Goldeneye on Xbox Live Arcade, not likely
by James Ransom-Wiley 
{ Apr 13th 2006 at 3:40PM }
Xbox 360 Central recently sparked a promising rumor, reporting that VGM Daily's Wednesday (4/12) podcast revealed "Microsoft [is] hoping to bring N64 title Goldeneye to XBLA." However, upon review, the interview with Xbox Live Marketplace team member Aaron Greenberg (featured in the podcast) casts a dark shadow on the possibility of Rare's classic reborn under the Xbox banner.
Here's our transcription (via Conrad Quilty-Harper):
VGM: It was recently made clear both by Rare and
Microsoft that all the Rare owned licenses are owned by you guys now. What's the likelihood of a game like Goldeneye
that was on the Nintendo 64 showing up on Xbox Live? 'Cause that game would do rather well ... ohhh, there's the smile!
'Wait for E3!'
Greenberg: No, the smile was just that you guys are asking very good questions. So,
here's the best way to answer that: I would say is that as far as I know we don't have plans to bring those
types of games on Xbox Live Arcade ... Some of the games that were ... on the N64, those games were pretty
large and are still gonna be pretty hard to distribute digitally depending on the title. I think even if you look at
what Nintendo's planning on doing in this space ... it's 8- and 16-bit games, it's not 32- and 64-bit games. So yeah,
we're excited to have Rare as a developer ... But we don't have a big strategy around bringing a bunch of those
games in particular [to the XBLA].
[Thanks, Master X 24]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
John @ Apr 13th 2006 3:46PM
screw microsuck, if goldeneye ever touches the 360 i will be pissed as hell.
It belongs on the revolution!
Odds Bodkins @ Apr 13th 2006 3:46PM
As much as I love the old N64 Goldeneye, I just don't see me using my 360 play this title. Let alone buying it again. It might be cute with live-multiplayer support.
.ed @ Apr 13th 2006 3:46PM
"...even if you look at what Nintendo's planning on doing in this space ... it's 8- and 16-bit games, it's not 32- and 64-bit games."
This guy apparently doesnt know that N64 games are going to be on Revolution... haha
Todd H. @ Apr 13th 2006 3:47PM
Bringing this and the multi-player for it would be awesome on Live.
benjamin @ Apr 13th 2006 3:47PM
But Nintendo IS planning on bringing 32 and 64-bit games to it's download service... am I wrong?
LunarDuality @ Apr 13th 2006 3:52PM
So then what is the "Virtual-Console type announcement" at E3 gonna be about?!?
JodyAnthony @ Apr 13th 2006 3:52PM
as anyone whos downloaded N64 roms (for "educational purposes") would know, even Resident Evil 2 is only like 1xx MB. most n64 games come in at around 20mb.
so 20-30mb is way too big for such a service, but 500mb demos arent?
Artimus @ Apr 13th 2006 3:53PM
This guy is a dope. N64 games are only like 8-32MB in ROM format. That's nothing! That's less than Quicktime's HD trailers (much less).
XBL Arcade is going to look pretty lame once the VC comes out.
Natrino @ Apr 13th 2006 3:56PM
I don't think Nintendo has any 32-bit games to release. Unless Sega 32x games count as being 32-bit and are available through the Virtual Console.
Michael @ Apr 13th 2006 4:04PM
Yeah, as with what everyone else is already saying, im astounded that M$ employs people that dont even know their own business.
Let me get this straight, they dont want to distribute goldeneye, a game thats almost revered amongst FPS lovers ...... because "the game would be too large to distribute"
When everyone with half a brain knows that the N64 cart never was able to hold the data that a CD could (hence why the PS1 trumped the N64)
Cds currently run at about 6 or 700 MB, the N64 carts were about 32megs from what I read.
Lets say with some sligtly updated graphics, nothing fancy, nothing more than what they did with gauntlet or joust ...... xbox live playability .......hell, lets say the game was 400mb (thats talking crazy, I know, just go with me for a min)
Thats STILL nothing compared to the 500 to 900 meg demos they have up right now on xbox live. I believe the project gotham racing demo weighed in right at 1.something gigs.
And yet they now own rare ....
Seriously, THEY PAY THIS MAN? GIVE ME HIS JOB! I can be JUST as stupid I assure you! Does he even know what they have up on xbox live marketplace? what their sizes are? what the data capacity of a common game cartridge is?
TOO BIG?
yeah. 100 meg is too big for a broadband connection. *wank*
Moron.
