FU to Sony (1)

rAiNsT0rm (877553) | more than 9 years ago | (#13016254)

That is what this is. To ensure the PSP keeps faltering and the DS more attractive, and with owning Rare this is a smart move. Rare has craploads of Nintendo experience and can pump out titles quite easily (something both the DS and PSP desperately need)... however what I don't want to see is Nintendo go the way of Sega and just make software for MS down the road. Nintendo is the last breath of fresh air in the market today, Stealing Rare was a big blow (and one Nintendo should have fought to the death over), I just don't want this to get ugly.. and with MS that is most likely the only outcome.

Re:An FU to Sony (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13016386)

Psst. Nintendo had the first option to buy Rare. They purposely chose not to. Microsoft paid what Rare wanted.

Seeing what Rare has since put out, I can't say that Nintendo made a bad decision.

Re:An FU to Sony (1)

rohlfinator (888775) | more than 9 years ago | (#13017370)

"Rare has craploads of Nintendo experience and can pump out titles quite easily..."

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 by Microsoft.) Rare was never known for "pumping out titles", they were known for their quality games like Donkey Kong Country and Goldeneye. Those quality games have been strangely missing in the current generation, though.

The biggest thing I can see coming out of this is a WiFi Perfect Dark port for the DS, which would certainly be a hit. A while back a Rare employee claimed that they had the first level of PD running on DS devkits, but they weren't officially planning to develop it fully.

Re:An FU to Sony (1)

focitrixilous P (690813) | more than 9 years ago | (#13018793)

Stealing Rare was a big blow

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 (1)

TheSkepticalOptimist (898384) | more than 9 years ago | (#13016318)

I think it is fine that Microsoft is writing game content for the DS, but I hope that is as far as it goes. I don't expect, or believe it is advantageous for Microsoft to port games to the GameCube, or any other competing console.
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 games ported to other platforms, if you have the PC or PS2, or even Gamecube version of an XBOX game, then why buy the XBOX version? Better graphics does not change the fact your playing the same game over again.
I think this is also interesting as it indicates MS is no where near entering the handheld game console market. If MS has anything up their sleeves, I think they would want to keep as much exclusive titles as possible.
I actually don't understand why MS hasn't come out with a portable yet. With the populatrity of PocketPC for PDA's, and the fact that new PDA's are actually coming with 3D graphics accelerators, it would be very easy for MS to create and market their own portable. Time will tell.

Re:Blurring the lines between consoles (1)

rohlfinator (888775) | more than 9 years ago | (#13017577)

"I actually don't understand why MS hasn't come out with a portable yet. With the populatrity of PocketPC for PDA's, and the fact that new PDA's are actually coming with 3D graphics accelerators, it would be very easy for MS to create and market their own portable. Time will tell."

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 of video games under their belt) can't seem to break Nintendo's monopoly, there's no way Microsoft could.

What can MS do to trump Nintendo and Sony? Make it a media player? Hasn't really worked for the PSP. Give it souped up graphics? Not without losing even more money than they did on the Xbox. Portable Halo? Maybe, but the audience that made games like Pokemon and Nintendogs huge successes probably aren't going to think of Halo as a killer app. And there's no way Microsoft could ever beat Nintendo in innovative, quirky, fun games, which have always been right at home on the handheld.

Microsoft would undoubtedly use the same strategy in the handheld market as Sony, i.e. churn out console-like games for their portable. And as we've seen, it hasn't really worked too well. The PSP is being outsold by over 2 to 1 by a seemingly underpowered competitor with no media capabilities. If Sony can't keep up to the DS, Microsoft can't even stand a chance.

Re:Blurring the lines between consoles (1)

MrCopilot (871878) | more than 9 years ago | (#13033103)

MSFT makes cash on OS for other handhelds. Not saying they won't at some point stab thier Embedded OS customers in the back, they are good at this. Its better to let other people test the market with your software for a while. Then swoop in, when all the kinks and prices have been worked out, and bam under market-priced microXbox.

