• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Goldeneye Remastered Coming soon to Xbox / Game Pass - Incl. Achievements, 4K Resolution etc

I think they would have 100% used it if they were allowed to. The 360 remaster was scrapped because of Nintendo and we're probably only getting this enhanced emulated re-release because they allowed it.

If that's the case, why would MS settle for terms where the Xbox version doesn't even have online multiplayer? At that point I would tell Nintendo to go kick rocks. Unless MS thinks by doing this, they can sweeten their way into getting GamePass on Switch or Nintendo as some Azure client in the future, and they don't want to burn that bridge.

But then the fact this is coming at all would say that Nintendo had a need to bring it about and if they were responsible for the 360 version's cancellation, couldn't they have just...allowed that version to be used in this instance? If it needed more development, just throw the resources at it. And again why no online multiplayer for the Xbox version?

Still feels quite half-assed honestly.

Xbox 360 version also let you toggle graphics modes to the "original" graphics (although it wasn't the "actual" N64 game running underneath it so it couldn't have been 100% accurate, if that's something people wanted.) It was the best of both worlds if it could have been officially released, instead this is something in between.

It's a bare minimum in-between solution, IMO. If Nintendo were the reason the 360 version was canned, why couldn't they just not ease up and let that version release again in this case? Is it because extra work would've been needed to get it running natively on the Switch, and a Switch version was a requirement?

There's still not much a way to me why online multiplayer isn't supported with the Xbox versions, either.
 

01011001

Banned
You can do that with the original game as well. Either by using one controller on each hand (it works surprisingly well thanks to their shape) or using an emulator and "fusing" two controllers in one.

or you just play the sensible settings that use the dpad for movement... which is functionally almost identical to modern dual analog controls
 

nkarafo

Member
Eh, sort of the "better version". It's the N64 game, but in a heavily hacked emulation shell with widescreen hacks. (They couldn't for example fix the font display since those are 2D elements.) And no online, even though that would have to be that weird me-host-you-tethered online play mode that emulators use.

GE_Screenshot_06-47035b425d9b7e958026.jpg



It is not the nice remastered edition that Microsoft was originally planning for Xbox 360.

N64 left, 360 version right
GE_Screenshot_02-5fc85f1c3965a771f83d.jpg
6RSovqCh8ghkXLSaHY9iu5.jpg
Jesus....

You can already emulate the game on PJ64 at 60fps/widescreen and use a 360 controller for dual analog (the original game did support TRUE dual analog controls).

This is just a convenience package so you won't have to do it yourself?


or you just play the sensible settings that use the dpad for movement... which is functionally almost identical to modern dual analog controls
You can do that too, yes. That's how i originally played the game.


Goldeneye was awesome, seen from the eyes of a 15 year old in the late 90s. But it is a terrible game from just about any modern standard. The nostalgia is strong with this one, but I really don't understand why anyone gets excited about this is 2022.
Oh boy, another one....
 
Last edited:

Hari Seldon

Member
What shooters were "infinitely" better on PC in 1997?

Quake 2 was the biggest FPS at the time and there were some others like Blood and Shadow Warrior.

All good games but Goldeneye was more ambitious and complex, offering things that didn't even exist in the FPS genre. It wasn't "better" or "worse" but it was different enough.
In 97 I was playing Duke 3D with custom modded maps against my friends using a modem, no split screen nonsense (split screen on 1997 TVs was TERRIBLE lol). But you are right in that I was thinking of Half Life when I posted this, but that was 98 not 97. Half Life was a generational leap easily, especially in multiplayer.
 

01011001

Banned
Eh, sort of the "better version". It's the N64 game, but in a heavily hacked emulation shell with widescreen hacks. (They couldn't for example fix the font display since those are 2D elements.) And no online, even though that would have to be that weird me-host-you-tethered online play mode that emulators use.

GE_Screenshot_06-47035b425d9b7e958026.jpg



It is not the nice remastered edition that Microsoft was originally planning for Xbox 360.

