So isn't this being made by the same people who made the other crappy bond games? I'd be skeptical at best.
I'd consider that a good thing! Treyarch are the very definition of 'middle-of-the-road', whereas Dead Space: Extraction actually has really nice variety and pacing - certainly underappreciated, I feel. Of course, that was a fixed-camera rail shooter for a side-game of a minor IP, with all the attendant low expectations - and this is a heavily modified version of sodding Goldeneye.
All people on this forum have done for years is bitch about how there isn't a remake of Goldeneye, and now that there is one people are bitching because it's this months Assigned Company To Hate making it. I'm going to wait until I can actually play it rather than judging it on thirty seconds of actually pretty cool looking trailer.
Oh and I played Goldeneye like a month ago. It's still the most fun console FPS I've ever played. People who say "oh it doesn't stack up now" are wrong.
All people on this forum have done for years is bitch about how there isn't a remake of Goldeneye, and now that there is one people are bitching because it's this months Assigned Company To Hate making it. I'm going to wait until I can actually play it rather than judging it on thirty seconds of actually pretty cool looking trailer.
Oh and I played Goldeneye like a month ago. It's still the most fun console FPS I've ever played. People who say "oh it doesn't stack up now" are wrong.
You're confusing 'Assigned Company To Hate' and 'In The Running For Worst Group of People On the Planet', Tube
Man I remember playing the original to death with my friends back in the day.
We had some goofy bullshit for house rules, though. Like you couldn't kill and unarmed player, instead they were supposed to kneel and do what you say or you could justifiably kill them, but then a fire fight would break out and your hostage would make a run for it while you were distracted!
815165 on
0
Options
Warlock82Never pet a burning dogRegistered Userregular
edited June 2010
I'm not quite sure why people are saying Goldeneye doesn't hold up. Maybe graphically... I thought the Perfect Dark XBLA port/remake held up really damn well, especially since I was fully expecting it not to. It does feel old, but it's still a *lot* of fun, even the single player.
Honestly, it's so many different factors that there's no way I see this remake being good. As someone already mentioned, not regaining health adds something of a strategic aspect to the game. Other things like a generally fun mission structure and unique weapons and gadgets also help to diversify it a bit from other more cookie-cutter FPSers out there. Things like speed running the levels to unlock cheat codes are a lot of fun. And there is just something special about the multiplayer that is hard to define (though I do think having the other people in the room with you really adds a lot to the experience).
I don't know, it's just not something I think they can bring back, least of all Activision. I do think it's something that can be duplicated (and it really has nothing to do with the Bond license as Activision would like to insinuate), but not by out-right copying it. I would throw Half-Life 2 and Portal out as good examples of a similar type of FPS (at least on the single player side). The integrated narrative and interesting, unique gameplay mechanics (i.e. gravity/portal guns) are big factors in that (again, at least for single player). It seems like a lot of developers forget that these days.
Extraction had really good presentation and VA. It's hard to say on the graphics because it was so dark, GE can't really do that so it will probably look worse.
There is a really big difference between a FPS and a rail shooter though. All you can really say is that they got the controls/sensitivty right.
Rami on
Steam / Xbox Live: WSDX NNID: W-S-D-X 3DS FC: 2637-9461-8549
For me, I'm not at all worried about Goldeneye holding up; I'm more concerned about the changes they're apparently making. I'll give it a shot, but it's probably best to not get my hopes up too much.
Oh and I played Goldeneye like a month ago. It's still the most fun console FPS I've ever played. People who say "oh it doesn't stack up now" are wrong.
Good for you, I guess? I'd be kind of surprised if that applied to the majority of people who used to love Goldeneye. I know I couldn't play it today and it used to be one of my favorites.
Did they have to change the story/bond for licensing reasons?
I guarentee you it was because they could not (or did not want to) secure likeness rights for Pierce Brosnan. It was probably too expensive, and I imagine they already had the rights for Daniel Craig since they do other Bond games.
Eh, it might turn out okay. Personally I think Perfect Dark was superior in just about ever way, and am happy enough with the remake we got for that. I'm not really looking for remakes so much as easier ways to play the game than hauling out my out N64 and hoping the carts still work. PD for the x360 did that just fine, few changes but being able to play it through my xbox was a nice convenience. I was never too interested in a Goldeneye remake, so I guess I'll just see how this pans out.
I also find is hilarious they try to imply in the beginning of that trailer that "us gamers" all think it's "the greatest shooter ever made!!!1!!11!"
Everywhere except this forum I've seen lots of people talking about how excited they are. Lots of positive show floor opinions too.
By the way, if you do read more articles on this you will find that it's not a remake (as even I originally thought). They are meticulously remaking a few levels but it's supposed to be a majority of brand new stuff.
If it has remote mines, the multi will be awesome, which is all that matters.
Everywhere except this forum I've seen lots of people talking about how excited they are. Lots of positive show floor opinions too.
