Nintendo Blocks GoldenEye for Xbox Live Arcade

[Rubius-sama]

http://www.gametrailers.com/viewnews.php?id=5457

Two words: fuck Nintendo.


Summary:
Despite an agreement that would allow dual releases of the game and other Rare titles on Wii's Virtual Console and Xbox Live Arcade, Microsoft says Nintendo won't allow the port of GoldenEye on a competitor's system.

Full Text:

According to Kotaku, Microsoft officials allege that Nintendo president Satoru Iwata blocked the release of a GoldenEye port on Xbox Live Arcade because the game originated on Nintendo hardware.

Microsoft claims Nintendo was unwilling to reach an agreement, this despite a favorable compromise for both companies that included a profit sharing deal. Nintendo owned a minority stake in Rare before Microsoft purchased the developer in 2002.

Unconfirmed rumors of a GoldenEye XBLA port surfaced last week, in which multiple sources reported that the game was already in development and less than two months from release before Nintendo purportedly canned the deal.

Nintendo was not immediately available for comment.

There is an online petition going on if anyone cares. This one has about 15,000 signatures so it's pretty big.

http://www.petitiononline.com/rare007/petition.html


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Rubius-sama on 2008-01-15 01:34 ]</font>

[ljkkjlcm9]

perfect dark was better anyways

THE JACKEL

[amtalx]

On 2008-01-15 03:21, ljkkjlcm9 wrote:
perfect dark was better anyways

THE JACKEL



LIES.

[SubstanceD]

While this does suck for X-Box live gamers, it shoudn't really come as a surprise to anyone, at least it did not surprise me.

[Allos]

On 2008-01-15 04:45, amtalx wrote:

On 2008-01-15 03:21, ljkkjlcm9 wrote:
perfect dark was better anyways

THE JACKEL



LIES.



It's the same game...with a lot more content. How is it not better?

[Moo2u]

Whatever. Microsoft snagged rare from under their carpet, so I think this is just some payback.

[HUnewearl_Meira]

<_<

I never really understood all the enthusiasm for Goldeneye, myself. I mean really, the solo game was mediocre at best, and the multiplayer grew stale after only a few hours. I mean, there's only so much you can do with a bunch of proximity mines. Beyond that, it's not clear to me that one should need this old FPS, when the console has other FPS games with far more creative gameplay.

[TheOneHero]

On 2008-01-15 09:25, HUnewearl_Meira wrote:
Beyond that, it's not clear to me that one should need this old FPS, when the console has other FPS games with far more creative gameplay.



But this is the only FPS you can play as Sean Bean! It's instant win!

Doesn't effect me much because:

1. I still play my N64.
2. Not downloading a game I already have. >_>;

[Saner]

my friend had Goldeneye and it's vastly overrated.

Perfect Dark was better, Timesplitters games are better,
even Perfect Dark Zero is better.

I could care less if Nintendo blocks goldeneye,
it's a really outdated FPS anyways and I rather play Rainbow Six Vegas, which is actually fun.

[amtalx]

On 2008-01-15 08:37, Allos wrote:

On 2008-01-15 04:45, amtalx wrote:

On 2008-01-15 03:21, ljkkjlcm9 wrote:
perfect dark was better anyways

THE JACKEL



LIES.



It's the same game...with a lot more content. How is it not better?


It's not the same game, it just has some overlapping content. Personally I thought the PD content wasn't as much fun as Goldeneye. Every time I put in PD, I just wished I was playing Goldeneye and switched.

[UnderscoreX]

Isn't the petition even more pointless than usual this time ? I mean proving that a bajillion people want the game on Live is just more incentive for Nintendo to NOT release the game on a competitor's console.

[Shattered_weasel]

On 2008-01-15 09:47, Saner wrote:

even Perfect Dark Zero is better.



NO!

[Sord]

On 2008-01-15 09:25, HUnewearl_Meira wrote:
<_<

I never really understood all the enthusiasm for Goldeneye, myself. I mean really, the solo game was mediocre at best, and the multiplayer grew stale after only a few hours. I mean, there's only so much you can do with a bunch of proximity mines. Beyond that, it's not clear to me that one should need this old FPS, when the console has other FPS games with far more creative gameplay.


nonstalgia. generally if you like something when your young a lot, and never grow out of it, you continue to like it when your older. Even when your old enough to know that it would be considered crap. Hell, I know people who think the original power rangers is some awesome stuff, and in some cases I agree (go Green Ranger!)

That said, I rather enjoyed Goldeneye, haven't played any of the Perfect Dark games. I wasn't even aware they were a sort of addage to the universe until awhile after Zero came out. And well, me and my friends certainly never found multiplayer stale. To us it was like what Halo is now (granted, I don't care much for Halo, but the fans love it to what seems beyound reason.)

[DLShAdOw]

Goldeneye had a better campaign. Perfect Dark had better multiplayer. Saner, there is absolutely no way PDZ is better than Goldeneye, or even the original Perfect Dark.

[RavenTW]

Is the game is old, overrated, and obsolete. Nintendo can keep it. End of discussion.

[Powder Keg]

Perfect Dark was better, for multiplayer anyways.


