Why isn't GoldenEye in Rare's HD game collection? Here's their answer

Polygon:

"One of Microsoft's most interesting announcements from this E3 is Rare Replay, a collection of 30 Rare Software games spanning the past 30 years, all available for just under 30 dollars. And while many of Rare's most iconic franchises appear in the collection — the Banjo-Kazooie, Perfect Dark and Viva Piñata franchises are all represented in their entirety — one of the company's most well-loved games of all time is absent: GoldenEye 007 on the N64. But why?"

[Neonridr]

I'm sorry but if you ask any gamer what Rare's great game ever created is, I would have to say a good chunk of them are going to say Goldeneye. Regardless if it isn't Rare characters or Rare worlds.. it's still fricken Goldeneye. No reason not to be there.

That being said the Rare Replay is still an awesome collection.

[christian hour]

Plenty of reasons not to be there. For starters, they never owned that IP, they just developed it. They do not own the rights and the asking price for them is probably incredibly high. I thought this was common knowledge among gamers at this point. Why we need to ask them to clarify this is beyond me. Suppose next they'll be asking why donkey kong is absent from the collection?

They can dress it up as "We just wanted rare worlds, rare characters" but thats essentially saying in a sneaky way "which of these do we own". Same thing.

All in all a spectacular collection. Gamers are a lucky bunch. Sadly they can also be a whiney bunch :( (#xboxorweriot anyone? so sad...)

[Neonridr]

Donkey Kong is owned by Nintendo, big difference there.

[smalltowngamer503]

(#xboxorweriot anyone? so sad...)

And ps fans are the holy grail of how fanboys should act?

Both sides are ridiculous and niether are better than the other. The ones who claim one side is worse tend to be the fanboys we all complain about ^ ;)

[christian hour]

@smalltowngamer503

Way to take my words out of context.

"GAMERS can be a whiney bunch." That was the part you should have focused on, after that All I did was cite a recent example, I wasn't saying one side was incapable of such childishness and the other was. Both sides are as bad as each other, as you said.

@neonridr
I wasn't saying goldeneye and donkey kong rights issues were one in the same. My point was, asking rare why there was no goldeneye was a bit of an absurd question to ask considering it was only 3 years ago when nintendo called a cease and desist on the xbla port. And then i was pointing out an even more absurd question would be why no donkey kong?

A rhetorical question followed by an even more (fictional and a product of my own mind in this case for a sad attempt at humor) absurd rhetorical question.

I spend far too much time explaining myself around here I've realised, either my grasp on the english language is dreadful or... well actually thats probably it :)

[darthv72]

I'm good with no goldeneye. Cobra Triangle, RC Pro AM and the rest are what I enjoy from Rare.

Goldeneye was developed by Rare under license from United Artists. The license has been passed around to several developers since then and games published by different publishers.

It's okay that it's not in this Rare collection. I can still play it on my N64. (that's a fair tradeoff)

[rainslacker]

James Bond franchise is owned by MGM. MGM is ultimately owned by a group of movie studios which is led by none other than Sony.

While this division of Sony(Sony pictures) doesn't seem to have an objection to licensing the James bond name for use on systems other than PS, I'd imagine the rights to license a James Bond license aren't particularly cheap. The license costs alone could have added another $10 onto the cost of the game, so it seems like a fair compromise to avoid getting the game on the collection. On top of that, Sony would probably be more prone to contracting out a JB game to another pub or studio so it can just make money without doing the work, like they did with 007 legends.

This is one amazing collection though. For $30, I'd say take it and be happy. It's an incredible value.

[Sy_Wolf]

Microsoft wanted to remake GoldenEye last gen. Nintendo said that it was fine as long as the Wii version looked as good as the 360 version. That couldn't happen for obvious technical reasons and the project was killed. Nintendo owns that game and there's nothing Microsoft can do about that.

[3-4-5]

* Rare Games Missing from Collection: (the best ones)

* Marble Madness - NES
* Wizards & Warriors - NES
* WWF Wrestlemania - NES
* California Games - Sega Genesis
* WWF Wrestlemania Challenge - NES
* Danny Sullivan's Indy Heat - NES <-- A Personal favorite of mine.
* Ken Griffy Junior Basebaseball - SNES
* Goldeneye 007 - N64
* Starfox Adventures - Gamecube

[Dabigsiebowski]

Mark Cerny (PS4 engineer) created marble madness and I'm pretty sure rare were the ones who ported it to the NES. It's not one of their own creations.

[3-4-5]

ahh I had thought they were more involved, or did they just acquire it after ?

