The return of the Start menu in future Windows 8.1 update: Thoughts?


Recommended Posts

yeah, just like the start menu is never coming back either.

 

Don't you ever get tired of posting the same BS over and over again?

The Start Menu is Metro based, The Start Screen still exists on Xbox, Windows 8, and Windows Phone. Not to mention, Microsoft's universal apps are all Metro based, so tell me, why do you think Metro is going away?

yeah, just like the start menu is never coming back either.

 

Don't you ever get tired of posting the same BS over and over again? People hate metro, people hate the start menu. Whatever... It's going around in infinite circles.

 

Yeah you'd think after two years of being wrong about absolutely everything they would give it a rest.

From what I can see here I think I'll stick with StartIsBack, and it seems I've heard this start menu is coming back song and dance before...

I prefer a clean desktop, and an uncluttered taskbar, at log on. Hell, I prefer a desktop at log on, and that is what I have, running 8.1.

Choice is good, to an extent.

Metro isn't going anywhere.

 

Yes, I know it was a joke... heh heh too bad...

 

The Start Menu is Metro based, The Start Screen still exists on Xbox, Windows 8, and Windows Phone. Not to mention, Microsoft's universal apps are all Metro based, so tell me, why do you think Metro is going away?

 

Nobody thinks metro is going away, I don't care what they do with it as long as they stop gimping the desktop.

I'm really not making any assumption.

 

Metro has not taken off...anywhere and customers have shown this by buying other things. 

If they are buying tablets and smartphones, why is it necessarily rejection of ModernUI?  Could it be that they are rejecting a traditional tower for reasons of price?

 

A tablet (an 8.1 tablet - not an RT tablet) has either price parity or actually costs LESS than a traditional tower PC; not to mention, merely in traditional retail, is more often available than a traditional tower.  (hhgregg, for example, doesn't sell traditional tower PCs at all.  Even Best Buy - the Urbane Gorilla of big-box retail - is selling fewer traditional towers than they did even two years ago; the same is true of eight-hundred-pound-gorilla Wal-Mart.  Basically, traditional tower sales are down, and tablet/slate/non-traditional PC sales, of all sorts, are up.  The traditional desktop formfactor is under siege by mobile/portable hardware - the OS has nothing to do with it at all.)

 

Also, traditional towers are not portable - except MAYBE in the "luggable" sense. Demand is for portability - and NOT in the luggable sense.  Hence portable PCs - in every screen size from seventeen inches down - are seling, and in droves. Touch is more common in the portable formfactors than in desktops - even AIOs, despite adopting touch, are still dwarfed in terms of sales by portables. And that is common features, where the only differences are portability and price - and yet you are trying to say that neither has anything to do with what gets sold?  Note that none of this has anything to do with the OS on the hardware at all.

  • Like 2

Because that's when the Win 8 hate started, to discount that overlooks the problem many have with it. It also shows how long people have been asking for the things that MS removed.

 

Funny, most of the people wanted just that - options, that's all I ask for, the option to continue using my desktop pretty much the same way I did in Win 7. I don't care if Windows is on any other platform, I use an Android tablet and IOS phone, because I liked their experiences on the platform I chose them on. Windows can be on as many form factors as Microsoft wants, but why does the UI have to be changed for the platform it's already on? They already had a great system - Aero, looked good, worked well and people LIKED it, why crap all over that with Win 8?

 

Don't worry I'm sure Stardock will make a replacement app if Microsoft removes Metro (or parts that you want)...

 

 

Funny, when I choose to, I can use the desktop in Win 8 exactly as I did in Win 7, with no add-ons, no limitations. I just have options beyond the traditional desktop (UI). And a much improved program launcher tying the halves of the OS together.

 

And I'm not talking about tablets here - I'm referring to having 2 different UIs and program styles to choose from, on my stationary computers.

 

Why do so many of the anti-8 crowd, when they talk of options, then immediately start talking about limiting those options to just what they prefer?

 

 

And I'm sure Stardock could come up with a $5 tool to replace half the OS . Because an entire operating environment and a little menu are totally the same thing . . .  :rolleyes: What I'd like them to do is a wrapper to let me run desktop programs in the Modern environment.

Nobody thinks metro is going away, I don't care what they do with it as long as they stop gimping the desktop.