By the way, if you do read more articles on this you will find that it's not a remake (as even I originally thought). They are meticulously remaking a few levels but it's supposed to be a majority of brand new stuff.
If it has remote mines, the multi will be awesome, which is all that matters.
I've seen the same sentiment in some other places. Frankly I am always distrustful when someone other than the original developers take a popular game and "remake it" (or otherwise use its name) to capitalize on that popularity. Least of all, Activision.
I remember way back, when info about a XBLA port of Goldeneye hit the net, with updated graphics and all that jazz, and people here squeed, and then started screaming out when it got canned.
Now people are saying "Oh yeah, a Goldeneye remake would totally suck".
Funny, that.
The Wolfman on
"The sausage of Green Earth explodes with flavor like the cannon of culinary delight."
Sounds weird. You can play it with a classic controller and then it plays much like Call of Duty, even left trigger aim down sights. The multiplayer even has CoD style perks system.
Oh and I played Goldeneye like a month ago. It's still the most fun console FPS I've ever played. People who say "oh it doesn't stack up now" are wrong.
Rocked it like a couple of weeks ago. It hurt me. The mines remained the only fun thing. Turok 2 ended up being better multiplayer. Starfox 64, Mario Kart 64, San Fran 2049 are still a blast as well.
But judging by screenshots, this won't be that game anyways, so it's mostly a wait and see.
are we still hating ea? or have we moved totally to activision
My main problem with Activision is Bobby Kotick( primarily from an interview in Game informer where he admitted to defrauding Japanese developers to keep the company going) is I guess the closest analogy is he's an Acme Saleman. He'll sell you a scam and he'll manage to sell you the same one five times before you catch on. and you just keep hitting the boulder.
The other problem is this lunacy about yearly franchise updates. Video games as a whole don't benefit from this either way. If it works we inevitably get shoddy product and even fewer new IPs than we're getting now. If it doesn't ( and yeah it isn't so far) Investors will shy away from proven properties because they aren't selling well this year.
I don't hate the company I'll buy their games ( woo Transformers)but their practices tend to be deplorable even moreso than EA apparently.
King Riptor on
I have a podcast now. It's about video games and anime!Find it here.
I know it's cool to have regenerating health nowadays since apparently every fucking shooter uses that now. Goldeneye didn't have regenerating health and it doesn't need it. I know they can balance around the fact that the player now regens health but it's not the same. It completely changes the combat dynamics.
It encourages retarded behavior like standing in open fire to have plenty of time to take a good aim at your target, shooting a few rounds then hiding for a few seconds until your health gets back up.
With a health/armor pickup system you can't go Retard Rambo on your opponents. Well, you can but you know you might have to survive another encounter before you get any more supplies so you'd rather be careful. It also adds to the feeling of danger.
I'll say I kinda like hybrids of both these systems, when it fits with the settings. Something like Red Faction 2 did. If I remember right instead of having one big health bar it was split in multiple smaller ones. If you took a few grazing shots you would be able to recover after a few seconds but if you took enough damage to lose a whole segment you wouldn't recover that part until you picked up some health.
It's not Goldeneye if it doesn't have DK Mode. Or a club-fisted Natalya taking forever on every goddamn computer (typing with the barrel of a Magnum no less) as she gets riddled with bullets. Fuck you, Control.
I don't know what to think about this reboot. Guess I should take the 'cautiously optimistic' stance, but deep down I'd much prefer an XBLA port. The legal reasons for Daniel Craig make perfect sense, but it still seems so... fraudulent.
Gutterkisser on
0
Options
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
edited June 2010
I thought back in the Casino Royale days Craig had sworn never to take part in a video game? Or am I thinking of someone else.
Sounds weird. You can play it with a classic controller and then it plays much like Call of Duty, even left trigger aim down sights. The multiplayer even has CoD style perks system.
Huh, CC support sounds pretty good; I wonder if they'll include Motion Plus support for more precise remote aiming, but the controller works for me. Also I have nothing but respect for Activison; they've been one of the industry's stalwarts from it's early days, but it's a little disconcerting to see them rely on the same couple of franchises for most of their big sales. Looking over their Wiki article explains a lot.
Posts
I'd consider that a good thing! Treyarch are the very definition of 'middle-of-the-road', whereas Dead Space: Extraction actually has really nice variety and pacing - certainly underappreciated, I feel. Of course, that was a fixed-camera rail shooter for a side-game of a minor IP, with all the attendant low expectations - and this is a heavily modified version of sodding Goldeneye.
Oh and I played Goldeneye like a month ago. It's still the most fun console FPS I've ever played. People who say "oh it doesn't stack up now" are wrong.
You're confusing 'Assigned Company To Hate' and 'In The Running For Worst Group of People On the Planet', Tube
Edit- And I was always meh about Goldeneye
Right
Suuuuuuuuuuuuuuure
We had some goofy bullshit for house rules, though. Like you couldn't kill and unarmed player, instead they were supposed to kneel and do what you say or you could justifiably kill them, but then a fire fight would break out and your hostage would make a run for it while you were distracted!