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 = more distribution. If you can make 30bucks on a DS game & not lose 100 on the console you would be more than stupid to not do it. What I can't understand is why MS doesn't insist on CE class ports of 1st party games. All Xbox and Microsoft games should have low quality ports for phones and MS pda's. Departmentalization can be a liability.

Procedure: (2, Insightful)

Gogo0 (877020) | more than 9 years ago | (#13016506)

1) Assist Nintendo in the hopes that Sony's fledgling handheld business goes the way of the NeoGeo Pocket Color

2) Nintendo again has no competitor in the handheld market

3) Microsoft enters the handheld market

Re:Procedure: (1)

Tanmi-Daiow (802793) | more than 9 years ago | (#13017258)


Donkey Kong Country.. DS? (1, Offtopic)

mmmike (870392) | more than 9 years ago | (#13016585)

you know it's coming.

The DS is becomming Unstopable (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13016727)

In spite of the DS seeming a little gimmicky it is selling remarkably well due to the original and inovative games that are being released on it.

"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 (including the PS2 and PSP) and its software is performing equally well. To date, there are around 2.5 million DS owners in Japan." []

In a lot of ways the DS may be a sign of things to come with the Nintendo Revolution. To start off games that are developed for it are nearly imposible to port to other platforms and yet it can still have games from other platforms ported to it; it is a platform where the Best Ideas seem to be surviving, not just the games that have the largest budget; and it provides simple methods to interact with games that are easy to pick up and understand. In general everything Iwata or Myiamoto have said about the Revolution is also true of the Nintendo DS.

Nintendo may (or may not) succeed at changing the current direction of videogames (and develop new markets); but regardless of the outcome I think that most people will agree that the attempt is needed and that the industry will benefit.

I have seen several people write that if Nintendo fails with their Revolution that we could soon see a colapse in the market. I don't know whether this is true or not but I suspect that if gamers reject inovation in place of bland generic videogames we may see an outcome that is similar to what the movie industry is facing; the focus on 'Big Budget Blockbusters' that are essentially pretty garbage (for example Starwars Episodes 1-3) is what is shrinking the demand, and thus the box office tallies, for movies.

Re:The DS is becomming Unstopable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13026349)

Nintendo can't fail with Revolution. They've become accustomed to 3rd place and are "aiming low" so to speak.

Not All Shocking Though (1)

Elranzer (851411) | more than 9 years ago | (#13017225)

This isn't really all that shocking, really. There's a few points to look at:

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 enter the PDA market, and Microsoft probably has no intentions to enter the game handheld market (they probably have grown to accept the inevitable Windows-like dominance of Gameboy), they do not view each other as competitors in the handheld market. So this is how Microsoft can make money in this market. An unlikely but possible "payback" would be Nintendo publishing classic games on PocketPC platform, the way Sega does.

3. Related to #2, Sony however DOES have a PDA as well as a game handheld. These being the PalmOS-based Clie and PSP. So they are a rival to both Microsoft and Nintendo. There's no reason Microsoft and Nintendo wouldn't "team up" to compete with Sony here.

4. Microsoft plays nicely, sort of, with its respected competitors. This is why you see Office, Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player and VirtualPC available for Mac OS. They do not have to make these for Mac OS, as they don't make them for Linux. Just as Bill Gates and Steve Jobs have a friendly-competitive history, remember Nintendo and Microsoft are both neighbors in Redmond.

5. As Nintendo has been in the gaming business more than twice as long as Sony, and makes a different type of product aimed at a different crowd, Microsoft probably has some respect for Nintendo in a way that they would not want to try to put them out of business. They probably do not feel the same way towards Sony, who seems to have this "let's put Nintendo out of business" attitued as well as making a game system that targets the same same crowd of people as Xbox. This might be Microsoft's way of sort-of supporting Nintendo and keeping them just that much away from out of business (even though Nintendo does not need their help).

6. Handheld games sell. Franchises like Conker and Dark need handheld homes, and the PocketPC and definitely the PSP are unlikely choices for these.

7. Nintendo has market dominance with both GBA and DS killing PSP in sales. With three systems already in existence, Microsoft probably thought they'd make more money, and it would be safer, to just develop for a platform that already exists rather than making their own.

