Forget Film, Games do Sci-Fi best.
An article in Wired online suggest that Sci-Fi games are now more creative than most movies being created today.
"After all, there have been vanishingly few original, mass-market, sci-fi or fantasy movies in recent years. We had The Matrix and then ... what? (I said "original" movies. Stuff like The Lord of the Rings, I, Robot and Minority Report were all based -- however loosely -- on pre-existing books. The shining exception is Joss Whedon's superb Serenity, a movie that, sadly, tanked at the box office.)"
That's the only mention in the article.
February 28 2006
You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.


Nice mention though.
newcj | February 28, 17:06 CET
If a Serenity game was done right, it would be huge. You have a vast array of planets, space travel, guns, fighting... In terms of game universes - and this is a personal opinion, but I suspect it's correct - Serenity represents an ideal game franchise material. Often, when you look at a movie (say 'King Kong'), you have a few action set pieces to work with, but that's it. With Serenity, you have this vast universe you can do anything with.
Fly to a planet? Do a hospital raid? Smuggle River in? Have River go mental fighty? Take off, sell the goods? It's all there. Everything you could want in a successful game is there.
I'm amazed Sierra didn't pick it the license. They literally have a huge amount of Browncoats in the bag by default anyway, and if they produce an actual decent game it's going to appeal outside the fan base (at one point the 'Chronicials of Riddick' game for the Xbox was outselling the movie).
[ edited by gossi on 2006-02-28 15:07 ]
[ edited by gossi on 2006-02-28 15:08 ]
gossi | February 28, 17:06 CET
There is a Stargate MMORG in the pipeline.
And I got more pleasure playing Knights of the Old Republic one and two than from watching the last two Star Wars films.
Simon | February 28, 17:12 CET
It's all there. You don't have a fan base for a game of 'Valiant', but yet they'll produce a game. Produce a game of Serenity, and people will buy it regardless. If it's good, it'll sell to people who either haven't seen the film or didn't like it - I hated the last 3 Star Wars films, but I own Knights of the Old Republic 1 and 2 as they are fantastic games.
gossi | February 28, 17:19 CET
My the time you factor in spending time with my family and friends, work commitments, the television shows i enjoy and the music i love to listen to finding the time to sit and play on a console is pretty much out of the question.
Personally i was never really taken with the whole gaming thing anyway. For the life of me i will never understand why people want to be sat moving virtual football players about on a screen when you could be out kicking a ball yourself. I know there is more to consoles than that type of game but i still think i'd rather be out doing something in the fresh air with whatever free time i do get.
Buffysmglover | February 28, 17:29 CET
And what do you do in this game? Whatever you want, pretty much. Want to do honest work? Go for it. Want to steal? Go for it. Stalk people? Become a witch? Wizard? Whatever you want.
I make my own story in that game.
[ edited by gossi on 2006-02-28 15:34 ]
gossi | February 28, 17:33 CET
[ edited by war_machine on 2006-02-28 15:37 ]
war_machine | February 28, 17:33 CET
Buffysmglover | February 28, 18:10 CET
Games like Morrowind or Everquest scare me. That is exactly the sort of thing that could suck my life into a giant, swashbuckly pit of addiction and, consequently, I avoid them. As it is i'm sort of an 'intense' games player in that I can go 6 months without touching one then, once started, generally spend every waking moment for as long as it takes finishing it. I'm what you might call goal oriented ;).
VWaG, likewise, but I sometimes enjoy playing a game on the PC when the air outside is a little bit too 'fresh' ;)
war_machine, that's a good point. The time spent, along with the interactivity, surely mean you're more likely to become involved in a well made game than a 90 minute movie (especially if you don't have any history with the story/characters - possibly another reason, apart from plain old lack of inspiration, why Hollywood likes adaptations over original sci-fi films).
I think what you miss in a game tho' is the feeling of communicating with another human on a very fundamental level that you get from the film going or novel reading experience. When you see or read something that really resonates with you, part of the appeal (for me anyway) is that someone else (i.e. the creator of the work) plainly feels the same way. It's a reminder that no matter how different we may seem, the same things make us tick underneath.