Good David Wise music though.

[problemchild84]

Oh man! Wizards & Warriors, I loved those games back in the day. I still have my copies of I, II and III. They were so damn hard too, especially back then without online guides and what not.

[rainslacker]

marble Madness they just made the console port of the arcade game published by Atari. The original was made by Mark Cerny...his first game.

W&W was published by Acclaim who gained the IP rights, but I'm not sure who owns them now that Acclaim is gone. I don't know if Rare came up with the original concept or not.

WWF Wrestlemainia probably has restrictive licensing issues and the studio was only contracted to make it.

California games I couldn't find any reference to Rare at all being involved. The Genesis port was developed by novotrade

Danny Leland same as W&W, they only did the port

ken Griffy Jr's Winning run is probably owned by Nintendo.

The GoldenEye game is owned by Nintendo, and MGM/Sony own the JB franchise rights which would probably be too expensive to license for a collection like this.

Starfox is owned by Nintendo, and there is no way they'd allow that with their own SF game coming out soon.

Are any of their titles that were funded by Nintendo actually in this collection? Can't recall but seems they are all from IP's that Rare actually owns.

[ArnoDorian]

i havent played much of GoldenEye back in the day but i will definitely agree with this GoldenEyes is awesome heck even my 5 year old of myself loved it back in my friends house tho :(
i wish i could find a way to play it ;-;
before i die

[christian hour]

You can pick up an n64 and goldeneye fairly cheap online, I know here in dublin theres even a few retro gaming shops where you can buy old consoles and games, I'm sure if you look around you'll find one in a town near you :)

[AnotherProGamer]

Goldeneye aged very badly

[rainslacker]

It's still a ton of fun. Particularly in 4 player split screen.

[Pozzle]

I don't think Goldeneye has aged too badly, tbh. There are far more outdated FPS games out there that a new generation of gamers would have a difficult time getting into. I recently had a 4-player session with some friends who'd never played it before, and once they figured out the controls and which screen their character was on, they had a blast. I was pleasantly surprised by how much they loved it.

[PhoenixUp]

Not even Sony can keep distribution rights for James Bomd movies, you think Microsoft would try to wrangle these rights for one collection

[Svinya]

What? Nobody is asking that. Everyone knows why. Pointless article.

[ZaWarudo]

Perfect Dark was better anyway.

*RUNS*

[coolbeans]

Get back here, you!

*Starts chasing*

Edit: Admittedly, I have some pretty big nostalgia glasses for Goldeneye. Props to the insane amount of content in PD though. Absolutely ambitious.

[OhMyGandhi]

I don't get it...So instead of coming out and saying that it may not have been economically feasible to ensure the license of GoldenEye, they chose instead to practically badmouth their own game, and one that so many hold dearly, as one of the best examples of a first person shooter on a console.

[KillerPwned]

Nintendo owns the rights to Goldeneye video game I believe. Awhile back when Goldeneye was getting remade for Wii it was a battle for Sony and MS to get their own version.

[RosweeSon]

Whilst this collection is still pretty great without it everyone wants just a standard version of goldeneye with sone online ability, it's such a classic game and I understand their line about we didn't create the universe well no it's James Bond but come on its one of their best pieces of work, I'd say top 3 if not top of the best of rare games, I played it for 3/4 years! Still went back for more haha, campaign multiplayer all just top notch, still conkers bad fur day, Jet force Jemini and Blast corps are worth the money alone the banjos and perfect darks and all the rest are a bonus but seriously goldeneye on its own would have been a big deal up there with Final fantasy 7 and Shenmue 3, what Microsoft can't afford it?! Pfft.
The fact the James Bond video games license is no longer owned by Nintendo, Rare or anyone even involved with the original game is the biggest problem, isn't James Bond owned by activison or EA?!

[FallenAngel1984]

For the same reason Donkey Kong Country won't be in this collection

[dangerousbrian0]

The same goes for Donkey Kong 64 and Diddy Kong Racing.

[franwex]

This is an interesting situation. The game was developed by Rare, which is now owned by Microsoft; but was published by Nintendo. James Bond franchise belongs to Sony, and EA has the right to the name Goldeneye for videogames; but only Activision can publish James Bond video games

Damn...

[captainexplosion]

I am disappointed Kinect Sports isn't included. As far as Goldeneye, I would think it would be really cheap to add.

[WizzroSupreme]

Activision, obviously. Same reason they can't put DK: Country in there. Rights and all. It sucks, but it is business. At least we're getting a couple dozen games for little more than a buck each with 10,000 gamer points.