James Cameron's Avatar: The Game Review

By Tom Bramwell Published 1 December, 2009

Purple pain.

Version tested: Xbox 360

Not to be confused with that game where you can run around and get 1000 gamerpoints in 60 seconds, James Cameron's Avatar is an adaptation of the Titanic director's upcoming and potentially rule-changing 3D adventure film, and the name on the box is more than a marketing ploy: he probably did spend more time selling the game concept in interviews than he spent debugging analogue deadzones in a corner of the Ubisoft Montreal office, but Cameron has put his stamp on this because he sees it as an important part of his Avatar vision. That alone is more promise than anyone typically associates with a game of a film.

The game itself is also immediately intriguing. Having picked between various male and female character models, you're thrown into the role of signal specialist "Able" Ryder, who is being sent to the planet Pandora to reinforce the RDA, a human military force locked in uneasy coexistence with the 10-foot-tall, indigenous purple Na'vi. The Na'vi live in simple villages, belying the harsh wildlife - harsh enough that the titchy humans have to surround their research camps with huge metal fences - and as you run around being introduced to the mechanics you have to fend off assaults from "viperwolves" in the jungle and catch only glimpses of the Na'vi themselves.

Before long all that changes, however, as on top of being put in an intriguing place, you're put in an intriguing position. Through the RDA's "Avatar" programme, your human consciousness is transported to a Na'vi body, and then you're confronted by a troubling accusation: all the evidence suggests the RDA is exterminating the Na'vi in order to plunder Pandora, and you have to choose between executing a human traitor or helping him to escape and siding with the Na'vi, and accepting all the complications that implies (not least of which is that your human body is stored in a sort of science-fiction coffin while you inhabit your avatar).

'James Cameron's Avatar: The Game' Screenshot 1

Avatar supports various 3DTV options, but we own all the tech in the world and can't run this, so we assume most of you can't either. We'll try to revisit the subject soon.

It's a simple choice, of course, but the difference between Avatar and other action games where you face polar opposites is that a huge volume of content genuinely rests on the decision: Avatar is effectively two entire games, and the path you take defines the next seven or eight hours either as a Na'vi third-person action-adventure or an RDA third-person shooter.

There is a lot of common ground between the two, of course. Both are third-person action games in the same mould, where the story moves you around several fairly vast, non-linear but not quite openworld levels, where you meet with key allies and then head out to complete a variety of actions to ingratiate yourselves with them or further your cause. Na'vi and RDA weaponry and abilities are different, but there's functional overlap in terms of controls (weapons are accessed by and remapped across d-pad directions, abilities are on face buttons with a bumper modifier) and the nature of the special skills (the Na'vi may be able to summon a viperwolf buddy, but both have strength buffs and healing spells, effectively).

While the order you visit locations and your focus once there is very different for each campaign, you are also running around Pandora in both cases, and so whichever path Ryder takes you still get to enjoy the lush environments Ubisoft Montreal has pulled together using a modified Far Cry 2 engine. Alien blossom and petals flutter on the breeze amidst bright, kaleidoscopic fauna, misty rivers and the soaring highways of broad boughs and jostling canopy. Some will mock James Cameron's vision of an alien planet (choice quote from one friend of Eurogamer: "Did it really take him 10 years to come up with a blue horse?") but it's nice to be in a colourful world for once (and besides, the horse has four front legs, and you can ride on it).

Initially, it really is the world and its mysteries that draw you in. The RDA soldiers discuss the massive fences they had to erect because otherwise the plants literally bite your arms off; there's panic in the ranks as sirens go off to signal the local fauna stampeding the barricades; and your weapons seem flimsy in the face of so much implied threat. Even when you get out amongst it, the game works to maintain that sense of being lost in the unknown, whether as isolated, overmatched RDA troops out in the wild or as a not-quite-Na'vi with much to prove, a traitor to your real species.

