Epic Mickey Catch-All

MrDeVil909 wrote:

More seriously, I think you need a certain critical mass of players for discussion to really take off and in this community that doesn't often happen with Wii games.

There do seem to be a few titles for the Wii that hit critical mass, but even these seem to be discussed as if people are slumming it when they spend time with them (Super Mario Bros Wii, coming to mind handily). Perhaps it's just the deep-seeded hatred that a lot of gamers seem to have towards the Wii (it not serving their needs in the way they want them served).

I want to buy this game. At this point, tho, I expect to be very annoyed by the controls, annoyed by the hand-holding, and to find much of the gameplay too simplistic. I don't understand, with that, why I still want to play this game but I do.

The premise of the game (Oswald not painting) intrigues me.

I hate to be down on this game, because I really wanted to like it. I'm a huge old-school Disney fan, and have loved Warren Spector's past efforts, so I've been rooting for it since day one. I can forgive a lot of flaws if there's an interesting experience to be had under them, but I'm not convinced it's there. It really could have been something great, but for something with such a strong inspiration behind it, it feels pretty uninspired. And man, other than the 2D levels, it's a really ugly game.

I made it to Tomorrow Land and it still hasn't grabbed me yet. I'm not enjoying myself when I play it. I think I'm going to give up on it.

demonbox wrote:

Perhaps it's just the deep-seeded hatred that a lot of gamers seem to have towards the Wii (it not serving their needs in the way they want them served).

I don't think disinterest should be read as 'deep-seeded hatred.' It's just disinterest. The Wii lacks a critical mass of core-gamer titles, so it doesn't appeal to many core gamers.

I mean, I'm in this thread, despite not owning a Wii, because I'm still interested in the platform. But almost every time a game comes out that isn't by Nintendo, it turns out to suck on some level.

I will admit my thoughts on the hatred of the platform thing is incredibly biased-- based on numerous comments from the gaming press (who can't be assumed represent the whole) and low sales for games that are interesting and doesn't just suck (MadWorld, Dead Space Extraction, even House of the Dead Overkill which is more fun than interesting really). The games that are good are far to often, in my opinion, grouped in the "meh" category simply because of the platform.

Again, seems that this game may land closer to suck than not. Interesting that Adam Sessler liked the game as much as he did.

MrDeVil909 wrote:
demonbox wrote:

Perhaps it's just the deep-seeded hatred that a lot of gamers seem to have towards the Wii (it not serving their needs in the way they want them served).

I don't think disinterest should be read as 'deep-seeded hatred.' It's just disinterest. The Wii lacks a critical mass of core-gamer titles, so it doesn't appeal to many core gamers.

I mean, I'm in this thread, despite not owning a Wii, because I'm still interested in the platform. But almost every time a game comes out that isn't by Nintendo, it turns out to suck on some level.

Truth. Kirby is the first and last game to capture my attention in some time. I literally gave up on Super Mario Galaxy because it was painful to play. Can I just play it with an enhanced classic controller with motion sensing, please? Can I get a button for spinning? So many annoyances make the platform second tier to me. The few good games there are I just want to play with a regular controller in HD.

MrDeVil909 wrote:
demonbox wrote:

Perhaps it's just the deep-seeded hatred that a lot of gamers seem to have towards the Wii (it not serving their needs in the way they want them served).

I don't think disinterest should be read as 'deep-seeded hatred.' It's just disinterest. The Wii lacks a critical mass of core-gamer titles, so it doesn't appeal to many core gamers.

I mean, I'm in this thread, despite not owning a Wii, because I'm still interested in the platform. But almost every time a game comes out that isn't by Nintendo, it turns out to suck on some level.

Yes and no. There are plenty of good third-party titles on the Wii, and there are plenty of those good titles that fall into that "core-gamer" demographic you're talking about. What tends to happen with Wii games, however, is that games that are less than stellar are blamed on the platform while less than stellar games on other platforms are blamed on developers.

Looking around the internet at the comments for this game, for example, there's a conviction some people have that it would have been a much better game on one of the HD platforms. There's no reason to think that, but it's a comment that's made time and again. This game's camera controls are getting most of the complaints, and perhaps that could have been alleviated by a second analog stick, but there's no reason to think the pointer controls could be pleasantly replaced with an analog stick or that the oddly structured platforming levels would be any different on a PS3 or 360.

Meanwhile, you don't see much-hyped but ultimately mediocre games like Fable III and Alan Wake being used as indictments of the 360 as a whole. Ultimately, most games end up sucking in some way, either by being too short, too buggy, too ugly, or something else. It's not any different with the Wii, but the blame is distributed differently on that platform than on the others.

ClockworkHouse wrote:
MrDeVil909 wrote:
demonbox wrote:

Perhaps it's just the deep-seeded hatred that a lot of gamers seem to have towards the Wii (it not serving their needs in the way they want them served).

I don't think disinterest should be read as 'deep-seeded hatred.' It's just disinterest. The Wii lacks a critical mass of core-gamer titles, so it doesn't appeal to many core gamers.

