GoldenEye: Rogue Agent

[Guest]

Yes. I think so.

but then surely it's going to get compared to rare's game... where it'll fall flat on its arse.

[Sprite Machine]

but then surely it's going to get compared to rare's game... where it'll fall flat on its arse.

It'll need to be sold to people before that happens. And most of the buyers probably wouldn't have played Goldeneye in the first place - merely heard of it, or have distant foggy memories of it.

That's what I reckon anyway.

[Burai]

There are three Goldfinger characters in there to one GoldenEye character. You expect us to just accept that the cast of Goldfinger will just happen to fit into the GlodenEye storyline somehow? Kudos if they pull it of, but I ain't holding my breath.

There are guys from all Bond films in there, not just Goldfinger and Goldeneye.

Dr No wasn't in Goldfinger, nor was Scaramanga.

If the Bond films weren't spread over the course of 40 years, but set in a more realistic timeframe, it wouldn't be at all inconceivable that Dr No and say Alec Trevelyan would have coexisted the same timeframe.

One thing about this Eurogamer report I've picked up on... Dr. No? Surely they mean Blofeld if they are fighting over control of SPECTRE?

[Guest]

It'll need to be sold to people before that happens. And most of the buyers probably wouldn't have played Goldeneye in the first place - merely heard of it, or have distant foggy memories of it.

That's what I reckon anyway.

so then, back to my original point, if that's the case then why link it with goldeneye at all?

seems a bit pointless to me, although i'm sure ea's marketing department know what they're doing... maybe.

[Popo]

Hmmmm, my James Bond general knowledge isn't what it used to be, but they also said that the game would have to be set before any of the movies, because of the obvious implication of Dr No dieing at the end of the first... I think they were generally alluding to 'this story's a crock of shit and James Bond doesn't have a proper time line anyway'.

[Sprite Machine]

so then, back to my original point, if that's the case then why link it with goldeneye at all?

Because I believe - despite Goldeneye being very old - it has a kind of legendary status that will boost sales regardless of who's played it.

Plus, you know, everyone loves sequels, right?

CHA-CHING!!!

[Guest]

Because I believe - despite Goldeneye being very old - it has a kind of legendary status that will boost sales regardless of who's played it.

Plus, you know, everyone loves sequels, right?

CHA-CHING!!!

yeah, maybe you're right. but...

i reckon it's only us hardcore gamers who really know how good goldeneye was, and we won't be so easily convinced that it'll better the original, plus any newcomers will be sorely disappointed that it's got nothing to do with the film.

[Spiral]

There are guys from all Bond films in there, not just Goldfinger and Goldeneye.

Dr No wasn't in Goldfinger, nor was Scaramanga.

If the Bond films weren't spread over the course of 40 years, but set in a more realistic timeframe, it wouldn't be at all inconceivable that Dr No and say Alec Trevelyan would have coexisted the same timeframe.

One thing about this Eurogamer report I've picked up on... Dr. No? Surely they mean Blofeld if they are fighting over control of SPECTRE?

Yeah, I know, I was just pointing out that if you use Onatopp to say it's linked with GoldenEye I can use Goldfinger, Oddjob and Pussy Galore to say it's more about Goldfinger.

Also, the game appears to be about SPECTRE. I never saw anything in GoldenEye that suggested organised crime to me, which is whay I have my doubts as to how it's associated. The timeframe was pretty much irrelevant to my point.

And that stuff about the golden eye. Reaching at straws much?

You've got a point about the Blofeld thing though.

[Jolly]

And yes, I really do think the Goldeneye name (as a game) is known very widely amongst most gamers.

Me too. I'd also go as far as to say it's the N64's best known game, and, as a consequence, is probably known by a fair few "PS2 owners".

[The Liberal Elite]

Because I believe - despite Goldeneye being very old - it has a kind of legendary status that will boost sales regardless of who's played it.

Plus, you know, everyone loves sequels, right?

CHA-CHING!!!

But still, you're talking balls, eh?

Unless none of the other Bond games have sold any copies at all. Or weren't any good.

Or the bond licence couldn't shift games by itself, even IF the games were good.

If I said 'goldeneye' to anyone, they'd reply, 'Bond Film', not 'sublime N64 experience'

[GwiDan]

You've got a point about the Blofeld thing though.

Isn't Blofeld a bit dead? There is absolutely no way at all that EA are trying to sell this game on its own merits, otherwise, they wouldn't have slapped the Bond licence and the almost legendary [in gaming terms] GoldenEye name on it. Couldn't EA have hired Free Radical to do the developing using the same years-old Goldeneye 007 engine but with you playing the part of General Ouromov, calling it "Goldeneye 007: Opposing Force". I'm sure Valve would have a few words with them, but it would surely be better than the crock o' something this is going to turn into.

[Cyhwuhx]

yeah, maybe you're right. but...

i reckon it's only us hardcore gamers who really know how good goldeneye was, and we won't be so easily convinced that it'll better the original, plus any newcomers will be sorely disappointed that it's got nothing to do with the film.

.::: I think it's the other way around. No matter what EA do, they can't possibly expect the hardcore to like this title because of it's name-link.

Really it could be another HALO2 with that name and it would still get slagged off.

I'm not saying it was a good decision to use the name, but I can see why they did it.

[Jolly]

If I said 'goldeneye' to anyone, they'd reply, 'Bond Film', not 'sublime N64 experience'

That may be, but if you then said "no, not the film" they might well reply "oh, you mean the game."