However, things take a turn for the worse around the time you realise implication is about the worst of it. There is often a sense of grind to the first few missions in a vast adventure - even brilliant Ubisoft games like Assassin's Creed II take a while to get going - but unfortunately the pattern is stuck once set: you're simply asked to wander between distant yellow markers on the map screen, then dispatched to another marker, sometimes to fetch plants, sometimes to speak to particular people, or sometimes to get in a fight. What little variety there is also finds itself undone by a lack of imagination beneath the surface: an unusual Na'vi mission, for instance, has you fighting an RDA dropship, but just has you doing the same thing three times (climb a ladder, effectively), and the third time is actually the first location again.

'James Cameron's Avatar: The Game' Screenshot 2

Vehicles pop up intermittently, including a riverboat and a dropship, but they're used poorly and lack definition compared to the Warthogs of the world.

Nothing Avatar does upsets your expectations of a game in this genre, but the core combat on both sides also fails to carry this lack of variety, and despite the constant accumulation of experience points, there's little progression to the weaponry. On the Na'vi side you use the bow and arrow at distance, and switch to blades or a staff for button-mashing melee attacks. You can string five hits together to activate a special, but the lack of tactile feedback in close quarters is deflating, and control is imprecise. On the RDA side, you have ranged weapons, but the Na'vi mainly run (and even teleport, infuriatingly) right up to you, so you spend a lot of time flailing, and the lack of hit response makes it difficult to appreciate kills.

There's no subtlety in either case. As a Na'vi, Ryder can use the jungle to avoid skirmishes in some cases by sticking to thick, elevated tree branches, but there's little opportunity to use it to your advantage in combat - something the Ewoks mastered in 1983. Enemies are pretty much the same throughout the game and their AI is poor, and sometimes bugged too, with plenty of running against walls and both sides reliant on being able to aim flawlessly over distance, rather than having any tactical nous.

The AI's flimsiness also spreads into the general set-piece behaviour. Pandora is meant to be at war by the latter stages of the game, binding you tighter to your chosen path - but in practice you can sprint between the yellow markers ignoring most of the ongoing skirmishes, which have no relevance to your story or character development except where specified, and so as the gameworld becomes more congested you feel less a part of it, and even more of an interloper, running between NPCs who stand on the spot waiting for you rather than doing anything else.

Events are also undermined in a couple of fundamental ways, the most surprising of which is that nobody ever explains why the RDA is on Pandora (not even in the "Pandorapedia" in the menus) or why they are using the Avatar programme (it can't be for infiltration - the Na'vi are fully aware of it). The divisive choice that sets you on an RDA or Na'vi path is also rather silly in the cold light of day: you're being asked to choose between people manifestly committing genocide, or the oppressed locals. It's hardly shades of grey. Nor does the writing really support it.

One point of interest is that the campaigns portray key characters from opposing perspectives, but it's too heavy-handed to work. For instance, one RDA officer who instructs you is a hard worker exasperated by troop deaths, or, from the Na'vi perspective, he's a soldier in a mech with a different icon above his head. The dialogue is also clichéd and inadvertently comical, particularly on the Na'vi side, where the person speaking broken English peppers it with unpronounceable Na'vi words like "Wdeasdjkng", and then translates them into things like "The First Voice". Ryder doesn't help. At one point my (female) version responded: "me no hablo Na'vi". That's not funny, that's a bit...

'James Cameron's Avatar: The Game' Screenshot 3

It's third-person, but your character is positioned slightly to the left of centre, and this means you often end up firing arrows or bullets into rocks you're accidentally behind.

Outside the main campaign, there's a Risk-inspired meta-game where you invest XP in buying units to take over territory. It's a novelty initially, but it's mostly about coming back at intervals to stack a particular area with overwhelming numbers and then click on the adjacent one, so it doesn't hold your attention for long. There are also regular multiplayer modes - Team Deathmatch, CTF, Capture and Hold, King of the Hill and Final Battle (destroy enemy locations before they reach yours), and to be fair, I didn't get to try these pre-release. It's also fair to say, however, that the combat is sufficiently poor that it would not be able to support compelling gameplay in these generic modes.

