Thursday, March 04, 2004
Sorry for another game-related post, but... it's all I'm thinking of right now. And fresh on my mind are two new Bond games from EA: Everything Nothing, out now, and the forthcoming GoldenEye: Dr. No vs Goldfinger.
Everything or Nothing looks and feels like a real big-budget sort of game. It's got a totally original plot written by the Bond scriptwriter Bruce Feirstein, a new Bond song by Mya, and a whole cast of real actors (including Pierce Brosnan, Heidi Klum, Willem Dafoe and Shannon Elizabeth) lending their voices and faces to the game. It's even got the Bond car (Aston Martin Vanquish) and a "pre-titles" opening sequence, where Bond finishes off a mission before diving into the main story. So it seems to have the requisite Bond elements -- certainly enough at first glance.
The game itself still needs a lot of work, though there's enough potential here that I'm honestly willing to forgive a lot of it. They've shifted to a third-person view now, meaning that unlike the original GoldenEye (the most popular Bond game of them all) you're not viewing the game through Bond's eyes -- instead, you see him on screen and control him from there. This allows the game to have more of an all-around action feel, which is fair enough because Bond isn't just about guns. I really like the hand-to-hand combat, for instance; you can mix up your blows by grabbing objects to throw or even rip someone's gun from their hands. And now that you can see Bond, you can also hide him behind crates and corners, and then pop out to fire. It's a really cool idea, but doesn't really work because you're usually being shot at from all angles, meaning there isn't anywhere to hide and doing so will probably just get you killed.
There are also some driving levels (which makes sense, since every Bond film has a good chase scene) which are a mixed bag. When the levels are good, they're fantastic -- simple, fast, full of explosions, and with depth by way of shortcuts and new routes and enemies. Unfortunately, they also felt the need to turn the driving levels into mini-Grand Theft Auto clones. Now, I LIKE GTA a lot, and I don't really have a problem with copying it (if you're going to copy a game, why not copy the best?). My problem is that they did a REALLY half-assed job of it. Naturally, the areas are much smaller than GTA's, but they're also totally lacking in detail or secrets. Alternate routes are few and far between, despite the apparently open areas, and there is little cohesion or intelligent planning when it comes to their layout. In general, it's boring. I can see a vague place for more GTA-style driving missions, taking place in urban areas packed with other cars and not necessarily involving flat-out speed and destruction, but if it's not implemented right it's useless. And it is here.
I wonder sometimes if EA "gets" Bond. They certainly do on the surface, but in other areas I'm really not so sure. Like the cars. Yeah, the Aston Martin is there, but what are Bond's other cars? A superbike and an SUV. How utterly American. His main gadget? A Q-Spider, a spider robot. Bond gadgets are almost ALWAYS regular items with hidden functions (pen grenade, toothpaste C4, etc), not a little robot. The so-called "Bond-liners" are totally flat, too. The latest Bond location? The swamps of New Orleans. Come ON.
And yet, with all that in mind they also came up with the super-cool "Bond Moments". See, every once in a while there's an opportunity to improvise, to deviate from the mission plan, and to accomplish your goals in a suitably 007-esque way (ie, blow up a gas station and take out two tanks AND a helicopter at the same time). These are awesome. They accurately reflect what Bond is about and are just damned fun to find and pull off.
But then they go blow their good work there by releasing the first details on GoldenEye: Dr. No vs Goldfinger, and it only justified my fears. First, let me explain the title. The "GoldenEye" part is basically an attempt to piggyback on the incredible success of the original N64 game, which is still regarded as the finest Bond game around. It may also refer to the fact that this is expected to be another first-person shooter like GoldenEye was, and rumours floating around suggest that it's also because the team behind the game are aiming to make it a spiritual sequel to GoldenEye. The "Dr. No vs Goldfinger" part is because this game is focused on the Bond VILLAINS, rather than 007 himself. And indeed the first details confirm that you're not playing as Bond in the game. Instead, you're a henchman trying to gain favour in Goldfinger's organisation (dubbed "the greatest criminal organisation of all time" in the press release -- uh, what about SPECTRE?). The twist? You used to be a candidate for 00-agent status, but MI6 kicked you out for "excessive brutality". Ugh. Ugh. UGH. "Excessive brutality"?!? I really don't think you can get more "American" right there. Bond films generally are not brutal films -- the only exceptions are notable because they are indeed exceptions to the rule. And the N64 game, despite being a shooter in the age of Quake and school shootings, was virtually accepted as the "non-violent" violent game. Parents saw the Bond brand and knew that this wasn't some wild, brutal game -- it would be just like the Bond films they've all seen: Bond shoots enemy. Enemy drops dead. You might see a patch of red on their shirt. That's about it. But hey, the trend in games is to get edgier, to get more hip, to hit maturity... and apparently, violence is the way. They really, really don't get it.
And it's sad, because generally it sounds like this could be a good game. I mean, it's a return to the original GoldenEye style, and features villains across the Bond universe, continuity be damned. The multiplayer, with all the villains present, should be awesome (and incidentally, if I'm not Bond, I bag Red Grant... or Alec Trevelyan).
The game will be featured heavily at E3 in LA in May, apparently. Wish I was going...
Posted at 11:51 PM