Point being mainly with #4, Microsoft views Nintendo as an Apple-like competitor (plays nicely with them, realizes they make different products) where as Microsoft views Sony as a Linux-like competitor (product is very similar, viewed as an actual threat).

I just hope this sorta-alliance between Nintendo and Microsoft doesn't fuel the 360-Revolution relation rumors floating around that don't seem to die (Hint: "360" and "Revolution" are related terms)

Isn't this how they got Apple? (2, Insightful)

rubberbando (784342) | more than 9 years ago | (#13017879)

Please read what I have to say before you mod me offtopic....

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? (1)

rohlfinator (888775) | more than 9 years ago | (#13018657)

I think this is completely different. Rare isn't getting any inside info, they just have DS dev kits, which Nintendo probably gave them even before they actually announced anything. Microsoft isn't going to get any special tips on how to design a handheld simply because one of their studios develops for the DS.

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 developing for the DS is a way they can still work with Nintendo without directly competing against their biggest investor. In all likelihood, THQ will publish any Rare-developed software, just like they did for the GBA. Microsoft will have little or nothing to do with the whole ordeal.

Re:Isn't this how they got Apple? (1)

damsa (840364) | more than 9 years ago | (#13019533)

Steve Jobs asked Gates to write software for the Mac. Back then MS didn't make Office Suites. Wordperfect and Lotus were kings.

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 (1)

Hellad (691810) | more than 9 years ago | (#13018492)

What I really hope for is that this is a signal of things to come. This hint at cooaperation makes me wonder if MS will allow Nintendo to offer old n64 games created by Rare to be downloadable on the rev. Some have wondered if Nintendo needs their blessing at all, Microsofts help would be good. While this by no means proves that MS would make that move, if makes me think that they may be willing to consider it.

Re:Revolution game downloads (1)

richman555 (675100) | more than 9 years ago | (#13018712)

I am still hoping to see Tecmo Super Bowl (1991) as a third party game available for download on Revolution :) This was the best football game ever created! I hope Nintendo can make this happen!

Re:Revolution game downloads (1)

bleaknik (780571) | more than 9 years ago | (#13019244)

Wow. After years and years of boring Madden rehashes, I had almost forgotten what a fun football game was like... *ducks*

Re:Revolution game downloads (1)

bleaknik (780571) | more than 9 years ago | (#13019235)

My understanding of the downloadable content is that if the big N owns the publishing rights, the big N is going to offer the download. Obviously, this may not actually happen, but...

According to [] , 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.

This is Rare, not MICROSOFT (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13019257)

Rare also released a couple of GBA games after being bought out by Microsoft. Sure they're entirely owned by MS, but Rare is just one studio. This isn't MSFT iniating a policy of developing games for Nintendo's handhelds, it's merely some of their developers, arguably the ones with the most freedom vs. studios like Bungie (cf. The Rushing of Halo2), continuing to make games like the ones they've been making for years. I'd wager that within five years they won't be making any more games for Nintendo. So basically what I'm saying is that they're not making MORE games for the "competition." If anything, they're making the same amount they used to make for the handhelds, and I'm betting they're actually making fewer and that the number will decrease as time goes by. Goodnight.

Re:This is Rare, not MICROSOFT (1)

FLAGGR (800770) | more than 9 years ago | (#13020798)

Bungie has nearly complete control over what they do. Hence the Halo ports to Mac and PC (Albeit a million years later.) However, RARE is more tightly bound and restricted. I believe theyre not allowed to make games for other platforms without MS's consent.

Oh, Rare, not Microsoft... (1)

WWWWolf (2428) | more than 9 years ago | (#13019760)

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 even remotely as interesting as GBA or DS, and they aren't even *trying*, so they can't have any plausible reason to tell Rare not to develop for GBA and DS!

Hell, even Square-Enix makes GBA games, even when they're part owned by Sony...

Uh, they've done this before.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13020512)

A quick search on google shows that Microsoft has several titles available for GBA and Age of Empires is coming soon to DS....this is hardly news.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?