Darlingcognito
Member
Goldeneye, Perfect dark, Doom, Quake, Wolfenstein and Halo. What a pearless set of fps to have. Just hope MS makes full use.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Goldeneye 007 achievements have popped up on trueachievements.com
- Thread starter ComputerBlue
- Start date
SLB1904
Banned
01011001
Banned
licensing is not ownership dude
Microsoft LITERALLY owns the game... LITERALLY... they don't own the bond license but these are 2 completely different things.
game code, game design, level design, most of the soundtrack (most of soundtrack is original to the game, many don't know that) and all the graphics that aren't depicting licensed likenesses
all of the above is owned by Microsoft (and partly Nintendo)
01011001
Banned
not sure what you want to tell me here. so maybe Nintendo doesn't have any rights for the game? but who knows? maybe some part of the contract with Rare gave Nintendo partial rights to the game code?
SLB1904
Banned
im literally arguing with you with sources and so far you haven't shown anything to back you up? how that works?
01011001
Banned
how hard is it for you to grasp that if a game company develops a video game, that THEY OWN THE RIGHTS TO THAT CODE...
that is a universal truth across the board.
the only exceptions are when a company agreed go wave away their rights, which Rare didn't do, which is very easy to verify as Perfect Dark is based on mostly the same code as it is an indirect sequel. So Rare clearly owns the game code, design and graphics as they reused some lf them in the Multiplayer of Perfect Dark
also NONE of your "sources" disagree with what I say
Last edited:
MrTroubleMaker
Member
SLB1904
Banned
God help me. Do you know how easy is to prove this is wrong?
who owns Sackboy assets, flight simulator, smash bros?
the developer or the publisher?
edit: i would like to continue this argument but im tired lol was long night. regardless the future will tell. doesn't matter how much we argue about it will find out soon anyway.
i
Last edited:
jigglet
Banned
One of the best games ever. I played this so much. It will forever be an important part of my childhood and I look back at this so fondly from both a personal level as well as its contribution to the gaming industry.
However, fuck replying this. Lmao it would play like utter shit in this day and age. And people are asking for online multiplayer? I hope you have some seriously low standards lol
What this game needs is a remake. A remake from a steady hand that knows what they're doing. Don't bring it into the modern age - fuck that. Keep it rooted in the 90's. But modernise it, somehow. I don't know how - I'm not a good enough designer to do it, but I'm sure there's someone out there that is (e.g. the team that brought Doom back to life with Doom 2016).
However, fuck replying this. Lmao it would play like utter shit in this day and age. And people are asking for online multiplayer? I hope you have some seriously low standards lol
What this game needs is a remake. A remake from a steady hand that knows what they're doing. Don't bring it into the modern age - fuck that. Keep it rooted in the 90's. But modernise it, somehow. I don't know how - I'm not a good enough designer to do it, but I'm sure there's someone out there that is (e.g. the team that brought Doom back to life with Doom 2016).
Last edited:
01011001
Banned
the publisher was Nintendo... so if anything Nintendo and Microsoft own the game.
also how hard is it for you to understand what game code is? what game design is? none of that belongs to anyone but the developers or to whoever the developer decides to sell it to.
Rare OWNS the code, WHICH I ALREADY TOLD YOU is evident by the fact that they reused a shitload of it in Perfect Dark. or do you actually think that Rare gave away a random amount of the game's code and design but held on to another random amount of it for themselves? "you can have that level and that code+assets for those weapons over there, and we keep the code and assets for these levels and these guns for ourselves!" does that make sense to you? does that sound plausible? I really hope that doesn't sound plausible to you because if it does you should seek professional help.
Rare used GoldenEye assets, code and designs in Perfect Dark, proving they own the game code and design. case closed
Last edited:
Lucifers Beard
Member
I’ve never seen someone so wrong in all my life.
Goldeneye was a classic because of the open mission structure and how replayable it was due to difficulty changes and unlocks. The multiplayer was also amazing at the time despite it running terribly.
I’m not sure how well it will hold up now but back then it was great.
Please let me know what FPS games were better at the time? I cant think of any that year that were better, especially on console.
kanjobazooie
Mouse Ball Fetishist
The Goldeneye 64 box states that Rare had (partial) ownership of the game.
And Perfect Dark's copyright notice only has Rare as the sole owner, which shows that they fully owned the reused Goldeneye assets (as 01011001 said).
jigglet
Banned
There really wasn't. It was a barren wasteland of shit.
And sure there were technically better FPS's on PC, but they were very different - fast paced arena shooters, generally.
Goldeneye broke some seriously important ground, to deny it is laughable.
I don't think GE holds up at all. I think it's horrible. But I think it was fucking mind-blowing for its time and contributed enormously to the industry.