N64 left, 360 version right
GE_Screenshot_02-5fc85f1c3965a771f83d.jpg
6RSovqCh8ghkXLSaHY9iu5.jpg

theory time:

what if that 360 port will come out either at a later date or simultaneously but isn't included in Rare Replay and is announced later because of a marketing agreement with Nintendo... 🤔

maybe Nintendo didn't want to look like they get the shitty N64 version so Microsoft agreed to also release a direct port of the N64 version first and then launch the enhanced version later
 
What modern standard is that? Shitty FPS games that tell you exactly where to go, with battle royale focuses, season passes, and microtransactions?

I'll take nostalgic Bond over those shitty games any day of the week. I hear 343 is still working on Halo Infinite to reach a modern standard, so the rest of you can look into that one when it's finished

No, those are shitty, too

Oh boy, another one....

:messenger_grinning_sweat:Trust me, I had many, many hours logged into Goldeneye on my N64. It's not going to stop me from saying it's a shit game, though.
 

nkarafo

Member
In 97 I was playing Duke 3D with custom modded maps against my friends using a modem, no split screen nonsense (split screen on 1997 TVs was TERRIBLE lol). But you are right in that I was thinking of Half Life when I posted this, but that was 98 not 97. Half Life was a generational leap easily, especially in multiplayer.
Half-Life was great in some respects but terrible in some others.

After playing Goldeneye, some regressions where obvious to me. I remember feeling disappointed how this new, "next generation", state of the art, PC FPS doesn't even have Goldeneye's system where you can shoot the enemies on different parts of the body for different results and damage. No headshots, no cool wound animations, etc.


:messenger_grinning_sweat:Trust me, I had many, many hours logged into Goldeneye on my N64. It's not going to stop me from saying it's a shit game, though.
Nobody is stopping you.
 
Last edited:

CamHostage

Member
theory time:

what if that 360 port will come out either at a later date or simultaneously but isn't included in Rare Replay and is announced later because of a marketing agreement with Nintendo... 🤔

maybe Nintendo didn't want to look like they get the shitty N64 version so Microsoft agreed to also release a direct port of the N64 version first and then launch the enhanced version later

Theory extra time:

What if that 360 port is the new Xbox version, but because of whatever deal Nintendo made, Microsoft had to remove the option to turn on the Xbox 360 textures/audio (that version also never had online multiplayer, so no difference there) and so it's that same 360 game in play but with only N64 graphics to look at...
 
Last edited:

keefged4

Member
Ah yes, thanks Nintendo for providing us with the Rom and the widescreen hacks we've already had for the past 20 odd years. FFS this is disappointing.
 
I can't wait to hear the xbox fanboy narratives about how Halo Infinite doesn't need split screen co-op and Goldeneye only needs split screen co-op. haha
 
Last edited:

rofif

Can’t Git Gud
4k on old ps1 era games is ugly af.
I hope they will offer original mode or something similar
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
That's very unlike Microsoft to ignore a new release on PC.

I think it's because this is being released as a part of the already-out Rare Replay package, which does not have a PC release.

If that comes to PC, this will too.
 

SmokedMeat

Gamer™
I think it's because this is being released as a part of the already-out Rare Replay package, which does not have a PC release.

If that comes to PC, this will too.

This is part of Rare Replay? Damn, I actually have that digitally - but no Xbox to play it on lol.

Hopefully the bring Rare Replay to PC.
 

NeoIkaruGAF

Gold Member
Why would people want this to be remade? Do you realize how stupid the very idea is? This is a licensed game from 1997, carrying one of the most valuable licenses in the world. The movie in 25 years old and not on anyone's mind in the slightest. Might as well ask to remake the movie while you're there, the chances and the incentives to do that are pretty much the same.
The point of the Goldeneye game is that it's a classic from many people's childhood, and a groundbreaking game for its time.
People clamored for a rerelease... well, here it is.
Anxious to see everyone's reaction to the game today. I sucked big time at Goldeneye in the short time I spent on it. I may give it another chance.
 

