Activision Defends GoldenEye Wii Exclusivity

GoldenEye Source FTW!

Pachter's an idiot, always has been and always will be. Just other month he was gobbing off that the PC was in terminal decline and the consoles were the future. Needless to say he was put in place by a legions of PC gamers.

Seriously, why do you journalists give this guy coverage?

@dunderk

Goldeneye source is pretty cool, but not as neat as this. I definitely look forward to this.

Activision and Nintendo don't give a crap about nostalgia or accuracy to the original game. Pierce Brosnan isn't even in Goldeneye Wii.

Also, Goldeneye Source is far better than this crao game will be. Watch the gameplay videos, they've added melee attacks (with the guns, not slappers) and are generally trying to mimic Halo/CoD. Pierce Brosnan isn't even in the game anymore.

'unable to save the sinking wii ship'? i thought only fox news extradited that badly

Still should have used Brosnan over Craig and updated the graphics. That's like when George Lucas inserted the younger Anakin for the older one in the ending credits of Return of the Jedi...just wasn't the same.

They'd have been better off releasing the old GoldenEye for the Wii Virtual Console for $10.

glad to see activison defend itself. i don't really care who plays bond in the new game as that not the point the point its a view from Craig way

Doesn't surprise me Nintendo are remaking another game. The done Metal gear solid for the game cube and have already had resurrected mario in perfect form from 1993 why not do the same to (arguably) the greatest shooter of all time?

LOL I guess he's never played "hard core" games on the Wii before. Folks buy the Wii for kids games and exercise stuff. It's graphics don't lend itself to "modern" FPS games or enthusiasts.

Naw, I doubt GoldenEye would do well on the Xbox 360; the FPS gamers there only want re-hashes of Halo and Modern Warfare. I doubt they'd know what to do with an FPS that didn't look and play like every other one in their library. Especially if it didn't use the clunky 2-analog control system that they all use. (which has been demonmstrated to be vastly inferior to keyboard+mouse for FPS games)

Meanwhile, a LOT of GoldenEye's gameplay relies heavily on the use of on-screen aiming; i.e, moving the crosshair without moving the whole friggin' view area. For this, the Wii-remote makes perfect sense; it also makes aiming about as easy as using a mouse. Given the game's emphasis on standing shootouts rather than run-and-gun like typical console games, a dual-analog setup really is a disadvantage.

Overall, I like the new re-make; for the most part, it appears to hold rather true, with a few additions that look like they'll go well. The only real complaint I have is the one that's already been said repeatedly: WTF is Daniel Craig doing as 007? I suppose I COULD forgive it if the actual player model/voice turn out to be Pierce Brosnan, and Craig is there as an "AI buddy." (sorta like the origina Perfect Dark's co-op mode) But as is, it does wind up being a bit of a disappointment to have the wrong Bond.

Lastly, "Sinking Wii Ship?" -1 for you, Tom's. Perhaps you'd forgotten that the Wii's sold approximately as many units as the 360 and PS3 put together? Apparently, 1st place by a 75% margin over #2 is a "sinking ship," so I'd hate to think what the PS3 would be described as. (An undersea oil well blowout?)

The irony is that the Wii's graphics are still well-placed above the Xbox, where all the "modern" shooters were just a few years ago, and the 360 and PS3 are leagues behind what the likes of Crysis/Crysis 2 look like on the PC.

If they're designing it to be used with Classic Pro controller (instead of wiimote/nunchuck combo), why WOULDN'T they port it to the other platforms? They wouldn't even need to make it a full retail release, make it an XBLA and PSN game. Even a quick and dirty port will look and run better on the other consoles, given the huge performance delta between them and the Wii.

It sounds like Activision is at least making games for the sake of gamers and not just trying to slap a well known title on the Halo engine and try to make a buck. I'd rather see original awesome games instead of remakes though.

What's funny is that the n64 wasn't known for FPS or Mature games either. Then there was GoldenEye and Perfect Dark.
"Real gamers" play games because of awesome gameplay, not a shiny coat.

Why goldeneye wii is not goldeneye:

- No Pierce Brosnan and is replaced with Daniel Craig
- No Rare Ltd. involvement(because they were bought out by MSFT)
- Title should be renamed to Casino Royale or Quantum of Solace or anything but goldeneye.
- Remade by activision - no explanation needed

If I may add my $.02. First of all Goldeneye Source is better than this cr@p remake that Activision / Nintendo is making. Secondly if anyone remembers the game Perfect Dark then they will know that the game a high definition remaster and was released on the Xbox 360. The game played exactly the same as the n64 version but looked sooooo much nicer.

What's the connection well long ago everyone came together and did the same thing for Goldeneye 007, they remastered it just like Perfect Dark. It exists and is real, but because Nintendo wouldn't let it be we will never see it, officially.

Having played Perfect Dark on the 360 I can tell you Goldeneye 007 would be much better on the 360 versus what Nintendo is doing. If only Nintendo weren't stupid by wanting the exclusivity to themselves we would have Goldeneye on the 360 already.

goldeneye was certainly one of the most beloved fps of all time, i grew up in the video games with it, electronic arts acquired the franchise but never achieved the glorious gameplay that rare imposed as a standard on the console's fps's ,but besides the nostalgia thing, i really find difficult that activision can compete with graphic megamonsters like crysis 2 or rage or the joyful complexity of fallout 3 on the xbox 360 even as a arcade marketplace download,so makes sense that appear in a less powerful,less challenging and more childish console like the wii and yet have a succesful game.

