-
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.
Code Mystics says, GoldenEye Xbox ports' FPS drops and Graphical issues are "authentic" to the N64 original.
- Thread starter Eddie-Griffin
- Start date
Neff
Member
Agreed, their stuff is almost always of high quality and made with care. This one feels rushed for some reason even though it works and is relatively bug free.
I'm guessing Nintendo wasn't happy about Xbox getting the superior version, or Eon wasn't happy with aspects of Rare's port, or Microsoft wasn't willing to spend additional funds to finish it/meet certification purposes. It could be anything.
The original had frame drops when it got busy. This port seems to just randomly crater at inexplicable times, no matter what you're doing.
Team Andromeda
Member
If not for Nintendo we would have the remake on the 360 decades ago. Nintendo are scum
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
I don’t see the problem? Sounds like they’ve faithfully recreated the feel of playing on a Nintendo console.
Jack Package
Member
That’s a load of shite. Never once in the n64 game (which I got on release as a kid), did I have an a enemy sidestep inside a wall so I couldn’t shoot him, but leave his gun sticking out to shoot and kill me. No, it wasn’t perfect back then, and it had the odd glitch on the lights, but nothing so egregious.
I’m so tired of being showered in horse piss by developers and publishers and being told it’s rain.
I’m so tired of being showered in horse piss by developers and publishers and being told it’s rain.
GigaBowser
The bear of bad news
The zero effort Switch version is actually better. No jankyness once you get through the controller layout walkaround and you can play online splitscreen until your hearts content.
I'm sorry my friends.
I'm sorry my friends.
Lunarorbit
Gold Member
Guess I'm going to start an emulation company then. You apparently don't have to do fuck all to the game and when you do the bare minimum just blame it on the original code you decided not to optimize.
EddieVanHelgen
Banned
What about the audio issues on xbox? Sounds kind of tinny and raspy.
chromhound
Member
That's what i was saying. I should have specified
Mattyp
Gold Member
Dumb comments 101 ZzzzZz
Fox Mulder
Member
This game even being released was held up for over a decade with licensing issues. The leaked remaster everyone wanted is a cancelled project Rare was doing in 2007.
For whatever reason with so many parties involved, an upscaled rom in an emulator is probably all they could do to get it out after all this time. You can’t even actually buy it either. Nintendo gets online play because it’s already part of the Switch emulation service.
It is better than nothing.
Last edited:
Alexios
Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
So why wouldn't MS offer the "superior version" as part of the deal if they want people to have it and it's not even being sold? The parity could be the same as now with just higher resolution and/or 120fps on Xbox. Switch has great ports from PS360 surpassing their versions, a simple game like that would not be an issue. It looked passable 15+ years ago (yes, passable, it looks more like an Xbox game than 360 and not even its best*) when it was being developed but by now it needs a remake itself if it's to appeal to folks who want games for the graphics, defeating the whole point.
*Wii got that Call of GoldenEye reimagining the PS360 also got and while it's a lesser/different game (and held back by its Wii roots) it's closer to the visuals people expected back then, well beyond the GoldenEye remake yet still far from the best PS360 (and the superior Switch) can do.
And you have no evidence (which is just a stepping stone before getting to the required actual proof before making such claims anyway but you aren't even there) to post when I just ask you for it so you continue your bullshit without replying to me, lol, very mature
I get some of you folks are in damage control mode for like this entire generation so far when it comes to Microsoft but come on.
Last edited:
chromhound
Member
That's what i was saying. I should have specified
Read my other comment dummy
IbizaPocholo
NeoGAFs Kent Brockman
nkarafo
Member
Don't know about the seams since the original is low res but i certainly don't remember the wobbly textures.
Also, why would they keep all these artifacts anyway? If they really wanted it to look authentic, they should also keep it N64 low res. But since they upscaled it, they should also hide the issues since the N64 also hides them.
In other words, that excuse is pretty bullshit.
Also, why would they keep all these artifacts anyway? If they really wanted it to look authentic, they should also keep it N64 low res. But since they upscaled it, they should also hide the issues since the N64 also hides them.
In other words, that excuse is pretty bullshit.
01011001
Banned
what would be kinda funny is if they made a Perfect Dark spinoff out of it.
replace the guns, assets, story and characters, but keep the mission designs identical.
call it Perfect Dark: Mission Gold or something.
and let 4J Studios make it.
the engine is already there thanks to their Perfect Dark 360 port.
lame gag1990
Member
It's completely playable as I've completed 00 Agent run earlier today with relative ease but It's a weak release. I don't buy their excuses. They're lying.
Majima Everywhere System
Member
Lol Nintendo's lax standards and shit performance are infecting othe consoles now.
Prove me wrong by releasing an acceptable console that respects a digital library.
Prove me wrong by releasing an acceptable console that respects a digital library.
RickMasters
Member
that explains why I was so dissapointed in it compared to the perfect dark port I can also play in the rare collection......... Its one thing to not have online MP in the Xb version.....but 30FPS too? ....And I have to bring up the perfect dark port again...They should have just followed that formula.
