The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Hm. Spiderman.
Now, I saw the film a while back, and to say the least, they hyped it up alot. Nevertheless, I watched it. I thought it was a pretty cool film, not bad, nothing "Amazing" but it was enjoyable. And cool Jumping spiders :o)
Anyway, me and a few friends rented out a game. There wasn't much there, so we decided to rent out Spiderman, after seeing the film, we wanted to play the game. Now. Heh.
It was. Hm.. how can I put this.. "Crap?"
Well. Pretty much, it was. The graphics were pants, pretty much no decent music, boring. His web stuck to the "Sky" ? I don't know.. And it was unrealistic. Yea, your Spiderman sure, but can you really swing into a building at 150mph and not sustain any damage? Hm. I think not..
It was boring. Now, the film. Was much better than this.
Now, Goldeneye. Ooo :o) That was a brilliant game. Why can't film-game conversions be as good as this? Don't ask me.
Im just wondering that, because the films quite good, they don't have to put "as" much effort into making the game. Now, don't get me wrong, making games is hard. And I could never do it. But, if your going to make something, make it good right?
Im just ranting pretty much about the majority of film-game conversions are of poor quality throughout.
This could be, that the film doesn't give them enough possibilities
and they can't stray away from the film slightly, they have to stick to the plot, so to speak. If you understand me. Now, Goldeneye, you could build and build with the many possibilities that the film left you with. I mean, shooting, and just basically James Bond rules, loads of gadgets, good weapons, bombs, explosions. Loads of stuff you could expand on. But, Spiderman, and other films. You just. Cannot.
So, if the quality of the game is poor. Could that be because the film didn't leave them with enough possibilities?
This, however, is not the films fault is it. Its just pretty much luck, and what the film is based on. And if you can come up with a good idea or not. T'is not really to do with the film. Not, as much as you'd like to think anyway.
This is just another view on the film-game conversions, and trying to explain why they're pants. The majority anyways.
Thanks for trying to understand. Which you probably didn't succeed in doing. Ah well. :o)
GasMask
Now, I saw the film a while back, and to say the least, they hyped it up alot. Nevertheless, I watched it. I thought it was a pretty cool film, not bad, nothing "Amazing" but it was enjoyable. And cool Jumping spiders :o)
Anyway, me and a few friends rented out a game. There wasn't much there, so we decided to rent out Spiderman, after seeing the film, we wanted to play the game. Now. Heh.
It was. Hm.. how can I put this.. "Crap?"
Well. Pretty much, it was. The graphics were pants, pretty much no decent music, boring. His web stuck to the "Sky" ? I don't know.. And it was unrealistic. Yea, your Spiderman sure, but can you really swing into a building at 150mph and not sustain any damage? Hm. I think not..
It was boring. Now, the film. Was much better than this.
Now, Goldeneye. Ooo :o) That was a brilliant game. Why can't film-game conversions be as good as this? Don't ask me.
Im just wondering that, because the films quite good, they don't have to put "as" much effort into making the game. Now, don't get me wrong, making games is hard. And I could never do it. But, if your going to make something, make it good right?
Im just ranting pretty much about the majority of film-game conversions are of poor quality throughout.
This could be, that the film doesn't give them enough possibilities
and they can't stray away from the film slightly, they have to stick to the plot, so to speak. If you understand me. Now, Goldeneye, you could build and build with the many possibilities that the film left you with. I mean, shooting, and just basically James Bond rules, loads of gadgets, good weapons, bombs, explosions. Loads of stuff you could expand on. But, Spiderman, and other films. You just. Cannot.
So, if the quality of the game is poor. Could that be because the film didn't leave them with enough possibilities?
This, however, is not the films fault is it. Its just pretty much luck, and what the film is based on. And if you can come up with a good idea or not. T'is not really to do with the film. Not, as much as you'd like to think anyway.
This is just another view on the film-game conversions, and trying to explain why they're pants. The majority anyways.
Thanks for trying to understand. Which you probably didn't succeed in doing. Ah well. :o)
GasMask
Yea true Edgy. I dont think Goldeneye will ever be beaten. Its supurb.
I personally believe Spider-man (as it's properly spelt) to be a better movie-to-game conversion than many others I've played in the past.
Sure, Treyarch have added a few extra Spider-man villians to extend the game's length, and Spider-man can swing on thin air, but I personally feel this is a much better game than the Playstation/Dreamcast version which only let you swing when you're in close proximity to a building. The reason being it's less frustrating in the GameCube/PS2/X-box/PC version as you don't just suddenly drop to the ground below when you get out of range of a building.
Sure, this game isn't as good a conversion as Goldeneye was. I mean, bar a few levels, Goldeneye was a true to the movie as you can get! Plus Goldeneye is still considered to be one of the greatest games ever! So the chances of any games, especially another film-to-game conversion are very low.
Sure, Treyarch have added a few extra Spider-man villians to extend the game's length, and Spider-man can swing on thin air, but I personally feel this is a much better game than the Playstation/Dreamcast version which only let you swing when you're in close proximity to a building. The reason being it's less frustrating in the GameCube/PS2/X-box/PC version as you don't just suddenly drop to the ground below when you get out of range of a building.