Honestly, it's so many different factors that there's no way I see this remake being good. As someone already mentioned, not regaining health adds something of a strategic aspect to the game. Other things like a generally fun mission structure and unique weapons and gadgets also help to diversify it a bit from other more cookie-cutter FPSers out there. Things like speed running the levels to unlock cheat codes are a lot of fun. And there is just something special about the multiplayer that is hard to define (though I do think having the other people in the room with you really adds a lot to the experience).
I don't know, it's just not something I think they can bring back, least of all Activision. I do think it's something that can be duplicated (and it really has nothing to do with the Bond license as Activision would like to insinuate), but not by out-right copying it. I would throw Half-Life 2 and Portal out as good examples of a similar type of FPS (at least on the single player side). The integrated narrative and interesting, unique gameplay mechanics (i.e. gravity/portal guns) are big factors in that (again, at least for single player). It seems like a lot of developers forget that these days.
The team assigned to this helped do Dead Space: Extraction.
Extraction was really good.
There is a really big difference between a FPS and a rail shooter though. All you can really say is that they got the controls/sensitivty right.
A- Make it look presentable
and
B- Have it control in a manner that is enjoyable
I'm set.
Oh QTES clearly designed to show off your Craig model? Fuck you Activision it's an FPS.
Good for you, I guess? I'd be kind of surprised if that applied to the majority of people who used to love Goldeneye. I know I couldn't play it today and it used to be one of my favorites.
I guarentee you it was because they could not (or did not want to) secure likeness rights for Pierce Brosnan. It was probably too expensive, and I imagine they already had the rights for Daniel Craig since they do other Bond games.
I also find is hilarious they try to imply in the beginning of that trailer that "us gamers" all think it's "the greatest shooter ever made!!!1!!11!"
By the way, if you do read more articles on this you will find that it's not a remake (as even I originally thought). They are meticulously remaking a few levels but it's supposed to be a majority of brand new stuff.
If it has remote mines, the multi will be awesome, which is all that matters.
I've seen the same sentiment in some other places. Frankly I am always distrustful when someone other than the original developers take a popular game and "remake it" (or otherwise use its name) to capitalize on that popularity. Least of all, Activision.
ultimately it us up to the publisher what happens, and they are the ones that say "finish it up already" or give the go for more time.
lets hope they dont speed it up to hit a schedule because that would potentially kill it.
http://www.youtube.com/vegassteven
Dude is awesome even digitally.
Now people are saying "Oh yeah, a Goldeneye remake would totally suck".
Funny, that.
Sounds weird. You can play it with a classic controller and then it plays much like Call of Duty, even left trigger aim down sights. The multiplayer even has CoD style perks system.
Rocked it like a couple of weeks ago. It hurt me. The mines remained the only fun thing. Turok 2 ended up being better multiplayer. Starfox 64, Mario Kart 64, San Fran 2049 are still a blast as well.
But judging by screenshots, this won't be that game anyways, so it's mostly a wait and see.
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/
I write about video games and stuff. It is fun. Sometimes.
My main problem with Activision is Bobby Kotick( primarily from an interview in Game informer where he admitted to defrauding Japanese developers to keep the company going) is I guess the closest analogy is he's an Acme Saleman. He'll sell you a scam and he'll manage to sell you the same one five times before you catch on. and you just keep hitting the boulder.
The other problem is this lunacy about yearly franchise updates. Video games as a whole don't benefit from this either way. If it works we inevitably get shoddy product and even fewer new IPs than we're getting now. If it doesn't ( and yeah it isn't so far) Investors will shy away from proven properties because they aren't selling well this year.
I don't hate the company I'll buy their games ( woo Transformers)but their practices tend to be deplorable even moreso than EA apparently.
It encourages retarded behavior like standing in open fire to have plenty of time to take a good aim at your target, shooting a few rounds then hiding for a few seconds until your health gets back up.
With a health/armor pickup system you can't go Retard Rambo on your opponents. Well, you can but you know you might have to survive another encounter before you get any more supplies so you'd rather be careful. It also adds to the feeling of danger.
I'll say I kinda like hybrids of both these systems, when it fits with the settings. Something like Red Faction 2 did. If I remember right instead of having one big health bar it was split in multiple smaller ones. If you took a few grazing shots you would be able to recover after a few seconds but if you took enough damage to lose a whole segment you wouldn't recover that part until you picked up some health.
Battle.net: Fireflash#1425
Steam Friend code: 45386507
XBL - Foreverender | 3DS FC - 1418 6696 1012 | Steam ID | LoL
But hopefully that doesn't mean you've just got one bar to do the level and there are no medpacks.
I don't know what to think about this reboot. Guess I should take the 'cautiously optimistic' stance, but deep down I'd much prefer an XBLA port. The legal reasons for Daniel Craig make perfect sense, but it still seems so... fraudulent.
For Golden Eye? I doubt that.
That sounds very evil.