A Spirited 15 Rounds ...

NearTheEars

Well-Known Member
Disney getting out of video games themselves and now simply licensing out their IP was a pretty stupid move especially now that Star Wars is stuck with EA, one of the worst publishers out there for their practices. There's a reason they were voted worst company in America multiple times. I remember how cool Star Wars 1313 looked which was then canceled because Disney shut down LucasArts.


The biggest loss for me though was Epic Mickey. Talk about an amazing concept if only they had the right talent behind it. Now it'll likely never see the light of day again with a well deserved reboot.


I’m far from a true gamer as I rarely play anything outside of sports games, but I have Battlefront and think it looks beautiful. There’s not much depth to the game, but it certainly can be immersive. Unfortunately I’m terrible at it, so I don’t last too long without getting killed by the people that clearly spend their entire day playing it.
 

Pixieish

Well-Known Member
Disney getting out of video games themselves and now simply licensing out their IP was a pretty stupid move especially now that Star Wars is stuck with EA, one of the worst publishers out there for their practices. There's a reason they were voted worst company in America multiple times. I remember how cool Star Wars 1313 looked which was then canceled because Disney shut down LucasArts.


The biggest loss for me though was Epic Mickey. Talk about an amazing concept if only they had the right talent behind it. Now it'll likely never see the light of day again with a well deserved reboot.


That too...such a shame!
 

Nickels5

Well-Known Member
I have news for you, in todays screwed up world if you don't do this you will be REPLACED by someone who will.
Again your wrong, I don't work 7 days a week and my job is 100% secure not too mention I'm in leadership position overseeing a group of 25 people. Sometimes when you have no idea what you are talking about it's best to say nothing.
 

Pixieish

Well-Known Member
One quick comment on today's second piece in the LAT on DLR and the political gamesmanship in Anaheim: the story wasn't overly notable for what was in there (not that it wasn't interesting), but rather for what wasn't mentioned at all.

And before you assume you know where I am going with this, ask yourself why that may be and what each party in this drama is looking for ... right now.

I think I might be missing what is "missing" from the article? It touches base on a lot of issues.

Unfortunately, the gamesmanship happens here too, but for us it's a nuclear power plant. Decades ago some schmuck thought it would be a good idea to end the plant's responsibility for real estate taxes in 2012 (I think that's when), so the town is now out millions per year in real estate taxes.
 

PorterRedkey

Well-Known Member
I regret to announce I am taking a break from the forums for a while since it seems to have devolved into one giant argument and the news from Disney hasn't been too promising lately. I will hopefully be back when things settle down or when there is something new and exciting to talk about.
We all need a break now and then.
I excited about all the "activity" that is happening at WDW, but not necessarily the substance of all the activity. However, remember it just theme parks we are talking about here, not cancer.
 

PorterRedkey

Well-Known Member
Why do I think Coco is either going to be great or total crap?
Book of Life was so unique and beautifully done. BoL is really unrated in my book. If you missed it like a lot of people, I would highly recommend it.

To me, and I hope I am wrong, Coco seems to be uninspired and derivative. The storyline is similar to Book of Life and the cheap "dog who loves bones is in a place with skeletons" has been done over and over. If the dog/skeleton play is an example of the film's humor, I fear the worst.

I know Pixar trailers are not the best, so maybe I will be surprised. I have been looking forward to this movie for a long time, so I am hoping it will at least be beautiful to watch on the big screen, even if the story doesn't hit the right note.
 

asianway

Well-Known Member
The more I hear about SW:GE, the less excited I get. I once thought at the very least we would get two of the top attractions in the world. That sure is looking more like one great attraction and one average one unless you're a SW crazed fan and like everything Disney does with the IP.
They still seriously going ahead with the role playing aspect in the land? I imagine they hotel will have it. For a month or so anyway.

Didnt last long in Pandora - if it ever existed at all....
 

FullSailDan

Well-Known Member
Agreed 100%! Electronic Arts has been in the gutter for years. Disney is foolish to not suck it up and find some people with passion for gaming and setting them loose on all their IPs.

