Current Events > Was GoldenEye 007 on N64 over-rated?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Keep in mind what your alternatives were back then:

- Doom on SNES

- No Medal of Honor OR Unreal Tournament until 1999, you have to wait 2 years for the next FPS

- No Call of Duty 1 until 2003

- Shelling out assloads of cash for a Pentium 2 PC, and using a dial-up modem.

So... yeah, there was Goldeneye...and... well, Turok.. and....

joe40001 posted...

No it wasn't

This,but it is now.It hasn't aged good at all.
---

I think what a lot of people who weren't around back then don't realize is that GoldenEye was the only feasible way to play a 4 player shooter game back in 1997 for most people. You could play some LAN or online PC shooting games but computers were way more expensive then consoles back then AND you needed 4 of them.
---

One thing I miss from Goldeneye is Grenade Launchers.

My sister and I used to go to either sides of the widest open field in the game (usually the main hall of the temple stage) and play turrets with the grenade launcher. We'd stand still and lob grenades at each other while guessing the angle to kill the person way on the other side.
---

The only real issue I had with GoldenEye was the framerate. Whilst the game aged okay, the framerate certainly didn't. It was just inconsistent throughout. The game wasn't overrated per se, as it was groundbreaking back in 1997. GoldenEye's gameplay under today's climate is rather basic and straightforward, which is probably the reason why some people consider it "overrated" head first.

Just a quick aside, I've always had a particular dislike towards the word overrated. From what I've seen, this word is often used by people who think they're special because they have an "unpopular" opinion.
---

StickFigures720 posted...

Just a quick aside, I've always had a particular dislike towards the word overrated. From what I've seen, this word is often used by people who think they're special because they have an "unpopular" opinion.

TC really should have asked if Goldeneye has aged poorly rather than asking if it's overrated.
---

Goldeneye was total ass compared to Quake but it was cool to be able to play multiplayer without having to do all the LAN bullshit.

mario masta posted...

StickFigures720 posted...

Just a quick aside, I've always had a particular dislike towards the word overrated. From what I've seen, this word is often used by people who think they're special because they have an "unpopular" opinion.

TC really should have asked if Goldeneye has aged poorly rather than asking if it's overrated.

means the same thing to me.

a good game that has aged poorly is over-rated despite genuinely being good at the time of release. was it an over-rated game back then? no, its praise was fully deserved. but looking back at it now. flaws have come to light which weren't originally flaws. i think the graphics are terrible now and if i were to go back and play it, i'd likely say that the controls now feel clunky.
---

I felt like it was dated horribly once i played world is not enough
---

Bass_X0 posted...

a good game that has aged poorly is over-rated despite genuinely being good at the time of release. was it an over-rated game back then? no, its praise was fully deserved. but looking back at it now. flaws have come to light which weren't originally flaws. i think the graphics are terrible now and if i were to go back and play it, i'd likely say that the controls now feel clunky.

That comes off as an unreasonable standard to have when you consider that there is no game that will look and play well 20 years later, as compared to what is then current. Maybe there is some gem that still holds up, but I'm struggling to think of it. Do you know of any game that came out 20 years ago and can still compete with the top offerings today or in the last couple of years?
---

Lorenzo_2003 posted...

Bass_X0 posted...

a good game that has aged poorly is over-rated despite genuinely being good at the time of release. was it an over-rated game back then? no, its praise was fully deserved. but looking back at it now. flaws have come to light which weren't originally flaws. i think the graphics are terrible now and if i were to go back and play it, i'd likely say that the controls now feel clunky.

That comes off as an unreasonable standard to have when you consider that there is no game that will look and play well 20 years later, as compared to what is then current. Maybe there is some gem that still holds up, but I'm struggling to think of it. Do you know of any game that came out 20 years ago and can still compete with the top offerings today or in the last couple of years?

I didn't say that. There are still games from twenty or even thirty years ago that still look decent and play well today despite obviously not looking as good as games from today. Super Mario World and Zelda: A Link To The Past still looks and play amazing despite not being in full HD 3D like modern Mario and Zelda games are.

The problem is that while 2D sprites can have a timeless appeal (although obviously not all of them), 3D games that look good for the time twenty years ago will generally look terrible today. It's like how CGI from the early 2000s looks terrible today whereas older hand-drawn Disney animation still has timeless appeal. Our eyes have just become adjusted to recognise low polygon counts, low resolution and low quality textures despite such things being standard back then. I'm not denying that Goldeneye looked good back when it was released, just that 3D ages fast. Super Mario 64 has also aged but because it intentionally had a simplistic cartoon style, its not aged as badly as Goldeneye which gave us the most detailed realistic graphics the N64 could do in 1997.

And this whole topic came about from watching this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6yW42sHPuQ
---

'Was it overrated?' No. It was pretty revolutionary for console shooters.
'Is it overrated?' Yes. It's aged about as well as you would expect.
---

Kerred posted...

If you want some quick info on Goldeneye's influence, check out Evil Tim's in depth look at the design and coding of Goldeneye, where he goes into detail about "did you know" stuff about at the game.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzvY0cLKruQ

Can't stand his voice.

Bass_X0 posted...

There are still games from twenty or even thirty years ago that still look decent and play well today despite obviously not looking as good as games from today. Super Mario World and Zelda: A Link To The Past still looks and play amazing despite not being in full HD 3D like modern Mario and Zelda games are.

The problem is that while 2D sprites can have a timeless appeal (although obviously not all of them), 3D games that look good for the time twenty years ago will generally look terrible today. It's like how CGI from the early 2000s looks terrible today whereas older hand-drawn Disney animation still has timeless appeal.

You think those two games still look good? Ok, we will have to agree to disagree. There's no way I could stomach looking at either game now, but Super Mario World does look better than that Zelda. The controls are nice too, I'll admit. I also don't think the older Disney titles are worth watching anymore. It's a nice trip down Memory Lane, and that's about it.
---

It's flawed, but I can still play it today and enjoy it enough. Using the control scheme that makes you move with the C buttons works pretty good when you get used to it.

It's flawed and outdated, but I wish people would stop writing it off as complete crap.
---

Nah but I hated the fuck outta the game because people will all tried to be oddjob for easily victories.
---

Lorenzo_2003 posted...

Bass_X0 posted...

There are still games from twenty or even thirty years ago that still look decent and play well today despite obviously not looking as good as games from today. Super Mario World and Zelda: A Link To The Past still looks and play amazing despite not being in full HD 3D like modern Mario and Zelda games are.

The problem is that while 2D sprites can have a timeless appeal (although obviously not all of them), 3D games that look good for the time twenty years ago will generally look terrible today. It's like how CGI from the early 2000s looks terrible today whereas older hand-drawn Disney animation still has timeless appeal.

You think those two games still look good? Ok, we will have to agree to disagree. There's no way I could stomach looking at either game now, but Super Mario World does look better than that Zelda. The controls are nice too, I'll admit.

Oh well, I guess the Classic SNES Mini just isn't going to sell well then.
---