Transformers: The Game Comments by Kristan Reed

I have to say I have played this on both Wii and PSP and it is a pile of crap on both.

Playing as the Decepticons makes it a slightly more enjoyable experience as you get to fly and blow more stuff up.

Still shite, mind you - and I am the kind of saddo who will spend £70 on a Masterpiece Megatron :-p

lim-dul

you sound like an absolute cretin with no idea of how the industry operates.

you sound like an absolute cretin with no idea of how the industry operates.

I know how the industry works and hence I've written that they did it for the money - the game will make a huge profit and TT will get a share of that. Wonderful for them. I just replied to all the people who said that we should cut them a slack - no, we shouldn't. There are no upsides for GAMERS when it comes to that type of crap. And making such a bad game spoils one's reputation - the decision each developer should make is: do I want to make loads of money now or do I want to make even more money in a while by steadily producing quality titles. It's obvious which way TT went - compare it to Blizzard who make money because of their brand alone - I mean, WoW isn't a particularly good or original MMORPG - it is so popular because everything with Blizzard on it means quality - and if it's a popular franchise like the *Craft line then all the better.

I'm not sure why I'm writing this anyway if the other side of the discussion, yes, I mean YOU Freelancepolice, chooses to post only short, meaningless and offensive replies.

The first Transformers game was really good fun. Frustrating as hell as when you went to replay levels you'd completed to get more of the items as they then ramped up the difficulty level. But I still can't believe they got those graphics out of the PS2.

True the platforming bits were rubbish but otherwise it was fantastic and a really good licensed product. Driving over the waterfall, transforming in mid-air into robot form and then shooting most of the robots on the other side before transforming just before I landed and drove through the rest was one of 'those' gaming moments.

ok. I tried at a mate's place. It's as shallow as a hot blond, but it's also as flashier as. So..., I'm going to buy it.
It's only money after all. I deserve a treat, me thinks.

I think it deserves the 3. Its fun destroying things and the animation when you transform is really nice. Nothing more to see here.

"I think it deserves the 3. Its fun destroying things and the animation when you transform is really nice. Nothing more to see here. "

i think this is why i cant seem to trade this game in...they look really, really nice.... and theres the g1 optimus *sigh*.... theres a few other issues this review doesnt point out like how in one section using turbo seems to slow you down when youre supposed to be going as fast as you can through tunnels... and the knocking you constantly out of the ring youre always being tied to....

actually im gonna ditch this rubbish!

The wait goes on for a perfect Transformers game (on a decent system).

@sharpfish

until a "real" game designer takes hold of a franchise like transformers, we'll continue getting the same drivel that entertains for 20 minutes before making us bring the game back to the store saying the disc won't load, hoping the staff are too confused to know what to do and refund you the difference.

Who cares if it's crap? It'll sell bucketloads anyway. It's not like games like these end up buried in a landfill somewhere in the desert you know.

@ Metalfish

Well spotted.

Jesus if you're going to try and defend this shit at least hide your name (in email address) from your profile.

Or I suspect that you already had but got caught out when the other night they reset some of the forum and the privacy settings were changed, thus everyone's email address became viewable unless you resave them.

The DS version is pretty fun, if a bit unfair at times.

Lim-dul,

You weren't party to any of the discussions, publisher directionals, property holder guidance, well, actually none of it.

Working for a AAA publisher on a AAA movie license is a totally different notion to creating something of love, for yourself, without mounting pressures of time and content-limitation.

I don't work for TT or Acti and I don't know the detail - but I can very much imagine the detail having 20yrs experience on my back.

L33t speak too, oh you clever, clever boy.

Licensed games aren't going to go away and they rarely serve the hard-core gaming market, so why the fuss.

Of course developers working on commercial projects 'do it for money' what do you expect? That's about as obvious as you can get. Have a think about it when you get into the big wide world, am sure if, when you get hired by McDonalds, you'll be doing it for the money and not the odd free apple-pie.

They would also try to make it as good as they can, for the market that the publisher requested, in the time & budget they had to work with.

On commercial games such as this, the royalty share is generally much less than with original titles and large scale modern developers need to earn income to keep running, they're not all lounging around chewing the cud, waiting for the next beautiful idea to drop from the heavens.

Lets face it, the game was always going to be poor. Still get to smash things up as a big robot. I might still pick this up when it becomes really cheep. No way am I paying full price for this game.

"It seems even lobbing around in the PS3 launch title Mobile Suit Gundam: Target in Sight is a better proposition than this game."

Surely its not that bad.... nothing can be as bad as Mobile Suit Gundam!!!!

Oh well, we will have to wait a few more years before someone does a good game. I still thought that the one a few years back were not that good either. One day we will get a good one. Maybe EA will do one.... then we know it will be decent!!!

