Quantum of Solace Game to Not Suck

[Jul 23, 2008, 10:31 am ET] - Share - Viewing Comments

MCV has a quote from developer Treyarch saying that their Quantum of Solace game should offer a quantum of solace to James Bond fans disappointed in the quality of recent games starring the super-spy. They lay the blame for the shortcomings of recent Bond games on former license holder Electronic Arts, contradictorily referring to the new game as a chance to make a "first impression":

“We’re not trying to fix anything EA did wrong, because that’s just what they did,” explained Quantum of Solace’s executive producer Garrett Young (pictured). “I’m sure the series pissed off a lot of gamers over the last few years as the games started to go downhill, but we have no control over that.”

“The pressure we feel is more about launching this franchise in the right way. We know that you only have one chance to make a really great first impression, and this is it.”

View

21 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >

21.

Re: selective perception??

Jul 24, 2008, 23:51

sponge

I'm not creating anything. I'm just stating the facts. Publishers have the power to change these facts but they have no real incentive to. I thought we were talking about YOUR definition of what constitutes a movie tie-in game? If in which case you aren't creating that, then I have to wonder who is.

20.

Re: No subject

Jul 24, 2008, 21:51

Creston

but its the only good movie based game that i can think of right now, in all of history.. got to be a few more id think Disney's Aladdin for the Sega Megadrive was actually a pretty good platform game. Creston

19.

Re: selective perception??

Jul 24, 2008, 17:10

Jedi Master

Unless they decide to do something with no good logic to it, like release a Godfather or Thing game 20+ years after the film's release. Really, who decided THAT was a good plan? As for the 007 game, I'd prefer they wait and release it with the DVD release several months after the film comes out. Give it a few extra months of polish. "Now on DVD, Bluray, and a game for PC and consoles"

18.

Re: selective perception??

Jul 24, 2008, 02:50

Jerykk

So if something has to have strict deadlines, short dev times, and creative stifling to be a movie tie-in, aren't you just creating a self fulfilling prophecy? I'm not creating anything. I'm just stating the facts. Publishers have the power to change these facts but they have no real incentive to.

17.

Re: selective perception??

Jul 24, 2008, 02:28

sponge

It didn't have the strict deadlines, ridiculously short dev cycles and creative stifling that actual tie-ins do. So if something has to have strict deadlines, short dev times, and creative stifling to be a movie tie-in, aren't you just creating a self fulfilling prophecy?

16.

Re: selective perception??

Jul 23, 2008, 23:19

Jerykk

Yeah, it was based on a movie IP, not on an actual movie. It didn't have the strict deadlines, ridiculously short dev cycles and creative stifling that actual tie-ins do. As such, it can't be used as an example of a good movie game because it's not actually a movie game. Here are the biggest reasons why movie tie-ins suck: 1) Very short dev cycles: Most tie-ins have only a year or less for development. This is easily the biggest reason why movie tie-ins suck. 2) Creative stifling: Not only do you have to abide by the fiction of the movie long before it is even finalized, you also have to conform to the desired rating and target audience set forth by the movie studio and publisher. Any aspect of the game can be changed at the very last minute in order to accommodate these things. Finally, the movie studio and publisher aren't going to let you take any risks. Your game will be as derivative as possible. 3) Multiplatform development: Most tie-ins are released for almost every platform in existence. Sometimes multiple developers are hired to divide the workload by tier (last-gen, current-gen, handheld, etc) but this is often not the case. Design choices must be made with all platforms in mind because you simply don't have the time to create special features for every console. Everything needs to be easily ported so as to minimize the time and resources required. Publishers could easily change the reputation of movie tie-ins. An extra year of development, less SKUs and more creative freedom would go a long way. However, this isn't going to happen because tie-ins are review proof. The people who buy them don't read reviews so it really doesn't matter how shitty the game is. If it has the name of a successful movie slapped on the box, it'll sell and that's all publishers care about.

15.

selective perception??

Jul 23, 2008, 22:46

space captain

you missed this part:

and its based on a movie ip




Go forth, and kill!

14.

