I just bought it today on impulse for the XBOX 360, before seeing this thread. I don't think it's terrible- certainly better than the demo for Pirates 3, and loads more fun than Superman Returns.

Superman Returns, Pirates 3, and Spider-Man 3 are all flawed movie tie-in games. But at the same time, there's some aspect of them (flying in Superman, the black suit in Spider-Man 3, using the Wii remote to swordfight in the Wii version of Pirates) that give them some level of playability. Transformers has nothing going for it. The Autobots and Decepticons actually look really good, which makes it all the more tragic that you cannot do anything interesting with them. This really is one of the worst games I've ever played.

Why is it so hard to make a good movie tie-in? Do the developers put their interns on the development team or something? Do the developers feel too creatively tied down because they have to follow the plot of the movie? Do they know it will sell because of the name alone and thus put in no effort? Games like Chronicles of Riddick prove that it's not only possible to make a good tie-in, it's possible to make a tie-in that becomes one of the best games a console has. Didn't this developer also make Lego Star Wars, easily one of the most fun and creative movie tie-in games ever made?

This even a question? First of all, quality has no effect on sales, as evidenced in even this thread with everyone talking about Spider-Men and X-Man games and so forth; apparently, people buy them just because it has some comic book character on the cover. Secondly, developers have to have the game finished on the shelf to tie-in to the movie. There was an interview with Retro Studios recently and they were asked what it was like being a Western developer working under a Japanese company.. their answer? Something along the lines of "American companies work under time constraints, Japanese companies work under quality constraints."

I think those are certainly factors, but there are good tie-in games. Hell, Spider-Man 3 was a semi-decent game. Obviously time was the reason it wasn't made better. But sometimes even tie-in games get delayed, and when they came out, they still aren't good, so I don't know.

The Japanese are no less guilty in the area of making mediocre licensed games (that the populace still buys anyway): look at all the Bandai licensed games that I own.

There's the deadline crunch, there's the "it'll sell no matter the quality" factor, the "licenses are for kids" factor, the "we spent all our money on the license" factor, etc., etc. Really, a licensed game is just a way to make a quick buck... they usually won't make it into a franchise unless the movie or property is really huge (they have no guarantee that they'll have the license for any movie sequels), and the game will most likely be massively discounted as soon as the movie leaves the public eye. And then there are sometimes huge limitations levied by the original property owners (like how they wouldn't let the developers use Neo in the first matrix game).

Spiderman 3 sucking is what really gets me... Spiderman 2 was great.

Misery loves company

Time for some new friends.

wow, i was seriously considering getting this on wednesday, guess ill have to pass.

I don't know, I still want it but not for more than $20.