Investigating these things on my way out of Pandora for the last time made it all the more disappointing, because as you run around the world itself it's evident how well put together it is. It may be a bit silly with its giant bats and weirdo rhinos, but it's a beautiful place, and that gully and waterfall bit over there would make a great set-piece, and that cliffside section is very atmospheric, and so on. Pandora could well lend itself to a great film, and would lend itself fabulously well to a good third-person action game. Unfortunately, despite Ubisoft providing two third-person action games here for the price of one, both of them are dull and forgettable.

5 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Tom.

About Tom Bramwell

Tom is Operations director of Eurogamer Network and Editor-at-Large of Eurogamer.net. He joined the company in February 2000.

Read more articles from Tom by visiting the Tom Bramwell archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (97) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • mcmonkeyplc #1 2 years ago

    I wonder if the film is actually any good.

  • jonthepymm #2 2 years ago

    So is it in 3D ?

  • the_dudefather #3 2 years ago

    James Cameron's Avatar

  • Skurmedel #4 2 years ago

    He must've done a lift on his forehead according to his Avatar.

  • lordofthedunce #5 2 years ago

    I'll be giving this and the film a miss.

  • telboy007 #6 2 years ago

    I thought the film would be poop but the game would turn out good...

  • MaFlippinHeadHurts #7 2 years ago

    Oh dear, I can see the film not living up to the hype either

  • cianchristopher #8 2 years ago

    Games based on movies, eh?

    Are they ever any good? I suppose King Kong wasn't too bad, really.

    Obviously Goldeneye was a classic, but that came out two years after the movie, so it's not quite the same as something that's in the shops at the same time the movie is in the multiplex...

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #9 2 years ago

    OUCH, I thought this was in danger of being good.

    Doesn't bode well for Ferngully with dropships in 3D...

  • Grump #10 2 years ago

    Looks like a rip-off of The Smurfs

  • Santino #11 2 years ago

    ubisoft lol

  • telboy007 #12 2 years ago

    "Doesn't bode well for Ferngully with dropships in 3D"

    LOL!

    This film obviously needed Uwe Boll.
    Edited by 1 at 01/12/09 @ 17:20

  • Britesparc Verified Creative, ITV #13 2 years ago

    @cianchristopher:
    Good games based on movies: Ghostbusters (the original at least, not played the new one); Blade Runner; GoldenEye... that's it off the top of my head but I'm sure I'm forgetting, well, two at least ;-)

    As for this: I'm not surprised, although a bit disappointed, it turned out mediocre. Still looking forward to the film, mind, although I'm not expecting a masterpiece, just an entertaining CGI fest.

  • Smoped #14 2 years ago

    Damn. Like I said elsewhere on this site, I was hoping that this would, against all odds, turn out to be a decent game, simply because it was very colourful. Well, back to browns and grays then...

  • des #15 2 years ago

    Not to bad for a movie based game,that was rushed to meat deadline.Movie fans will play it,everyone else will ignore it.Business as usual.

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #16 2 years ago

    Also, is there definitely no coloured-glasses 3D support?

  • UberFrog #17 2 years ago

    Another Ubisoft ShitGame

  • dr_faulk #18 2 years ago

    Jesus Christ Almighty. Anyone who gives more than 5 seconds thought to either the film or the game being anyway decent is an idiot. The moment I hear the words "James" and "Cameron" being mentioned I lose control of my neck and eye muscles and brain begins to wind down.

    He's boring.

    And his touchy-feely films are boring.

    So everyone cop on and stop giving this immediately identifiable trash so much media attention.

  • butler` #19 2 years ago

    I want that "5/10" in big, 3D letters.

