So, now we've examined the history of Bond and gaming, and so now I will undergo the task of creating the game that I believe would best represent James Bond in the interactive medium. Perhaps what I'm doing is just this side of fanfic, but maybe if I could change a mind or two, I consider this article a success (and really, it's all I could hope for).
Looking back at the franchise as a whole gives us the perspective to see what has worked and what has not. If the several takes on this formula are any indication, it would seem that the best approach would be a first-person shooter. However, the reason behind this could be that EA (and subsequently, Activision), have tried their hand at the shooter genre almost exclusively (although Activision's plans for future iterations remain to be seen) not because the first-person perspective necessarily fits the Bond franchise well, but because both publishers were perhaps trying to capture the allure of the coveted Goldeneye.
Indeed, the entire franchise has almost always tried to match the multiplayer chaos that made Goldeneye so great. However, simply in trying to reach that standard, and claiming that later iterations will be as good as the that game means that, whether the games actually do that or not, the expectations created by that promise won't be met. This is because no title could capture the importance of Goldeneye's release. That is, the importance of being one of the finest early examples of an FPS on a console. Because no other Bond FPS can claim this importance and must instead be weighed against Goldeneye, regardless of the title's own merits, the first-person genre has, for lack of a better term, been done.
Another possible reason that first-person shooters have been the standard model for Bond games could be because of the audience's familiarity with the genre. Fans themselves expect Bond games to be like Goldeneye, because they feel comfortable with that genre. Fans expect the publisher to try to re-create Goldeneye appeal to them, and in turn the publisher does this to cater to that crowd. The Bond licence is a comfort area to most of the people who play them, and it's likely that publishers feel this way too.
Now, assuming that both the players and the publishers want more done to the franchise and aren't just content with the current "cash-cow" model, how can we come up with something that is more faithful the James Bond movies? To identify what we're supposed be faithful to, let's identify some common aspects of Bond films: chases (both on foot and vehicles), gunfights, gadgets, stealth, distinct villains, and Bond Girls. Which of these are easily applicable to games? Obviously, villains and Bond Girls are easily applied to plot lines, which I'll get to later. However, The rest of the aspects I mention are all in the neighborhood of "Gameplay Mechanics", and how applying those concepts offers us a foundation in which to create this theoretical Bond game. And while the foundation of a "great" Bond game would seem to be building a completely new game from scratch, when we expand our scope outside shooters, we have several new templates from which to work from. We don't have to go in a completely revolutionary route to create something great, we just have to make something new for Bond players. Keeping the aforementioned aspects in mind, the genre that can most help us happens to be the platformer. With some adventure and action elements thrown in is a great template for us to work off.
With that in mind, to form a clear picture of the sort of game I'm thinking of, imagine Assassin's Creed. Despite the array of opinions about that game, most people can agree that one of the best things about that game is the way that jumping from building to building felt. It felt accurate and, most importantly, fun. Thinking of just that alone sets up a good foundation with what should be with Bond. So, imagine Altair in a James Bond skin, and instead of Jerusalem, imagine a modern city like Hong Kong or New York. Instead of a horse you have a luxury car, and instead of things like knives and swords you have guns and gadgets. Now you have an idea of what this game would be like. The game would be objective-based, with it plopping you in an area, giving you an objective (such as chasing someone down), and you completing that objective. To give the game the feeling of a fast-paced action movie, the game would feature more linear enviornments, with a small amount of room left for exploration. By creating smaller areas, this means developers to create the wide variety of locales needed to properly captivate an average Bond movie's variety of landscapes.
With the addition of gadgets, the stealth sections of the game can be further expanded. The same example of hiding in certain areas to throw guards and the like off of your trail, with devices like flashes, grappling hooks, etc. And with these devices we can make the substance of the "chasing of Bond" more lifelike by adding gunfire from both sides. This, more than any of the running and gunning that makes up the majority of Bond shooters, brings the aspects of your average Bond movie to life in the modern game world. It would (disregarding any bugs or issues involving the implementation of these ideas, something that is very likely to happen in the development process) perhaps allow us to accurately capture the feel of these movies, and isn't that what any licenced game is supposed to do?