Naa.. we dont want EA doing a version. Then it will become standard average fair. We want an ace game :-D Personally I would want it cartoon style like the cartoon.

Someone should make games for all the old cartoons..... dungeons and dragons... pole position etc..... how ace would that be??

At least we would know that it would be decent if EA did the game.... yeah.. it would not be the best game ever. But would be good and solid. tbh... I would take that right now. Instead of the poor version we are about to get.

EA have messed up Harry Potter... which I was really looking forward too... so if they can mess that up then Transformers would be not better!!

The new one is naff... we all no it., but what did we expect... its a game based on a movie... they are always a bit on the naff side.

Movie tie ins are not always naff. Just most of them :-) Easy money for the developer though. At the end of the day they are there to make money..... would transformers make more money if it was a great game??.... yeah... probally... but enough to justify a much bigger team and more resources... probally not.

They banged out a rushed game to get it out of the way... so they could concentrate on the next star wars lego game. Which im really looking forward too.

they have messed up harry potter because the book is not very good. I went to see the film last night. I was bored right the way though!!!...... I would not really recomend it to anyone who is not a harry fan.... I know you all are!!!

"Working for a AAA publisher on a AAA movie license is a totally different notion to creating something of love, for yourself, without mounting pressures of time and content-limitation. "

Appreciate what you're saying, but you have to have some self respect when it comes to creating work... No? This game is dire. It's actually taking the piss out of the consumer that is paying good money for a game that is 'linked' to a summer blockbuster movie. I'd be ashamed to have my company linked to a below par game that is basically 'broken'. If licensed games are this shit, they should be given away for free as promotion for the film or at a mega budget price.

Its the same old same old though. Until the consumer stops buying this shite it will keep getting made.

L33t speak too, oh you clever, clever boy.

Of course developers working on commercial projects 'do it for money' what do you expect? That's about as obvious as you can get. Have a think about it when you get into the big wide world, am sure if, when you get hired by McDonalds, you'll be doing it for the money and not the odd free apple-pie.

On commercial games such as this, the royalty share is generally much less than with original titles and large scale modern developers need to earn income to keep running, they're not all lounging around chewing the cud, waiting for the next beautiful idea to drop from the heavens.

Wonderful attempt at trying to patronize me. I'm sorry to inform you that I actually graduated from university and work both as a translator and a reporter for, guess what, two gaming magazines. I don't need to be told that publishers do it for the money because that's exactly what I've said.

How do you explain, however, that some companies can do completely without movie tie-ins? And I'm speaking about smaller studios as well. I can just repeat what I've said before even if I got the notion that you're either too dumb to understand what I'm saying or just posting to offend me. TT made a decision - they decided to do a movie tie-in. They are professionals at what they are doing so they knew EXACTLY how much time they'd need to make a good game - it's not their first title after all. I'm sure they tried to do a good game but they KNEW that this goal couldn't be achieved under pressure from the movie industry. They decided to make money and spoil their reputation - OK, we know that software developers do it for the money but some sell themselves like cheap bitches and some don't.

Nobody forced TT into accepting the contract so they shouldn't be excused for making a crappy game - that's all. All this bullshit with "they needed the money" and stuff is, well, just bullshit. TT isn't even that small a developer. They had at least two major hits with Lego Star Wars and there are LOADS of smaller companies that struggle to keep up in the gaming industry - yet they don't produce movie tie-ins and won't produce movie tie-ins unless they are absolutely sure that they can make a good game out of them.

Besides - like I said before producing rushed crappy titles just spoils your reputation. It's a typical thing for short-sighted, greedy developers who want to make easy money but don't think about the future. These times, when brands are one of the most valuable commodities a company can have, one's good reputation is far more profitable than games that'll sell many copies over a short period of time even though they're crappy.

"Plenty of decent movie game tie ins have had the same thing happen to them (Van Helsing, Ghost Rider, FF:ROTSS, X Men, SM3). Heck, it was especially evident wih SM3...it was the same as SM2 which got great reviews, but improved massively, which then meant it scored lower? I still don't get that logic. "

Sorry, but you are dead wrong about SM3. Not played the others you mentioned so will not comment on those, but SM3 was terrible.

I actually loved SM2 and bought SM3 solely on the basis of that, and if SM3 was the exact same as SM2 -like you incorrectly said it was - then it would've been great. It wasn't.
The swinging was essentially the same, if not better. But the main crux of the game - the combat - was one of the most broken and frustrating things I've ever experienced in modern video gaming. Not really much of a problem with the thugs (this was actually somewhere near to 'fun', but not quite), but in the clear unfair lack of balancing and apparent lack of playtesting in the majority of the bosses.
It became something you had to endure in order to get to the point where you can access the symbiote suit. Once I'd got that suit and did a few more missions, I gave up. I couldn't take it anymore. The fights weren't hard, in fact most were easy, but were rendered artificially overlong and mostly luck based (counter system was at times hit and miss as to whether it actually does what you ask it to).

