If only it was that simple, it's the publishers who have the say, not the developers. Doesn't help that this is one of the most awkward licensing nightmares you could imagine.

Nintendo published it as a second party title, having nearly owned half of Rare.

MS now own the original developer.

Activision hold the overall 007 license (but I don't know how much say they do actually have in this all since Goldeney is after all a Nintendo property)

Nintendo and Rare do not own the rights to GoldenEye. After the game was released Nintendo did not renew the license with MGM and this is how EA purchased the license to make 007: The World is Not Enough and subsequent games based off of the James Bond license.

Furthermore, any game code, characters, and the title of games made from the use of a licensed property belongs to the licensee which is MGM or its parent company. Then their is also the Right's to use Piers Brosnan's image that must be secured.

Therefore Nintendo nor Rare own the rights to GoldenEye or anything pertaining to the game i.e. game code or characters or maps.


The race for the N64 rights to James Bond 19: The World is Not Enough is on:

http://ign64.ign.com/articles/066/066355p1.html


No More Bond for Rare:

http://ign64.ign.com/articles/061/061742p1.html

I've never actually thought once about MGM coming into the mix but it does make perfect sense!

+1 to patjuan32! :)

*laughs as Gordon Freeman walks up and bitch slaps MrMarc*

Not entirely true. License rights are a bit more complicated than that and usually, the code stays with the original creators. The only problem is that if the licenser is being difficult, the code is basically worthless to the holder because they can't use the game for anything.

After all, Perfect Dark did use the same engine as Goldeneye. If the code was locked up and owned by MGM, there would have been a sticky legal situation by re-using the Goldeneye code. 

I understand your theory, but do you honestly believe all sides have not pored over every single minute detail of this?    If there was something out of place, it would be known.

I think they should both put out a Golden Eye game at the same time.

MS could redo what they want to enhance it for Live. Nintendo could put it out in its original form on the VC.

Both would be happy, both would have similar but distinctly different games, and both would appeal directly to their main userbase with an awesome game.

Nintendo has a perfectly legitimate reason for not wanting Microsoft to have the game. Now more than ever, they are viewed y a lot of gamers as the 'kiddy' system with no big 'mature' games. Whenever Nintendo fans argue against this, what game do they point to? Goldeneye.

Now, what would happen if that game was available (in superior form, no less) on a competitor's platform?

*laughs as Jimmy Bondage skillfully whips out his silenced PP7 and blasts the crowbar wielding - emotionally retarded mute before he can even get close*