GoldenEye: Rogue Agent Review

By Rob Fahey Published 30 November, 2004

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' Screenshot 1

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

'GoldenEye: Rogue Agent' Screenshot 2

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

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Rob.

About Rob Fahey

Rob Fahey is a former editor of GamesIndustry.biz who spent several years living in Japan and probably still has a mint condition Dreamcast Samba de Amigo set.

Read more articles from Rob by visiting the Rob Fahey archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (108) Latest comment 1 year ago

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

  • meepster2312 #1 7 years ago

    Not as good as Driver then?

  • sir_tripod #2 7 years ago

    "EA in shit cash-in game shocker!"

  • rauper Verified Managing Director, Eurogamer Network #3 7 years ago

    Oh my gosh.

  • CrunchinJelly #4 7 years ago

    Uh-oh.

    Something tells me EA won't be so quick to send EG review code in the future. ;)

  • steven #5 7 years ago

    Who expected this to be any good?

  • Venkman90 #6 7 years ago

    EA - pwned

  • Artemus #7 7 years ago

    Holy molars! This is on my brothers Xmas list. Heh.

  • malloc #8 7 years ago

    So you have time to review tat like this but not Echoes. Amazing.

  • Blerk #9 7 years ago

    Bwah-ha-ha! 2! A 2! Look! :-D

  • steven #10 7 years ago

    "So you have time to review tat like this but not Echoes. Amazing."

    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.

  • Whizzo #11 7 years ago

    /awaits binky ;-)

  • boo #12 7 years ago

    Excellent review!
    /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.

  • magicpanda #13 7 years ago

    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.

    Awesome. Good review.

  • #14 7 years ago

    Wonderful Review!

  • pjmaybe #15 7 years ago

    A 2! Heh, ahh c'mon I was looking forward to having another "EA are raping the very RIM off the Bond licence" argument with a few tards like I did in the EON thread...

    Peej

  • malloc #16 7 years ago

    >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.

    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!

  • Tricky #17 7 years ago

    " Oh my gosh.

    I'll see your "Oh my gosh," rauper and raise you a "Flippin' 'eck!"

  • BravoGolf #18 7 years ago

    Deadly! And here was Gamespot previewing it as a superb game !

  • Xinch #19 7 years ago

    EA have been given 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.

    Narff

  • Schwabing #20 7 years ago

    schooled! comprehensively.
    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.

  • Nemesis #21 7 years ago

    Ow.

    /has to look away

  • Shinji #22 7 years ago

    feeling guilty about having bought SSX3 and Burnout now. boo.

    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.

  • Tyronne #23 7 years ago

    So postal 2 is actually better than this then ? :)

  • Stevas mkII #24 7 years ago

    I read this review, like, twelve times already.

    It's like a car crash.

  • lemonfist #25 7 years ago

    1/4 as good as halo then

  • Tyronne #26 7 years ago

    Thing is if this was about 20 years ago this title would be on a cassette 50 games compendium, that or firebirds `dont buy this`

  • NAC #27 7 years ago

    What a review. This game more than any other sums up just what EA are about. Yet it sells more than Prime 2. I *pity* the developers, it must have been torture to be working on a game that you know, represents everything that is wrong with the games industry today. Hang on?!! torture, slave labour? that are what EA are about!!!

  • jmctavish #28 7 years ago

    I would love to try this game, Killzone and other recent fps console games that have been slaughtered on EG. Maybe they would help me to appreciate both Halo titles more because they have not done anything for me. The N64 Goldeneye is still the only console fps that i have enjoyed and it is really sad that this game is pissing on its good name.

  • krudster #29 7 years ago

    Malloc, and other people keen to see a MP2 review. Now listen up. Firstly, I'm on holiday, or at least trying to. At the moment I'm sitting here playing MP2 for fun, with the intention of writing a review. You see, the last MP I played part way through (10 hours ish), and never finished thanks to getting caught up reviewing other games, and y'know, doing other stuff.

    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.

  • sam_spade #30 7 years ago

    It's games like this that the insidious crime of piracy was made for.

  • Jaytee #31 7 years ago

    This is the funniest review I've read in a long time, and one of the most honest. Kudos to the writer

  • Tyronne #32 7 years ago

    The basic premise of the review could be summed up with `its shite` and then just the score .