  • bad09 #20 2 years ago

    Tried the demo of this and it is really poor I could not even finish the demo. Very pretty tho.
    Edited by 1 at 01/12/09 @ 17:45

  • Nithron #21 2 years ago

    It's computer generated, so there's no constraints when it comes to the shape of actors inside foam suits and so on. And yet all the aliens are still just people with funny skin colours and weird ears. The vegetation is just Earth's but a bit bigger and most of the animals seem to be of the "giant earth species" variety. What's with the lack of imagination in sci fi designs?

  • SpaceMidget75 Verified Senior Software Developer, Minerva Computer Services #22 2 years ago

    Would have been nice to have had some info on the 3D aspect of the game or maybe do that in a separate Digital Foundry article.

    Also, what's with all the film hate and cynicism? Have you all seen it yet? JC has a pretty good filmography as a director so I'm going to wait until I've seen it personally.

  • SpaceMidget75 Verified Senior Software Developer, Minerva Computer Services #23 2 years ago

    @dr_faulk

    Yeah, The Terminator and Aliens were fucking shit weren't they? :roll:
    Edited by 1 at 01/12/09 @ 17:50

  • onyxbox #24 2 years ago

    saw this at the EG expo and thought it was a Turok re-branded

  • dr_faulk #25 2 years ago

    @SpaceMidget75

    I said he's boring and his touchy feely films are boring, not all his films. Terminator's okay. I watched it recently. SFX are beyond shit. Too many rose-tinted glasses if you ask me. Aliens is good.

    My main point is: everyone should have looked at Avatr when it was first announced and realised, immediately, that it was going to be a swollen, bloated, preachy "special effects" feature that wouldn't entertain kids or adults.

    I'm going to be so right about this film.

  • siro #26 2 years ago

    Only almost as bad as expected!

  • kaya08 #27 2 years ago

    Die Hard trilogy on the PS1 was a great movie tie in.
    Maybe they can only be good if they come out years after the film.

  • SpaceMidget75 Verified Senior Software Developer, Minerva Computer Services #28 2 years ago

    @dr_faulk

    Well fair enough, but looking at his 'proper' film list as director I wouldn't say that 'touchy feely' was something that would be worth mentioning:

    The Terminator
    Aliens
    The Abyss
    Terminator 2
    True Lies
    Titanic

    So Titanic then? (Maybe the Abyss if you were pushing it.)

    You might be right about Avatar but I still stand by his previous record being pretty fucking good to be honest! So I'll wait and see.

    BTW, slagging off The Terminator might get you a whole lot of negs. ;) EDIT: Haha, or me it would seem.
    Edited by 1 at 01/12/09 @ 18:09

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #29 2 years ago

    Does chronicles of riddick count?

    Actually, no. Similarly, James Bond Nightfire or Everything or Nothing wouldn't count, even if they were good. RTS pioneer Dune 2 doesn't count, either, despite being ostensibly the sequel to a game that was based directly on the David Lynch movie.

    Actually, it's debateable whether Avatar counts as a game-of-the-movie since it doesn't cover the film's events. And that's the reason i thought it might have been any good.

    Edit: What I mean to say is, Chronicles of Riddick isa good game, but it's not really a game-of-the-movie, it's a game featuring characters from a movie franchise.
    Edited by 1 at 02/12/09 @ 09:29

  • space_ace #30 2 years ago

    still excited about the film, i never believed jc that this will be a different, worthy tie-in. games are a world of difference to film and maybe up there someone will realise this finally

  • dr_faulk #31 2 years ago

    @SpaceMidget75

    "slagging off The Terminator might get you a whole lot of negs"

    I honestly can't have a discussion with my mates about Terminator. And don't get me started on Terminator 2! =O

  • makeamazing #32 2 years ago

    Playing the game for the last hour, and either i am too tired for it, or its just alittle tedious. The game doesnt look as bad as the video trailers i saw, but its a simple affair.

    Is anyone really surprised this scored low? But its a 12 plus, so i will see how my kid fairs on it, he didnt look that bothered though, so i guess its not really a game that is going to grab you unless you are a real avatar fan.

