Why Do We Love Games Based on Movies, TV and Books?

drewcula wrote: Batman. Who doesn't love Batman?

doopy doopy doo, just walking by, nothing to see here

I have to disagree, Matt. Maybe 15 years ago that was what we were looking for, but for me, personally, I’m looking for how a game tackles an IPs themes more than how it handled an unfolding story. We can entirely blame GF9 for this. I’d go as far as to say that they changed how licensed games are designed and how we think about them. Knizia did it before them, but GF9 made it work on a scale he doesn’t really work in.

The reasons I love Star Trek: Ascendancy or Firefly or Rebellion is that the distilled, basic, more universal elements of those IPs is present in those games. I think that’s why Doctor Who is ultimately a failure, the themes of Doctor Who are a bit more nebulous and hard to latch on to and communicate in a game. Ghostbusters when you really get down to it is about man defeating God with science, which not only does the game ignore but goes with a poor design to boot.

At the very least, an atmosphere is essential. I played Hellboy for the first time last night and I absolutely loved it. If had the atmosphere and pacing of a Hellboy comic, packed with moments tied to specific characters that only that character could be responsible for. Ghostbusters stumbled hard here as well, as comedy is something that happens accidentally is a game and is never funny over repeat plays.

Matt, I don't jive with your problem.
In my instances of IP games above, I get the sense of surprise, story, and strategy.
They occur in a "What If?" context, and I love it.
Two examples from the past week;
1) 6 player game of Dune, and House Atreides got their asses handed to them with all Leaders off to the Tanks before turn 3. The Messiah Paul was waiting to be cloned while the Freemen and Emperor struck an alliance and won the game.
2) 4 player game of Batman: GCC. Batman and Catwoman defused a bunch of bombs only to be destroyed by a juiced-up Bane. The World's Greatest Detective felled by 'roid rage. Nightwing took out the drugger with dual batons for a win.

Interestingly, from a perspective of story "length," the examples above range from long too short. I would imagine the Dune scenario occurred over months while the Batman scenario only lasted minutes.

In both cases, the players did not know what was going to happen. The outcome was not predetermined. Players knew their characters, their motives, their strengths and weaknesses. Their interactions with other players developed in real time.

I guess the same would be true with any IP RPG. But in my examples of excellence, I'm focusing on miniature-centric board games (Dune and Murder She Wrote the chit-tasic exception), because that's another way I enjoy IPs. I like the toys. I like to handle them. I like to look at them. I like to paint them.

I'm going to spend my Sunday painting those toys. Off I go! But I'll part with this; I dig these IPs enough for repeat experiences. When I rewatch a film, or reread a book - I'm enjoying on a different level. Not better or worse, just different.

Barnes! When we cross paths, I'll make certain* I have a copy of Epic Duels. You can play Holmes if I play Dracula.

*Presuming it's an okay reimplementation. A week before I demo it, I can say I'm not pleased that the character side-kicks are chits instead of miniatures.

Movies, TV, and Books give everyone a common foundation of the "lay of the land" before the game starts -- it's easier to get non-gamers interested. I'm a sucker for Ghostbusters and most things related to Dragonlance (in fact, the three board games aren't that bad). I like Star Wars (although that is overplayed by now) and most Victorian Horror (Dracula, Frankenstein). Superhero wise, Spiderman draws most of my interest. My biggest weakness would probably be something related back to real literature (which I would count Dracula and Frankenstein in, as well as LotR) -- like a Moby Dick game or the like. If someone made a Picture of Dorian Gray game that was decent, I would probably buy it immediately. Or a Gormenghast game -- that would be awesome.


I used Ghostbusters as an example in a lecture on Friday on how absurd academia is -- specifically when Ray tells Peter: "Personally, I liked the university. They gave us money and facilities, we didn't have to produce anything! You've never been out of college! You don't know what it's like out there! I've worked in the private sector. They expect results."

Josh Look wrote: Ghostbusters when you really get down to it is about man defeating God with science, which not only does the game ignore but goes with a poor design to boot.

Ghostbusters is just good on so many levels -- one of my favorite things is that the characters don't really have an arc. They finish the movie just the way they started it. I like it just as much as when I saw it in 1985, with the exception of maybe thinking that Peter is more creepy (before I kind of thought he was kind of jerk).

I don't think that the game is really based on the movie was much as the cartoon and the recent comics. And, I only think that the kickstarter edition is worth playing -- that has a lot of nice little additions, like having to capture Samhain with the headlights of Ecto-1. Dealing with the different "boss" ghosts with different mechanisms adds a variability that non-kickstarter version really needs.