Viewing Thread:
"Goldeneye 2"

Rare has made many a smash hit before, remember the success they reached with Donkey Kong Country on the SNES and with that incredible beat ‘em up killer instinct on the same platform? The next genre they conquered meanwhile was on the N64, the first person shooter genre, with a game called Goldeneye. Now Goldeneye reached new heights for first person shooters, no one could really put a finger on what was so brilliant, the individual hit areas on baddies or the ability to mess with near enough anything? Whatever it was it is one of very few games that had a life span of 3 years. Now with the Bond license gone and the original team disbanded the chances of a grand return to the glory days of Goldeneye are almost nil, and instead we have three alternative games.

So only a handful of the original Goldeneye team still exist within Rare today, most left and created their own company Free Radical Design, a couple joined Retro Studios and are as of now working on new Nintendo First Person Shooter, Metroid Prime. Others have joined Acclaim and other such companies including Capcom. But despite losing the majority of the Goldeneye team, Rare did still have something that they could use to make a claim as the real sequel to Goldeneye, the Goldeneye engine. The Bond license may have gone from their grasps but nevertheless with the Goldeneye game engine in place, creating a new game that feels and plays very similar to the original Bond outing was highly possible. Enter Perfect Dark, a game that is so popular that a third is already planned for Gamecube, the first N64 game featured many elements from Goldeneye, including the control system, certain multiplayer levels and even Goldeneye guns (or close relations)! But it isn’t just the Bond license that this game is sorely lacking. Robert Booth successfully headed the Perfect Dark project but lacked the skills and unique insight into the Goldeneye project that lead designer of Free Radical Design, David Doak had. It also created some complaints, many moaned that it lacked the experimental fun that made Goldeneye so great. Personally Perfect Dark was great in many parts better than Goldeneye, despite this the elegance and mystery surrounding Goldeneye was not carried forward into Perfect Dark.

People believed Dr. David Doak and his band of men left Rare due to disliking Nintendo, this is in fact untrue it was to do with wanting to come up with their own original ideas rather than being dictated on what to do. But their first game, Timesplitters, was released just for Playstation 2 and that helped fuel the rumour despite the PS2 being the only console available at the time that Free Radical Design could make their idea successfully on. Timesplitters wasn’t like Goldeneye, it didn’t have a good story (in fact it really didn’t have one at all) but the multiplayer was stunning implementing ideas such as Deathmatch editor, which proved to the world that the originality and ingenuity of the Goldeneye team did exist within Free Radical Design. Yet you must consider this has no relevance to Bond in anyway, featuring nothing from Goldeneye and going against the slow paced stealth multiplayer mode used in Goldeneye in favour of a faster more action packed one. So how can this be seen as the true follow up to Goldeneye then? Well it can’t but its sequel that is destined for a Nintendo console (Gamecube) this September can. Featuring a similar control system, a decent enough storyline, the general interface feels like the teams first smash hit FPS and even certain levels are a definite tribute to Goldeneye including a Dam level. Timesplitters 2 looks very promising indeed and does look like a game that borrows heavily from Goldeneye as well as mixing clever new ideas that Free Radical Design are famous for.

But no game engine or no genius design team can replace that brilliant feeling of actually playing as James Bond. Something with EA and their various teams are in charge of, The World Is Not Enough, Agent Under Fire and the upcoming Nightfire are three of the five Bond games from EA and the only three that are actually first person shooters. Eurocom heads two of them (TWINE and Nightfire) and to be quite honest despite not having a world-renowned game engine or critically acclaimed design team these games aren’t too shabby. They all borrow heavily from Goldeneye, trying to get the dynamics similar to the worlds best, they even try to suck you into the world of Bond more than Goldeneye with actual voices and longer cut scenes. But none of EA’s attempts beat Goldeneye be it Single player or Multiplayer (despite maybe the vehicle levels in Agent Under Fire). Also the ability to explore and the beefy feel of the weapons were sadly missing. It successfully put you in Bond’s shoes but they won’t be breaking any records anytime soon and they haven’t created anything as stunning and long lasting as Goldeneye did, it is just a well-rounded effort.