  • dingo75 #33 2 years ago


    Good games based on movies: Ghostbusters (the original at least, not played the new one); Blade Runner; GoldenEye... that's it off the top of my head but I'm sure I'm forgetting, well, two at least ;-)

    Chronicles of Riddick


    Last hopes for December:

    D.I.R.T. 2 (PC)
    The Saboteur

    Not as if I wouldn't swim in games already. :p
    Edited by 1 at 01/12/09 @ 18:37

  • Zomoniac #34 2 years ago

    So how does its achievement generosity compare with its namesake?

  • kendoji #35 2 years ago

    Sounds pretty good for a movie tie-in.

  • Vin #36 2 years ago

    This was stillborn from the moment Cameron bored half the world to death at E3.

  • andromeda #37 2 years ago

    Better get used to it,peeps, this site'll be smothered in 'Avatarising' in a few days..

  • sarcasmoidosis #38 2 years ago

    " So how does its achievement generosity compare with its namesake? "

    Easy Multi achievements if you have a friend. Single player will take a while.

  • trip919 #39 2 years ago

    Can’t say I’m surprised by this really. Game & movie both screamed turkey to me. I’ll be very surprised if the movie is in any way decent!

  • Ryze #40 2 years ago

    /chortle

    /guffaw!

  • TheJuriel #41 2 years ago

    No surprise this isn't really all that good.

  • Fatum #42 2 years ago

    Just an other let down. Great.

  • Darren #43 2 years ago

    I played the PC demo of Avatar over a week ago and while it definitely wasn't terrible, neither did it impress me in any way, it was pretty much what I expected. The A.I. was pretty lousy though with one large hippo like enemy content to stand just beyond a fallen tree while I slowly wittled away its health despite the fact there was room for it to reach me. Still, it could have been worst. The graphics are quite pretty though... shame about the terrible animation.

    Me, I think I'll put my cash toward the movie and spend the money I save on a better game.

  • kongzi #44 2 years ago

    @EarlBassett: Just like that I could argue you don't know anything about film if you consider Cameron a good director. A good special FX guy, sure... Some people like Alien, other people Aliens. Are you in it for the many explosion or the many subtle layers weaved into the story? Either way, the way Avatar is being pushed it's bound not to meet expectations, even if it's good which I seriously doubt. And sure, I know fuck all about films... go ahead and think that, what makes you the expert then?

    Personally I liked most his films, Avatar just doesn't appeal to me. If something's gonna be CGI I'd rather it just be full animation and not try to give it a sense of realism. But then, I'm an animator myself and this motion capture malarkey is taking bread outta my (future) kids mouths, goddammit!

    edit: hmm.. then again, people are still gonna see it because of the 3d, I know I am.. so maybe it won't flop after all. Good for Cameron, then.
    Edited by 1 at 01/12/09 @ 20:46

  • Velios #45 2 years ago

    GETTING THIS!!!

  • FortysixterUK #46 2 years ago

    James Cameron made Aliens , the Abyss and Terminator 1 & 2....alll outstanding films.
    Can't think of any really decent films after those, so the comments about him making crap films are not entirely correct.
    I just hope Avatar doesn't turn out to be a duffer...I reckon this is his last chance in the movie world.
    The game of Avatar looks promising in trailers, but then, who makes a bad trailer ?

  • davisorle #47 2 years ago

    Im really not surprised. All the footage released over the net so far were a bunch of 3rd person action gameplay which is of the level of games same genre released the least 8 years back. Why the number 8 and not 5 or 10? The answer is Clear

  • Nephirion #48 2 years ago

    3 pages for a 5 wtf :o

  • neilka #49 2 years ago

    In its defence, the Pandorapedia does explain the things the review says it doesn't. That's about all you can say in its defence though.

  • JayKwon #50 2 years ago

    I still want it :'). 5 sounds budget game reasonable:).

