Official Nintendo Magazine

Log in to access exclusive Nintendo content, win prizes and post on our forums. Not a member yet? Join for free

Quantum Of Solace Review

No, Mr Bond, we expect you to not be rubbish

'The best Bond title since Goldeneye', they said; 'You'll be blown away by how much better it is than the last few games,' they said. Granted, the fact that 'they' were all people who had a vested interest in the game doing well should have had our alarm bells going crazy way in advance. However, the idea of Quantum Of Solace being the best Bond game since Goldeneye is fairly true. It's just that it achieves that accolade by virtue of only being 'mostly bad' as opposed to 'utterly rubbish' like the other games were.

Admittedly, 'mostly bad' doesn't mean completely bad. But extolling the game's few redeeming features - the close combat system, the ability to blind fire without exposing yourself from cover, the way enemies react when you shoot different body parts - doesn't prevent the negatives far outweighing the positives. Fact is, having uttered more expletives at Quantum Of Solace than at any other game in recent months (moreso than Mega Man 9, even), we assure you it's a frustrating experience. And sadly, that frustration is a cumulative effect from a number of particularly annoying problems.

Click to view larger image

Dr. No Thanks

The most damning issue is over the game's presentation, which ranges from sloppy in some places to downright awful in others. Visual textures on the walls and floor are a blurry mess when you get close and the framerate is, for the most part, atrocious. Explosion effects are pitiful; someone bursting a paper bag behind you would have more effect than the pathetic flame effects and complete lack of noise shown here. Radio conversations between enemies continue, even if you kill one of the conversing parties midway through them. Bond's hands while holding a pistol look like a pair of feet, all pink and fleshy. These and many more besides make Quantum Of Solace feel decidedly unpolished, as though Activision didn't feel the Wii version deserved much attention to detail.

The muddy visuals also make combat difficult, as enemies more than a few feet away have a habit of blending into the background - you'll often only spot them when the lock-on markers will pop up or you see the red light from their sniping scopes. It doesn't help that the AI is horribly unbalanced and has a nasty habit of killing you in just a couple of shots before you even see them (when they're not hiding behind cover that's much smaller than they are or standing around aimlessly waiting to be shot, anyway).

And sadly, even the controls have their own niggling problems. The dash-and-cover ability is nice, but becomes an annoyance when it results in you taking cover behind anything you happen to accidentally bump into while dashing. Jumping over obstacles is incredibly selective (some low walls you can, some you can't despite them looking identical) and you can't do it while in cover; you have to back off and leave yourself exposed before being given the option. Using the Wii Zapper makes some of the controls incredibly awkward, because the buttons are on top of the Wii Remote out of reach. And overall, they just feel either too sensitive or too sluggish depending on the setting you choose - the Custom option helps, but even then it's hard to find the sweet spot.

Click to view larger image
Considering that Activision passed over the release of Casino Royale to spend more time developing this, you have to wonder how it ended up being so lacking. Indeed, even if you're the biggest Bond fan in the world then, there's really only one option here: don't bother. Go see the film, enjoy the intense action and then leave it at that - don't let your good memories of a decent Bond flick be sullied by licensed tat like this.

Comments

112 comments so far...
Add a comment

  1. Ranooth Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 11:02

    "The next Goldeneye" yeah right.

    O well back to facility if i want some 007 goodness.

  2. Tom266 Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 11:08

    NOOOO!!
    I was hours away from going to buy this game, then you have gone and completely changed my mind :(:(:( WHY!

    And you haven't even mentioned the multiplayer, both offline and online, surely they should be taken into consideration when reviewing this, or was it that you didn't have time to try these parts out?

    Oh, and one key questions, how many players can you play online?

  3. Turkey Toad Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 11:15

    Wow. I know the Wii isn't the most powerful console, but come on, those graphics are awful. They wouldn't look out of place on an N64, and I'm not even exaggerating.

    Developers are just lazy when it comes to the Wii.

  4. Fletche Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 11:24

    Wasn't expecting that, is this really the best they can do on the Wii? Get the imporession that with big cross platform games that the Wii is very low down in priorities for developers.

  5. DavidVM Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 11:26

    Sounds like an even more extreme case of what happened with the Force Unleashed, where the game gets all the attention it needs on the PS3 and X-Box then gets a third rate hand me down version for the Wii. This doesn't make the greatest amount of sense since recent figures show that there are more Wii consoles in Britain than its two rivals put together (not sure if this is the same for the rest of the world though).
    Some games will always suit the more graphically powerful consoles and some games will always be best on the Wii. What p**ses me off is why bother releasing a sub-standard game in the first place, why not just let games play out to their strengths on the various consoles and stop us wasting our money and time.

  6. Anonymous Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 11:31

    And you haven't even mentioned the multiplayer, both offline and online, surely they should be taken into consideration when reviewing this, or was it that you didn't have time to try these parts out?


    The game wasn't out when the review was written, so the online servers weren't up for us to test. The multiplayer wasn't mentioned specifically but the gameplay issues mentioned all spread through to it, so that doesn't make playing it with friends any better.

  7. adam-ell Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 11:34

    back to the N64 then :(

  8. danz202 Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 11:39

    Had they done the review about Wifi as well then it'd probarly get a bit higher, not much mind you.

  9. benjamin246 Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 11:42

    I like the way they used the N64 engine to give it that retro feel....... WHAT, THEY DIDN'T! :twisted:

    Next time you do a review like this you should just post a picture of some sick with the games name under it. Sorry, im a boosh fan.