Last edited:
Banjo64
cumsessed
I love it when people bring receipts.The Goldeneye 64 box states that Rare had (partial) ownership of the game.
And Perfect Dark's copyright notice only has Rare as the sole owner, which shows that they fully owned the reused Goldeneye assets (as 01011001 said).
SLB1904
Banned
rare own project dark and banjo that's why Microsoft owns them. not because of the cover saying '' the rare logo is a trademark of rare'' lmfao
kanjobazooie
Mouse Ball Fetishist
I really can't tell whether you're trolling or not.
You said Rare didn't own anything from Goldeneye, but we know for sure they reused code and assets (including maps and weapons) in Perfect Dark.
The copyright notice from Perfect Dark (not to be confused with trademark) does not mention any other third parties. Who owns these assets then?
Edit: I don't want to start a fight with you. I come in peace. lmao
Last edited:
lame gag1990
Member
I had the pleasure of playing the leaked 360 build on single player and online. Still love it and I frequently play the N64 version throughout the years since release. I'm all over this.
Squall as his avatar. Yep, definitely a whiny emo bitch.
Last edited:
SLB1904
Banned
I really can't tell whether you're trolling or not.
You said Rare didn't own anything from Goldeneye, but we know for sure they reused code and assets (including full levels) in Perfect Dark.
The copyright notice (not to be confused with trademark) does not mention any other third parties. Who owns these assets then?
yeah I'm trolling. come on man
do you think you were the first to find that cover? i found that first didn't use because is not evidence enough for the argument
the first error on your cover evidence is calling ''Nintendo rare''
Nintendo never own rare they had 49% of the share of the company.
you don't need to be an expert to understand that the reason MS got in the conversation was when they acquired rare.
if you read carefully the cover it clearly states game by rare, danjaq (you know the company that just renew the trademark) and eon.
and Nintendo was the publisher at the time.
the owner of the game owns the asset, just because project dark reuses the assets is not evidence of anything. is not like eon going to use that, they aren't developers. God knows what contract they made at the time. you know people negotiate these things.
a clear example is how from reuses demons souls and bloodborne assets in dark souls and now in Elden ring. and at same time bluepoint remade demons souls using those same assets. sony could stop them but of course they wont for obvious reasons.
again ill post this video thats being ignored
timestamp btw, just make it easier
edit: also he talks about how the remaster from MS never come to be
thats a screenshot of my history. i dont want you to think im lying
is 9:43 now
Last edited:
GHG
Gold Member
Chukhopops
Member
On PC maybe, on consoles I don’t think so Tim. At the time nothing came close to offering that much between the weapon variety, mission structure, local multiplayer.
As far as I know it’s still the second highest rated console FPS after Perfect Dark.
I wish there were game statistics at the time to know how many hours we have played local MP between Mario Kart 64, Smash Bros, Mario Party and Goldeneye. The golden age of local MP.
Calverz
Member
Eh this will be the xbla version that leaked in 2021. Well on Xbox it will be. Nobody cares about the switch online version lol
Goalus
Member
Now check the post history of the users who come into this thread with negative takes and do the math.
kanjobazooie
Mouse Ball Fetishist
Sorry, man. You just suddenly mentioned "trademark" even though it has nothing to do with the discussion. I thought you were joking.
First of all, I'll emphasize that we are talking here about code and assets, not the IP itself.
And what does the 49% have to do with anything? I never said Nintendo owned Rare.
And Sony was able to let Bluepoint remake Demon Souls because Sony actually owned the majority of the assets. The copyright notice of the original PS3 game (not trademark) states them as the one owner, and does not show Fromsoft as having co-ownership status.
The part you linked talks about publishing rights and IP ownership. That has nothing to do with assets, though.
Again, I just want to have a friendly discussion here. No need for aggression from either side.
Also, the argument here was about code and assets, not the IP itself. I hope we all are clear on that.
It's alright if we didn't reach an agreement. The Fromsoft comparison was a good point, though.
First of all, I'll emphasize that we are talking here about code and assets, not the IP itself.
What do you mean "Nintendo Rare"?
And what does the 49% have to do with anything? I never said Nintendo owned Rare.
Fromsoft is a different case. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think they copy and pasted exact maps from Sony's games to Bandai's games, like Rare did with Goldeneye and PD.
And Sony was able to let Bluepoint remake Demon Souls because Sony actually owned the majority of the assets. The copyright notice of the original PS3 game (not trademark) states them as the one owner, and does not show Fromsoft as having co-ownership status.
The part you linked talks about publishing rights and IP ownership. That has nothing to do with assets, though.