  • smelly #51 2 years ago

    I dont want to read the words of the review for fear they'll have movie spoilers in there (i literally know nothing about the movie and want to keep it that way until i've seen it)

  • smelly #52 2 years ago

    >"James Cameron made Aliens , the Abyss and Terminator 1 & 2....alll outstanding films. "

    You missed out titanic... After that he stopped making feature films for a while concentrating on documentaries


    >".I reckon this is his last chance in the movie world. "

    WTF are you on exactly?
    Edited by 1 at 01/12/09 @ 21:38

  • smelly #53 2 years ago

    Quote : "Terminator's okay. I watched it recently. SFX are beyond shit."


    *facepalm*

    .. doesnt really warrant any more of a reply than that really does it?

  • sarcasmoidosis #54 2 years ago

    @smelly: in theory, the game has nothing to do with the movie. so no spoilers.

  • Kerome #55 2 years ago

    Oh dear. I'll probably go see the film, but I have to say the recent long trailer on TV was a little bit 'meh'... the original reveal trailer had some real wonder in it, but this felt a bit too action-ey. Games from movies, well, this is just holding true to form, more often than not they're quick-cash-in rubbish to hit the consumer wave before interest ebs.

  • Kerome #56 2 years ago

    Admittedly both Batman: Arkham Asylum and Riddick are rather good...

  • bad09 #57 2 years ago

    Batman isn't a movie based game but there has been quite a few good ones I've enjoyed so tie-ins are not all bad...

    Riddick
    Robocop arcade
    Robocop 2/3 amiga
    Ghosbusters was a fairly good effort
    Indiana Jone and The Last Crusade
    Ep1 Racer
    SW Arcade (Atari)
    Super SW games (SNES)
    Indy Trilogy on (SNES)
    Aladdin
    Enter The Matrix
    Goldeneye
    Die hard Trilogy
    Batman The Movie
    The Back To The Future Games
    Alien Trilogy
    Total Recall (Amiga)

  • mowgli #58 2 years ago

    Looks about as shit as the film then.

  • Razorus #59 2 years ago

    Before I carry on reading this article, might I point out that the Na'vi are blue, not purple. Alright, back to the review.

  • slackarse #60 2 years ago

    Game based on film is sub-par. News at 11.

  • nedgip #61 2 years ago

    what about the 3d?

  • Zander #62 2 years ago

    I don't expect the film to be much kop either and I have enjoyed most of Mr Cameron's films.

    @ kongzi - To say a director isn't good by just citing his (ok he does love them) use of special effects is a bit of a poor showing. Ok so you don't need to be a 'cultured' man to enjoy his films but they are enjoyable none the less. Not all films need to have 'subtle layers' and be conversed over a skinny decaf latte. I actually think it was pretty impressive how he took a psychological horror (I love Alien btw) and made something different (and good) out of it. Besides none of his films are (maybe Avater withstanding!) as shite as some of the blockbusters that have recently made it to the big screen (Transformers & T4 etc..).

    Back to the game... why is it so poor? They had ages to work on it (apparently) and if it was so poor why release it before the film. Releasing it after would have given it a bit longer to dev and still be able to advertise the film. Oh wait they want our Christmas money...

  • PapaSmurf630 #63 2 years ago

    I reckon Avatar would be much better if it had Arnie in it.

  • Antaios #64 2 years ago

    Great, so it's your typical movie-to-game crap-o-rama. Now I don't want to see that trailer anymore on the video page, hehe.

  • 3william56 #65 2 years ago

    "SFX beyond sh*t"

    Did you notice that the Terminator is 25 years old? And got an Oscar for those "sh*t" effects?
    /double facepalm

  • wonton #66 2 years ago

    terminator 1 & 2 and alien and aliens are amongst some of the best sci-fi films ever.

    JC may never top those four but his past work alone gets him alot of respect from me.

  • bad09 #67 2 years ago

    Alien was Ridley Scott.

  • zErOb_cOOl #68 2 years ago

    I just wish Avatar seemed a bit more original.