That's not even mentioning the terrible way in which the storyline was dealt with. I'm not talking about the scenes not being the same as the film, but in that it was blatantly clear that entire scenes from within the game were cut out leading to one of the most ridiculously poorly dealt with storyline narratives since the advent of big budget video game production.
For example, Spidey suddenly knowing exactly who Sandman was and that he killed his uncle, without ever apparently having met him or even knowing of his existence.

In fact I think the reviews were disappointingly easy on the game, mostly citing the overly hit and miss and frustrating luck based element of the combat. Not mentioning the aforementioned pathetically lazy, and blatantly unfinished story cuts, and the apparant zero playtesting of a lot of the boss fights (New Goblin and the first Kraven come to mind....)

But if you actually liked the game, then good for you. But don't go saying the reviews were wrong just because you have low standards when it comes to games.

Lim, with such well balanced and informed scrutiny of the industry, your gaming press bosses must be highly delighted. Congratulations for avoiding Ronald and co.

It's a commercial, production led industry, not an art fantasy. TT can't obviously just sit there knocking out SW Lego all day and every day. Running a sizeable dev is a very costly business.

I can assure you that your view of indy devs is so far off the mark it's untrue. For most indies (esp. small ones with little critical mass) the real game is all about surviving and being able to hold your head high enough water to hope to make the prototype that's going to break the endless (and thankless) work-for-hire cycle - and then you have the fight for the IP rights etc etc.

Greedy devs? Stupid, ill-informed lazy writing I say.

Maybe you should think Greedy Publishers, they're the ones snapping up these kind of licenses.

Incidentally, the devs who don't do licenses typically have their own IP, or are publisher owned, with a share in the IP or so. New IP is few and far between these days, chart sales typically demonstrate that the mass market isn't actually all that bothered.

You know what? I thought about writing a long reply to your post but after reading your lame-ass intro, quote: Lim, with such well balanced and informed scrutiny of the industry, your gaming press bosses must be highly delighted. Congratulations for avoiding Ronald and co., I decided that you're just not worth replying to since you're only some guy with self-esteem problems letting his frustration out by playing smart on the internet.

I said what I had to say and people who are REALLY smart and not just pretending to be, like you, will probably agree with me - a lame game is a lame game no matter what and the guys who made it should be held responsible for letting crap out on the market - no matter the reason.

P.S. I haven't mentioned indie developers anywhere - I mentioned smaller developers. And smaller developers often do sign contracts with big publishers so they can't be considered "indie".

P.P.S. TT can't obviously just sit there knocking out SW Lego all day and every day. True - they could be making some good games instead. NOT movie tie-ins.

P.P.P.S. Greedy publishers? Sure they are, so what? We're not speaking about publishers here. Dev studios agreeing on working on projects like movie tie-ins do it for the money so they could be described as greedy as well. A respectable dev studio wouldn't accept an offer to make such a crappy game, which I've said like a thousand times before if you just read my posts instead of thinking up new ways to insult me, you dork.

EOT on my side. Although I bet that spudge will want to have the last word, maybe with some insulting post. Good that I won't have to read it.

-> ignore poster

I think we can all agree this is not the greatest game ever not even close (well, still a good choice among PS3 titles, but not for the beautiful machine), but one thing seems very, very wrong, this game's as bad as Bionicle Heroes plus some much nicer aesthetics - Bionicle scored 6.
Why ?

Lim you are a fruitcake. If you were a half decent journalist you would know that Spadge has a ton of experience running a small and independent developer for many many years.

Still, why let reality impinge on your world view? It can be inconvenient when trying to construct grand, sweeping, idiotic diatribes.

And what exactly has Spadge's running an indie studio have to do with TT producing a crappy game? 0_o

Dear oh dear. Just accept that you don't really know what you are talking about. You are starting off in games journalism, a bit of humility might serve you well.

whats SM2/3?

Spider-Man 2 and 3 I assume.

Wow! a 3. To think my aunt almost picked this one up for me along with Motorstorm. The movie wasnt bad conciderin what it's about but come on 3!

>"And what exactly has Spadge's running an indie studio have to do with TT producing a crappy game? 0_o"

It means he has more knowledge in the development process than you do, therefore his comments carry more weight, knowledge, experience and truth than yours.

Can`t believe this hasn`t been mentioned yet :

Well done to EG for giving an honest review of the game, even though the site is plastered with advertising for the game. Would have been very easy to hand out a 6 or 7 and fobb us off with "for fans of the film / genre".

Has there ever actually been a decent movie tie-in?

