• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.
  • Furukawa Speaks! We discuss the announcement of the Nintendo Switch Successor and our June Direct Predictions on the new episode of the Famiboards Discussion Club! Check it out here!

Rumour [RUMOR] Nintendo's brand mandates prevented Universal Studios from using classic DKC designs (incl. K Rool) in Theme Park

Hailinel said:
OK. He still gave Retro freedom to work on new things.

It is exhausting beyond comprehension that multiple Nintendo fanbases treat Tanabe personally as Literal Satan because of decisions he was not solely responsible for.
Click to expand...
What's also a little confusing in discussions of people passionate about video games is this propensity to refer to Tanabe as simply "that guy", without understanding what he's done or what he stands for. Again, this doesn't force anyone to appreciate certain choices, and it doesn't preclude criticism, but all this talk of not recognizing a developer's work and professional legacy because you don't really know him but have read or see videos about it from people on the Internet who have never developed a game in their lives is exhausting.

Of course I love King K Rool. I grew up with him. We're adults now, and things have a right to evolve.
 
Hailinel said:
People keep painting the decision to exclude the Kremlings as somehow malicious instead of giving Retro free rein to make new enemies.
Click to expand...
Hailinel said:
It is exhausting beyond comprehension that multiple Nintendo fanbases treat Tanabe personally as Literal Satan because of decisions he was not solely responsible for.
Click to expand...
I know other people do, but that was not what I was trying to get at, I was just quoting him from what Retro and Nintendo came to the conclusion of. I don't hate the guy, I do not know him.
I would like to see the Kremlings back, but this is a decision that's Nintendo's, not his, and I never implied it was! For Returns and Tropical Freeze it was definitely more Retro wanting to make something of their own.
 
0
Seven said:
It's nobody's fault; Retro suggested using the kremlings as the villains for their DKC game and the higher-ups, including Tanabe, instead gave them the opportunity to create their own villains.
Click to expand...
No Tanabe and maybe other Nintendo higher ups told them what could or could not be in the game
 
I imagine a lot of the discussion on Nintendo not liking the Rareware characters comes from the fact that they seemed to be hesitant to use Diddy Kong back in the day and opted to use DK Jr. instead. Mario Kart Double Dash almost brought DK Jr. back before Diddy Kong was finally okay to use in the spin-off games.

I think that had less to due with any conspiracy of them not liking the Rareware characters and just their tendency to stick with internally created characters in the spin-offs for the most part. The Donkey Kong characters and Waluigi are exceptions to this, but there's a reason why we haven't seen any of the other spin-off characters take part in their Kart/Sports/Party games.
 
Last edited:
The only thing weirder than assuming that the DKC Returns visuals being used in the park mean anything towards the future of the franchise (the same park that uses 3D World visuals for a depiction of Mushroom Kingdom, despite the fact Mario Odyssey, Mario Wonder and the Mario movie all feature visual takes dettached from those elements) is this weird assumption that K. Rool in Smash was supposed to be some kind of KREMLINGS IN DONKEY KONG RENAISSANCE or whatever instead of merely "Sakurai made a guy that got alot of requests from hardcore nerds in a poll finally playable".
 
Given the nature of the park's production I'm not convinced "Universal" (whatever entity we're talking about here, their legal team, an individual person, etc) fought too hard to get K. Rool included, especially by specifically using Smash as their rationale; bringing Ultimate into play just reminds me of that rumor about K. Rool being planned to appear in the Tropical Freeze Switch port, which I'm also skeptical of for similar reasons.

There's a very simple reason for why the park is primarily themed after 3D Land / 3D World and Returns / Tropical Freeze: those were still brand new games when this deal went in motion, over a decade ago now. I'm sure at some point somebody asked about using any other DK elements that won't be featured in the final park: Kremlings, Snowmads, other Kongs and Animal Buddies beyond those already included; that's a logical assumption to make from a realistic brainstorming process. The issue with this specific claim is that the features of Donkey Kong Country (the theme park land) were basically already set in stone going into 2019. Not a very long window of time for someone to point at the response to K. Rool in Smash (announced in August 2018) and argue for any meaningful change to the land's theming; likely far too late in the process for making that change to even be feasible. By the time Super Mario Land opened in Japan (planned for 2020 despite slipping into 2021) all of the attractions and stamps (achievements) for DKC were already listed in the files of the Universal Japan app (the stamps complete with unique artwork created for all of them); this is simply a long process.

