Quantum of Solace: The Game Review

By Kristan Reed Published 3 November, 2008

A measure of mediocrity.

Version tested: Xbox 360

It's Bond! With Gears of War cover mechanics and the Call of Duty 4 engine! How can it possibly fail? As it turns out, by being dull, repetitive, unchallenging, ruinously linear, and one of the shortest full-priced games ever. Quantum of Solace: The Game (in case we got confused with, I dunno, Quantum of Solace: The Hamper) starts off with solid fundamentals, only to undermine them in depressingly swift fashion. The controls are pleasingly refined and well-implemented, with an intuitive cover system that does a fine job of giving 007 the ability to switch between walls, boxes and cover points with the minimum of fuss. But it's nowhere near enough. All too quickly, the game settles into a tired FPS routine that plays itself.

The chief culprits are that twin FPS menace of linearity and predictability. Right from the very start, there's rarely an opportunity to improvise or think for yourself. Just point Mr. Broody in the direction you're told to, crouch behind cover, wait until the obliging enemies pop their heads out and repeat until the area is clear. It would be nice if all the people copying Gears of War actually paid attention to what it was doing, rather than phoning in superficial explanations.

Initially, there's a sense that the enemies aren't as clueless as the usual drones that populate mass-market shooters, but it really is just window dressing. Destructible cover allows you to send enemies fleeing in panic, and occasionally it even looks like they're working as a team trying to outflank you and pressure you into making mistakes - but it's little more than a scripted illusion, so the core gameplay degenerates into stop-and-pop. With the now-standard recharging health mechanic reducing the challenge almost to zero, it's actually harder to screw up than not. Assuming you've got motor function, finding cover when you're shot at will be enough to get you through most situations unscathed.

'Quantum of Solace: The Game' Screenshot 1

We tried to find a less generic screenshot, but failed.

What with the boring shooting, it's almost a relief when Treyarch introduces elements to remind you 007 is a spy, and not just a sour-faced chap with a nice suit and a selection of big guns, but this is cocked up as well. It's almost a given that we get to perform some silent takedowns on unsuspecting enemies, but they're so poorly implemented that you wonder why they bothered. On several occasions during any level, you'll get a chance to creep up behind enemies and incapacitate them with a single button press. Despite presumably being on high alert, these idiotic goons never see you coming as long as you're crouched down on approach. With faintly embarrassing predictability, they follow strict, basic patrol paths, and stand around staring at walls for no apparent reason.

And despite the obvious noise, no-one in the vicinity turns a hair if their back's to you (which, thanks to pathetically generous level design, means they will generally always have their backs turned on the source of any potential noise), meaning you can rack up one ridiculously easy stealth takedown after another. Even if you screw up, armed combat is so generous and unthreatening that it's never much of a problem. Sometimes you'll also find yourself battling enemies in Quick-Time Events, but, again, the game gives you such a large window of opportunity to succeed you could steal Mr. White's mansion through it without grazing the sill. The AI's antics are as predictable as the explosives stashed all over every level, waiting to cue the 'mousetrap' moments that blow up any neighbouring henchmen not already dead by stupid.

'Quantum of Solace: The Game' Screenshot 2

Licensed to brood.

With solid but uninspired stop-and-pop combat, and an excruciatingly bad attempt at incorporating melee combat, it's not surprising the rest of the game's similarly disappointing. There's more stealth-lite in the form of security cameras that sweep specific points of the level for intruders. Rather than introduce interesting evasion tactics, or give the player any sense of achievement for hacking the system, the designers cop out completely and reduce the task to a single button press on a nearby panel in a manner we haven't seen since the worst of PS2. Elsewhere, unlocking supposedly super-secure doors involves pressing d-pad directions when prompted at glacial pace.

A couple of times you get to shimmy along ledges and jump between windows, with a cutaway view giving the player a chance to see the action from a suitably useful perspective. But, yet again, there's almost no tension, because the AI is so completely dense. Almost every step of the way you feel like the game has been designed for complete idiots with zero attention span.

Once in a while though, it hits upon something genuinely interesting, like a good set-piece. Having to guide a drugged-out Bond out of Casino Royale itself is a particular highlight, as is the Venice level set in the crumbling building and the one set on a train. But these bits are far too rare to elevate the overall quality of the experience and distract you from the mediocrity surrounding them, and for the most part you're funneled through corridors instead, dispatching brainless enemies and wondering whether EA would have done a better job after all.

