Pachter's an idiot, always has been and always will be. Just other month he was gobbing off that the PC was in terminal decline and the consoles were the future. Needless to say he was put in place by a legions of PC gamers.
Seriously, why do you journalists give this guy coverage?
Also, Goldeneye Source is far better than this crao game will be. Watch the gameplay videos, they've added melee attacks (with the guns, not slappers) and are generally trying to mimic Halo/CoD. Pierce Brosnan isn't even in the game anymore.
Still should have used Brosnan over Craig and updated the graphics. That's like when George Lucas inserted the younger Anakin for the older one in the ending credits of Return of the Jedi...just wasn't the same.
They'd have been better off releasing the old GoldenEye for the Wii Virtual Console for $10.
Doesn't surprise me Nintendo are remaking another game. The done Metal gear solid for the game cube and have already had resurrected mario in perfect form from 1993 why not do the same to (arguably) the greatest shooter of all time?
Naw, I doubt GoldenEye would do well on the Xbox 360; the FPS gamers there only want re-hashes of Halo and Modern Warfare. I doubt they'd know what to do with an FPS that didn't look and play like every other one in their library. Especially if it didn't use the clunky 2-analog control system that they all use. (which has been demonmstrated to be vastly inferior to keyboard+mouse for FPS games)
Meanwhile, a LOT of GoldenEye's gameplay relies heavily on the use of on-screen aiming; i.e, moving the crosshair without moving the whole friggin' view area. For this, the Wii-remote makes perfect sense; it also makes aiming about as easy as using a mouse. Given the game's emphasis on standing shootouts rather than run-and-gun like typical console games, a dual-analog setup really is a disadvantage.
Overall, I like the new re-make; for the most part, it appears to hold rather true, with a few additions that look like they'll go well. The only real complaint I have is the one that's already been said repeatedly: WTF is Daniel Craig doing as 007? I suppose I COULD forgive it if the actual player model/voice turn out to be Pierce Brosnan, and Craig is there as an "AI buddy." (sorta like the origina Perfect Dark's co-op mode) But as is, it does wind up being a bit of a disappointment to have the wrong Bond.
Lastly, "Sinking Wii Ship?" -1 for you, Tom's. Perhaps you'd forgotten that the Wii's sold approximately as many units as the 360 and PS3 put together? Apparently, 1st place by a 75% margin over #2 is a "sinking ship," so I'd hate to think what the PS3 would be described as. (An undersea oil well blowout?)
[citation][nom]jerreece[/nom]It's graphics don't lend itself to "modern" FPS games or enthusiasts.[/citation]
The irony is that the Wii's graphics are still well-placed above the Xbox, where all the "modern" shooters were just a few years ago, and the 360 and PS3 are leagues behind what the likes of Crysis/Crysis 2 look like on the PC.
If they're designing it to be used with Classic Pro controller (instead of wiimote/nunchuck combo), why WOULDN'T they port it to the other platforms? They wouldn't even need to make it a full retail release, make it an XBLA and PSN game. Even a quick and dirty port will look and run better on the other consoles, given the huge performance delta between them and the Wii.
It sounds like Activision is at least making games for the sake of gamers and not just trying to slap a well known title on the Halo engine and try to make a buck. I'd rather see original awesome games instead of remakes though.
[citation][nom]jerreece[/nom]LOL I guess he's never played "hard core" games on the Wii before. Folks buy the Wii for kids games and exercise stuff. It's graphics don't lend itself to "modern" FPS games or enthusiasts.[/citation]
What's funny is that the n64 wasn't known for FPS or Mature games either. Then there was GoldenEye and Perfect Dark.
"Real gamers" play games because of awesome gameplay, not a shiny coat.
- No Pierce Brosnan and is replaced with Daniel Craig
- No Rare Ltd. involvement(because they were bought out by MSFT)
- Title should be renamed to Casino Royale or Quantum of Solace or anything but goldeneye.
- Remade by activision - no explanation needed
If I may add my $.02. First of all Goldeneye Source is better than this cr@p remake that Activision / Nintendo is making. Secondly if anyone remembers the game Perfect Dark then they will know that the game a high definition remaster and was released on the Xbox 360. The game played exactly the same as the n64 version but looked sooooo much nicer.
What's the connection well long ago everyone came together and did the same thing for Goldeneye 007, they remastered it just like Perfect Dark. It exists and is real, but because Nintendo wouldn't let it be we will never see it, officially.
