Nintendo to Microsoft: No Goldeneye for you!
Monday, January 14th, 2008 at 10:30pm by Jack
Word on the digital street is that Nintendo is playing the no soup for you card on Microsoft as it pertains to that golden goodie, Goldeneye.
Allegedly, in what is quickly becoming a pissing match of almost biblical proportions, Nintendo blocked the title’s move over to Xbox Live Arcade, regardless of the fact that accepting the deal would have also allowed Rare to publish Goldeneye and other Rare developed titles to be named later on the Virtual Console. Nintendo President Satoru Iwata himself was rumored to be in on the negotiations (or lack thereof, for that matter). Also keep in mind this is all heresay from Microsoft sources.
If this story is true, you can whine all you want about how Nintendo is being a stubborn ass, because bottom line is this is all a business, and these companies are competitors. Nintendo saw a way to keep its edge this generation, and it took it. Besides, when Brawl hits next month this will all be a distant memory.
January 14th, 2008 at 10:38 pm
I believe the rumor going around is that if this went through, Microsoft would be allowed to publish updated Rare games, such as Goldeneye and Banjo Kazooie and Nintendo would have been allowed to put the original games up on the VC. It looks like a win-win for gamers if you ask me.
January 14th, 2008 at 11:00 pm
Yea, but it’s business, and that is not really winning for Nintendo, and since they have the best hand here, they do what is best for them.
January 14th, 2008 at 11:21 pm
This all has to be taken with a grain of salt, though, as it IS just rumor. But honestly, the way I look at it, this just saves me 10 bucks. I’m happy.
January 14th, 2008 at 11:27 pm
that game sucks! Come on, go back and play it, it’s not that great anymore.
January 14th, 2008 at 11:30 pm
@ sir jorge:
It’s not acclaimed by its current state (though its still good for multi) but rather by the revolution it brought. Without it, FPSs wouldnt be as great as it is today.
January 15th, 2008 at 1:29 am
One of my favorite games on the N64. It deserves to be on the VC, not Arcade. As for me, I own the cart so I could care less.
January 15th, 2008 at 1:31 am
I didn`t like it either, but i`m happy Nintendo stoped this.
January 15th, 2008 at 2:21 am
“Besides, when Brawl hits next month this will all be a distant memory.”
Except it isn’t coming out next month.
March 9th, delayed again.
January 15th, 2008 at 3:04 am
Streex, the reason people (myself included) want it for XBLA is because of the online multiplayer. I own the cart as well, so I wouldn’t buy it without online. And we all know that if Nintendo released it on VC it wouldn’t have online.
I don’t care who’s at fault here. I want my online Goldeneye and I want it in 2-3 months like it was supposed to have been. It really shouldn’t be that hard to compromise some sort of 50/50 deal.
Anon, I looked at the official site to confirm, and it’s true. All this bad news in one post is killing me. D:
January 15th, 2008 at 3:27 am
If the story is true then it’s a little disappointing to hear this. I would of enjoyed running through Goldeneye again, even if it doesnt stand up to todays games.
But I can understand why Nintendo would say no, especially if XBLA got a revamped version. That would of been a killer to Nintendo owners.
Itd be a bit like finding out your hottest looking ex just went all bases with the new guy after you put in all the hard work.
January 15th, 2008 at 3:48 am
I didn’t know letting a developer put a game out on your system was “hard work”. Rare made the game, not Nintendo.
January 15th, 2008 at 6:27 am
I didnt mean developer wise. I meant in gameplaying/console owning kind of way.
One of the big things about N64 was Goldeneye. Now Xbox want to do something we all want to do….play Goldeneye online.
January 15th, 2008 at 8:40 am
@droop4
of course it would be winning for nintendo they make money of people who download the game on xbox live and the VC. Now the VC doesn’t have some of the biggest games on the Nintendo 64 available, such as Goldeneye, the Banjo Kazooie series, Diddy Kong Racing, and others.
January 15th, 2008 at 9:38 am
Brawl next month? Oh ha ha….as if.
From the dojo:
Due to delays in the completion of Super Smash Bros. Brawl, we’ve had to change the release date of the game to Sunday, March 9th.
I deeply apologize to the people who have looked forward to playing the game for so long and ask that you hold on just a little longer. Thank you for your patience.
January 15th, 2008 at 10:51 am
When the rumor about all this claims “Nintendo is stopping Microsoft”, we’re only hearing a half-truth that’s been reinterpreted by a bunch of uneducated 13 year olds whose mommies let them spend way too much at the computer. “Nintendo stopping Microsoft” in this case is bad translation of the legalese that is actually defining the original contract statutes. The game was developed by Rareware, Ltd. in Twycross, England. The game was licensed by United Artist. The game was published by Nintendo of America/Nintendo Co. Ltd. In the end, Rare has ZERO say-so in the game’s destiny, as seeing now it is no longer even the same company. It is in fact an entirely new corporate entity with separate trademarks and everything. It’s the publisher who always gets control of everything. This whole thing is as lame as the idea that Halo will somehow make its way to the other consoles. Not gonna happen, people. If you people are THAT desperate to play Golden Eye online, download the Half-life 2/Source Mod “Golden Eye Source.” It’s an incredible recreation of the Golden Eye multiplayer game but with Half-life 2 quality graphics and online multiplayer.
January 15th, 2008 at 11:16 am
I’ve wanted to say something about this topic… but am worried that the one-sided nature of information available combined with silly oversimplification from fanboys from both sides makes it pointless.
