Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

New Ghostbusters Video Game in the Works 204

Next month's issue of Game Informer has a big, familiar symbol on its cover. On their website, they tease the announcement of a brand-new Ghostbusters video game. This isn't some knock-off, either: "Harold Ramis, Bill Murray and Dan Aykroyd are getting back together and revisiting their roles to make a sequel to Ghostbusters 1 and 2 - in video-game form, and we've got the first details. Both Aykroyd and Ramis are teaming up for scriptwriting duties and are going far beyond just the typical licensed add-your-voice-to-the-game-you-had-nothing-to-do-with formula" Commentary on the announcement provided by Rock, Paper, Shotgun.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New Ghostbusters Video Game in the Works

Comments Filter:
  • Does this mean that damn song will be coming back too?
  • The movie came out in 1984. It's the end of 2007 now. Are they hurting that badly for material?
    • There will be people who really like it. I'm really psyched for this game, provided they do a good job, just based on the fact that it's Ghostbusters.
      • by omeomi ( 675045 )
        There will be people who really like it. I'm really psyched for this game, provided they do a good job, just based on the fact that it's Ghostbusters.

        Too bad movie-themed games almost always suck...I'd love to see a good Ghostbusters game, but I don't have much hope that it will be any fun to play.
        • The Sega Genesis version was pretty fun.

          You had your choice of three ghostbusters and each had different abilities. Also, near the end you fought the marshmallow man.
    • Scraping bottom? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by fullmetal55 ( 698310 ) on Thursday November 15, 2007 @05:12PM (#21370237)
      What about that movie that's opening up soon? or has it started already? Beowulf...

      it's based on an epic from 1300 years ago!

      Talk about unoriginal!

      I mean it's 1300 years old! who would want to see those characters in a different medium... /Sarcasm

      • Ghostbusters
        Ghostbusters II
        A couple of games.

        As from your example, there are LITERALLY CENTURIES of material available.

        Yet we seem to keep getting rehashes of the same things. I'm not talking about the same plots. I'm talking movies that were already done.
        • by Fallingcow ( 213461 ) on Thursday November 15, 2007 @06:01PM (#21370937) Homepage
          It seems to me that The Odyssey is begging to have an RPG made based on it. It'd be a little like Chrono Trigger/Cross + God of War. Awesome.

          For that matter, The Iliad (or better yet, the whole Trojan cycle, filling in the gaps where necessary) would make a kick-ass multiplayer hack-n-slash, a bit like Gauntlet meets Dynasty warriors, with control points and a bunch of allied NPCs helping you out. Maybe the ability to call for divine intervention from whichever god happens to be on your side. Damn, that would kick ass.
          • a bit like Gauntlet meets Dynasty warriors
            Isn't Dynasty warriors just gauntlet + Final Fight + Diablo?
      • Beowulf... (Score:2, Offtopic)

        by Moryath ( 553296 )
        has about as much to do with the original story (or even modern revisions) as I, Robot [imdb.com] had to do with the novel or even Asimov's creation.

        And it'll probably be just as shitty a movie too.
      • What about that movie that's opening up soon? or has it started already? Beowulf...

        I'm waiting for the sequel set in medieval times, as portrayed by The Brothers Grimm -- "Hansel und Grendel"

    • by slapout ( 93640 )
      Have you seen what's been coming out of Hollywood lately?
    • by ddrichardson ( 869910 ) on Thursday November 15, 2007 @05:16PM (#21370297) Homepage

      The movie came out in 1984. It's the end of 2007 now. Are they hurting that badly for material?

      The Warriors [imdb.com] came out in 1979 and the game [rockstargames.com] in 2005 yet is one of the best film tie-ins I've ever seen, expanding the story and letting you play through the movie.

      I guess a good game is a good game, maybe when they aren't being rushed out to coincide with the movie's release, not to mention having a cult following.

      • I think the fact that Ramis and Aykroyd have a hand in writing the story for the game says enough: it will be funny...

        The Warriors videogame wasn't even written by the same people and it's a great game! If they can combine solid game programmers with the script they're gonna have for Ghostbusters, it should be an awesome game.

