Author Topic: Steven Spielberg Wii exclusive (Read 36465 times)

zakkiel · « **on:** May 09, 2007, 12:57:26 PM »

EA has Steven Spielberg producing a Wii game, and it's scheduled for this fiscal year. link Fifth paragraph down. Sorry if this is in a thread somewhere already.

ShyGuy · « **Reply #1 on:** May 09, 2007, 01:08:36 PM »

I assume since it's coming from a Hollywood director that it will be story driven, rather than a collection of minigames.

BranDonk Kong · « **Reply #2 on:** May 09, 2007, 01:14:20 PM »

He's bringing ET for the 2600 to the Virtual Console =(.

IceCold · « **Reply #3 on:** May 09, 2007, 02:08:11 PM »

Wasn't he playing WiiSports with Miyamoto at E3?

MarioAllStar · « **Reply #4 on:** May 09, 2007, 04:16:58 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
Wasn't he playing WiiSports with Miyamoto at E3?

Yes.

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #5 on:** May 10, 2007, 07:55:03 AM »

'Enter the Matrix' says hi.

decoyman · « **Reply #6 on:** May 10, 2007, 08:12:01 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: MarioAllStar
Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
Wasn't he playing WiiSports with Miyamoto at E3?

Yes.

Spielberg is too cool for wrist straps! (And, are those wired Wii remotes? Why don't they just reinforce that cord, then set up some displays in stores with it???)

Back on topic, I'm curious to see what comes of this. If Spielberg is given full control (as I'm sure he would demand), we could be in for something cool.

Ceric · « **Reply #7 on:** May 10, 2007, 09:04:51 AM »

Fun Factoid: His Dad was a Computer Scientist and worked for Honeywell back in the day.

Ian Sane · « **Reply #8 on:** May 10, 2007, 10:04:53 AM »

Didn't Spielberg help make The Dig? That game turned out to be pretty good so there's some hope. But then that was a LucasArts SCUMM game and this is EA. Still my main beef with EA is that their designs are usually bland and uncreative as their mainstream focused business practices prevent them from doing anything interesting. They make well designed games that are dull as dirt. But Spielberg doesn't make dull stuff. His films often have huge mainstream appeal but they are rarely dull. He would probably not want "his game" to be so generic.

Maverick · « **Reply #9 on:** May 10, 2007, 01:14:26 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Brandogg
He's bringing ET for the 2600 to the Virtual Console =(.

Aww I was hoping we could at least make it five posts before someone made an ET joke.

zakkiel · « **Reply #10 on:** May 12, 2007, 03:22:11 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Didn't Spielberg help make The Dig? That game turned out to be pretty good so there's some hope. But then that was a LucasArts SCUMM game and this is EA. Still my main beef with EA is that their designs are usually bland and uncreative as their mainstream focused business practices prevent them from doing anything interesting. They make well designed games that are dull as dirt. But Spielberg doesn't make dull stuff. His films often have huge mainstream appeal but they are rarely dull. He would probably not want "his game" to be so generic.

Supposedly, it's entirely original, like nothing we've seen before.

Not sure what that means. Setting? Premise? Story? Gameplay?

Stimutacs Addict · « **Reply #11 on:** May 13, 2007, 11:46:59 AM »

wasn't his most recent 'completely original' project the movie AI?

Kairon · « **Reply #12 on:** May 13, 2007, 05:29:54 PM »

That wasn't completely original AT ALL. That was a Stanley Kubrick project he was finishing up because the guy keeled over and died... AND it was completely underappreciated. THE ENDING ROCKED GUYS! Seriously!

Edit: Old Habits Die Hard

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #13 on:** May 13, 2007, 07:53:09 PM »

I begin to wonder if my posts are more serious than KIE-RAWN's these days.

Spak-Spang · « **Reply #14 on:** May 14, 2007, 02:40:44 AM »

Now we are talking AI, I have an opinion on that.

AI is a brilliant movie for the first half. In fact the "first ending" The Stanley Kubrick ending was brilliant. Emotional, powerful and easily made it one of the greatest Sci-Fi stories about artificial life ever created.

Then Speilberg had to go screw it up with his style of happy endings. He couldn't end the movie as a tragedy so he decides to completely jump shark, move the picture even further into the future, just to revive our character, and give him a happy ending. STUPID, HORRIBLE...and completely ruined the themes and message of the movie.

Anyone who has seen AI knows exactly where the movie should have ended, without me even having to describe the scene.