People mention Chronicles of Riddick, but its not actually tied to the movie: its a prelude to it.

Making tie-ins is a quick buck these days and it helps that you dont have to write a storyline for the game, as you just copy the script from the film, which obviously takes away most of the scope for any original content.

We should all just face facts though - most of (if not all) tie-ins are shite, but they'll still continue to be thrown out because they continue to sell. Until they stop making money, theres bugger all that any of us can do. Moaning on here to other people who feel the same way isnt going to help.

And I do feel that TT should take the blame if this is as bad as its said to be. They developed it, so its their baby. If the film was bad (which I hear it isnt) then the blame would be with, primarily the director and his crew, not with whoever actually owns the licence for Transformers.

Oh and good review. I assume the 3 was for the visuals and the fact that there may actually be a minute amount of fun to be had by this game - albeit totally mindless fun!

It means he has more knowledge in the development process than you do, therefore his comments carry more weight, knowledge, experience and truth than yours.

When it comes to the process of designing games I would agree with you. However, we're not talking about the development process. Once again I repeat that we're talking about TT having made a shitty game purely for money and the fact that they shouldn't be excused for doing so since it was solely their decision and their responsibility.

That's all I was saying the whole time while Spadge was trying to cure his complexes by posting offensive comments which had barely anything to do with the topic at hand - more along the lines "you're a kid, you have no money, you don't know what you're talking about" - strong statements, though somewhat lacking in merit and not based on any factual knowledge.

Oh whatever, but if you're serious about journalism (and at least as serious as myself about running a games studio) I'd advise you to grow up fast (you're not showing any signs of maturity whatever you might think) and take a deep breath before spewing so much ill-informed emotive nonsense on a subject you CLEARLY have no actual experience other than what you think must be the case and therefore actually is. Perception is reality and all that? Well, actually, no it isn't.

For the record, you really do not know what you're talking about with regards to the motives, reasoning and running of a games studio so just get over it and quit making the accusations.

It's perfectly fine to not know, it's called experience and learning and you'll get it as you mosey on through life and over time - there's no simple fast track.

There are many things I don't know the inside track on, but I'd rather find out or learn more than postulate and kick off in public and leave myself open to wanton abuse by my peers - many of whom can show some kind of decorum in these matters, or indeed may have much better experience of the subject.

Bottom line on this, or for that matter, pretty much anything is; if it isn't for you, then move along. If it's not hurting you, or your family, then ignore it. Life's too short to get knotted up by some notion that your civil liberties and sensibilities are being raped simply because two companies did business that you, for some reason, find objectionable.

BTW I've made no comment on the product, the review or anything as such. I'm merely outlining that things happen for certain reasons - commercial factors being the driver. I certainly wouldn't consider this as TT's Baby (I think that's unlikely in the extreme) since it's a 3rd party IP. Babies only occur (largely speaking) at Devs where you're there at the conception and you own all the love involved. I'd also imagine that this title is certainly not aimed at the hard-core, few movie tie-ins are.

Failing all that, if it's all too obvious and you are really smart, then go set up a start-up and show everyone how it's done, once you get bored of blazing a trail in the writing world that is. I'm sure your high-ideals will be respected by everyone in the tremendously short life-span you'll enjoy that is development life without any commercial nous.

Reputation and kudos is nice to have; we have a little bit, but most of it comes from within the industry, which is where it's best valued. Reputation of the studio generally has very little influence on the commercial mass market, its just a hard core thing, with only a few exceptions.

Lim-Dul is right. Crap is crap, and TT make junk, Lego SW included. And it's a good thing to comment on why crap is crap, and crap-makers are crap-makers, even if 'civil liberties' are not being 'raped'.

Spadge, if you're going to demonstrate idiocy by saying "why don't YOU make a better game" (a nonsensical argument) to Lim-Dul, or you should at least tell us who you are and what games you have made yourself, if you think it somehow supports your defense of this garbage (it doesn't).

The rest of you sycophants who are saying 'spadge is teh game-developer therefore whatever he says is (somehow) more cogent need to look up 'argument to authority' and understand logical fallacies.

Twinfalls for Prime Minister

Twinfalls for nob-head. What on earth is up wit da yoof?

*sigh*

>What on earth is up wit da yoof?

I think this is a good example of the perils of over-specialisation in the school system. It seems they can either read or write. Write or comprehend. Comprehend or construct an argument...now if only there was some way of multitasking so that all of these things could be combined in any single hour of the day.

Rise of the Robots!!!! Man i haven't heard that name in years!

If you look at spadge's profile... you will see he has bags of experience.. and thus.. knows what he is talking about.

My dad bought this on the cheap. It's alright I suppose, but pretty much all critisism in the review is entirely valid. The game is broken, but I can eke some fun out of blasting stuff. Not much though.