Topic: Diddy Kong Racing Switch?

A few of you might remember, we had a rumour about Diddy Kong Racing in the end of the WiiU era. Maybe the game was far from ready so they decided to make a quick version of Maro Kart 8 to fill the gap of early releases to Switch. They since they released Mario Kart 8 deluxe as an early Switch title and that means we wont see another Mario Kart in a few years, maybe we will see a new Diddy Kong Racing next year?

Any thought? Would you like to see a new Diddy Kong Racing to the Switch?

No

I would LOVE to see Diddy Kong Racing on Switch, it was really unique and set itself apart from Mario Kart games. It's one of my favourite game ever and had countless hours of fun with friends and family.

It was actually rumoured that Nintendo were going to make a Diddy Kong Racing sequel for the Wii. Or at least one group of developers pitched them. I believe it may have been the group behind Excite-bots. Maybe it was the case that Excite-bots was actually what developed from the prototype - I can't quite remember.

I was a big fan of the original Diddy Kong Racing - unlike Mario Kart 64 the best racer almost always won (purely because the powerups were less powerful overall and more predictably obtained) so it was a much better single player game in my opinion. I'm not sure if it's strictly needed for the Switch though.

I highly doubt it'll happen unfortunately..

Diddy Kong Racing was borne out of a partnership between Rare (the developers) and Nintendo...I believe it started with Nintendo entrusting Rare with developing a Donkey Kong platformer on the SNES (?) and went from there, with a string of successful games throughout the 90s.

These days though, Rare (or what's left of them, many of the devs jumped ship) are now owned by Microsoft - for a new Diddy Kong Racing game to come out, Microsoft and Nintendo would have to come to some sort of arrangement...Microsoft's position would almost certainly be that they'd want the game to release on both Switch and Xbox, but Nintendo are highly unlikely to want their characters appearing in fully-fledged games on other platforms, so I just can't see it happening...

...I imagine that these sorts of conversations probably happened before Rare released their recent 'Rare Replay' collection - with no agreement reached - meaning that Rare Replay would be an Xbox exclusive, minus any games with complex legal rights issues (Donkey Kong, Diddy Kong Racing, GoldenEye etc.) ..many of those titles, I fear, are lost in time

As for the chances of a new Diddy Kong Racing game made by someone other than Rare - I think it'd be pretty pointless...aside from Diddy Kong himself, the rest of the characters (TT, Krunch, Conker, Banjo, Pixie, Taj etc.) are all property of Rare, not Nintendo - so they'd probably be better off adding Diddy Kong to Mario Kart and going from there...

...a Mario Kart game, with Diddy Kong, hovercraft, story elements etc would be pretty cool though - I'd buy it!

See, I actually think there is a chance, here. Microsoft owns Rare, but Microsoft has demonstrated it is willing to allow its owned devs to publish their games on other systems (Minecraft dev, Mojang, comes to mind).

If things continue to be a struggle for the Xbox especially, I could see Microsoft giving the green light for Rare to publish things on other consoles. Microsoft would still make money from the deal. They could stand to make a lot of money from it, in fact.

@rallydefault Unlikely. The only reason Minecraft is coming to all platforms is because it was virtually on every platform already before Microsoft acquired the studio.

Diddy Kong Racing doesn't have to be developed by Rare though...

And no, I don't particularly care for the game. I'd rather see a new F-Zero than another Mario Kart clone.

Aside from Diddy Kong though, every other character in DKR is Rare IP - without getting both licences (Diddy from Nintendo, the rest of the characters from Rare/Microsoft), is there much point? Without the Rare characters (Conker and Banjo especially), all you've got is Diddy and a kart, with a certain amount of the 'soul' of the original game lost - so you may as well just stick him in Mario Kart and be done with it...

Diddy Kong Racing was released on the original DS and this was well after Microsoft bought Rare. The only characters removed were Banjo and Conker if I remember correctly.

@NaviAndMii That's what I expect will happen if this they ever release another entry. So I don't see the point, we already have Mario Kart.

@Aurumonado I must admit, I forgot about that! I think that Microsoft only gave that game the green light because they weren't really in the handheld market at the time - the 'hybrid' nature of the Switch might prove to be a sticking point from their point of view (?) I dunno...

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see it happen! Diddy Kong isn't the biggest name in the Nintendo roster - maybe they could give 'secondary/spin-off' characters like that a different kind of status to the likes of Donkey Kong, Mario, Link, Samus etc. and allow them to feature on other consoles? Diddy Kong Racing - on Switch and Xbox - with cross-network play perhaps? Yes please!

..but unless Microsoft change their stance of wanting Rare developed 'home console' games to feature on Xbox - or Nintendo change their stance by allowing Diddy Kong to appear on non-Nintendo consoles - I can't see it happening myself, unfortunately

You never know though - as @rallydefault said, Microsoft and Nintendo (with Minecraft cross-play) have demonstrated a willingness to make things happen if they think that it'd be good for fans - but, like @Octane said, even if they could figure something out, it'd have to be more than just a Mario Kart clone for there to be much appetite for it...a lot of the elements that made DKR unique all those years ago are now in Mario Kart (eg. air and water-based racing) - they'd have to add fresh elements and twist up the formula enough (again!) for it to have that degree of separation from the MK series...I won't hold my breath, but I'd certainly be interested if it gained any sort of traction

I don't see it happening, but it would be cool. That was a really great game.