Re: No subject

Jul 23, 2008, 21:23

Jerykk

but its the only good movie based game that i can think of right now, in all of history.. got to be a few more id think Butcher Bay wasn't a movie tie-in, as it was a prequel to both the movies and not based on any movie itself. Third person cover system in an FPS worked fairly well imho in R6 Vegas. Third-person cover system in a first-person shooter is retarded and unbalanced. The whole concept of cover is balanced by the fact that you can't see while behind cover. You sacrifice tactical awareness for protection. Third-person cover systems destroy this balance. R6: Vegas's implementation was especially heinous, as you could actually aim while behind cover, completely negating any possible downside to cover. Did it make the game easier? Sure. Auto-aim makes games easier too. As does God mode. Easier != good. This comment was edited on Jul 23, 21:27.

13.

"greedy developers"?

Jul 23, 2008, 20:55

siapnar

Quite possibly the stupidest, most ignorant comment I've seen on Blues, and that's taking a pretty big cake.




I have projectile dysfunction.

12.

Re: No subject

Jul 23, 2008, 20:18

Enahs

came up a week or 2 ago but bears repeating.. "Riddick Butcher Bay" is a fucking killer game, and its based on a movie ip

but its the only good movie based game that i can think of right now, in all of history.. got to be a few more id think

And I think that has more to do with Vin Disel creating his own game company to make the game not suck, and not just leave it in the hands of greedy developers. Which makes a lot of sense, if you are going to have a video game character look like you.

Alternating Logo (GreaseMonkey script):
http://www.ualr.edu/szsullivan/scripts_/BluesNewslogo.user.js




I am free of all prejudice. I hate everyone equally. - W. C. Fields

11.

Re: No subject

Jul 23, 2008, 20:14

space captain

A game based on a movie that is good? The history for video game movies states quite the opposite. I take everything that a dev says about his game with a ton of salt especially a game based on a movie. Prove me wrong dev, prove me wrong.

came up a week or 2 ago but bears repeating.. "Riddick Butcher Bay" is a fucking killer game, and its based on a movie ip

but its the only good movie based game that i can think of right now, in all of history.. got to be a few more id think




Go forth, and kill!

10.

Jul 23, 2008, 19:43

Kxmode

They didn't develop those games. They pushed the developers to ship the game regardless of readiness. Giving the license to Activision isn't going to change a thing. Activision will basically make the same demands to Treyarch: the release date must coincide with the film's release regardless of readiness. ----- http://www.gamemusicjukebox.com/ Game p/reviewer for http://www.gameindustry.com/ This comment was edited on Jul 23, 19:45.

Re: N64

Jul 23, 2008, 17:39

CeeJay

I really liked 007 : Nightfire - I thought it was a good game.




I'm the developer of SweetFX

Re: No subject

Jul 23, 2008, 17:26

NKD

That's a very novel way of thinking; dumbass.

Actually, when it comes to movie-based games, trying to not suck IS pretty novel.




If you don't like where gaming is heading, stop giving your money to the people who are taking it in that direction.

Re: No subject

Jul 23, 2008, 16:37

DDI

Third person cover system in an FPS worked fairly well imho in R6 Vegas.

N64

Jul 23, 2008, 15:34

hulkvsspawn

The last great James Bond game was Goldeneye for the N64. 4 player action with grenade launchers was the bomb.

Re: No subject

Jul 23, 2008, 15:12

Cutter

Yeah, you know it's going to suck.

"He was one of a kind. He was a mutant. A real heavyweight water buffalo type...who could chew his way through a concrete wall and spit out the other side, covered with lime and chalk, and look good in doing it." - Bill Murray as Dr. Hunter S. Thompson




"Are you crazy? Is that your problem?" - Jack Burton

Re: No subject

Jul 23, 2008, 14:33

Overon

A game based on a movie that is good? The history for video game movies states quite the opposite. I take everything that a dev says about his game with a ton of salt especially a game based on a movie. Prove me wrong dev, prove me wrong.

Re: No subject

Jul 23, 2008, 12:21

manic half

are these the same guys that think Brothers In Arms sucked but made Call of Duty 3? wat?

Re: No subject

Jul 23, 2008, 11:55

Jerykk

The game looks pretty sucky thus far. Third-person cover system in a first-person shooter? No thanks.

21 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >