Viewing Thread:
"Will Rare ever make a decent game?"

Banjo Pilot = sh*t
It's Mr Pants = mmmm mediocracy


It's been, what, four years since they released a game worth playing?

Zelda OOT had me in the first minute. The whole opening sequence (before you even pressed start or anything) was absolutely magical.

Now I'd admit that once I'd broken into Hyrule Castle, Zelda did indeed have me by the balls (that can sound so wrong! :-S) but like you said... 3 days...


Goldeneye had me in 20 minutes.
The first game I played with proximity mines, because I'd read some tricks for that in a magazine (ofcourse, tricks didn't work unless you were already a pro!).
The first few seconds I spent bemused, trying to move Bond around using the D-Pad.

So I tried that silly little novelty joystick the N64 controllers had (times have changed indeed! :-D) and got suddenly intruiged by:

a) The Assault Rifle could shoot through doors
b) You could hold R and bring up a crosshair for accurate aiming.
It even zoomed in for you.

Then I played again with Lasers in the Bunker (which impressed me because it was just like the Bunker in the film and the Lasers were damn cool).
Then they let me play a bit of the first mission with the sniper rifle...

Maybe you hadn't played a decent amount of FPS games, so much of Goldeneye's greatness was wasted on you. Maybe you were really into platform/adventure games (like I was a few year earlier) so dabbling an FPS was never going to be so satisfying, but everyone I knew could instantly connect with Goldeneye, having just played one or two games.

If you could get a friend to patiently play through Zelda until getting to the castle, then I reckon you could hook them. But I know few people who'd've had the patience to take it that far. Especially as so many of them had prejudices against the N64 and it's "kiddy" games.

I became a Nintendo obsessive via Zelda.

I got the N64 with some game called Goldeneye I hadn't heard of.

I enjoyed Goldeneye but as soon as the shops opened I rented the game I was always appealed by. I'd found Goldeneye hard to play so I rented the new Zelda, just to see if it was any good.

In 3 days play all I had done was get my shield, my sword, defeated Gohma... oh and I broke into hyrule castle and met Zelda.

There was no going back.

Alright Mr Pedantic!

Played it "DEEPLY".
Zelda's charms grow on you through in-depth sessions while Goldeneye can get you hooked in 5 minutes.

Come on!
Surely you understand what I'm getting at!

I'm not even saying that Goldeneye is better than Zelda (although I do think so). I'm just saying that Goldeneye pulls you in quickly wheras Zelda takes it's sweet time to absorb you (which is fine if you've gotten it anyway but it's going to have a harder time grabbing people's attention after a 5 minute go!).

You all agree with me yet? :-)

Strafio wrote:
> The only people I'd met who liked Zelda were ones who'd already
> played it.

Well what do you expect?
Why else would you like a game?

Dringo wrote:
> Strafio do you honestly believe Zelda only appeals to existing fans?
>
> Do you not think a new Zelda game could attract new gamers?

I actually do.
I think that this new Gamecube Zelda will perhaps help get back a lot of the N64 fans who had enough and went and got an Xbox or PS2, and it'll be a tremendous treat for us.

But although I can imagine someone buying a Gamecube for it, I can't see it happening very often.
Goldeneye on the other hand, EVERYONE loved Goldeneye!
Kids, teenagers, adults, it was so easy to pick up but with so much depth to master.

And you'd only have to play it once.

Hmmm...

Maybe I was a bit narrowed in my experience...



Seriously, the only reason I even gave it a go was because people who had played it were citing it as the best game of all time. I was kind of narrow minded back then, about what sort of games I wanted to play. :-)

The only people I'd met who liked Zelda were ones who'd already played it.
But I guess I've not quite met everyone in the world just yet! ;-)


Still not in the same league as Goldeneye though! :-P

Strafio do you honestly believe Zelda only appeals to existing fans?

Do you not think a new Zelda game could attract new gamers?

Ocarina of Time attracted a lot of attention. I became a Nintendo fan because of it, it made me buy and N64 (got it for Christmas 1998). My teacher got one because she liked the look of the game on the tele and my old friend who I haven't seen in years got an N64 because of OOT.

So I know for certain Zelda attracted new fans.

Yes I had a SNES but I never owned Zelda on it.

Ocarina of Time, before I started getting into Nintendo, was in my eyes the first Zelda game.

And the reason I got an N64.

Zelda sold extremely well to people who already had an N64, and maybe a couple of Snes owners. Windwaker sold Gamecubes to people who used to own N64s.

Perfect Dark DID sell systems, but not the same way that Goldeneye did.
And I guess you didn't imply that they sold more systems than Goldeneye, but you definately implied that they were in the same league, which is just as bad! :-P

Strafio wrote:
> He implied it! :-P
>
> And I'd argue that Zelda sold few N64's to people who weren't diehard
> Snes fans, except maybe in Japan where they're all about the
> adventure games.

Well Zelda did extremley well, it sold out before Christmas and was really hard to find, it had a fantastic marketing and it sold very very well and Nintendo 64's were a very popular console that Christmas because of it.

The advertisement and appeal of Perfect Dark sold the system, simply because it did appeal to the mass market.

I never implied they sold more systems than Goldeneye. But they did their fair share of selling.

Wind Waker caused an 100% increase in Gamecube sales upon release too.