GoldenEye: Rogue Agent Review
Putting the "Special" into "Special Agent".
Version tested: Xbox
Order yours now from Simply Games.
The name was a mistake.
Look, let's be clear here: we know that EA has been lambasted time and time again for this particular point, but it's worth mentioning it again anyway. The name was a mistake; the first in a catalogue of mistakes which makes your average telephone directory look like a pizza delivery leaflet. When you pick a name like "GoldenEye," you invite an automatic assumption that your game is a cash-in, not to mention difficult comparisons with hits of yesteryear viewed through treacherous rose-tinted spectacles, and a dose of cynicism that it's going to take a truly excellent game to dispel.
Of course, if you have a truly excellent game, that's not really a problem. The Chronicles of Riddick took a movie licence and made it into arguably the best first-person shooter on the Xbox. Ninja Gaiden and Prince of Persia resurrected much-loved classics and turned them into stunning modern hits. You can overcome the cynicism and turn the name to your advantage, given enough inspiration, talent, and flair.
And that's where the problem lies, really.
Eye spy a shameless cash-in

GoldenEye: Rogue Agent isn't a truly excellent game. It's not a mediocre game. In fact, it's not even a passable game; it's a disastrous car-wreck of a game, the kind of embarrassment that will quietly get dropped from the CVs of those who worked on it (or included with perverse pride, like a medal worn by the survivors of a particularly grisly battle) and for which management at EA are undoubtedly already looking for scapegoats. Without the GoldenEye name, we'd dismiss it as yet another horrendous FPS game to join the pile festering in the corner, where we suspect that one day they will merge, become self-aware and promptly implode when faced with a world which isn't entirely made from muddy stock textures and boring pre-fabricated level geometry. However, with the name of Rare's sublime N64 title attached, and a position just outside the top ten of the UK charts this week, GoldenEye goes from being just another rubbish game to being an absolute disgrace.
From the outset, this game feels rushed and unfinished. The horribly rendered video sequences are edited together with all the skill and grace you might expect from a chimpanzee set loose on a copy of Final Cut after drinking a jug of espresso, with even the "iconic" Bond title sequence feeling more like a bad student parody of the series' famous intros than like a genuine attempt to immerse the player in the universe. The mission scripted events are nothing short of bizarre in places; enemies spawn behind you or pour endlessly from doorways (because we all know that endlessly respawning enemies spell F U N in anyone's language!), and levels are stuck together from pre-fabricated rooms that make Halo's library level look varied and interesting.
To make matters worse, the whole affair is ugly. We don't just mean it's got anti-aliasing problems (it has), or that it's got glitches like Halo 2 (it might have, if it was actually doing anything remotely clever like bump maps or textures with more than four blurry pixels in them). We're more concerned with the fact that you can count the polygons in some scenes without running out of fingers and toes, and that the designers' idea of making the pathetically bland world they constructed interesting was to sling coloured lighting around. The ultimate effect is not dissimilar to the nauseating over-use of coloured lighting seen in the Quake 2 mods of yesteryear, only somehow uglier; EA hasn't even bothered trying to polish this turd, they just wrapped it in multi-coloured Christmas tree lights and hoped nobody would notice the stink.
Stand still

And then there's the gameplay.
Or rather, there isn't. When the word "gameplay" is uttered, we'd like to think that some element of fun or enjoyment is implied. By that standard, GoldenEye doesn't have any gameplay; it tries desperately hard to replicate Halo's 30 seconds of fun, but ends up with 30 seconds of mind-numbing tedium which is trapped between control systems which offer either auto-aim so forgiving as to be outright hilarious, and manual aiming which is downright painful to control thanks to bizarre acceleration on the controls. Not that you'll be working very hard to get your aiming down; you didn't honestly think that challenging AI was on the menu, did you? Instead, you'll be challenged by an endless flood of identikit enemies who either stand perfectly still and wait to be shot, or run from side to side along an entirely predictable path.
