Goldeneye's Successor

[windfish]

Every time there's a new Bond game out, people ask whether it's "Goldeneye's Successor." A decent question, but one that lacks a real center. What does it mean to be Goldeneye's Successor? Now, I'm bad at console shooters, and only decent at Mouse-n-keyboard shooters, and I often don't like to play multi-player games that I'm bad at, so I'm a little removed from the discussion. But I do have some thoughts.

To my understanding, Goldeneye was the first really successful console shooter. And that's it. People liked the single-player, but people REALLY liked the multi-player. It was the first time that folks could really shoot each other up in the same room without feeling like dorks having a LAN party. (Note: Author is a dork who enjoys LAN parties).

So what are people waiting for in Goldeneye's successor? A new Bond game that's as good? I find it completely unbelievable that one has not come out. I haven't played them, not being much of a console person, but I can't believe that one that's "as good" and probably "better", in terms of game design, shooter mechanics, multi-player, etc... is concerned, has not come out in the ten years.

No, Goldeneye was significant because of what it was, when it was. If there's an N64 around, it's quite common to hear the phrase "dude, let's play some Goldeneye." There hasn't been a Bond game since then to which similar phrase has been attached. When people say "Dude, let's play some Goldeneye", they mean that they want to sit down and play a frantic multi-player shooter game on a home console. So Goldeneye's successor doesn't have to be a Bond game - it has to be a genre-defining console shooting game with lengendarily accessible and prevalent multi-player. Ladies and Gentlemen of the board, Goldeneye's successor has come and gone. It's Halo. "Dude, let's play some Halo." See, you hear that all the time. Whether or not you like Halo, it is the most prevalent console shooter of this generation.

(Folks should be reminded that I tend to lose at Halo, so I don't like it, so I am not what one would call a "fanboy". So don't disregard my point.)

There won't be a Bond successor to Goldeneye until the next genre-defining console shooter is also a Bond game. Until then, Halo sits in the throne of Goldeneye.

 

[ElArabDeMagnifico]

We must be able to shoot people's hats off damnit!

 

[zoozilla]

There won't be a Bond successor to Goldeneye until the next genre-defining console shooter is also a Bond game. Until then, Halo sits in the throne of Goldeneye.

I always thought that they would have their own separate thrones - I mean, now where will Goldeneye sit?

 

[Avatar Roku]

Hm... sounds about right.

 

[windfish]

There won't be a Bond successor to Goldeneye until the next genre-defining console shooter is also a Bond game. Until then, Halo sits in the throne of Goldeneye.

I always thought that they would have their own separate thrones - I mean, now where will Goldeneye sit?

Oh, it has its own throne, in its own kingdom of Older Gamers who have N64s and not XBoxes, and who met it first and refuse to worship the New Gods.

 

[Zac_Dai]

I guess you could argue Halo is its successor, but it still lacks the comedy of oddjob, slappers only fights and the golden gun.

 

[Darth Marsden]

Goldeneye wasn't just a genre-defining console shooter, it was a genuinely fun game. I can't count how many hours I spent on it, both on single-player trying to get those damned cheats and in multiplayer playing as Jaws because I was that little bit better then my friends. It was incredibly well balanced, had excellent level design and was, as I say, pure, simple fun.

Each subsequent game in the series tried, and failed, to be as good as Goldeneye, and with each passing game the bar was raised higher and higher as our memories became more and more gold-tinted. The problem was that these other games were trying to BE Goldeneye, rather then their own games. As a result, whether due to poor controls, level layouts or AI, when they failed, it kept becoming obvious that there probably wouldn't be a Goldeneye-beater. This came to a head with Goldeneye: Rogue Agent, which was kinda fun in it's own way, but was rightly called out for shamelessly cashing on with the name.

The series going third-person was, to me, probably the best thing to happen to it, since now people accepted that the series was going to try something new. That it - to a degree - worked was probably because EA realised that first-person Bond games would always be compared to Goldeneye, so maybe they should try something new. There were still problems, but most people were willing to overlook them because the game was, at its core, fun. From Russia With Love was much the same thing, with the added bonus of "Shawn Chonnery".

With Quantum of Solace, Treyarch have made a well crafted, technically proficient and, that key word, fun game. I can't say what it's like in multiplayer, but I've heard good things. Why has it worked? Because they made the game they wanted to make. They could have gone with a typical first person game, or a third person platformer. Instead, they made a brilliant game that complements the character from the films, even if it does have a few minor flaws. And that's why it works. Because if you were to take away the Bond, it would still be a good game, which is, to me, the criteria of a good movie tie-in.

There will never be a true successor to Goldeneye, because it's obtained a mythological status in our minds and memories. The best we can hope for is a really good Bond game, and with Quantum of Solace, I think we've got it. Even if it is too short.

 

[Darth Marsden]

The closest I can think of is unlocking higher difficulty levels, but you're right. I completely forgot about that. It's been so long since I played it in single-player, it's easy to forget how many great features where in it.

Do many other multiplayer FPS games have a handicap option? I can't think of any off the top of my head.

 

[The Wooster]

I've personally never layed Halo but thing I found with Goldeneye that I haven't found with other 1st person shooters is the challenge. Once you complete the game you unlock 007 mode where you can tweak how good the enemies are. It amazes me that even though the graphics of games have got better, noone seems to have thought of a similar system in a new(ish) game (If I am incorrect then feel free to tell me, I am just unaware of any).

With the exception of Halo 3's skull system no I haven't seen anything like that. Which is a shame because options are what make good games great.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

It was always about Power weapons....RCP-90, head shot, 'nuff said :-D

 

[johnman]

Golden eye was great simply as it was such a fun game to play. Level desing to rival valve and awesome weapons and the n64 controler was perefect. In fact that was part of it, the n64 controller was the only one i have ever felt comfortable using.

 

[Darth Marsden]

Go back and use it these days. The control stick is really stiff in comparison to modern controllers.

 

[WhiteFangofWhoa]

Ermmm... Going to probably sound like an ignoramus here so someone will yell at me, but wasn't Perfect Dark meant as a spiritual successor to Goldeneye? My only problem with it was it was blurry as all get out when lots of people were in the same area, plus Perfect Sims and the like were amazingly cheap at times.

Unless you're limiting this to only Bond games.

 

[PedroSteckecilo]

The Timesplitters Series comes really close.

 

[ZeroMachine]

I remember when Timesplitters 2 was being praised as "the next Goldeneye". I used to think so, too, cause it was pretty damn fun for the same reasons. But I guess it can only be called that if the majority of people think its better, but I still say it was the spiritual successor to it in my own mind =]

Other than that, the OP has an excellent point on Halo. It really is the successor to Goldeneye. Now we just need to wait for the next big thing that lasts for years. Probably won't get it anytime soon, though. Closest we've gotten recently are Team Fortress 2 and Left 4 Dead. Fun games, but not as popular as the predeccessors to the throne.

 

[SteinFaust]

Timesplitters 2 > Goldeneye.

same HUD, check
similar gameplay, check
WHOLE ASSLOAD OF WEAPONS AND WACKY SECONDARY FIRES, check.

i think we have a winner here.

 

[JediMB]

Something I loved about GoldenEye, besides the multiplayer, was the mission objectives in the singleplayer levels. Place a remote mine here, hack a computer there, avoid killing the scientists, kill off Ourumov before he executes Trev... err, wait... >_>

And yes, the level design was just excellent.

It's sad that MGM took the Bond license away from Rare simply because they thought the game focused too much on violence. What rubbish.