[ edited by Saje on 2006-02-28 16:48 ]
Saje | February 28, 18:18 CET
war_machine | February 28, 18:30 CET
zeitgeist | February 28, 19:04 CET
I'm not sure if I totally agree with the author of the article, that Sci-Fi is better suited for games, I just think for some reason most game makers have put more effort into their Sci-Fi. I definitely agree that the Star Wars Games (KoTOR specifically) was much better than the recent movies.
I actually think horror is best done with games. I have never really been scared by movies or books. But playing a game on the Xbox 360 - Condemned: Criminal Origins - I was scared out of my mind. I could seriously only play for a half hour to an hour tops before needing a break. Nothing in the horror genre has ever affected me like that. Don't get me wrong, I like some horror movies, but never because they have scared me.
Zeit - I used to be a big MMO player myself. Started with The Realm 2.0-3.0, than UO, EQ, DAoC, WoW. The problem with those games IMO is at the end levels of the game I always get sick on the game, with WoW after level 50 you couldn't play the game unless you were willing to sacrifice 4-5 hours to get anything done. I think a Serenity MMO would seriously sour me on the Universe, if not only because it would lack any type of good story, one of the biggest draws of Serenity/Firefly IMO.
[ edited by Odysseus on 2006-02-28 17:16 ]
Odysseus | February 28, 19:11 CET
I wonder if perhaps the interactivity itself acts to distance us emotionally since you're always to some extent analysing what's going on (especially if solving puzzles). I guess I find it hard to imagine myself feeling anything while playing a game that isn't just a result of adrenaline (e.g. annoyance, exhilaration) and even that is in response to events in the game rather than out of some feeling of connectedness. Maybe i'm playing the wrong games ;).
It seems to me that games and sci-fi go together for many reasons but mainly because games creators are techies and techies, to generalise, like sci-fi (in fact many probably are techies because of sci-fi). Added to this is the lack of even physical constraints in science-fiction and the way it encourages, possibly requires, new experiences and environments and it's basically a natural for games.
Saje | February 28, 19:22 CET
Firefly Flanatic | February 28, 20:01 CET
war_machine | February 28, 20:01 CET
Firefly Flanatic | February 28, 20:02 CET
Exactly my feelings!! I never play computer or video games, at all, but it's just because I know my personality too well. Most are too inane for me to want to waste time on, and the ones that aren't, I know I could quickly get addicted to and have all my free time sucked into hours and hours in front of the computer or TV screen. Hell, even with simple mind-numbing games like Solitaire and Minesweeper i had to trash them from my computer in college, because I'd use them as procrastination tools, and i realized i'd much rather spend my time not writing papers doing something more fun, like hanging out with friends or going on a hike.
I'm fully aware that some of the modern, story-based games are utterly brilliant, and that's why I have zero desire to ever even see what they're about. I procrastinate enough without them :-)
acp | February 28, 20:06 CET
Here's a notion: you are there. What you do has consequences. What you do matters. Make bad choices? Your characters die. You can't get them back. You are on the frontier with those characters, and you have to be prepared.
gossi | February 28, 20:07 CET
Odysseus | February 28, 20:33 CET
A Serenity game would be enormous, all of those worlds, all of those places...it could potentially be one of the most immersive games ever made. I really wish someone would make it...
UnpluggedCrazy | February 28, 20:40 CET
Normally Sierra would pick up the rights to Universal titles, and I have to admit I'm still very surprised a game hasn't officially entered development.
gossi | February 28, 20:55 CET
Re: the fully realistic character life. That strikes me as an idea that's great on paper but really, really frustrating in real life. Imagine playing an Everquest character for a year, gradually building weapons, spells, hit points (or however it works) only to accidentally fall off a cliff while fighting some lowly minion. Mucho annoying. If the game design and learning curve aren't absolutely perfectly pitched, I think i'd be giving up in frustration pretty quickly.