Pancakeshouse @ Apr 13th 2006 4:06PM
So if Metroid Prime: Hunters can look better than Goldeneye on a DS at such a compresed size, why can't Goldeneye be compressed smaller than 50mb to be on XBLM?
Besides, a 10 year old game such as Goldeneye would be a million times better than Rare's crappy excuse for new games. WhDoes anybody even like Perfect Dark Zero multiplayer anyway?
Justin @ Apr 13th 2006 4:10PM
They don't want there to be the possibility of sending people to Nintendo's Revolution (for more N64 games) by offering original Nintendo games on the 360 console.
idioteraser @ Apr 13th 2006 4:12PM
Ah Micheal the N64 was superior to the PS1. It's games sold far more on average as well. Also lack of piracy made the N64 a money maker. Carts were superior to cd-roms at the time. Lot of N64 games were considered far superior in graphics to most PSone games.
Also the virtual console will have one of the turbografx cd-rom formats which was 200-300 megs and this was FMV cd-roms to boot.
It hasn't been mentioned if the vc can do dreamcast games, or even download gamecube games. Nintendo defintely knows how to do a wifi service unlike Mircosoft.
Goldeneye more likely has to due with the fact that Nintendo was the publisher. All those rare games were published by Nintendo. Rare was a second party so all the games are in limbo.
www.PS3-Files.com @ Apr 13th 2006 4:12PM
Maybe a compilation disc? Please?
NeedleLies @ Apr 13th 2006 4:13PM
total BS... current 360 demos are bigger than any N64 game... c'mon PGR3 demo was a Gig!
Justin @ Apr 13th 2006 4:18PM
Wow James, viable sources for your post. This is so unexpected of you.
Michael @ Apr 13th 2006 4:19PM
[quote=justin]They don't want there to be the possibility of sending people to Nintendo's Revolution (for more N64 games) by offering original Nintendo games on the 360 console.[/quote]
That logic is flawed, if thats the case why would they be releasing street fighter?
The only thing nintendo has a hold over is their own IPs such as mario, donkey kong, samus, etc etc.
They have no claim to 3rd party games which leaves them open to MS wooing the developer for the distribution rights of that game.
The1 @ Apr 13th 2006 4:20PM
MS will not put a game on XBLA that is over 80 mb.
Joe @ Apr 13th 2006 4:22PM
oh, fanboys. first of all, i don't know how some of you guys compare an as-of-now non-existent service to a proven, working service.
second of all, there are different requirements between XBLA games and demos to be put on the marketplace. this is an example of something called a business model. obviously, demos don't have any size requirements, and you see them get delayed because of some planning like bandwidth issues, compatibility testing, etc.
the same thing will happen to the nintendo VC and the playstation network.
DigitalDept @ Apr 13th 2006 4:24PM
Do you nintendo fanboy/idiots/morons ever stop to think maybe since everyone else might be hopping on the VC bandwagon MS might wanna get in on on that cash I am going to buy a revo just for that think if Revo has a larger install base cheaper(free)etc online think about how much they can make by licensing all those Rare games back to Nintendo that not only make them look good but might help and a (big might) help them grease the wheels of other japanese developers who knows giving Nintendo access to rare might help MS in the long run
DCSimian @ Apr 13th 2006 4:27PM
*prays it comes to the VC with Wifi support...well, at least come to the VC!
I doubt it'll happen, but one can dream, right?
Crux @ Apr 13th 2006 4:31PM
Considering it was Nintendo, not rare who bought the license for Goldeneye 64, it is more likely that it will appear on the Revolution than on Microsofts Live service. It is a similar scenario to them giving the Starfox or Donkey Kong licences for Rare to work with. It depends on the technicalities of Nintendo's deal with MGM as to the extent of their publishing rights.
JodyAnthony @ Apr 13th 2006 4:32PM
#18, DigitalDept:
They're called periods. Use them.
even if you made any valid points, i have no idea. your entire post was just a huge run on sentence. maybe i'm dumb, but I have a real hard time following such things.
Raymond @ Apr 13th 2006 4:35PM
Hey DigitalDept, you call us morons/idiots, yet you don't have one bit of punctuation in your post. that makes me think your're the idiot. Any way, no, even if they licenced it back to Nintendo, Nintendo would make more money in the long run with the downloads. Microsoft would only make money on the selling of the one time event of selling the licencing to the rare games.
Justin @ Apr 13th 2006 4:37PM
@Michael
If I'm not mistaken, Street Fighter made its original apperance in the arcade and from there ported to a plethora of consoles. So the memories a gamer gets from playing a Street Fighter game on XBLA could be varied and not from a specific Nintendo console.