 

How is Microsoft gimping the desktop? Especially now that the menu is coming back? Personally, I think returning the menu is gimping the OS, but a long as it remains optional, I can just leave it disabled and not have to deal with it.

Funny, when I choose to, I can use the desktop in Win 8 exactly as I did in Win 7, with no add-ons, no limitations. I just have options beyond the traditional desktop (UI). And a much improved program launcher tying the halves of the OS together.

 

And I'm not talking about tablets here - I'm referring to having 2 different UIs and program styles to choose from, on my stationary computers.

 

Why do so many of the anti-8 crowd, when they talk of options, then immediately start talking about limiting those options to just what they prefer?

 

 

And I'm sure Stardock could come up with a $5 tool to replace half the OS . Because an entire operating environment and a little menu are totally the same thing . . .  :rolleyes: What I'd like them to do is a wrapper to let me run desktop programs in the Modern environment.

 

How is Microsoft gimping the desktop? Especially now that the menu is coming back? Personally, I think returning the menu is gimping the OS, but a long as it remains optional, I can just leave it disabled and not have to deal with it.

 

Where did you get a copy of Win 8 with an actual working Start Menu like the one in Windows 7? Oh, yeah, you don't so you can use Win 8 EXACTLY like Win 7.

 

Ok, please stop lumpng me in with the anti-8 crowd, I have stated many many many many many times and I'll state it again... for the RECORD. - I am glad there are users who like/love/enjoy Metro and the more CHOICES Win 8 has the  better.

 

Please stop with the drama - I said "Microsoft removes Metro (or parts that you want)...", just like you know the topic of this thread, the way they removed the Start Menu from the desktop. Did Stardock remake the entire desktop or "an entire operating enviroment"?

 

Microsoft gimped the desktop by making me use something that looked like a bad tablet UI, stop with the "now that" because there wouldn't be a RETURN of anything if people were happy with Metro. They ripped out Aero and replaced it with a bad Litestep theme, they removed the ability to change the FONT, and people couldn't even figure out how to turn the damn thing off. You know when Microsoft removes something from Metro, that you find very useful, and want it back, then maybe, just maybe you will understand how I feel about Win 8. They removed/hid previous functionality for no reason, or maybe you know a reason to remove the ability to change the font?

 

Too bad, we can't leave Metro disabled and have a Win 7 styled desktop...

Where did you get a copy of Win 8 with an actual working Start Menu like the one in Windows 7? Oh, yeah, you don't so you can use Win 8 EXACTLY like Win 7.

 

Ok, please stop lumpng me in with the anti-8 crowd, I have stated many many many many many times and I'll state it again... for the RECORD. - I am glad there are users who like/love/enjoy Metro and the more CHOICES Win 8 has the  better.

 

Please stop with the drama - I said "Microsoft removes Metro (or parts that you want)...", just like you know the topic of this thread, the way they removed the Start Menu from the desktop. Did Stardock remake the entire desktop or "an entire operating enviroment"?

 

Microsoft gimped the desktop by making me use something that looked like a bad tablet UI, stop with the "now that" because there wouldn't be a RETURN of anything if people were happy with Metro. They ripped out Aero and replaced it with a bad Litestep theme, they removed the ability to change the FONT, and people couldn't even figure out how to turn the damn thing off. You know when Microsoft removes something from Metro, that you find very useful, and want it back, then maybe, just maybe you will understand how I feel about Win 8. They removed/hid previous functionality for no reason, or maybe you know a reason to remove the ability to change the font?

 

Too bad, we can't leave Metro disabled and have a Win 7 styled desktop...

 

On the desktop, I can hit the Win key, and type what I want to launch. That's exactly how I used the desktop in Windows 7. I avoided the Menu like the plague. Or I have the choice of an actual usable program launcher in the form of the Screen.

 

So no, I don't think replacing the Menu with another launcher gimped the desktop at all. Rather it was improved by the replacement of a cumbersome, outdated feature. IMO Microsoft finally fixed their mistake from 1995.

 

And the latest update is actually adding stuff to Modern that I don't want or need. I'm holding off on updating until I'm sure the faux-desktop stuff can be disabled. A close box and taskbar have no place in Modern. I guess you could say I'm losing the cleanness of Modern in this update.