Saje | February 28, 21:09 CET
[ edited by Odysseus on 2006-02-28 19:25 ]
Odysseus | February 28, 21:19 CET
Ultimately, games should be a fun exercise. However, there's nothing to stop games also being exciting, entertaining, enjoyable - which make you think and feel.
Classic example: Max Payne. In that game, you revisit a constant nightmare where you relive the murder of your wife and child. Each time you relive the nightmare, there's differences. For example, one time, when you enter your house and hear your child screaming (it's fairly disturbing), as you run up stairs and down the corridor to your room, the corridor keeps getting longer and longer, and seemingly has no end. You just keep running. By the time you get to the end, your child is dead.
It's disturbing, but it's also kind of beautiful. It's a human look at nightmares, and it's interesting to play.
I really do think one of feelings missing in many current games is emotion.
[ edited by gossi on 2006-02-28 19:24 ]
gossi | February 28, 21:22 CET
Oh my, images are starting to appear in my mind right now... It's so pretty... And now I wanna play it... Stupid imagination...
Djungelurban | February 28, 21:31 CET
The plot gets fairly complex, but there's all these different, unique characters, tons of backstory and twists, and it's very moving, funny, and excellently designed. It's a huge game with lots of dialogue, all spoken and sometimes very adult, and it just draws you into the story and the worlds. I can't recommend it highly enough.
In April (the month), the "spiritual successor" to TLJ--as it's creator doesn't think of it as a direct sequel--called "Dreamfall" is finally coming out. It looks to be every bit as good, and I personally can't wait for the next chapter.
My next favorite game along emotional and character lines, is "Grim Fandango." I still go back and play it to this day. And you know what else? "Kingdom Hearts" for PS2. I'm not a Final Fantasy buff, or that into Disney, but man, I took a chance and fell for that game hard (and David B is in it). Also with a sequel approaching.
[ edited by pat32082 on 2006-02-28 19:44 ]
[ edited by pat32082 on 2006-02-28 20:19 ]
pat32082 | February 28, 21:43 CET
I'm glad I'm not the only one with some Grim Fandango love. To this day I will easily tell people it's my favorite game without skipping a beat. I painted Manny on my computer case and I'm about to get him tattooed on my arm.
war_machine | February 28, 22:04 CET
"Tulips." ;-)
ETA: Oh yeah, gossi. "Max Payne." Excellent head trip of a game. All these other games say, "it's like playing an action movie!" but MP actually delivered. Lotta class and style.
[ edited by pat32082 on 2006-02-28 20:24 ]
pat32082 | February 28, 22:18 CET
gossi | March 01, 00:11 CET
war_machine | March 01, 00:18 CET
Really, Serenity would be a perfect world to build a video game in.
Dizzy | March 01, 02:50 CET
And the times in between the jobs were what Firefly/Serenity was about, so that means much dialogue from the crew.
pat32082 | March 01, 03:34 CET
Dizzy | March 01, 03:40 CET
Like this idea: Greg does the music.
And I've always wanted a GTA-like, open ended Buffy game, where they create the entire town of Sunnydale, and you're free to roam as you wish into any of the major structures we've seen on the show. And you could even have vechicles, like Giles' car, Spike and Dru's car and his bike, Oz's Van, Xander's Uncle's Car, Joyce's Jeep, Xander's Ice Cream Truck...
But in between the main plot missions, you'd just patrol the town, slaying random demons and vamps, and you could switch between characters and do research as Giles, or play with the Dingoes as Oz...
And don't think I'm kidding. I'd totally play it.
[ edited by pat32082 on 2006-03-01 01:43 ]
[ edited by pat32082 on 2006-03-01 01:49 ]
pat32082 | March 01, 03:42 CET
UnpluggedCrazy | March 01, 07:42 CET
They have. Phone call later to discuss.
Ultimately, I can't fund it myself (hey, who'd have thunk it?), so I doubt the phone call will last more than about 30 seconds. I suppose really the people will need to have an interest are the likes of Sierra, or indeed Universal's own game company.
gossi | March 01, 14:31 CET
UnpluggedCrazy | March 01, 20:29 CET