No Rare titles on Nintendo's Virtual Console?

LaughingTarget, you're missing the whole point. Games aren't all about the technology behind them. People played Goldeneye because it was *FUN* It was a great game, period. Who cares about the "one-plane" feel of it? It was just a fun game. Stop analyzing games and start PLAYING them.

#51 -

That is the thing, Goldeneye wasn't all that fun, especially coming from someone with PC shooter experience. It reminded me of Doom, which came out 4 years earlier. It wasn't just the poor control scheme and lack of story that killed the game, it was the very gameplay elements contained within. As a shooter, Goldeneye was dated even when it was released. I fully understand the value of the game in terms of console gaming, but in the genre as a whole, it was a major step backwards in every element with exception of graphics.

Comparing Goldeneye to contemporary titles (as in released in 1997 along with Goldeneye) such as Jedi Knight 2, Quake 2, and even Hexen 2, you will find that Goldeneye had the following issues:

1. Poor AI. AI at the time in PC shooters were becoming advanced enough to start seeing a small semblance of AI strategy. Goldeneye followed the mass enemy tactics concept created by Doom. Basically, the enemy really didn't do much thinking and came at you.

2. Weak level designs. With titles like JK2 creating massive environments in shooters, Goldeneye was still relatively stuck in corridor land and had few to no alternate paths. This was primarly due to the lack of a decent AI system.

3. Limited gameplay options. Goldeneye's variety came solely in the source of guns you could pick up. Again pointing at JK2, you saw a shooter that gave the gamer options on how to complete missions. You could kill, you could sneak, and you could even fool your enemies. Goldeneye fell back a few years and gave you a mission that pretty much had only one way to complete it, added side missions, then timed the whole thing.

Goldeneye is incredibly constrictive even when compared to the shooters of the day.

Microsoft is likely going to charge at least $10 for these things through XBL. The question is, will today's audience go for it? Chances are the answer is no. If people called Halo 2 restrictive and short, Goldeneye is only worse, and Halo 2 can be had for under $10, with better gameplay, control scheme, and the all-important graphics.

Since console shooters have pretty much closed the gap with the PC counterparts, you're likely to find more people out there like me who are unlikely able to stomach the concept of playing Goldeneye's insanely limited experience after seeing the better side of things.

Just like Doom was considered back in the day, no one plays it anymore, even though it is free. Because of such, it is highly unlikely Goldeneye will be able to attract anyone at a $10 pricetag.

i dont see why M$ wouldn't want Rare on the VC, think about it:

they sell rare games on VC= They get $$$
they sell rare games on XBLM= They get more $$$

so: $$$+$$$=$$$$$$

do the math gates, your suposse to be smart!!!

Geez, Rare, when you f*** over an old partner, you f*** 'em but good, don't you?

CCCCCCCC COMBO BREAKER!!!!!!! Sorry, just couldn't resist

No big deal. I never liked any of Rare's games except Donkey Kong Country anyway. Conker was good for a laugh but I can't say I enjoyed the gameplay. Not sure what everyone saw in Goldeneye, but I certainly didn't enjoy it, albeit only a short play.

MosquitoControl - You have the best points (3 hit home ). (But, here is a thought) When companies agree to sell shares, money may be the minor goal. Maybe, the company may have made agreements for future actions. And what would stop M$ and Rare from releasing titles on both Xbox Live and VC? I don't know cuz: 1) I don't work in either company and 2) It still a rumor! I'm grabbing my NooB crossing shield and Knowitall armor, so fire away. (This should be fun!)

I really don't care about any of those titles with the exception of Golden Eye.