And I never said Nintendo had any control over Rare IPs did I? I am saying when a person sits down to play Golden Eye (Which was exclusively for N64) on the XBLA, then more than likely they are going to have memories specifically of the N64 and of other N64 games they played and that in turn could possibly lead them to purchasing the Rev. for more N64 games.
Is that flawed logic? I think not.
RP @ Apr 13th 2006 4:38PM
If EA had their way, it would never be seen again. Not only do they own the Bond license, but it also shows up everything they've done with the license since to be the utter cock that it is.
Anyway, yes, that is a surprisingly unintelligent reponse from the MS rep (although i'm starting to notice a trend - J Allard's criticism of the Revolution controller was "How am i going to watch DVDs with that?"). I can only imagine that either they genuinley do have plans of that nature and they're just doing a really poor job of covering it up with flimsy responses until they're ready to announce it, OR due to licence problems (EA not playing ball?) they can't so they're trying to brush it off as not a big deal.
Either way, i'm not really bothered. I still have my N64 and GE thankyouverymuch.
Michael @ Apr 13th 2006 4:38PM
ah idioteraser - thats opinion (what you think about why the N64 got trumped or why it did not) what is fact is that the cartidge did not have more space than a cd.
And second or thrid party developer? Doesnt matter, they own rare and all the IPs plain and simple. There is no logical reason given during that interview why they cant release goldeneye on xbl.
http://xbox.ign.com/articles/371/371977p1.html
"The deal for Rare was a full acquisition INCLUDING ALL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY and means Rare is more or less an internal development house for Microsoft Game Studios."
Concerned @ Apr 13th 2006 4:40PM
#20, JodyAnthony
No, they're called "Full stops". A period is when a lady decides to bleed from her vagina for no apparent reason
Justin @ Apr 13th 2006 4:42PM
@Concerned
Somebody needs to take a biology course.
RP @ Apr 13th 2006 4:47PM
Concerned could use a course in punctuation as well.
Michael @ Apr 13th 2006 4:51PM
yeah justin, that logic is flawed.
Not releasing a game originally on the N64 to keep people from buying the revolution for fear of leading their customers to want more N64 games is nothing more than conjecture.
Id like to see where there was a larger percentage of 1st party Nintendo titles released on N64 vs the number of 3rd party titles (that distribution rights can now be had for the right price)
Heres a hint, I doubt youll find it. But youre welcome to try.
Yes I know SF was out in arcades 1st, but I fail to see how that plays into their business strategy for NOT releasing goldeneye.
I didnt see this point of view brought up when a current gen version of Perfect Dark got released for 360 (oh noes! perfect dark cant be released on 360 cuz all the peoples will want to relive the original perfect dark on da nintenoes 64!)
With sligtly updated graphics, leaderboards, achievements and live online multiplayer it would offer something worthwhile people would pay money for.
JodyAnthony @ Apr 13th 2006 4:52PM
#26 Concerned
Period:
1 The full pause at the end of a spoken sentence.
2 A punctuation mark ( . ) indicating a full stop, placed at the end of declarative sentences and other statements thought to be complete, and after many abbreviations.
ill trooper @ Apr 13th 2006 4:54PM
Yeah, they made Multiplayer GoldenEye for the 360... It's commonly called 'Perfect Dark Zero.'
The only thing that interests me here would be the single-player game - It would be fun to play through that again at some point... It was one of my all-time favorites. Innovative, and difficult. With bonus levels if you beat the game at the hard settings.
Maybe I'll dig my N64 out of storage this summer for that one...
rudimentalist @ Apr 13th 2006 4:55PM
Would it still run at 10 frames per second and give me headaches? That's the most nostalgic part.
epobirs @ Apr 13th 2006 4:59PM
It's a different story for Street Fighter, since that is being treated as an aracde hit rather than a past console title from the folks across the road. Likewise for the Midway titles.
The largest N64 game was Resident Evil at 64 megabytes. Even with the addition of an online manual this shouldn't take more than half an hour to download on the worst connection that dares call itself broadband. Most of the really big N64 games were only half that size at 32MB (256 megabits), so I doubt the much earlier Goldeneye was any bigger than 16MB. By comparison, Geometry Wars is 14 MB according to a Team Xbox review.
Unless they felt Geometry Wars was pushing the limits on download size, there shouldn't be a problem with most N64 titles.
