Is any James Bond 007 game ever going to live up to Goldeneye?

Goldeneye was pretty ground breaking at the time it was released, and it did set a lot of standards. The controller scheme was amazing, and 4 player split screen = non-stop fun for quite a while. I've got many fond memories of that game, you probably won't say the same for the majority of games released today.
 
Some games age better than others. The Snes final fantasies aged much better than FF7. In general those first gen 3d games didnt age well at all. Goldeneye was the shit tho. I can see why you think its crap for the same reasons I think Halo is crap, but it was the best console fps and the first with multiplayer. It was a big deal
 
inotocracy said:
Goldeneye was pretty ground breaking at the time it was released, and it did set a lot of standards. The controller scheme was amazing, and 4 player split screen = non-stop fun for quite a while. I've got many fond memories of that game, you probably won't say the same for the majority of games released today.
Click to expand...

Yup

Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, and a little Mario Kart 64 was our time killer for quite a few days we just just felt lazy back in high school. We would setup mazes with hidden mines and traps and see if the others could make it through without dieing. Placing bets who would win, the loser buys the pizza. memories like that won't be had with the games and gaming styles of today. Now its grab your computer/console, dsl/cable line, microphone and talk. I was hoping the Wii would revive those good times, but no. Growing up sux :(
 
Think of how many PC games RIGHT NOW that have enemies that react to where they are shot?

Hardly any. The models stagger a bit. In Fallout 3 you can blow limbs off but otherwise your shots don't seem to have any momentum on your enemies until they die. In Crysis and Far Cry 2, again, they are like ragdolls but don't have specific animations that happen when you shoot them in the hands, the crotch, etc.

Goldeneye was groundbreaking and even games right now don't have the "feeling" of impact when you hit enemies.
 
bit-tech seems to think Quantum of Solace sucks. I had no idea Treyarch was developing this one, but I guess it sort of figures.

I guess the gist is that QoS is an exceptionally bad PC game and a marginally bad game overall.
 
The Bond games are made for the console and kids, the fact they are being ported over to the PC.
Most ports are even worse....
 
Golden Eye was a great game at the time.

Newer games have already surpassed it, but no other Bond game has leaped over the standards bar of their market like Goldeneye has, so they don't get as much recognition.
 
Treyarch = disaster waiting to happen.

I tried the demo. It was terrible. They took the modern COD4 engine and made a game that looks like it should have been released 4 years ago.

We're talking Rainbow Six Raven Shield quality graphics with slightly sharper textures. Absolutely terrible. No good shaders or effects whatsoever. It's just textured polygons. Looks like a Directx 8 game.
 
i loved it, i was 17 when i started lpaying and i always also playing FPS online on my uncles computer and had played many PC based games but i loved goldeneye, every weekend we would rent 5 or 6 games and by the end of the night, we were playing golden eye cause everything else just sucked!

nestalgia or not, it was great what it brough to the table at it's time... today games are just the sam rehased shit over and over and over with nothing new in any of them
 
Goldeneye was phenomenal when it came out, and while there were things that were similar, there was little that compared favorably to the "fun" of the console multiplayer for awhile.

Yeah, I'd agree that even ignoring graphics, most of the newer 007 games probably are better on an objective scale, but they've been mediocre in comparison with the games of their time periods. For the fans to consider a new 007 game to be "live up to the legacy" of Goldeneye, it would have to be similarly *amazing* in comparison to its peers, which, well... That's as hard as it seems.
 
I think it was Everything or Nothing that I picked up used and had some coop. It was hard as hell but pretty fun. We finally got so frustrated because the difficulty was insane.

Goldeneye was a blast though, my brother and I used to play the Archives and chasing his avatar around when he played as Jaws looked so funny. Dual Klobbs ftw
 
Spare-Flair said:
err Daikatana probably belonged in 1997. Too bad it didn't come out until 2000

Bond was also great at the time because of the world it put you in. A modern world with bright, colorful places and human enemies and just things that felt like real life.

What did you have on PC? Quake II, Hexen, Heretic, Blood, etc... all freaking ugly games with brown and muddy dark worlds and horror elements and just not the kind of game I ever enjoyed. After Doom, that seemed to be the only kind of FPS there was (aside from Duke Nukem but that was pretty dark as well despite being in a modern city).

Goldeneye was great in 1997 because it provided a genre that you never really saw otherwise, and yes it had tight ground-breaking features and a feeling of freedom (snow level) you felt in few other games.
Click to expand...

For the most part I was rambling, you probably noticed I didn't make a point at all in that post. :D

But I hated the snow level in golden eye. So damned hard to see anything: it was dark, everything was white, I always got lost, and I'm so glad we don't have to put up with "fog" anymore to make up for poor draw distances. :)
 
Goldeneye 64 had some sort of comedic, stylized feel, although I think it was done completely on accident. Plus it had a million different gameplay modes (license to kill, slappers only, golden gun, you only live twice, etc) which always kept it entertaining while playing with friends. I don't understand why newer games seem to avoid these simple features. All the multiplayer games that come out these days just tell you how you should play. Goldeneye allowed you to customize the multiplayer so it was a fun experience for every player. Sure, some of the gameplay modes might have been completely unrealistic, and not even fitting with the style of the game, but they were fun, and that's what mattered.
 
refraxion said:
Yes I agree with you, fully. I loved Turok 2 compared to goldeneye (which sucked imo).

