Vor wenigen Tagen wurde ein neues Gameplay-Video released, wo man das Silo-Level sieht:
Sieht schon ziemlich aus.
tba
Diese Seite verwendet Cookies. Durch die Nutzung unserer Seite erklären Sie sich damit einverstanden, dass wir Cookies setzen. Weitere Informationen
Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 1 mal editiert, zuletzt von Flat Eric ()
Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 2 mal editiert, zuletzt von dsf ()
Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 1 mal editiert, zuletzt von Flat Eric ()
In der Tat.Flat Eric schrieb:
Sieht so fantastisch aus...
Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 1 mal editiert, zuletzt von Akido ()
Der Ersteller des Videos kommentiert es auch unter dem Footage:Licences are by nature highly restrictive agreements, and while GoldenEye 007 slipped past under the radar of the licence holders, the success of our game meant that subsequent games have been less fortunate, and probably less free from that kind of oversight in their development than those teams would have liked.
- Quelle Kommentar unter dem Video (finde die richtige Stelle nicht mehr, ist aber auch hier gepostet worden)I'm getting many comments saying I got the "Nintendo wasn't the reason
this got cancelled" wrong, that I oversimplified and misunderstood. I
did not. Let me explain more, and how I've been in this community and
legal mess for long before probably many people here:
Nintendo doesn't own the Bond IP at all. It's not their property, it was a
licensed game, such license expired after the deal was over and EA got
it on a bid. The game was published by Nintendo yes, just like Banjo
Kazooie was, and where is that game? Xbox.
Now, in the description I clearly mention: "As you can see, even if Nintendo was an
issue, they'd have to censor the game heavily for it to adapt to their
view and see a potential release." - What does this mean? Well, that's
explained in the second link which most people seem to outright just
ignore. I obviously address Nintendo as a potential roadblock, but even
if they reached an agreement, then they'd have issues with MGM/EON about
what the game contains. It's all explained in the second link, after
GE64 released and was a big success, they didn't like how the game
"represented" Bond and started adding fees and guidelines to it. No
blood, no Bond dying, no civilian kills, no good vs good characters in
multiplayer, no cheats, no use of Bond theme, Bond model has to be the
current Bond actor (This was recently changed when Barbara said Bond's
actor likeness won't appear on any game anymore), etc.
So, what does this mean? It means that even if Nintendo had a role at blocking this
release, it wasn't their biggest concern. The IP holders always are, and
those are who decide what happens with this.
In 2014, Rare tried to push this again for release with Rare Replay, even went ahead to
record interviews as "Rare Revealed", you can watch it here:
*
Once again, this obviously got declined.
Why? At the time all the licenses expired, nobody owned the gaming
rights like Activision back in 2008, so why? Oh guess what, same reasons
as before! MGM/EON doesn't like videogames and they blocked the
release! It's not that hard to understand and I'm honestly baffled by
the people calling me out on this, when it's clear they didn't stop one
second to think of all the other issues. I've had contact with GE and
XBLA devs about this for years, I heard all stories and versions, some
were told it was Nintendo by the higher ups, other knew it was deeper
than that. Nintedo is, and never was the main issue of this.
Thank you for reading, and seriously, re-read the two links in the
description with the interviews. It's clearly explained there that
Nintendo isn't the only issue here and never was. They don't own the IP,
they don't own the assets, they don't own anything anymore. All of that
expired.
Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 4 mal editiert, zuletzt von Flat Eric ()
Archive.org --> GoldenEye XBLA
1 Besucher