It's mostly agreed that it's a skinned version of GoldenEye Rogue Agent. There's no direct source confirming this (the source Wikipedia links to is just Matt's blog, which doesn't mention the connection), but a comparison leaves little question, as provided by this video:
Compare it to the video provided by Cassamassina and it's readily apparent.
---
Tell me to get back to rewriting this site so it's not horrible on mobile
Wow. That's some good work, Lou.
So it was probably the developer of GoldenEye: Rogue Agent DS, n-space, that was shopping it around.
Whoa, I almost posted this myth busting thread a few days ago because G4 thought that 360 discs held more data than Wii discs so that was the reason Epic Mickey did not feature voice acting.
Turns out that Spector said specifically that he didn't include voice acting as many of the old characters didn't even have voices and that hardcore gamers might be turned off by Mickeys un-hero like speaking voice.
Also, factually, Wii dual layer discs hold close to 8.5 gb whilst 360 discs only hold about 7gb, the discs have been cracked by people at GAF and apparently there is like a 1.3 gb unusable partition on 360 discs. Kind of like the 20gb 360 hard drive which only has 13gb of free space.
But anyway, this myth has to die for fucking good, even years after the fact there are still people who think the PS2 was more powerful than gamecube.
gamingeek said:Whoa, I almost posted this myth busting thread a few days ago because G4 thought that 360 discs held more data than Wii discs so that was the reason Epic Mickey did not feature voice acting.
Turns out that Spector said specifically that he didn't include voice acting as many of the old characters didn't even have voices and that hardcore gamers might be turned off by Mickeys un-hero like speaking voice.
Also, factually, Wii dual layer discs hold close to 8.5 gb whilst 360 discs only hold about 7gb, the discs have been cracked by people at GAF and apparently there is like a 1.3 gb unusable partition on 360 discs. Kind of like the 20gb 360 hard drive which only has 13gb of free space.
But anyway, this myth has to die for fucking good, even years after the fact there are still people who think the PS2 was more powerful than gamecube.
LOL, do these people have functioning eyes?
Myth #3 (Or really just an inside view on game retailing.
=-=-=
Leo, Do you know anything about this? I think you said at one point you worked in corporate for one of the gaming retailers?
=-=-=
I'd really like to know the inside story on game pricing at retail stores. Hopefully one or more of you have had the joy of wroking in retail and can let us know.
I used to frequent a store in California that was part of a chain called Fry's Electronics. It's like Mecca for nerds. Inside Fry's they had a gaming section that was about the size of 4-5 EB/Gamestop stores. So a game comes out, and it's $59.99 everywhere. Fry's would sell it on day one for $49.99 and then on day two put it back up to $59.99 (clearly a loss-leader, they were happy not to make any money on the game just to get you into the store so you could buy other things). If they game sold well, or had collectible value (like JRPG's in small runs), it would remain at the price until either the Greatest Hits version came out, or a new console came along.
Other games however, would drop $10 or $5 as months passed, and then drop again, and again, until you could get some games for as little as $8. I have many games from Fry's I still have not opened and some of them have 5 or 6 price labels on top of one another (like 2 mm's of label), and if you peel the labels back, like the skin of an onion, you can see the history of the game's price drop.
Who is making money on a game that was acquired from a publisher at, say $50, and is now selling it at $8? The only thing I could think of is that Fry's was aggressive enough with publishers (due to their size) where they could say, "These 9 titles we bought off of you have not sold, we want to return them to you and get a refund" To which the publisher would reply, "We'll give you a credit off the next games, you can keep those (since they have no use for some loser games that never sold).
In short. How much do retailers pay publishers for their games and how does the deep discounting system work out for both the retailers and the publishers? Fry's is not unique in this case, they are just an extreme example. You could also look at Amazon as another example.
Surely they don't pay $50 for them...
When you've got stock left over I suppose it's better to sell it for next to nothing than just it away.
I thought that there was some sort of returns policy on unsold stock where the publisher would eat it.
As a generalisation, retail would pay these guys a maximum of 40 per cent of what they made. So on a £29.99 game the publisher would receive about £12 (and on a sub-licensed deal, we would then only get about £4.25 of that) – minus return, write down and consignment costs.
When would we get that money? Well, payment would be by the end of the quarter.
So, let’s say £10 per unit sale goes to the publisher, £3 to the developer/sub-licensor, and it’s in your bank five months after the customer has paid out £30.
