[Un]Creative Licensing – The death of originality
While this year has featured a few great creative licensing acts in the form of Batman: Arkham Asylum and the new Ghostbusters: Movie game, the product isn’t always worth buying. One game that immediately comes to mind is the game Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. This game was created for literally every platform available. If you don’t believe me, click this link:
In a game that basically follows the exact (lackluster) script of the movie, with poor gameplay and relatively unimpressive graphics – I often wonder why people would shell out the $60USD cost of admission for a mediocre/poor game after an approximate $10USD movie ticket plus snacks. I bring up this point because only people who love the movie and/or license or irrational consumers would buy this game (especially after the reviews received). Others that come to mind are Madagascar, every Disney movie ever made, and Avatar.
Wait a minute... I've seen this before!!! IN THE THEATRES!!!!
In fact, I cannot think of one game based on a movie I would even consider buying in this day and age outside of the aforementioned Ghostbusters: The Movie game (for the Wii-mote Proton Packs). This is due mostly to it being deemed to be a respectable game. These “movie” or “TV” games are more often than not host to poor controls, afterthought sound effects, repetitive gameplay, and objectives, and mediocre graphics. The only selling point that makes the game appealing to consumers is the license and characters.
How movie licensed games SHOULD be done
I have read a bunch of articles, editorials, and blogs regarding the exploration of video games as a medium for entertainment. This would make me think developers are trying to create more value for the consumer or tell a story that has not already been told. This is what makes video games a valid and effective medium for entertainment. If you think about the various books, movies, and art you have enjoyed throughout your life, you would realize most of it is original. Think of all the original works that have warranted the millions of fans they draw: Metal Gear Solid, Devil May Cry, Final Fantasy, Uncharted, God of War, Resident Evil (1, 2, 4, and 5), Bio Shock, and Grand Theft Auto 3 (yes, there was a story) just to name a few.
How many movies based on books can claim to be as good (legitimately) as the original work? I can say maybe Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings trilogy (maybe…) is the only one that gave me the same level of satisfaction. I have heard the Harry Potter series is in similar comparisons, but alas it is not my cup of tea. However, why should video games (like movies and/or books) settle for being subpar for the sake of selling copies? Do people really buy subpar novels based loosely on original movies… or do they end up in the bargain bin after a week or two of taking root on the “new arrival” shelves? I guess my point being when you port a book or graphic novel/manga from movies or video games – they are not mere rehashes. They have strict originality injected into them in some aspect, making them the author’s own creation. However, the more I delve into the subject, movies from books and video games from movies don’t even represent rehashes of the original work. They lack the originality and feeling that made the originals so implausible and as a result you get an incomplete product or experience.
If a new experience is offered and the consumer is paying to see an original work by the studio, I would gladly pay the price of admission to own the new product, experience, and storyline. Video games serve the same purpose to me as books do to an avid reader or bookworm. Games must do one of two things to warrant an MSRP priced purchase in my mind: (1) develop an original story with characters that has not been told before and (2) provide a value equal to the price paid. Simply rehashing a movie script in a game with tacked on features is unacceptable and just a cheap way of padding the pockets of the trademark owners and developers at the expense of consumers.
Kids, for your sake I hope this game is as deep as the movie was...
The act of rehashing the movie scripts into a mediocre interactive experience has replaced making games that use the characters in a way that furthers the license and consumer experience. Games like Arkham Asylum, Aliens vs. Predator, and Marvel: Ultimate Alliance have all accomplished this heralded pastime in recent times, and created significant value to the trademark. These “creatively licensed” movie games usually do more damage to the franchise and license than add value to the license in general. There is rarely hope of adding new storylines, character development, or depth to the universe and creating a totally new experience for the consumer seems unfeasible. This is the main difference between games deemed to be unique masterpieces of creative licensing and those chastised as being poorly executed remakes of movies.
This leads to my next question: why do companies constantly put their licenses at risk of horrible games that take away from either good or mediocre movies? I think the answer comes down to the simple gouging of consumers, where younger consumers will be drawn to games that depict the characters and licenses they love. Parents and younger consumers don’t necessarily realize what the quality of the product they are purchasing is, primarily due to a lack of research or the impulse/emotion driving their desires. I cannot tell you how many birthday parties or gatherings where games have been gifted to receive a question of “is this game any good?” from the buyer. This never seems to surprise me that people shell out hard earned cash on products they have no knowledge of or what quality the product offers.
Until these games stop producing profits through the act of irrational consumerism, these horrendous games will continue to be made. I think once the owners of the license and studio developers will finally get the point once consumers stop buying these games based on trademark loyalty and emotional purchases. Until then, these rehashed games will continue to plague the shelves of retailers and riddle the bargain bins by the dozen. These prices offered in the bargain bins are usually overpriced for the experience (or lack thereof) you will receive anyway. Save yourself some money and rent the movie instead of buying these unspeakably horrific games, the movie usually is less frustrating and time consuming than the dreadful game. At least with a movie rental, you only ever waste two hours of your time and maybe $3USD, compared to the cost of the game and the effort put into a mediocre experience that leaves you feeling like a dry, soulless husk.
ABOUT THIS AUTHOR
Good stuff, Greg. I think the Ghostbusters game faired better because it wasn’t based directly on the movie and was more or less treated as a sequel. I encourage this mindset from developers, but agree with you on the games based directly on the movie rarely are decent. There are the occasional exceptions, Wolverine and Spiderman 3 come to mind, but the vast majority are developed in under 6 months with a minimum budget.