The real Deal behind Goldeneye Cancellation

#1
This is from the "Guess what 360 game" thread, but i felt it deserved its own

Thanks to Mojo

This is no hoax. This is no fan-made ROM hack, PC Source mod or Photoshop fake. This is no joke, and contrary to the date on the cover, this is no April Fool either. This is the Nintendo 64's GoldenEye running on the Xbox 360, made by Rare, published by 007 license holders Activision and released over Live Arcade by Microsoft - and it's the best game you'll never play.
GoldenEye was set for release in the middle of this year, until it was cancelled late in 2007, apparently at the behest of Nintendo. As Oddjaw tells it, Nintendo America boss Reggie Fils-Aime was supposedly completely behind the idea, knowing well what the project would mean to gamers, especially when the deal was sweetened by Rare's offer to port the game to Wii, while making the rest of their back catalogue available on the Virtual Console.
The agreement between the parties allowed the game to be developed almost to completion before Nintendo's Japanese boss Satoru Iwata decided that under absolutely no circumstances would Nintendo allow the game to see release on another platform. While Ninty apparently have neither rights to the code nor any legal means to block the release, it's rumoured that the threat to Activision's relationship with Nintendo was enough for them to disband the project.
As gamers who own Wii and 360, you were going to be taken care of.
 
#7
SantaC said:
we know this. old.
This is the actual stuff from the magazine.

Holy shit, I missed that about the entire back portfolio of Rare... now I'm not just amused, I'm pissed. Fuck you Iwata, I could have awesome shit like Battletoads, Killer Instinct, etc. if not for you!
 
#16
I don't believe that for a second. Its some unidentified source pinning blame on Nintendo for a port that was *never* going to happen.

* Nintendo published the game when Rare were part of Nintendo. So unless explicitly specified in the $300m sale of Rareware, how does anyone but Nintendo own rights to the code? Rareware probably aren't even entitled to port their own non-license games to 360.

* This has been brought up in other threads but Nintendo wouldn't have been the only obstacle anyway. There's the bond license itself, use of likenesses (Pierce Brosnan/Sean Bean etc), use of Eric Serra's soundtrack... Activision, Sony/MGM, various actors...

Ridiculous.
 
#18
Nintendo aquired the original license in 1996, not Rare. Rare was working on a contractual basis, like any for hire developer really... it's like suggesting Eurocom and Activision could get together and rerelease TWINE or Nightfire without EA's say so. Fat chance.

I do like the suggestion that Darth Iwata had to illegally scare Activision out of making easy money though. :lol
 
#23
jarrod said:
Nintendo aquired the original license in 1996, not Rare. Rare was working on a contractual basis, like any for hire developer really... it's like suggesting Eurocom and Activision could get together and rerelease TWINE or Nightfire without EA's say so. Fat chance.
Rare were 51% Nintendo 49% Stamper Bros weren't they? So its not even like they were a company that was just hired out. Rare *were* Nintendo at the time.

And yes, Nintendo held the license.

So you've got some unidentified 'mole' in an Xbox-only gaming rag, blaming the president of the competition for a game that lots of people want to see on XBLA. Juicy!
 
#24
radioheadrule83 said:
I don't believe that for a second. Its some unidentified source pinning blame on Nintendo for a port that was *never* going to happen.

* Nintendo published the game when Rare were part of Nintendo. So unless explicitly specified in the $300m sale of Rareware, how does anyone but Nintendo own rights to the code? Rareware probably aren't even entitled to port their own non-license games to 360.

* This has been brought up in other threads but Nintendo wouldn't have been the only obstacle anyway. There's the bond license itself, use of likenesses (Pierce Brosnan/Sean Bean etc), use of Eric Serra's soundtrack... Activision, Sony/MGM, various actors...

Ridiculous.
Yeah, this can't be the whole story. Why can't everyone just accept the license is a mess? For this game to come out, it would require the 4 biggest companies in gaming to be on the same page...not happening, ever.
 
#26
jarrod said:
Nintendo aquired the original license in 1996, not Rare. Rare was working on a contractual basis, like any for hire developer really... it's like suggesting Eurocom and Activision could get together and rerelease TWINE or Nightfire without EA's say so. Fat chance.

I do like the suggestion that Darth Iwata had to illegally scare Activision out of making easy money though. :lol
That's what I think. It seems as if the magazine got somehow hold of the material and the just copied the story from the internet. Why would Iwata interfere even though he didn't when Rare left? It would be right issues.
 

Princess Skittles

Prince's's 'Skittle's
#28
radioheadrule83 said:
I don't believe that for a second. Its some unidentified source pinning blame on Nintendo for a port that was *never* going to happen.
I'm leaning with you on this one.

The whole thing sounds like sensationalism (perfect for GAF though).
 
#32
radioheadrule83 said:
I don't believe that for a second. Its some unidentified source pinning blame on Nintendo for a port that was *never* going to happen.

* Nintendo published the game when Rare were part of Nintendo. So unless explicitly specified in the $300m sale of Rareware, how does anyone but Nintendo own rights to the code? Rareware probably aren't even entitled to port their own non-license games to 360.

* This has been brought up in other threads but Nintendo wouldn't have been the only obstacle anyway. There's the bond license itself, use of likenesses (Pierce Brosnan/Sean Bean etc), use of Eric Serra's soundtrack... Activision, Sony/MGM, various actors...

Ridiculous.
How else could you play an unreleased game without going to the source yourself? Rare/MS probably wanted the world to know, cause they went to great lengths to make this happen. This magazine provides more evidence than any other site claiming to be in the know about Goldeneye.

Why would MS green light a project like this unless all parties agreed? Someone mentioned big corporations go through heavy budgeting and planning before starting any game. Think about it.
 
#37
Nintendo are greedy and rightfully so, maybe Satoru Iwata smelled something fishy in the contract they signed with MS about royalties. To cut a project about to be completed smells like politics behind doors and how much one receives in royalties.
 
#44
Prine said:
Why would MS green light a project like this unless all parties agreed? Someone mentioned big corporations go through heavy budgeting and planning before starting any game. Think about it.
This also assumes that Reggie went ahead and agreed to working with MS without consulting NCL. Does anyone think NOA has that sort of autonomy? 'Cos I sure don't.

This story reeks of sensationalism.
 
#46
SolidSnakex said:
He's running a business, and from a business point of view it wouldn't be in his best interest to allow this to happen.
Uh... Rare backlog nothing in his best interests because the competition gets one game (which they also get)?
 
#47
radioheadrule83 said:
Rare were 51% Nintendo 49% Stamper Bros weren't they? So its not even like they were a company that was just hired out. Rare *were* Nintendo at the time.
Actually, Nintendo didn't invest in Rare until 1998 iirc. :p
 
#50
Mundorare said:
The funny thing about it is that during the bilateral negotiations between Microsoft and Nintendo, the Japanese were offered the possibility of getting the rights to release the original GoldenEye 007 for their Virtual Console in exchange of their blessing for a special edition on Microsoft’s Xbox Live Arcade. Rumour has it they didn’t like the deal, which was, in any case, beneficial for everybody. Including their users.

So basically Nintendo wants GoldenEye. Microsoft wants GoldenEye. Rare wants GoldenEye. Activision wants GoldenEye. And players yearn for GoldenEye. But thanks to the first ones, nobody gets GoldenEye, unless Microsoft or any company without strong commercial ties with Nintendo obtains the Bond licence someday.