You can, of course, dual wield many of the weapons. Halo stole that idea from this game, don't you know? Dual wielding is implemented competently, and allows you to shoot one weapon while reloading another, but the fact that you've got two guns on screen rather than one doesn't do much to alleviate the fact that you don't give a damn about the enemies you're shooting, the mission objectives you're completing, or anything much other than ending the pain you're being subjected to by having to play this game for more than its natural lifespan of twenty-odd seconds in order to write a decently comprehensive review.
Of course, fans of the 007 universe are already up in arms about the fact that GoldenEye completely destroys the continuity of the films, introducing several villains and henchmen who are from different eras of the movies and pitting them against each other. We can't say this bothers us much; it's not like the 007 universe is coherent to begin with, after all. However, there's a niggling annoyance at seeing how much creative licence EA have been given with this much-loved franchise, only to produce such a shoddy and badly-conceived game; it's like watching a tramp drink a bottle of Middleton Very Rare whiskey or Bollinger champagne and then piss all over himself under a railway bridge.
Fool's GoldenEye
The basic problem, when it comes down to it, is that nobody loved this game. The EA executives who conceived of it didn't love the game, or the franchise, or the concept - they just set up an Excel spreadsheet which proved that GoldenEye + Overworked Development Team + Buckets of Marketing Money + Uninformed Legions of the Great Unwashed = MONEY. The designers didn't love this game, they just threw together poorly understood ideas from other games like Halo and Half-Life so that the management types responsible for the project could be satisfied that it was ripping off popular products. The artists and programmers didn't love the game. Even the voice talent (and talented they are, we'll grant that much) sound like they're phoning in their lines. The whole thing has the feeling of everyone along the line saying "Will this do?" and the answer, frankly, is "no, it won't."
EA can make good games. The talent is there. The capacity to produce startlingly good fun titles undoubtedly exists within this behemoth of the industry, but the recent deluge of pathetically poor licensed tat like Prisoner of Azkaban, Catwoman and now this execrable excuse for a first-person shooter show that this talent is being absolutely smothered under a layer of incompetence somewhere, which is a terrible shame. And quite a lot of people will probably buy GoldenEye: Rogue Agent, which is also a terrible shame - because any game which even its creators clearly didn't love certainly doesn't deserve 35 quid of anyone's money.
Order yours now from Simply Games.
2 / 10
You may also like...
-
Happy Action Theater Review
-
ModNation Racers: Road Trip Review
-
Call of Duty: Black Ops has best game ending ever, says Guinness World Records
-
Sony confirms PS Vita 1st Party digital only game prices
-
Mass Effect 3 Demo: The First 20 Minutes
-
Why Devs Owe You Nothing
-
Tim Schafer: publishers aren't evil
-
Halo 4 Master Chief action figure flaunts new suit design
-
DICE working on multiple Battlefield 3 fixes
-
EGTV: Eurogamer playtests PlayStation Vita
-
App of the Day: Monkey Bump
-
Face-Off: Final Fantasy 13-2
-
Apple begins Foxconn factories inspections
-
Sony's $50m Vita marketing campaign targets PS3 owners
-
UK Top 40: Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning beats Darkness 2
-
Fallout: New Vegas dev asks fans what game they would like it to Kickstart
-
Retrospective: Star Wars Episode I Racer
-
Digital Foundry: PS3 Skyrim Lag Fixed?
-
Metal Gear Solid 3D demo on eShop this week
-
Activision: games are relationships, "brands in people's lives"
-
Metal Gear Solid 5 expected between April 2013 and May 2014
-
Making FIFA Street in the FIFA engine's image
-
FIFA Street footage pits France vs. Germany
-
Ridge Racer Unbounded delayed by four weeks
-
Gotham City Impostors Review









Comments (108) Latest comment 1 year ago
Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Something tells me EA won't be so quick to send EG review code in the future.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Actually i prefer this to be reviewed first to warn everyone from buying this game or thinking its a 'sequel' to Goldeneye 007 on N64. However Echoes need to be reviewed to tell people to buy the game i mean no 33? thats undeserving for such a game i'd say.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
/likes to see spades getting called f&*%ing spades
And yet it's still, as Rob says, just outside the top 10.