To give Treyarch credit where it's due, Quantum of Solace does at least look presentable throughout, although it's a dinner jacket rather than a dinner jacket. Daniel Craig's likeness is genuinely excellent, and the seamless way the game employs the cover system is a useful (and convenient) means of ensuring the star gets enough time on-screen. The levels are also reasonably detailed, with a good deal of variety ensuring the Call of Duty 4 engine is given a run for its money, with over-the-top explosive effects and loads of destructible objects throughout, so you won't be complaining much about the way it looks, or the way it sounds either.

In fact, the audio chaps can skip detention entirely, with an array of excellent voice talent contributing to slick mission briefings, mid-mission chatter and plenty of incidentals. The soundtrack's great too, so in certain respects the game does its job of creating a suitable atmosphere. It's just a shame the core gameplay's so vapid and uninspired, and not helped at all by the utterly confusing way the narrative flits around the timeline of both Casino Royale and its sequel. If you're not a student of Bond, you will neither know, nor probably care why, in the middle of the game, you're suddenly thrown into flashback, or playing bits of the Casino Royale timeline which didn't make it into the film.

'Quantum of Solace: The Game' Screenshot 3

Use some cover Mr. Terrorist!

And while we're not ones to complain too much when games are short these days, in this case Quantum of Solace is unacceptably brief. Clocking in at around the five to six hours even for cack-handed old grumps like me, you could clear the single-player campaign in a single evening without breaking a sweat. Sometimes it's great for a game to be on the short side if it's crafted and poetic (ICO, for instance), and massively replayable (Portal), but that's never the case here. Some of the Achievements (like taking out a posse of snipers with one bullet each) are a nice touch, but enough to make you want to play it again?

Inevitably at this point there's always a chance for the multiplayer to help save face, and Bond does passably. Among all the standard modes are a couple that stand out - there's Bond Vs, for instance, where one person plays as 007 trying to disarm bombs placed by players representing the 'Organisation' - and the popular Golden Gun mode also makes an appearance, giving one player Saruman's one-shot-killer and everyone else the rank-and-file. Meanwhile, Bond Evasion mode is pretty good, with players trying to escort a VIP between locations. The weapon upgrade system, meanwhile, gives the multiplayer side a bit of longevity, with cash-based unlocks allowing you to customise weapons with a series of attachments, and improve reload times and damage levels. It's all too little, too late, though, and struggles to escape the stigma of the rest.

'Quantum of Solace: The Game' Screenshot 4

If Bond walked into his local Sainsbury's he would probably find at least 16 things to blow up. It's the rule of 007, apparently.

That's because in a genre as super-competitive as the shooter, it's easy for minor elements to prove to be the deciding factor, but when it comes to Quantum of Solace, the problems are blatant and fundamental. As a piece of interactive merchandise for the masses, it does its job: it's polished, intuitive to control, and approximates the Bond Experience, albeit with about as much subtlety as Vesper Lynd's neckline. For everyone else though, it's brainless, dull, and ridiculously easy. Rather than giving the Bond game its Casino Royale moment, Activision and Treyarch have simply carried on in the joyless tradition of dumbed-down shooters designed for thickos, and GoldenEye has never seemed so far away.

5 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Kristan.

About Kristan Reed

Kristan is a former editor of Eurogamer, dad, Stone Roses bore and Norwich City supporter who sometimes mutters optimistically about Team Silent getting back together.

Read more articles from Kristan by visiting the Kristan Reed archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (83) Latest comment 9 months ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • RedPanda #1 3 years ago

    Post deleted at 14:31:59 28-01-2012

  • the_dudefather #2 3 years ago

    the game's bland, james bland

    edit:
    'although it's a dinner jacket rather than a dinner jacket'

    what?
    Edited by 1 at 03/11/08 @ 13:25

  • Der_tolle_Emil #3 3 years ago

    So we're back to the good old days of traditional movie tie-ins.

  • Trane #4 3 years ago

    Meh, when are they finally going to release a decent bond tie-in?

  • Darren #5 3 years ago

    C'mon... we all knew it wasn't going to be good, didn't we? Just because the game uses the CoD4 engine, doesn't guarantee it will be good... not when Treyarch are behind it! ;)

  • Azazel #6 3 years ago

    Quelle surprise.