    If the graphics are that bad does this mean COD:WAW's
    graphics are going to be terrible to? As they both use the same engine.

    Whats the online play like?

  10. Hotblack Desiato Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 11:57

    Well, surely seeing as the score is 52%, then the positives actually DO outweigh the negatives?

  11. super-mario-wii Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 11:59

    back to the N64 then :(

    same ere

  12. ACRID Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 12:02

    I wouldn't buy this purely because of the atrocious graphics, never mind the appaling controls, AI and all round gameplay, another job well done Activision.

    My only disagreement with the review is that I think Bond's hands look more like Pig's trotters than human feet, especially in screen shot 6.

  13. cp.06 Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 12:07

    For god's sake! Activision have annoyed me now! I wanted a decent Bond game!

    Grr! Look at Bond's hands! This is unnacceptable. How does this stuff get through quality control? Im sorry but I'm 14 and this is coming off my Christmas list.

    Good day Activision! I SAID GOOD DAY! :x *storms out of virtual room in a huff*

  14. chazrinelli Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 12:08

    Half of you guys really annoy me, Graphics this and Graphics that, who cares? Its about the gameplay, not the graphics and controls. What really annoyed me was when someone in the Wii section moaned about Wii Sports not being online! It was a freebie! What did you want online straight from the off? You cant have everything, you have to wait. Back to 007, it doesnt look that bad IMO just because graphics are poor and controls are hard dpesnt mean it deserves a low score.

  15. TheDeDeDe Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 12:10

    Bought this today by trading in some games, I wish I got De Blob now. :roll:

    I haven't played it yet, because I don't want to spoil the film, but 52% is a shockingly low score...

    However you didn't mention the Online or Multiplayer? Care to elaborate please. :P

  16. Ubahquiet Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 12:29

    Tie-In Law stands firm, it seems.

    Back to 007, it doesnt look that bad IMO just because graphics are poor and controls are hard dpesnt mean it deserves a low score.

    You're kidding, right? Poor graphics and crap controls deserve low scores.

    You know what the graphics remind me of? The N64, particularly Blast Corps(I dunno why). Even then, BC looks better.

    The gameplay's bad, eh? To be expected, it's a tie-in.

    My N64's sitting beside my comp all plugged in, methinks I'll go back to GoldenEye.

  17. Gordon Ramsey Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 12:34

    This is the kind of thing I expected anyway. :lol:

  18. Anonymous Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 12:44

    Half of you guys really annoy me, Graphics this and Graphics that, who cares? Its about the gameplay, not the graphics and controls.


    Did you miss the bit where I said that the gameplay's pretty rubbish too then, thanks to the dodgy AI?

  19. shmoogle Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 12:57

    why are games so complicated to buy for these days, also judging from this review it doesnt give us much hope for COD 5 does it :P

  20. Joerulesdaworld Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 13:06

    Half of you guys really annoy me, Graphics this and Graphics that, who cares? Its about the gameplay, not the graphics and controls.


    Did you miss the bit where I said that the gameplay's pretty rubbish too then, thanks to the dodgy AI?

    well you have given games a gold award with dodgy AI

  21. djs5590x Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 13:07

    lol wow... Goldeneye has better gameplay AND better graphics. Think ill stick to that version...

  22. shmoogle Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 13:17

    why are games so complicated to buy for these days, also judging from this review it doesnt give us much hope for COD 5 does it :P

  23. gazman_1874 Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 13:21

    Half of you guys really annoy me, Graphics this and Graphics that, who cares? Its about the gameplay, not the graphics and controls. What really annoyed me was when someone in the Wii section moaned about Wii Sports not being online! It was a freebie! What did you want online straight from the off? You cant have everything, you have to wait. Back to 007, it doesnt look that bad IMO just because graphics are poor and controls are hard dpesnt mean it deserves a low score.

    fair enough about the graphics, but the gameplay (which it is all about apparently) is also awful

  24. Nook T Nook 00 Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 13:35

    Once again, the Wii gets the bad version of the game.

  25. gils Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 13:55

    we must of expected this as goldeneye is hard to top, but if people are atleast going to try making a wii game, do us all a favour and spend time developing it! the wii has so much to over, (the motion controls etc) but yet again we get companies not even bothering with the wii and its potnetial and probably trying to push the game harder for the xbox and ps3 markets, where the graphics are better! i didnt need to see a ONM review to no that this was gong to be crap game!
    goldeneye for VC please!!

  26. LightSamus Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 14:50

    God no. I hope the PS3 one is a lot better. I'm hoping the Wii just got fobbed off again. I couldn't care less if the Wii one is rubbish so long as the PS3 one is good. And why so much commentary on the graphics? They don't mean everything.

  27. r3d st33l4000 Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 15:07

    Well thats dissapointing I was going to go out and buy this game later. :(

  28. Fletche Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 15:16

    Once again, the Wii gets the bad version of the game.

    360 version got 6.9 on IGN so I don't think it is exclusively Wii bad

  29. williamissocool Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 15:37

    Why are nearly all movie tie in games rubbish! I mean, some harry potters were ok (fine, only the last one) but every other movie tie in is complete and utter awfulness. If there are any good ones, make them free on virtual console (only free because all the rubbish we have been forced to slog through after stupidly buying without reading ONM's prestigious review) But what is the online play like?

  30. Carbonite2008 Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 15:40

    I like the way they used the N64 engine to give it that retro feel....... WHAT, THEY DIDN'T! :twisted:

    Next time you do a review like this you should just post a picture of some sick with the games name under it. Sorry, im a boosh fan.

