78 replies to this topic

[TonicBH]

See, I had limited expectations, but after plunking in several hours, getting about half of the trophies (PS3 version here) and dabbling in multiplayer... I'd say it's tolerable. I've played worse James Bond games (hello FRWL and GE:RA), but this is up to par with AUF with me.

Still doesn't beat Nightfire as my favorite Bond title.

[YouKnowTheName]

Try pressing R. Seriously, GoldenEye had a SLIGHT auto aim that was optional and toned down for higher difficulties. It was a perfect simulation of a humans natural instinctive aim. Without it the game would require constant stopping and aiming or blindly firng and praying. See Perfect Dark Zero. Eeeeeexactly.

Maybe bringing Nazis into it was a little extreme, but I re4ally don't see how the game doesn't get crucified. How would you feel if you were a Star Wars fan and everyone was always telling you how The Phantom Menace was the best? You'd be mystified.

I mean, seriously, whats to like about it? The combat is repetitive and couldn't be any less fun. The levels are linear and require no thought or navigation. The aiming system is outright disfunctional with a camera to match, the combat a pointless button masher, the driving sections almost unplayably slippery and the story stupid enough to make you miss the gritty realism of Moonraker. Did someone tell EA the everyone lover the invisible car from DAD? Because they included both that and an invisibility SUIT for God's sake!

Is it because it has the actors and faces? Is it seriously that simple? Put enough gloss on and people will like it?

For that matter, how can people like EON better than FRWL? Its the same game, basically. All the above applies to FRWL, but at least FRWL is finished. The auto aim actually aims and something you want to shoot most of the time, and having you toggle between aiming and focused aiming means you can change targets in a way that almost constitutes gameplay. Its still a stupid system, and means the game basically plays itself, but at least it CAN play itself most of the time in FRWL.

Ask yourselves this: Would the games stand without the license? GoldenEye not only would, but did: Perfect Dark. Everthing else would be instantly cast aside as the third rate cash-ins they are.

Edited by YouKnowTheName, 09 January 2009 - 11:41 PM.

[Safari Suit]

The Duel rules! Yo!

[BlackFire]

The game is not the problem, is the studio IMO

Look at Star Fox adventures for example, Rare did that game and it was on the early days of the GCN and the game looks superb! They always show effort in their games (Goldeneye).

Which makes me wonder how this game could've turned if developed by Rare or if Treyarch took their time.

[YouKnowTheName]

^It's worth noting that Starfox Adventures is widely know as being the beginning of the end for Rare.

If developed by Rare the game would be totally different. Rare may not be anywhere near as good as they were, but they do still have good design. Look at PDZ, which I found beautifully nostalgic in terms of design, with releatively open levels, multiple paths, and the option to play stealthily or gung-ho as you wished. The reason it fails is because the action/aiming mechanics are AWFUL, so the fun gets sucked out. (and the awful plot, acting, character design, but... y'know.)

QOS has largely the opposite problem. The action mechanics are fantastic, and the combat great fun, but the scope and design are so poor the fun gets sucked out that way instead. Between the two is the second coming of GoldenEye we so desperately need.

Edited by YouKnowTheName, 09 January 2009 - 11:40 PM.

[Mr Teddy Bear]

Try pressing R. Seriously, GoldenEye had a SLIGHT auto aim that was optional and toned down for higher difficulties. It was a perfect simulation of a humans natural instinctive aim. Without it the game would require constant stopping and aiming or blindly firng and praying. See Perfect Dark Zero. Eeeeeexactly.

There is no SLIGHT about it. Sure, it was toned down in higher difficulties, but then the AI suddenly got perfect aim. Don't even get me started on the horrible frame rate, one of the most important aspects in a shooting game. GoldenEye is a true land mark in video games design, but it is a long shot from perfect.