Kairon · « **Reply #15 on:** May 14, 2007, 08:17:10 PM »

What's so bad about the ending to A.I.?!?!? I mean, c'mon! He's a robot, and he's just doing what he was programmed to do. That's not a happy ending. It's an ironic one... especially since he'll be the keystone to what those who discovered him know about us. HALEY JOEL OSMONT will be our message to eternity!!!

Edit: AAARRRGGGHHHH!!!!

ShyGuy · « **Reply #16 on:** May 14, 2007, 08:41:36 PM »

Remember when Evan used to hang out here and and set us straight on movies? Sigh, those were the days...

Spak-Spang · « **Reply #17 on:** May 15, 2007, 03:18:00 AM »

No the bad part of the ending, is that the Super powerful robotic alien species that comes out of no where in the story comes and finds the robotic boy. The Robots have apparently evolved to be basically living, emotional, human beings. And they scan the boys memory and gives him the one thing he wants in life, being loved by his mother...even though it isn't real.

The whole point of the movie was to answer the question could we create a machine that could love, and would humanity accept that machine as a true life form or would it always be a machine, a man made creation.

The answer in the movie was truthful and dark...that mankind would always look at machines as just tools or toys for their pleasure...they could never have the true emotion of love towards them...but they doomed that Android to love in a loveless society.

And in the end, his hope and faith (which is essential to love) leds him on a hopeless quest to find the love that doesn't exist for him.

Spielberg took that ending. That deeply sharp, painful, and beautiful ending. And throws in this crazy happy ending that makes little since, just so we can feel so relief for the protagonist.

It flat out ruined the film. And I stand that there are two endings to the film. The Stanley Kubrick ending, and the Spielberg ending. One is great...and one really ruins the entire point of the movie.

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #18 on:** May 15, 2007, 05:35:00 AM »

Mega Man was outraged by Speelbarg.

Kairon · « **Reply #19 on:** May 15, 2007, 06:00:58 AM »

Ah, very good explanation Spakkie. I can see where you're coming from now... even though I loves me a happy ending.

edit: blargh

Spak-Spang · « **Reply #20 on:** May 15, 2007, 06:07:44 AM »

I usually love happy endings...and I have a friend that loves AI and we debate this point all the time. He completely disagrees. He loves the ending of AI, but does agree there seems to be two endings...yet he really likes that the movie takes a turn for the more traditional Speilberg ending...since most people will go into the movie not knowing what they were getting themselves into.

And in all honesty, Speilberg probably created a movie that Kubrick could have never achieved. And it is one of the finest true Science Fiction movies America has produced.

Ian Sane · « **Reply #21 on:** May 15, 2007, 12:08:55 PM »

"Anyone who has seen AI knows exactly where the movie should have ended, without me even having to describe the scene."

For me it should have ended at the box office with me buying a ticket to a different movie.

But then it was in the previews that I first saw any footage from Fellowship of the Ring so that could be worth the money right there.

Speilburg's films having sucky ending has been a trend for a while now. A.I., Minority Report, Catch Me If You Can and Munich all reached this point where I thought the film had ended and thought to myself "that was pretty good" and then the film just kept going for like half an hour. Every one of those films had me looking at my watch thinking "when is this thing over?" which I would consider a big no-no for films. The audience shouldn't be impatiently waiting for a film to end. I though Minority Report and Catch Me If You Can were good enough overall that even with drawn out conclusions they're still good but the endings ruined the other two for me.

"And in all honesty, Speilberg probably created a movie that Kubrick could have never achieved. And it is one of the finest true Science Fiction movies America has produced."

What about Planet of the Apes? That's got a dark sci-fi ending that's just perfect. "YOU BASTARDS! YOU BLEW IT UP! DAMN YOU ALL TO HELL!"

Kairon · « **Reply #22 on:** May 15, 2007, 12:58:26 PM »

What's with people not liking these Spielberg endings? I didn't notice anything wrong with any of the movies you mentioned IanSane(except for A.I., which I liked but must admit was completely something else).

Its... it's people like you that keep me from getting a satisfying denoument!!!

P.S. By generalizing your views, you'd probably hate Earthbound... and RPGs in general?

Smash_Brother · « **Reply #23 on:** May 15, 2007, 01:26:10 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane For me it should have ended at the box office with me buying a ticket to a different movie.

You get points for that.

All you have to do now is pick up a Wii and you can be one of the cool kids.

Adrock · « **Reply #24 on:** May 15, 2007, 01:31:51 PM »

Who needs a Wii when there's cocaine?

Don't believe the hype, Ian.

News:

Author Topic: Steven Spielberg Wii exclusive (Read 36465 times)