The grannies must be Christmas shopping early this year.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Awesome. Good review.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Peej
Comment below viewing threshold Show
That's it you see. EG are quite happy to review arse-shaftery like this, even import games that won't reach us for months, yet games that are actually quite good (and generally made by N), get left behind, only to out comments with 33 is hugely disappointing. Which it is, but then nobody gets to hear how good it is as it ain't reviewed.
I'm wrong and on my high-horse, but I don't care.
/rides around smugly
I say there's a fox!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I'll see your "Oh my gosh," rauper and raise you a "Flippin' 'eck!"
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Narff
Comment below viewing threshold Show
this, combined with the 'EA-spouse' weblog, really does make them seem like an evil bunch.
feeling guilty about having bought SSX3 and Burnout now. boo.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
/has to look away
Comment below viewing threshold Show
But SSX and Burnout are bloody excellent games. SSX is exactly the kind of game I'm talking about when I say that EA *can* make superb games. Even the last Bond game, Everything or Nothing, was promising in ways, and suggested that they were taking the franchise in the right direction. This game is just.... Horrible. It's genuinely the worst thing I played this year.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
It's like a car crash.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
This time I really wanted to play the sequel properly, under no pressure. We got the code late, there were tons of other things to review, we didn't want to rush out a review in a day just to meet deadline. So here I am playing the game, chuckling at Rob's review, and all certain people can do is try and bitch that we haven't put up a review of MP2.
Please consider that we try and put every review up on time. Sometimes it doesn't work out. We have a two-man editorial team on EG, and one of them (me) is on holiday, technically doing work. Now, when the review arrives, you'll know we really broke the back of the game. I could write it now and say, yep, it's good, a bit harder than before, broadly the same game but with multiplayer, 8/10, bosh. But I want to really soak it up, consider my verdict. Is that not worth waiting for? Or will you just continue bitching about a review being a few days late?
Anyway, enjoy Rob's review. It's a good 'un.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
But that wouldn't be half as entertaining. My gf is not a videogame fan but even she found this review hilarious
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Well, it was in the original Goldeneye...
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I've always found that amusing. Silly ad men!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
/remembers what the Krudster does for a job.
/retrieves admiration
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Or rather it should have read 'Dont Order Yours Now from Simply Games!!' or anywhere else!!!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
/rides around smugly
I say there's a fox!"
LOL !!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I had real hope, even in an interview with the head designer, he specifically said that he knew what GoldenEye meant to gamers the world over, and he would do justice to the name! What a load of Goldenballs!
It is time for someone to stand up and say 'No more sub-standard, low-quality cash-ins!' EA, don't be alarmed if you see someone standing outside your office with a flaming torch and a pitchfork, I'm just exercising my rights as a consumer....
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I find comments like malloc's very annoying. I don't find them annoying because of the actual complaint though - given that I've been working on EG for several years, I'm sure nobody will be surprised to hear that I find it very depressing when we're not in a position to review something like Echoes in time for release. What I do find aggravating is the implication that we prioritised things like the MGS3 import review and GoldenEye over Echoes. That's just stupid. Doing that would so obviously frustrate the people reading Eurogamer that it surprises and upsets me that you'd think we'd actually do it deliberately.
The reality is that we're not so well staffed that I can afford to sweep aside half the work I've done on a feature in order to make way for something even bigger, and due to the unpredictable nature of PRs, the postal service, and other games, it's very difficult to schedule things perfectly to overcome that with just two full time editorial staff. As a result, every so often something like the Echoes review slips.
Now, if you were being generous, you'd note that over the past few months we've been better than ever before about making sure games are reviewed in a timely fashion - preferably before they've even come out, or at least on the day of release. It was our number one priority going into the "Christmas rush" and we even sorted out a freelance budget to handle a certain amount of overflow.