In the end, I don't doubt that the person relaying this story is just repeating what they were directly told, but I wouldn't be shocked if it was at least a little overembellished to begin with. Theming all recent DK extended media after Returns was quite clearly a very coordinated effort: the theme park, the appearance of the Jungle Kingdom in the Mario Movie and even the DK Lego sets all pull from mostly the same elements as each other. Mostly is the key word there, as the differences with the movie in particular (Cranky being a king, Chunky appearing at all, etc) tell me the brand doesn't have to stay 100% consistent in all incarnations going forward, and that's a good thing. Sometime after it opens in Japan and Orlando I do hope that DK land can expand to include more elements from games outside of Retro's Duology (both the Rare games or any future DK projects); same for Mario land moving past the Wii U era too (the best you get currently is the Peronza Plaza theme being one of the songs that can play in the cafe).
 
Last edited:
Remember that these parks (and the Mario movie and those scant few mobile games) were part of a plan to expand the presence of Nintendo IPs in non-video game media. Said plan was announced around the time when Wii U was flopping, 3DS was near-flopping, the Year of Luigi lost incurred hundreds of billions of dollars in loss, and everyone was worried that Nintendo would actually, truly go third-party.

Some say that Nintendo's adamancy to play it safe with the Mario brand in the mid-2010s with the "mandates" and the "no Toads with facial hair" and the "Miyamoto hates fun" was an effect of Nintendo's financial woes. Seeing how the parks take after the NSMB/3D World/MK8 asset pool (their most recent, highest-selling, widest-appeal games in the series at the time), I think there's truth to that. DKC Returns was a big hit on the Wii iirc, so I wouldn't be surprised if that was also why the DK expansion doesn't have any pre-Returns stuff (not to mention that K. Rool and the Kremling Krew hadn't appeared in a proper DK game for lord knows how long).

Less "anti-fun" and more "we're almost in the red, we can't risk going wild here."
 
I prefer it this way. I don't like k rool or the kremlings.

I like that Retro kept the best bits of the Rare era and started fresh with their duology of games.
 
linkwashere said:
Is this some kind of assumption based on your perception of two remakes and a trailer of one new game or is there any real evidence to support this?

Also, I don't think the IP regulations apply the same to Nintendo studios developing software than to a third party company making a theme park.
Click to expand...
Assumption, why I added "seemingly". There's no definitive evidence, but Nintendo allowing the existence of unaltered SMRPG and TTYD remakes is a good sign when they altered designs in Superstar Saga and BIS remakes in 2017 and 2019.

Brothership existing with the typical look of a M&L good is a good sign as well. Dream Team came out in 2013 and feature series typical designs of new enemies/NPCs, although nothing crazy with Toads and established species. Maybe they're just less restrictive with M&L's creative liberities in particular for some reason?

Soul Skater said:
Wait I thought Nintendo didn’t have any weird anti-fun creative restrictions around their IPs and anyone who suggested they did was a conspiracy theorist
Click to expand...
We were right, shocker! It's odd people didn't get the memo when Tanabe confirmed brand restrictions in interviews leading up to TOK.
 
MetalLord said:
parks are made mainly for kids, people that remember k rool are grandpas nowadays
Click to expand...
Super Smash Bros. Ultimate sold better than both Retro DKC games combined. I guarantee that more kids know who K. Rool is than Tiki Tong, the final boss of a notoriously difficult game.

3457967-smashbrosultimate-worldoflight-promo-1.jpg


People used the same tired arguments to justify K. Rool's exclusion from Smash. "He's too irrelevant; little kids won't know who he is!" And now that he's in Smash, the same arguments are being used as if Smash Ultimate never happened. You realize Donkey Kong Country Returns came out 14 years ago, right?
 