And Everything or Nothing is a great James Bond game. Why? Because it went out of its way to give the players an interactive, authentic Bond experience. A lot of that is to do with polish, voice acting, great facial likenesses, vehicle sections etc. but I don't see a crime in enjoying those aspects as you do. So I guess I'm a Nazi.

[K1Bond007]

The game is not the problem, is the studio IMO

Look at Star Fox adventures for example, Rare did that game and it was on the early days of the GCN and the game looks superb! They always show effort in their games (Goldeneye).

Which makes me wonder how this game could've turned if developed by Rare or if Treyarch took their time.

Rare is an incredibly different beast now. Perfect Dark Zero was pretty bad (way overhyped) and that was originally a GoldenEye clone. And since you brought it up, Star Fox Adventures is an abomination. It should have never been made, though that said, to be fair there hasn't been a good sequel to that series since Star Fox 64.

Rare really hasn't been the same since the 64 days and it should be noted that the two founders of the company just left. That could be good or bad for their future, who knows..

[MattofSteel]

I thoroughly enjoyed both EON and FRWL. Yeah, the lack of free roaming aim was a pain. But the totally seamless integration of driving, shooting, fighting, "clevering," etc., made for a really terrific Bond experience across the board. Both underrated in large part, IMO.

This one falls just a bit short. It's tolerable, like someone said. Not really that BAD by any stretch.

[Jaws0178]

Look at it this way. The way I see it, it could have been worse. Much worse.

[MattofSteel]

Yes it could have.

[sorking]

I don't understand how people, especially Bond fans, actually get some enjoyment out of EON or FRWL but they do seem to and I suppose I have to live with it. Its like going on a protest against the Nazi party only to find that everyone else is standing behind you debating their merits while you get left standing alone waving a banner that says something you logically thought everyone could see was true.

The problem is that EON and FRWL DON'T give an "interactive Bond feel" because they steadfast refuse to BE interactive. You don't really play as Bond at all, the third person aspect means that you are always watching Bond rather than being him (which is, for those with bicycle pumps lodged in their skulls, the point) And you don't really get to control him because everything is automated anyway. For Gods sake, we have shooting games THAT DON'T LET YOU AIM YOUR OWN GUN. All you seem to do is make helpful suggestions to Bond, which he largely ignors in favour of aiming where he damn well likes, while trying to control the camera, usually equally in vain.

Almost all QOS's problems can be found in EON/FRWL. Linear level design that leads you by the hand for the whole game? Check. Boring, obvious objectives and patronisingly obvious clues? Check. Dull, generic weapons? Check. QOS wins out because it is at least great fun to play, with brilliant action mechanics, just nothing else. And it at least stays as true to the films as it can, without being some homogenised mess. Jaws and Pierce Brosnan? For crying out loud....

GoldenEye and QOS let you BE Bond. You are him, you aim and shoot your own gun as you want. GoldenEye let you explore as well, and really BE Bond within an interactive world, which is why it is still so far ahead of the competion.

And I played GoldenEye through again right before QOS came out to see if I really WAS being nostalgic. It has happen before. And you know what? It put almost every action game of the last eleven years to shame. Yes, it shows its age in many places (the A.I is hilarious by todays standards) but the aiming and hit detection is so good and the core mechanics so much FUN that it still shines, and while a bit kill heavy, is very varied. Somehow sneaking though the Bunker picking off guards from behind feels way different to blasting out through the Archives. Just goes to show that variety is in design, not tacking on some awful driving bits. Even eleven years on, it puts every other Bond game EA choked up to shame.

QOS makes a step in the right direction. It puts the camera back in Bonds head where it belongs, focuses on the shooting mechanics and doesn't rely on crappy gimmicky driving bits. It just falls into too many of EONs pitfalls.

To use Blond Bonds phrasing QOS is a small, well built game with too much timje spent on the paint job. I'm not defending it, after all I made this topic, but by contrast EON and FRWL aren't good games served up some paint, they are broken piles of scrap wood with a gallon of paint poured on top.