Game development is a horrible business to be in right now. The cost and time of development has skyrocketed, and one bad game can completely bankrupt a studio. They are being smart to farm it out especially if they don't have the talent. EA is a horrible company to work for.(full disclosure: I interned for them out of college and ran away as fast as I could once the internship ended) However, they do know how to control budgets and deliver on time. Something very important when dealing with licensed IP games that need to capitalize on other concurrent media. They certainly could go with another company, but I imagine many of them either A: don't meet Disney's requirements to deem them capable/reliable or B: don't want to touch that with a ten foot pole for a variety of reasons.

The only area Disney could really be competitive in for video game development is telling new and unique stories. They can use their IP ala Kingdom Hearts, but that's also very risky. See: Epic Mickey.
 

PorterRedkey

Well-Known Member
They still seriously going ahead with the role playing aspect in the land? I imagine they hotel will have it. For a month or so anyway.

Didnt last long in Pandora - if it ever existed at all....
FWIW, I think they might be embellishing on what the role-playing aspect of the land will be. It wouldn't be the first time.

I do think the hotel will stay true to the concept. They may water it down if it isn't popular, but role-playing, or at least buying into being on a spaceship is kind of the point. You buy your 3 day/2 night space cruise at the Star Wars resort. You basically are in a self-contained facility (as far as the guest are concerned) like a cruise ship. You must stay on the cruise ship when you are in space. I could see a stop at the SW:GE "port", but other than that you will be on the spaceship.

Can anyone confirm that this is the current idea?

If it does work this way, Disney will need to be very clear about what the experience entails! However, the role-playing could be just wearing a robe over your clothes to dinner. If you don't wear them they may kid you about your alien clothes, but nothing will be required. You may be given a role at some point if you want to, but I bet you can also just be space passengers who can just enjoy the show.

Can you say any more about how this all might work?
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
In terms of Galaxy's Edge ... Spirit isn't the biggest fan of the franchise so .... still sounds like two great rides. Of course one might be 'meh' about it if they don't care very much about the franchise. I also think it was much smarter to develop a new land rather than try to replicate one from the movies. I know there's been some criticism on here because of that but I think it was the smartest move. They'd have to limit themselves to one and it would never meet the expectations of the uber fans so a generic space port that captures the essence of the franchise was the smarter move. Most won't care like we do on here.
 

Disneyhead'71

Well-Known Member
There is a VERY TRUE point to this narrative though. (Also the coddling started long before millennials.)

Children are not being allowed to experience disappointment. Children are not being allowed to experience fear. Children are padded to the gills in order to avoid being hurt (and likewise laws are being passed to protect idiot-humans from themselves and their horrible decisions), parents are showing up at colleges demanding to know why their child didn't get an A and are calling potential employers to ask why their child didn't get the job.

The world in general is raising a bunch of coddled, spoiled, temper tantrum-throwing people who couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag. If it is mildly unpleasant, parents feel the need to protect their child from it and all that is doing is setting those children up for failure. (I think it's safe to say that we're seeing a surge of these kinds of people in the parks as well.)

Oh, and previous generations taking a look at subsequent generations is how society deems what needs to change, so there's that, too.
My kids haven't been coddled.

Their parents kind of suck at the whole adulting thing.
 

Pixieish

Well-Known Member
Game development is a horrible business to be in right now. The cost and time of development has skyrocketed, and one bad game can completely bankrupt a studio. They are being smart to farm it out especially if they don't have the talent. EA is a horrible company to work for.(full disclosure: I interned for them out of college and ran away as fast as I could once the internship ended) However, they do know how to control budgets and deliver on time. Something very important when dealing with licensed IP games that need to capitalize on other concurrent media. They certainly could go with another company, but I imagine many of them either A: don't meet Disney's requirements to deem them capable/reliable or B: don't want to touch that with a ten foot pole for a variety of reasons.

The only area Disney could really be competitive in for video game development is telling new and unique stories. They can use their IP ala Kingdom Hearts, but that's also very risky. See: Epic Mickey.

