E3

[ARTgames]

@goldeneye Nintendo Wii haters:
Iv played all those big box fpses on all consoles and on PC. And fpses on the wii are really different. If you don't like it that's fine. But give it a try if you have not. And does any one here even remember the first golden eye's controls? You cant even really look down or up.

And yes its Nintendo only. Its like Nintendo only really big fps. There going to hold onto it like xbox hugs halo and ps3 hugs kill zone. Also I like the graphics my self but I know why a lot of people may not.

I just like the over all feel of the media released for this game. It reminds me of all the past 007 games I have played and feels to just as good or better than them.

As for online play the wii does just fine for low about of players. like 4 vs 4 etc. But I really think they want to pay back to the old 007 and make this an awesome split screen game.

And I'm sure its going to be better than Quantum Of Solace that's out on this current gen of gaming systems.

Also, did anyone else see the presentation of the new xbox and think "how is that any different from the current xbox?" because I did. It is literally a 360 with a different color scheme and more memory.

I think they are tying to make a xbox without the ring problem. Thats what came to my mind first.

[JoEL]

But seriously the Wii? what a joke. The Wii seems like more of a kids console. Don't get me wrong though, I don't hate nintendo or the Wii, it's just stupid that they have specific console only games.

[ARTgames]

But seriously the Wii? what a joke. The Wii seems like more of a kids console. Don't get me wrong though, I don't hate nintendo or the Wii, it's just stupid that they have specific console only games.

Yes the Wii. Have you played the wii stuff? Its got games that I do think appeals to ever one. And this is coming from a crank the fps and graphics up PC gamer.

And Ill agree with you that exclusives suck for almost any system and any game.

[Meiun]

But seriously the Wii? what a joke. The Wii seems like more of a kids console. Don't get me wrong though, I don't hate nintendo or the Wii, it's just stupid that they have specific console only games.

The Wii is not a kids console... Like I've said before, neither the console itself or Nintendo are to blame for a lot of the issues you guys are bringing up. It's just the third party developers. The Wii just has a lot of unique potential for cool stuff with its motion sensing and other features, and third parties tend to like to take advantage of that (and it just so happens younger and casual players tend to be most susceptible to that). There are a number of great and non-kid based games for it, as well as higher budget games that really do things right with all of the systems unique features (although admittedly not as many as there could be from the 3rd parties). Nintendo themselves however, as well as a number of other companies always tend to make real quality games. It's not like I'm some huge Wii fanatic or anything (I even have a PS3 which I also enjoy), I just think its foolish how stubborn and biased people can get towards Xbox and what not. Personally, the reason I like the Wii more than the Xbox is not because it has a higher quantity of quality or adult based games, but instead because the good games that it does offer tend to have something unique about them that you can't get anywhere else. With 90% of the games for Xbox, while they may be "good games," you can typically get something as good, better, or at least similar for the PC or PS3. That can rarely, if ever, be said for the Wii (or most Nintendo games for that matter).

Also, like I mentioned briefly before, the Wii is definitely capable of some larger scale online multiplayer. Like a lot of the issues, just comes down to how the developers decide to go about things  as well as what they use for their servers (which they do have choices for).

[Lingus]

You know, when Goldeneye first came out, and everyone was all crazy about it... I never understood that. It was a horrid FPS. The graphics were awful, which is not an issue in itself (I'm not a videophile or anything), but the fact that even with full screen (singleplayer) view you would be squinting to find the blobs of pixels that were your enemies is just ridiculous. And the controls were ridiculous. Compared with a PC FPS of its time, it seemed like it was made 10 years prior by someone with no concept of game design. Of course, I'm slightly exaggerating. I get that console controls and hardware was part of it and that there were limitations they had to deal with... But why the hell did people go crazy over the game? I hated playing it with other people. It was so frustrating.

In any case, it doesn't look like they've improved much. It still looks like a game that was made with 10 year old graphics, and in my experience the Wii controller is not any better suited to FPS games than a console controller is. Given, I've not played Metroid Prime 3 so I'm not entirely sure what the Wii is capable of in that respect. But it sounds like that's based on the fact that it has lock on. The FPS games I've played on the Wii did not have that and they were ridiculously difficult to aim with any accuracy (I understand the hardware/software of the controller is accurate, but actually being accurate with that kind of controller is difficult.) In any case, we don't know what kind of controls Goldeneye will use, but I guess if they don't have lock on it will kind of suck (which in my opinion is kind of a lame way to make an FPS anyways, so I dunno...)

[Lucifer]

I don't know what you're comparing it to, I don't know any other fps game that came out before 1997, that's back before I could count to potato. So I've really got no comment on the graphics... I just honestly never noticed they were horrible, I guess I was having too much fun to stop and smell the pixels. The controls were difficult, then again, I personally find all controls for nowadays console FPS games to be difficult, my brain just can't handle the concept of the two analog sticks. Although I do remember laughing at my friend as we played the game 'bout a year ago, as he was running around into walls I was chucking odd job's hat at him... good times.

What I loved most about the game was the single player, not the multiplayer. Playing through the game at the hardest difficulty and memorizing every level. The way the enemies reacted to your gunshots, and how you could shoot people's helmets off. Being able to sneak about the mission where you start off in the vents without ever being noticed. I personally thought the game design for the levels was fantastic.

Anyways, I agree on your second paragraph, christ you'd think the graphics would have gotten a little better... I don't think they've changed!

P.S

[Lingus]

Anyways, I agree on your second paragraph, christ you'd think the graphics would have gotten a little better... I don't think they've changed!