  • Jaytee #33 7 years ago

    "The basic premise of the review could be summed up with `its shite` and then just the score . "

    But that wouldn't be half as entertaining. My gf is not a videogame fan but even she found this review hilarious :)

  • Salvia #34 7 years ago

    "because we all know that endlessly respawning enemies spell F U N in anyone's language!"

    Well, it was in the original Goldeneye...

  • Adam #35 7 years ago

    I appreciate the irony of '2 out of 10' followed in close order by 'Order Yours Now from Simply Games!!'

  • NAC #36 7 years ago

    Yeah definitely one of the best reviews i've read. Piracy is bad but who gives a f*ck when its EA.

  • bort118 #37 7 years ago

    Give the next bond game to free radical!

  • Mugwum Verified Operations Director, Eurogamer Network #38 7 years ago

    "I appreciate the irony of '2 out of 10' followed in close order by 'Order Yours Now from Simply Games!!'"

    I've always found that amusing. Silly ad men!

  • boo #39 7 years ago

    /admires the Krudster for working while he's on holiday.
    /remembers what the Krudster does for a job.
    /retrieves admiration

  • NAC #40 7 years ago

    "I appreciate the irony of '2 out of 10' followed in close order by 'Order Yours Now from Simply Games!!' "

    Or rather it should have read 'Dont Order Yours Now from Simply Games!!' or anywhere else!!!

  • IronGiant #41 7 years ago

    "I'm wrong and on my high-horse, but I don't care.

    /rides around smugly

    I say there's a fox!"

    LOL !!

  • Razzajazz #42 7 years ago

    I'm so gutted! I ignored all the warning signs that screamed 'THIS GAME IS SHIT' during the development, hoped that EA MIGHT actually care about one of the most revered names in gaming, but oh no! This travesty against the GoldenEye name is exactly what I feared deep, deep down in my soul!

    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....

  • Razzajazz #43 7 years ago

    Also, lay off krudster and let him have a holiday! The MP2 review will turn up shortly, so chill out, peeps!

  • Tyronne #44 7 years ago

    You could excercise your right as a discerning gamer by simply asking for people to send you their copies of the game and then send them a picture of yourself standing over the pile while pissing on it with a huge smile on your face or you could simply get a family pet to shit on it.

  • tengu #45 7 years ago

    My, what an unimpressive looking video game.

  • Mugwum Verified Operations Director, Eurogamer Network #46 7 years ago

    Just to add something to what Kristan said:

    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.

  • kalel #47 7 years ago

    The whole Free Radical thing. It's so obvious what they should do it's almost painful. TBH, I'm not a massive fan of Timesplitters or Perfect Dark, but they know how to make a shooter feel good, and EA have got the Bond liscence. It's not rocket science.

  • Tyronne #48 7 years ago

    Well for a place thats free to view stuff I have no complaints in regards to what is revieved and in what order and have won some pretty good stuff on here so all in all keep up the good work :)

  • Pirotic #49 7 years ago

    see, how i'm confused - will 4 copies of this be as good as one copy of halo? :D

  • Mugwum Verified Operations Director, Eurogamer Network #50 7 years ago

    "see, how i'm confused - will 4 copies of this be as good as one copy of halo?"

    In terms of exchange value, only just.

  • boo #51 7 years ago

    problem - EG staff shortages result in delays
    solution - employ all the regulards!

    /awaits staff t-shirt
    /watches EG budget run away whimpering

  • ralphwolfenstein #52 7 years ago

    RE: what Mugwum said - in the US they ONLY review finished, boxed code and even online sites like IGN usually only go to review after the game is out. Halo 2 being an obvious exception, but only by a matter of days Most magazine reviews hit over a month after release...

    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.

  • ekko #53 7 years ago

    Glad you have gave it a 2 and not some 4 - 6 which would've given the gimps some room to maneuver.

  • Sko #54 7 years ago

    "/remembers what the Krudster does for a job."

    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 ;)

  • Zero Beat #55 7 years ago

    As good as World War Zero: Iron Storm then? (Rebellion) (True score 2/10 ;)

  • Razz #56 7 years ago

    /rolls spliff
    /gets steaming cup of tea
    /settles in comfy chair
    /reads review

  • Razz #57 7 years ago

    /offers crumpet

  • Killerbee #58 7 years ago

    Great review. Never was a game more deserving... :)

  • malloc #59 7 years ago

    re: krudster (and Mugwum)

    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.

  • Scimarad #60 7 years ago

    If all the miserable bastards that made posts complaining about the reviews could engage their brain for a second they would realise what a fantastic job Eurogamer is doing. Have you morons actually visited other gaming sites?