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #7 3 years ago

    "it's a dinner jacket rather than a dinner jacket"

    donkey jacket?

  • dr_faulk #8 3 years ago

    oh w0w lol sum oF d gRphX are TEH BEZT!

  • turnget2005 #9 3 years ago

    still it was better than halo 3! :)

  • BartonFink #10 3 years ago

    An the Wii version

  • penhalion #11 3 years ago

    Much like the actual movie then. No gadgets, a thug version of bond and no real plot to speak of.

    Why the heck is the evil organisation called quantum of solace instead of specter. Who's idiotic idea was that. An organisation who's name means an infinetesimally small amount of solitude WTF

  • septimus #12 3 years ago

    Horrid game, thanks Gamestation for allowing returns!

  • DFawkes #13 3 years ago

    I have to echo the_dudefather - "although it's a dinner jacket rather than a dinner jacket. " means what? I'm easily confused at the best of times, but I read that one bit several times to see if I could get it. I can't.

    I'm hoping the Wii version won't just be a broken version of this. Please.
    Edited by 1 at 03/11/08 @ 13:32

  • FWB #14 3 years ago

    Barton: That's a joke, right?

  • Lebowski #15 3 years ago

    Give the lad Sackboy a dinner jacket, he'll make a good Bond game.

  • dr_faulk #16 3 years ago

    What did everyone think of the film? I thought it was singularly boring. What a waste.

  • BartonFink #17 3 years ago

    @FWB - nope apparently not.
    Check it out http://www .officialnintendomagazine.co.uk/
    Edited by 1 at 03/11/08 @ 13:45

  • theiceman #18 3 years ago

    OUCH! worse than goldeneye i see. I am now officially worried about COD:WAW.

    when is a dinner jacket not a dinner jacket?

    when eurogamer says so.

  • the_dudefather #19 3 years ago

    @Gremmi

    ahhhhhhh

    add italics to review please EG :)

  • Fab4 #20 3 years ago

    Game spin-off from movie, in mediocrity shocker!

  • tiddles #21 3 years ago

    er, did "Saruman" really have a golden gun? I missed that bit in LOTR... Scaramanga must be jealous! :p

  • Rodafowa #22 3 years ago

    "I want a quantum of solace
    But no more than a quantum
    I know they do big bags of solace
    But I don't want 'em..."

  • 3TPete #23 3 years ago

    ..and the popular Golden Gun mode also makes an appearance, giving one player Saruman's one-shot-killer

    eh?

    have I missed the Lord of the Rings/ Bond crossover film?

    \tiddles got there first
    Edited by 1 at 03/11/08 @ 13:53

  • NorfolkNClue #24 3 years ago

    @Trane - what do you mean 'finally' release a decent Bond game. Did you not play Goldeneye on the N64?

  • PatrickEwing #25 3 years ago

    I can testify that this is the shortest SP game I've ever played, 4 and a half hours in and you've suddenly completed it, effing rip off. there are some nice touches in it however. Who wants to swap this and one of my finest camels for Dead Space?

  • Marshall2008 #26 3 years ago

    Game isn't as bad as they say. Not a keeper by any means but definitley worth playing through.

    One thing this game is though is WAY better than the movie. QoS is a stinking pile of shit compared to Casino Royale. Theres about 10 action sequences punctuated with little dialogue and even less story. I would give the game 6.5 and the movie 4 or 5 out of 10.

  • PearOfAnguish #27 3 years ago

    Well, that was completely expected. Did anyone think this was going to be good?

    Partly because it's a reboot, partly because the rights of SPECTRE were a hotly contested issue. Additionally, the group is just called Quantum, not Quantum of Solace.

    And maybe because the name SPECTRE is silly.
    Edited by 1 at 03/11/08 @ 14:00

  • Trigga_Tybalt #28 3 years ago

    i hear ya red panda. i was getting worried this might be good and worth buying.

  • Joco84 #29 3 years ago

    Played the PS3 version at the weekend, thought it was dull and severly lacking in anything interesting.

    Whats more, the graphics were terrible. While I don't usually think GFX make or break a game, when it looks worse than CoD2 from years ago, you have to start wondering just what the hell happened.

