Reporting For Duty
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
GoldenEye (2010) vs 007 Legends
I've been surfing around the net and it's not possible to ignore the backlash and terrible review that Legends were given. Goldeneye (2010) also has it's fair share of negativity but some, if not most, people actually enjoyed it and liked it. But I want to know why Goldeneye was given better ratings seeing that Legends are trying to do the same thing but with different Bond stories, here's my evaluation
GOLDENEYE (2010)
+Good graphics (reloaded)
+Variety of weapons
+Nice stealth element
+Multiplayer was good and had old maps
+Story sticks close to the game (and movie) and understandable
+Good voice acting for most of the cast, though...
-Liknesses were all changed
-Lack of gadgets
-Soundtrack lacks the Bond theme
-Removal of Boris from the story
-Story was more straightforward and to the point
007 LEGENDS
+Variety of weapons and weapons feel better
+Return of some gadgets
+Some old characters use the likenesses of their old actors and some actors return to voice their characters
+Tribute to old soundtrack and themes into the soundtrack (especiallyGoldfinger and OHMSS)
+Setpieces and level design is pretty great
-Tacked on fist fighting combat
-MP not so good
-Voice acting not so good and sometimes cringy
-Unless you've watched the movie, you won't be able to understand the story
-How the story is told isn't creative (flashbacks after Bond gets shot in SF)
-Daniel Craig in all of the levels, it was kind of forgivable in Goldeneye but in all of these, no.
-Despite coming out a year after Reloaded and made by the same company and in the same engine, it looks worse (playing on PC at 1080p and it's still blurry and aliased and there is no definition)
What do you guys think?
GOLDENEYE (2010)
+Good graphics (reloaded)
+Variety of weapons
+Nice stealth element
+Multiplayer was good and had old maps
+Story sticks close to the game (and movie) and understandable
+Good voice acting for most of the cast, though...
-Liknesses were all changed
-Lack of gadgets
-Soundtrack lacks the Bond theme
-Removal of Boris from the story
-Story was more straightforward and to the point
007 LEGENDS
+Variety of weapons and weapons feel better
+Return of some gadgets
+Some old characters use the likenesses of their old actors and some actors return to voice their characters
+Tribute to old soundtrack and themes into the soundtrack (especiallyGoldfinger and OHMSS)
+Setpieces and level design is pretty great
-Tacked on fist fighting combat
-MP not so good
-Voice acting not so good and sometimes cringy
-Unless you've watched the movie, you won't be able to understand the story
-How the story is told isn't creative (flashbacks after Bond gets shot in SF)
-Daniel Craig in all of the levels, it was kind of forgivable in Goldeneye but in all of these, no.
-Despite coming out a year after Reloaded and made by the same company and in the same engine, it looks worse (playing on PC at 1080p and it's still blurry and aliased and there is no definition)
What do you guys think?
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I agree. This is why I'm willing to overlook a lot of Legends' issues. While it's a deeply flawed game, at least it tries (and often succeeds) to have fun. Plus, I can't ignore the awesomeness of revisiting classic Bond moments. Legends has Bond style, whereas Goldeneye: Reloaded is just COD with a 007 logo on it. The issue with GE:R is that, although there's nothing wrong with it, there's also nothing special or interesting about it. It's very bland.
My main issue with Legends is that I often find myself getting frustrated and annoyed at the game (i.e. skiing in OHMSS, the motorcycle section in SF, and the data sphere in MR!!!). Because of this, I sometimes flip back and forth on which game I prefer. Sometimes I'll take an average of bored (GE:R) over an average of angry (Legends). That said, I do think that Legends is the better game on the whole, and more importantly, it's the better Bond game.
They are all just bullshit call of duty copies which is annoying, at the end of the day they arnt real bond games. At least 007 legends has some 007 history in it so it's more fun as well as it has some cool vehicle chases but in general they have few 007 elements to even make them James Bond games. I agree there needs to be more action if they make a video game but they should still follow the plot some what to make it more interesting
Both games are cheap Call of Duty rip offs, but they're fun games (I especially enjoyed 007 Legends a lot because of the old Bond movies revisit and the nods to the original scores). They're not good games, but they're fun to play. My main gripe with 007 Legends is that it actually felt very short (I played all six missions in one day), and such a game should have started its development a couple of years earlier so to include the full movies.
Goldfinger should have had a DB5 sequence, which would have felt very fun.
Admittedly, I don't know what else they could have added from OHMSS, as the movie actually doesn't have many action pieces. Perhaps some stealth spying in Piz Gloria or the hand fights from the beginning of the movie.
Licence to Kill should have included a fight in the bait shop and the fight on Milton Krest's ship.
Die Another Day should have included the hovercraft chase, the skirmish fight and the ice palace chase. Seriously, the movie's main flaw is it feels more like a videogame than a movie, so they should have played with that!
Moonraker had the PTS plane fight, the gondola chase (it's over the top for a movie, but imagine how fun that would be in a game!), a fight in Rio de Janeiro and a boat chase.
Skyfall also had plenty of moments which fitted in a videogame; the komodo dragon fight, the London chase and most especially the Skyfall battle.
This is the way I would have actually done the game: http://videogamefanon.wikia.com/wiki/007:_The_Legend_of_James_Bond
Yeah also I liked the idea of playing from different characters perspectives but it didn't work out as well as it sounds
007 Legends has gadgets, but that’s all it has going for it. I feel more like the Daniel Craig Bond in Reloaded.
Yes. You describe it aptly.
While I do get some enjoyment out of Legends (most of it being the fan service) I feel that it lacks the pacing of GE:R. The difference being that GE:R feels like it was paced as a full game whereas Legends feels like it was done level by level.
Rather than being informed by what came before they just rehash what came before. In doing this every level follows almost the exact same structure but with a different skin. Not to say GE:R wasn't guilty of this as well. Just feels a bit more noticeable in Legends.
I'd actually say Legends is the most disappointing Bond game. It was a great concept that wasn't given the time and budget it needed to become fully realised. It was rushed out the door as a budget title but released at full price.