Defending 007 Legends

Posted December 30, 2012 by alfssk in Articles
007 legends wii u review

The reviews are out for 007 Legends and they have ranged from “alright” to pretty much “horrible.” Having reviewed the Wii U version of the game highly and enjoying the experience thoroughly, I wanted to see what others were saying about the overall 007 Legends package.


Upon examining some of the reviewers and even user comments on other gaming websites, the criticism seems a bit off on almost all accounts, and had the game featured a change of title, it would have likely been given near perfect 10′s, without even having to change up the game play elements in any capacity.


One of the biggest complaints was that the game played similarly to Call of Duty. Call of Duty is a first person shooter, 007 Legends is a first person shooter. Call of Duty utilizes weapons, 007 Legends utilizes weapons. Call of Duty allows the player to run, 007 Legends allows the player to run. The criticism is extremely off base and almost illogical. Both games are first person shooters and must allow for the human characters to interact with the environment in human like ways. There is a swap weapon button, a run button, a fire from the hip or aim down the sites option, and the graphics are HD and impressive. Call of Duty gets high reviews for such controls and appearances, but 007 Legends receives negativity?  It just does not make any sense.


If anything, 007 Legends takes what Call of Duty offers and increases the game play. It allows for cover and fire controls that CoD has neglected to include each and every installment and it allows for useful gadgets and animated combat graphics that are more logical than a “one knife and you are dead” approach that Call of Duty takes, regardless of where the knife hits. Stab wounds to the foot killing a fully trained soldier = “ok”, but hand to hand combat options that follows button prompts (but are interactive) = “awful.” It just does not add up.


Other complaints ranged from 007 Legends focusing on the worse of the Bond movies. Having seen every Bond movie several times through and being a hard core fan, there is some legitimacy to this argument, but in the end it is completely null. Goldfinger is among the worse? Most people rank that among the best in the series. On Her Majesty’s Secret Service is the worse? Lazenby was weak at times and seeing Bond in a kilt was beyond annoying, but the point of 007 Legends was to have one mission from every Bond. Lazenby did one movie, so it had to be included. Regardless of that “technicality,” the movie has a Rotten Tomatoes 81% fresh rating and has been hailed as one of the most emotional Bond movies to date.  License to Kill was god awful, but the 007 Legends take of the story actually made the movie almost seem passable, as it applied the same awful original premise but at least gave it an update and a somewhat more mainstream plot. Die Another Day was one of the few Bronsan films that did not see multi-console video game adaptations and was not terrible in the slightest, though its hard to be judged next to Goldeneye. Moonraker could very well be one of the worse Bond movies ever made; there is no argument there.


With all of that said, we have 2 great Bond films, 2 horrible Bond films and one pretty good film. To say that all of them were the worse missions in the 50 year history would just be wrong, and it would ignore the fact that Eurocom was giving a diversified group of missions to allow for varied game play ranging from skiing, frozen fortresses, storming a mountain top liar, to Mexican drug territory to outer space. Varied game play options being called terrible for giving great Bond experiences and improving upon bad Bond experiences is not a logical argument either. It would be one thing to rate the game poorly because it forced you to watch Moonraker, but id did nothing of the sort, so the cinematic experience of such films is really irrelevant.


Tying in to the issue of the films is that each 007  Legends mission was broken down into essentially crash courses of the original plots. It can be argued that each mission deserved a fuller look, but considering most reviewers stated that those missions were from the worse Bond movies, why would they even want extended missions? Having played through the missions, I did desire each one to be a full game. The Bond history is rich and full of varied experiences and getting just a piece of the pie instead of the full pie was dissatisfying at times. The solution to that issue was to actually look at the game and understand what it was supposed to be.


Taking place where Bond is shot on top of the train and falls to the watery depths below, each mission is supposed to be Bond’s flash backs as he is near unconscious having just been shot and fallen presumably to his probable death. Flashbacks tend to never be the full experience, but rather glimpses. The game was advertised as such, but then gamers and reviewers called foul when they were delivered what was promised. I guess the next Mario game should be given a 0/10 score because it won’t feature team death matches. It is quite ridiculous to punish a game for giving exactly what it stated it would give. It is not unreasonable to want extended missions based on how well done the smaller missions were, but it is unreasonable to dock the quality of the smaller missions that were provided despite having always been advertised as such.


The Skyfall mission was a bit poorly done and I can understand some of the issues with the unlocked content. Silva was nowhere to be seen. That was unacceptable to be honest. Any criticism in that regards is well warranted.


Other complaints about the mission ranged from, “Did they even watch the movie?” 007 Legends Skyfall mission begins on the rooftops as you pursue after Patrice. Gunmen begin to attach you instantly. Some have complained that this was not true in the movie, and therefore the game sucks. Well with that logic, the original Goldeneye sucks. I do not recall Bond escaping into a tank and shooting turrets down a plane airway in the movie. I do not recall Bond using a magnet to grab a key and escape a jail cell and run and gun his way through hallways in the movie. I do not recall Bond chasing Alec in circles over and over again putting over 100 bullets into him in the movie. I do not recall Bond actually shooting Xenia in the jungles in the movie. Video games are not the same thing as a movie! That argument could be among the most illogical of them all. Had Silva been included and more of the actual plot been looked at, the Skyfall mission would have had a much better feel to it, but despite its shortcoming, it still played well for what it was.


007 Legends was not a perfect game, but the criticism it has received on a large scale is mostly based on faulty assumptions. While some criticisms can be fairly directed at it, the vast majority of the insults the game has received has been based on people looking for reasons to be negative, rather than on the actual game play. 007 Legends for the Wii U turned out to be an excellent Wii U launch window game and one of the better Bond installments in recent years on video game platforms.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 10.0/10 (2 votes cast)

Defending 007 Legends, 10.0 out of 10 based on 2 ratings

About the Author