Seriously, why is this again? I know Retro like to say they wanted to do something 'new' and original, but hang on...
In Metroid Prime, they still managed to bring back Metroids, space pirates, Ridley, etc.
And the Mario franchise has gone about 30 years with Bowser and the Koopa Troop being the main villains in literally 99% of games in the series.
What makes it 'right' to have no Kremlings or familiar enemies in new Donkey Kong Country games, but to then use Bowser and the same old Mario enemies in every single Mario game? Or for Retro to bring back everyone's favourite Metroid bad guys each time?
For one: I like that they are creating new villains. I hate how every Mario game has the same villain and set of enemies. I don't want the same to happen to DKC. Variety, y'know?
For two: My theory is that the Retro Studios DKCs will be a trilogy like the old ones and in the third one they will go all out with the Kremlings. That would kinda make sense right? It would basically be the plot: "K. Rool is back for revenge" etc.
PS: I liked the Tikis. :o ...and the Vikings look fun, too...
Other people probably know this stuff better than I do, but my understanding was that Microsoft own the rights.
I read somewhere that when MS bought Rare, they were under the mistaken impression that they had bought the DK franchise.
Of course Donkey Kong existed long before Rare made their games, so the characters were still owned by Nintendo. But MS had bought the rights to any characters and intellectual property created by Rare. And that includes the Kremlings since they didn't exist prior to DKC. Actually I think Rare initially created them for an unrelated game, but after that project stalled they ended up including them in DKC.
This is all off the top of my head and maybe I'm wrong about it, but that's my understanding of the situation.
Other people probably know this stuff better than I do, but my understanding was that Microsoft own the rights.
I read somewhere that when MS bought Rare, they were under the mistaken impression that they had bought the DK franchise.
Of course Donkey Kong existed long before Rare made their games, so the characters were still owned by Nintendo. But MS had bought the rights to any characters and intellectual property created by Rare. And that includes the Kremlings since they didn't exist prior to DKC. Actually I think Rare initially created them for an unrelated game, but after that project stalled they ended up including them in DKC.
This is all off the top of my head and maybe I'm wrong about it, but that's my understanding of the situation.
MS might have THOUGHT they were getting the rights to the DKC characters, since, you know, MS is fond of making jerk moves like that, but they didn't. Rare was on a sort of hire basis to Nintendo at the time, so while they created like 99% of the content of the DKC games while "hired" by Nintendo, Nintendo owns every single one of them.
The "official" excuse is that they wanted to go in a different direction by introducing new villains. Unofficially, I think they just didn't want to be total jerks by saying "Oh hey Rare; you remember those characters you did for us like 20 years ago (roughly)? well guess what. Retro has them now. Kthxbai"
That said. It's my own personal opinion that the DKCR game/s (while pretty awesome platformers in and of themselves) aren't QUITE up to the DKC standards without the iconic villains we've all grown so attached to and annoyed at over the past 20 years (roughly). The first game was annoying due to the total lack of swimming levels, and, if memory serves, ice/snow levels. But the fact that Retro is putting swimming levels, AND making them a little more awesome than the DKC ones, into Tropical Freeze is a step up.
So who knows. Maybe ShyGuyXXL is right. Maybe, come DKCR 3, we'll find out that K. Rool was behing the Tikis AND the Vikings and he was just testing the waters to see how much bigger a threat DK had gotten since their last showdown ... and then, you know, deciding stupidly to steal his crap once more.