Fess
Member
Exactly! That’s kinda how Dark Souls came to be, Sony owned Demon’s Souls and From wanted to do more for more people, it worked out fine. And with Goldeneye people just want the gameplay, it’s not the James Bond story that is the pull here, it’s an old ass movie.
hyperbertha
Member
Its all to capture that original cinematic experience. More frame drops = more cinematic.
FeralEcho
Member
To be fair Perfect Dark on Xbox looks and runs amazing!It's one of my favourite games on Series S!
i honestly am enjoying Goldeneye alot at the moment,there's some ocassional juddder and compared to Perfect Dark it's a night and day difference in smoothness but it's still very enjoyable and having not played this until now I can now see how it became such a classic.It has a soul which many games nowadays lack.That incredible soundtrack also helps alot.
It and PD have the best Pause Music of all time.
Last edited:
Ronin_7
Member
Because this game was made for a quick buck?
Tarnpanzer
Member
Is the leaked remaster fully playable, i.e. all levels/difficulties completable without major bugs?
If so u may be better off emulating that version instead of playing this turd.
If so u may be better off emulating that version instead of playing this turd.
THE DUCK
voted poster of the decade by bots
So why wouldn't MS offer the "superior version" as part of the deal if they want people to have it and it's not even being sold? The parity could be the same as now with just higher resolution and/or 120fps on Xbox. Switch has great ports from PS360 surpassing their versions, a simple game like that would not be an issue. It looked passable 15+ years ago (yes, passable, it looks more like an Xbox game than 360 and not even its best*) when it was being developed but by now it needs a remake itself if it's to appeal to folks who want games for the graphics, defeating the whole point.
*Wii got that Call of GoldenEye reimagining the PS360 also got and while it's a lesser/different game (and held back by its Wii roots) it's closer to the visuals people expected back then, well beyond the GoldenEye remake yet still far from the best PS360 (and the superior Switch) can do.
And you have no evidence (which is just a stepping stone before getting to the required actual proof before making such claims anyway but you aren't even there) to post when I just ask you for it so you continue your bullshit without replying to me, lol, very mature
I get some of you folks are in damage control mode for like this entire generation so far when it comes to Microsoft but come on.
It's got zero to do with damage control, ms delivered what they were allowed to by Nintendo. They wouldn't have wasted the time and energy and money into the remaster, basically complete it, and then shelf it for an inferior version unless they had no choice. A small child could understand this but you, in full save Nintendo mode, live in denial.
Dream-Knife
Banned
No one knows Goldeneye more than Graslu00. If he says there's issues, there's issues.
Mahnmut
Member
That and also because of the state of it. More generaly, lately we've been delivered half ass ports, unfinished games released at full price etc etc...
The game is legendary, why didn't they put the effort into delivering something that matches that legacy ? I can't believe they ditched the graphical overhaul of the cancelled XBLA version.
Also why are the Switch and XS versions handled by different teams with different issues/perks ?
That's such a mess...
Last edited:
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Disappointed that they did not emulate texture filtering the way Nightdive did for their port (see DOOM64)…
Big Baller
Al Pachinko, Konami President
That's when you realise it's just business and has nothing to do with heart and soul, and that there's a discrepancy between what players want and expect (heart and soul in a beloved game they have fond memories of) and what investors want and expect (maximum profit). In many cases these two interests allign but sometimes they do not. We've seen that with Rockstar who decided to hand the brand that made DMA Design to what is now Rockstar with all their success and one of the biggest gaming brands on the planet to a mobile port developer who has only average technical competence in porting something to the Unreal engine and zero understanding of visual art and how a proper remastered version would have looked like. But I doubt they were the ones who decided how it looks and either way it had to be approved by Rockstar and they gave it a pass.
And someone approved this version of Golden Eye. And this someone should have known better and maybe they do but they didn't care. Especially since Nintendo fans are used to low-effort re-releases and won't even notice. So why spending even more money? It's just a product that's good enough for the mass audience in this state.
Drizzlehell
Banned
They already made a remake in 2010. You don't want them to do this again. Copyright holders of the James Bond franchise have weird stipulations for video games based on the property.
Probably the only reason why this port was finally allowed to be put out is that Daniel Craig is out and they didn't find a replacement yet.
nial
Gold Member
And they would be right, they developed that specific version.
But considering that MS has already ported some of their games to Switch (The Bard's Tale remastered, Minecraft Dungeons and Legends, and both Ori titles), it doesn't make sense for them to suddenly not give a 15-year-old remaster from a 25-year-old game.
My personal guess is that Microsoft offered them the original Xbox Live Arcade remaster to release on the eShop, but Nintendo saw that Goldeneye would be a big boost for their N64 online service, and having the game available to purchase separately would go against that (and by the way, it's the exact same reason you can't buy NES, SNES, and N64 classics on Switch!).
And the icing on the cake, as everyone here agrees, is that they wanted some kind of version parity between the two consoles, which led to Microsoft accepting the deal.
Last edited:
Hayabusa83
Banned
I can't believe they took blood out of the Xbox Series version. What an absolute joke.