Isn't Perfect Dark being still being available for purchase with all its Goldeneye assets enough evidence of Rare owning these assets? Again, we are talking about clearly distinguishable things like ported maps that have the same names. Not smaller things like in Fromsoft's case.
Again, I just want to have a friendly discussion here. No need for aggression from either side.
Also, the argument here was about code and assets, not the IP itself. I hope we all are clear on that.
It's alright if we didn't reach an agreement. The Fromsoft comparison was a good point, though.
kanjobazooie
Mouse Ball Fetishist
I don't know if SLB put me on ignore or the browser is fucking up, but my last post was a reply to his and I can no longer tag him.
ok so you just trolling the thread with fake concern all over it ?dude
anyway, there is no point arguing about it. only time will tell. my guess Nintendo license expired and this company is just getting a quick cash grab.
sorry, i guess for wanted better bond games or at least a decent port of this game.
Banjo64
cumsessed
There’s no point
kanjobazooie
, he’s replying in bad faith because it’s unlikely that this game will release on PlayStation.
I’d probably buy this on Xbox and Switch as long as it’s not full priced. If it has online it’ll be a banger.
kanjobazooie
, he’s replying in bad faith because it’s unlikely that this game will release on PlayStation.I’d probably buy this on Xbox and Switch as long as it’s not full priced. If it has online it’ll be a banger.
Badlucktroll
Member
jigglet
Banned
lol yeah
Beer Baelly
Al Pachinko, Konami President
SLB1904
Banned
no, i didn't lol
i was doing some water change in my tank. i wouldn't put on ignore for that lol
i dont know what we are talking about assets. we don't know the contract so its pointless talking about it.
like i said. whoever owns the game owns the assets, to be fair this topic is very ambiguous and kinda irrelevant. even if they didn't use the assets they could just make new ones which makes this argument pointless. case in point that new game from the creators of the battlefield if we didn't know better you would think they use battlefront assets.
our original argument was regarding the cover you post. it doesn't say anything about ownership but the logos.
which standard practice like something like this
this assets argument started when the other user said the developer owns the assets which isnt true. that's why i gave the example of Sackboy which is developed by sumo? but sony owns the assets
Last edited:
kanjobazooie
Mouse Ball Fetishist
I guess my browser was fucking up. Sorry.no, i didn't lol
i was doing some water change in my tank. i wouldn't put on ignore for that lol
i dont know what we are talking about assets. we don't know the contract so its pointless talking about it.
like i said. whoever owns the game owns the assets, to be fair this topic is very ambiguous and kinda irrelevant. even if they didn't use the assets they could just make new ones which makes this argument pointless. case in point that new game from the creators of the battlefield if we didn't know better you would think they use battlefront assets.
our original argument was regarding the cover you post. it doesn't say anything about ownership but the logos.
which standard practice like something like this
The C in the notice stands for copyright; the trademark part is a separate thing. The copyright line means that a company has the right to use the property in specific ways, which includes assets like code, music, graphics, etc. Not just logos and trademarks.
Copyright and trademarks are two different terms. I'm sure you know that, but I explained it for the sake of clarity.
In Spider-Man's case, it means that both Sony and Marvel own parts of the Spider-Man game.
In Goldeneye's notice which I posted earlier, you'll see you see that Rare does actually have copyright ownership alongside Nintendo and 007 owners. We don't know what exactly Rare owns, but it's most likely the game assets, since they reused some of them in Perfect Dark and they can still sell PD today with no issue. And as I said, they lifted well-known assets from Goldeneye, not small things.
You said that Eon or Danjaq would have no use for the assets if they owned them and wouldn't care if Rare reused them. However, if another party owned these assets, Rare would be obliged by law to compensate them and show them in the notice. But since only Rare owns the reused assets, they were fine.
I know you mentioned Fromsoft earlier, but as I said Fromsoft never copied levels from one game to another.
You are right when you say that we don't know all the details. But it's clear that Rare does have ownership of some parts of the Goldeneye game (not the IP of course).
Sorry for flooding your notifications today. lmao
SLB1904
Banned
nah its cool bro.I guess my browser was fucking up. Sorry.
The C in the notice stands for copyright; the trademark part is a separate thing. The copyright line means that a company has the right to use the property in specific ways, which includes assets like code, music, graphics, etc. Not just logos and trademarks.
Copyright and trademarks are two different terms. I'm sure you know that, but I explained it for the sake of clarity.
In Spider-Man's case, it means that both Sony and Marvel own parts of the Spider-Man game.
In Goldeneye's notice which I posted earlier, you'll see you see that Rare does actually have copyright ownership alongside Nintendo and 007 owners. We don't know what exactly Rare owns, but it's most likely the game assets, since they reused some of them in Perfect Dark and they can still sell PD today with no issue. And as I said, they lifted well-known assets from Goldeneye, not small things.