    40 quid saved for me, thanks a lot Treyarch!

  • mazzl #30 3 years ago

    haven't seen the movie yet, the game does look nice, but euro 59 for 8 hours of mediocre fun is a bit much.

  • FWB #31 3 years ago

    Then the Wii looks shockingly bad.

  • Meho #32 3 years ago

    On PC the game is... how shall I put it... As if made for three year olds... I've probably never made so many headshots in a FPS game and you barely have to bother aiming because even blindfiring from cover will kill the thugs most of the time. The graphics are silly and the level design is lke something out of 2001. There is very little challenge and even less freedom to improvise (I mean, why even bother shooting the explosive barrels and such when the ehemies are easily dispatched as it is, except, of course, to shorten the experience...) However the game DOES throw a lot of explosions around and designed to be idiot friendly, I guess it's a good starting point for newcomers to the genre... Er... this is about as nice as I could come up with.

  • Toothball #33 3 years ago

    I was in Gamestation on Thursday. The girl behind the counter was like "Quantum of Solace is out tomorrow! It's the best Bond game yet!".

    "Better than Goldeneye?", I asked.

    "Well...", came the answer. Then she tried to sell me Fallout instead.

  • paulf #34 3 years ago

    the review is a bit harsh imo, tune the difficulty level up from easy to agent or 00 level (the hardest 2 settings) and you will have much more of a challenge on your hands, sure it is linear but on these difficulty settings the game creates a good sense of urgency and danger, and on certain levels I found myself swearing at the deviousness of the ai. The online multiplayer is solid too its not a great game by any means but a 6 or 7 would of been a fairer reflection

  • Razorus #35 3 years ago

    Obvious Phail. And the film was a shitty mess too!

  • PearOfAnguish #36 3 years ago

    KingsXKing, you make no sense.

  • kinky_mong #37 3 years ago

    I'll echo what has been said that the game must be very faithful to the film because that deserved 5 out of 10 too.

  • Hog-lumps #38 3 years ago

    er, did "Saruman" really have a golden gun? I missed that bit in LOTR... Scaramanga must be jealous! :p

    Wasn't scaramanga and Saruman both played by the same actor (Christopher Lee) though? If so, aren't EG just being facetious with their saruman comment?

  • siro #39 3 years ago

    Oh my, I get really good at predicting scores. :)

  • krudster #40 3 years ago

    Yes, the Saruman comment is related to Christoper Lee. It's deliberate.

  • krudster #41 3 years ago

    Gremmi explained it perfectly. If you know the dialogue in the movie, you'll know what the comment in the review refers to. Tom added in the gag and decided it didn't need italics. I can see why people would read it and think it was a mistake.

  • Quint2020 #42 3 years ago

    I bet this a really fun, if a little unoriginal shooter that deserves about a 7, sort of like Timeshift.

  • The_Surreal #43 3 years ago

    This review is bullshit man!
    And then there are plenty of people on here who HAVEN'T EVEN PLAYED THE GAME joining in on the shit talking.

    Actually go and play the game, then you'll see that it's pretty good.

    If you like COD4 and RB6: Vegas2, and you're a bit gutted that COD is returning to WWII, then this is the game for you!

    Oh and it's not called Quantum of Solace: The Game, but simply Quantum of Solace..... At least on my UK version it is.

  • Triggerhappytel #44 3 years ago

    "it's a dinner jacket rather than a dinner jacket."

    +1 to the 'WTF does this mean' gang.

    EDIT - although I do see this has been addressed elsewhere in the comments.


    I thought the Bond licence was taken away from EA and given to Activision in an effort to improve its quality?!

    I would like to see a review of the Wii game. That look beyond awful.
    Edited by 1 at 03/11/08 @ 15:31

  • PearOfAnguish #45 3 years ago

    "@pearofanguish

    "To give Treyarch credit where it's due, Quantum of Solace does at least look presentable throughout, although it's a dinner jacket rather than a dinner jacket."

    If this makes sense to you im happy you fuckwit"

    As explained, it's a quote from Casino Royale, you incoherent half-wit.

  • The_Surreal #46 3 years ago

    @KingsXKing

    Thanks buddy.
    I expected some serious flaming for that, which may still come my way actually.