On the desktop, I can hit the Win key, and type what I want to launch. That's exactly how I used the desktop in Windows 7. I avoided the Menu like the plague. Or I have the choice of an actual usable program launcher in the form of the Screen.

 

So no, I don't think replacing the Menu with another launcher gimped the desktop at all. Rather it was improved by the replacement of a cumbersome, outdated feature. IMO Microsoft finally fixed their mistake from 1995.

 

And the latest update is actually adding stuff to Modern that I don't want or need. I'm holding off on updating until I'm sure the faux-desktop stuff can be disabled. A close box and taskbar have no place in Modern. I guess you could say I'm losing the cleanness of Modern in this update.

 

Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, because I think the start screen gimped the desktop. Don't worry they are "fixing" Win 8 as we speak.

 

Too bad the new update mandatory if you wish to recieve future updates... so much for choice.

 

Too bad the new update mandatory if you wish to recieve future updates... so much for choice.

 

On that we can agree. Why does it have to be either-or?

The update being mandatory is because of the API changes they've made, it's needed, specially for universal apps and a unified app store coming later.

 

Lots of you are going back and forth rehashing the same arguments, in the end it doesn't matter because here's the choice everyone wanted.    Use the new menu, or don't, or load up some old 3rd party menu still if you feel like it, it matters little at this point.  The desktop was never going away, it wasn't even depreciated, some make it sound like they gutted things out of the desktop which never happened.   Metro is also here to stay, or in this case WINRT, store apps are becoming part of the desktop and to that end I expect more changes to the desktop to support them while also brining WINRT features to older Win32 WPF apps, like contracts.

 

Don't be surprised if after we get the new menu they then work on a new taskbar as well.  Also if they stick to the trend of sharing things between Windows and WP, when they bring over the Action Center that the old systray gets the boot as well.   I also expect to see the charms in the new menu as well, from the little concept glimpse at the BUILD keynote they did they weren't there but I have a feeling they will be in the final version.  Or if not in the menu then some way to bring them up next to the app window and not in the corner. 

 

Either way, nothing is going away, and the two things are coming closer together now.

  • Like 1

Updated this afternoon. Nothing really changed initially, other than the close minimize bar in Modern apps. Works well, well done. Pinning Modern Apps, genius. Shoulda been there day one. I see no need to add taskbar over modern, or run modern in Windows, but it's definitely better though I'd like a more modern look to the right-click context menus on the start screen.

Updated this afternoon. Nothing really changed initially, other than the close minimize bar in Modern apps. Works well, well done. Pinning Modern Apps, genius. Shoulda been there day one. I see no need to add taskbar over modern, or run modern in Windows, but it's definitely better though I'd like a more modern look to the right-click context menus on the start screen.

 

 

Odd thing about the right click on the start screen is that it's like a half-way done metro style menu.  They removed the dividing line between the item text, and where the check mark would go, and they also changed the highlight style to a flat, strokeless grey, instead of the blue, outlined box on the desktop.

 

I agree with you, I wouldn't mind them going all the way in the next update.

... So? Snap them to the side. They make great side apps. What's wrong with viewing photos fullscreen? Windows has had fullscreen for years. Why is it suddenly a bad thing?

 

i don't know if you are multi-tasking like others most others do. This is probably why you like Metro.

On the desktop, I can hit the Win key, and type what I want to launch.

why would you WANT to have the extra hassle of typing what you are looking for though... why not just click it?

i don't know if you are multi-tasking like others most others do. This is probably why you like Metro.

My multi-tasking has always been around fullscreen, or "snapped" windows. I can't stand to have a mess of oddly sized open windows just floating around everywhere, making a mess of things. It takes too much time to click through that. When Windows 7 introduced better snapping abilities, I was thrilled. Windows 8 (and Metro) are no different. Just like in Windows 7, I can drag an app to the sides of the screen to snap them in place.

why would you WANT to have the extra hassle of typing what you are looking for though... why not just click it?

 

If it were a case of simply clicking an item, that would be one thing, but the menu required drilling down to find anything not in the most frequently used or pinned programs. I hate having to dig through multiple submenus. It's easier and faster to type. I like the screen because it eliminates the drilldown - it really is "just click it".