What references would the Universal Studios people have to go off of in order to make the assets? Those characters haven't been in games for decades. Are we gonna give them the crummy 3D models from the 1994 boxart and manual? I don't think Nintendo wants other companies designing their characters. They want to give them approved models and tmhave others run with it.

Also if Nintendo was expecting to do something with the Kremlings in the future they want the flexibility to do whatever they want with the characters and designs. If they redesign the characters someday they don't want a bunch of legacy designs locked up in a 25 year Universal Studios deal and they don't want to worry about having to redesign the park.
 
Last edited:
Dark Cloud said:
I wonder if some people just agree with every decision Nintendo does out of some “loyalty”
Click to expand...
I wonder if some people have trouble understanding that criticizing a company for serious and legitimate reasons (such as unacceptable problems in the work environment like at NoA, or real prejudice against consumers like Nintendo's initial refusal to recognize the joycon drift) is absolutely not to be equated with fans wishes?

And I have nothing against fan wishes, I have fan wishes. Just, maybe we could try to have a sense of priorities? Unhealthy "loyalty" is refusing to denounce Nintendo when they actually hurt people.
 
This should be news related to Nintendo's excessive protection of property rights.

This is normal, Nintendo is a Japanese company. And located in Kyoto, it is also the most culturally conservative place in Japan. This has nothing to do with money or anti-consumer behavior. If they want to make money, they should strongly support these, and there is no need to treat company managers as complete fools. This is more determined by culture and values.
 
Dark Cloud said:
I wonder if some people just agree with every decision Nintendo does out of some “loyalty”
Click to expand...
There is no universe where "understanding how a media company works" requires loyalty. Would be more interesting to analyse what personal introspection one must require to accuse fellow fans of being shills just because they're not mad that a cartoon alligator is missing from a wall or two in Universal.
 
Dark Cloud said:
I wonder if some people just agree with every decision Nintendo does out of some “loyalty”
Click to expand...
At a point, some decisions are just cynical marketing brand decisions that come with the territory. Every fandom butts their heads around it for every type of game. Acknowledging that isn't agreement. It's just annoyed acceptance.

Try being a Sonic fan now when you grew up on the Archie comics, cartoons, OVA.
 
Wockio said:
Wanting to maintain a sense of cohesion across an IP =/= anti-fun
Click to expand...
I mean literally ...yes? lmao

If there is a lamer reason to be against doing something fun that the fans and park runners want to do other than "this isn't artistically consistent with our decade+ old 'new' donkey kong games", then I can't think of it. Especially when it straight up isn't even true. King K. Rool wouldn't look wildly out of place in the DK section at a theme park. It isn't like people are screaming for there to be a Hologram of CG DK with Sterling Jarvis singing "I'm nobodies hero" or something
 
Last edited:
boodream said:
I wonder if some people have trouble understanding that criticizing a company for serious and legitimate reasons (such as unacceptable problems in the work environment like at NoA, or real prejudice against consumers like Nintendo's initial refusal to recognize the joycon drift) is absolutely not to be equated with fans wishes?

And I have nothing against fan wishes, I have fan wishes. Just, maybe we could try to have a sense of priorities? Unhealthy "loyalty" is refusing to denounce Nintendo when they actually hurt people.
Click to expand...
Cmon this is ridiculous

You can criticize a company for artistic reasons it doesn’t have to be tech issues or legal issues
 
Soul Skater said:
I mean literally ...yes? lmao

If there is a lamer reason to be against doing something fun that the fans and park runners want to do other than "this isn't artistically consistent with our decade+ old 'new' donkey kong games", then I can't think of it. Especially when it straight isn't even true. King K. Rool wouldn't look wildly out of place in the DK section at a theme park. It isn't like people are screaming for there to be a Hologram of CG DK with Sterling Jarvis singing "I'm nobodies hero" or something
Click to expand...
I mean the simple and straightforward answer is, as Mondo and others have mentioned, at the point in time that the agreements were made and signed, DKCR was the newest game, and the attraction was agreed upon to be based upon its aesthetics and characters. They're not going to upend things just because K. Rool popped up in Smash. That's not how these agreements work. If anyone asked about K. Rool at any point after agreements were signed and work began, it was almost certainly not pushed for very hard at all.

