Wallace and Gromit Game Preview

MBCook writes "Gamers.com has a preview of the game based on the upcoming movie (due in 2005). The preview includes 10 screenshots and some descriptions of game play. The game is expected to be released by the end of the year for the PS2 and the X-Box. The player controls Gromit in an attempt to stop Feathers McGraw from using the inhabitants of the local zoo in his jewel smuggling operations. With levels, like in Sly Cooper, that are designed to be more than a 2D platformer on rails, this looks like a game to look forward to." I've got patent pending on that!

Comments

a question for all you 3d developers out there

[smylie]

I notice that in the screen shots of, (for example), the tractor, the wheels are not round but rather a 13-sided semi-circle shaped object.

Is it still too computationally expensive to draw a proper 3D circle in a game like this using todays hardware?

I realise a "true" circle is probably impossible/impractical, but even a 50-sided circle would probably be enough to fool the eye. Or would this have such a negative effective on FPS that it wouldn't be worth it?

Re:Huh?

[Dr.Enormous]

Consider a live movie: you get the actors in place for a shot, and then they do it while the camera rolls.

Now stop motion: You get the "actors" in place for the shot, then you take a frame or three, then move them a little, then another couple frames, then move them a little. And consider that each frame--even if it gets used--is a small fraction of a second. If you want to do it well, it takes time.

Re:No GameCube version?

[iainl]

"Is the GameCube really that abysmal that it can't handle a platform game?"

Probably more like "Does the XBox not have anything to compete with our new platformer?"

The GameCube has Sunshine, and Wario (plus rumours of Mario 128) on its way. The PS2 has Jak 'n' Daxter (considered by some to be better than Sunshine, even). The XBox has Blinx. I know where I'd release my platform title...

Yes it is suspicious...

[nanojath]

I mean, "Wallace and Gromit... have to free 24 levels worth of imprisoned baby animals..." and yet no GameCube version?

Surprised Hollywood green-lighted long-term projec

[GuyMannDude]

The game, which is based on the movie, is coming out the end of 2003, but the movie isn't being released until 2005? Does it really take that long to do those stop animation films?

As the others have pointed out, this is entirely believable. What really gives me pause to think is that Hollywood was actually interested in such a long-term project! Does anyone know how long it takes to make a traditional animated film? A computer-animated film? How about a live action film? I would guess that in these cases it would take less time. So I'm surprised that Hollywood was willing to look at something that takes multiple years to create. The only thing I can think of is that maybe this stop-motion claymation actually costs less money to make because of the low level of technology. I don't know.

Maybe I'm completely out of touch with how Hollywood does business but I'm surprised that they were willing to invest in a film that wouldn't see the light of day until 2005.

GMD

Bam goes boom

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's hope that they get paid for making the game:

Bam fucked over a load of companies in the companies in the UK by commisioning projects and then refusing to pay for them. The companies went bankrupt and didn't have enough money to sue Bam.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?sect ion_name=pub&aid=204

Let's also hope that Bam doesn't become bankrupt before the game ships - they've been losing cash ever since they started and are now running out of cash to run the company. It'd be slightly surprising if they can stay alive till quarter4 when this game is meant to ship.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?sect ion_name=pub&aid=944

Won't have that charm

[ianscot]

Wallace and Gromit is all about the claymation look, the pacing, and the cinematic feel of the whole thing. Judging by these screen shots, I'm not seeing any of that.

Think of Feathers McGraw, the penguin, in the animated short -- he had no facial expression at all, but they made him sinister just by letting the camera linger an extra split second on that blank face, you know? How do you catch that feeling in a game? Cut scenes before you go to the standard-platform-jumper play? What-ever.

Kind of sad. They'd make a better game by having Wallace build his whacked-out inventions to overcome various obstacles, wouldn't they?

Re:Surprised Hollywood green-lighted long-term pro

[j-b0y]

I guess there's a few reasons why Hollywood would want to do this a Wallace and Gromit film:

• Cheap. The fixed cost is pretty low, and the keeping the animators supplied with clay and film is a lot less expensive than top-earning actors/actresses, huge sfx sequences, expensive sound sets and location shooting.
• No egos. Nick Park is is one of the most self-effacing multi-Oscar winners you can find. Peter Sallis is not going to throw a fit because his trailer only has one jacuzzi.
• Infinite Merchandising. The BBC has been (for a state-run organisation) extremely effective at the merchandising thing. And the merchandising opportunities are directly proportional to the imagination of the creators

I was worried about Chicken Run, as I thought the combination of Mel Gibson and Disney was going to overwhelm the charm and subtlety (and, let's face it, Englishness) of Aardvark's films. As it turned out, Gibson seemed to understand and was completely cool with the Aardvark style; Disney knew when to butt out. Brownie points all round.