    If the graphics are that bad does this mean COD:WAW's
    graphics are going to be terrible to? As they both use the same engine.

    Whats the online play like?

    judging by the wii specific trailer cod's graphics are fantastic.

  31. Mama Luigi Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 15:48

    I've heard the PS3/360/PC version is alot better than this one but still nothing special. No Bond game will ever compare to Goldeneye 007 unless Free Radical obtain the license. Afterall, most of the team that worked on Goldeneye and Perfect Dark at Rare now work there.

    This looks to me like another example of developers underestimating what the Wii can do. The gameplay sounds terrible but it's the graphics that really show the laziness. I'd rather look at Goldeneye's graphics on the N64. I'm sure this is the same version of the game that will be released on PS2 and if I'm correct in saying this, the graphics even look horrendous for that console. Anyway I'll shut up. I'm starting to sound like a gamer who favors graphics over gameplay.

  32. Anonymous Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 16:07

    And why so much commentary on the graphics? They don't mean everything.


    Presentation and graphics are two totally different things - please read the review to see what I mean. The general presentation of the game, which goes much deeper than just the visuals, is really sloppy. Plus, the visuals DO adversely affect the gameplay because of the enemies not being as easy to see as they need to be in an FPS where you can be shot from a long, long way away if you're not in cover.

  33. ChrisONM Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 16:34

    Sounds like an even more extreme case of what happened with the Force Unleashed, where the game gets all the attention it needs on the PS3 and X-Box then gets a third rate hand me down version for the Wii.


    To be fair, the Wii version of The Force Unleashed clearly had some work done on it, because it was quite a good game. The Duel mode was proof that they at least tried to make up for the weaker graphics.

  34. ChrisONM Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 16:34

    Sounds like an even more extreme case of what happened with the Force Unleashed, where the game gets all the attention it needs on the PS3 and X-Box then gets a third rate hand me down version for the Wii.


    To be fair, the Wii version of The Force Unleashed clearly had some work done on it, because it was quite a good game. The Duel mode was proof that they at least tried to make up for the weaker graphics.

  35. Super_Sonic96 Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 16:37

    A serious disapointment, i was hoping this would make my christmas list

  36. fanboy Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 16:43

    This was gonna be the first game I got for Wii since Smash Bros.

    After reading the review this morning I ended up getting it on 360 though.

    Its ok, no great shakes, but the only reason I really wanted it was for the online multiplayer.

    The single player is basically COD4 with a Bond mod. Its decent COD4 type action but its not groundbreaking at all.

    I just dont get why companies keep screwing the Wii versions of these kind of games up. How can you get these controls wrong? Metroid and Medal of honour have managed it, why not just copy them?

  37. Tom266 Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 16:45

    IMO, this is an unfair review. They have only really reviewed a 1/3 of the game (Single Player) and should really have spent more time with the online and local multiplayer. Surely the multiplayer is a large section in the game and should be taken into consideration!

  38. Gavin Rozee Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 16:58

    Pierce Brosnan was a better Bond, and so were the games based on the films he was in.

    Just wait for The Conduit or get Resistance 2.

  39. hulkbuster Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 17:06

    I got a copy of the new bond game today but i got it on PS3 it's good,I new it would be cr@p on the Wii........003.5 :lol: :lol: :lol: .

  40. Tooom Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 17:28

    is the ds version any good?

  41. Jenova Project X Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 17:36

    Does anyone know about the Xbox 360 version, is that a good game? Is it considerably better or the same game just with better graphics?

  42. TheVelvetRoom Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 17:59

    All this time, I refused to believe the hype. I ignored all previews in the mags because I already knew that it couldn't possibly be good. And I was right!

  43. majin buu Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 18:17

    Went against ONM's review and bought it because several people who had the game said it was good and am not disappointed. The graphics aren't bad, in fact they are quite good, above par. The single player is fun and the multiplayer both online and off is good fun and online is generally lag free.

  44. Hunter3992 Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 18:57

    Nice....
    What else could you really expect I suppose.

  45. fanboy Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 19:07

    Does anyone know about the Xbox 360 version, is that a good game? Is it considerably better or the same game just with better graphics?

    Yeah its good. I think its basically the same game but with much better controls.

    Single player is decent and very cinematic, but Ive heard that its very short.

    The online is absolutley immense though. Its exactly like COD 4 but all different maps etc. Like COD4 with a bond mod.

    I cant believe what I read in the other thread that the Wii version only supports 4 players online. That is just totally unacceptable.

    If you ave a PS3 or 360 and want more Cod4, then I would recommend this, as its just like a massive bond themed expansion of Cod 4.

    Im proper gutted for Wii only owners though, as it sounds like they've really been screwed.

  46. phazonking Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 19:14

    Half of you guys really annoy me, Graphics this and Graphics that, who cares? Its about the gameplay, not the graphics and controls. What really annoyed me was when someone in the Wii section moaned about Wii Sports not being online! It was a freebie! What did you want online straight from the off? You cant have everything, you have to wait. Back to 007, it doesnt look that bad IMO just because graphics are poor and controls are hard dpesnt mean it deserves a low score.

    anyone would think you work for activision.

  47. NIN-ALEX-TENDO Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 19:36

    Its says the Developer is BeeNox? I though Treyarch was supposedly doing all the Consoles bonds?

