I did make an argument, it's not my fault that you can't be assed to read it. Here, for your benefit, I will state it again:

In terms of structure the game could not possibly be more removed from Goldeneye. Goldeneye was a mission-based shooterfest based on the speed at which one was able to play, a corridor shooter whose controls were built around the ability to aim accurately within those narrow corridors with very few exceptions.

Metroid Prime was none of those things; it was not mission-based, it was not a corridor shotoer, and its pacing was much slower and more methodical. It was a Metroid game, and borrowed its construction entirely from Super Metroid.

In terms of mechanics, Goldeneye was (again) built to be a shooter first and foremost. One's ability to aim was paramount, and everything else extended naturally from that.

Metroid Prime, in terms of mechanics, borrowed more heavily from Ocarina of Time - thanks to the lock-on feature, one didn't need to worry about aim overmuch, and fighting enemies usually came down to knowing what weapons they were weak to (again, like previous Metroid games and also Zelda) and knowing how to dodge their attacks - the latter of which wasn't particularly possible in Goldeneye.

In terms of ability progression, Goldeneye had little to speak of - James Bond started and ended the game with the same abilities.

Metroid Prime was a Metroid game where you started off able to run, jump, and shoot, and built up an enormous repertoire of abilities that actively changed the way you interacted with the entirety of the environment, dynamically opening up new places to explore.

There is a difference between an opinion and an argument. What I've presented, more than once, is an argument, pointing out essential differences between the games in terms of design, mechanics, and progression. What you're offering is an opinion, which is to say you're restating your opinion and basically disavowing any need for agrument in the first place.

You can continue to illustrate your lack of perspective here if you wish, but until you actually have an argument your insistence can only amount to empty words.

Did you just write that now? Because I sure haven't seen that earlier in this thread.

Also I disagree with most of the things you said about Goldeneye. It's in no way a "corridor" shooter especially compared to most FPS nowadays. You had to find where to go next and some of the maps were rather big. You had objectives that sometimes required you to go back where you came from.

The controls were good back then.

It was an expansion on earlier arguments that had been made.

I acknowledged that some levels were open, but they were the exception. Necessary back-tracking doesn't change the fact that it was designed so that you mostly fought enemies in a cone where you could easily aim at them with an R button press and some twitching.

I never said the controls weren't good, I said that their intent was different.

You still haven't made an argument concerning how Metroid Prime owes anything to Goldeneye. I am not taking you seriously in the context of this discussion until you do; until that time you're just repeating yourself to no effect and no end.

I don't really want as I haven't played Metroid Prime enough to compare every aspects of the game with Goldeneye.

What I said and what I still believe is that Metroid Prime wouldn't have been the way it is without Goldeneye (mostly the FPS aspect). After the release of Goldeneye 007, Miyamoto actually wanted to make Ocarina of Time a FPS:

"Apparently prompted by a love of Rare's Nintendo 64 shooter GoldenEye, which is another of the three reasons to own a Nintendo 64, Miyamoto wanted to make OoT a first-person shooter too.

"I thought that the FPS system would be the best way of enabling players to take in the vast terrain of the Hyrule Field. Besides, by not having the player’s character on the screen, we can spend more time and machine power on creating enemies and the environments," said Miyamoto."

So it's no surprise that Metroid Prime went the FPS way.

That's why I said that Goldeneye was a major influence.

When Rare left Nintendo, all the talent left Rare.  So unless Retro leaves Nintendo, all the talent leaves Retro, Microsoft buys Retro and has them start making games for babies, Retro's going to be winning this comparison for a long time.

A firmware for a piece of hardware > Games. New firmware gives way for new games thus new firmware is more available

AussieGecko said:

The whole point Nintendo might have sold them becasue MS brought out a blank cheque to Nintendo as well and Nintendo was going in another direction anyway. There are not a lot of games like DK64 and Banjo Kazooie that doesnt have a Mario in it on the Wii. That is fine what they are doing sells. But maybe just maybe Rare wanted to do other things and MS let them.