You said that Eon or Danjaq would have no use for the assets if they owned them and wouldn't care if Rare reused them. However, if another party owned these assets, Rare would be obliged by law to compensate them and show them in the notice. But since only Rare owns the reused assets, they were fine.
I know you mentioned Fromsoft earlier, but as I said Fromsoft never copied levels from one game to another.
You are right when you say that we don't know all the details. But it's clear that Rare does have ownership of some parts of the Goldeneye game (not the IP of course).
Sorry for flooding your notifications today. lmao
is nice to talk to someone like you, that actually listens for a change lol
kingfey
Banned
are you still salty about that game?
I would just leave this here
GoldenEye 007
You are Bond. James Bond. You are assigned covert operations connected with the GoldenEye weapons satellite. M will brief you on your mission and objectives from London. Q Branch will support your efforts with a plentiful supply of weapons and gadgets. Moneypenny offers you light-hearted best...
www.metacritic.com
Beer Baelly
Al Pachinko, Konami President
Arent poeple aware? The remake is fully playable
Neff
Member
Don't care, you're still wrong.
All signs point to it being the original, but Reloaded was legit nonetheless.
To be clear, Nintendo jointly owns code and assets pertaining to the N64 game with Microsoft. And they need permission from numerous rights holders of the IP (and each other) to re-release the game, just as those same IP rights holders need permission from both Nintendo and MS to do the same thing. The guy you replied to was 100% correct.
Last edited:
I hope so .. not interested in a game that has N64 graphics..
kingfey
Banned
When a game is made, there are certain owners for it.no, i didn't lol
i was doing some water change in my tank. i wouldn't put on ignore for that lol
i dont know what we are talking about assets. we don't know the contract so its pointless talking about it.
like i said. whoever owns the game owns the assets, to be fair this topic is very ambiguous and kinda irrelevant. even if they didn't use the assets they could just make new ones which makes this argument pointless. case in point that new game from the creators of the battlefield if we didn't know better you would think they use battlefront assets.
our original argument was regarding the cover you post. it doesn't say anything about ownership but the logos.
which standard practice like something like this
this assets argument started when the other user said the developer owns the assets which isnt true. that's why i gave the example of Sackboy which is developed by sumo? but sony owns the assets
1: Licenses holder.
2: The company that made the game.
3: The publisher of the game.
1: The current holder of IP for James bond
2: Rare who made the game
3: Nintendo who published the game.
| GoldenEye 007 | |
|---|---|
| Developer(s) | Rare |
| Publisher(s) | Nintendo |
For Spiderman, Sony Owns the movie rights. Because of that, They have leverage against MS. Its why we never saw spiderman again in any of xbox consoles. Even the marvel avengers spiderman (Fortnite is different).
Any asset of the game, belongs to the game developer, not the publisher. The publisher owns the rights to publish, like Sunset Overdrive. Its owned by Sony, The studio belongs to Sony, but the publisher is MS. So Sony cant simply get the game on their console, until MS agreements runs out. MS cant put the game on their XSX/S on other hand.
Shifty1897
Member
I've got some fond childhood memories of one hit kill, pistols only in multiplayer.
OmegaSupreme
advanced basic bitch
rodrigolfp
Haptic Gamepads 4 Life
But you also needed to expand your perspective for the game not suck anymore, after the mod to use mouse+kb and good framerates...
it played like shit even compared to FPSs of its days...
Sp3eD
0G M3mbeR
Absolutely loved the mission structure in goldeneye and loved how you had to do more with increased difficulty. Made every level feel like it had 3 different versions (and it also had that custom mode where you could adjust difficulty once you mastered the level).
I know perfect dark / zero had similar structure, but it never felt as good as in 007.
Also the cheats being attached to getting through certain difficulties in speed run times was carrot on a stick genius. I will never forget the feeling of accomplishment in getting through facility in that crazy fast time to unlock the invincibility cheat. I think I literally cheered when I did it.
I know perfect dark / zero had similar structure, but it never felt as good as in 007.
Also the cheats being attached to getting through certain difficulties in speed run times was carrot on a stick genius. I will never forget the feeling of accomplishment in getting through facility in that crazy fast time to unlock the invincibility cheat. I think I literally cheered when I did it.
Deerock71
Member
Mixing franchises creates wormholes. Do not dabble in such dark majicks.
GriffinCorp
Member
Xbox has been trying for years. Please let this be they’re moment. I just played the N64 Goldeneye a couple of days ago. I hope this is happening.
SLB1904
Banned
lol first time hearing this with bass