Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'GBAtemp & Scene News' started by T-hug, May 21, 2008.
lol so europe version came out? i dont see much differences.
yes, but it's still good
Is this a movie game or just a racing game fueling itself on movie hype and using the same name?
It's a movie game.
It's not bad but I stopped playing it after 10 minutes. :\
You brave soul. I dont see myself watching the movie (Which I feel shouldn't have been made *grr*) let alone playing Movie Game
It's a goddamn good game, get over the fact it's a movie game already guys. It doesn't always mean it's gonna be bad, just most of the time.
I dont think all movie games suck or are bad (I've never played one XD that I recall. Surely I've never owned one.) I just really, really enjoyed Speed Racer when I was a kid. I hate the fact that they made the movie--and the trailer looks so "spoofy" or something. Like..theyre not serious about the movie! It would seem that they shot a great deal of it before a felt screen--which is almost always terrible in my opinion (I mean really, is there no creativity anywhere in hollywood these days?) and it would seem the digital editors drew their inspiration for cut and paste graphics from a "goddamn good" bag of skittles.
I was only asking about the game because I'd seen different things around the I-net. One saying its a racing game, one saying its a "movie" game.
The game is actually pretty decent....
Go speed racer, go speed racer, go speed racer gooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well it's both. Movie game isn't a genre like racing game is anyway. It's racing game because, well it's about racing and it's a movie game because it's based on a movie (which is based on an anime/manga) but don't expect any story or anything, it's really leaning more towards pure racing even though you can't really compare these two
It's the only game I'm playing right now...
Let's see. There's Chronicles of Riddick, which was actually better than the movie (not hard, but still, it was a fun little game.)
There's one Pirates of the Caribbean game that didn't suck, but that's because they shoehorned the license into an almost-completed Pirates!-themed game at the last second.
And then there's a handful of decent things from LucasArts (and BioWare buying a license from LucasArts): Indina Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, some of the Jedi Knight titles, Knight of the Old Republic (if that qualifies.) Lego Star Wars, too. I guess with the bazillion awful Star Wars titles out there, a handful would have to be good...
...and that's about it. One thing that stands out is that most of those were made without time constraints -- Fate of Atlantis and the Jedi Knight games were made long after the movies were out, so they didn't have to rush the game to meet its deadline. One of the main reasons license games tend to suck is because of that -- they have to wait to start development on the game until the movie is almost done (so they have those awful images from the movie they can plaster over everything); then they have to rush development so they can release around the same time. Even Knights of the Old Republic 2 was damaged by this (IIRC they rushed to meet one of the prequel movies -- how painful, having a good game rushed and damaged to meet the deadline of a vastly worse movie. Should've delayed the movie until the game was done, it would have been better.) But at least in that case they started long before the movie was finished -- typical license games have such a small window of time in which to be made that it's a miracle they get made at all. (That's why they're often just generic engines or other games with scenes and characters from the movie crudely plastered over them.)
Riddick is an odd exception, because the big-name actor from that movie owns his own game company and insisted that they make it right.
To me, the Harry Potter games were the biggest disappointment. They didn't need to be based on the movie -- the fans don't really care about the movies anyway, they would've just wanted stuff from the books. There was no need to wait until they had scenes from the movie to work in, or images of the actors, or anything silly like that. They could've been started long in advance, and with so many movies they could've just worked and made a good game and then sold it alongside whichever movie was next. But the people who set the plans for those tie-ins don't know or care at all about videogames, and they know they can shovel out crap and people will buy it as long as it has the license -- so they went ahead and used still-frames from the movies, made the games in a few weeks, and they all sucked. That tells you everything you need to know about movie games right there.
(Still, in this case -- well, it's a racing game, you can't screw up a racing game too badly, can you? And it's not like it's hard to slap some Speed Racer skins and models into a pre-existing racing game and call it a day.)
You can. Believe me, you can.
I'm scared to watch the movie lest I get epileptic seizures due to the vibrant neon colours throughout the whole show.
As for the game, I like pressing the X button while hopping.
Game's interestingly good. I like the fact that it's more driving-based, less weapon-based.
This game I like much more than Mario Kart- mainly because winning actually takes skill in as a component- as opposed to a slot machine that gives you items based on your position. Also you can see that each computer player wants to be in first place- you'll see cars fighting in the distance in front of you and so on; as opposed to every CPU player going after YOU, no matter what position you're in. The only thing Mario Kart has on top of this is internet play.
Its an good game but i hate the car-fu you need to do 100000 times or something