Further, the source of this information is not proven to be a reliable narrator.
 
Last edited:
Number1000DKFan said:
Cmon this is ridiculous

You can criticize a company for artistic reasons it doesn’t have to be tech issues or legal issues
Click to expand...
I never said we couldn't criticize anyone, and you know that well if you read my posts on the subject.

I was replying to a post that was a bit Manichean for my taste (and I say that without any hostility) which precisely implied that differentiating between issues that are objectively of general interest on the one hand, and the opinions of certain fans, respectable but subjective, on the other, was nothing other than "loyalty", and I hope I have the opportunity to do so, whether you find it ridiculous or not.
 
Number1000DKFan said:
Absolutely and it makes forums like this worse

I can safely say that the brain trust of Miyamoto Koizumi and everyone else has produced the best games ever made

But that doesn’t mean any of them are beyond criticism
Click to expand...
We can say the same for the post you’re agreeing with which is essentially calling people shills because they don’t like certain posts that don’t essentially agree that “Nintendo bad”. You’d have a more valid point if Nintendo wasn’t criticized on almost everything they do. Like I’m getting “denying Metroid in Fortnite” vibes in here which essentially was making mountains out of molehills.
SpaceGodzilla said:
mountain meat molehill

plus are we really using an unverified source to make some lame doom post?
Click to expand...
After the last DK thread seems like it is their turn to make sure they are heard.
 
Professor Chops said:
Super Smash Bros. Ultimate sold better than both Retro DKC games combined. I guarantee that more kids know who K. Rool is than Tiki Tong, the final boss of a notoriously difficult game.

3457967-smashbrosultimate-worldoflight-promo-1.jpg


People used the same tired arguments to justify K. Rool's exclusion from Smash. "He's too irrelevant; little kids won't know who he is!" And now that he's in Smash, the same arguments are being used as if Smash Ultimate never happened. You realize Donkey Kong Country Returns came out 14 years ago, right?
Click to expand...
Using Ultimate as a metric for anything is a fallacy because it implies Mother 3 could sell millions because kids recognize Lucas. "Why is Nintendo leaving money on the table by not localizing the blonde kid game"?

In the end, the question should be "is K. Rool absolutely necessary for a new DKC game"? The answer is a resonating "no", since Returns and Tropical Freeze have both proved the franchise can sell without him. They can sell really well, in fact, as TF should be around 5 million by now on Switch alone.

Would it be nice if he returned? Yes. But again, he's not an essential part of the games and should not be brought back just because the devs felt forced to. He's just the most recurring antagonist a la Ridley. Does not mean Ridley must be in every Metroid (especially since he appears to be truly dead dead for now).
 
Last edited:
"Mario games are using too much older stuff. We need newer stuff!"

"DKC games are using too much newer stuff. We need older stuff!"

See, Nintendo cannot win here, because in the end, fans subjectively dictate what is "killing liberties and creativity".

I personally think it's bizarre that Nintendo incentivizing first-party studios to come up with newer creations over three-decade old crocodiles that have starred in half a dozen games is somehow "stifling creativity" or "anti-fun"?
 
Last edited:
Number1000DKFan said:
🤦
Click to expand...
It's a legit question.

If by "Nintendo did a bad thing" you mean "Nintendo licensed usage of DKCR assets out for purposes of the theme park attraction, and thus K. Rool is disqualified from appearing as part of the attraction because he is not in DKCR," then...

Well, that's just a blatantly silly thing to say is a "bad thing they did". It's a very basic contractual licensing agreement.
 
0
Understandable imo. Just like there's a difference between "Mario" and "Mario & Luigi" there's a difference between "Donkey Kong" and "Donkey Kong Country."
 