    This might mean COD5Wii might be done by this developer, but if treyarch do it I bet it will be far better than what BeeNox would churn out. Even By lookin at the screenshots they look terrible.

    But Videos and previews on IGN Say that COD5 on Wii seems to b great so wemight have hope, cant say the same for 007. I watched the film today which was quite good but this is a downer I was gonna buy it for crimbo.

  48. daddybobo Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 20:09

    Was it Activision that got publisher of the year? If it was what a joke. This is just poor. With Nintendo and the Goldeneye history surely they know there are a lot of fans awaiting a great Bond game on a Nintendo console.

    This has really annoyed me. I wasn't even looking forward to the single player it was the 12 player multiplayer I was looking forward to. I envisaged late nights over the wifi. Dreams dashed on the rock of despair I can tell you.

    Maybe ONM can review the multiplayer side of it for us??? Is this possible? Still if the graphics are so poor then maybe the multiplayer wouldnt be fun.

    Damn it Activision you suck :evil:

  49. majin buu Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 20:21

    Was it Activision that got publisher of the year? If it was what a joke. This is just poor. With Nintendo and the Goldeneye history surely they know there are a lot of fans awaiting a great Bond game on a Nintendo console.

    This has really annoyed me. I wasn't even looking forward to the single player it was the 12 player multiplayer I was looking forward to. I envisaged late nights over the wifi. Dreams dashed on the rock of despair I can tell you.

    Maybe ONM can review the multiplayer side of it for us??? Is this possible? Still if the graphics are so poor then maybe the multiplayer wouldnt be fun.

    Damn it Activision you suck :evil:


    The graphics aren't poor.

  50. daddybobo Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 20:23

    Ok so what about the multiplayer?

  51. Doclector Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 20:37

    I had hope. Not much, but I had it. Something HAS to be done about this. Wii owners keep getting the short end of the stick, and I know I could just get an Xbox 360, in fact I'm thinking of it (not dumping my wii though), but it's just unacceptable. These guys are supposed to make games. They're not supposed to mess it up just because they cba to take time to do it properly on wii. There should be some kind of call for standards. Why do they keep doing this? Because there's a large amount of people who don't read reviews, and will buy such stuff. It looks brilliant on the back of the box, so much so that I tried to check for a "screenshots from xbox 360" caption, but no such warning, and clearly, those shots aren't from the wii version. Surely that's against adertising laws? Anyway, I ask for a boycott. Just don't buy it, and tell everyone you know not to buy it, and hopefully they get the message.

  52. Flash7 Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 20:48

    Crap. I was looking to buy this as well! Oh well, I hope Call of Duty 4 will be a better experience.

  53. pumpkinpie001 Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 20:52

    Went against ONM's review and bought it because several people who had the game said it was good and am not disappointed. The graphics aren't bad, in fact they are quite good, above par. The single player is fun and the multiplayer both online and off is good fun and online is generally lag free.


    I completely agree. Despite the graphics, which are nowhere near as bad as you made them out to be, the gameplay is solid, and the online and multiplayer are fantastic. It deserves 70% at least.

  54. majin buu Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 21:02

    Ok so what about the multiplayer?


    Splitscreen and online are both good but its a shame about only four players however the experience is still enjoyable with hardly any lag.

  55. fanboy Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 21:48

    I just cant believe you can only have 4 players online. Its just a travesty.

    Im really not trying to rub it in, but what with the 360 and PS3 versions getting 12 player online it just seems terribly unfair.

    Im guessing theres no credit system either? Do you get points after every match to go towards buying new guns/gadgets etc?

    Are all the modes there? Like the 007 mode where one person is James Bond and everyone else has to hunt him down?

    Unfortunatley I doubt they will be, and its a real shame cos I really wanted this for Wii. The Wiimote is brilliant for Fps's.

  56. chazrinelli Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 22:33

    The game is really good, gameplay is really good, camera does go off a bit too much and graphics are great! obviously ONM are not fans of 007... Mltiplayer, very good, considering I had 5 seconds of fun since I joined an ending game lol. Worth the buy, dont listen to ONM. GT pro was good, graphics were poor as anything though. Great season modes on GT Pro...

  57. cheezwiz45 Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 22:55

    What the heck is your problem Onm! If you published this review BEFORE the servers came online, then surley this review is a bit unfair. While I do support some of your reviews this is actually one of the best tie- ins ive ever played! Granted 4 player online is a weenine bit weak but you can use the zapper, create your own charachter and it has plenty of replay value! 75% at least!

  58. TheDeDeDe Friday 31st Oct 2008 at 23:47

    Went against ONM's review and bought it because several people who had the game said it was good and am not disappointed. The graphics aren't bad, in fact they are quite good, above par. The single player is fun and the multiplayer both online and off is good fun and online is generally lag free.


    I completely agree. Despite the graphics, which are nowhere near as bad as you made them out to be, the gameplay is solid, and the online and multiplayer are fantastic. It deserves 70% at least.

    Same here.

    ONM's review was extremely harsh...

  59. fisher2007 Saturday 1st Nov 2008 at 03:43

    if you go here its got 11 votes and user score 9.0

    http://uk.gamespot.com/wii/action/james ... user-score

  60. Shaun2005 Saturday 1st Nov 2008 at 04:26

    http://medialib.officialnintendomagazin ... umb300.jpg

    I don't like comparing Wii to 360/PS3 but the presentation gap is ridiculous. Seriously developers... Get it sort.