They're like that they are.

[Spiral]

Isn't Blofeld a bit dead?

Yeah, but so are Dr. No, Goldfinger and Oddjob by that point.

[Guest]

.::: I think it's the other way around. No matter what EA do, they can't possibly expect the hardcore to like this title because of it's name-link.

Really it could be another HALO2 with that name and it would still get slagged off.

I'm not saying it was a good decision to use the name, but I can see why they did it.

yeah, that's exactly what i mean...

anybody who actually knows goldeneye (the game) will slate it because it won't be up to the standard of the original

and anybody who doesn't will slate it because it's got nothing to do with the film.

lose, lose situation.

and if it is a halo beater then they should drop the bond license completely and tout it on its own merits.

[The Liberal Elite]

That may be, but if you then said "no, not the film" they might well reply "oh, you mean the game."

They're like that they are.

I just asked everyone in london, and they said, 'huh?'

[Space Renegade Ulala]

[quote name='Sprite Machine' date='May 5 2004, 02:18 PM'] I terms of how well-known the Bond films are, Goldeneye doesn't exactly sit up there at the top does it? Well, nearer the top than some... [/quote]
Actually, it does. When you take everything into consideration, it's definitely among the top 5, I'm sure most would agree.

[The Liberal Elite]

Actually, it does. When you take everything into consideration, it's definitely among the top 5, I'm sure most would agree.

Actually, yeah. It's classic bond.

[Guest]

Actually, it does. When you take everything into consideration, it's definitely among the top 5, I'm sure most would agree.

i agree too. in fact i'd say it's probably my favourite...

[K]

I really don't know why people are going so apeshit over this. For one thing, it's not like the Bond films take place in some kind of realistic, consistent universe- if you're outraged by, say, Blofeld coexisting with Xenia Onatopp, you might want to ask yourself how Bond can morph from a decrepit englishman with a wonky eyebrow to a hairy welshman in the course of two films.

And for another thing, this looks like the most original thing anyone's done with the Bond licence since... erm... well, ever, really. Playing as a henchman is a fantastic idea, and the idea of working your way up the ranks is a corker. I'm certainly more interested in playing this than another installment of "James Bond: Nothing Lasts Longer Than Some Other Things... Forever".

EA-bashing on an internet forum? Who would have guessed, eh?

[Spiral]

For a start, I'm hardly going apeshit. I'm just a bit annoyed.

It's not because it's EA. EA's output as of late has been generally good.

It's not because the game sounds like a bad idea. It sounds interesting.

It's not becasue of continuity issues. Bond has never really done continuity.

It's because they are apparently cynically attempting to ride on the back of another companies success with a movie license without any real justification for using the name. If the game was based on the film, I'd be ok with it, but from what I've read so far it isn't. That is a bad thing.

[Guest nomenclature]

The guy has a golden eye! Golden Eye...GoldenEye... ... ! ... ... !!!!

[Rocko]

Actually, it does. When you take everything into consideration, it's definitely among the top 5, I'm sure most would agree.

All things considered, it's probably my favourite.

[McFly]

Why invent this goldeneyed man bullshit just say there was another Goldeneye sateliite weapon. DUUUUUUHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

[decider]

Arent the rights to the old bond movies all availabile seperately ? I think EA only have rights to (a) new films/games (B) Goldeneye - hence the name ? Perhaps

EA have the rights to exploit the entire bond franchise until 2010. And exploit it they shall.

For the record, I thought E/N was a lot of fun. Until the last level.

[Landshead]

All things considered, it's probably my favourite.

But is it your favourite because of the game.

[Comrade]

I don't know where people are getting an idea that Goldeneye (N64) wasn't famous from. It's extremely famous. It's probably the only N64 game that most Casuals could name (other than Mario 64 probably, and not because they know about it, but because they know that Mario games are on Nintendo consoles).

Now, Perfect Dark, only the hardcore know about that. So you could imagine that a lot of casuals might think"...oh, Goldeneye on the N64, that game was great! It's a pity they never made a real sequel...". And here's a real sequel.

Admittedly, EA have missed the best time for it, but I still think there's enough interest in Goldeneye as a game to capitalise on it.

Also, I think it's interesting that that shit in-joke IGN kept going on about at the time has actually come true ("eye tat is golden" or some bollocks).

[Mayfair Rick]

Yes, Goldeneye was a good game.  No, I don't think that everyone who has a PS2 has heard of it.

You're mad. Stark raving bonkers loony. Now, I don't know about everyone else here, I know that my own life experiences are different to the rest of you. But I'm pretty sure that if any particular Playstation 2 owner was

A) Remotely interested in computer games during the N64 era

and B) Had any friends whatsoever

Then they WILL have heard of the game, regardless of whether they owned an N64. The pertinent question is one of how relevant the license is in todays market.

[ianwuk]

Personally, I think that after the lacklustre respose for 007: All or Nothing, EA decided to do what they do best, sequels using brand names, and nine out of ten people would probably say Goldeneye when asked to name a Bond film, hence, the game will be selling on name alone, and besides, it's the only recent Bond film EA has yet to make a game out of.

[Jumble Jumble]

I'm certainly more interested in playing this than another installment of "James Bond: Nothing Lasts Longer Than Some Other Things... Forever".

I think you'll find it's "Tomorrow's World Never Says Die Enough Again Twice".