User Reviews (1 - 11 of 59)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

just like the other 007 games, [its bad]

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 2 / 14
Date: December 08, 2002
Author: Amazon User

I have already wasted enough money on 007 games. The 007 graphics always [are bad](during gamplay it looks like gamecube graphics :(, but are ok during cut scenes). Their bullets look like flying blocks, and their is no freaking blood, they get hit with a rocket launcher and fall down to their knees instead of flying backwards.

DATED AND MUCH TOO EASY

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 0 / 0
Date: May 20, 2004
Author: Amazon User

The only challengs this game offered was in the silly sequences where Bond has to fight off the entire underworld while stuck in something which limits his ability to use stealth. Start to finish at the "most difficult" level it took me less than 8 hours. The look and feel are VERY POOR in 2004 -- maybe it was impressive when it first came out but in today's market ...

Save your money. Borow it from a friend. It is not worth a repeat play.

This better be good

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 1 / 20
Date: November 13, 2002
Author: Amazon User

I plan to buy this when it comes out, just like the other guy said, if it is anything like agent under fire I will never buy another bond game again. They could have atleast made a multiplayer mode.

Shame on the 5 star reviewers

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 0 / 1
Date: December 27, 2002
Author: Amazon User

Shame on everyone who gave Nightfire 5 stars. This game has the feel of the playstation one. The gameplay is identical to Medal of Honor (Frontline), which was released some 1 to 2 years ago. There are no fantastic graphics. I bought into all the hype the reviewers were giving. This does NOT contain the quality that Halo, Ghost Recon, or Splinter Cell type games have. I almost feel that they should give Nightfire away free as door prizes at the cinemas. This game will quickly be on the 20 dollar game shelf along with bloowake and Munchs Oddysee. Do yourself a favor and do some research. There are some GREAT games out there. Thank goodness for XBOX!

This is no Goldeneye:

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 0 / 2
Date: January 02, 2003
Author: Amazon User

What happened? Goldeneye was incredible and kept my friends/family and I entertained for years. What the people of Xbox should do is copy Goldeneye, and just add some better graphics with the awesome capabilities of the big black/green box, then I would be glad. I bought this game hoping it would be better than Agent Under Fire (which I used to own, and beat), but nope, . Here are some pros and cons:
Props
-great graphics
-neat new guns
-Bond actually looks like. . .Bond
-good multiplayer (not great)
-neat vehicles and gadgets

Cons
-a little bad language
-references to sex
-bad gameplay
-computer is too smart,

Bitter dissappointment

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 0 / 2
Date: January 02, 2003
Author: Amazon User

The 2 is for the graphics.Pretty good to be honest but the clumsy controls make this game a pain in the ...!.I want my money back now! As one reviewer put it 'Rent before you buy'.Wise words 'Grasshopper'

Predictable, Tedious, and outdated

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 0 / 1
Date: June 24, 2003
Author: Amazon User

I've been playing games since I can remember, and right away one thing sticks out like a sore thumb when I put this in my xbox:
the ai is a joke. Halo raised the bar, and this game does not live up to it. Unfourtunetely, unlike EA's cousin MOH, this game doesn't have an effective atmosphere to make up for that. A lot of things that you should have control over are watched via cinematics.

The graphics work, the sound is ok(bond is ruined by the terrible impersonator, a suprise after Buffy), and unlike Goldeneye, there is no consitent hit detection or blood.

So I guess you will love this if you are the type who lines up to get DAD when it came out on DVD, otherwise halo,unreal,rtcw,and moh frontline all do better jobs.

Very Bad Game

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 0 / 0
Date: March 30, 2008
Author: Amazon User

This game is extremely bad. The graphics are bad and after you beat it once you don't want to ever beat it again. You are in 2nd person shooter which is bad and your enemys dissapear after they die which is unrealistic. The multiplayer is the only thing that saved this game from getting a 1 star. Even then the multiplayer mode is mediocre. Borrow this from a friend. DON'T WASTE YOUR MONEY

Nightfire or just Under Fire?