  • peterfll #47 3 years ago

    Am I the only one in the thread that thought the film was actually perfectly enjoyable? Enjoyable trash.

  • Marshall2008 #48 3 years ago

    I quite enjoy mindless action orientated entertainment but QoS was the limit. It should have at least had some story to it or gone the whole hog and trotted out an 80 minute long movie. Damn, Arnies Commando (a class movie) had more story in it than QoS.

  • groovychainsaw #49 3 years ago

    Sounds like many of the criticisms are the same as I felt about COD4s campaign - standard FPS, very linear, nice setpieces, you can see the respawns/AI behind the curtain, bland in places. Lucky COD4 was redeemed by its multiplayer for me eh?

  • Lebowski #50 3 years ago

    "Pay attention 007. Looks like a normal games console, right? Wrong! This is the Xbox 360. Press this little button here, anywhere from five minutes to five months, and eventually these three lights will turn red - the RROD! Guaranteed to leave its victim a quivering wreck and on the phone to customer support for two hours."

    "And what's this, Q?"

    "That's the PSP."

    "And what does that do?"

    "F**k all."

  • Ignatius_Cheese #51 3 years ago

    Harsh but fair, I guess. I found it an enjoyable romp in a Bondy-type world although definitely no keeper (unless I forget to return it...)

  • RedSparrows #52 3 years ago

    I didn't really expect this to be very good. I'm not sure why people did, although I didn't pay much attention.

    CoD4 engine! OMG! /sleep

  • Bartacus #53 3 years ago

    The 3 minute PC demo of this game was so awful.

  • iago71 #54 3 years ago

    Movie tie in ????? Get real - since when were they ever up to much? Goldeneye excluded (Though that came out eons after, in fact it was merely a couple of months before Tomorrow Never Dies went into cinemas) ..... No big surprise here. Far too many other games to be giving our attention to. Move on - Thank God - my wallets aching from the beating its been taking over the last month......

  • dr_swin #55 3 years ago

    I bet it is hard sometimes having to drag yourself away from something great like fallout 3 to play/review this rubbish.

  • mikll #56 3 years ago

    I agree with the majority of EGs review except for the end score.

    Its easily a 6.5 or 7.

    whilst it is simple and linear its a perfect Bond tie-in. Its fun and lets face it, if it were difficult and you kept dying then you would say its nothing like Bond. So I think that they have portrayed Bond perfectly.

    So if you want to have a bit of fun but don't wanna fork out the money for this game then do what i've done, buy the game, play it and enjoy yourself (its only short) then sell on a week later and end up having spent only £3 on the thing. Bargain if you ask me :)

  • Ryboy #57 3 years ago

    I'd give the film an even lower score. It was shite.

  • UncleLou #58 3 years ago

    "Rather than giving the Bond game its Casino Royale moment, Activision and Treyarch have simply carried on in the joyless tradition of dumbed-down shooters designed for thickos, and GoldenEye has never seemed so far away."

    Heh. You sound angry. Not in a silly "angry internet men" sense, but because of palpable annoyance. Which is good. :)

  • PearOfAnguish #59 3 years ago

    "@pearofanguish

    So seeing casino royale and knowing its script gives you brains.

    I missed out on both

    Ur the fuckwit"

    By missed out on both, I assume you mean 'seeing Casino Royale' and 'brains'.


    Maybe next time you should attempt to comprehend what you are reading before posting silly comments and jumping down people's throats, as you only make yourself look even more stupid.

    Edited by 1 at 03/11/08 @ 17:03

  • Waffleaber #60 3 years ago

    I love my Wii but those shots are awful.

    When the fuck did Bond start firing his gun with his feet?

  • krudster #61 3 years ago

    Yes. Playing Fallout 3 recalibrates the scoring system slightly for me. Maybe pre-Fallout this ranks as a 6, or a 7 if you're feeling ludicrously forgiving of shocking game design. Post-Fallout, games like this feel like they were designed in a different *century*.

  • urban #62 3 years ago

    shame because he's supposed to be an avid game and wasn't going to play ball unless they made it good..and its still shite?

  • beastmaster #63 3 years ago

    Anyone here played the multiplayer? Any good?

  • captainrentboy #64 3 years ago

    I'm playing the game in work on my breaks, and to be fair it isn't terrible by any means, just really really average. It starts off pretty shit but definitly picks up as you go on. The controls are really solid, and there are some nice set pieces, but like the review says the enemies are rediculously stupid. Alright for a rental I'd think.

