Marvel to change the way it handles games - but will it work?
Posted by Graham. Filed under G, Interviews, Multi-platform, News. Tagged with Hulk, Iron Man, Marvel, Thor.
I found some enjoyment with this years Iron Man game, (though I know I’m one of few), and I did actually enjoy HULK quite a lot - the occasional mindless destruction does wonders for my sanity.
However, I haven’t lost all taste, and do realise that as far as superhero-based game franchises go, Sega’s latest offerings are far from the best. But, the main problem I have with games like Iron Man or HULK, is that they were based on the movies, and were planned to be released alongside their cinematic counter-parts.
If you look back at some of the best superhero games of all time - you will find that most of them were not based on movies. Instead they had their own story lines (or were based loosely on the comic books), and because of that the development teams had more time and creative freedom to make the games.
Well it seems that Marvel might be thinking along the same lines as myself (oh yes, all credit goes to me).
Speaking at the Madison+Vine Conference this year, Ira Rubenstein - Marvel’s EVP, Global Digital Media Group (basically in charge of games) - spoke about some of the future ideas that they have for the company regarding video games based on their franchsies.
- Marvel should start making more games based on its heroes without necessarily tying and timing them to a movie
- When there is a movie, he wants to get to work earlier, even before a script is final. He said he’s telling Sega to get started on the “Thor” and “Avengers” games (based on the movies coming out in 2010) now.
- Marvel should consider making more downloadable and casual videogames based on its properties.
While I think the first point made is a great one, and I would love to see a new Iron Man game, not tied down to a movie - flying around, shooting enemies, maybe taking on the Hulk… I think, perhaps, the second could hold many problems.
One of the biggest issues with movie-based games is that the developers are not always given the full storyline for the movie. They are given the general plot outline, and maybe told a few crucial moments in the movies, but ultimately as a movie is being made, it can change so much from the original idea, that it would be very difficult to reveal the full synopsis. Plus there is always a higher danger that information on the movie could be leaked, when telling a developer what they are doing.
While giving developers plenty of time to make games, as mentioned Thor and The Avengers are not released until 2010, is a good idea (as time restrictions is another big issue with movie tie-ins). Will the movie studio be able to reveal much about the movie? And how much might the movie change during production?
Now, some of you might say that I’m thinking too much about this, and that really just having enough time to make a decent game is all that counts.
Well, surely, the whole point of having a movie tie-in game is that the game should offer the experience as the movie?
If the movie and game differ so greatly, then what is the point of even calling it a movie tie-in? It would just be better off for Marvel (or whoever) to give the developer free rights to make a game using an original story. Then the team would have as much time as needed to make a game, and not be restricted by a crappy movie story.
Well, I guess the main point is that Marvel are trying new things, and the prospect of seeing some new, non-movie related superhero games is a welcome thought!
I hope we see some games of the same caliber that we saw back in the 16-Bit era, like X-Men, X-Men 2: Clone Wars, Castle/World/Land of Illusion, Spider-Man etc…
That said, the 16-Bit era also saw some great movie games; Aladdin, Lion King, Toy story, Batman Returns (Game Gear version)… hmm… perhaps companies should start making games for the Megadrive and SNES again instead? - It was clearly a better time for comic book franchises.
[Source: TheCutScene Via Kotaku]
[Image from TheCutScene]
Comments on this article
There have been 2 responses to this article.
I generally agree with your assessments, but I would like to point out that the Spider-Man 2 game was created to coincide with the movie, and it was a phenomenal superhero game and probably one of the best ever in my opinion.
Ultimate Spider-Man, on the other hand, was based on the comic series and had plenty of time to be in development, and in my opinion came off as a watered-down version of Spider-Man 2, with clunkier web-swinging, less cohesion (the jumps between spidey and the somewhat boring to play as venom), and no Bruce Campbell voice-overs.
I think the real key to creating a good superhero game is originality. Spider-Man 2 was unlike any other superhero game before it. And the sequels have been lackluster as a result. Hulk: ultimate destruction was also an original idea, and incredible hulk was a retread.
Neal
Posted July 25th, 2008 at 10:53 pm.
@Neal - Yeah I can admit there are exceptions to the rule.
And I too loved Spider-Man 2. I was very upset when I bought Spider-Man 3, no way near as fun.
But the best bits about Spider-Man 2 (in my opinion) were all the extras, and appearances from various Marvel villians, which weren’t in the movie.
The actual missions which followed the movie plot weren’t that much fun really.
Same with HULK - The main plot missions just weren’t that great (though I enjoyed fighting Abomination) - But the various side missions and appearances from random Marvel Villians, made me enjoy the game quite a bit.
-Also its a cracking experience when you fight on top of a building, and it suddenly starts collapsing beneath you.
But yeah my point is - the best parts of these games does always seem to be the things that the developers added to the stories - and the extra characters that don’t feature in the movies.
My most memorable moment from Spider-Man 2 was when Mysterio built that massive device on top of the Statue of Liberty - that was so much fun destroying that.
Graham
Posted July 26th, 2008 at 1:16 am.