BTW, can someone tell me why the game called Blood Stone? (Sorry if the answer is in this thread -- I haven't read all of it.)
Having just beat it, I can honestly say it means - nothing. Squat.
All the talk of diamonds, DNA, an intricate scheme, etc. - meant absolutely
nothing. Unless I missed something, colossally.
What a wasted opportunity. At least 'Everything or Nothing' was shoehorned into some dialogue.
I'm actually a little pissed about it. All the careful work that went into other areas of the game to 'brand' it and make it a rich (albeit short) experience, and it ends up being just an empty, depthless shell of a concept.
For awhile, it's a thrilling 'chase' where Bond disposes of a series of glorified henchmen without ever reaching a true villain. In a strange way, like QOS, there's actually something about that 'vague' approach which makes it feel strangely Fleming-like and atmospheric. Great thriller for a bit, but one with a forced payoff that's left
so unexplained (especially as to how Bond ever figures it out!) that you ultimately come away feeling cheated.
Their basic script strategy was seemingly, "Throw as many elements at the screen as will stick, arbitrarily tie a few of them together at the end,
never explain what the overall gist was, and have Fierstein add a few dialogue flourishes."
And yet, strangely enough, I had fun with it. Can't say I didn't enjoy.
Can say I'm disappointed they wasted such great opportunities.
EDIT: Tdalton's right - that's the singular reference to anything remotely related to the title.