Search Results
7/19/2025, 8:05:43 AM
I can understand people at Nintendo and some fans not liking Cranky being stated to be the original DK, but I also say just accepting Rare's DK as being the same character that Miyamoto originally came up with, is also disingenuous. If they didnt want an outside company making up lore for one of their own franchises and characterizations, they should have stepped in more or just made the game themselves. Remember, Nintendo did have a Super Donkey game in the works on the SNES, so they had a chance to revive the franchise in their own way, but as soon as they handed over the reigns to Rare, they basically lost the right to any claims of creative ownership to the stuff those guys made. Outside of being an ape and named Donkey Kong, Rare came up with the appearance, the characterization, the world, the friends, the foes, 99% of the DNA of what the IP was known for, with 1% being some throwback references to the arcade games. Donkey Kong on GameBoy is the last time we saw Nintendo take a stab at the IP, completely divorced from anything Rare had a hand in, and after that they decided to not bother doing anything else. If Rare said Cranky was the original DK and Nintendo or Miyamoto did nothing to stop that, well thats just the lore then and it anything that comes after is simply a retcon. Nintendo DK and Rare DK were essentially completely different franchises, they didnt even play the same way, so I always kind felt it dumb to even lump them together, kinda like saying Super Mario Bros and the Mario & Luigi games are not separate creative identities from different developers. Bananza might as well just be a complete reboot, taking ideas from both Nintendo and Rare visions.
6/19/2025, 11:12:23 PM
Page 1