Developer states there is very little chance of seeing classic James Bond title once again
Rare: GoldenEye 007 revival incredibly unlikely
#1
Posted 22 September 2009 - 03:22 AM
#2
Posted 22 September 2009 - 04:22 AM
#3
Posted 22 September 2009 - 07:22 AM
#4
Posted 22 September 2009 - 11:43 AM
???????????????????????????????
#5
Posted 22 September 2009 - 12:30 PM
just means i have to hold onto my nintendo 64
Edited by Bucky, 22 September 2009 - 12:30 PM.
#6
Posted 22 September 2009 - 05:22 PM
pretty much non-news. it is too bad nintendo will not let this happen.
It's not just Nintendo. It's quite complicated.
#7
Posted 22 September 2009 - 05:36 PM
Here's a dumbed down version which is my understanding of the situation:pretty much non-news. it is too bad nintendo will not let this happen.
It's not just Nintendo. It's quite complicated.
Activison, Danjaq, Nintendo, Microsoft, and Rare would all have to agree and there's just too many conflicting interests.
The Legend of Zelda franchise is owned solely by Nintendo whereas GoldenEye and Perfect Dark are owned by Rare, which no longer have a partnership with Nintendo. Nintendo got to keep certain characters like Donkey Kong because they're Nintendo characters.they transferred ZELDA OCARINA and ZELDA MAJORA to gamecube disc - so why can't they dot it with GoldenEye or the sequel PERFECT DARK
???????????????????????????????
Activision now owns the rights to the 007 video games and Rare is Microsoft's partner. It's all a big mess.
#8
Posted 22 September 2009 - 08:20 PM
they transferred ZELDA OCARINA and ZELDA MAJORA to gamecube disc - so why can't they dot it with GoldenEye or the sequel PERFECT DARK
???????????????????????????????
1. The Zelda games are entirely in-house Nintendo properties
2. It was one-time, limited deal as build up for Wind Waker
Going back to 1, let's look at everyone who would have been involved with GoldenEye 007:
Rareware - Developers
Danjaq and EON - Rights holders of Bond, GoldenEye, etc.
Nintendo - Publishers
Right there are three parties who would have to consent. It's not like in the case of Zelda, where Satoru Iwata can pretty just point to a random guy and order him to port the games to their latest console. And, even if assuming those three were to consent, Activision are now the official developers of 007 gaming properties, meaning they would have to consent as well. If Activision were to consent, not only would a cut of the profits be going to Danjaq/EON (not that they won't from any game they make on their own), but cuts would go to Nintendo, a company that, while sometimes-publisher, is also a rival developer, and a cut would be going to Rare as well. If I'm in charge of Activision, am I really going to split the money four ways, with half of it going to the competition? And Nintendo would basically have the same reaction. Nintendo still publishes the occasional Rare game, but really after the late 1990s the companies ceased working together. I doubt we'll ever see the number of Rare games we got on the N64 published to a Nintendo system any time soon.
#9
Posted 22 September 2009 - 08:51 PM
it would probably be in their best interest to have agreement among all of them because if it gets released on both xbox live arcade as well as nintendo virtual console it would provide a lot of downloads meaning free money for activision.
#10
Posted 23 September 2009 - 03:14 AM
#11
Posted 24 September 2009 - 12:01 AM
Here's a dumbed down version which is my understanding of the situation:pretty much non-news. it is too bad nintendo will not let this happen.
It's not just Nintendo. It's quite complicated.
Activison, Danjaq, Nintendo, Microsoft, and Rare would all have to agree and there's just too many conflicting interests.
I'm not sure Danjaq would be involved. Maybe. I doubt it though. This is MGM Interactive's area.
But it's not just companies. To a lesser extent, I'm fairly sure actors of certain characters would have to give their okay. Pierce for instance, I think. The 10th Anniversary edition they were cooking up for XBLA had to drop characters because of this issue.
I've kind of forgot most of the details about this because... it just doesn't matter. It's likely to never happen. Do yourself a favor and just get Perfect Dark for XBLA. It was almost the exact same thing and it was just as good if not better. Frankly, I thought it was better, but it just came late in the console's lifecycle so it never caught on like GE.
#12
Posted 24 September 2009 - 12:30 AM
#13
Posted 24 September 2009 - 01:04 AM
#14
Posted 24 September 2009 - 03:39 AM
It was heaps better because it had DALTON in it.
Give me Dalton or give me death. Stuff Brosnan. Goldeneye 64 is because of him.
#15
Posted 24 September 2009 - 04:34 AM
It had Dalton on the box. The Sega Genesis' graphics were so primitive that it was impossible for them to design the game's Bond in Dalton's image.It was heaps better because it had DALTON in it.