Maybe these are the ravings of someone who just wants to see something new out of a franchise with so much potential, but like I mentioned earlier, maybe someone who needs to see it will see it, and at the very least take a few cues that they may like. Or maybe my whole idea is crap.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Bringing Bond Back Pt.1: The History of Bond
The James Bond franchise has had a prolific role in the movie world. With over 20 movies now under its belt, it's one of the biggest movie franchises in history. Being such a large identity in the public conscience, it was inevitable that such a large franchise with gunfights (and shaken martinis) would see video game adaptations, especially if the character involved in them is extremely marketable. Bond’s history with games may not be as long as his history with movies (or books, for that matter) has, but with the relative age of the video game industry being young compared to that of movies, he’s been in video game history much longer. From text adventure to racing games to first-person shooters, Bond has worn several hats throughout his gaming career.
The first “Official” Bond game was James Bond 007(1983), released on two of the Atari’s (2600 and 5200), ColecoVision, and the Commodore 64. The game was a side-scroller game based on four Bond movies (Diamonds Are Forever, Moonraker, For Your Eyes Only, and The Spy Who Loved Me). A View to a Kill (1985) was then released as both a text adventure game and an action game on both the PC and C64. Most Bond games in the 80’s and early 90’s (including, but not limited to, The Living Daylights (1986), License to kill (1989), and James Bond: The Duel (1993)) followed these formats, ranging from adventure games to action side-scrollers, based on the movies or spinning off into an original Bond story.
The Bond franchise as a whole (except for the books) took a hiatus in the early 90’s. It was 1995’s Goldeneye that broke that drought, and the movie was positively reviewed, hailed as a return to form for Bond after the Timothy Dalton era. Movie was released. People more or less liked it. That should’ve been the end of that. Until, that is, Rare released Goldeneye 007(1997) for the Nintendo 64 two years later (James Bond 007, for the Game Boy was released the same year). This time, Bond went modern, switching to the first-person perspective made popular by games like Wolfenstein 3D and Doom. However, it innovated in many ways that were new to console FPS’s, such as a Zoomable sniper scope, and had a hit-detection system that allowed one-hit kills if enemies were shot in the head. The game was also lauded from a concise control scheme that was rare in consoles at the time, and a deathmatch mode that had a high replay value. In fact, the game better reviews than even the movie did (if Metacritic is to be believed), and has since then gone on to become one of the best movie-game adaptations to date.
With such a highly lauded title under its already bulging belt, the next Bond game had a lot to live up to. Unfortunately, developer Rare no longer wanted to do Bond games, and moved on the create Perfect Dark (2000) (ironically, the game was billed as being the “spiritual successor” to Goldeneye), and the franchise was handed over to Electronic Arts. For its first outing, EA had Black Ops develop Tomorrow Never Dies (1999) for the Playstation. Abandoning the formula that had made Goldeneye so popular, the game switched from first to third-person perspective, and favored a story that was loosely based on the movie of the same name, and left multiplayer out altogether. Not surprisingly, the game was not received well, with its biggest problem being the lack of multiplayer support of any kind, as well as the aforementioned story that was far removed from that of the movie.
With its next Bond game, EA then shifted gears, and attempted to capture the quality of Goldeneye. Switching back first-person, EA released The World Is Not Enough (2000) (a year after the movie actually came out) For the Nintendo 64 and Playstation, with a Game Boy Color version released the following year. Black Ops handled the Playstation version while Eurocom worked on the N64 version. With the return of the first-person perspective came multiplayer on the N64 version (it was not included in the Playstation version). The game garnered mostly positive reviews, with the N64 version receiving better reviews because of the inclusion of multiplayer; however both versions were well-received for returning to the Goldeneye formula. Shortly after that, a racing game, entitled 007 Racing (2000), was released, to mostly mediocre reviews.