RAIDEN1

Member
Who knew that this would be the first James Bond game, in years, (to be able to play on current consoles..) and that the last great Bond game was in 2011.....will the next one coming up be better than Bloodstone (which I must admit I have never played..but heard good things about it..)
 
Who knew that this would be the first James Bond game, in years, (to be able to play on current consoles..) and that the last great Bond game was in 2011.....will the next one coming up be better than Bloodstone (which I must admit I have never played..but heard good things about it..)
The level design and mission design of Goldeneye is one of the best of any first person game aside from something like the original Doom and Doom 2. The aiming system however, won't be for everyone. Doom aged better because of that one difference.
 

93xfan

Banned
OK I'm gonna be honest...this is kind of an L.

The insiders who leaked this were, at least AFAIK, were hyping it to be a remake. Or at least that's what I came to the conclusion of. And it would make sense: this is a 1997 game with rudimentary 3D at its core, why NOT remake it with modern graphics? Wasn't there a GameSpy version back in the day that actually did that to an extent, even tho that version was canceled?

You don't really need any special hardware to run GoldenEye at 4K with decent framerate, people've been doing that on mid-level laptops for years by this point. Heck, some of the budget option laptops out there now can probably do it via emulator, I've seen some able to run PS2 games at 4K 60 (tho it is very game-specific).

But moving on, this does feel kind of like a missed opportunity. Again, why NOT a full-on remake? Keep the core gameplay intact of course, but with modern visuals? It's moves like this which are pretty baffling to me because then you have Sony who are willing to do just that for games even as recent as Demon's Souls, which was awesome. The Crash remakes were also great, and those were also for games highly influential in their day the way GoldenEye was so...was GoldenEye just not deemed worth doing a remake for?

I mean to really get what a potentially missed opportunity this is: we could've gotten a min-remake series for GoldenEye, Perfect Dark, and Perfect Dark Zero. Some teases of (optional) game mechanics from the Perfect Dark reboot put into them. Modern visuals that could've given a glimpse of what to expect from Perfect Dark reboot. They literally could have taken the MCC approach here and done something truly special for a series of games with lots of dedicated fans, and a better presentation draw in new fans before Perfect Dark reboot releases.

Instead we get this. You can spare me the "but it would've needed to run on the Switch too!" arguments; the Switch is at least around Wii U level and can clearly run games significantly better-looking than GoldenEye 007 with ease. Besides if Microsoft were involved in this, you'd think they would have a handling on scaling the game's visual budget across different performance targets, that's kind of their own strategy with the Xbox Series consoles! I really don't see how anyone can look at this and not call it a phoned-in, barebones effort when this could've (and should've) been a remake.

It's an L for both Microsoft and Nintendo IMHO.
Nintendo doesn’t care about selling a game. They want you to feel you have to subscribe to their shitty expensive pack for $50 a year.
 

93xfan

Banned
Wait, from the screens Rare are showing, it's not the 360 remaster nor does it have online on Xbox but it does on Switch? If this is the case, Nintendo has dicked Micorosft with this release.
Fuck Nintendo. Bunch of assholes that charge $60 for a straight 720p Pikmin port.
 
Last edited:
Nintendo doesn’t care about selling a game. They want you to feel you have to subscribe to their shitty expensive pack for $50 a year.

They obviously care to some extent, tho I get what you mean since this is coming as part of of their emulator online pack or whatever it's called.

Alo seems like Nintendo are to blame that Xbox isn't getting the superior 360 remake version; almost guarantee Nintendo would've required a port to Switch or no dice. So Xbox gamers are basically being held ransom and Microsoft is just totally cool about it.

