Y'know...you could have just said it yourself. No need to bloody your keyboard, mate (cleaning them's a pain).

As for the rest of your post, have you considered playing Medal of Honor Heroes 2? I assure you, your complaints about console FPS controls will magically vanish...

Actually, if you had read my response to Rol, I knew completely that you could change controls in Golden Eye, and I'm willing to bet that most other people realized that as well, but I think the problem lies in how goldeneye indicated the differences between its different control schemes. That's certainly what threw me off.

As I pointed out, in the 1.1 control scheme (that I HATE) it labeled the analog stick as "move" and the c buttons as "look", when you switched to 1.2, the only thing that changed was that the cbuttons were now labeled "move" and the control stick was labeled "look" which gave me teh initial impression that the only difference was that the analog stick and the c buttons got swapped around, but still had the same configuration.

Also, what the hell did you do to your N64 controllers? I've never had that much trouble with mine. As a matter of fact, i think I still have both of my original N64 controllers and they're in perfect condition. The analog stick isn't loose at all. I think I did lose a 3rd party controller that way though.

Yikes. I know you can change the controls. I didn't know it when I first started playing (as I played it at friend's houses), but when I did learn, I still didn't do it because we were busy jumping in to games. So I just sucked it up and played. Like I said, the game's usually level playing fields and slight vertical auto aiming mostly made up for it. I just think it was a poor choice for a default scheme considering how well the Turok style worked.

Going back and forth from Goldeneye and Turok was a pain in the ass.

I recently played Goldeneye again for the first time in seven years, and I was very impressed. It made me realise how little the fps genre has advanced in the eleven years since its release.

I think it easily holds up, even today. Each to his own.

I also played Perfect Dark, and while I considered it to be superior to Goldeneye when it was initially released, with the benefit of retrospect I think Goldeneye is the better game all round, considering it's earlier release. Sure, PD has superior multiplayer options, but Goldeneye has a cooler vibe about it, better music, a better single player experience, and just seems to play a little bit faster.

I also came away impressed with Banjo Kazooie. I think it holds its own against Mario 64, it just wasn't quite the trailblazer that game was, which of course, it was heavily inspired by.

Good times.

Pokemon Snap + Alcohol + Mates = Stupidly (and inexplicably) fun time.

For a very long time n64 games didn't age at all but finally I think they have :(

All the great pc games from that era haven't aged at all though, starcraft, half-life etc

@ OP. You just bashed my two favorite games of all time. Thanks.

Vigilante 8 isn't one of them.

Goldeneye and Perfect Dark are both better than any shooter out now. I get pissed every time that I hear that they haven't aged well. Oh, and OoT is much better than the TP for anyone arguing otherwise. The N64 had two Zeldas much better than TP. Oh, and you are not the coolest guy ever. Sorry.

What about Turok? Heck, you can JUMP in Turok. Plus, I enjoy the inclusion of totally random crap, like giant beetles, Gorillasaurs, and Laser T-Rex.  Much more fun than just shooting at a bunch of yokels with guns of their own.

And no, N64 only had 1 Zelda game better than Twilight Princess. I don't see OoT being that different from TP, except for worse controls, graphics, story, mood, etc. It may have done the basic stuff first, but that doesn't make it the best. Even if you do argue that OoT is inherently better in other aspects, I still feel this only brings it up to Par at best.