Well, they're definitely better than the original, but in an FPS when you're trying to aim at something that's about an eighth of an inch on your monitor, the higher the res the better. At that distance, you can't really tell if it's a person or a tree. But with higher res graphics it becomes more clear. That's really my only complaint on the graphics. And it's not even that I can't play the game due to it, you get used to the lower res after a while... it's just frustrating because higher graphics are possible, and you know it's possible, and yet you're handicapped by lower res.

[Torch]

Also, did anyone else see the presentation of the new xbox and think "how is that any different from the current xbox?" because I did. It is literally a 360 with a different color scheme and more memory.

I think they are tying to make a xbox without the ring problem. Thats what came to my mind first.

You'd think so, wouldn't you? I shit you not, the extent to which they fixed this problem is by replacing the red LEDs with more green ones.

[ARTgames]

Anyways, I agree on your second paragraph, christ you'd think the graphics would have gotten a little better... I don't think they've changed!

Well, they're definitely better than the original, but in an FPS when you're trying to aim at something that's about an eighth of an inch on your monitor, the higher the res the better. At that distance, you can't really tell if it's a person or a tree. But with higher res graphics it becomes more clear. That's really my only complaint on the graphics. And it's not even that I can't play the game due to it, you get used to the lower res after a while... it's just frustrating because higher graphics are possible, and you know it's possible, and yet you're handicapped by lower res.

You need to keep in mind that this fps was made with the Wii in mind. And also every one is under the same controls as you. Have you played a fps on a wii? Ill agree and say that its not the same as the other systems but I think its fun. Also this game may not be for you. You need to take the system and game as it is. This game is not your battle field or COD. Its like asking mario kart to be Gran Turismo. There both racing games that are really different. 007 is the game with the cool gadgets and weapons. Not your hyper real fps game.

I doubt there handicapping it I'm sure there using all the power the system is providing. But if that's not what you mean and your saying that the game can look better than welcome to PC gaming. Ware most of crap is dumb down to the 360 / ps3. But i think you already know that because i think you are a PC gamer.

[Lingus]

Yes, I have played an FPS on Wii. I said that. I get that they made it specifically for the Wii, but I just don't like the Wii controller for an FPS style gameplay.

I think it's kind of a cop out to say "take it for what it is". That shouldn't be the goal of a game developer.

Btw, TF2 is the FPS with the cool gadgets in my opinion. Which brings up a good point. The graphics aren't that insane in that game, but with the art direction they gave a lot of visual cues to make things easy to distinguish. Red vs. Blue makes it really easy to see what team someone is on, and character outline makes it easy to see what character someone is. And it makes the game look awesome. That's really all I'm asking for. I don't need super intense highly advanced graphics. I just want something that looks decent and lets me play the game. That's what I mean by a handicap. Not that they weren't using the Wii's hardware to the full extent.

I don't need Mario Kart to be Gran Turismo. They're different games. One is trying to be an authentic driving simulator, and the other is trying to be a fun racing game. They both do it well. In contrast, Goldeneye is trying to be a full on FPS, and it doesn't compare to other games in the genre around the same time. At least not in my opinion.

[ARTgames]

I just don't think this game is for you. agree?

IMO I like the game as shown in the video. I many even like it the way you want it.

[Lingus]

I just don't think this game is for you.

That's probably true. Though I haven't really seen it yet so I'm not making a judgement call yet. I was mainly talking about the original and how it became so popular. And btw, I can't stress this enough, I'm not saying I want HD graphics. They just need to be clear enough to know what you're looking at. That doesn't require high resolution. It just requires good art direction.

[ARTgames]

I like the art in the trailer. This may be all matter of op. But your right that no one has really seen it.

@any one
Also I wanted to say but i just forgot is to ask is any one happy for the 3ds or not?

[Meiun]

    On the note of controls for Goldeneye and being on the Wii. I don't know what it is, but I myself honest to god am able to use the Wii remote with near pinpoint accuracy in all the FPS and other games that involve pointing, granted it did take some practice. Granted, how fast you are able to aim also plays a vital role, which I am fairly good but certainly not the best at. A lot of my friends however (some less accustomed to the Wii) have tons of difficulty using the remote accurately when trying it out, having it be shaking all over the place and even just failing to point it at the sensor bar properly. So I wouldn't immediately discredit the accuracy of the hardware, because from my experience it has tended to be more the person and or the fact that it may not be quite as simple as one could anticipate. One thing you do need to be sure of is to not get too far from the system, because the standard sensor bar tends to not get great range at more than about 10-12 feet I'd estimate.
   But either way, I'll go ahead and stop defending the Wii. I am not trying to disagree with anyone as much as help point out things that people may have overlooked or been ignorant towards before they go jumping to negative conclusions (especially about something that isn't even out yet).
 
   On to the 3DS, I think it looks like it could be pretty sweet. I am pretty amazed that they are actually able to do that stereoscopic 3D so effectively (based on what the sites that have demo'd it said at least) without the need for any form of glasses or anything. Personally I think that could add for a whole new level of innovation and cool game features.

[Lingus]

On to the 3DS, I think it looks like it could be pretty sweet. I am pretty amazed that they are actually able to do that stereoscopic 3D so effectively (based on what the sites that have demo'd it said at least) without the need for any form of glasses or anything. Personally I think that could add for a whole new level of innovation and cool game features.

Yea I was just watching this actually. Based on an earlier video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_P4gyjf5tQ) I had assumed it was not true 3d in the sense that you get with wearing glasses. I just thought it was something similar to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw

Now looking at the E3 videos, it does seem like there's some kind of "effect" going on. It looks maybe like the screen has something which directs light in different ways. Kind of like those 3D effect images that use vertical lines to direct different parts of an image depending on how you hold it. Of course, I can't be sure from those videos. I'm curious though, if this is really stereoscopic in the sense that it would require the use of both eyes, or if you'd still see the effect while covering one eye.