    There may be hidden depth to the storyline...I haven't seen the film...but the premise of the film seems overly contrived, heavily leaning on much better sci fi storylines, rather than a eureka moment of genius. I think hour long Star Trek episodes have had far more in-depth ideas going on.

    Hopefully the greatness is in the execution. Sadly not for the game though.

  • abigsmurf #69 2 years ago

    Fern Gully with mechs and no Tim Curry. I just can't get excited for a film with is likely designed to make the audience feel guilty in that way.

  • koopa #70 2 years ago

    Who cares about Terminator, Aliens, Titanic... You're forgetting he made Piranha 2 ;)

  • ThisWillDestroyYou #71 2 years ago

    the dude who commented on terminators sfx being shit...way to undermine your comment mate, they were revolutionary for the time on what was a relatively low budget film, you probably weren't even born when it came out.

    god kids thesedays

  • bad09 #72 2 years ago

    Dunno the Arnie head looked suss even back then :)

  • metalangel #73 2 years ago

    Yet another planet called Pandora. FAIL. Mr Sulu, set in a course for Rigel VII. I think I prefer women with green tits over women with blue tits.

  • JDFreeman #74 2 years ago

    You will never break the mould of shite movie to game ports (or game to movie!)! Never i tells ya! Never! Mwuuu Haaa haaaaaaa haaa! ha.

    (Film looks shite too Dances with smurfs! Cameron hasn't done an interesting story since Aliens)

  • koshien #75 2 years ago

    Oh, come on guys! You own all the tech in the world and couldn't get it to work in stereo-3D?!
    You just need the Nvidia 3D Vision kit, or the Zalman Trimon 3D monitor, or some other solutions ;)
    I myself bought the Zalman Trimon 3D monitor on amazon.uk for as low as 199£.
    Waiting for the big plasma Panasonic 3D tvs to come out next year...
    Too bad for the score...5/10? I will try it anyways, colours are very vivid and particular, and I actually liked the demo.

  • Hypercube #76 2 years ago

    Terminator 2 is a bit pants (IMHO) and while Aliens is an 'enjoyable romp', it took the tension and fear generated in the first film by not knowing what the alien was, or even looked like, and just turned it into a brawl.

    Out of all of his films, I probably rate either the first Terminator or the Abyss as his best ones.

    And this one looks like shit.

  • Britesparc Verified Creative, ITV #77 2 years ago

    The final word on Cameron's films - feel free to disagree :-)

    Piranha 2 - not seen
    Terminator - Five stars
    Aliens - Five stars
    The Abyss - Four stars
    Terminator 2 - Five stars
    True Lies - Three stars (the casual racism and misogyny spoils it a bit for me)
    Titanic - Three stars (The first 90 min: 2 stars; the last 90 min: four stars)

    I've not seen any of his documentaries. Anyway, whilst I think he lacks depth as a writer, he's a phenomenal action director, and generally speaking makes really, really good films.
    Edited by 2 at 02/12/09 @ 10:24

  • Nephirion #78 2 years ago

    This is a game of a film, its crap, move on

  • sneetch #79 2 years ago

    @3william56
    "SFX beyond sh*t"

    Did you notice that the Terminator is 25 years old? And got an Oscar for those "sh*t" effects?
    /double facepalm

    Yeah, maybe he'd prefer that they give it to George Lucas so he can add CGI terminators and little amusing droids all over the place. Won't that be awesome, he can remove the weapons and drug references too while he's at it.

    I agree with you, the movie was excellent and the special effects were excellent too (for the time, it's not surprising they seem a bit shaky these days). I've no doubt they'll remake it with some hot young things in a few years time to get back in touch with "the kids" (and probably balls it up).
    Edited by 1 at 02/12/09 @ 10:47

  • Beano #80 2 years ago

    Game looks just as bad as the movie does - hopefully I'm wrong reg. the movie!

  • andromeda #81 2 years ago

    Guess she don't like the cornbread either...