I mean, I'm in this thread, despite not owning a Wii, because I'm still interested in the platform. But almost every time a game comes out that isn't by Nintendo, it turns out to suck on some level.

Yes and no. There are plenty of good third-party titles on the Wii, and there are plenty of those good titles that fall into that "core-gamer" demographic you're talking about. What tends to happen with Wii games, however, is that games that are less than stellar are blamed on the platform while less than stellar games on other platforms are blamed on developers.

Looking around the internet at the comments for this game, for example, there's a conviction some people have that it would have been a much better game on one of the HD platforms. There's no reason to think that, but it's a comment that's made time and again. This game's camera controls are getting most of the complaints, and perhaps that could have been alleviated by a second analog stick, but there's no reason to think the pointer controls could be pleasantly replaced with an analog stick or that the oddly structured platforming levels would be any different on a PS3 or 360.

Meanwhile, you don't see much-hyped but ultimately mediocre games like Fable III and Alan Wake being used as indictments of the 360 as a whole. Ultimately, most games end up sucking in some way, either by being too short, too buggy, too ugly, or something else. It's not any different with the Wii, but the blame is distributed differently on that platform than on the others.

There is an interesting discussion brewing here. I like my Wii, but all of the games I've loved have been first-party. However, to avoid derailing this thread, I'd be willing to hop into a different thread about the challenges the Wii faces with the "core gamer." Anyone else interested?

I'd be interested. The Wii is still a puzzle to me. I love the DS and really loved the GBA. So my dislike for the Gamecube and "meh" feelings for the Wii are interesting to me considering how much I crave new Mario, Metroid and Kirby games over other similar games.

ClockworkHouse wrote:

Looking around the internet at the comments for this game, for example, there's a conviction some people have that it would have been a much better game on one of the HD platforms. There's no reason to think that, but it's a comment that's made time and again. This game's camera controls are getting most of the complaints, and perhaps that could have been alleviated by a second analog stick, but there's no reason to think the pointer controls could be pleasantly replaced with an analog stick or that the oddly structured platforming levels would be any different on a PS3 or 360.

There actually ARE reasons to think that.

While I agree that HD does not make a better game in most cases, Epic Mickey is an exception. Everyone keeps referring to the concept art. Why? Because it looked so damn good. This game screams for fantastic graphics and their use of the Wii was a poor decision. It is fundamental to what this game is trying to do.

The second analog stick is another reason to have gone PS3/X360.

Additionally, I think the PS3/X360 demographic is a better fit...but I know that doesn't make sense when marketing Mickey. They certainly picked the more financially advantageous option, which is fine, but they should expect harsh critiques for its shortcomings.

And then about a year longer development time on level design so the damn camera isn't so frustrating...even if it is "hard" Warren.

I still love experiencing it. But that is despite almost all of it.

MisterStatic wrote:

While I agree that HD does not make a better game in most cases, Epic Mickey is an exception. Everyone keeps referring to the concept art. Why? Because it looked so damn good. This game screams for fantastic graphics and their use of the Wii was a poor decision. It is fundamental to what this game is trying to do.

I interviewed Warren Spector for an article recently, and I asked him about the difference between the concept art and the finished product. The gist of his response is first, that games change constantly during production. Early concept art for games tends to be radically different from the final product in both look and tone. The concept art that leaked online was a direction they considered for the game but rejected. Secondly, a lot of the concept art they did for this game was feeling out the boundaries of what Disney would let them get away with. Some of what you saw was intentionally too dark, and they never expected it to be approved.

A PS3/360 version of this game wouldn't have lived up to the concept art any more than the Wii version does, because that concept art doesn't accurately represent the game they set out to make. It's not as though they set out to make that game but had to scale it back to work with the hardware. That concept art wasn't going to be made on any platform.

ClockworkHouse wrote:

A PS3/360 version of this game wouldn't have lived up to the concept art any more than the Wii version does, because that concept art doesn't accurately represent the game they set out to make. It's not as though they set out to make that game but had to scale it back to work with the hardware. That concept art wasn't going to be made on any platform.

I understand what you are saying. But, I think the PS3/360 (or PC) have assets available that would make it look better. This matters here. This game at its core is about its art and that of Walt Disney; whether it matches the original concept art intent or not. The Wii only conveys that convincingly on the 2.5D levels in-between. The main levels suffer from limited texture memory, primitive shaders, and last generation rendering capability.

As much as I have loved many things about it, I quit. Trade in value was high enough to pick up Little Big Planet at no cost, which I have never played and want to play before the sequel.

Bye Mickey.

I hope that, if it is as dreadful as people say, that the price will drop dramatically so I can pick it up and see it through lowered expectations. I'm going to buy this so cheaper is better (for me, not so much for them).

Well, I had some credit and took the plunge. I was just too curious. It's not good. I mean, there is a good game in here. That's the sad thing. But the camera issues are real. It's hard not to think about Okami and wonder what might have been if you could do the painting with an analog stick instead and have a camera control handy. Either way the biggest issue for me is the handholding. It gets tedious. Oh, and apparently waggling to spin has become a standard now.