  61. Prince_Ashitaka Saturday 1st Nov 2008 at 07:58

    On Amazon's description of the game it talks about 12-player online and I've read that elsewhere, but everyone here seems to say that it's only 4-player online. Could anyone who's got the game clear that up for me please?

    I've seen videos of Wii footage of this game and i don't think it looks anywhere near as bad as you make out-granted his hands do look...not like like hands. But how much time in a FPS do you really spend staring at the protaganists hands?

  62. chazrinelli Saturday 1st Nov 2008 at 09:56

    On Amazon's description of the game it talks about 12-player online and I've read that elsewhere, but everyone here seems to say that it's only 4-player online. Could anyone who's got the game clear that up for me please?

    I've seen videos of Wii footage of this game and i don't think it looks anywhere near as bad as you make out-granted his hands do look...not like like hands. But how much time in a FPS do you really spend staring at the protaganists hands?

    I think it does depend onn which game you play, because I played team conflict, but there was 4 people but there maybe more to turn up.

    EDIT Only 4 player but is really fun! quite hard too...

  63. The Sandbag Saturday 1st Nov 2008 at 10:23

    loads of the stuff i saw for this game was awesome. now they have gone and wrecked it? this is definitely coming off my christmas list, and the film was awesome

  64. majin buu Saturday 1st Nov 2008 at 10:42

    http://cdn.medialib.officialnintendomagazine.co.uk/screens/screenshot_13375_thumb300.jpg

    I don't like comparing Wii to 360/PS3 but the presentation gap is ridiculous. Seriously developers... Get it sort.


    The graphics are a lot better in game. All the stills look crap but in motion the game looks quite good.
    Also whoever said you can create your own character would you care to explain how?

  65. chazrinelli Saturday 1st Nov 2008 at 10:59

    http://cdn.medialib.officialnintendomagazine.co.uk/screens/screenshot_13375_thumb300.jpg

    I don't like comparing Wii to 360/PS3 but the presentation gap is ridiculous. Seriously developers... Get it sort.


    The graphics are a lot better in game. All the stills look crap but in motion the game looks quite good.
    Also whoever said you can create your own character would you care to explain how?

    You can choose which character you are in the multiplayer modes.

    The game is great ONM just dont like it. (there probably rubbish at it thats why :lol: )

  66. Joerulesdaworld Saturday 1st Nov 2008 at 12:41

    Yh i willprobz b buyin this 4 ps3 and i think this is one of the best fps for wii since all they can compare this 2 is...redsteel maybe

  67. Tom266 Saturday 1st Nov 2008 at 13:50

    I remember when we saw all the first screens of Mario Kart Wii and everything thought they looked awful, but it is because they are still. When you watch videos or actually play it for real it is really good.

  68. VivaLaGabe Saturday 1st Nov 2008 at 14:01

    Anyone relised why the gameplay and graphics suck for 007 Quantum of Solace?
    Because its on the Wii, Now if you want the real experience of the game, try playing it on Xbox360 and PS3, It's beyond amazing then.
    No crap reviews that.

    Oh and stop fan-boying the game...

  69. Rynowarrior Saturday 1st Nov 2008 at 15:31

    My Friends are all arguing to me about how PS3 is better than Wii. Games like this just prove them right... :(

    DAMN YOU ACTIVISION!!!

  70. daddybobo Saturday 1st Nov 2008 at 18:50

    Was it Activision that got publisher of the year? If it was what a joke. This is just poor. With Nintendo and the Goldeneye history surely they know there are a lot of fans awaiting a great Bond game on a Nintendo console.

    This has really annoyed me. I wasn't even looking forward to the single player it was the 12 player multiplayer I was looking forward to. I envisaged late nights over the wifi. Dreams dashed on the rock of despair I can tell you.

    Maybe ONM can review the multiplayer side of it for us??? Is this possible? Still if the graphics are so poor then maybe the multiplayer wouldnt be fun.

    Damn it Activision you suck :evil:

    Just want to apologise for part of my post. I saw the multiplayer running and it looks good. And I am not bothered about it only having 4 players. If I wanted 12 I would play counter strike or something. 4 players is plenty as Goldeneye showed us.

  71. obi wan 4138 Saturday 1st Nov 2008 at 18:54

    the thing i cant work out by looking at those screen shoots is weather it is an first second or third person shooter? it just a mess of all of them

  72. majin buu Saturday 1st Nov 2008 at 19:15

    the thing i cant work out by looking at those screen shoots is weather it is an first second or third person shooter? it just a mess of all of them


    First person mainly but third when in cover behind objects.

  73. ElfenLied Saturday 1st Nov 2008 at 19:45

    Damn...I was really looking forward to this game as well =[

    My brother wants to get it for Christmas...I don't have the heart to tell him it's not that good >.<

  74. tomandjak Saturday 1st Nov 2008 at 20:36

    I'm a big Bond fan so I got this just when it came out. It has the best multiplayer since goldeneye! Sure the single player is pretty short but the multiplayer makes up for it. If The graphicsa aren't even that bad. There as good as call of duty 3. The AI is brilliant. First person to Third person is a really good feature. Everywhere else this game has been reviewed it's got 8 or 9. Don't let this review put you off! If nothing else, buy it for multiplayer. :D :!:

  75. tomandjak Saturday 1st Nov 2008 at 20:45

    I haven't played it yet, because I don't want to spoil the film, but 52% is a shockingly low score...

    It dosen't spoil the film too much so don't worry!