However you're not being generous. You're basically saying that we have such contempt for our readers that we'll go off and write about whatever we want and damn the people who wanted something else. Which is not remotely true. And it's only the thought that most of you probably realise that without having to have it spelt out for you that's keeping me from kicking the keyboard tray under the desk and going off to watch Smallville instead of sitting here and writing whatever it is you'll be using as a vessel to complain about the lack of an Echoes review come tomorrow morning.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
In terms of exchange value, only just.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
solution - employ all the regulards!
/awaits staff t-shirt
/watches EG budget run away whimpering
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Reviewing genuine, final code at least means you avoid Driver style debacles, and I think the US attitude is admirable. In the UK, I think I'm right in suggesting that hardly any review you see in the print press is based on final code. The other PAL websites you might visit just recycle their print copy, so Eurogamer, alongside NTSC-UK, remains for me the only genuine review site written for a UK/European audience that I trust as they generate their own content which hasn't been pre-agreed by a publisher/magazine cover deal.
Given time constraints, I would rather be told how crap Goldeneye is than how good Metroid Prime is. I'm 80% confident Prime will be great and I'll no doubt buy it anyway. But I was about 30% optimistic that Goldeneye would be average or better. Looks like I needed this review more.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Aye, him and his endures piles'o'tat like Goldeneye so you don't have to. It's not all 8+/10 games, PR parties, free Gameboy DS's... and... uh...
Ok, you have a point
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
/gets steaming cup of tea
/settles in comfy chair
/reads review
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Fair enough mate. Enjoy your hols. I'm actually playing MP2 at the moment, and it's takes a lot of time. In fact I've played it for probably over 2 hours and only just got the space boots, big game. ( I did get to the Core of MP on the first one, so I'm not a total novice)
But you can understand the frustration of Nintendo (and GC) fanboys when we're trying to get some GC love in the UK and respectable sites, such as EG, give the impression that import and EA tosh get priority over quite possibly one of the few good releases out for the Cube this year, with the exception of Paper Mario.
And yes I probably haven't been as charitable as I normally like to think I am, sorry.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Some of use appreciate you, Eurogamer
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
LOL @ 'cocktouchers'
That is a great insult right there. Venomous, yet somehow gentle at the same time. Brilliant.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
WHAT HAS HAPPEND TO QUALITY CONTROL IN GAMES!!!!! IS IT ME??????? AAAAGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!HELLO!?!?!? ITS 2004 FOR GODS SAKE!!!!!!!!! AAAAGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Atari Marketing guy: "We're so good at what we do, we could put shit in a box, and it'd still sell!"
Chris Crawford: "You can, and you do."
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I knew this was going to end badly. Hats off to EG for not giving it an above-average score.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
..on behalf on the Rogue Agent supporters club.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I know " the mainstream" gamer, but that doesn't answer my question.
Just becuase you only play games now and then doesn't mean you would want to play a game that isn't fun. The mainstream gamer knows what a good game is, things like Halo and GTA sell to everybody or Chronicels of Riddick, a movie licensed game. So obviously they have experienced quality gameplay, so why buy shit? You finished Halo 2 now you go play this, it woulden't be fun, even if you're not a hardcore gamer: a crap game is still a crap game.
Games cost a hell of a lot of cash, so you woulden't honestly buy one just because of an advert, would you? Even if you only ocaisionly play games you woulden't risk 60+ Euro becuase it had James Bond written on it?
So why does this sell, what kind of bizar voodoo magic is EA using, sold thier soul to the devil?
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I mean, its the sequesl to dat game, goldeneye. dat was good innit? that means this must be good.
And you also get to be a bad guy.
I don't care what the hundreds of reviews say, the advert looks too cool, so i'm, like, gonna buy it.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
HELL YEH!
Keep it up EA. Please. For all of us. Maybe if you keep flooding the market with such tat, even the braindead will finally see you for what you really are. And then you will collapse and die, to the sound of the applause of all right-minded gamers.
Or perhaps not. People are sheep and are easily fooled by pretty posters and adverts.
/sigh
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Is it wrong for me to be tempted to rent this game, to see just how crap it really is?