Nintnedo has every right to make this decision though if it's a port. However, Rare can re-do/re-code the entire game as a new title if they want to and Nintendo would have nothing to do with it. That probably wouldn't make sense from a business/profit standpoint though.

[Jaspaller]

Goldeneye using an X360 controller? That would be godly, and online multiplayer would only sweeten the deal. Nintendo would get the crap end of the deal though, Goldeneye with the old controls on a Wii controller would suck really bad IMO.

Aiming with two sticks as opposed to one (or that horrible 2.x method where you hold 2 n64 controllers lololololol) ftw!

[CherryLunar]

On 2008-01-15 09:47, Saner wrote:
my friend had Goldeneye and it's vastly overrated.



It wasn't for it's time. I mean it was pretty hot shit 12 years ago and I can see why. I mean... I totally remember geeking all over the game with my cousins, brother and his friends and it was hella fun. And when it boils down to it thats all that matters.




On 2008-01-15 03:21, ljkkjlcm9 wrote:
perfect dark was better anyways

THE JACKEL



QFT

Perfect Dark had so much more content and customability in the multiplayer mode.



But yeah. Aside from that I'd probably consider purchasing the game for nostalgic value if it were to be released. I probably wont go as far as to sign a petition for it though. I really don't miss the game that much.

[Weeaboolits]

They probly blocked it because they want it for virtual console.

[Feelmirath]

On 2008-01-15 19:43, Jaspaller wrote:
Nintendo would get the crap end of the deal though, Goldeneye with the old controls on a Wii controller would suck really bad IMO.
Most Virtual Console games make you use a Gamecube or Classic controller anyway XP

[Obscenity]

On 2008-01-15 19:37, Artea wrote:
Perfect Dark was better, for multiplayer anyways.


Which means it's the better overall game, because most people put in far more time on multiplayer for an FPS than the single-player mode.

[AC9breaker]

On 2008-01-15 17:29, RavenTW wrote:
Is the game is old, overrated, and obsolete. Nintendo can keep it. End of discussion.

[Rubius-sama]

On 2008-01-16 09:03, Ronin_Cooper wrote:
They probly blocked it because they want it for virtual console.



You would think that, but the deal included the release of the game on both XBLA and VC. The funny thing is they can't even get it on VC unless Microsoft agrees (since they own the developer), so Nintendo has no intention of seeing the game on VC.

[Jife_Jifremok]

Now why in the hell would they block GE from being released on XBox Live Arcade if that means not having it on Virtual Console? This would be an excellent addition to the VC library of any oldschool gamer who's been subject to the great GE nostalgia and cannot return to playing their own copy of GE!


On 2008-01-15 09:47, Saner wrote:
my friend had Goldeneye and it's vastly overrated.

Perfect Dark was better, Timesplitters games are better,
even Perfect Dark Zero is better.

I could care less if Nintendo blocks goldeneye,
it's a really outdated FPS anyways and I rather play Rainbow Six Vegas, which is actually fun.


In its time, Goldeneye was pure awesome. It was *THE* N64 game to have.

Perfect Dark was the spiritual successor to Goldeneye and improved it in many ways, thus making GE outdated except if you preferred the GE campaign.

Timesplitters, surprise surprise, is the successor to Perfect Dark! The guys at Rare who made Goldeneye and PD left Rare before the Microsoft buyout to form Free Radical Design and made Timesplitters. They made their own previous games obsolete. Except that Perfect Dark still has the better simulated multiplayer (that is, with bots) and Timepslitters never had a decent enough online multiplayer to compensate. Here's hoping for Timesplitters 4...(or why not just make a NEW series already? It's gonna be the same as TS, PD and GE but improved anyway!)

So yeah, GE is mainly for seeing where the Timesplitters style originated. Not to mention for seeing the first (or one of the first) fully 3D console FPS done right. History and nostalgia. That's all, but it's enough. I sure as hell would LOVE to relive those glory days. (Actually, I tried to on an emulator but it only worked barely well enough. Good fun anyway, though it certainly has been ravaged by age! PD was pretty much unplayable though so I can't relive that campaign yet.)



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Jife_Jifremok on 2008-01-17 00:34 ]</font>

[Nidarrock]

On 2008-01-17 00:32, Jife_Jifremok wrote:
So yeah, GE is mainly for seeing where the Timesplitters style originated. Not to mention for seeing the first (or one of the first) fully 3D console FPS done right. History and nostalgia. That's all, but it's enough. I sure as hell would LOVE to relive those glory days. (Actually, I tried to on an emulator but it only worked barely well enough. Good fun anyway, though it certainly has been ravaged by age! PD was pretty much unplayable though so I can't relive that campaign yet.)
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Jife_Jifremok on 2008-01-17 00:34 ]</font>


Exactly, which is why I too am a little miffed at this news. It does seem kind of silly that nintendo would end up loosing the title altogether than jointly release it. Look at the TMNT arcade game on Live, made by Konami(who no longer has the license), and re-released by Ubisoft to be one of the top selling XBLA titles of '07.

If MS offered to share profits with Nintendo why miss out? Everyone wins.

Unless there is still something else that isn't right on either side.