    The film is considerably worse than Casino Royale, sure it might have more action scenes, but when most of them last 90 seconds and look like they were shot and edited by someone having an epileptic fit it doesn't really mean that much. Nothing in the film was as cool as CR's freerunning opener, or the scene at the airport, and the plot was a bit of a mess too.
    Basically Martin Campbell needs to come back for the next one, because Forster can't shoot an action scene for shit.
    That car chase at the start was cutting at least once every second, fucking rediculous,..... I'm too angry, I'm going to shut up :)

  • Gunzberg #65 3 years ago

    what does this mean for the next Call of Duty..........

  • shotgun44 #66 3 years ago

    The wii screenshots actually made me laugh!

  • p00ntang #67 3 years ago

    I agree with the posters who liked it. Review contained fair points but I still enjoyed it. Definitely a worthwhile rent (like Spider-man WOS)

  • oerhoert #68 3 years ago

    Krudster: I agree with you on the game, however I have one question:

    If the multiplayer is the best part, why not elaborate on that, and leave the cruddy single player to rot in a corner? Why dedicate 15 paragraphs to the single player and only 1 to the multiplayer when anyone contemplating getting the game should clearly be most interested in hearing about the multiplayer?

  • BBIAJ #69 3 years ago

    I bought the Collector's Edition of this from gamestation yesterday, as I'm a sucker for shiny things, and having read how easy/short the game was, decided to whack the difficulty all the way up to 007, and I'm having great fun with it.

    Went in not expecting all that much from it, and was pleasently surprised with what I've gotten out of it so far.

    Even from a brief play on an HMV demo pod, I knew that I'd enjoy the "pop 'n' shoot" gameplay.

  • chischis #70 3 years ago

    @peterfil

    No you're not the only one who enjoyed it. Saw QoS with my fiancee last night. It IS somewhat plot-light, but the action is impressive and the acting solid: I found it perfectly enjoyable.

    No interest in the game.
    Edited by 1 at 04/11/08 @ 00:10

  • paul_haine #71 3 years ago

    genuine lol @ Waffleaber.

  • spacedmonkeys #72 3 years ago

    I just dont get reviews any more. I'm playing this, and liking it alot, its fast, fluid, with nice looking levels that make me want to play more to see whats coming next. Compare this to Braid which got a 10 out of 10, which I bought on the strength of the review, and hasnt been played for more than a couple of hours at most. I'm actually surprised that I like a Treyarch game. COD3 convinced me never to play a Teyarch game ever again. But for me but this game is quite well done. OK its got annoying parts like the stealth and security cameras, but for a quick blast in the very limited gaming time I get these days, its great.

  • Olemak #73 3 years ago

    The COD engine does not seem to do AI much at all, as it is all scripted events, really, in COD4. That got rave reviews; but when a Bond licence comes along to do the same thing, it gets butchered? That strikes me as a little unfair... but perhaps the scripted set pieces are simply uninspired and same-y. Like, the Chernobyl sequence in COD4 was simply fantastic, even though it was all scripted predicability, really, but it was still refreshing and great. That the same game holds something like the later "Death from above"-level goes to show how veried that game is - even though the AI is pretty weak. It's all about smoke and mirrors, not about AI . not really. It does not bode well for COD5...

    But then again, maybe QoS is exactly the game EA ordered from Treyarch? Maybe they wanted something short and manageable, something casual 40-something Bond fans could play through and enjoy?

  • GeoNHev #74 3 years ago

    Isn't good? I think it's bloody brilliant! So happy with this game!

  • actionfitz #75 3 years ago

    Movie tie-in game in utter crap shocker!!

    heh, this review contained perhaps the most damning criticism of a title i've ever read on the internet to date:
    "wondering whether EA would have done a better job after all."
    fucking harsh! lol.
    almost burnt my nasal cavity with coffee reading that.
    :)

  • StrayBezza #76 3 years ago

    Also - multiplayer is excellent.

  • Olemak #77 3 years ago

    @ simakperrce: I'm not saying that all 40-something gamers are casual gamers; just that there are a lot of 40-something bond fans who are not "hardcore" gamers. I'm simply venting the possibility that they somehow found this to be an important demographic.

