It's a damn Kung Fu Panda

by Alisha Karabinus { Jan 18th 2008 at 4:00PM }

These days, it seems that when someone makes an animated film, someone else clearly has to come along and make a game, and even kung fu pandas aren't exempt from this rule. Though, considering that getting your beat on can be pretty fun in games, we hear, it might make sense in this case.

There's just one problem. Licensed games? Generally not so great. But that's okay. You can still take a moment to shake your head over these screenshots (or the movie's trailer), muttering, "It's a damn kung fu panda." Or maybe that was just our reaction.

Gallery: Kung Fu Panda

Tags: activision, kung-fu-panda, licensed, movie

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

Vogelfrei @ Jan 18th 2008 4:10PM

You know what licensed game was far better than it should have been? Cool Spot. A game based on a 7Up marketing campaign. With that concept, it should have been so bad as to be unplayable. But it was clever, creative, and addictive.

TriptychR @ Jan 18th 2008 10:08PM

It *was* really cool; until you got to the end and discovered you went through all that time and effort for no real ending at all.

obo @ Jan 18th 2008 10:28PM

AVOID THE NOID

Unbreakable_idea @ Jan 18th 2008 4:16PM

Are these definitely confirmed Wii in-game screens? It'll be pretty sad if a licensed panda game ends up in the top ten for best graphics on the Wii. Seriously. Look at the art style of the background (almost MP3-esque) and all of the shadowing effects. Why don't 95% of our games look this nice?

HellsHammer @ Jan 18th 2008 4:20PM

I'm sure others are tired of this type of thing, besides just me.

Computer animation of some cutesy little animals with b-list celebrities who have time off from telling shit jokes in between clips on VH1 countdown, getting into some mild shenanigans with edgy humor for the parents who got suckered in, yet again. Followed by two sequels. Followed by a terrible game on multiple platforms.

Why do kid's movies HAVE to be made into games? I don't get it.

Mr Khan @ Jan 18th 2008 4:42PM

I say Shrek gets a free pass on being spited for that, though, since Shrek started this whole trend (Toy Story pioneered the mass market CG Movie, but Shrek basically put an end to real animation period)

Trash like Madagascar or Bee Movie, however (which aren't exactly trash, but are insanely formulaic) do not

HellsHammer @ Jan 18th 2008 5:33PM

Antz, Monster's Inc., A bugs Life, etc. are all in the same boat. Shrek is no different, to me. Eddie Murphy and Mike Myers are just as washed up as the rest of these voice actors.

My real issue is not the movies, but the garbage excuse for games made because of them. Anyone who played the Fantastic Four game knows what I'm talking about.

CSP @ Jan 18th 2008 7:02PM

oh i mean come on. The one and only legendary panda with the knowledge of martial arts is Genma Saotome, the son of the half male half female Ranma Saotome. Did someone from dreamworks accidentally watch the first episode of a 20 year old series and decided to make a movie with that character?

This is why the US are going to make cartoons for kids only. Their creators have given up.

gorecki @ Jan 18th 2008 8:02PM

There is a lot of reason to be sceptical about movie tie-ins, for good reason. However, we should always try to keep an open mind about thes things. On the odd occasion when a movie game is actually good, it can become a must-own for console owners. The licence will always shift a few copies, and any good game will always sell a bit due to reviews and word of mouth, so combining the two will make a hugely successful game. Playing a a character that you are familiar with from a film will always add a bit of extra magic to a game.

So if developers spend some time getting tie-in games right, it wuld pay off big time. Goldeneye is an obvious example, but I remember really enjoying The Lion King game too, and that sold loads.