It seems that if you coat a turd in enough sugar people will buy it. If people would give these games the crucifying they so richly deserve, maybe devs would get some idea of what to do withe the next one. Keep this up and they'll be pulling that 3rd person again.

Possibly the longest post I've ever written...

I'm really offended by this post, as it goes.

As if questions of taste are the same as right and wrong! The Nazi comparison makes me especially uncomfortable - there's nothing immoral or cruel about people liking a videogame. Plenty of other examples available - for example, it's also like being the only flat-Earther at a scientific convention. (The truth is like neither, of course.)

EON didn't give an interactive feel? Okay. Not to you. did to me. It's the best of the last-gen games for me by a country mile. Where the control system, weapon system and level design on FRWL was a step back IMO.

This does not mean I was suckered in. This does not mean I accepted the 'turd' because of the sugar. It just means the game worked for me.

First person perspective isn't 'the point'. Calling people stupid (a bicycle pump in the skull?!) if they think otherwise doesn't make you look any more right...just blatantly less willing to accept other opinions and perspectives. Which makes the Nazi line ironic as well as offensive.

Playing as Bond is, I guess, 'the point', but clearly not everyone feels as you do when it comes to what that means. Me, I felt like I was playing as Indy in the not-at-all-bad Emperor's Tomb game, and the travelling sections of Spider-Man 2 represent a pinnacle of capturing the exhilaration of swinging around New York as the guy. I don't see first person as benefiting that at all.

You're welcome to disagree. Just please don't call me a fascist when you do it.

The sense of adventure was greater in EON. It's flawed, but one shooting level included more variety than the whole of QOS - the gadget choices, the opening of doors. Simplistic, but at least it's something. It also had the courtesy to play out an entire story with clear exposition, defined (but simplistic) characters and a sense of progression. As opposed to the greatest hits playback vibe QOS provided.

And yeah, I like that it played on a large scale. Not just 'videogame' big, but yeah, great huge TSWLM massive. Why the hell not? Games require masses of henchmen, constant new environments and big set-pieces. Bond has a version of its genre just made for gaming. So why the hell not use Jaws? Why not? If you don't like it, fine - but you have to be pretty stubborn not to understand the appeal of that for some.

And I enjoy the old-school decision to switch between genres. The driving's well put together - I spent ages trying to get the top result on the race, and the cycling was a blast. Again, it's not award-winning, but it's polished and clear and entertaining. It's arguably 'the way games used to be' - oh those happy days playing Robocop on the ZX Spectrum - but it's not like that ceased aeons ago...and it's not like it's provably the wrong way to go.

Just a matter of taste.

Edited by sorking, 13 January 2009 - 08:19 PM.

[Mister Asterix]

The problem is that EON and FRWL DON'T give an "interactive Bond feel" because they steadfast refuse to BE interactive. You don't really play as Bond at all, the third person aspect means that you are always watching Bond rather than being him (which is, for those with bicycle pumps lodged in their skulls, the point)

Actually, the point is watching Bond. $1,607,637,642 US Box Office says so. As far as I’m concerned GoldenEye sucks, NightFire sucks more, GoldenEye: Rogue Agent sucks abominations. Quantum of Solace is the best and only good first person shooter of the entire Bond catalog. But I like watching Bond, I don’t like watching a gun and a wrist. How do you ‘feel’ like James Bond when you are simply a mass killing death machine’s hand?

The shooting controls in Quantum of Solace are freaking awesome on the Wii. You actually point at the target and pull the trigger. How cool is that? But I swear to God when I was playing the sink hole level I thought this game should be called Bond of Brothers. The damn thing is all shooting; it’s extremely great at the shooting (though better at shooting in the cover system), but contrary to the first person shooter games Bond is not just a gun. And he’s definitely not just a machine gun. And people complained about the machine guns in Tomorrow Never Dies?

All of the games are too much shooting (some levels are exceptions but no game is.)