There is nothing wrong with Nintendo wanting to protect their asset here. GoldenEye is immediately recognized as “the” reason to buy an N64, perhaps even more than Mario 64 was. Why would Nintendo let that property move to the XBox 360 without heavy compensation? (In the same vein, Microsoft squashed the Halo DS demo because they want the Halo name to stay exclusive to XBox. The name recognition was worth more than the easy profits they would’ve gotten from allowing a DS game to be published.)
There is no wrong party here - if Microsoft really wants to put the game out, they will find an agreement that is acceptable for both parties; if they are more concerned about profit, then it won’t happen. Same goes for Nintendo.
The two important questions are: (1) which company will bend first; and (2) if neither company compromises, does either company have the ability to publish classic Rare games anyway? It really would be a shame if the Rare’s N64 games could never be republished because of this dispute.
With question (1), I’m awfully skeptical about how this information is being “leaked” into the gaming media. My cynical side keeps thinking that this is an effort to blackmail Nintendo with bad PR if they refuse to accept the deal. Poor Microsoft! A repressed victim who only wants gamers to have fun, while big bully Nintendo won’t share their games…
Anyway, I hope that Rare’s games do come out eventually. But until that day, there are countless great games available to play [i]right now[/i]… so it’s really not worth stressing over.
January 15th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
God damn it, this is some real crap right here, man. Personally, if Nintendo is the one that stone-walled the prospect of online Goldeneye, then I am EXTREMELY upset with them. From my point of view (the consumer), I want Goldeneye, and I want online multiplayer. Microsoft and Rare of course know that nearly the entire gamer population wants that too. But of course, because Nintendo isn’t getting the scratch it thinks it deserves, this happens. Now, all the fun I and the rest of the world’s gamers could have had by playing a revamped version of Goldeneye is lost forever. This is just unacceptable. It’s purely a selfish move from Nintendo, and I don’t care if it’s “business as usual”, as I’m sure they have enough money to let this one slide and make their (former) customers happy. Seriously, this is a travesty, and I hope Nintendo gets some heated emails for this.
Now of course this comment is subject to change when all facts are revealed, but it wouldn’t surprise me that Nintendo blocked the XBLA version of Goldeneye from being released. It wouldn’t surprise me in the least.
January 15th, 2008 at 12:43 pm
This is absolutely stupid. An updated yet very true to its original version of Goldeneye, running at 1080p , 60FPS, achievements and ONLINE multiplayer?
Nintendo and MoneySoft should have worked together to allow the game on BOTH the VC AND LIVE. Gamers on BOTH systems would buy the hell out of the game.
I would love to see a perfect arcade addition of KI on the 360 as well.
Work together guys, and watch the money come in for both sides!
January 15th, 2008 at 1:09 pm
droop, there were BETTER FPS games on the N64 than that overrated title, such as Turok.
January 15th, 2008 at 4:18 pm
@Kale
I’m not sure who has the rights for games developed by Rare and published Nintendo, but if Rare had no say as you claim, why was Diddy Kong Racing DS stripped of all Banjo characters? why is there no N64 Rare game on VC yet?
January 15th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
Once again, I must stress how stupid this all is. Seriously.
Microsoft could make a LOT of money on X-box live with updated, HD, online versions of Goldeneye, Killer Instinct, Perfect Dark, Banjo 1 & 2 , Diddy Kong racing, and so on…
Nintendo could make a LOT of money on the VC with Goldeneye, Killer Instinct, Perfect Dark, Banjo 1 & 2 , Diddy Kong racing . Hell, maybe even be forced to IMPROVE them with online play to keep up with the 360.
Gamers would be in love with either the VC or the Live arcade, happy gamers all around. Happy gamers, happy Nintendo, happy moneysoft.
SO. It is a Win-Win-Win scenario for gamers, Nintendo and Moneysoft.
Not doing this is absolutely, positively stupid.
January 16th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
yeah they could make a lot of money, but unfortunately that’s not how all business works. just seeing $$$ isn’t enough to make a compramise from Nintendo’s point of view. especially when they are dominating the scene, i don’t think a few extra bucks are going to make or break them. besides someone already stated that’s like xbox letting halo come out on another system. it’s the name that they are protecting. i don’t blame them or have any ill will, it was a great game, but as a fanboy i wouldn’t want any other console to get their grubby little hands on our games. so cry, complain, and stomp your feet and say what you will, but in the end i get the satisfaction of knowing tough shit
January 16th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Everyone, keep in mind we’re only hearing one side of the story. In my opinion, speculation before we know all of the facts is pointless.
January 18th, 2008 at 1:11 pm
If this story is true, you can whine all you want about how Nintendo is being a stubborn ass, because bottom line is this is all a business, and these companies are competitors. Nintendo saw a way to keep its edge this generation, and it took it. Besides, when Brawl hits next month this will all be a distant memory.
If this is true… then it’s a shame that as a gamer you have such a lousy opinion.
Last time I checked RARE still releases games on Nintendo systems… because that’s what best FOR gamers not Microsoft who owns the company these days.
Really a lousy opinion - no matter what!
January 19th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
Where was Microsoft when Rare needed money to finance the Goldeneye project back in 1996? They were too busy with Windows 95.
Since Nintendo financed and published Goldeneye from the start, they should and will be able to do whatever they want with it.
Assuming this story is true, if Nintendo can boldly decline the deal, then they might already have some way of putting it out on VC exclusively, but is behind held behind closed doors in the meantime.