  76. tomandjak Saturday 1st Nov 2008 at 20:48

    However you didn't mention the Online or Multiplayer? Care to elaborate please. :P

    Oh and by the way there is 2 different multiplayer modes. Conflict and Rush. Conflict is just simply shooting each other for points but Rush is where you have to conplete challenges. These range from simple assassination to not so simple tasks like assembling the golden gun. Like I said before don't let the review put you off. If you are a bond fan you'll love it and won't care about what the review says!

  77. chazrinelli Saturday 1st Nov 2008 at 21:08

    the thing i cant work out by looking at those screen shoots is weather it is an first second or third person shooter? it just a mess of all of them

    1st for normal mode, 3rd in action and cover mode.

    Damn...I was really looking forward to this game as well =[

    My brother wants to get it for Christmas...I don't have the heart to tell him it's not that good >.<

    DO NOT LISTEN TO ONM! They just dont like the game for some wierd reason. It deserves atleast 80% the only problem i have with it is its too short!

  78. adamwalker222 Saturday 1st Nov 2008 at 21:17

    BOND!!!
    why did u have to be crap?!
    anybody know if its better on ps3???

    this is a real shame, cud have been a great game. oh well

    < goes and puts on goldeneye >

  79. majin buu Saturday 1st Nov 2008 at 22:11

    BOND!!!
    why did u have to be crap?!
    anybody know if its better on ps3???

    this is a real shame, cud have been a great game. oh well

    < goes and puts on goldeneye >


    ITS NOT CRAP! That review and score is the ONM reviewers own personal opinion, whilst I can't say that their opinion is wrong and everyone is entitled to their own opinion my personal opinion is that the game is actually quite good, online is really good fun as is single player. Graphics are actually quite good its just n stills they look bad.

  80. Wk93 Saturday 1st Nov 2008 at 22:55

    ^ Are you saying this as a Bond fan or do you honestly believe this is a good game?

  81. NirdBerd Saturday 1st Nov 2008 at 23:08

    The next Goldeneye..hmm. No.

    52% was beyond my expectations. That's horrible

    I'll stick to Everything or Nothing and TimeSplitters.

  82. Galahad Sunday 2nd Nov 2008 at 06:11

    Giving it 52% is way to harsh, but I do feel like
    BeenBox developers should be punished for having gold in their hands, and doing such an insulting port.

    The first 10 minutes of the game, are spectacular, I sat with my brother, and we were so blown out by the engine and graphics, agreeing, it's almost like Gears of Wars.
    But, as shockingly the game starts off, it's almost unbelievable how poor it gets in many parts. I think consistency is the main issue here. BeenBox were patient enough to port the graphics in the first 10 minutes, making far-away objects like mountains and water very plain, and the near enviornment identical to the PS3 - spectacular. But afterwards, they just couldn't keep up. Small roomss look empty and plain with no lighting and textures, and big areas
    no longer get the desereved attention. If the Wii can't handle a certian massive area, they should have changed a bit the design, and inserted larger building in the front to block the far and streched, resource taking streets. But because it's a port, and not a dedicated gamed, they didn't. So, it becomes very sloppy.
    Giving us Online with only 4 players is truly inconceivable. 14 years after Doom, and that game had at least 16. I can't accept any explantion for such a lame effort, and that's why I said, the developers should realy be ashamed. The online stages by the way, again suffer from great inconsistency, some areas looks quite well, other will actually remind you goldeneye- low polygon count, thin walls and bad textures.

  83. danz202 Sunday 2nd Nov 2008 at 11:18

    Having played this since Thursday I have to agree with the review, but only concerning the Single Player mode.
    Single Mode does have some shocking/weird graphic moments (in one cutscene Bond's arm goes through a pole and in another you see a car with the body sticking out of it) The 1st level looks pretty good, shame it doesn't carry on from that.

    However, the best bit about the game is the multiplayer (I haven't played offline) there's no AI problems there and it has some pretty good gameply. But it's let down by the rankings, they tried to go by MKWii's one but it didn't work. If the host is losing they can d/c wheneevr they want. 4 players isn't that bad, but you shouldn't base the review just on Single Player.

  84. neschris Sunday 2nd Nov 2008 at 11:41

    this game was never going to work on wii because the cod4 engine is too advanced for it to run properly, maybe codwaw will be better because treyarch have had 2 years to work with it, is it really only 4 player online? what a joke.

  85. fanboy Sunday 2nd Nov 2008 at 11:45

    Just to answer the people asking if its any good on PS3/360 -well the single player isnt up to much but the online is LITERALLY as good as COD4, maybe even better.

    Golden Gun mode from the N64 is on it and is just brilliant, and theres also an online game called 'Bond Vs' where one player is James Bond and the rest are terrorists trying to hunt him down while he defuses bombs.

    The online is absolutley staggering on the other consoles, I just dont get why it wasnt ported correctly.

  86. Galahad Sunday 2nd Nov 2008 at 12:28

    It's awful what they did to the online,
    If they had any sense, they whould have put the outmost resources to the online, making it the best choice for gamers who are drooling over Xbox/PS3 Multiplay since day one.
    They already had a great engine, just cut on the useless fighting scenes, or any other shtick not related the main experience, and focus on the bloody best online you can get !! Idiots...
    Now, you just made us Wii users even more frustrated, and still without the basic ingredient - online game like Quake,Doom, Halo, GTA.... f**king retards.
    To any one who is compromising on this pathetic online, saying that 4 players with lousy graphics/gameplay is actually not a catastrophe: why don't you go and play Ubisoft's imagine babies instead, hey, it's not that bad either.