On my Sons Windows v8.1 P.C. I installed classic shell and downloaded a heap of start orbs so he could choose his start button.

 

Now he aint bothered now that Windows in the future will add a decent start button.

If it were a case of simply clicking an item, that would be one thing, but the menu required drilling down to find anything not in the most frequently used or pinned programs. I hate having to dig through multiple submenus. It's easier and faster to type. I like the screen because it eliminates the drilldown - it really is "just click it".

for me, typing out what you are looking for me seems like more work. For me, its "I see it, I click it" 

If it were a case of simply clicking an item, that would be one thing, but the menu required drilling down to find anything not in the most frequently used or pinned programs. I hate having to dig through multiple submenus. It's easier and faster to type. I like the screen because it eliminates the drilldown - it really is "just click it".

 

That is great.  Keep with the Metro / typing to launch applications.  Not sure why you and Dot Matrix have a hard time understanding and are trying to convince others that Metro is so much better and that WE should use it.  No thank you, I'd much rather have the Start Menu / QuickLaunch bar to run programs instead of being thrown into a full screen program launcher.  

 

Also, the argument that the Start Menu is legacy and has passed its usefulness is such hogwash...it is JUST a program launcher...that is it and that is all it should be.  Did I mention I love the QuickLaunch bar?  Even after almost 15 years it beats the Start Menu and Start Screen at launching programs.  I don't like pinning because it takes either holding the shift button or right clicking to run multiple instances.

 

Below is my simple Windows 7 method of launching programs.  Desktop has two icons, Computer and Recycle Bin.  Simplistic and it works for me.

post-21852-0-10537200-1397394552.jpg

If it were a case of simply clicking an item, that would be one thing, but the menu required drilling down to find anything not in the most frequently used or pinned programs. I hate having to dig through multiple submenus. It's easier and faster to type. I like the screen because it eliminates the drilldown - it really is "just click it".

This, x1000000000000000000000000000000000

That is great. Keep with the Metro / typing to launch applications. Not sure why you and Dot Matrix have a hard time understanding and are trying to convince others that Metro is so much better and that WE should use it. No thank you, I'd much rather have the Start Menu / QuickLaunch bar to run programs instead of being thrown into a full screen program launcher.

Also, the argument that the Start Menu is legacy and has passed its usefulness is such hogwash...it is JUST a program launcher...that is it and that is all it should be. Did I mention I love the QuickLaunch bar? Even after almost 15 years it beats the Start Menu and Start Screen at launching programs. I don't like pinning because it takes either holding the shift button or right clicking to run multiple instances.

Below is my simple Windows 7 method of launching programs. Desktop has two icons, Computer and Recycle Bin. Simplistic and it works for me.

It may just be a launcher, but it's a horribly designed launcher. The biggest issue with it (and the desktop in general), is that it just doesn't scale well at all. It's incredibly hard to see those icons, and the user is dependent on reading line after line in order to locate the folder they need, thanks to the vanilla folders all having the same icon. Taskbar pinning is great, but it's no savior either, as I find myself easily able to mis-click on those icons, wasting time as I now have to wait for the application to launch before closing it. The same applies for the quicklaunch bar. I'm personally glad that was removed from Windows 7. It was great to pin "show desktop" there, and that was about it.

FYI, You can open new instances of applications by simply clicking the middle mouse wheel.

That is great.  Keep with the Metro / typing to launch applications.  Not sure why you and Dot Matrix have a hard time understanding and are trying to convince others that Metro is so much better and that WE should use it.  No thank you, I'd much rather have the Start Menu / QuickLaunch bar to run programs instead of being thrown into a full screen program launcher.  

 

Also, the argument that the Start Menu is legacy and has passed its usefulness is such hogwash...it is JUST a program launcher...that is it and that is all it should be.  Did I mention I love the QuickLaunch bar?  Even after almost 15 years it beats the Start Menu and Start Screen at launching programs.  I don't like pinning because it takes either holding the shift button or right clicking to run multiple instances.

 

Below is my simple Windows 7 method of launching programs.  Desktop has two icons, Computer and Recycle Bin.  Simplistic and it works for me.

 

You can also middle click for multiple instances of pinned items on the taskbar.  Of course that's if you're using a mouse.  I don't know if you might be using a laptop touch pad or something.

