Battle: Los Angeles Game Can Only Kill An Hour Or So

googleback

New member
Apr 15, 2009
516
0
0
I enjoyed the movie a great deal but i said walking out it would have made a better videogame.

very wasted opportunity... i mean seriously... how fucking hard is it to make an fps about an alien invasion?
 

Trogdor1138

New member
May 28, 2010
1,116
0
0
Realitycrash said:
Trogdor1138 said:
Realitycrash said:
Trogdor1138 said:
Realitycrash said:
Lesson someone should have learned way long ago: Don't buy movie-tie-ins.
They are always, and I mean ALWAYS, bad.

In fact, I challenge you; Find me one that doesn't suck, that left a half-decent impression AND made an impact at gaming overall.

I am obligated to mention Goldeneye, your challenge is completed. It fits your criteria.
Thanks for playing! However, your argument is invalid.
Was it a great game? Sure.
Did it make an impact? Like hell.
Was it a movie tie-in? No.

Sure, it is based on the movie, but movie tie-ins are rushed in production to be released within the same month (or at least very close) as the movie, to make as much money possible of the hype. Goldeneye, the movie, came November 1995, while the game came a whooping two years later, in August 1997. That's PLENTY of time to develop an awesome game based on a movie.

Links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GoldenEye_007 - The Game.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GoldenEye - The Movie
Oh okay, I thought you might have meant tie-in as in just movie games in general, I was going to mention but didn't bother, my mistake.

Well... I can think of some pretty swanky ones, but I can't think of any that made a big impact on the industry. They don't always need to of course, but it would be nice to have one someday... Someday...
I heard that the latest Transformer-movie-tie-in-game wasn't completely horrible?
Revenge of the Fallen? Haven't played it, the Transformers games never really hit the mark with me, especially from a fan standpoint. The movie sucked an amazing amount of ass that has yet to be topped even 2 years later.

Some good ones I remember over the years were: Batman (Mega Drive), Terminator 2 (Arcade), Spiderman 2 (Multi)

Oh, just remembered, Chronicles of Riddick, I think it might have actually had a bit of an impact, it's well regarded and I see similar things that popped up in shooters later. I'm not saying it was the greatest thing ever of course, but it's probably the best tie-in, pretty sure it came out alongside the far inferior film.
 

Realitycrash

New member
Dec 12, 2010
2,779
0
0
Trogdor1138 said:
Realitycrash said:
Trogdor1138 said:
Realitycrash said:
Trogdor1138 said:
Realitycrash said:
Lesson someone should have learned way long ago: Don't buy movie-tie-ins.
They are always, and I mean ALWAYS, bad.

In fact, I challenge you; Find me one that doesn't suck, that left a half-decent impression AND made an impact at gaming overall.

I am obligated to mention Goldeneye, your challenge is completed. It fits your criteria.
Thanks for playing! However, your argument is invalid.
Was it a great game? Sure.
Did it make an impact? Like hell.
Was it a movie tie-in? No.

Sure, it is based on the movie, but movie tie-ins are rushed in production to be released within the same month (or at least very close) as the movie, to make as much money possible of the hype. Goldeneye, the movie, came November 1995, while the game came a whooping two years later, in August 1997. That's PLENTY of time to develop an awesome game based on a movie.

Links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GoldenEye_007 - The Game.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GoldenEye - The Movie
Oh okay, I thought you might have meant tie-in as in just movie games in general, I was going to mention but didn't bother, my mistake.

Well... I can think of some pretty swanky ones, but I can't think of any that made a big impact on the industry. They don't always need to of course, but it would be nice to have one someday... Someday...
I heard that the latest Transformer-movie-tie-in-game wasn't completely horrible?
Revenge of the Fallen? Haven't played it, the Transformers games never really hit the mark with me, especially from a fan standpoint. The movie sucked an amazing amount of ass that has yet to be topped even 2 years later.

Some good ones I remember over the years were: Batman (Mega Drive), Terminator 2 (Arcade), Spiderman 2 (Multi)

Oh, just remembered, Chronicles of Riddick, I think it might have actually had a bit of an impact, it's well regarded and I see similar things that popped up in shooters later. I'm not saying it was the greatest thing ever of course, but it's probably the best tie-in, pretty sure it came out alongside the far inferior film.
Ah yes, Chronicles of Riddick..I heard even Yatzee (from listening to ZP) liked parts of that game. Hmm, must watch review again.
 

Someone Depressing

New member
Jan 16, 2011
2,417
0
0
Well, I can't stand short games.
Espesially ones that have Multi-Player to make up for it.
I recently got Homefront for my PS3, I hated it mainly because the campaign was too short and it thought Multi-Player would make up for it, Ya know! That mode where you play with Mentally-Handicapped 10 Year olds! That mode!
 