  87. majin buu Sunday 2nd Nov 2008 at 13:32

    ^ Are you saying this as a Bond fan or do you honestly believe this is a good game?


    Because i honestly believe this is a good game. Sure there are some moments in the game where some of the textures are sloppy but at other times the game looks great. Online is really good, even if it is only four players.

  88. Joerulesdaworld Sunday 2nd Nov 2008 at 14:29

    i loved redsteel ad this comes close to beating it becasue of the live and multiplayer

    worth getting its the wiis cod4 or nearly

  89. fanboy Sunday 2nd Nov 2008 at 15:22

    It's awful what they did to the online,
    If they had any sense, they whould have put the outmost resources to the online, making it the best choice for gamers who are drooling over Xbox/PS3 Multiplay since day one.
    They already had a great engine, just cut on the useless fighting scenes, or any other shtick not related the main experience, and focus on the bloody best online you can get !! Idiots...
    Now, you just made us Wii users even more frustrated, and still without the basic ingredient - online game like Quake,Doom, Halo, GTA.... f**king retards.
    To any one who is compromising on this pathetic online, saying that 4 players with lousy graphics/gameplay is actually not a catastrophe: why don't you go and play Ubisoft's imagine babies instead, hey, it's not that bad either.

    Well said.

    Its just a bloody disgrace.

    Im very fortunate because I own all three consoles, but I feel for Wii owners here. They simply have THE BEST method for playing Fps's but they have been tragically short changed here, despite people saying that 4 player online is still good. (It may be if you never play Call of Duty etc)

    On 360 Ive played it enough now to say that I really love the online aspect of the game. I actually prefer it to Cod at the moment because of the superior game modes, and the new 'holo sight' rifle attachment you can buy is awesome.

    The only thing that would make it better would be Wii controls, but theres no way Id sacrifice everything else for just that.

  90. Ze Terminator Sunday 2nd Nov 2008 at 16:02

    http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg220/supernintendotom/screenshot_13370.jpg

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d8/Goldeneyeemulated4lw.jpg

    In case you didn't realise, the one on the bottom is Goldeneye.

    And here is a screenshot of the PS3 version:

    http://news.filefront.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/quantum_of_solace_-_explosion.jpg

    I think we all know which is better :wink:

  91. Tom266 Sunday 2nd Nov 2008 at 17:19

    http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg220/supernintendotom/screenshot_13370.jpg

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d8/Goldeneyeemulated4lw.jpg

    In case you didn't realise, the one on the bottom is Goldeneye.

    And here is a screenshot of the PS3 version:

    http://news.filefront.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/quantum_of_solace_-_explosion.jpg

    I think we all know which is better :wink:

    No comment :lol:

  92. shmoogle Sunday 2nd Nov 2008 at 21:52

    so the ps3 has better graphics than the wii, tell us something we didnt know :o

  93. legendwork Monday 3rd Nov 2008 at 11:47

    OK people calm down, calm down! it's plain and simple and the rule has been around for a long time.
    RULE:
    multi-format games are pants = unhappy people

    i stick by these rules(usually) and it never fails.

    any way we will have the conduit to look forward to, so relax....the future is promising.

  94. Paul101 Monday 3rd Nov 2008 at 12:48

    I don't normally sign up for forums, but I think these comments are a little harsh.

    For one I think people need to stop comparing EVERY Bond game to Goldeneye. Yes Goldeneye was AMAZING and rightly so and yes there have been some horrible versions, but Goldeneye was a long time ago and should not be used as the bench mark any longer.

    I don't think we will ever get a bond game like that again no matter how much we protest. For a first person shooter I'm quite enjoying QoS merely for the fact you can have some good classic blazing shootouts.

    Multiplayer is a lot of fun and is as unpredictable as the players. I think we need to maybe try not to handicap all new bond titles even before we get to play them.

  95. jonny F Monday 3rd Nov 2008 at 21:47

    :evil: :twisted: ACTIVISION YOU SUCK AND CARRY ON SUCKING ON MY RING OH while i,'m on about brown rings shuff your publisher of the year award up yours you sloppy ***** once again get in line join the que of s**t game makers for the wii to be shot by the firing squad TAR :!: :!:

  96. mn9ajas Tuesday 4th Nov 2008 at 16:20

    Sounds like it comes down to personal preference. I wish Nintendo would relax its rules on renting Wii games so that we could rent them from blockbuster to see for ourselves without having to fork out Ł25-35 everytime.

    When does Red Steel 2 come out??

  97. jonny2may Tuesday 4th Nov 2008 at 20:39

    I don't care about the visuals, The game is a good game all round.
    If your a person that doesnt really care about graphics but's about the gameplay then you'll love this.
    And the Online play is AMAZING!!
    Me pesonly would recomend the game. :D

  98. jonny2may Tuesday 4th Nov 2008 at 20:49

    Half of you guys really annoy me, Graphics this and Graphics that, who cares? Its about the gameplay, not the graphics and controls. What really annoyed me was when someone in the Wii section moaned about Wii Sports not being online! It was a freebie! What did you want online straight from the off? You cant have everything, you have to wait. Back to 007, it doesnt look that bad IMO just because graphics are poor and controls are hard dpesnt mean it deserves a low score.