 

The argument about the Start Menu being legacy has to do with how it's set up as a bunch of folders that has to be drilled down into and something heavily mouse oriented, not that it's basic function as "just" a program launcher is somehow "legacy".  The Start Screen is still basically a program launcher too.

 

Come to think of it, even the Windows 7 menu that you're talking about is already more than "just" a program launcher.  It's a place to access recently used items, link to folders, link to places on the desktop, shutdown/restart the computer, access your user profile, search for things...

You can also middle click for multiple instances of pinned items on the taskbar.  Of course that's if you're using a mouse.  I don't know if you might be using a laptop touch pad or something.

 

Yea, the problem with that is that on my mouse, the middle button (I'm assuming you're talking about the wheel) causes it to go from no-resistance to a "clicky" spin and vice versa (where I prefer the "clicky")...if you know what I mean?

 

Anyway, never did like the whole pinning applications except on my HTPC..and that is just because the icons are bigger and I really do not launch multiple instances of applications on it.

Yea, the problem with that is that on my mouse, the middle button (I'm assuming you're talking about the wheel) causes it to go from no-resistance to a "clicky" spin and vice versa (where I prefer the "clicky")...if you know what I mean?

 

Anyway, never did like the whole pinning applications except on my HTPC..and that is just because the icons are bigger and I really do not launch multiple instances of applications on it.