    Some of use appreciate you, Eurogamer :-)



  • NAC #61 7 years ago

    Yep Eurogamer is the best games site on the net no bullSh*t and its free (well it has adverts but thats no problem)

  • Shadrach #62 7 years ago

    Q wrote: 'I hope they are proud of themselves. The cocktouchers.'

    LOL @ 'cocktouchers'

    That is a great insult right there. Venomous, yet somehow gentle at the same time. Brilliant.

  • bort118 #63 7 years ago

    How obvious is it that they should give the next bond game to free radical!? i meen look at what EA can manage on their own!

  • PuffyPipe #64 7 years ago

    Almost makes me want to buy a N64 with Goldeneye again just to remind myself what could be acheved in the late summer of 97!

    WHAT HAS HAPPEND TO QUALITY CONTROL IN GAMES!!!!! IS IT ME??????? AAAAGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!HELLO!?!?!? ITS 2004 FOR GODS SAKE!!!!!!!!! AAAAGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!

  • Schwabing #65 7 years ago

    yeah, this is the first website I go to for games opinions and the best out there imho. you guys deserve big bags of credit for the quality here. That you manage that with a skeleton staff is really impressive. big thumbs up lads.

  • mash the x button #66 7 years ago

    So you reckon this game is a load of shite then?

  • Mugwum Verified Operations Director, Eurogamer Network #67 7 years ago

    Put it this way: We got paid to play it, and /we/ feel ripped off...

  • Bezzy #68 7 years ago

    Reminds me of a quote from a meeting a long time ago in Atari:

    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."
    Edited by 1 at 30/11/04 @ 20:11

  • Royal Fool #69 7 years ago

    Ouch!

    I knew this was going to end badly. Hats off to EG for not giving it an above-average score. :)

  • Shadrach #70 7 years ago

    Cocktouchers, the lot of 'em.

  • binky #71 7 years ago

    I'm not going near this thread even with a ten foot barge pole...

  • Artemus #72 7 years ago

    teh game rulez..HALO 2 and HALF LIFE 2is teh rubbish. 007 owns with da dual weilding and u get 2b bad.

    ..on behalf on the Rogue Agent supporters club.

  • Freek #73 7 years ago

    Why do these games sell?
    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?

  • The-Bodybuilder #74 7 years ago

    EG say this game is shit, but like, i saw the advert on tv, and it was like, you know, good innit?
    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.

  • stonedben #75 7 years ago

    oooh god. I've been reading reviews on here for a few months now, but this one has finally tempted me to sign up and comment. So here it is:

    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

  • Nause #76 7 years ago

    And as a employee of a famous "videogame selling store" I have to pretend this is actually good !

  • The Button #77 7 years ago

    /reads review

    Is it wrong for me to be tempted to rent this game, to see just how crap it really is?

  • 3william56 #78 7 years ago

    Moneypenny: James, M would like a word. Seems there's a been an incident.

    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...

  • pjmaybe #79 7 years ago

    Oh....my...heavens....

    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

  • sir_tripod #80 7 years ago

    3william56: As amusing as that was, you have far too much time on your hands!

    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?

  • bionutz #81 7 years ago

    Hello,

    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!

  • Shinji #82 7 years ago

    Er, bionutz... You'd prefer if we just ignored the shite games so that people aren't warned of them? Um. Odd perspective.

  • bionutz #83 7 years ago

    I meant: don't review it until the end: is crap, ok, it's got a 1 or 2, no need to play it anymore (although only played 40%). I was anyways sure this was crap...
    [Edit] - I don't buy games not reviewed at Eurogamer normally.
    Edited by 1 at 01/12/04 @ 09:50

  • mustardkid #84 7 years ago

    "Why do these games sell?
    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.

  • mustardkid #85 7 years ago

    i get what yr saying bionutz - as soon as it's been ascertained that the game is a steaming turd stop playing, write review, get on with something good. - thats yr point yeh?

  • Jaytee #86 7 years ago

    "GoldenEye + Overworked Development Team + Buckets of Marketing Money + Uninformed Legions of the Great Unwashed = MONEY "

    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...

  • bionutz #87 7 years ago

    Reply: mustardkid 01-Dec-04 09:52:55 i get what yr saying bionutz - as soon as it's been ascertained that the game is a steaming turd stop playing, write review, get on with something good. - thats yr point yeh?
    Exactly

  • Eighthours #88 7 years ago

    Bravo Rob. Bravo. It was a brave move to shame EA totally, with the ever-present threat of being shut out of their PR loop for being off-message.