If Nintendo's actually cock-blocking the 360 version from being released and therein also preventing the Xbox version of this remaster from having online multiplayer (couldn't MS just use online MP code from the Perfect Dark game and put it in their version of this remaster, if legally allowed?), then they absolutely deserve to be called out for being blatantly anti-consumer.

Like, that would be an open-and-shut case, but some people out here are more about BS optics than actually being honest I suppose 🤷‍♀️

Fuck Nintendo. Bunch of assholes that charge $60 for a straight 720p Pikmin port.

It's funny that Sony is made out to be an anti-consumer boogeyman by certain folks, yet Nintendo has a longer history of being outright anti-competitive at times (draconian NES/Famicom 3P licensing practices, anti-trust lawsuit they lost in the US, super-high MSRP prices for 1P games several years later, people who had Wii U 1P games having to re-buy every single one for the Switch if they wanted to play them again, no upgrade paths, etc.) and never get called out for it, especially on places like ResetERA.

Guess it's because of "muh childhood feelz" and nostalgia glasses or stuff like that.
 
Last edited:

Beechos

Member
A full on remake wouldve taken like 5 years in this day and age and a lot more resources which im not even sure rare has these days. I dont think rare has made anything that looks like goldeneye since goldeneye all their games since have had a cartoony disney like aesthetic.
 

RAIDEN1

Member
I know I have posted it in the past a couple of times, but this would be THE opportunity to go for an orchestral/movie-like soundtrack...

 

DaGwaphics

Member
If Nintendo's actually cock-blocking the 360 version from being released and therein also preventing the Xbox version of this remaster from having online multiplayer (couldn't MS just use online MP code from the Perfect Dark game and put it in their version of this remaster, if legally allowed?), then they absolutely deserve to be called out for being blatantly anti-consumer.

Like, that would be an open-and-shut case, but some people out here are more about BS optics than actually being honest I suppose 🤷‍♀️

It's Nintendo's game, the fact they came to an agreement to allow it on Xbox at all is something. I'm sure this was something MS was trying to get done at the time the 360 version was made but couldn't (otherwise why were they making it at all). That's progress at least.

It's funny that Sony is made out to be an anti-consumer boogeyman by certain folks, yet Nintendo has a longer history of being outright anti-competitive at times (draconian NES/Famicom 3P licensing practices, anti-trust lawsuit they lost in the US, super-high MSRP prices for 1P games several years later, people who had Wii U 1P games having to re-buy every single one for the Switch if they wanted to play them again, no upgrade paths, etc.) and never get called out for it, especially on places like ResetERA.

Guess it's because of "muh childhood feelz" and nostalgia glasses or stuff like that.

Basically everyone I've ever heard talk about gaming gives Nintendo a hard time about their pricing policies and the BS about purchases being linked to a console vs. a user account. Nintendo fans do ultimately acquiesce, but the complaining is still there. Case in point the hubbub about the "limited" release of that Mario collection and so on.
 
Last edited:

Banjo64

cumsessed
It's funny that Sony is made out to be an anti-consumer boogeyman by certain folks, yet Nintendo has a longer history of being outright anti-competitive at times (draconian NES/Famicom 3P licensing practices, anti-trust lawsuit they lost in the US, super-high MSRP prices for 1P games several years later, people who had Wii U 1P games having to re-buy every single one for the Switch if they wanted to play them again, no upgrade paths, etc.) and never get called out for it, especially on places like ResetERA.

Guess it's because of "muh childhood feelz" and nostalgia glasses or stuff like that.
Don’t overthink it bud.

I bought my Switch Oled brand new a few months after launch for £244 and bought Splatoon 3 digitally today for £35.

They’re currently much more price conscious than Sony right now, in the UK at least, so right now they get brownie points from me. When they start being cuntos again I’ll shift more time/money to Xbox or PS (whichever is less cunty at the time).

And right now Sony are acting in an anti consumer way, so right now that’s the sentiment.
 

SenkiDala

Member
OK I'm gonna be honest...this is kind of an L.