Trogdor1138

New member
May 28, 2010
1,116
0
0
Realitycrash said:
Trogdor1138 said:
Realitycrash said:
Trogdor1138 said:
Realitycrash said:
Trogdor1138 said:
Realitycrash said:
Lesson someone should have learned way long ago: Don't buy movie-tie-ins.
They are always, and I mean ALWAYS, bad.

In fact, I challenge you; Find me one that doesn't suck, that left a half-decent impression AND made an impact at gaming overall.

I am obligated to mention Goldeneye, your challenge is completed. It fits your criteria.
Thanks for playing! However, your argument is invalid.
Was it a great game? Sure.
Did it make an impact? Like hell.
Was it a movie tie-in? No.

Sure, it is based on the movie, but movie tie-ins are rushed in production to be released within the same month (or at least very close) as the movie, to make as much money possible of the hype. Goldeneye, the movie, came November 1995, while the game came a whooping two years later, in August 1997. That's PLENTY of time to develop an awesome game based on a movie.

Links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GoldenEye_007 - The Game.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GoldenEye - The Movie
Oh okay, I thought you might have meant tie-in as in just movie games in general, I was going to mention but didn't bother, my mistake.

Well... I can think of some pretty swanky ones, but I can't think of any that made a big impact on the industry. They don't always need to of course, but it would be nice to have one someday... Someday...
I heard that the latest Transformer-movie-tie-in-game wasn't completely horrible?
Revenge of the Fallen? Haven't played it, the Transformers games never really hit the mark with me, especially from a fan standpoint. The movie sucked an amazing amount of ass that has yet to be topped even 2 years later.

Some good ones I remember over the years were: Batman (Mega Drive), Terminator 2 (Arcade), Spiderman 2 (Multi)

Oh, just remembered, Chronicles of Riddick, I think it might have actually had a bit of an impact, it's well regarded and I see similar things that popped up in shooters later. I'm not saying it was the greatest thing ever of course, but it's probably the best tie-in, pretty sure it came out alongside the far inferior film.
Ah yes, Chronicles of Riddick..I heard even Yatzee (from listening to ZP) liked parts of that game. Hmm, must watch review again.
I only bought the game recently in it's PS3 version after wanting to play it since the original Xbox version. I've only played a bit of it mostly because I'm distracted by other games, but it's good, better than most shooters (especially modern ones).
 

V TheSystem V

New member
Sep 11, 2009
996
0
0
Realitycrash said:
Lesson someone should have learned way long ago: Don't buy movie-tie-ins.
They are always, and I mean ALWAYS, bad.

In fact, I challenge you; Find me one that doesn't suck, that left a half-decent impression AND made an impact at gaming overall.
Goldeneye. It aged badly, but it was an amazing first person shooter at the time that has influenced many and made the genre evolve.
 

TerribleAssassin

New member
Apr 11, 2010
2,053
0
0
CannibalRobots said:
So let me get this straight, we pay 10 dollars for a FUCKING ESCORT MISSION!??!?!?!
That's like buying a quarter of GTA!

In all seriousness, if you put in a movie based game at that price, don't expect wonders, unless it's Scott Pilgrim...
 

Realitycrash

New member
Dec 12, 2010
2,779
0
0
V TheSystem V said:
Realitycrash said:
Lesson someone should have learned way long ago: Don't buy movie-tie-ins.
They are always, and I mean ALWAYS, bad.

In fact, I challenge you; Find me one that doesn't suck, that left a half-decent impression AND made an impact at gaming overall.
Goldeneye. It aged badly, but it was an amazing first person shooter at the time that has influenced many and made the genre evolve.
Thanks for playing! However, your argument is invalid.
Was it a great game? Sure.
Did it make an impact? Like hell.
Was it a movie tie-in? No.

Sure, it is based on the movie, but movie tie-ins are rushed in production to be released within the same month (or at least very close) as the movie, to make as much money possible of the hype. Goldeneye, the movie, came November 1995, while the game came a whooping two years later, in August 1997. That's PLENTY of time to develop an awesome game based on a movie.

Links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GoldenEye_007 - The Game.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GoldenEye - The Movie
What I previously stated.
 

ZombieGenesis

New member
Apr 15, 2009
1,909
0
0
Fucking hell, I downloaded the DEMO of Recttear: Item Shops Tale and THAT lasted me considerably longer than just an hour. People are paying $10 for this?
Ugh, I feel disgusted with this industry.
 

THEoriginalBRIEN

New member
Aug 23, 2010
131
0
0
mattttherman3 said:
Owyn_Merrilin said:
Wait a minute, where do the Escapist contributors go to for their movies that a ticket costs less than $9.99? Around here, a standard ticket runs right around that price, with a 3D ticket being $11 or $12. That's USD, by the way, not Canadian or Australian.