Alexios
Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
Nintendo should let em have the original (included in the XBLA remaster too) and let them port it to Xbox as they actually did do, but MS shouldn't let them have the remaster and let them port it to Switch. K.
So who is to blame if that's true then when we got the thing Nintendo allowed and didn't get the thing MS did not have to allow according to you (as if Nintendo had to allow anything at all), I'd think the one who didn't cooperate but opinions vary, lol
Parity is addressed in the post you pretend to reply to but apparently didn't read past the first two words even though it's just two lines. It's a low fidelity budget 360 remaster at best looking like an OG Xbox game, of an N64 game. Of course Switch can easily run that with only higher resolution on Xbox, maybe 120hz vs 60 on Switch (but hey, if parity was really a clause then just lock it to 60 on Xbox too, but still do 4K vs whatever Switch's maximum resolution is, 1080p docked I believe?).
Just as the current release has similar differences in resolution (and the Xbox was advertised as having both 4K and smoother fps in the blurb announcing these releases so obviously that wasn't an issue either even though in the end the release is messy and does not have that, lol). Rare was so hands off the project they falsely claimed it having these enhancements it doesn't have but yeah, everybody there truly cares about these games, hardcore fans, so much they didn't even try it, just advertised it.
Microsoft Announces Arguably Better GoldenEye For Xbox Right When Nintendo Does
Switch's GoldenEye 64 port competes against a remaster on Game Pass
kotaku.com
At least Nintendo has also shown they are willing to release an almost-finished-but-not-released-in-its-time game with Star Fox 2. The norm in the industry is that if it's not released on time (or even if it is) then it's forgotten forever unless leaked decades later. See Sega's Propeller Arena or any number of cancelled games, same situation as the XBLA remaster (which for all you know was blocked by other companies, after all Activision released official GoldenEye games that same generation on the Wii, PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 so clearly there were discussions going on with all the rights holders). No third party rights holders involved most of the time either. So yes, it's very likely that Microsoft just don't care for a 15+ year old cancelled game at this point and didn't even care or remember to bring it up when whatever party thought to discuss releasing the og GoldenEye.
Microsoft doesn't even let Kamiya and Platinum Games which was never even owned by them unlike Rare have Scalebound despite not even doing anything with an IP nobody else is involved in and hasn't had any releases so has 0 value to them
Why did they even bring Code Mystics in and not whoever made the Perfect Dark remaster, even if new assets and touch ups weren't allowed it'd still be a way better release than what you got, lol, as if whatever suits made the deal can tell the difference between emulation and sourceport.
PS: Still no evidence on which of all the involved rights holders had anything to do with them being unable to release the remaster (or a modern remake) vs just the original as is, just more speculation, lol. So no, not "everyone agrees" and if they do based on literally nothing then they're dumb. I mean, Perfect Dark was made under similar circumstances with Rare still under Nintendo's 'unlimited funding' but with no other third parties involved to the rights yet they were allowed to self publish it and it was let go alongside Rare and released just fine (yet they didn't enhance it as much).
Last edited:
Puscifer
Member
The remake that hit the Internet least year was built from the from ground up with proper 60fps code from source and people are playing it on xlink kai, shits wild
nial
Gold Member
Lol, that's more your case. Your whole post has nothing to do with what I said, read it again please. c:
That's why I said it's a personal guess! None of us have evidence for anything here, that doesn't mean we can't speculate as to why things are this way.
Edit: Lol, I see you edited your post. All that word soup and it still has nothing to do with what I said!
Last edited:
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
Profit from who though? Not that many actually care about this game as people like to believe. You would need effort and production in order to get more interest from the general audience, just the basic game with a res boost, but worst gameplay, more glitches, and more frame rate drops isn't going to cause even 4 million people to come running. Maybe not even 2. Can't see much money being made for either version without something to appeal more to gamers or causals who may have remembered the game.
Strange
Last edited:
anthony2690
Member
Couldn't Microsoft just offer to release the Xbox 360 cancelled version for both Xbox and Nintendo? I would think the switch would be capable of running a Xbox 360 port.
But again, like you said there could be loads of background stuff we would never know, maybe it was offered and refused.
Last edited:
Big Baller
Al Pachinko, Konami President
There is blood but its glitchy
onnextflix5
Member
If they did not care, then why would they have not just finished the xbla version, it would have been easier and cheaper to do so, and just let Nintendo do whatever they wanted,
Clearly Nintendo is cockblocking the whole thing, ms are fools to agree.
Quasicat
Member
I also think it was offered, but Nintendo probably wanted to get it in their N64 app and locking it behind the highest tier of NSO probably looked pretty enticing as extra value.
I really wonder about licensing behind this as you can’t buy GoldenEye outright, but instead you get it through a subscription service or buying Rare Replay.
AngelMuffin
Member
Certainly those “licensing issues” could be resolved with a certain sum of money? Or is it a matter of who actually owns the license since it’s a game tied to a movie made by a developer owned by Microsoft originally released exclusively on a Nintendo console?