Jump to content
IGNORED

Goldeneye Re-Make Developer Named...

northy

By northy
in Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Warszawa

Warszawa

Posted
Posted
Yes but retro werent supervised by EA.

They didnt make F1 either :unsure:

F1-98??

I remember that. The first two games, developed by Bizarre, were good. The '98 edition is surely the lowest a single franchise has plummeted within the space of a year. It's almost legendary, I'd say. :( I haven't played something so unplayable since.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tiki

Tiki

Posted
Posted
I started working in the Dundee studio in June 2003, SoE was made in the Edinburgh studio and released in early 2002.

The Edinburgh Studio visited my uni and were very full of themselves after releasing SoE. I'm not sure why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Burai

Burai

Posted
Posted
F1-98??

I remember that. The first two games, developed by Bizarre, were good. The '98 edition is surely the lowest a single franchise has plummeted within the space of a year. It's almost legendary, I'd say. :) I haven't played something so unplayable since.

No, I'm assuming he means F1 2000, which was horribly unfinished, rushed out so you could emulate the 2000 season as it happened, but sadly with 1999 track layouts/graphics, an utter stab in the dark at what Indianapolis might be like, messed up performance values and an insane number of bugs. F1 Championship Season 2000 was released as a full-priced apology. But it was still shit.

Agreed about Sony's Formula One 98 though. Development was handed to Visual Concepts, who somehow or other made the worst F1 game ever.

As a matter of interest, did anyone ever pick up the unlicensed version of Sony Formula One 97?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Warszawa

Warszawa

Posted
Posted
No, I'm assuming he means F1 2000, which was horribly unfinished, rushed out so you could emulate the 2000 season as it happened, but sadly with 1999 track layouts/graphics, an utter stab in the dark at what Indianapolis might be like, messed up performance values and an insane number of bugs. F1 Championship Season 2000 was released as a full-priced apology. But it was still shit.

Agreed about Sony's Formula One 98 though. Development was handed to Visual Concepts, who somehow or other made the worst F1 game ever.

As a matter of interest, did anyone ever pick up the unlicensed version of Sony Formula One 97?

Visual Sciences definitely developed F1 98, not Visual Concepts.

"Monday 20th April 1998

PSYGNOSIS SHUFFLE F1 DEVELOPER

Visual Sciences replace Bizarre Creations

Reported in CTW, Psygnosis are switching to Glasgow-based Visual Sciences to develop the next edition of the massively successful F1 license. The two previous versions were coded by Bizarre Creations. As well as F1 '98, Psygnosis will also publish Expert Pool from the same team.

Visual Sciences are a member of the Scottish Games Alliance, a band of emerging software companies based north of the border, using joint-promotional tactics and internal cooperation to boost games development in the region. Game-Online will be bringing you a guide to the SGA, with exclusive interviews with Red Lemon and Inner Workings."

I'm amazed they kept the F1 contract after that atrocity!

Maybe they've improved considerably since the apparently also catastrophic F1 2000....Can't say I've played an awful lot of their other stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
northy

northy

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I take it all back:

"Visual Science specializes in the development of AAA video games based on original or licensed properties on a variety of genres and platforms."

As I rule, every time I hear the term AAA associated with a game, I automatically assume it'll be shite. A collective smirking from the design staff is standard when a director / producer starts using that kind of lingo in our team meetings.

http://www.justwannaplay.com/information.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Burai

Burai

Posted
Posted
Alot more had it not been live. On release day the servers were going mad, if it hadn't made that live move not as many copies would have been sold.

Right... So that's a maximum of 500,000 copies, worldwide at the very extreme. You do understand that MOHRS sold more than that in its first week on sale?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MK-1601

MK-1601

Posted
Posted
We're not going to go down that 'half a million more customers doesn't matter' road again, are we? It was tremendously embarassing the last time.

If you genuinely believe that adding Live support to a game would equate to an extra 500,000 sales then you are smoking crack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
D-Side

D-Side

Posted
Posted
If you genuinely believe that adding Live support to a game would equate to an extra 500,000 sales then you are smoking crack.

Tell you what would have a MASSIVE impact on sales: Not having any online compatibility at all. That would please everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
D-Side

D-Side

Posted
Posted
Face it - the only people who care about live are us and other slightly more than casual gamers.

Some of us care so much about Live, they try and convince others to buy cheap-o jetskiing games, simply because of the online mode.

Course, I'm not going to mention any names...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Liberal Elite

The Liberal Elite

Posted
Posted
Some of us care so much about Live, they try and convince others to buy cheap-o jetskiing games, simply because of the online mode.

Course, I'm not going to mention any names...

That's because the people that this person was trying to convice others to buy CARVE are in the aforementioned group of people who have Live. WINKY WOO

There's only one game that would convince the general public to go online, *if* it had online functionality, and its name rhymes with Band Left Boughto

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Robo_1

Robo_1

Posted
Posted

Oh dear, this is going to be bloody awful!

Taken from the Bond website MI6

The latest issue of Electronic Gaming Monthly has an interesting teaser of what to look out for next month.

The publication claims to have an exclusive cover story with details on the next 007 game from Electronic Arts.

"It's a world-exclusive cover story on the game with three names: GoldenEye: Dr. No vs. Goldfinger - sequel of sorts to the best James Bond adventure ever, GoldenEye 007 (Nintendo 64).

For the first time, you won't be stepping in the shoes of the British superspy. Instead, play the villain and take on 007 in this FPS that shakes up the Bond-universe timeline and continuity like a perfect martini...made in the Twilight Zone. (Where else would you see classic Bond fiends like Dr. No, Goldfinger, and even Oddjob going after each other?)"

According to the magazine, the story has just been bumped off the cover of the next issue for an even bigger news piece, but expect all the details to be inside.

;) Not content with messing with perfection (Goldeneye), they now fancy messing with the entire Bond Universe ;)

EDIT: Looks like it's probably EG's April fools joke ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.

  I accept