        Now all we need is Sam Raimi to write the script for an Army of Darkness videogame, if they don't simply do the plot from the movie.
    • by vidarh ( 309115 ) <vidar@hokstad.com> on Thursday November 15, 2007 @05:24PM (#21370395) Homepage Journal
      What that means is that those of us who were kids when the movie opened are now right in the middle of the largest gaming demographic, and have lots of disposable cash.

      And why do you think there's been so many superhero movies over the last few years all based on storylines from the 80's? I mean, I've hardly gone to a see a single superhero movie in the last ten years that's not been based heavily on storylines I remember from the comics I bought as a kid.

      The timing is great - both in terms of the people who saw it in the cinemas and all of those of us who were too young and had to wait a few years to see it on TV or video.

      • by Tim C ( 15259 )
        And why do you think there's been so many superhero movies over the last few years all based on storylines from the 80's?

        Because a lot of the people making those movies were kids in the 80s, just like us. It's no coincidence, and it's not just cynical targeting of a given demographic. The people making them are making them because *they* think they're cool too.
    • "The movie came out in 1984. It's the end of 2007 now. Are they hurting that badly for material?"

      There was a surge in popularity for a Ghostbusters game when that demo video flew around the web about a year ago. Ghostbusters is not 'bottom of the barrel', and though the hurting for new material bit may be true, this is hardly proof of it.

      Save this meme for when they announce the Filmation Ghostbusters game. :P

    • This comment doesn't even make sense to me... hurting for material? Are you complaining that they don't make games based on newer movies? Because guess what - they do. Every single movie that has come out in the last 10 years has a game based on it. Each and every damn one. (Personally, I thought that Hairspray: The Game was sorta fun, but got pretty boring and repetitive towards the end.)

      Or are you saying that games based on movies suck in general? If that's the case, then why does the age of the
    • by mblase ( 200735 )
      The movie came out in 1984. It's the end of 2007 now. Are they hurting that badly for material?

      One word: Transformers.
    • Blame Sony. There was going to be a third Ghostbusters movie until the Blair Witch Project came out. Blair Witch made $140,000,000 and had a budget of just $60,000. Sony's executives thought they could follow the Blair Witch model and shelved Ghostbusters 3. The estimated cost of making G3 was $150,000,000.

      There was already a script and lots of ideas. The material was there, and we were never going to get to see it. I hope the game finally lets us see what Sony denied us.
  • by phorm ( 591458 ) on Thursday November 15, 2007 @05:05PM (#21370107) Journal
    I've been saying for years that they should do another movie. Provided that they keep with the spirit (pun not intended) of the first two, modern special effects combined with a good script could make for a great movie.

    Given hollywood's abysmal track record in late-sequals though, I think perhaps it would be better off without any, regardless of whether it is a movie or game.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Applekid ( 993327 )
      You had me up to "first two". Compared to the original, Ghostbusters 2 was sad.
      • Lies. Ghostbusters 2 is better than Ghostbusters 1, on the merits of the Statue of Liberty scene alone. Everything else is just icing on the proverbial cake. God, that scene rocks.
      • by spoco2 ( 322835 )
        Oh bah! While GB2 was essentially a rehash of the story of one it was done with so many new gags and great stand alone bits that it is also a classic unto itself.

        Lines from it come up all the time in my circle of friends (sad? maybe)

        "I had part of a slinky once... but I straightened it"

        I might have to rewatch it soon actually...
        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by Blakey Rat ( 99501 )
          Haha, my friends and I in psychology class used to always use the line, "Good! Now let's see what happens when we take away the puppy..."
      • by elrous0 ( 869638 ) *
        Sequels done more than a decade after-the-fact always suck. "The Color of Money" is a very rare exception.
    • by pete-classic ( 75983 ) <hutnick@gmail.com> on Thursday November 15, 2007 @05:18PM (#21370327) Homepage Journal
      You can hardly say that the original had a good script. A substantial amount of the film (a lot of the best parts) were ad libbed. Most of the sense of a "good script" came from the fact that Ackroyd had all this weird, but internally consistent, stuff in his head.

      I think the second one had a "proper" script. Naturally, lightning didn't strike twice.