Knowing now that the first-person perspective was what fans wanted in their Bond games, EA continued down that particular path. The next two games released, James Bond 007: Agent Under Fire (2001), and James Bond 007: Nightfire (2002) both closely adhered to the formula with varied results. Agent Under Fire had varying scores from review publications, from 1up.com’s D+ (below Average) to Game Informer’s 9 out of 10 (superb). The game was hailed for a well-executed variety of gameplay styles (GI), while 1up panned it as being "little more than a paint-by-numbers first-person shooter with a few driving and shooting gallery segments thrown in for variety's sake." Nightfire fared slightly better, with EGM giving it an A-, praising it as "The best 007 title to come around since GoldenEye". However, reviews were still somewhat mixed, although with a positive majority.
About a year later, EA released James Bond 007: Everything or Nothing(2003) on the GBA, with console and PC versions. This time, EA chose to forgo the first-person perspective and again tried its hand at a third-person shooter. The game was unique in a number of ways; it had a co-op mode instead of deathmatch, and it had characters actually modeled after the various actors in the game. In spite of this seemingly obvious oversight, the game received mostly positive reviews, with Gamespot's review claiming it was "perhaps the best James Bond game ever made." It was perhaps a breath of fresh air in the field of Bond shooters.
Later that same year, EA decided to go another route, albeit while switching back first-person. In GoldenEye: Rogue Agent(2004) (notice the lack of the James Bond 007 in the title), you play the role of ex-MI6 Jonathan Hunter, who teams up with Goldfinger in the series first foray into playing a villain. Aside from the unique premise, the game received mostly mixed reviews, problems cited being that it was generic, and that it seemed "...like a cheap attempt to cash in on the nostalgic feelings that many have for [Goldeneye]" (Gamespot). Playing the bad guy didn't stop the game from being boring, apparently.
Cut to 2005, and EA then releases a throwback to classic Bond in From Russia with Love (2005), based on the classic 1963 movie. Switching again to third-person, the game focused on lots of gadgets and had an element of stealth to it. Sean Connery even lent his full likeness to the game. Unfortunately, the game met with middling reviews, earning a 71 metacritic score.
The James Bond license was then acquired by Activision in 2006, and in their first Bond game was Quantum of Solace(2008). Although it coincided with the release of the movie of the same name, the plot is actually based on both Casino Royale and Quantum. The game was based in first-person, though it switched into third-person when Bond took cover. Daniel Craig lent his likeness to the game, and the game was based on the Call of Duty 4 engine. Again, however, the game was still panned critically, being seen as to solid but derivative.
That, in a nutshell, is Bond's history with video games. In Part 2, We'll examine how the Bond franchise could be redeemed as a franchise, and how the Bond experience could be further authenticated in the interactive medium.
The first “Official” Bond game was James Bond 007(1983), released on two of the Atari’s (2600 and 5200), ColecoVision, and the Commodore 64. The game was a side-scroller game based on four Bond movies (Diamonds Are Forever, Moonraker, For Your Eyes Only, and The Spy Who Loved Me). A View to a Kill (1985) was then released as both a text adventure game and an action game on both the PC and C64. Most Bond games in the 80’s and early 90’s (including, but not limited to, The Living Daylights (1986), License to kill (1989), and James Bond: The Duel (1993)) followed these formats, ranging from adventure games to action side-scrollers, based on the movies or spinning off into an original Bond story.
The Bond franchise as a whole (except for the books) took a hiatus in the early 90’s. It was 1995’s Goldeneye that broke that drought, and the movie was positively reviewed, hailed as a return to form for Bond after the Timothy Dalton era. Movie was released. People more or less liked it. That should’ve been the end of that. Until, that is, Rare released Goldeneye 007(1997) for the Nintendo 64 two years later (James Bond 007, for the Game Boy was released the same year). This time, Bond went modern, switching to the first-person perspective made popular by games like Wolfenstein 3D and Doom. However, it innovated in many ways that were new to console FPS’s, such as a Zoomable sniper scope, and had a hit-detection system that allowed one-hit kills if enemies were shot in the head. The game was also lauded from a concise control scheme that was rare in consoles at the time, and a deathmatch mode that had a high replay value. In fact, the game better reviews than even the movie did (if Metacritic is to be believed), and has since then gone on to become one of the best movie-game adaptations to date.