    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.

  • Tiger_Walts #89 7 years ago

    Some parts of the game actually look less detailed than GoldenEye64. It's as if they were trying to emulate the original title in the looks department.

  • prettyboytim #90 7 years ago

    Don't hold back, now...

  • mash the x button #91 7 years ago

    "And as a employee of a famous "videogame selling store" I have to pretend this is actually good !"

    What a revealing comment....

  • DaM #92 7 years ago

    "..on behalf on the Rogue Agent supporters club. "

    It should be "Rouge Agent supporters club" surely!
    Edited by 1 at 01/12/04 @ 14:39

  • max #93 7 years ago

    From <a href=http://www.worthplaying.com/article.php?sid =21655&mode=thread&order=0>WorthPlaying</a>

    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

  • Shinji #94 7 years ago

    Um. Techno soundtrack? What?! The music is mostly vaguely synth-orchestral stuff in the style of Bond movies. Did they even PLAY the game? The music is by Paul Oakenfold, which you could read off a press release easily enough and surmise that it's techno, but I certainly wouldn't describe the final product as being techno by pretty much any stretch of the imagination.
    Edited by 1 at 01/12/04 @ 12:56

  • tengu #95 7 years ago

    Is each of those twenty levels full of closet-gays and brain dead retards? Because they're the only ones who could use 'Smallville' and 'Excellent' in the same sentence!

    And if Pete Ross has lived in Smallville his whole life, where did he pick up his 'black stereotype hood-style' accent?

  • #96 7 years ago

    You see what's happened? You've given this such an excelent write up (I mean it's written well, not that you think the game is good) you're actually going to MAKE people go and get it, just to laugh at it (in the same way people laugh when they see someone trip up in the street and graze their knee).

    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!

  • Razzajazz #97 7 years ago

    Smallville is pretty good, in a "Got nothing else to do on Sunday afternoon except fight the hangover" kind of way! Oh, and Lana is fine, but that's another matter!

    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!

  • rauper Verified Managing Director, Eurogamer Network #98 7 years ago

    Well don't say you weren't warned then :-)

  • tiddles #99 7 years ago

    A pity - I thought the concept was great, and I was really hoping this would turn out well (especially after Everything Or Nothing wasn't half bad...).

  • sam_spade #100 7 years ago

    A pity - I thought the concept was great

    What? Ha-ha!

  • #101 7 years ago

    I liked Everything of Nothing too...

    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...

  • tiddles #102 7 years ago

    "A pity - I thought the concept was great

    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!

  • Grindie #103 7 years ago

    Good thing I don't rely on other people to make my mind up (and that GAME has a 10 day money back guarantee) or I wouldn't of bought this game.

    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.

  • sam_spade #104 7 years ago

    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!

    What? Ha-ha!

  • Senor_Sanchez #105 7 years ago

    Im quite shocked at the bad production values of this game. BAr the decent cut scene rendering everything else was first generation PS2 at best. As an artist i found the levels plain ugly, with low res bland textures and very simple crude geometry that didnt even have propper normal smoothing/hardening! The game character models are pretty nice, well detailed (for a ps2 FPS) with decent texturing and decent animation. The AI wasnt that bad for a PS2 FPS - i liked the hiding behind boxes and wild fire but i found it really sub par. Bond Everything or Nothing was a VERY pretty game - a nice fun no brainer shoot em up with HIGH production values. Different team different game though i suppose. I found this long, tedius, messy and sub par. Im not as vitriolic as some of the fan boys on here about the 'blasphemous' use of the words 'GoldenEye' so i gave it a fair chance, and was very disappointed with it. And i got a free copy so i feel for anyone who bought it.

  • Khanivor #106 7 years ago

    Playing this at the moment and while it's not great it's nowhere near as bad as the review makes out. 2/10 should be for something unplayable.

    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.
    Edited by 1 at 11/12/04 @ 17:15

  • Homer Simpson #107 7 years ago

    I still don't see why they just didn't bring out a game of Die Another Day instead :|

  • Nillsens #108 7 years ago

    I'm suprised that no-one mentioned the blue sparks yet.

    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.

  • Xboxfanuk #109 1 year ago

    I bought this game for £0.50 somewhere. It's amazing for that price!