      -Peter
      • by inKubus ( 199753 )
        I'd like to see Bill Murray return to humor instead of the droopy eyed sad guy role he's played since being typecast in the Wes Anderson flicks, Lost in the Translation, etc. I'd like to see some of that arrogant humor return, ala Scrooged. They are all older guys so you could work that into the script. Lots of aging boomer jokes, one of them can be haunted by a dead grandparent, etc.
        • by kcornia ( 152859 )
          Personally I liked when he started going the offbeat stuff like Rushmore. Agree on the disappointment that was Lost in Translation. Nude SJ could have saved it, but alas it was not to be.
    • I've been saying for years that they should do another movie. Provided that they keep with the spirit (pun not intended) of the first two, modern special effects combined with a good script could make for a great movie.

      Given hollywood's abysmal track record in late-sequals though, I think perhaps it would be better off without any, regardless of whether it is a movie or game.

      As long as it has Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, and Harold Ramis it'll be a fun movie. Hell even if it's just bill murray.

    • Well according to the extra material on Blues Brothers 2000, Aykroyd was in Ghostbusters 3. :)
  • by onkelonkel ( 560274 ) on Thursday November 15, 2007 @05:05PM (#21370113)
    the streams cross you!
  • by Iphtashu Fitz ( 263795 ) on Thursday November 15, 2007 @05:06PM (#21370121)
    Well, let's say this Twinkie represents the normal amount of psychokinetic energy in the New York area. Based on this morning's reading, it would be a Twinkie thirty-five feet long, weighing approximately six hundred pounds.
  • by Fx.Dr ( 915071 ) on Thursday November 15, 2007 @05:10PM (#21370197)
    Here's hoping the trio are teaming up for a third go-around out of love for the franchise instead of love for another paycheck. I can think of far too many ways this project could go sour, especially since it's been, what, almost two decades since the 2nd flick? Good luck, guys. We're pulling for you.
    • I've heard Murray isn't interested, and this is the a strong reason it hasn't happened yet. they are all actually pretty old now, and I don't know if the movie would have the same feel.
  • by JK_the_Slacker ( 1175625 ) on Thursday November 15, 2007 @05:10PM (#21370199) Homepage

    I see an opportunity to coin a term here... when you're engaged in multiplayer, and your teammate crosses streams with you, resulting in both your deaths... we'll call that streamkilling. Or teamcrossing. I'm still working on it.

    • when you're engaged in multiplayer, and your teammate crosses streams with you, resulting in both your deaths... we'll call that streamkilling
      I call that, "wet feet".

      Because that's the only bad thing that ever happened when I "crossed streams" with my brothers growing up.
    • by inKubus ( 199753 )
      I see an opportunity to coin a term here... when you're engaged in multiplayer, and your teammate crosses streams with you, resulting in both your deaths... we'll call that streamkilling. Or teamcrossing. I'm still working on it.

      Soviet Rush-In?
  • by Etherwalk ( 681268 ) on Thursday November 15, 2007 @05:10PM (#21370201)
    There was an old Ghostbusters game--I remember playing it on a PCjr, I think in the late 80s. You needed one of the joystick accessories.

    (The PCjr itself, incidentally, is a remarkably funny machine. To add the second 128K RAM, you... wait for it... take a cover off the side of the case and plug in a unit the depth and height of the case that makes it about an inch thicker. There isn't a parallel port on the main case, but there *is* one on the back of the extra 128K RAM, which also takes its own external power supply, if I remember correctly...)

    (And you could keep going, adding inches to the case until you had 512 or 640K or some-such.)
    • by Panaqqa ( 927615 ) * on Thursday November 15, 2007 @05:33PM (#21370505) Homepage
      Actually, there was a Ghostbusters game written for the Commodore 64 that I can recall playing back in about 1984. Surprisingly good graphics for the standards of the time, and considering the machine could only user 8K of RAM for video (and that 8K it had to steal from the 64K RAM total in the machine).

      As I recall, the program was a little over 30K in size. Hmph. These days a "hello world" executable can run 1.7 MB.
      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        Hmph. These days a "hello world" executable can run 1.7 MB.
        Maybe in YOUR world.