    I agree, Everyone is about graphics.
    I own the game and I think that that dosent really matter the game looks good enough for me!
    And when you get used to the controls the're really not that hard to use.
    Me personaly thing the game is brillaint and the online tops off this brillaint bond game! :wink:

  99. joeb007 Tuesday 4th Nov 2008 at 21:32

    you are all crazy fools if you think this is a bad game!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This game is perfect for the WII!!!!!!!!!!!! The zapper works SOOOOOOOOOO well!!!!!!!!!!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :D :D :D 96% Buy this game!!!!!!!!! Trust me if you havent all ready BUY IT NOW !!!!!!!!!!!!

  100. daddybobo Tuesday 4th Nov 2008 at 22:36

    http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg220/supernintendotom/screenshot_13370.jpg

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d8/Goldeneyeemulated4lw.jpg

    In case you didn't realise, the one on the bottom is Goldeneye.

    And here is a screenshot of the PS3 version:

    http://news.filefront.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/quantum_of_solace_-_explosion.jpg

    I think we all know which is better :wink:

    That isn't even the same screenshot you goit. It's like putting a picture of a cat next to a dog and saying "We all know which is better". Find me the same screenshot on the PS3 and if its better then thats fine.

  101. scotthmurray Wednesday 5th Nov 2008 at 20:18

    I agree with Tom266’s comment of “…and you haven't even mentioned the multiplayer ~ …surely it should be taken into consideration when reviewing this, or was it that you didn't have time to try this part out?”

    This review is severely under-researched - I can only imagine the amount of people who would jump at the chance of bursting a paper bag behind this writer.

    Ps: when you’re “uttering expletives” it’s normally a good indication you’re not just frustrated - you’re not very good at the game either.

  102. John_R Thursday 13th Nov 2008 at 11:46

    just to get this clear: I am a big 007 fan, i love the wii and FPS.

    but this game is one of the worst examples of how to do a FPS on the WII, its broken, controls are shoddy, frustrating and looks so bad i am offended.

    I owned this game or 2 days and returned, Its awful. If you havnt bought it PLEASE DONT. If you have look be realistic stop defending it stop trying to convince yourself you didnt buy a gaming shambles!

    you owe it to yourself to be playing better games than this. Agree with the rewiew 100%.

    This game should have never been released in this state.

  103. koopa64 Sunday 30th Nov 2008 at 17:16

    This game is great the graphics are gd in motion,the gameplay is solid and the multiplayer online and off is fantastic 80-85 is much more appropriate score methinks.

  104. markdean2012 Thursday 18th Dec 2008 at 16:38

    back to the N64 then :(

    same ere

    and me i bought goldeneye the other day for my N64 and i am loving it so far, i only have one controler for the 64 does anyone know were i can get another one? don't care if it is official or not
    and don't say eBay
    i am talking about a real life shop here
    (i got goldeneye at play & exchange)

  105. bouno Thursday 1st Jan 2009 at 22:16

    I got this game quite early when it came out and I think that if the multiplayer, which in my opinion is definately the best part of the game (both online and offline), had been taken into account, this game would have achieved a higher score.

  106. Redfish20 Friday 2nd Jan 2009 at 22:18

    It's not that bad. ok so the graphics aren't that good, I can live with that. It's not original, but it's an fps, what were you expecting? plus the cover system is great. The multiplayer deathmatch mode does exactly what it says on the tin and does it very well, and it's online.
    P.S. using actual gunsights in games is not a rubbish idea.

  107. Redfish20 Friday 2nd Jan 2009 at 22:21

    It's not that bad. ok so the graphics aren't that good, I can live with that. It's not original, but it's an fps, what were you expecting? plus the cover system is great. The multiplayer deathmatch mode does exactly what it says on the tin and does it very well, and it's online.
    P.S. using actual gunsights in games is not a rubbish idea.

  108. ginger007luke Friday 6th Mar 2009 at 20:21

    bad bad bad bad bad, the feet thing is a lye only for one level the aim is a great and you said it was bad and good for cod. You probably pu people of a great game and the online is ace. I got this game for last christmas a you lied about everything. At least 89% even a gold award!

  109. ginger007luke Friday 6th Mar 2009 at 20:26

    It's not that bad. ok so the graphics aren't that good, I can live with that. It's not original, but it's an fps, what were you expecting? plus the cover system is great. The multiplayer deathmatch mode does exactly what it says on the tin and does it very well, and it's online.
    P.S. using actual gunsights in games is not a rubbish idea.


    He is exatly right

  110. slangman Thursday 26th Nov 2009 at 12:58

    I'll stick to the N64 version of Bond thank you.

  111. Sonic Freak Saturday 3rd Apr 2010 at 10:54

    I actually think this game looks really good. Might even be a purchase!

  112. imbusydoctorwho Monday 29th Nov 2010 at 23:34

    This games is so
    bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad This games is so
    bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad

Register or log in to commment
Add a comment
Nintendo Co., Ltd. is the owner of certain copyright which subsists and trade marks and other intellectual property rights in certain content, characters, artwork, logos, scripts and representations used in this publication. All rights are expressly recognised and they are used by Future Publishing Limited under licence © 2006 Nintendo Co., Ltd. All rights reserved. "Nintendo", "International Nintendo Licensed Product" "Nintendo DS", "Nintendo DS Lite", "Nintendo DSi", "Nintendo 3DS", "Nintendo DSi XL", "Nintendo 3DS XL", "Wii" and "Wii U" and the associated logos are the trademarks of Nintendo Co. Ltd. All rights reserved.