  • Syrette #82 2 years ago

    I actually feel sorry for Cameron after seeing how passionate he was about this game during Ubisoft's E3 conference.

    Shame they let him speak for about half of the conference.

  • Dr-Freudstein #83 2 years ago

    looks like azurik from the old black box...

  • Sunyavadin #84 2 years ago

    Given the review you'd think this was "James Cameron's Titanic: The Game" it goes down so fast....

  • muscleblade #85 2 years ago

    Waiting for The Saboteur review then.
    Need just one more new game before chrismas.

  • Vanmunt #86 2 years ago

    Get the oven ready.... here comes the Christmas Turkey!!!!

  • jambo74 #87 2 years ago

    Movie tie-in game in gash shocker!

    What did we expect?

  • darc #88 2 years ago

    It sounds like every other Ubisoft game in this genre. I'm still skeptical about Assassin's Creed 2, even.

  • Dogs-in-Hats #89 2 years ago

    Boom - its proper shite

  • rexluger #90 2 years ago

    games turned to movies normally fail 90% of the time lol
    ______________________________
    (no spam)
    Playstation/xbox/wii fans add me and check out my blog please http://luger992.wordpr ess.com/

  • Nithron #91 2 years ago

    @ notmyrealname : This is true. The important part, i suppose, is the story; it's much easier to convey with humanoid aliens, and just changing the way they look wouldn't impact the story anyway. The whole "actually alien aliens" thing would be a lot easier to do in something like Star Trek(Which in the later series did play around with some weird stuff), where aliens come and go in a weekly basis and aren't more or less the protagonists of the core plot.

    Reading the plot summary on Wikipedia however it sounds like the aliens are just basically people, with two-person relationships and clans and... well, you get the picture. It's basically a thin allegory for the encroachment of imperialism upon indigenous peoples, in which case, why even bother putting it in space? Why not just have people in a jungle instead?

  • aphexstwin #92 2 years ago

    i think some people here are focusing on jc as a director, he's a good writer and artist too. he drew that kate winslut nude in TITanic and wrote point break and one of my personal favourite films, strange days. but i think regardless of his directorial style and vocal cues in his films, he will be better remembered for me by his approach to making films real - to - reel. he wanted the big ship built in titanic when he could have gone digital and he wanted a near working submersible drilling rig for the abyss. no one has dared to take risks as big as him, and he's pulled it off everytime. avatar may be a shit film, time will tell, but he's always one of the only directors pushing the boundaries of whats possible on film. only ridley scott has done more imo.

    oh the game. as others have said, games from films dont work, movies from games dont work. (DOOMLOL). but was the game ever going to be close to the film without giving the plot away? doubt it tbh
    Edited by 1 at 03/12/09 @ 00:35

  • DarkFenix2k9 #93 2 years ago

    I'm pretty sure everyone knew this was going to be shit the moment it was announced. Movie to game doesn't work.

    This doesn't really dent my faith that Assassin's Creed 2 will be any worse, I loved AC1 and from what I've seen of AC2 they've only improved on a winning formula.

  • poopmonster #94 2 years ago

    I'm gonna wipe this from my mind and sit down to watch The Thing (without, then with, commentaries on)

  • FogHeart #95 2 years ago

    Hmmm...does the game of The Thing count as a game of the film?

    Anyway, it's good to see the Dunia (FC2) engine used in another game, shame that it's the BEST thing about this game-of-the-film! Was very worried that this was just going to be another Unreal Engine 3 clone.

  • Les #96 2 years ago

    "Pandora could well lend itself to a great film"

    But it didn't. It's a technical masterpiece but one of the worst movies ever conceived IMHO. 2 hours and 45 minutes of tired clichés and awful acting. It's truly amazing that Cameron needed so much time to tell so little...

    If this is the future of cinema, it might as well be dead.

  • TheAlien #97 2 years ago

    The film is very good. I give the game a 8/10. Stop shitting about it, please!