More likely, the guy just didn't want to get into all of the ugly complications that would be involved. First off, there is ownership of the Goldeneye IP. Rare may have a license in perpetuity for the N64 version but that probably doesn't cover any other versions. So it means striking a new deal with the IP owner, whose parent company might not be amenable to the idea.
Why do we need a new version? That brings us to the second complication. It is incredibly unlikely that Nintendo is going to grant a license to emulate the N64 for anyreasonable price. Rare's assigned team would have to create a N64-ish environment to run on the 360 to simplify porting their games that aren't entangled with Nintendo or anyone else's IP.
Then there is the matter of hosting a game most associated with a rival platform company rather than the neutrality of the arcades.
Microsoft almost certainly wants to get some value from Rare's old IP but finding the right way to do it is so simple.
someone @ Apr 13th 2006 5:07PM
I believe that this is the first time rare has ever said, "no, we really don't want to make a profit..."
ok, that's just my ultra-paraphrase...
another thing: "look at what Nintendo's doing, no 32/64 bit on thiers..."
right... aparently you weren't there at E3 when they announced nes, snes, AND N64 games for download...
Justin @ Apr 13th 2006 5:10PM
Michael,
Considering nostalgia is the in thing recently, that is definitely a risk. Also, Perfect Dark Zero is not a direct port, as Gold Eye would be.
Call me ignorant, but I'm not sure where you were going with this:
"Id like to see where there was a larger percentage of 1st party Nintendo titles released on N64 vs the number of 3rd party titles (that distribution rights can now be had for the right price)"
DigitalDept @ Apr 13th 2006 5:13PM
Do you nintendo fanboy/idiots/morons ever stop to think, "Maybe since everyone else might be hopping on the VC bandwagon MS might wanna get in on on that cash?" I am going to buy a revo just for that. "Think if Revo has a larger install base, cheaper(free)etc online. Think about how much they can make by licensing all those Rare games back to Nintendo. That not only make them look good but might help, and a (big might) help them grease the wheels of other japanese developers. Who knows giving Nintendo access to rare might help MS in the long run.
P.S. you guys (not all of you) but most of you are still
fanboy/idiots/morons. But Thanks for the Grammar check
Odds Bodkins @ Apr 13th 2006 5:19PM
"MS will not put a game on XBLA that is over 80 mb."
Aren't most of the Xbox 360 downloadable demos anywhere from 400 to 800MBs?
I don't think 80MBs is gonna be a problem.
tom @ Apr 13th 2006 5:28PM
This guy comes off like a dope for claiming size as an issue to keep Goldeneye off of XBLM. Goldeneye was a 12 Megabit cart. The current XBLA requirement has a max of 50 megs.
Licensing issues are far more daunting. First there is the Bond License which is currently owned by EA from MGM. MS would have to release a port or recompile of Goldeneye for the 360, which would be considered a new bond game which would violate EA's license.
An emulated Goldeneye game would cause Nintendo to sue claiming that MS reverse engineered the N64 (which they would hae to do pull off such a feat).
I think the chances are much better of getting a ported Perfect Dark (originally for N64) on XBLA.
Russell Carroll @ Apr 13th 2006 5:36PM
Isn't the issue that Goldeneye isn't a Rare IP it's a Rare game?
They owned rights to create the game and market the game, but not the IP. If they own an IP they can do sequels, but that doesn't mean that they would necessarily have full rights to the original material.
In addition they may have an exclusivity piece to the console. Re-releasing a game that was an exclusive to a Nintendo-based console would likely require a new contract unless the original contract was time dated (such as the RE4 contract on the GCN). Time-dating contracts is pretty common, but I don't know if that is the case when signing something to be an exclusive title on a Nintendo system.
Art Guy @ Apr 13th 2006 5:57PM
Odds Bodkins - No. I think you confused as to what XBLA is. "A" stands for Arcade. As has been stated over and over, there are no games in the Arcade over 80mb. In fact I think the largest is 40mb, but don't quote me on that.
The 360 game demos (Kong, PGR3, COD2) are NOT Arcade titles, and you can not download the entire game or purchase them in the online marketplace.
That said, I think MicroSoft should remove the under 80MB requirement if it means games like GoldenEye will never be available.
Firebomb 87 @ Apr 13th 2006 6:30PM
Guys, I did a little resaarch a while ago about all this. I have been wanting Rare to release some of their older Nintendo 64 games on XBLA for some time now (love to see Banjo-Kazooie in Hi-Def!). I researched the sizes of this game and other Rare titles, including Perfect Dark, Banjo-Kazooie, Banjo-Tooie and Jet Force Gemini. Also the max size for a game on XBLA is not 80, it is 50MB. Notice MB is different from Mb.