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Bond puts down blonde and martini, guns the Aston to MI5. 30 seconds of sexual frustration for MP and a toss of his hat later, he enters M's office...
Bond: M, Minishter. What sheemsh to be the problem?
Minister: Good afternoon 007. Are you familar with EA?
Bond: Electronic Artsh. Computer game conglomerate. Largest shupplier of sch*te Computer Gamesh to the western world. Turnover beyond that of most shmall countriesh.
M: Well this time, 007, they've gone too far. They have hijacked a national treasure. They intend to use it as a subliminal carrier to brainwash young people into eating crap on an international scale.
Minister: Worse, they and are planning to humiliate Her Majesty's Government and the Double O department. Bond, you must protect the legacy of the Goldeneye, and stop them at all costs.
Later... down in Q branch
Q: Ah, 007. This condom packet contains a computer virus designed to remove graphical detail and AI routines, decalibrate controllers and add crappy coloured lighting effects. Get it into EA, and it will destroy the project, and may lead to the collapse of the EA empire. And do be careful Bond!
Several gadgets, sh*gs, smutty double entendres and climbing sequences later, Bond breaks into EA towers.
Bond: Thish'll teacsh you to mesh with the British shecret servish. Ha Har EA, Goldeneye Only Lives Onesh!
Game is released to universal derision. Millions are lost. EA collapses. The shadowy head of the Goldeneye project is summoned to Number One's office.
Number 1: We do not tolerate failure in this organisation! Bwahahaha![Presses button]. [Chair refuses to tip back and deposit the EA stooge into the death chamber].
Number 1: Damn. I forgot. We *do* tolerate failure. Lots of it. Have a promotion, and please take over the Riddick franchise...
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Played this last night. My brother is a Bond fan, and a massive Bond completist. He's bought all of the Bond games to date and this has taken anything Bond/Game related way back to the heady days when Domark got the licence from Eon to produce a few games based on existing movies.
Now, think what you will of EA, and personally I think they're seriously doing the franchise more harm than good, they have stuck together what they thought would be the perfect "lego brick" game to fit their idea of a perfect market. In other words...
1) It's Bond. It will sell because it's Bond.
2) We've made the main character NOT Bond, but some evil dude. People like to play the baddie.
3) We'll name the game after possibly THE most successful Bond game of all time.
4) We'll quickly use up as much of the existing IP we have access to from gaining the Bond licence as quickly as possible.
5) We'll shove some tits in there. Kids like tits.
Playing it though, well you could almost be excused for thinking you'd mistakenly put "Agent Under Fire" in your machine instead of the latest of the Bond franchise. The gameplay in places is EXACTLY THE SAME, in fact no hold on, they've actually REMOVED some of the elements that made AUF reasonably playable.
I seriously think EA missed their calling in life. They should just make front ends for other companies because the one strong point with Goldeneye is the presentation. It's slick, the intro movie "almost" works (had they not tried to mix and match Bond timeframes like that I would almost have admired the CG) and other presentation points are dealt with very well. The game itself though, christ it's just all over the place and even a complete FPS hater like me could probably complete it in one sitting...
Anyway, I feel sorry for my Brother, and the other Bond fans who've probably never read a review of this game but went out and bought it to put with their collection...2 / 10 was dead on the money and I seriously hope this doesn't sell enough to warrant EA getting it into their stupid heads to make another game this piss poor (but of course you know it will).
Peej
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Would it not be possible to set up something like "www.ea-are-wankers.com " and publicise it as much as possible? The site would basically show the list of EA's own games FIFA, Madden and er... that's about it and how they're killing the gaming industry?
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Why do you continue to make a review if you realize the game's deeply flawed? You shouldn't waste your time on bad games. Better do some reviews for games that are worth it!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
[Edit] - I don't buy games not reviewed at Eurogamer normally.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I know " the mainstream" gamer, but that doesn't answer my question."
because something like 50% of hardware owners don't read any specialist gaming press. so most game titles are completely meaningless to them, unless they've got familiar words like "james bond" on them.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I just forwarded that line to a bunch of people in our development studio, and there was a lot of reflective nodding and grim smiles...