I loved Kingdom Hearts and Epic Mickey - and my older son does too, and we were super bummed when they pulled the rug out from under Disney Infinity (I'm pretty sure we have 90-95% of the figures, and we got the updates as they came out). THAT had massive potential, but infighting between developers/departments put the kibosh on that whole thing (and royally upset a lot of devoted players). We really love the Lego crossover games, but look at what happened between Indy and Pirates - Indy got a two-game series, and Pirates got the cheapo treatment because attention shifted to the next Lego: Harry Potter game.

Look at the app Magic Kingdoms - people love it, even though it's super simple and *sort of* a different spin on the Infinity idea (it's limited to MK, but it's got characters from popular movies and it gets new characters regularly).

Disney Infinity tried to be too much all at once...Disney and players would have been better served if the different brands were kept separate (Disney, Star Wars, and Marvel), and let's face it: no one is going to fall into the "buy this character figure to get it into your game" trap from Disney again and that idea is getting old anyway what with Skylanders, Amiibo, etc. Kingdom Hearts and Lego both rely on IPs owned by companies other than Disney. Magic Kingdoms relies on outside developers (which is fine only because they give it tons of attention), but as a game itself, it's very limited, and no one wants to continuously be forced into buying characters for such a limited game (in almost every new update, there is at least one character that has to be bought using gems, which in turn, are bought with money). Epic Mickey, while a fun game with beautiful graphics was only going to go so far simply because of the nature of the story.

I just think if Disney could learn from past mistakes and build a creative team that combines people with their ear to the ground in terms of gamers and what they want with people who have massive development talents - and combine that with people who know enough about the three big brands, that they could make a killing.

Maybe if they wait it out until development costs go down. I'm really NOT a fan of EA simply because their customer service is so awful (good luck getting any kind of response from them on anything).
 

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
I regret to announce I am taking a break from the forums for a while since it seems to have devolved into one giant argument and the news from Disney hasn't been too promising lately. I will hopefully be back when things settle down or when there is something new and exciting to talk about.

@HMF you will be missed, Agree that news from Disney in large part is downright depressing unless you are a stockholder and even stockholders are not happy as DIS continues to fall vs its peers and the broader market.
 

Pixieish

Well-Known Member
FWIW, I think they might be embellishing on what the role-playing aspect of the land will be. It wouldn't be the first time.

I do think the hotel will stay true to the concept. They may water it down if it isn't popular, but role-playing, or at least buying into being on a spaceship is kind of the point. You buy your 3 day/2 night space cruise at the Star Wars resort. You basically are in a self-contained facility (as far as the guest are concerned) like a cruise ship. You must stay on the cruise ship when you are in space. I could see a stop at the SW:GE "port", but other than that you will be on the spaceship.

Can anyone confirm that this is the current idea?

If it does work this way, Disney will need to be very clear about what the experience entails! However, the role-playing could be just wearing a robe over your clothes to dinner. If you don't wear them they may kid you about your alien clothes, but nothing will be required. You may be given a role at some point if you want to, but I bet you can also just be space passengers who can just enjoy the show.

Can you say any more about how this all might work?

I'm curious about the role-playing too...wouldn't that conflict with no costumes for adults in the parks?
 
Last edited:

Haymarket2008

Well-Known Member
In terms of Galaxy's Edge ... Spirit isn't the biggest fan of the franchise so .... still sounds like two great rides. Of course one might be 'meh' about it if they don't care very much about the franchise. I also think it was much smarter to develop a new land rather than try to replicate one from the movies. I know there's been some criticism on here because of that but I think it was the smartest move. They'd have to limit themselves to one and it would never meet the expectations of the uber fans so a generic space port that captures the essence of the franchise was the smarter move. Most won't care like we do on here.

Totally agree and well said. I think the choice of a new locale was a brilliant idea. There are FAR too many places they could have chosen and it would have been limiting. By creating a specific and new place for these characters and stories to live in, nothing will seem forced or out of place. And regarding Spirit, that is the first time any insider has said anything remotely negative about the attractions, so I'm still holding on to my extreme optimism. The Millennium Falcon attraction was always secondary to the Battle Escape, so I don't mind it being "lesser". But I am sure they both will wow guests.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom