Disney Epic Mickey

Published 29 October, 2009

Warren Spector's latest finally shown.

Comments (57) Latest comment 3 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • TravisTouchdown #1 3 years ago

    It's not exactly Castle of Illusion, is it? And there was me getting all excited... Ah well.

  • Guv #2 3 years ago

    shame it's on the wii... could have been impressive otherwise

  • JackyB #3 3 years ago

    I must say I am a little dissapointed too. Thought it would be darker. Its not so much the graphics technically, but the style of them. Still looking forward to the game though. Early days and all that

  • PearOfAnguish #4 3 years ago

    Sure this isn't a different game? Doesn't seem to have much in common with the concept art and all that talk of 'reinventing Mickey'.
    Edited by PearOfAnguish at 29/10/09 @ 10:27

  • LOLLERS #5 3 years ago

    oh good, green lava-slime

  • Shinetop #6 3 years ago

    Ouch. Not exactly what the concept art was suggesting. The atmosphere seems more like Psychonauts than like the dark, twisted world the artwork conveyed.

    It's still an interesting idea, and it could work, but this first look at the actual game isn't very reassuring.

  • kangarootoo #7 3 years ago

    Hmmmm, not quite what I was expecting either.

    I'm not really seeing a dark re-imagining of Mickey Mouse. I'm just seeing Mickey Mouse with a paintbrush and a slight scowl.

    It could still be a very good platformer, but I'll hold judgement on whether it is anything more than that for now.

  • kangarootoo #8 3 years ago

    "how does this look better than anything released in the last generation?"

    If graphical fidelity is all that matters to you, the Wii will always come last. Writing it at each new opportunity isn't brining anything new to the table.

    What DO you like about what you have seen so far?

  • Shinetop #9 3 years ago

    What DO you like about what you have seen so far?

    For myself: the concept art, and the tone it conveyed. A tone that's notably absent in these screenshots.

  • marilena #10 3 years ago

    I don't think it's the Wii's fault necessarily. For me, Super Mario Galaxy is a great looking game. This looks very bad. Almost amateurish and certainly not in line with the spectacular concept art that was previously shown.

  • joe90 #11 3 years ago

    wow.. that is all

  • JahB #12 3 years ago

    well at least we now know why instead of having a reveal trailer, they released the concept art first.

  • Promey #13 3 years ago

    I think it looks alright. Why care about graphics (the spreadsheet FM is awesome), its gameplay that matters.

  • smoothpete #14 3 years ago

    Wow, disappointed. Where's the interesting dark look from the concept art? This looks dull as piss

  • VicViper #15 3 years ago

    Its certainly lacking the uncomfortableness that I got from the artwork, the zombie/mecha donald duck lacks the creepy element in the screen shots. Some of the artwork was really dark which was what made it a interesting idea. Everything seems too soft and well round I guess, well its early days yet maybe they have a few art passes to do to get things where they want.

  • mkreku #16 3 years ago

    I loved the concept art. This looks like a kid's game. What a let-down.

  • varsas #17 3 years ago

    I wonder why some people can not distinguish between graphical style and graphical prowess because I don't see anything in the screenshots that suggest it would be better executed on the 360 or PS3. I think the execution looks pretty good but I'm not so sure about the style. However this is only a small batch of screenshots and some of the concept art doesn't appear at all related to these levels.

  • JahB #18 3 years ago

    I don't see anything in the screenshots that suggest it would be better executed on the 360 or PS3.

    you might wanna check the word "resolution" in the dictionary. arguably the art style would still look underwhelming on 360/PS3 as well (in comparison to the earlier concept art), but at least the game itself wouldn't look like it's being made for the ps2.

  • Slipstream #19 3 years ago

    This style differs vastly from the concept art which is such a shame, I saw it working too.
    Mini Ninjas did the same '>.>

    I mean now it officially looks like it's aimed at kids.
    Perhaps I was asking for too much when I assumed the sinister side of Kingdom Hearts had treacled into Disney Studios.
    Still, these are early days, we've yet to see the game in motion, for all we know some of these pictures may not even feature in the final code.

  • alimokrane #20 3 years ago

    very very disappointed... these screens are more like an Epic Fail :'(
    Edited by alimokrane at 29/10/09 @ 11:17

  • kangarootoo #21 3 years ago

    @JahB

    "you might wanna check the word "resolution" in the dictionary"

    That is an odd thing to say, given that nobody had used the word resolution before you wrote it.

    varsas make a distinction between graphical style and graphical prowess. Something like resolution would fall within the scope of prowess, which was exactly varsas' point.

  • varsas #22 3 years ago

    @JahB: You put a lot of stall in resolution because I don't see how would a sharper version of this make it look so much better?

    @kangarootoo: Thanks for pointing that out. When referring to graphical prowess I mean high polygon counts, textures, effects and A.I. i.e. what makes something like Gears of War impossible on the Wii and not something as simple a resolution. When referring to graphical style I would point to something like Okami that looks fantastic and continues to do so but does not require a lot of processing power.

    Edited by varsas at 29/10/09 @ 11:15

  • Meho #23 3 years ago

    Well, I'm still hold high hopes for the gameplay, but, yes, the screenshots certainly don't scream "a classic in the making" at me. Concept art was intriguing. This just looks... bland and uninspired.

  • Pirotic #24 3 years ago

    Makes you wonder why they bothered releasing the awesome concept-art when they must have known people would be disappointed with the final result. Major letdown.

  • kangarootoo #25 3 years ago

    @jstar

    I don't think we can blame Warren. Times have changed, and the stuff he makes (would prefer to make?) just doesn't sell as well as it used to.

    I bet he would love to make games like DE for the rest of his days, but he has to stay in business like anyone else. Although on the flip side, maybe he just enjoys the change? Making a different kind of game can be interesting you know.

    Either way, his games have given me many hours of fun over the years, so if he wants to do a platformer just for the enjoyment and variety, or because it keeps him in ferarris, I think he has earned that right.

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #26 3 years ago

    The screenshots don't hold up that well against, say Jak and Daxter from 7 years ago on an inferior technology platform.

    I think my predictions about the low-production-value wilderness of thirdparty Wii games may be coming true.

  • penhalion #27 3 years ago

    hahahahaha....whew

    I remember pointing out that there was a good reason this was on the Wii. I mentioned that disney would in no way allow for a dark and brooding mickey mouse game and that the concept art was probably nothing to do with the game. I got a heck of a lot of "You don't know nothing" and "you're wrong it's going to be the best game ever because spector is doing it" nonsense.

    I may get rated down but, I've been getting to say "I told you so" to some very prominent posters quite a lot lately so I'm content with that :)

    I'll repeat my original point. Stop being hype whores! Don't bloody assume something is the be all and end all just because it's fronted by a name you know. Just like movies, games can be hit or miss regardless of the producer. The fact it was based on Mickey Mouse and was confined to the Wii should have sounded alarm bells in any serious gamer out there immediately!

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #28 3 years ago

    I actually thought that Deus Ex would usher in a new era of gaming.

    One could reasonably argue that Oblivion and Fallout 3 are part of the product of the new era of open design begun by deus Ex. Warren Spector's 'obstacles not tasks' philosophy has also had significant influence in the GTA-clone open world genre, the Hitman games, and a lot of other stuff.

  • JahB #29 3 years ago

    @varsas

    any graphical style is vastly enhanced by graphical prowess. while okami sure looked great on PS2/Wii, you can't possibly argue that it wouldn't have looked better on any of the two big consoles. and i think the same applies to mickey, if the bland style was at least technically well executed, it might not look as massively disappointing as it does now.

  • kangarootoo #30 3 years ago

    @penhalion

    You do love your "I told you so" don't you ;)

    Probably rather better than my own brand of self importance though.

  • kangarootoo #31 3 years ago

    @JahB

    I take your point that, if all else is the same, a healthy dose of graphical prowess is preferred. I just don't think it is going to amke or break any game. It seems like we all agree that awesome graphic are nice, but the disagreement (if there truly is one) is that a lack of groovy graphics means a game is no good.

    I'm not disappointed at what I've seen purely because the graphics look a bit basic (it is early days, so I'm not too worried about that sort of thing). My concern is purely about the style of what I am seeing. If the draw and texture resolutions were higher, I'm still not sure my key concern would be addressed.

  • JahB #32 3 years ago

    @kang

    groovy graphics do not make or break a game +1.

    BUT: i was very excited for this game when i saw the concept art. then i heard it was for the wii and thought - they can't possibly pull this off. then came the screenshots and everything i anticipated was confirmed. my point is simply that the 360/PS3 would have had the muscle to bring the concept art to life, and as a gamer i'm disappointed they threw a great idea away right when making that first decision.

  • hulahoops #33 3 years ago

    "I think it looks alright. Why care about graphics (the spreadsheet FM is awesome), its gameplay that matters."

    Wow. It's true, we really did say things like that 10 years ago didn't we.

  • kangarootoo #34 3 years ago

    @JahB

    I know what you mean, I guess the two are connected to an extent. I was just thinking of the sweping vistas in Uncharted 2 (or indeed Halo, the first open air level). Sometimes sheer graphical horse power can HELP create an atmosphere that might not otherwise be possible.

    I know some of the early concept shots showed a sort of inky monster thing, and realising such a thing effectively would probably require the ability to draw moving liquid in a realistic way.

    That said, video games have always been about making the best of what you have at the time. The first Tomb Raider on PC looked incredible the first time I saw it. If you had frozen me there and then, thawed me out today, and showed me the same game I would be just as impressed.... unless, you showed me gears of War or Assassin's Creed first, then I would not be so amazed upon seeing TR again.

    The only reason we look down on the Wii graphically is because we have more powerful machines to compare it to. In the end, all that does is harm our experience as gamers. Better to try and force yourself to think "ok, it doesn't look as good as XYZ, but I'm going to purposely forget about that and see what else it is offering me".

    Really, far more of the work is done in our imaginations than on screen, but only if we let it happen.

  • kangarootoo #35 3 years ago

    Is it worth mentioning also that Deus Ex wasn't all that graphically when it first came out, but that didn't stop it being a hugely involving and entertaining game.

  • PearOfAnguish #36 3 years ago

    "my point is simply that the 360/PS3 would have had the muscle to bring the concept art to life"

    I don't think that's the case at all. Look at Okami, that's a beautiful game because of the unique art direction, even if it's not technically astounding. Same for Braid, Lucidity, World of Goo, Loco Roco etc etc.

    Don't think it would have been impossible to pull off something close to the concept art simply by making it heavily stylised. Going by these screenshots, though, the problem is that the style is so generic (are we certain it isn't Generic 3D Platformer X for the PS2?) the weak visuals really stand out.

    Is it worth mentioning also that Deus Ex wasn't all that graphically when it first came out

    True, but again, it has a distinctive style and atmosphere that make it very easy to ignore the shonky visuals.
    Edited by PearOfAnguish at 29/10/09 @ 12:55

  • Skurmedel #37 3 years ago

    But this doesn't have anything to do with processing power, the screenshots simply doesn't look like the concept art. It doesn't matter if this was a Wii, 360 or PS3 game, it wouldn't have quite the same style anyhow. Isn't that the real problem? Sure, Mickey looks more mischievous or what it was he called him, but the world around him doesn't look all that dark. It looks more like Willy Wonka Ville with somewhat mean looking critters. No amount of computer power can mitigate that fact really, if what one was hoping for was something in line with the concept.

    (basically what Pear said)
    Edited by Skurmedel at 29/10/09 @ 13:01

  • varsas #38 3 years ago

    @JahB: Of course Okami would look better on 360 and PS3 by just having a higher resolution but in all honesty what would really be enhanced on those machines? I don't think the art style of the game benefits much with a higher polygon count or better textures. I don't think there is anything in these screenshots that would look vastly superior on 360 or PS3.

    On the other hand if one looks at some of the early concept art then one can imagine those looking better on 360 or PS3. As someone else mentioned these screenshots don't match the concept art; in particular the early concept art doesn't match up at all.
    Edited by varsas at 29/10/09 @ 13:14

  • PearOfAnguish #39 3 years ago

    There's a weird disconnection between Mickey and the game world, like they had one team making a Mickey character for a bog standard Disney platformer, and an entirely separate outfit creating this stylised Tim Burton world, and the two have just been mashed together. Maybe that's intentional, but it looks a little odd.

  • youhavenomail #40 3 years ago

    No need for me to sit on the fence here. The screenshots look horrible. I'm not sure what PS3 and 360 could do for such bland art design. It's so unimaginative that I'm not surprised they decided the power of the Wii would suffice. You'd think there was enough grey in this industry without bringing it into Mickey Mouse's World (unless it's used like in the first level of Mickey Mania).

  • 57th_FoX #41 3 years ago

    i want another good goofy game... like goof-troops!