To answer the OP, all the other bond games lives up to it and more. Goldeneye was trash and still is IMHO.
Click to expand...


Eww Fogrok 2 and the really bad 007 games that came after Goldeneye? :(

I didn't even have a N64, but I had friends who did, and even as a pretty much pure PC gamer, at the time, I had a blast with it. It wasn't earth shattering, but it had fun multiplayer, and real world elements in a colorful setting. That was something we were lacking on the dark and sci-fi-ish PC FPS scene at the time.
 
MattyC said:
Eww Fogrok 2 and the really bad 007 games that came after Goldeneye? :(

I didn't even have a N64, but I had friends who did, and even as a pretty much pure PC gamer, at the time, I had a blast with it. It wasn't earth shattering, but it had fun multiplayer, and real world elements in a colorful setting. That was something we were lacking on the dark and sci-fi-ish PC FPS scene at the time.
Click to expand...

Eh, Turok 2 imo >>>> Goldeneye ever will be.
 
I somewhat enjoyed Turok, but Turok 2 wasn't fun for me at all. Golden Eye, though, absolute blast.
 
Whats up with all the Goldeneye haters?

I had more fun playing 4 player GE deathmatch than I have had in halo/battlefield/cod4/etc.
 
grendel240sx said:
Whats up with all the Goldeneye haters?

I had more fun playing 4 player GE deathmatch than I have had in halo/battlefield/cod4/etc.
Click to expand...

I don't hate on GE at all, but I found other games more entertaining for me during my N64 days.
 
did you perhaps do a lot of drugs back then and your memories are hazy?

the only really good thing about turok 2 was the gore. and the cerebral borer.
 
Martyr said:
did you perhaps do a lot of drugs back then and your memories are hazy?

the only really good thing about turok 2 was the gore. and the cerebral borer.
Click to expand...

I don't do drugs. I just preferred Turok 2 over GE. GE to me was not very exciting at all. Maybe you need to get a head shake, I don't hate GE, just it wasn't my type of game. Bad assumptions are bad.
 
When perfect dark came out for the n64, i felt it was very similar, yet a more refined goldeneye, in terms of smoothness, complexity, and multiplaying options. Especially with the "expansion pack" i bought so the n64 could process perfect dark to its full potential.
 
MirageMobile said:
When perfect dark came out for the n64, i felt it was very similar, yet a more refined goldeneye, in terms of smoothness, complexity, and multiplaying options. Especially with the "expansion pack" i bought so the n64 could process perfect dark to its full potential.
Click to expand...

yeah, it could choke the n64 though. really at the limits of the hardware. great weaponry though. and the bots were great too, plus challenges. lots to do.
 
obviously the complicated answer is:

no.

the simple answer is that the answer is definitely no, because golden O7 was the best game ever fucking released on n64, other than zelda harmonica of the times, and blitz: big dudes tackling other big dudes + firey footballs.

i also did the same thing with perfect dark regarding the little red memory expansion pack. the game was decent, but the later levels seemed to get repetitive interms of map design. plus, who wants to play as some ugly chick with no boobs? if im going to be a chick, im going to have big boobies, and a fat ass, and lollipop lips. and im gonna show off my fine ass and my long legs and do chocolate pudding thumbdrop dances all over the side show.

skeet skeet skeet.

know what im sayin?
 
Apathy said:
obviously the complicated answer is:

no.

the simple answer is that the answer is definitely no, because golden O7 was the best game ever fucking released on n64, other than zelda harmonica of the times, and blitz: big dudes tackling other big dudes + firey footballs.

i also did the same thing with perfect dark regarding the little red memory expansion pack. the game was decent, but the later levels seemed to get repetitive interms of map design. plus, who wants to play as some ugly chick with no boobs? if im going to be a chick, im going to have big boobies, and a fat ass, and lollipop lips. and im gonna show off my fine ass and my long legs and do chocolate pudding thumbdrop dances all over the side show.

skeet skeet skeet.

know what im sayin?
Click to expand...

Lara Croft in Tomb Raider?
 
SPARTAN VI said:
For the most part I was rambling, you probably noticed I didn't make a point at all in that post. :D

But I hated the snow level in golden eye. So damned hard to see anything: it was dark, everything was white, I always got lost, and I'm so glad we don't have to put up with "fog" anymore to make up for poor draw distances. :)
Click to expand...

Am I wrong or didn't even oblivion do fog to make up for draw distance? True it was further than you could see in goldeneye, but I believe some games with big open worlds still use it on occasion.
 
There is not much else that can really be said about GoldenEye.

So +1 to what everyone has already said.

Ooo... Wasn't GoldenEye one of the first games to implement active scenery? Dunno what is called, but You could shoot the TV's and lights. Also, bullet holes. That was new too.
 
its probably one of the most investigated and tested and pondered games out there. like the island in the first level across from the dam...
 
how the hell do you get to that island. i dont think i ever got there. i remember someone saying that oddjob was supposed to be inside of it. maybe i did get there and found it to be a completely empty building. <shrug>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top