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Exactly
Comment below viewing threshold Show
This is the most cynical product that EA have ever produced (which is saying something, considering some of their past abominations). It was clearly rush-released, the creators told "you cannot deviate from this deadline." EA didn't care about the game's quality at all, they just wanted to make a quick buck. The game's low (for EA) entry in the charts hopefully means that this will die a slow death at retail.
EON should take away the license from EA, before they do irrevocable damage to the Bond name.
And no, I'm not hyping this up for the sake of it. This is honestly an abominable attempt to fleece the consumer, with no realistic defence of EA's motives possible, even for the usual "apologist" brigade.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
What a revealing comment....
Comment below viewing threshold Show
It should be "Rouge Agent supporters club" surely!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Rogue Agent's also got a multiplayer mode, which is great for about 15 minutes on each map before the thrill kind of wears off. Catching each other in deathtraps and stunning the other guy with an EMP is fun (and why does an EMP stun another human, anyway?), but I found it wasn't long before we wanted to play something else. If you were addicted to Perfect Dark or Goldeneye on the N64, then you'll have a lot of fun with this, but I was never a big fan of those.
Goldeneye: Rogue Agent has a challenging, excellent single-player mode, with great presentation and some truly amazing set pieces. This is about as close as any shooter's come to replicating the action-movie experience, with plenty of toys to play with and a great techno soundtrack. It's not without its faults, and the multiplayer mode isn't all that great, but for a singleplayer experience, Rogue Agent delivers.
They give it 8.5/10. It appears that its not only the non-magazine reading public that are persuaded the game is good, but even reviewers. Their comments on the N64 GoldenEye are even more hurtful!
Max
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
And if Pete Ross has lived in Smallville his whole life, where did he pick up his 'black stereotype hood-style' accent?
Comment below viewing threshold Show
There is a danger that slagging off a game to this extent and with such QUOTABLE prose, you'll create some kind of underground fanbase for this donkey of a game.
With that said. Thank you EG for entertaining me, and increasing my trust in your service of honest game opinions. Now can you PLEASE open an avenue for payment so us gratefull gamers can put something in your Christmas stockings?
thank you thank you thank you!!!! And if I don't post again, Merry Christmas!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I have played a bit of this game in a demo pod in an esteemed games supplier's shop, and can safely say that 15 minutes with this game you're reaching for a copy of Final Exit! Djini has a vaild point, I only tried the demo to see if it was as awful as EG says it is, and by God, are they correct!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
What? Ha-ha!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
NB: I said LIKED, as in it was OK... I bought it 2nd hand for £19... well worht the money, good entertainment, didn't hold a candle to Indiana Jones though... I was *hoping* This GE:Rogue was going to be worth buying, but it sounds like it not even worth playing, let alone purchasing (even 2nd hand)...
Pity...
Comment below viewing threshold Show
What? Ha-ha!"
I should clarify, I meant the idea of playing the bad guy and bringing back all the Bond villains, rather than sullying the memory of the great N64 shooter!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I loved it! I loved every second of it! It's dumb as hell and pretty easy, but it was like playing an Arnie movie: Start at point A, shoot loads of people, end on point B... simple and fun if you don't try to compare it to the original Goldeneye.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
What? Ha-ha!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Maybe the review has more to do with the two words associated with the game, EA and Goldeneye, then the actual content of the game itself.
Never played Goldeneye very much, so not a fan. Don't get hard for Bond neither. But as a stupid shooting game this titles has its merits. I reckon younger gamers would enjoy it more then cynical gamers. My copy is going to my flatmate's 8 year old and I reckon he'll get a lot of pleasure from it.
The kid has been a CS addict for the last four years so it's not like he's ignorant or anything. Just not looking for the 2nd coming with each new release.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I mean, there isn't any blood in Timesplitters and it doesn't look anywhere near as wrong as this.
Surely this brings it down to a score of 1.
Comment below viewing threshold Show