  • koopa #42 3 years ago

    Not really impressive (some screens look like Rayman 2 on N64), but they have a whole year to improve it, not to mention the gameplay aspect sounds pretty interesting...
    Edited by koopa at 29/10/09 @ 15:04

  • messiahtj #43 3 years ago

    This game looks everything but epic =|

  • FenderMaster #44 3 years ago

    doesn't quite live up to the concept art, but it's still a very nice looking 3D platformer, and probably my next Wii purchase

  • bushwod #45 3 years ago

    why does Mickey look so... Evil!?!

  • JJrabbit #46 3 years ago

    Epic taking the mickey.....

  • Skorms-Boss #47 3 years ago

    I still think my idea of mickey in fallout 3 is better
    this looks weak

  • The-Bodybuilder #48 3 years ago

    I'm baffed...
    Did people REALLY expect Disney would let Spector turn mickey into a dark, twisted fantasy-horror-like game?

    The days of Disney making creepy and quite scary (Pinocho, I'm looking at you, you and your giant whale) products are long gone.

  • the_mtfr #49 3 years ago

    Wow, the screenshots look... like we should make room for this game in the Bristol Stool Scale.

    See here: [link url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Stool_Scale
    ]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Sto...[/link]

    I'd say it's somewhere between 5 and 6. Any objections?

  • smelly #50 3 years ago

    OH LOOK! It's NOT grey and brown!

    OH LISTEN! Is that the sound of xbox owners masturbating furiously at the prospect of being able to tell us all how "kiddie" and "rubbish" it looks?

    OH Colour me not surprised in the slightest...

  • trip919 #51 3 years ago

    After all the mouthwatering art & the excellent interview he did with Game Informer, I can’t help but express my feelings of being completely underwhelmed.

    I’m no graphics whore by any stretch of the imagination, but these screenshots are alarming. Still its early days so I’ll be keeping an eye on its progress.

  • GamesConnoisseur #52 3 years ago

    Wii and Nintendo are allowed to make a game platform exclusive! Same way as other platform has their own exclusive titles and I didn't realise we would automatically discard titles based on not coming to platform of our preference?!

    Secondly, static screenshots never tells a whole story, how many games that was orginially deemed disappointing was found to be great and vice versa?!

    For Wii it's look interesting and mickey would find a better audience with Wii casual crowd anyway as Spector said and I m sure he WOULD not associate his name with something that ll tank!!

    I think this game would educate people a bit about the early days of animations, Mickey and could still be quite fun for hardcore HD multi platform gamers. At least that is my best wishes, would get no pleasure to see this and Warren fails!

  • The-Bodybuilder #53 3 years ago

    Oh Smelly, must you always play the pantomime idiot?

  • Shinetop #54 3 years ago

    Looking forward to this and Metroid Other M next year.

    How anyone can put down a game they haven't even played (or seen being played) is just plain stupid on their part.

    Yes, because not being interested in something you've never seen beeing played is stupid, but looking forward to it is perfectly normal.

    Did people REALLY expect Disney would let Spector turn mickey into a dark, twisted fantasy-horror-like game?

    Did people expect it to resemble the concept art that Disney greenlighted? Yes.
    Edited by Shinetop at 30/10/09 @ 08:42

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #55 3 years ago

    I compared this to Jak and Daxter earlier, but actually, the art style - particularly the cut-out buildings - remind me of Blinx the Time Sweeper. Although, as you can see in the screenshots here, another 2002 game manages to look considerably better than Epic Mickey does - although the fact that Blinx was disappointing to play brings us back round to the graphics versus gameplay debate.

    In any case, the real point about this game is, as I was saying, production values. Regardless of the Wii's graphical prowess, and we know it can make great looking platform games, see Mario galaxy, and also the marios and Zeldas of the gamecube, it looks as if not much effort has been put into making their world look good (I like the rabbits, though, Mickey is adequate, but the robot thing is a bit naff). If they're not putting enough effort into the graphics to outshine 7 year old competitors, what effort can we be sure they're putting into gameplay or storytelling?

  • Boomerang #56 3 years ago

    @the_mtfr

    Epic posting my son, epic.

  • Zomeguy #57 3 years ago

    Warren Spector already blames Disney.


    Seeing as I will soon be visiting Disneylandparis for the second time this year, I'm a bit disappointed too...