O_o
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Hello, Hope all is well. I am in UK.  
    • I'm not happy with myself for it, but I've gone and got hold of it. Just another 45 minutes and I'll be Bond, James Bond. In my defence, IO's Hitman series is awesome, and I'm a sucker for 007. So while it might seem a bit simplified compared to Hitman, I'm sure I'll be right at home.
    • Or just check the script yourself ^^. I hate having a Microsoft account tied to my windows install.
    • 007 First Light review: Satisfying spy adventure that James Bond needed by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe I have fond memories of classic James Bond games from the Electronic Arts era. Using high-tech gadgets, sneaking into parties, and dispatching bad guys were wildly exciting activities for my younger self. In recent years, Bond games have entirely disappeared, alongside the super spy genre. Fast forward to 2020, imagine my surprise when IO Interactive announced it had secured the Bond IP to make a game. Considering the studio’s Hitman history, this project is one I keenly kept an eye on. Six years later, 007 First Light is finally here, and after spending time inside this globe-trotting adventure, I can safely say that my excitement for this developer’s take on this universe was not unfounded. IO has taken lessons it has learned from Hitman and combined them with what I would expect from a directed cinematic experience like James Bond. I have refrained from mentioning major plot points to save you from story spoilers in this review. This is an original story that doesn’t tie into any movies, so there isn’t an expectation of knowing the backstory or the decades of movies either. Bond, James Bond When 007 First Light begins, Bond is just Bond. There isn’t a spy angle, fancy gadgets, or even a secret mission. The introductory mission is framed to show how James Bond handled himself and how he does not care about the odds when it comes to saving lives. It’s a gorgeous level as well, showing off an island scattered with cliffs in the middle of a storm. Looking back, this is probably the best-looking level in the game, with IO showing off all its abilities with its custom engine, Glacier. But my favorite ended up being the follow-up to this level. Once the United Kingdom's foreign intelligence agency, MI6, recruits our daring youngster into its super-spy “00” program, training begins. However, instead of treading through the same tutorial missions where the game teaches you to run and jump and drive, IO opted for a montage, and it’s amazing. The scenes cut between Bond practicing and improving his marksmanship, parkour, hand-to-hand combat, and driving as weeks go by in his training. What impressed me here was the lack of any loading screens or stutters as scenes instantly switched to different locations entirely, as if I was watching a movie. This creativity is a trend I noticed in most levels, where there is some sort of gameplay or choreography mechanic being introduced to keep things interesting. Soon, the rest of the cast is introduced, bringing other agents that our favorite secret agent will be working with, the scientists and engineers that build MI6’s spy gadgets, as well as higher-ranking officers that either appreciate or (at best) tolerate Bond’s rebellious attitude. It’s a tight cast, all with incredibly good voice acting and personalities that quickly grew on me. The casting for Bond himself is also an excellent one. From showing his iconic soft spot for women to the condescending smiles that get a rise out of enemies, I had no issues getting immersed into this universe as this new face of James Bond. The missions take place in a wide range of locations as MI6 sends Bond to tackle dangers that are growing everywhere from the UK to Africa. These aren’t unrelated adventures where MI6 is sending secret agents, which is an angle I would love to see in another game, but a part of a bigger conspiracy affecting the entire world. Some of the twists and turns were all too predictable, and the character that Lenny Kravitz played made me cringe a little too much. But all in all, I enjoyed the campaign’s storyline that sets the stage for this new agent joining the illustrious “00” program. Plenty of Possibilities The third-person style of IO Interactive fits this role quite well. Bond is presented as a master at hand-to-hand combat as well as firearms, while also having a knack for being stealthy when required. Most sections of missions have a lot of freedom. This means I could beat up every goon and security guard on the way to an objective, slip past them without sounding a single alarm, or do a mix of both. My sessions usually end up with the third option because I tend to be impatient about waiting for a patrol to move. Drawing from its Hitman genes, the developer almost always gives multiple routes for going through missions. Levels can be massive, sometimes sporting hundreds of NPCs going their own ways and having conversations. If my objective is to break into a security room on the third floor, I could look around for roof access, eavesdrop on conversations to find out where someone lost a key, create a distraction and pickpocket a guard for a keycard, sneak in through the vents, or simply kick down the offending door. I enjoyed the variety on offer, especially because the same solutions didn’t usually show up in different missions. Before heading out into a secret MI6 escapade, the gadget specialist of the branch walks Bond through the organization's latest and greatest achievements. This can be cool little devices like a laser built into the watch, a phone that fires poison darts, or a camera that emits a powerful shockwave. The choice of what can be taken into the mission is up to the player. I could usually find fresh routes or get out of tough situations with a punch or two, so I never had the feeling of missing out by not choosing the right equipment. It’s still a fun practice. Choosing the armaments before a mission enhanced the super spy feeling quite a bit. As I mentioned, stealth comes in as a very viable option for most of the missions, letting Bond sneak past foes or knock them out silently. While it is satisfying to clear entire areas of goons and walk away without any alarms, the way of accomplishing this could have been done better. Bond can lure enemies, sneak up and knock them out, or use a gadget to disorient them before dealing a nasty blow. Bodies cannot be moved or hidden afterward either. It’s a very simple system, which I wish were more exciting to pull off. Perhaps more stealth-orientated gadgets, distraction options, or multi-takedowns could have helped here, I think. Getting caught while attempting to be in stealth does not mean a game over. Other than getting into a fist fight, an interesting twist of 007 First Light is the bluffing option. While an enemy is confused as to what you are doing in a restricted location, Bond has the option to improvise and persuade them that you are exactly where you’re supposed to be. These are fun little dynamic interactions with unique dialog depending on the mission and location, giving a few