Having played Perfect Dark on the 360 I can tell you Goldeneye 007 would be much better on the 360 versus what Nintendo is doing. If only Nintendo weren't stupid by wanting the exclusivity to themselves we would have Goldeneye on the 360 already.
goldeneye was certainly one of the most beloved fps of all time, i grew up in the video games with it, electronic arts acquired the franchise but never achieved the glorious gameplay that rare imposed as a standard on the console's fps's ,but besides the nostalgia thing, i really find difficult that activision can compete with graphic megamonsters like crysis 2 or rage or the joyful complexity of fallout 3 on the xbox 360 even as a arcade marketplace download,so makes sense that appear in a less powerful,less challenging and more childish console like the wii and yet have a succesful game.
I think we are all missing the point. Sure theres a possibility that it WOULD do well on other consoles, and the graphics might make a difference, but I don't really think it matters, it already looks good. Its that this Goldeneye 007 is entering into a fresh market. 360 and PS3 already have great shooters. From the daring RE5 to Halo, to COD(and dare I say resistance, is that even really a good shooter, that game never did sit right with me for some reason)but the wii is an open market, they are attempting to bring a taste to the wii that is spicing up everything else on the market. You 360 fans can keep your games, I'm just happy to finally get a (hopefully) good shooter on the wii I can enjoy (does redsteel and conduit ring any bells, ya shitty shooters, thats all us wii owners have, so give us a break) as well, does anyone smell perfect dark, i mean co-op wise. I been waiting for a game whose multi-player could come close to perfect darks game modes, play styles, and the ability to have cool AI bots running around either against or for you. not going to lie, halo came close and with halo:REACH they might just overshadow PD for me, still anyone else seeing possibilities like activision, or are you all to pent up in your own system to see a smart move when it smacks you in the face.
I see angsty fanboys like to vote down comments that shatter their reality, without daring actually respond to them. So be it.[citation][nom]kinggraves[/nom]What's funny is that the n64 wasn't known for FPS or Mature games either. Then there was GoldenEye and Perfect Dark.[/citation]
It's worth noting that the Nintendo64 actually had a higher ratio of "mature"-rated titles than the PS1, at about 8.9% to only 7.5%. While GoldenEye & Perfect Dark might've been the most prominent, there were others too that showed up, from series such as Turok, Mortal Kombat, Doom/Quake, Duke Nukem 3D... (even, *shudder* Daikatana) Many were also N64 exclusive, never appearing on the PS1.
[citation][nom]Strider-Hiryu_79[/nom]Why goldeneye wii is not goldeneye:- No Pierce Brosnan and is replaced with Daniel Craig- No Rare Ltd. involvement(because they were bought out by MSFT)- Title should be renamed to Casino Royale or Quantum of Solace or anything but goldeneye.- Remade by activision - no explanation needed[/citation]
I can grant that some caution is warranted with Activision dealing with this... But it still remains very much GoldenEye; a simple change of Bond character doesn't replace all the levels, the storyline, etc.
[citation][nom]DaFees[/nom]What's the connection well long ago everyone came together and did the same thing for Goldeneye 007, they remastered it just like Perfect Dark. It exists and is real, but because Nintendo wouldn't let it be we will never see it, officially.Having played Perfect Dark on the 360 I can tell you Goldeneye 007 would be much better on the 360 versus what Nintendo is doing. If only Nintendo weren't stupid by wanting the exclusivity to themselves we would have Goldeneye on the 360 already.[/citation]
Exactly what would make it better on the Xbox 360? Sure, it runs at 720p with x4 AA, but the visual updates aren't exactly all that stunning. It still has the distinct look of "we slapped on higher-res textures on everything and called it good." Really, is something like this, or this, or this, that what you'd call a major visual improvement? It hardly looks any different; a more-detailed skybox, some higher-res textures that you don't notice at first, and that's it.
Granted, the job being done for the (shelved) XBLA version of GoldenEyelooked a lot better, though it still shows a lot of the same problems. (notice the lack of polygons on the "non-flat" concrete wall, and the low polygon-count railing) By contrast, the Wii version, in spite of having a lower resolution, DOES seem to be adding polys and effects, such as here and here.
All told, I think the Wii version will look better than how the XBLA version would've.
I agree, he's an idiot. Even more so that he has forced me to defend POS Activision. I should be a gaming analyst since obviously it requires nothing more than spouting BS. No different than a sports analyst.