Compare that to the digital model. On a £29.99 sale, the digital partner will pay the publisher – or in many cases direct to the developer – between 60 and 70 per cent, by the end of the month following the sale.
Wow. To recap: on a sale over the counter today, we can have our £3 by the end of March, or on a digital sale, we can have £20 by Christmas.
 |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The optimist proclaims we live in the best of all possible worlds while the pessimist fears this is true. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
Okay, this is weird. Since the latest 360 dashboard update I have noticed a couple of things (NEW MYTH)
- When you put in a XB game the 360 says it is not supported and asks you to visit xbox.com/games (That page does not exist).
http://www.xbox.com/en-GB/games/backwardcompatibilitygameslist.htm
- Everywhere I've found on the xbox.com site that makes reference to the list of backward comapitble games has been de-linked.
- I have put in more than 5 games that are listed as being backward compatible on external lists (like Wikipedia) and the 360 says it does not support them (some of these are games I have previously played on the 360).
- Halo and Halo 2 still work.
Has backward compatibility been removed?
I just put in Stranger's Wrath with live off, it said Not supported, goto xbox.com/games.
Then I connected to live and it said, There is an update for this game (5MB). It then downloaded something, disconnected from live and said, "This game is not supported."
I believe I have been fucked over.
*Strokes chin*
This is iffy. Wouldn't there be a huge outcry about this as soon as internet nerds (even worse than us) sniffed this out? Or do you think that after five years into the consoles life hardly anyone is trying to play previous generation games on it?
___
Listen to Wu-Tang and watch Kung-Fu
Hmm, it really wouldn't surprise me if MS removed BC. If the Halo remake rumors are true, then I expect those games to be disabled soon as well.
Ravenprose said:Hmm, it really wouldn't surprise me if MS removed BC. If the Halo remake rumors are true, then I expect those games to be disabled soon as well.
why would they disable something they put resources into providing in the first place? to sell more "originals" as downloads?
___
Listen to Wu-Tang and watch Kung-Fu
bugsonglass said:why would they disable something they put resources into providing in the first place? to sell more "originals" as downloads?
Are they still selling their downloadable Xbox originals? I thought they took them all down a while back.
Anyway, I'm guessing they might want to pull a Sony, and start releasing "HD" versions of their back catalog, even though they said they had no interest in doing that, which makes it even more believeable to me.
I'd love for more of you to try it. I have an original 12GB XB with a silver account. Maybe they are being special because I have a US console with an Australian IP address, but it doesn't stop Halo from being played.
bugsonglass said:*Strokes chin*
This is iffy. Wouldn't there be a huge outcry about this as soon as internet nerds (even worse than us) sniffed this out? Or do you think that after five years into the consoles life hardly anyone is trying to play previous generation games on it?
I think hardly anyone tries. If you look on the web there are plenty of people asking if it has been removed, and the response link to either dead xbox.com pages or the wiki page.
I mean I can see how it could be overlooked if htey put it in the November update. Most people (myself included) are used to seeing the "not supported" message, you just figure it's one of hte titles not supported and move on. I only noticed because I tried a game I knew for sure was compatible prior to the update. If a few more of you can test, maybe we can break some news...
wouldn't shock me if MS did something stupid like that it wouldn't be the first time they do and if its true then more then ever i have no reason to own a 360
That's terrible if true. 
I called Xbox support. They confirmed that an online connection is now required (since November) in order for original XB games to be played on the 360. The agent I spoke to said he had received "many" calls on this issue since November, but that only the Live group can assist (and that department is closed).
In my tests my 360 has been connected to Live. So, I'll call again tomorrow and see what they say, but there is some new information at least.
Well that's stupid.
Is online connection double-speak for a Gold account or just an online connection?
___
Listen to Wu-Tang and watch Kung-Fu
As a service to ending ignorance in our time, I wanted to provied a place for us to use our combined knowledge and research abilities to resolve gaming myths. Anyone got any they want solved?
I'll kick it off with:
- Was the IGN Halo DS video legit? Was Halo made for the DS?
"It's a rumour that's been flying around the internet for some time but Bungie has finally admitted it's "very likely" another developer created a DS version of Halo. However, the dev said that there has "never been an officially funded or sanctioned development of any sort of DS Halo game" from Bungie.
Speaking to Siliconera, Bungie's Brian Gerard and Frank O'Connor candidly tackled the subject of Halo DS. They confirmed that "every once in a while it does come up" and that Microsoft could potentially publish it through THQ, as it did before with Age of Empires: Age of Kings on DS."