The insiders who leaked this were, at least AFAIK, were hyping it to be a remake. Or at least that's what I came to the conclusion of. And it would make sense: this is a 1997 game with rudimentary 3D at its core, why NOT remake it with modern graphics? Wasn't there a GameSpy version back in the day that actually did that to an extent, even tho that version was canceled?

You don't really need any special hardware to run GoldenEye at 4K with decent framerate, people've been doing that on mid-level laptops for years by this point. Heck, some of the budget option laptops out there now can probably do it via emulator, I've seen some able to run PS2 games at 4K 60 (tho it is very game-specific).

But moving on, this does feel kind of like a missed opportunity. Again, why NOT a full-on remake? Keep the core gameplay intact of course, but with modern visuals? It's moves like this which are pretty baffling to me because then you have Sony who are willing to do just that for games even as recent as Demon's Souls, which was awesome. The Crash remakes were also great, and those were also for games highly influential in their day the way GoldenEye was so...was GoldenEye just not deemed worth doing a remake for?

I mean to really get what a potentially missed opportunity this is: we could've gotten a min-remake series for GoldenEye, Perfect Dark, and Perfect Dark Zero. Some teases of (optional) game mechanics from the Perfect Dark reboot put into them. Modern visuals that could've given a glimpse of what to expect from Perfect Dark reboot. They literally could have taken the MCC approach here and done something truly special for a series of games with lots of dedicated fans, and a better presentation draw in new fans before Perfect Dark reboot releases.

Instead we get this. You can spare me the "but it would've needed to run on the Switch too!" arguments; the Switch is at least around Wii U level and can clearly run games significantly better-looking than GoldenEye 007 with ease. Besides if Microsoft were involved in this, you'd think they would have a handling on scaling the game's visual budget across different performance targets, that's kind of their own strategy with the Xbox Series consoles! I really don't see how anyone can look at this and not call it a phoned-in, barebones effort when this could've (and should've) been a remake.

It's an L for both Microsoft and Nintendo IMHO.
An L ?
 
Goldeneye 007 has never been good anyway.

(actually, I believe that but is interesting to see what other people might think now when they play it in 2022/2023)

I'm gonna try it though. Maybe better with a controller than on a PC emulator.

Will it have online multiplayer or only local?
Never been good? My friends and played this game constantly. I replayed the campaign over and over again trying to be beat it as fast as I can. The amount of hours playing Bunker with just proxy mines.... It may not hold up to newer generations but to say that it was NEVER good? that's BS.
 

mdkirby

Member
Plain old history revisionism.
I mean it’s subjective. I was a little late to the party having never been into Nintendo, so I played it for the first time a couple of years after it’s release, and was initially excited given magizines had raved about it so much (also first time playing an n64), and I thought it was dated and fairly clunky then, and despised the n64 controller. Don’t get me wrong it was an ok game, but I’d had more fun and played more impressive games at the time.

Given this isn’t a ground up remake but little more than a 60fps up-res it will I expect hold up very poorly by many gamers modern standards, except for those wearing exceptionally strong nostalgia lenses.

I’m not really sure who it’s being made for, those with such nostalgia for it will be my age, which is 40. I’m very lucky in that my wife doesn’t mind me playing a ton of games, helped by us not having kids. But very few of my friends my age are in that position, where gaming is a rarity for the vast majority of them. I’d argue this is even more niche and will feel even more dated than the new shemnue.

I guess it can’t have been much work tho I suppose. Aside from a lot of painful hours back and forth with lawyers sorting out the rights.🤷‍♂️
 
It's Nintendo's game, the fact they came to an agreement to allow it on Xbox at all is something. I'm sure this was something MS was trying to get done at the time the 360 version was made but couldn't (otherwise why were they making it at all). That's progress at least.
Lol no it’s not, both Nintendo and Microsoft have equal rights to the game, both need each other’s blessings to release the game, ms got the short hand of the stick, because they are dumb and clueless.
 
Top Bottom