Everything or Nothing and From Russia With Love are exceptional because they are complete Bond stories. From Russia With Love is a lesser game than Everything or Nothing, but it is a better Bond game because it has a better story. But both offered driving and shooting. Wonderful, a variety. Bond should be a variety. I want driving levels. I want boat chase levels. I want aerial dogfight levels. I want gambling levels. Hell, I want character interaction levels. That’s the stuff Bond is all about.

Quantum of Solace is a great Bond shooter game, but sadly it is just that. The length was just fine for me, but I’m no hard-core gamer.


And Brozbond vs Jaws? Awesome.

[Gothamite]

I don't understand how people, especially Bond fans, actually get some enjoyment out of EON or FRWL but they do seem to and I suppose I have to live with it. Its like going on a protest against the Nazi party only to find that everyone else is standing behind you debating their merits while you get left standing alone waving a banner that says something you logically thought everyone could see was true.

The problem is that EON and FRWL DON'T give an "interactive Bond feel" because they steadfast refuse to BE interactive. You don't really play as Bond at all, the third person aspect means that you are always watching Bond rather than being him (which is, for those with bicycle pumps lodged in their skulls, the point) And you don't really get to control him because everything is automated anyway. For Gods sake, we have shooting games THAT DON'T LET YOU AIM YOUR OWN GUN. All you seem to do is make helpful suggestions to Bond, which he largely ignors in favour of aiming where he damn well likes, while trying to control the camera, usually equally in vain.

Almost all QOS's problems can be found in EON/FRWL. Linear level design that leads you by the hand for the whole game? Check. Boring, obvious objectives and patronisingly obvious clues? Check. Dull, generic weapons? Check. QOS wins out because it is at least great fun to play, with brilliant action mechanics, just nothing else. And it at least stays as true to the films as it can, without being some homogenised mess. Jaws and Pierce Brosnan? For crying out loud....

GoldenEye and QOS let you BE Bond. You are him, you aim and shoot your own gun as you want. GoldenEye let you explore as well, and really BE Bond within an interactive world, which is why it is still so far ahead of the competion.

And I played GoldenEye through again right before QOS came out to see if I really WAS being nostalgic. It has happen before. And you know what? It put almost every action game of the last eleven years to shame. Yes, it shows its age in many places (the A.I is hilarious by todays standards) but the aiming and hit detection is so good and the core mechanics so much FUN that it still shines, and while a bit kill heavy, is very varied. Somehow sneaking though the Bunker picking off guards from behind feels way different to blasting out through the Archives. Just goes to show that variety is in design, not tacking on some awful driving bits. Even eleven years on, it puts every other Bond game EA choked up to shame.

QOS makes a step in the right direction. It puts the camera back in Bonds head where it belongs, focuses on the shooting mechanics and doesn't rely on crappy gimmicky driving bits. It just falls into too many of EONs pitfalls.

To use Blond Bonds phrasing QOS is a small, well built game with too much timje spent on the paint job. I'm not defending it, after all I made this topic, but by contrast EON and FRWL aren't good games served up some paint, they are broken piles of scrap wood with a gallon of paint poured on top.

It seems that if you coat a turd in enough sugar people will buy it. If people would give these games the crucifying they so richly deserve, maybe devs would get some idea of what to do withe the next one. Keep this up and they'll be pulling that 3rd person again.

Possibly the longest post I've ever written...

I'm really offended by this post, as it goes.

As if questions of taste are the same as right and wrong! The Nazi comparison makes me especially uncomfortable - there's nothing immoral or cruel about people liking a videogame. Plenty of other examples available - for example, it's also like being the the only flat-Earther at a scientific convention. (The truth is like neither, of course.)

EON didn't give an interactive feel? Okay. Not to you. did to me. It's the best of the last-gen games for me by a country mile. Where the control system, weapon system and level design on FRWL was a step back IMO.