So what do you class as the sequel to Goldeneye, if you wish to re-create the feeling that Goldeneye presented you with what game would you choose? As for me well I don’t know, originality is always what I go for so probably Timesplitters but lucky for me I’m in a position where I can play and enjoy all three. Maybe one day the awesome game engine, the brilliant team and the most sort after First Person Shooter game license will reunite and we can enjoy the true sequel to Goldeneye but lets face it, we may be waiting a very long time.

Here's to the future.

Dringo.

No no no no no..... it can't be for Nightfire...

I remember recently reading about how Bond will be completely different in this game - unlike Pierce Brosnan or any other Bond they've done before.

And you can't try and tell me that they're NOT gunna use the real him in the game based on the 20th Bond film! That's just madness!!

Solskjær wrote:
> So.... Dringo obviously loves Nintendo - and Rare...
> Can you blame him though!?
>
> I don't really like the idea of having a new Bond game every 6 months
> or so from EA, it is too rushed to me.
> I also don't like how they can now use Brosnan's face - but at least
> it's only for Die Another Day - which I HOPE they spend time on!

Its not for Die Another Day that they paid for his face and voice. Its for use in 007 Nightfire.

So.... Dringo obviously loves Nintendo - and Rare...
Can you blame him though!?

I don't really like the idea of having a new Bond game every 6 months or so from EA, it is too rushed to me.
I also don't like how they can now use Brosnan's face - but at least it's only for Die Another Day - which I HOPE they spend time on!

I can't wait for Die Hard: Vendetta either - it looks a great game, even if it is or isn't the next GoldenEye.

er-no wrote:
> There was way to much waffle in that post.
>
> Rare can make anything. Any software company can... fact is Rare do it
> alongside other companies. The Nintendo/Rare difference is only
> because they take there time over games at all stages.


i agree, you could have got straight to the point!!!

Dringo wrote:
> I agree but what of the EA Bond titles? Surley one day Eurocom might
> create the excellent First Person Shooter like they have done with
> TWINE but mix it with a more enjoyable multiplayer experience, more
> exploration and clever bits and we'd truly have a sequel to Goldeneye,
> Sadly Eurocom have to follow EA's orders to make a game as quick as
> possible against Nintendo's "Take your time" attitude.


Exactly. Eurocom have to make the Bond games to order pretty much. They could have spent their time working on a good engine and getting the multiplay just right in anticipation for the next Bond game (as the engine and multiplay really doesn't require the developer to know the plot of the next movie) so they could have spent more time on the next Bond game based on a movie. But instead they had to make another Bond game based on no movie, so as well as the gameplay had to come up with their own new plot, locations, characters, etc.

You get the idea. A movie would at least give them something to work from rather than creating many elements from scratch, and waiting for the movie would have given them greater time to perfect many of the gameplay elements. But EA wanted another Bond game sharpish, and it turned out very average.

There was way to much waffle in that post.

Rare can make anything. Any software company can... fact is Rare do it alongside other companies. The Nintendo/Rare difference is only because they take there time over games at all stages.

Sibs wrote:
> I think the wider issue here is just how much change is accpetable
> before a game ceases to become similar enough to the previous title.
>
> It is much like Strafex and Metroid. He said Metroid Prime wouldn't be
> a 'proper' Metroid game because you couldn't see Samus most of the
> time, and the grappling hook was missing, and the ball rolling was
> gimmicky. Obviously Strafex would have liked these features to be used
> as an anchor point, something remaining constant in the series.

Yes well Strafex is wrong :) The grappling hook is in there and the bal rolling is a major part of the gameplay.