With such a highly lauded title under its already bulging belt, the next Bond game had a lot to live up to. Unfortunately, developer Rare no longer wanted to do Bond games, and moved on the create Perfect Dark (2000) (ironically, the game was billed as being the “spiritual successor” to Goldeneye), and the franchise was handed over to Electronic Arts. For its first outing, EA had Black Ops develop Tomorrow Never Dies (1999) for the Playstation. Abandoning the formula that had made Goldeneye so popular, the game switched from first to third-person perspective, and favored a story that was loosely based on the movie of the same name, and left multiplayer out altogether. Not surprisingly, the game was not received well, with its biggest problem being the lack of multiplayer support of any kind, as well as the aforementioned story that was far removed from that of the movie.
With its next Bond game, EA then shifted gears, and attempted to capture the quality of Goldeneye. Switching back first-person, EA released The World Is Not Enough (2000) (a year after the movie actually came out) For the Nintendo 64 and Playstation, with a Game Boy Color version released the following year. Black Ops handled the Playstation version while Eurocom worked on the N64 version. With the return of the first-person perspective came multiplayer on the N64 version (it was not included in the Playstation version). The game garnered mostly positive reviews, with the N64 version receiving better reviews because of the inclusion of multiplayer; however both versions were well-received for returning to the Goldeneye formula. Shortly after that, a racing game, entitled 007 Racing (2000), was released, to mostly mediocre reviews.
Knowing now that the first-person perspective was what fans wanted in their Bond games, EA continued down that particular path. The next two games released, James Bond 007: Agent Under Fire (2001), and James Bond 007: Nightfire (2002) both closely adhered to the formula with varied results. Agent Under Fire had varying scores from review publications, from 1up.com’s D+ (below Average) to Game Informer’s 9 out of 10 (superb). The game was hailed for a well-executed variety of gameplay styles (GI), while 1up panned it as being "little more than a paint-by-numbers first-person shooter with a few driving and shooting gallery segments thrown in for variety's sake." Nightfire fared slightly better, with EGM giving it an A-, praising it as "The best 007 title to come around since GoldenEye". However, reviews were still somewhat mixed, although with a positive majority.
About a year later, EA released James Bond 007: Everything or Nothing(2003) on the GBA, with console and PC versions. This time, EA chose to forgo the first-person perspective and again tried its hand at a third-person shooter. The game was unique in a number of ways; it had a co-op mode instead of deathmatch, and it had characters actually modeled after the various actors in the game. In spite of this seemingly obvious oversight, the game received mostly positive reviews, with Gamespot's review claiming it was "perhaps the best James Bond game ever made." It was perhaps a breath of fresh air in the field of Bond shooters.
Later that same year, EA decided to go another route, albeit while switching back first-person. In GoldenEye: Rogue Agent(2004) (notice the lack of the James Bond 007 in the title), you play the role of ex-MI6 Jonathan Hunter, who teams up with Goldfinger in the series first foray into playing a villain. Aside from the unique premise, the game received mostly mixed reviews, problems cited being that it was generic, and that it seemed "...like a cheap attempt to cash in on the nostalgic feelings that many have for [Goldeneye]" (Gamespot). Playing the bad guy didn't stop the game from being boring, apparently.
Cut to 2005, and EA then releases a throwback to classic Bond in From Russia with Love (2005), based on the classic 1963 movie. Switching again to third-person, the game focused on lots of gadgets and had an element of stealth to it. Sean Connery even lent his full likeness to the game. Unfortunately, the game met with middling reviews, earning a 71 metacritic score.
The James Bond license was then acquired by Activision in 2006, and in their first Bond game was Quantum of Solace(2008). Although it coincided with the release of the movie of the same name, the plot is actually based on both Casino Royale and Quantum. The game was based in first-person, though it switched into third-person when Bond took cover. Daniel Craig lent his likeness to the game, and the game was based on the Call of Duty 4 engine. Again, however, the game was still panned critically, being seen as to solid but derivative.
That, in a nutshell, is Bond's history with video games. In Part 2, We'll examine how the Bond franchise could be redeemed as a franchise, and how the Bond experience could be further authenticated in the interactive medium.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