I think we are all missing the point. Sure theres a possibility that it WOULD do well on other consoles, and the graphics might make a difference, but I don't really think it matters, it already looks good. Its that this Goldeneye 007 is entering into a fresh market. 360 and PS3 already have great shooters. From the daring RE5 to Halo, to COD(and dare I say resistance, is that even really a good shooter, that game never did sit right with me for some reason)but the wii is an open market, they are attempting to bring a taste to the wii that is spicing up everything else on the market. You 360 fans can keep your games, I'm just happy to finally get a (hopefully) good shooter on the wii I can enjoy (does redsteel and conduit ring any bells, ya shitty shooters, thats all us wii owners have, so give us a break) as well, does anyone smell perfect dark, i mean co-op wise. I been waiting for a game whose multi-player could come close to perfect darks game modes, play styles, and the ability to have cool AI bots running around either against or for you. not going to lie, halo came close and with halo:REACH they might just overshadow PD for me, still anyone else seeing possibilities like activision, or are you all to pent up in your own system to see a smart move when it smacks you in the face.

I see angsty fanboys like to vote down comments that shatter their reality, without daring actually respond to them. So be it.

It's worth noting that the Nintendo64 actually had a higher ratio of "mature"-rated titles than the PS1, at about 8.9% to only 7.5%. While GoldenEye & Perfect Dark might've been the most prominent, there were others too that showed up, from series such as Turok, Mortal Kombat, Doom/Quake, Duke Nukem 3D... (even, *shudder* Daikatana) Many were also N64 exclusive, never appearing on the PS1.



I can grant that some caution is warranted with Activision dealing with this... But it still remains very much GoldenEye; a simple change of Bond character doesn't replace all the levels, the storyline, etc.



Exactly what would make it better on the Xbox 360? Sure, it runs at 720p with x4 AA, but the visual updates aren't exactly all that stunning. It still has the distinct look of "we slapped on higher-res textures on everything and called it good." Really, is something like this, or this, or this, that what you'd call a major visual improvement? It hardly looks any different; a more-detailed skybox, some higher-res textures that you don't notice at first, and that's it.

Granted, the job being done for the (shelved) XBLA version of GoldenEye looked a lot better, though it still shows a lot of the same problems. (notice the lack of polygons on the "non-flat" concrete wall, and the low polygon-count railing) By contrast, the Wii version, in spite of having a lower resolution, DOES seem to be adding polys and effects, such as here and here.

All told, I think the Wii version will look better than how the XBLA version would've.

I agree, he's an idiot. Even more so that he has forced me to defend POS Activision. I should be a gaming analyst since obviously it requires nothing more than spouting BS. No different than a sports analyst.

Two things... First, you probably don't pass the maximum intelligence allowed requirement to be an "analyst." Secondly, sports analysts have to actually understand the subject they're talking about... Usually.

I'm sure it just slipped their mind of the wad of cash Wii gave them to make it an exclusive.

omg they changed a bond actor, not as if we havent seen that like 50 times??

i don't think he knows what he is talking about, i actually find the precision pointing mechanism for first person shooters that the wii remote offers a vast improvement from using a dumb stick to aim with and its vastly closer to the accuracy you can achieve if not more so then acceleration based input devices like a mouse

They have every right to make it Wii exclusive and if it wasn't, people would be bitching that it's not Nintendo.

As far as the game goes, no Brosnan cuts me deep. It looks surprisingly good though.

I think this game will be better because it's exclusive. Most Nintendo exclusives turn out pretty well. The original Turok series on N64 were awesome but when the series went to all consoles it just went to crap. I think it's due to having to use some of the development people to port when the same $ could be used to make the game better. If the games successful I'm sure it would be ported later on just like Resident Evil4.

any one one that gave this guy's comment athumbs down is a total moron .... nicely said dude. and quite true ,since the bond movie frachise started in the 60's there have been countless "bonds" actors filling the role at differnt times, hell bronson wasn't even the best in the lot , so whats the big freaking deal??? you don'ty hear old foggies crying about the game not using sean connery (hands down the best bond actor there ever was). so getover it already it's not like you are gonna ahve to look at teh guys mug the whole game , it's a FPSer ,you can imagine waht ever bond actor you like LOL.

Ok, Yes the Wii version may offer more polygons and whatnot, despite the low resolution. Sure this might be better than the Xbox Live port, but here is the thing. Some games are just that good that you needn't change them.

To just come out and say we are remaking Goldeneye 007 for the Wii is a very tall order. You have a lot of loyal fans to the game who still enjoy the original to this day and therefore will have the absolute highest of expectations for the Wii version.

What might be the downfall is the decision to add elements to this remake that didn't exist in the original. Sure these elements may work for newcomers to the series but if they don't work for the loyal fans of the original game it could really turn them off.

Plus Nintendo has had a history of bad online experiences (namely the whole friend code thing) so I am not sure I want to imagine how multiplayer will work in this remake.

Basically this remake is trying to be like the original but yet different at the same time and I'm not too sure this will work.

Sure you can thumb me down, but this just how I feel.

I think they should release it with better graphics. You can say all you want about "gameplay is more important than graphics, blah blah blah I like pong"....but this is lame. So the Wii is suped up gamecube and the gamecube is one generation ahead of the N64...so basically this is like 1.3 gens away. It's like taking an xbox game and remaking it into an xbox 360...

Again, if graphics aren't important play it on the N64...heck I still do.

I stumbled onto this by chance and I have to say reading most of your comments causes me a migraine. You're too worried about what makes a game good anymore that you all forget to have fun with it.

Wii is garbage. Period.

Enuff said ...

I don't care which platform it's out on (although I'd prefer it to be a PC game too) but what I do care about is the replacement of a great Bond with a rubbish Bond.