StarDestroyer.Net BBS

PS3 IGN review

What a turd.

I played the demo for that, and while fun for a few minutes, it seemed extremely repetitive.

Yet another reason to not buy a PS3.

I played the 360 demo, it seemed to be, well... Shit.

In terms of super-hero action games I'm still waiting for someone to top Hulk: Ultimate Destruction. Because goddamnit, doing an elbow drop onto and Abrams from the top of a sky-scraper was FUCKING AWESOME.

holy shit! A 3.8? With all the jokes saying their scale starts at 6.0, I guess they actually rated it a -2.2.

So apparently this game will suck the awesome from games adjacent to it on the shelf.


I guess it just goes to show that there are only so many "awesome points" to be split between the game and the movie.

weemadando wrote:I played the 360 demo, it seemed to be, well... Shit.

In terms of super-hero action games I'm still waiting for someone to top Hulk: Ultimate Destruction. Because goddamnit, doing an elbow drop onto and Abrams from the top of a sky-scraper was FUCKING AWESOME.

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/33185.html

Granted not quite super hero but still.. plus it's by the same team.

Yet another reason to not buy a PS3.

It's a multi-platform game. Der.

SylasGaunt wrote:

weemadando wrote:I played the 360 demo, it seemed to be, well... Shit.

In terms of super-hero action games I'm still waiting for someone to top Hulk: Ultimate Destruction. Because goddamnit, doing an elbow drop onto and Abrams from the top of a sky-scraper was FUCKING AWESOME.

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/33185.html

Granted not quite super hero but still.. plus it's by the same team.

I know, I've been keenly awaiting it. Sadly it was just bumped to 2009.

I propose a theory where the movie boosted itself by draining all the potential awesome from the game. Thus instead of a mediocre game and mediocre movie we get an awesome movie and a rubbish game.

weemadando wrote:

SylasGaunt wrote:

weemadando wrote:I played the 360 demo, it seemed to be, well... Shit.

In terms of super-hero action games I'm still waiting for someone to top Hulk: Ultimate Destruction. Because goddamnit, doing an elbow drop onto and Abrams from the top of a sky-scraper was FUCKING AWESOME.

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/33185.html

Granted not quite super hero but still.. plus it's by the same team.

I know, I've been keenly awaiting it. Sadly it was just bumped to 2009.

LMAO! I watched the video, and after it finished playing, it asked me to verify my age because the video contained violent material.

Movie games in general tend to suck, and video game movies not much better (okay, Uwe Boll takes up about 60% of the blame for that, but still ).

But a 3.8 from IGN? Damn.

Every review site has been incorrect in my opinion at least once, but from the universal hate for this I won't even bother testing the demo.

A movie game that sucks? But I thought that the overall trend was towards "Escape from Butcher bay", not E.T, I mean just look at the glorious history of adaptions in entertainment

Sad. The tech demos I saw at E3 looked unpolished but promising.

KlavoHunter wrote:Yet another reason to not buy a PS3.

This is a multiplatform title. Don't turn this into platform hate.

Waaaait a second. Didn't I know you from another board? SGN?

Seems like someone at Sega really favoured Nintendo in the console mix, as the Wii version seems to be getting slightly better reviews for being less frustrating than the PS3/360 version, and the DS version even seems half-decent. Neither one's exactly getting major recommendations, however.

I played the demo. It was one of those "Wow I regret I tried out this free product" moments. The environments have pretty much zero interactivity other than "shotz ur dudz" and their are pretty much no penalties for anything. You can literally just hover over a base, absorb missiles and tank rounds and just blow up everyone with your laser palm. Oh, did I mention the controls suck?

Darn, I thought it looked quite good from the trailer I saw in shop, yesterday. It even had the whole Black Sabbath thing going on.

Played the free demo, thanks to XBox Live.

Blah.

Bland, boring, not fun, too hard to fly, controls suck ass, too few weapons, enemies are too hard to see against the desert floor, enemies are too bland and nondescript...just...meh all around.

1.5 out of 10...this game could have rocked. It didnt.

Played the demo at a friend's house, and it was enough to make me stop the download of my own copy. As far as I know, soldiers are nothing more than target practice. I don't know about higher difficulties, but when I played on medium they did literally no damage, and instead just stood there firing repeatedly. If you got close, for some reason they would put their gun down and stand there screaming at you.

The laser was perhaps the most wanked weapon you could get early in any game. Unlimited ammo, quick recharge, and strong enough to instantly destroy any enemy.

It's a telling sign that the default option on the demo menu is "Exit Demo".

Most boring superhero game since the last superhero game.

Praxis wrote:This is a multiplatform title. Don't turn this into platform hate.

I thought multiplatform titles were rare. Huh, guess not.

Waaaait a second. Didn't I know you from another board? SGN?

Hi.

Why do movie-based games always suck? Does anyone know?

They have every advantage in the world: the story is written for them, the characters are designed for them, there's Hollywood money behind the project, and as an added bonus, the characters and setting are already known and loved by the public. It's almost as if they must try to get it wrong.

They bank entirely on the movie hype, sort of how all of Rockstar's non-GTA games sell purely based on outrage from the easily-offended. Why waste money and time making a good game that will sell when you can spend a pittance and make a piece of shit that will still sell, albiet for a short while?

Darth Wong wrote:Why do movie-based games always suck? Does anyone know?

Zero effort is placed into the game play design. Sure it's got the style, and most gamers are pretty wimpy when it comes to judging game play substance, but even substantially bad game play design will show up to most people. These games aren't really even meant to sell moderately. It's 100% merchandising. Movie based games are basically electronic action figures that like all of the other products will disappear after the movie leaves the public eye.

I have always attributed it to the cost of the license and the short window for delivery (The game needs to be on shelves hot on the heels of the motion picture release).

It's telling that the movie games that tend to be warmly received are titles that hit shelves well after the films, when there is no longer a massive time constraint.

Darth Wong wrote:Why do movie-based games always suck? Does anyone know?

They have every advantage in the world: the story is written for them, the characters are designed for them, there's Hollywood money behind the project, and as an added bonus, the characters and setting are already known and loved by the public. It's almost as if they must try to get it wrong.

Rushed out for release in time for the movie. No time for polish, detail, or the other layers of tender loving care that make a game good.