>
> And this is where the two rival series seem to split. Timesplitters
> seems very arcadey, doesn't seem to take itself seriously, but it
> looks to pay homage to Goldeneye with similar levels (a Siberia level
> has been seen, and someone mentioned a Dam level similar to
> Goldeneye's original). On the other hand Perfect Dark takes gameplay
> elements such as the sneaking around, the realistic reactions of
> enemies to being shot, and the spy theme to build upon the experience.
> Both series thus far have featured great multiplayer, and both have
> influences from Goldeneye. However, I don't think it is a case of
> which is the true sequel to Goldeneye. As it has been said, one of the
> elements that made Goldeneye so good (and certainly an element that
> made it sell so well) was that you were playing as James Bond, and all
> the stuff that went with that, gadgets, the classic silenced pistol,
> sneaking around infiltrating enemy bases, and blowing a lot of things
> up! Obviously Rare have lost the Bond license, and Free Radical Design
> aren't likely to pick it up (and probably wouldn't want it anyway) so
> we are unlikely to ever see a 'true' sequel to Goldeneye, because the
> Bond franchise was one of the biggest factors in making it the game it
> was. But still, we have the promising looking Timesplitters 2 on the
> horizon, and despite any uncertainty about where Rare's future
> allegiance lies, you can be certain another First Person Shooter will
> be coming from them at some stage.
>
> I don't think Goldeneye 2 will ever happen. But Goldeneye has set a
> blue print, and has shown others the way. It has been much imitated,
> and thus far it seems only Rare have bettered it. It has inspired
> other developers, and games still aspire to its greatness. A true mark
> of greatness.

I agree but what of the EA Bond titles? Surley one day Eurocom might create the excellent First Person Shooter like they have done with TWINE but mix it with a more enjoyable multiplayer experience, more exploration and clever bits and we'd truly have a sequel to Goldeneye, Sadly Eurocom have to follow EA's orders to make a game as quick as possible against Nintendo's "Take your time" attitude.

AfroJoe wrote:
> Can Goldeneye 2 actually be made by anyone other than EA?
>
> If there even is a Goldeneye 2.

I dont think so, but its not like it could be called goldeneye 2.

Can Goldeneye 2 actually be made by anyone other than EA?

If there even is a Goldeneye 2.

I think the wider issue here is just how much change is accpetable before a game ceases to become similar enough to the previous title.

It is much like Strafex and Metroid. He said Metroid Prime wouldn't be a 'proper' Metroid game because you couldn't see Samus most of the time, and the grappling hook was missing, and the ball rolling was gimmicky. Obviously Strafex would have liked these features to be used as an anchor point, something remaining constant in the series.

The same is true here. Certain features need to be kept constant to retain the 'feel' that the game has descended from Goldeneye, and therefore only a certain amount of change can be implemented to be accepted by the hardcore fans of Goldeneye. Of course with each 'sequel' to Goldeneye (Timesplitters series or Perfect Dark series) the anchor points can potentially move further from the original, as if Perfect Dark and Timesplitters were the first in a line of stepping stones, and Timesplitters 2 and PD2 are the next in line, further away (at least they are potentially further away, as the players will have already experienced a certain amount of change in the first sequel, so a certain amount more change will be acceptable for the next in the series). Basically the formula can be changed to a certain extent with each sequel and please the hardcore fans of the original, but it is how much the series can be altered. The challenge for the developer I think is to keep the series fresh and new, while keeping at least some similar features and a similar feel to the original, so long running fans won't be disappointed.

And this is where the two rival series seem to split. Timesplitters seems very arcadey, doesn't seem to take itself seriously, but it looks to pay homage to Goldeneye with similar levels (a Siberia level has been seen, and someone mentioned a Dam level similar to Goldeneye's original). On the other hand Perfect Dark takes gameplay elements such as the sneaking around, the realistic reactions of enemies to being shot, and the spy theme to build upon the experience. Both series thus far have featured great multiplayer, and both have influences from Goldeneye. However, I don't think it is a case of which is the true sequel to Goldeneye. As it has been said, one of the elements that made Goldeneye so good (and certainly an element that made it sell so well) was that you were playing as James Bond, and all the stuff that went with that, gadgets, the classic silenced pistol, sneaking around infiltrating enemy bases, and blowing a lot of things up! Obviously Rare have lost the Bond license, and Free Radical Design aren't likely to pick it up (and probably wouldn't want it anyway) so we are unlikely to ever see a 'true' sequel to Goldeneye, because the Bond franchise was one of the biggest factors in making it the game it was. But still, we have the promising looking Timesplitters 2 on the horizon, and despite any uncertainty about where Rare's future allegiance lies, you can be certain another First Person Shooter will be coming from them at some stage.

I don't think Goldeneye 2 will ever happen. But Goldeneye has set a blue print, and has shown others the way. It has been much imitated, and thus far it seems only Rare have bettered it. It has inspired other developers, and games still aspire to its greatness. A true mark of greatness.