This does not mean I was suckered in. This does not mean I accepted the 'turd' because of the sugar. It just means the game worked for me.

First person perspective isn't 'the point'. Calling people stupid (a bicycle pump in the skull?!) if they think otherwise doesn't make you look any more right...just blatantly less willing to accept other opinions and perspectives. Which makes the Nazi line ironic as well as offensive.

Playing as Bond is, I guess, 'the point', but clearly not everyone feels as you do when it comes to what that means. Me, I felt like I was playing as Indy in the not-at-all-bad Emperor's Tomb game, and the travelling sections of Spider-Man 2 represent a pinnacle of capturing the exhilaration of swinging around New York as the guy. I don't see first person as benefiting that at all.

You're welcome to disagree. Just please don't call me a fascist when you do it.

The sense of adventure was greater in EON. It's flawed, but one shooting level included more variety than the whole of QOS - the gadget choices, the opening of doors. Simplistic, but at least it's something. It also had the courtesy to play out an entire story with clear exposition, defined (but simplistic) characters and a sense of progression. As opposed to the greatest hits playback vibe QOS provided.

And yeah, I like that it played on a large scale. Not just 'videogame' big, but yeah, great huge TSWLM massive. Why the hell not? Games require masses of henchmen, constant new environments and big set-pieces. Bond has a version of its genre just made for gaming. So why the hell not use Jaws? Why not? If you don't like it, fine - but you have to be pretty stubborn not to understand the appeal of that for some.

And I enjoy the old-school decision to switch between genres. The driving's well put together - I spent ages trying to get the top result on the race, and the cycling was a blast. Again, it's not award-winning, but it's polished and clear and entertaining. It's arguably 'the way games used to be' - oh those happy days playing Robocop on the ZX Spectrum - but it's not like that ceased aeons ago...and it's not like it's provably the wrong way to go.

Just a matter of taste.

I'm an EON lover as well and I have to agree that the 'Bond and Beyond' version of the character lends very well to videogames. I have no interest playing as Fleming's Bond, high on Benzedrine playing a card game with Hugo Drax as they talk about M's butterfly collection while Hilary Bray does some exciting genealogy research in the background. I'm afraid that when I play a video game, I want lasers, rocket-firing motorcycles and Jaws. Spectacle isn't a bad thing.

And while YKTN does have a point as regards the 'non-gameplay' of EON, he's not totally on the mark. You DO have to make decisions. There are plenty of levels that are stealth adventures or brawly shoot-outs, depending on your decision and cunning. And while the gadgets are increasingly sci-fi, you don't HAVE to use them unless you want to and sometimes it's easier to rely on your wits and a knowledge of how you think your enemy will act rather than using Q's invisibility suit.

Frankly...I want to go and play EON right now...

Edited by Gothamite, 13 January 2009 - 02:49 PM.

[sorking]

I have no interest playing as Fleming's Bond, high on Benzedrine playing a card game with Hugo Drax as they talk about M's butterfly collection while Hilary Bray does some exciting genealogy research in the background.

I'd just like to take a moment to totally admire this description.

[Mister Asterix]

I have no interest playing as Fleming's Bond, high on Benzedrine[...]

Yeah, but how cool would it be to have Bond use some _“power-up_” pills?

[Jaws0178]

I'm not so sure about that, Mr. *

[Mister Asterix]

I'm not so sure about that, Mr. *

(i was kidding.)

[Jaws0178]

Oh, well pooey on you, Mr. A.

[Gothamite]

I have no interest playing as Fleming's Bond, high on Benzedrine playing a card game with Hugo Drax as they talk about M's butterfly collection while Hilary Bray does some exciting genealogy research in the background.

I'd just like to take a moment to totally admire this description.

Why thank you.

I would just like to emphasise that I am in no way undermining the literary 007. I love and adore the Fleming novels, I just don't think they would work as well as videogames as Bond & Beyond has in the past.