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 8 / 9
Date: December 02, 2002
Author: Amazon User

James Bond 007: Nightfire offers incredible graphics and clever similarity to the nostalgia of the 007 legacy; however, in terms of gameplay and features, Nightfire has few attributes which place it above all previous 007 games. The story mode is very short, in fact I finished the game the night I bought it, and consider myself a mediocre gamer. Instead of having more levels, the game is intended to be played repeatedly in an attempt to "earn" all of the upgrades...a boring plan to extend gameplay. Unfortunately for 007, the release of Timesplitters 2 set higher expectations than Electronic Arts could have anticipated when they conceived the limited multiplayer features--which are more limited by having most features locked. Making things more difficult, the game limits which characters may face each other in Multiplayer Maps--why can't Bond and Zoe Nightshade face off in a multiplayer shoot-out? Even more bothersome, many of the upgrades and game concepts--gold rewards...ha ha ha--came directly from Agent Under Fire. EA fell quite short of the competition this Christmas with this release in light of Timesplitters 2 which boasts 100 playable characters, 76 game levels, system link mode, and enough challenges to last for several continuous weeks. As for Nightfire, rent before you buy!

whatever

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 4 / 6
Date: January 09, 2005
Author: Amazon User

EA still hasn't gotten Bond right. It's not terrible, but it's not great.

First of all, it's pretty short. 11 missions, and not very long missions at that. The a.i. is tolerable, but the only reason the a.i. gets you is because the game throws wave after wave of them at you, not because they're actually intelligent. I breezed through the first half of the game, but then it got tedious. There's a part where you are out amongst cranes and crates trying to fight off snipers on the roofs. Problem is, you can't really see them, and there's so many of them you can't get out a shot without being torn to shreds. It's sort of like EA thought that part in Half-Life where you fight those fast ninja-like assassins was really great and they'd try knocking it off. It failed.

Mostly, the last half of the game felt like that. EA being cheap to make up for poor a.i. and me just speeding through everything I could, taking plenty of damage, but squeezing out nonetheless.

You get to drive an underwater version of the Aston Martin in the game too. It's cool for the first minute and a half, but then you have to navigate through an underwater mine field in a very tight tunnel and that's when the icky control problems really make themselves known and next thing you know KABOOM.

But there are some fun parts. The tutorial mission is actually quite good. I had a blast on the first rail shooter level, and the first vehicle driving level. The level where you fight your way down the skyscraper is intense and fun.

The multiplayer is decent, but EA's little GOOD or BAD thing is here again, as it was in The World is Not Enough for N64. This means Bond is GOOD, and so are the Bond girls, and so they cannot fight each other. Ever. The BAD players can fight each other all they want, because, you know, BAD people do that. But not GOOD. Nope. This is annoying because you get your round setup and everything, and you're like "THIS IS GONNA BE SO COOL" and then it tells you that you can't have GOOD players fighting each other. It's even worse than it was in TWINE, too, because TWINE at least had a lot of characters.

The multiplayer levels are kinda blah, too. And there's not many of them.

The bots are ok because you can alter the characterstics of the generic characters. Sadly, you can't do this for the characters you unlock which is annoying.

The gamemodes they introduced probably seemed good when they were making them, but they're not very good here. Goldeneye strike, where you collect two halves of the goldeneye key and one person is automatically struck dead, sounds pretty neat, yeah? Too bad it's kinda confusing, and the deaths are very anticlimatic. King of the Hill would be good if it had a Mobile Hill option instead of just fighting it out in one spot the whole time.

But still, there is at least an ounce of fun in here. If you like James Bond, you should get this, because it's cheap and you'll enjoy it every now and then. Or, better yet, if you want an EA Bond, get the first shooter they made, The World is Not Enough on N64. Nightfire just felt like a poorly designed version of that game(which wasn't the best itself) except with much better graphics(the graphics in Nightfire are the only thing I have no complaint about.)

Review Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next 

Actions