Sure, this game isn't as good a conversion as Goldeneye was. I mean, bar a few levels, Goldeneye was a true to the movie as you can get! Plus Goldeneye is still considered to be one of the greatest games ever! So the chances of any games, especially another film-to-game conversion are very low.
Well, I can't deny it's a great idea for a topic...
And thanks.
And thanks.
Hm, that screws my GAD chances up. Great..
Heh. Congrats anyway...
Heh. Congrats anyway...
MoJoJoJo wrote:
> Tell me, did you read Swander's post, and sub conciously post this
> one, without realising the similarities?
Um. I wrote a topic and posted it.. I don't know what goes on..
> Tell me, did you read Swander's post, and sub conciously post this
> one, without realising the similarities?
Um. I wrote a topic and posted it.. I don't know what goes on..
=D
Tell me, did you read Swander's post, and sub conciously post this one, without realising the similarities?
Hm. Spiderman.
Now, I saw the film a while back, and to say the least, they hyped it up alot. Nevertheless, I watched it. I thought it was a pretty cool film, not bad, nothing "Amazing" but it was enjoyable. And cool Jumping spiders :o)
Anyway, me and a few friends rented out a game. There wasn't much there, so we decided to rent out Spiderman, after seeing the film, we wanted to play the game. Now. Heh.
It was. Hm.. how can I put this.. "Crap?"
Well. Pretty much, it was. The graphics were pants, pretty much no decent music, boring. His web stuck to the "Sky" ? I don't know.. And it was unrealistic. Yea, your Spiderman sure, but can you really swing into a building at 150mph and not sustain any damage? Hm. I think not..
It was boring. Now, the film. Was much better than this.
Now, Goldeneye. Ooo :o) That was a brilliant game. Why can't film-game conversions be as good as this? Don't ask me.
Im just wondering that, because the films quite good, they don't have to put "as" much effort into making the game. Now, don't get me wrong, making games is hard. And I could never do it. But, if your going to make something, make it good right?
Im just ranting pretty much about the majority of film-game conversions are of poor quality throughout.
This could be, that the film doesn't give them enough possibilities
and they can't stray away from the film slightly, they have to stick to the plot, so to speak. If you understand me. Now, Goldeneye, you could build and build with the many possibilities that the film left you with. I mean, shooting, and just basically James Bond rules, loads of gadgets, good weapons, bombs, explosions. Loads of stuff you could expand on. But, Spiderman, and other films. You just. Cannot.
So, if the quality of the game is poor. Could that be because the film didn't leave them with enough possibilities?
This, however, is not the films fault is it. Its just pretty much luck, and what the film is based on. And if you can come up with a good idea or not. T'is not really to do with the film. Not, as much as you'd like to think anyway.
This is just another view on the film-game conversions, and trying to explain why they're pants. The majority anyways.
Thanks for trying to understand. Which you probably didn't succeed in doing. Ah well. :o)
GasMask
Now, I saw the film a while back, and to say the least, they hyped it up alot. Nevertheless, I watched it. I thought it was a pretty cool film, not bad, nothing "Amazing" but it was enjoyable. And cool Jumping spiders :o)
Anyway, me and a few friends rented out a game. There wasn't much there, so we decided to rent out Spiderman, after seeing the film, we wanted to play the game. Now. Heh.
It was. Hm.. how can I put this.. "Crap?"
Well. Pretty much, it was. The graphics were pants, pretty much no decent music, boring. His web stuck to the "Sky" ? I don't know.. And it was unrealistic. Yea, your Spiderman sure, but can you really swing into a building at 150mph and not sustain any damage? Hm. I think not..
It was boring. Now, the film. Was much better than this.
Now, Goldeneye. Ooo :o) That was a brilliant game. Why can't film-game conversions be as good as this? Don't ask me.
Im just wondering that, because the films quite good, they don't have to put "as" much effort into making the game. Now, don't get me wrong, making games is hard. And I could never do it. But, if your going to make something, make it good right?
Im just ranting pretty much about the majority of film-game conversions are of poor quality throughout.
This could be, that the film doesn't give them enough possibilities
and they can't stray away from the film slightly, they have to stick to the plot, so to speak. If you understand me. Now, Goldeneye, you could build and build with the many possibilities that the film left you with. I mean, shooting, and just basically James Bond rules, loads of gadgets, good weapons, bombs, explosions. Loads of stuff you could expand on. But, Spiderman, and other films. You just. Cannot.
So, if the quality of the game is poor. Could that be because the film didn't leave them with enough possibilities?
This, however, is not the films fault is it. Its just pretty much luck, and what the film is based on. And if you can come up with a good idea or not. T'is not really to do with the film. Not, as much as you'd like to think anyway.
This is just another view on the film-game conversions, and trying to explain why they're pants. The majority anyways.
Thanks for trying to understand. Which you probably didn't succeed in doing. Ah well. :o)
GasMask