Some popular Rare titles on the N64
GoldenEye 007
Banjo-Kazooie
Banjo-Tooie
Perfect Dark
Jet Force Gemini
Blast Corps
Go to www.wikipedia.org and type in the name of one of these games. Find out the size of it, listed on the page. Then open up a new browser and go to Google. Type in, for example '64 Mb to MB'. This will give you the MB size of a game, or any file. Every MB is divided up into 8Mb. For example '64 Mb to MB' will give you 8 MB. My computer is having a problem getting to wikipedia for some reason. So you guys would have to do it instead, sorry.
All of these franchises, including Conker, belong to Rare and Microsoft EXCEPT for GoldenEye. EA now owns the James Bond license, including GoldenEye 007. The size of the game is not the issue, it's the rights to it.
Edward @ Apr 13th 2006 6:31PM
Actually I believe the limit on Arcade titles is to ensure they fit on a memory unit. The idea is that you can take the game on your MU and play it at a friend's house. Also if they have the HD, they can keep a copy of the demo version, and unlock it later if they want.
samegamebettagraphics @ Apr 13th 2006 6:39PM
what about the nintendo seal quality, those nintendo own any rights to any of the games the put that "seal" of quality on there products. Also the some real un-informed or close minded people that comment here. One more thing why would microsoft want unorignal content on their xbox 360 ohhhhhh waittttttttttttt they already haveeeeeeeeeeeeeeee, call of duty and a few other ports. lol lol lol i crack myself up. you know what game is hotttttt for XBOX The CHRONIC- cles of narnia. hahahahaha some of the best graphics ever lol lol look look his forhead is shiny. oh wait wait wait the most anticipated FPS ever HALO 2 lol lol lol if they would of told me that it was halo 1 just with better looking guns and better looking maps i would of never played it. oh man running out of games oh oh let me not forget about FORZA lol wat an excuse of GT 4 killa lol its an arcade racer just with better physics crap....... name another game thats AN XBOX ONLY GAME that i would like to play...so i can lo lol
Kyle @ Apr 13th 2006 6:53PM
(Just to emphasize what #42 said)
You all are forgetting that the Xbox Live arcade is for small games. It is seperate from the Marketplace for a reason: size of games. You can download a game from the Arcade and none of them have been over 64MB. The point of them releasing something on the ARCADE is for you to quickly download a game(trial or full) and play it and share the demo with your friends via the memory card. Arcade games are purposely given an "Access Point" outside the Marketplace so these can be kept seperate.
Nintendo hasn't given a number of how many games will be available and when and I seriously doubt you will see more than 5 N64 games on there (at lauch)due to the size of the game. Also, lets tone down some of the Nintendo childish fanboyism also. I was once a Nintendo-only fanboy but I never acted like some of you are.
(I understand that Arcade games are also accessible through the Marketplace but it is not like they have their very own category such as "Demos and Trailers".)
Johnny M @ Apr 13th 2006 6:55PM
What you dont know is that XBLA is limited to 50mb Im not sure if its legal to emulate a N64 on the 360 It probaly is maybe console rights dont interfere with game rights who knows but a rom of goldeneye I had was less than 20mb so its possible!
SheepShirts @ Apr 13th 2006 6:55PM
A couple people here understand, but it seems that nobody is listening.
Rare does not own the Bond IP. That belongs to MGM I believe.
Neither Nintendo or Microsoft/Rare owns the license to publish Bond games. That belongs to EA.
Unless some sort of agreement was made with EA it would be necessary to change the name of the game, and remove any plot points and characters that resemble the events and characters in the movie. i.e. ALL OF IT
And that is first and foremost, why we will likely not ever see a port of GoldenEye on either the Revo or the 360.
Jedediah Johnson @ Apr 13th 2006 7:02PM
This is a tough one for M$. Though they own rare, EA has the rights to the Bond Licenses including the movie/titel Goldeneye. But even back when Rare made Goldeneye I'm to the understanding that Nintendo owns the coding to the game seeing as they were the publisher/helping developer and Rare was their 2nd hand developer. So with all this in mind the only legal way to get the original Goldeneye game on the XLA is to pay rights to EA and Nintendo. Now which one of them do you think will go for it? Yeah..none.
KaptainK @ Apr 13th 2006 7:10PM
what if ea released it on nintendo's virtual console...if they own the rights to "james bond 007 Goldeneye" ea owns goldeneye name, so does nintendo or rare own the rights to the game itself?