OT: It's a ripoff, but what do you expect for a movie tie in game that was $9.99 at launch? If anything, we should be applauding these guys for cutting the price along with the length. For the length at hand, $9.99 is a bit much, but I think it would be great if we saw more AAA quality games with lengths comparable to a movie being sold at rates comparable to a movie ticket or a discount DVD.
I paid 4.50 canadian, which is on par with USD or close to it, but that was matinee, Regular is 9 and 3D is around 12.
Wait a minute where do Escapist commenters go to for their movies that a ticket costs a standard $9.99? Around here, a standard ticket runs right around $12 with a 3D ticket being $15 or $16. That's USD by the way, not the clown money the rest of the world uses.

But really I can't believe anyone would be stupid enough to buy this. Every screenshot on Steam had the same fucking gun (m4?) and what appeared to be the same location.

It's probably still better than Skyline though.
 

shintakie10

New member
Sep 3, 2008
1,342
0
0
omicron1 said:
$10 an hour? Sounds about like Call of Duty: Black Ops if you don't care about multiplayer!

Welcome to my world, me buckoes! Join the Righteous Outrage Brigade and help spread our indignation around the globe! $5 an hour maximum!
Honestly, if you buy a CoD game at this point and dont care about the multiplayer then you really shouldnt complain about wastin 60 bucks...well...really 40-50 bucks dependin on how you break it all down. CoD's single player is really just tacked on at this point. Its why I only got Modern Warfare 2 about a month ago.

On topic, 10 bucks for an hour long game is atrocious and the makers of that game should be ashamed of themselves.
 

Freshman

New member
Jan 8, 2010
422
0
0
While its shortness is a fun fact, This really isn't surprising in the least. games based off of movies always suck. (for clarification, based off of movies, so something like say, star wars battlefront is alright, but something like star wars II the game will probably suck)
 

CobraX

New member
Jul 4, 2010
637
0
0
Too bad about the movie, the trailers looked good

Too bad about the game, it looked like a good cheap thrill.
 

Duncan Turley

New member
Feb 24, 2011
2
0
0
Eh it is actually the same cost as the movie when you factor in gas to get to the theater. *facepalm* Am I justifying it?????? OH GOD NO!
 

DTWolfwood

Better than Vash!
Oct 20, 2009
3,716
0
0
Hey at least its less of a ripoff than those full priced Movie tie in games.

This is a price of the movie ticket which basically suppose to let you live the movie.

Personally i enjoyed the movie :p it was straight to the point and formulaic but i felt like i got what i expected for my money. Its no Skyline, that movie was just shitty all around.
 

Doctor Insanovic

New member
Feb 1, 2010
70
0
0
If you said all this in Australia you would be considered a troll. I guarantee it. Movie tickets here generally cost between 15 and 20 dollars, and that's regular, not 3D. and the only game you could buy for 10 dollars, no matter how shit, would probably be an NES cartridge at a garage sale. So reading this is really weird for me.
 

Asuka Soryu

New member
Jun 11, 2010
2,437
0
0
vansau said:
mattttherman3 said:
Thats worse than Rogue Warrior. I saw that movie today, not the worse movie ever. In a nutshell the plot is exactly how that guy said it. Still better than Skyline.
Dude, anything was better than Skyline.
Batman and Robin Forever?
 

michaelknives52

New member
Mar 12, 2011
36
0
0
whiteblood said:
Whoever said Battle LA was bad had their head womped with a filthy stick and mistook it for Skyline. I HATED Skyline, and actually fell asleep for a half hour and missed nothing of consequence. I saw Battle LA and loved it; it's a sci-fi war movie.

It's not about the shiny tech, or devices beyond our comprehension. It's about the destructive, gritty, desperate, and heartless enviroment that is war. It's also a bitchin' Marines recruitment ad.

Also, by order of the captcha, I am to "post limon". So, limon
Your bonkers it was a mindless flag-waving piece of crap. If they cut the emotional scenes and actually included... I dunno say a plot then it would have been better. I mean really after seeing drones blowing a helicopter of marines up did they really expect the air strike to come. A well place tactical nuke would have done the job because apparently the aliens thought it would be a bright idea to put a command station for drones underground instead of I dunno.... orbiting the planet. Seriously they come to blow up strategically useless cities instead of i dunno military installations and nuclear facilities. They have supposedly been around since 1942. They are highly mechanised... you'd think they would be able to hack us or something.

These weren't very intelligent life forms They remind me of droids from clone wars. They are simply resource acquisition drones that harvest resources from planets. Humanity in that universe will be really screwed when the race that programmed them steps in with ships orbiting the planet. The concept was poorly executed. Didn't even get to see a robot speaking in that auto-tune voice in the trailer. What's up with that. Poorly executed movie... even worse video game. KONAMI? really they had an opportunity to expand upon the Battle: LA UNIVERSE BUT THEY SOLD OUT.