    I'm 40 in two years myself, and still a gamer, although not exactly "hardcore". But then again, I guess I never really was. Kids and morgages etc. take up a fair chunk of time - but then again, whiling away the evening with a good game on the big screen, with the offspring soundly asleep, is an exellent pasttime. But I have to say that finishing something like GTAIV (which I did actually finish) or Oblivion (which I'm still chipping away at) is a huge task that takes several months. Fallout 3 is very appealing, but also somewhat daunting. I sorta liked being able to finish Uncharted and COD4 within a reasonable timeframe. Maybe six to ten hours is about right for a nice, mainstreamed game aimed at the still gaming family guy demographic, who has better things to do than walk around Liberty City looking for pidgeons or closing fifty plus oblivion gates.

    I cathegorise "casual gamers" as someone who gets a game not because they're into gaming as such, as a hobby, but because the're into whatever the given game is about. Like Guitar Hero; lots of people playing it because they're into rock music, not because they concider themselves "gamers" (although a fair bit of gamers also enjoy those games). So: 007 QoS is probably made for people who are primarily fans of James Bond, not hardcore gamers. The latter group would probably get Gears of War 2 instead, right? And Bond has a lot of grown-up fans with morgages and kids and all that, and not 70 hours to spare to finish a game.

    6 hours of singleplayer gameplay still sounds really stingy, but maybe it is a result of a deliberate strategy, and not just developer laziness.

  • louyfitz #78 3 years ago

    Just remake Goldeneye or something, it'll never happen but I'd love to see Goldeneye remade EXACTLY the same, just with a facelift.

    Goldeneye was the best Bond game ever, and it still is.

    Until I see something amazing, if I wanna play Bond, then I'll dust off the N64.

    Besides I'm none too keen on all this FPS/TPS crossover thing, FPS games a great, so are TPS, personally I like FPS better, but mixing the two just annoys the fuck out of me when playing a game.

  • GeoNHev #79 3 years ago

    Is it true that Goldeneye is coming out on xbox live arcade? wow, wouldn't that be awsome?!

  • grav #80 3 years ago

    well i usually use eurogamer as my main guide to games but i really think you got it wrong with this one. I picked it up for 19.99 this week and thought i would give it a go and i think its great. Its not a fantastic game but it has to be worth a 7 or 8. It uses the COD engine and adds a cover system and this works really well. I set the difficulty to agent (hardest) and have really really enjoyed this game. I suspect playing through on the regular difficult may be far too easy but agent is just the right difficulty for a hardened gamer. The AI of the baddies is great they will run away, charge you and if you are not careful they will flank you. The melee works well requiring a short quick time event which is better than just pressing a single button as it most games.

    Then the online games are great too loads of game modes that work really well. I think 5 out of 10 is harsh and the reviewer got this wrong. Especially considering most movie licenced games are bad, this is a solid game you feel like bond and i am really enjoying it. I would recommend it to anyone who has finished cod5 and gow2 and needs a new challenge and its a must for bond fans.

  • sjmlondon #81 3 years ago


    The multiplayer is actually quite good fun, with all the varied levels looking excellent and a good selection of modern guns to select depending on the layout of the map. Admittedly the single player is fairly shortly but are generally fun. The achievements are well thought out as well.

    Pick it up cheap on ebay and you'll enjoy it. There's still a lot of people playing it online.

  • steveb07 #82 2 years ago

    I bought this game a few weeks ago and have been playing it on and off until I completed it last night.
    I didn't read any reviews first but expected it to be a 7 not 5 out of 10. I enjoyed it and it was quite demanding at times on the hardest difficulty. I'm now going back on easy to mop up the remaining achievements on my pc. For £10 I've had more than my monies worth.
    Edited by 1 at 13/11/09 @ 22:53

  • cjs #83 9 months ago

    I just finished this over the weekend (quick review here), and if you set your expectations correctly and didn't pay too much for it, the single-player campaign is a good bit of fairly easy, mindless fun. It's good that it's so short, actually, since much more of it and it would start to get truly dull.

    I've hardly touched the multiplayer yet, but it seems to offer some interesting possibilities. In particular, with modes such as the Bond Escape one, it at least has something different from the endless "simply shoot everybody else a lot" gameplay of most multiplayer games.