extra moments for Bond to go past suspicious guards smoothly. It’s the first time I’ve witnessed this system in a game, and I hope to see more. License to Kill Bond isn’t just dealing with security guards or civilians. From time to time, entire gangs of gun-toting mercenaries show up in levels looking to take down our protagonist. It is then that License to Kill mode is activated for Bond, letting him use firearms with no restrictions. I was surprised by just how tight gunplay is in 007 First Light. The weapons feel powerful and satisfying to fire, with single bullets capable of taking down an enemy with a headshot. Ammo is scarce, and enemies don’t drop weapons with full magazines most of the time. This forces a hectic kind of gameplay where I am always advancing towards enemies to take their weapons after they are downed. Things like shooting legs to immobilize, aiming at the hands to make their weapon go flying, blowing up nearby fire extinguishers for cover, and using gadgets to halt a goon in their tracks while I reload, make up enjoyable levels. I had to hold back my disappointment when the enemy count in these action sequences dropped to zero and I had to go non-lethal again. Speaking of action sequences, First Light isn’t just offering sandbox levels to complete at the player’s own leisure either. Each level comes with specific linear and directed scenes to move the story forward and put Bond in tight situations. These usually end up with high-octane chases or driving sections, offering the chance to witness chaining explosions, hails of gunfire, and scripted parkour scenes that remind me of Mission Impossible movies more than Bond. Elements like seeing James Bond jump out of a plane without a parachute or drive through buildings in London inside a trash truck were fantastic and always left me at a high point when finishing a mission. The classic James Bond theme is sprinkled in here too, which only happens a handful of times in the game, but at just the right moments. Visuals and Performance Compared to Unreal Engine 5 games we are seeing nowadays, 007 First Light isn’t flexing a huge amount of realism when it comes to graphics. The models, textures, and effects all feel a little dated, with the starting mission that I mentioned being the most visually striking. However, the complete lack of stutters, the hundreds of NPCs that can be on screen without a single hitch, massive sandbox levels, and smooth transitions between them all play a part in making this an immensely immersive and complex experience. The in-engine cutscenes are gorgeous as well, offering an upgraded visual style and model detail over the gameplay sections. Animations are one aspect that jumps out at me about any new game, and First Light has nailed what a third-person action game should feel like. Walking, sneaking, and running all have a heaviness to them that I appreciate. Whenever Bond moves past a wall or a ledge, his arms reach out to lightly hold those structures until he moves away. NPCs actually react to my character and move out of the way. Even during melee combat or takedown animations, the fists impacting a body or a head hitting a wall all have that same weight. Even the more frivolous animations, like catching a gun in midair or chucking an empty one at a goon (yes, you can do that), are satisfying to pull off. Of course, the in-engine cutscene animations are remarkably well done too, with facial animations and the upgraded model details improving my engagement with the characters. I have an AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT 16GB paired with an eight-core Ryzen 7 3700X and 32GB of RAM, with the game running at 1440p resolution. Deciding to completely max out all the graphics options gave me a range of frame rates between 60 and 100 depending on the scene and level. While I did try to enable AMD FSR, which bumped up the frame rates by a good 20% at Quality mode, IO Interactive’s implementation of the technology wasn’t that great. Every corner and edge in levels began shimmering, and I was also seeing smearing issues in fast-moving sections. The title seemingly uses the older generation FSR 3.1 and not the machine learning-assisted FSR 4, leading to these artifacts. Unfortunately, there isn't a way to manually upgrade this right now either. I opted to turn off the upscaling and play the game in native 1440p to avoid problems. I would say the FPS range I was getting was an acceptable one for a single-player action game for my setup. I do wish there were an FOV slider option in the settings. While the camera is far enough back for my tastes in most situations in this third-person adventure, at times the perspective is far too close. When trying to look around quickly and spot targets, I realized I was getting a slight headache at times due to the use of an almost over-the-shoulder close-up camera. Conclusion Being James Bond in 007 First Light is a treat. Traveling around the world chasing conspiracies, using high-tech gadgets disguised as everyday accessories, and improvising on the spot to fool foes all give a fantastic feeling of being a super spy. For an origin story, IO Interactive has done a great job at introducing the character and his motives for doing what he does. The satisfying combat animation and fantastic voice acting are definitely high points, with the License to Kill moments being my favorite. Not being able to move bodies and the simplistic stealth of mechanics does hurt its presentation a little. The NPC logic and intelligence is easy to manipulate and trick, repeating the same actions over and over again if I keep making distractions. The lack of an FOV slider was also a pain (quite literally) at times, and the FSR implementation is quite poor. These are things I hope the studio will improve upon with updates. Even with its faults, IO Interactive and James Bond are a match made in heaven. The studio knows how to make a main character that oozes charm and competency while also leaning heavily into its Hitman experience to make gigantic levels with what looks like hundreds of NPCs roaming around. Being an origin story, IO’s Bond has a way to go before he becomes the highly effective agent we see in the movie world. I am hoping the studio will continue this series alongside its Hitman ventures going forward, just so we get to experience the journey for longer. 007 First Light is available on PC (Steam, Epic Games Store, and Xbox PC), Xbox Series X|S, and PlayStation 5 for $69.99. This review was conducted on the PC version of the game provided by IO Interactive.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Collaborator
      conkir earned a badge
      Collaborator
    • Rising Star
      olavinto went up a rank
      Rising Star
    • One Month Later
      lamborghiniv10 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      lamborghiniv10 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Reacting Well
      X-No-file earned a badge
      Reacting Well
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      271
    3. 3
      +Edouard
      75
    4. 4
      Skyfrog
      74
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!