Nintendo 18

A Microsoft Exec Thought they Owned Donkey Kong


According to former Rare game director, Chris Seavor, Microsoft mistakenly thought they owned the Donkey Kong IP after they purchased Rare.

A Twitter question asking Seavor where is the Xbox One’s version of Knack, prompted Seavor to recall a story from when Microsoft purchased Rare.

“The current generation of ‘enablers’ won’t even know they own the IP… Here’s a true story.. When Rare was first bought by MS a group of execs came on a tour.. One of them noticed the Donkey Kong. ..Posters everywhere and said.. ‘Hey that’s great.. We own Donkey Kong right??’ ………/massivesigh”

Seavor added to that story by saying, “christ, whatever happened to Starfox? MS aren’t the only ones sitting on prime real estate and wondering why their arse is sore.” 

This is all too funny. Microsoft, a company that just got into the business of home consoles in 2001, would say something that stupid. And Seavor is completely right about Star Fox. Nintendo needs to make another big Star Fox game like Star Fox 64.

 More From Playeressence 
Furious Francis
Check out the Furious     EA – The Worst                  Shin Megami Tensei X 
Francis’ Youtube!           Company in the US            Fire Emblem Preview
What’s with all the          E3 All Axis all the             Xenoblade 2 Preview 
Sega hate?                          hottest news from E3     Best Wii U game?
  • NinjaHound

    wouldn't the title be better if it was "Microsoft exces thought they owned DK" instead of "one"
    it is just confusing not that i have anything against the title

  • *NormalGamer*

    As far as I’m concerned, the Donkey Kong IP was ‘always’ a Nintendo IP; it’s one of Miyamoto’s creations, after all.

  • rickmodus

    hahahahahaa just hilarious.

    Francis…of topic.
    I am not a rap kinda guy but this is the best videogame rap ever.

  • timg57867

    Looking at what they did with Banjo Kazooie, I guess we can all be glad DK was never part of the deal. It sucks though that Nintendo can't put any Donkey Kong Country games on the VC because of this…

  • Gintoki

    Christopher Seavor: “To be fair, it was actually a bland, grey exec out for a free jolly to UK who said it, rather than MS as a whole.”

    Francis: “Microsoft Thought they Owned Donkey Kong.”

    Francis, you are right when you criticise sensationalist “journalism”, but you are doing the same thing yourself…

    To quote a few right neogaf reactions to the secondary source from

    “Microsoft =/= one employee. smh”

    “I don’t think the article title is an accurate interpretation of that anecdote.”

    “Sensationalist title.”

    “Misleading title? Misleading title.”

    “, the hallmark of quality journalism™

    The home of absolute rubbish as they’ll take anything/anyone and pay based on views, so you’ll want to be as sensationalist and exaggerate as much as possible.

    It should honestly be a banned site. Utter shite.”

    These reactions could also apply to your article. If you don’t want to misinform your readers, you really have to improve your skills.

    • Furious Francis

      Do you want me to rename the article to, "One employee from Microsoft thought they owned the Donkey Kong Franchise when they purchased Rare?"

      Calm down dude.

    • jcnba28

      Shut up dude, like seriously.

      • timg57867

        Whoa! Let's not get harsh here…..

        • NGX159

          Agreed, we don't need a battleground for argument here on this site like WiiUDaily forums….whoops I said too much.

    • Furious Francis

      Changed the title "ONE" Microsoft employee thought they owned the Donkey Kong franchise….. are you happy? Have my skills improved? lol

      • UncannyOmninaut

        As if this article wasn't funny enough adding that "One" just adds extra hilarity. Pouring salt in the wounds of Microsoft there Francis.

    • RicardJulianti

      As far as the reactions thing goes….specifically in regards to "Microsoft =/= one employee"….that's not entirely true.

      When you are an executive of a company and you visit a studio said company just bought….you are there representing the company as a whole. Microsoft had to formally make a statement that Adam Orth's insensitive "rural life sucks" comment didn't reflect how MS feels….and the guy still lost his job. People get fired all the time for misrepresenting the company they work for.

      Another example is Paula Deen. She made a racial slur and subsequently lost sponsors and so forth. The companies had to distance themselves from her and make formal statements that her views do not reflect theirs etc etc. Everyone, even if on a subconscious level, attributes things like that to the overall company whether it's true or not. So when people hear that a Microsoft Executive touring Rare Studios after buying them said "We own Donkey Kong right?", they see it as "Microsoft thought they owned Donkey Kong" because he was there officially representing the company.

    • Matthew Wesley

      Look, Man; I'm just saying that Microsoft ran Rare into the ground. Empirical evidence… it's great. When all variables are ceteris paribus (all things being equal) except for one, and there is a significant change, then one can draw at least a hypothesis at most a grounded theory on the event. Rare before Nintendo= pretty good games; Rare during Nintendo=pretty great games; Rare during Microsoft= pretty shitty games (hey, that rhymed!). Rare stayed relatively the same during it's pre Nintendo years, as did it during the Nintendo Years, only when they went to Microsoft did the shit hit the fan. A mass exodus of the original team (key word: MASS) and a general lack of quality games can only lead me to think that the company that bought Rare is the random variable. Hence my conclusion… Microsoft ran Rare into the ground.

    • rubix8703

      @ Gintoki
      In your overzealous attempt to correct someone, you again miss the error in your train of thought. If the executive was there as a representative of Microsoft, then it can be said that Microsoft was being represented. That's called inductive logic, it doesn't always work, but in some cases it is effective. It also brings to mind the transitive property of equality. You know: 'if a=b and b=c then a=c," yeah, that thing. If the man worked for Microsoft, and Microsoft is the company represented, then it can be said the man represented Microsoft. There is nothing 'sensationalist' about a little conjecture, try being a little less preemptive for a change.

      It isn't that serious.

      How about next time instead of assuming, you take off your metaphorical critical glasses, wipe them off, and try to see things through a different lens. In short, dude… lighten up!

  • donzaloog

    They wish they had a great franchise like this.

  • joe

    Microsoft get out of gameing you ppl r so fuck head Microsoft gameing dont need to ppl go back to pc

  • Matthew Wesley

    Ha ha ha ha ha! No wonder Microsoft didn't know what in the hell to do with Rare.

    • Dusklurker

      Well they could have cashed in on killer instinct a long time ago, as well as conker since they bunged up banjo and perfect dark.

      I think the moral of the story here is that they really need to work on quality control. They keep running great ip’s into the ground.