I picked up the game over the break, so I had something to do at family's while everyone was asleep.

This game REALLY suffers from the camera issues, wow it is severe. I personally do not have any issues with the controls, such as painting and pointing and the Wii motes. I actually really enjoy it and thought it was done well for the painting.

This game also suffers from Wii graphics and I am NEVER one to bring up graphics. I know almost nothing about it, but fail to see why a game like Mario Galaxy (1 and 2) look gorgeous to me with 0 "graphics lag" and this game seems to have issues and not look as nice.

I am not VERY far into the game, and I will pick it up when I can, however it has definately NOT taken a front seat in my priorities.

I got this for Christmas and have been putting a wee bit of time into it.

For me, the game is beautiful. I really like the colors and aesthetics (even if it is a far cry from the initial concept art).

The camera is a distraction that pulls me from the game but isn't a game breaker for me. It isn't a reason I die, per se, mostly something I constantly tinker with while I explore. It should be better, don't get me wrong. For me, same for the constant hand-holding. A definite distraction but not a game-killer.

But for me it's the controls that really kill the game. A platformer with poor controls and planes of movement is a poor game indeed-- and that's what I find most frustrating. The game can be really irritating.

I do plan on finishing it, it's just a matter of finding time.

As far as how far I am into it-- a few hours maybe? I just found Pete's log (that sounds unpleasant).

Word has it they've been hit by some "massive" lay-offs. These seems far enough out that I'm not going to chalk this up to the usual end of project stuff.

Having not played the game I can't be too harsh on it but from what I've heard, its only solid selling point is that there's Mickey Mouse. Always seemed strange to me to make a game targeted at adults using the definitive childhood icon of two decades ago.

I don't think it's the studio being singled out, Propaganda games who did the Tron movie tie-in also got canned.

This seems to be a predictable possible outcome of making a deal with a big publisher. As much as job losses always suck, I think people are going to be less and less surprised when this happens (if they aren't already) and should weigh up whether the supposed security of a permanent position at a studio is worth the bother (crunch, etc.) compared to contracting.

That's the thing, Scratched, I understand that contracted workers are always dropped at the end of the project. It usually says that's going to happen in their contract. I don't think that's what's happening here since it's been so long since Mickey came out.

Also, Epic Mickey apparently sold decently. Doesn't make sense to single out a profitable arm of your company for firing.

LarryC wrote:

Also, Epic Mickey apparently sold decently. Doesn't make sense to single out a profitable arm of your company for firing.

It was one of the best sellers in December, 1.3 million copies apparently which is more than titles like Need for Speed and Gran Turismo sold in November/December combined. It definitely makes the layoffs more surprising.

demonbox wrote:

for me it's the controls that really kill the game. A platformer with poor controls and planes of movement is a poor game indeed-- and that's what I find most frustrating. The game can be really irritating.

Yup, it's like playing something from the PS1 era, in that period where Mario64 was the only 3D platformer that worked and everyone else didn't have a clue.

I do plan on finishing it, it's just a matter of finding time.

Likewise.

Ok, I've come up with a very partial resolution to the camera issues. Instead of trying to use the d-pad to move the camera just use the c-button to snap the camera behind mickey. On the analogue stick you've got pretty accurate and fast movement so you can orientate the camera much more rapidly with this method. Takes a little getting used to but it's better than the sluggish camera movement on the d-pad. Still not great but it's made the game reasonably playable, to the point that I can enjoy the game instead of constantly thinking about how crappy it is. YMMV

Just finished it, I completed it via the paint path, doubt I'll got back and do the thinner path. Was very, very average. Not the worst thing I've played but heart breaking wasted opportunity.

Considering buying the concept art book for the game that it releasing soon-- really most of what I loved about the game-- the potential.

So, Epic Mickey 2 has been announced. And it's multi-platform. So that means we'll get all those concept art drawings in the real game, right? Because it's on an HD console now, right?

Spoiler:

I'm still annoyed by that argument, apparently, and will not let it die.

The new one is a co-op game with one player controlling Mickey and the other controlling Oswald the Rabbit. This one will be fully voiced and will feature musical numbers. The paint vs. thinner moral choices will be back.

After hearing so much feedback about the first game, the designers plan to fix the camera so that you'll never need to use the manual controls at all. I'm sure that will be a perfectly satisfying solution for everyone and that we won't hear any grumping at all about dual analog controls.

Spoiler:

I'm cheerful.

ClockworkHouse wrote:

So, Epic Mickey 2 has been announced. And it's multi-platform.

Well I know what co-op game I'm playing next year. Not that I probably have much choice in the matter...

garion333 wrote:

Mickey would be awesome in Deus Ex.

A cyberpunk Disney game would be amazing.

What a shame.

I'll buy it, but I have a happy nature. I'll play just about anything once. I did quite like the original. Not the great epiphanic property everyone was hoping for, but it worked.

Is it a first person shooter yet?

Mickey would be awesome in Deus Ex.

Edit: Those were two separate thoughts. Please don't tell me that Deus Ex isn't a 1st person shooter, I'm aware of that. The trenchcoat made the game.