I just saw this thread - and then I realized that a "Kung Fu Panda" game is coming out this week -_-
Games spawned from films that don't suck!
- Thread starter hobob
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Golden Eye, Warriors, and Godfather. I'm not counting the Star Wars games because MOST of them only take place in the universe and not a direct part of the movies.
Chronicles of Riddick is awesome.
The Lord of the Rings beat em ups are hella fun, despite lacking depth and Third Age is okay, though not brilliant.
Also there are quite a few good Starwars games, though not all of them are based directly on the movies, but I think that play in universe allows for better game making.
The Lord of the Rings beat em ups are hella fun, despite lacking depth and Third Age is okay, though not brilliant.
Also there are quite a few good Starwars games, though not all of them are based directly on the movies, but I think that play in universe allows for better game making.
Oh God, with those horrible "stealth" missions where no one could see you or you'd Hulk out, killing your girl? The Hulk Ultimate Destruction or whatever was sweet but not the movie based one.DGKT93 said:
Ghostbusters II on the PC. Followed the movie fairly closely and is the only Ghostbusters game to date that I've played where I actually felt that it had captured the Ghostbusters spirit. The side-scroller on the Genesis didn't feel like it should have been called Ghostbusters, and the original game really sucked. You know, the one where you alternate between an overhead map and some terrible gameplay.
Goldeneye, obv. It's the only truly classic film adaptation I can think of.
Batman: The Movie on the Amiga was a fairly solid side-scrolling platformer, as was Robocop 2. And Lethal Weapon, for that matter. Blade Runner on the PC was surprisingly good, too.
Arguably, the LOTR: Battle For Middle-Earth games were made off the back of the films' success, although they're not really spawn as such, more kind of second cousins.
Batman: The Movie on the Amiga was a fairly solid side-scrolling platformer, as was Robocop 2. And Lethal Weapon, for that matter. Blade Runner on the PC was surprisingly good, too.
Arguably, the LOTR: Battle For Middle-Earth games were made off the back of the films' success, although they're not really spawn as such, more kind of second cousins.
King Kong was actually pretty good. It was made using a unique style, rather than typically just being [the protagonist] fighting [the enemies] in the third-person.
The Matrix on PS2, very good game, altrhough im probaly about the only person that thinks that, and probaly the only person that diddnt either trade theirs in, sell it, or throw it in a nearby river.
Which Bladerunner game would this be? The 1997 one? It got some good reviews, and some mediocre ones, and was an okay game. Certainly not the or one of the -worst- videogame/movie tie ins, actually, they didn't even really go with the same story as a the movie heh.Anarchemitis said:
The way I remember it, killing the raptors was a supply problem, very difficult to use sticks and burning sticks, however it is very easy to kill them with guns.Johnn Johnston said:
The average player would then think to themslves "Hmmm, maybe I will use guns" unfortunately the entire lanscape is coverd in 100s if not 1000s of sticks but not a weapon in site.
Don't worry, you won't because I loved those games too.Boredom13 said:
Also, I actually really liked Matrix: Path of Neo. At least that game had some good thought made into it, unlike the abysmal Enter the Matrix.
There's a lot of fairly good movie-based games. Problem is, they're overshadowed by A TON of crappy ones.