Goldeneye 64 Remake

Retr0gamer

Fieldog wrote: »

Half-life etc which if memory serves was maybe 2 or 3 years after goldeneye? Im open to correction on that as im not arsed opening another tab on my laptop!

A little over a year actually.

maddymcmaddser wrote: »

But these are things that were all true when it first came out, why do they bother you so much now?

Because back then they were forgiveable because Goldeneye was so far ahead of anything else that it was the only game of it's type that was that advanced. At the time the best the PC had was Quake 2 which in single player terms was a much worse game than goldeneye and has aged even worse. It was doing things that no other FPS had done before but since then better games have come along and done them better without the problems of goldeneye like a terrible framerate. Also back then the 'atrocious' AI was the most advanced in an FPS but is terrible now because of games coming along with much improved AI.

Then you've got the 4 player multiplayer which was fantastic especially at a time when the only other way to experience it was with a PC lan. PC's had online gaming at the time but I feel online gaming is a shallow comparison to having the people you are playing against in the same room. I've no problems with goldeneyes multiplayer because it's still fun. All my complaints are levelled at the single player game.

maddymcmaddser

Retr0gamer wrote: »

A little over a year actually.



Because back then they were forgiveable because Goldeneye was so far ahead of anything else that it was the only game of it's type that was that advanced. At the time the best the PC had was Quake 2 which in single player terms was a much worse game than goldeneye and has aged even worse. It was doing things that no other FPS had done before but since then better games have come along and done them better without the problems of goldeneye like a terrible framerate. Also back then the 'atrocious' AI was the most advanced in an FPS but is terrible now because of games coming along with much improved AI.

Then you've got the 4 player multiplayer which was fantastic especially at a time when the only other way to experience it was with a PC lan. PC's had online gaming at the time but I feel online gaming is a shallow comparison to having the people you are playing against in the same room. I've no problems with goldeneyes multiplayer because it's still fun. All my complaints are levelled at the single player game.

So basically old game looks and plays like an old game?

Retr0gamer

maddymcmaddser wrote: »

So basically old game looks and plays like an old game?

Not really. I can't say the same about Super Mario World. It would be old game plays like an old game but is still amazing.

It's more like old game plays like an old game and has been surpassed so much that it's no longer relevant.

In the case of super mario world it pretty much perfected the platform gaming genre which is why it's timeless.

Goldeneye is the forerunner to a the modern FPS games and has been totally out done by them. Medal of Honour came along first on the PS1 and bettered goldeneye in single player and Half-Life came along a year later and totally rewrote how FPS games should be made. It's responsible for for a lot of changes in FPS gaming but it's been totally out done.

senordingdong

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Not really. I can't say the same about Super Mario World. It would be old game plays like an old game but is still amazing.

And Goldeneye is an old game that plays like an old game but is still amazing.

Retr0gamer

senordingdong wrote: »

And Goldeneye is an old game that plays like an old game but is still amazing.

No it's not. It doesn't play well at all.

LIGHTNING wrote: »

Retro I respect your opinion but thats total non-sense. Goldeneye isnt the forerunner to modern FPS. Console gamers like to think so but its not, Quake 2 was out at the same time as Goldeneye.

Sure even Quake 1 was out a year before and had 16 player support, 3DFX support,CD audio, it was a far superior 3D engine. Goldeneye to many people was their first taste multiplayer FPS but it doesnt mean it broke any new grounds, i wont go into its many many flaws.

I'm not talking about multiplayer here. Quake 2 was a far better multiplayer game than goldeneye, there's no question about it.

However in single player Quake 2 is another game that has aged terribly and in hind sight it wasn't very good to begin with. Goldeneye in single player brought a whole heap of new concepts to single player FPS games with Quake 2 was pretty much find red key to open red door hidden behind a crappy hub system.

Retr0gamer

All that is true but as I said the AI was advanced when it came out. Quake 2's AI is even more chronic. It's one of the first games with a reload button, maybe even the first. It varies it's mission objectives and enemies have different hit areas and react differently when shot in them, a first for an FPS.

senordingdong

Retr0gamer wrote: »

No it's not. It doesn't play well at all.
.

In fairness, we're going down the road of opinions versus facts now, so we'll have to agree to disagree.

Fair point about the rose tinted glasses, but if I put on Goldeneye right now, I could still have fun playing it, that's what I'm basing my opinon on.

If I turned on another FPS just as old, like Quake, I would get a headac....I just wouldn't be bothered turning on Quake, or some other equally old FPS.

Retr0gamer

Never played strife. Blake Stone did have that but it wasn't handled very well. I've played marathon and it's kind of shoddy. It did have mission objectives but it basically boiled down to get to the exit.

Good call of Dark Forces though. It definitely had defined mission objectives and much more elaborate and well designed levels than goldeneye. Love that game.

As for Descent, I'm not claiming goldeneye was the first FPS with true 3D enviroments.

Duke 3D was a far better game than goldeneye but it was basically find the key card stuff again but just done really well.

senordingdong wrote:

If I turned on another FPS just as old, like Quake, I would get a headac....I just wouldn't be bothered turning on Quake, or some other equally old FPS.

Well the thing is when I try to play goldeneye I get eyestrain and headaches due to the bad framerate. There are plenty of equally old FPS games that I wouldn't turn on just like goldeneye because they aren't much fun anymore. Also you may have fun on the first few levels of goldeneye but you'd be hard pressed to finish it because the levels get worse later on. However there are a lot of equally old FPS games that I would gladly turn on and play like dark forces, duke 3d, Blood, Shadow Warrior, Doom 2, Descent 2, Ultima Underworld etc. because these games are still as playable as the day they came out unlike goldeneye.