Soul Skater said:
Wait I thought Nintendo didn’t have any weird anti-fun creative restrictions around their IPs and anyone who suggested they did was a conspiracy theorist
Click to expand...
Ricimer said:
We were right, shocker! It's odd people didn't get the memo when Tanabe confirmed brand restrictions in interviews leading up to TOK.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, but why is this rumor proof again?

OT: Do I enjoy the Kremlings? Yeah. Do I think this rumor is 100% proof that Nintendo are evil bastards because they won't validate my nostalgia? No.

Like, nothing here is worth anything more than an eyeraise at best, why are you here trying to "rally the troops" in protest against this? Like...oh no, no Kremlings. Okay.
 
NBOctoling said:
I'm sorry, but why is this rumor proof again?

OT: Do I enjoy the Kremlings? Yeah. Do I think this rumor is 100% proof that Nintendo are evil bastards because they won't validate my nostalgia? No.

Like, nothing here is worth anything more than an eyeraise at best, why are you here trying to "rally the troops" in protest against this? Like...oh no, no Kremlings. Okay.
Click to expand...
Tanabe already confirmed the existence of brand mandates starting from at least Sticker Star's release. This rumor just further corroborates that fact and sheds further light on details.

Given the veracity of the source, as a credited project lead at Universal, it's unlikely for him to be lying as an established poster. Especially when we know old school DKC elements like Ellie were featured in near-final designs for the park but aren't in the final design.

Nobody in this thread is calling Nintendo "evil" and trying to dismiss criticism as just people unhappy their "nostalgia isn't being validated" is just reductive.
 
Ricimer said:
Tanabe already confirmed the existence of brand mandates starting from at least Sticker Star's release. This rumor just further corroborates that fact and sheds further light on the issue.

Given the veracity of the source, as a credited project lead at Universal, it's unlikely for him to be lying. Especially when we know old school DKC elements like Ellie were featured in near-final designs for the park but aren't in the final design.

Nobody in this thread is calling Nintendo "evil" and trying to dismiss criticism as just people unhappy their "nostalgia isn't being validated" is just reductive.
Click to expand...
So the "issue" is the existence of brand and IP guidelines licensee parties are required to abide by?

That's not a secret. Every company protective of the image of the IP they license out has guidelines they contractually enforce.

I mean congratulations. You learned IP law exists.
 
Hailinel said:
So the "issue" is the existence of brand and IP guidelines licensee parties are required to abide by?

That's not a secret. Every company protective of the image of the IP they license out has guidelines they contractually enforce.

I mean congratulations. You learned IP law exists.
Click to expand...
....no that's no my problem at all! Brand and IP guidelines existing are fine in general. But it can be a problem when they're too restrictive.
 
I enjoy most of the DKCR/TF enemies, but the SNES trilogy is goated for a reason. Everything from the stages to the enemies is 11/10. It sucks if Univeral can't use the og enemies at all.

I get why there would be some red tape involved, but when you've grown up with the SNES like I have, you want to get your nostalgia fix.
 
Ricimer said:
....no that's no my problem at all! Brand and IP guidelines existing are fine in general. It's only a problem when they're too restrictive.
Click to expand...
And that relates to the DK attraction how? It's pretty clear that the agreements struck did not include any game featuring K. Rool. That's the beginning and end.

This truly is trying to drum up fan anguish to make a mountain out of a molehill.
 
Ricimer said:
....no that's no my problem at all! Brand and IP guidelines existing are fine in general. It's only a problem when they're too restrictive.
Click to expand...
Here's the thing: "too restrictive" is subjective and difficult to quantify.

There are people who think Sonic has too restrictive guidelines because Sega does not bother to make TV/Comic characters part of the games, even though that would (and HAVE) caused all sorts of legal problems.

The Retro games have a fine enough art direction for DKC's modern incarnation to base itself in. Kongs, jungles, minecarts, etc are all there, and other old elements can eventually be added, albeit slowly so as to not overwhelm the newer stuff (like Dixie and Funky in TF).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top Bottom