Call of Duty and Battlefield were both originally PC games. Goldeneye had nothing to do with them. Goldeneye may've launched a FPS revolution on consoles, but it was just latching onto the FPS revolution that had been ongoing for 5 years already on the PC.
The question GoldenEye answered was mostly "can we do this". Shooters were always going to be popular if they found a way to consoles successfully.
Call of Duty was a success on PC but it didn't become the monster it ended up as there, it took the console multiplayer world to do that. So I think you can draw a line from GoldenEye to Call of Duty in that way. There were 11 years between GoldenEye and BFBC though, let alone the main series.
I don't think GoldenEye is the game of the year, but I'd vote for it over the other 2 top vote getters pretty easily. 50 Sheas made the best case it has.
GoldenEye might be overrated, but it's also unfairly come down on most of the time. I played Wolf3d, Duke 3d, Doom 1 & 2, Hexen. Those early shooters had their control oriented growing pains as well but don't get any flak at all. As someone who played those and who is probably one of the bigger FPS snobs around here, it didn't even really enter my mind that GoldenEye's shooting sucked at the time. I just played the hell of it. GoldenEye was an action game with solid level design, extremely enjoyable multiplayer modes and split screen, gadget/weapon usage, and it let you experience the movie in a way that's probably still under recognized.
If you grab a controller and play GoldenEye it doesn't even really feel like a PC shooter from that time, I don't think it was supposed to. Turok as an example does try to and fails miserably at it.
Duke Nukem 64 handled it a lot better being mostly a port.