Krunch is a Kremling. Kremlings, and King K.Rool are (C) Nintendo...
That's what's been seen in releases like Dokey Kong Jet Race/Barrel Blast and Diddy Kong Racing DS (as playable characters) and in Smash Bros. (as a trophy and costume).

On another note, it's weird that they took Banjo and Conker out in the DS version (exchanged them with Dixie and Tiny Kong) but left Tiptup in.
Tiptup is a character from Banjo-Kazooie from the Bubblegloop Swamp world.

@Octane
True for Minecraft because it was already out there, but Microsoft owns lots of devs that release their stuff on all systems, especially when you include second-party devs. Whereas Nintendo's second-party devs don't typically stray from Nintendo hardware, Microsoft's second-party stuff is all over the place and rarely exclusive.

Bottom line is, I'm just saying in the modern market, it's totally possible that Microsoft lets it happen if there is enough demand and the game will also be on the Xbox. They will profit. And unlike Nintendo, Microsoft has never been skittish with allowing their IP to appear on other systems if it still means profit at the end of the line.

@rallydefault What's a.. ''second'' party developer? First and third party are the only ones that exist.

As for Microsoft, they're a bit unpredictable. But I don't think Nintendo would ever allow their IP (Diddy Kong) on another console. That's a can of worms you don't want to open.

People often used to refer to Rare as a 'second party' Nintendo developer - I think because Nintendo owned less than 50% of Rare (?)

Ahhh! ..did not know that!

@Tsurii @NaviAndMii
True, "second-party" as a term is man-made, but it does mean a couple very real things: it's a studio that a) takes exclusivity deals with console-makers and/or b) is owned partially by a console-maker. Many times a second-party developer fits both options. Option A on its own is obviously very flexible, but for whatever reason, devs seem to show "loyalty" (or whatever you wanna call it) toward one console or another.

For an example this forum would probably recognize, many probably don't know that Retro was a second-party developer until 2002 until they were formally "bought" by Nintendo through stock. Previously they were an independent developer that still made titles for Nintendo systems exclusively. In fact, the majority of their time on Metroid Prime was done as an independent dev, and their stock was only bought by Nintendo in the final months of making the game. They were technically a second-party dev for about 4 years.

Microsoft has tons of them, but unlike Nintendo, their second-party games appear on many platforms.

@NaviAndMii
And yes! You are correct! Nintendo NEVER owned Rare, so it was never a first-party studio for them. They gave them lots of money lol but never actually owned majority stock in them. Rare was, therefore, technically a "second-party" dev for Nintendo because they pretty much took only Nintendo exclusivity deals without ever actually being owned by them.

I want it to have Excite Truck mechanics (big air to reach new spots, tree rushes, smashes, etc.) and be sort of like a wild, fantasy version of NFS: MW...

So open world with lots of things to collect and discover (vehicles, new competitions and challenges like racing and other modes similar to the original), and some sort of K. Rool mafia who chase you down or try to steal bananas or whatever.

With a good map and lots of neat locales this could be a great racing game thar fills a niche for Nintendo.

@NaviAndMii As if Nintendo can't just use DK characters or create new ones. None you mentioned are pivotal to the concept. And I don't agree with adding Diddy to MK along with DKR elements. MK is an arcade racing franchise that sells better than any other. Nintendo would be foolish to overload and convolute MK when it sells already rather than attempt to establish a second racing franchise in the singleplayer, adventure vein. In fact I suppose you could look at Diddy's recent absence as a sign that they are keeping that option open.

If a new DKR game is unique enough from MK then there is no reason Nintendo couldn't see potential for success. Release one MK per platform with a multiplayer emphasis along with a DKR oriented more around single player. I hope they do something along those lines, but then again I want another FZero, Excite Truck, Waverace, Kirby Air Ride (would be so good for Switch), etc...

I can't stand the term second party games, as I have absolutely no idea what it's supposed to mean... Even with an explanation, it still doesn't make sense.

@rallydefault If you're talking about Iguana Entertainment (since Retro never finished a game before they were acquired by Nintendo), they also developed for Windows, SEGA systems, and PlayStation. But that ''loyalty'' you're describing doesn't actually exist. They weren't publishers either. Most games they made were for Acclaim Entertainment and Sunsoft. You should also keep in mind that hardware was so different between consoles back then, that porting a game basically meant starting from scratch. It was sometimes easier to stick with one console than to develop for all of them.

This day it's the opposite. There's really no reason not to release a game on all systems (at least PC, PS4 and Xbox One), because porting games between them is relatively simple.

Your explanations don't make a lot of sense either, because A can be anything. Every console manufacturer has exclusive deals with a third party developer at some point. They're still third party developers though. And your other example, B, is the division between third and first party. Does the company own more than 50% of the shares? That means they own the company and it's first party. If they own less than 50%, they're still a third party.

I'm also not sure what [second party] games and/or developers you are referring to, if you could name any, that would help I think.

If anything, the end user would be the ''second party'', meaning us. Since it's pretty pointless to talk about consumers that way, I don't think anyone really uses the term anymore.