        #include <stdio.h>
        int main() {
                        printf("Hello, world!\n");
                        return(0);
        }


        compiled with gcc 3.4:

        -rwxrwxr-x 1 me users 6788 Nov 15 16:50 hello


        almost 7k.

        ~
        • by Panaqqa ( 927615 ) *
          Obviously it won't be 1.7 MB if you use gcc, or for that matter assembler (in which case I can bring it in under 1k). But try it using an IDE from a certain unnamed software and flying chair provider famous for bloat and see what size your executable is. Especially if you let it include everything it wants to in your project.
          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by Applekid ( 993327 )
            It's very possible to get a Windows "Hello World" made in Visual Studio in under 5 or 6K.

            If setting it to "release" mode is all you rely on you'll be unhappy. You can enter project settings and set options such as align on 1-Byte boundaries instead of the default 16, REALLY remove debugging information (strangely, some still sticks around), set the linker to exclude the default libs, things like that. Look at the options, think about what they would do, and set it to the one you think is appropriate. When d
            • by lgw ( 121541 )

              You might have to dig around the Win32 API to get the "native" equivalent to printf (it'd probably be easier to just call one of the messagebox functions), but you can do it.

              That library call would be ... printf.

              Win32 is a small, solid API that's been mostly unchanged now for >10 years. There are 100 layers of crap built on top of it, but you don't have to use those.

              Ya gotta trick Microsoft's compiler into doing what you want (as opposed to just passing parameters to gcc) but it can get done.

              You can also just pass parameters to cl. You didn't think Microsoft built anything internally using projects and solutions, did you? (Well, maybe stuff in C#, but that's a different story).

          • But it's not really a 'Hello, World' program then, is it, it's a 'Hello, World' with a load of includes and other stuff you don't need. Amazingly enough, the designers of said IDE didn't envisage that all you'd want to do is print 'Hello, World' on the screen, so they made some assumptions about sockets, GUI controls etc.
      • by bedouin ( 248624 )
        That was a great game. Upon seeing this story in my RSS reader it was the first thing I thought of. I was tempted to load an emulator just to play it.
  • First Screen here (Score:5, Informative)

    by EGSonikku ( 519478 ) <(moc.liamg) (ta) (elibom.nesretep)> on Thursday November 15, 2007 @05:10PM (#21370203)
    http://kotaku.com/gaming/ghostbusters/ghostbusters-screen-co+op--mp-info-322990.php [kotaku.com]

    They've said the game is set in the early 90's after Ghostbusters II so either the Stay Puft Marshmellow Man makes a comeback or there is a flashback. Im voting he gets ressurected, or they are taking some license with the flashback since last I checked they never did and scaling of walls ;-)
    • Is that really a screen shot of the actual game? There's a lot of depth and detail in the buildings, every window is inset and all that. I suppose it can be with the latest game systems, but it could be a concept rendering.
      • by G Fab ( 1142219 )
        If there's only one screenshot, it's never a truly accurate screenshot.

        If they had enough game to give actual screenshots, they'd show more than one.
        • Yeah, but that said, I think you can get graphics like that, or damned close to it, on an Xbox 360 or (presumably) a PS3. Gears of War looks about that good, and it's been out quite a while now.
    • It could also be a nightmare sequence :)
  • by Steeltalon ( 734391 ) on Thursday November 15, 2007 @05:10PM (#21370205)
    In this game if someone asks you if you're a god YOU SAY YES!
  • by HaeMaker ( 221642 ) on Thursday November 15, 2007 @05:11PM (#21370221) Homepage
    Since video games manufacturers are not under WGA contract, they can write video game scripts but not movie scripts.
    • I really dislike the idea that because the WGA is striking, everyone else tangentially connected to them should stop what they're doing as well in a "show of support" for the strike. If you do, in fact, support the strike, good for you. But this criticism of people who don't stop what they're doing really kinda pisses me off.

      If you're not a member of the WGA, they do not represent you and you therefore do not represent them.
  • by morari ( 1080535 ) on Thursday November 15, 2007 @05:12PM (#21370227) Journal
    I had heard for a while that there was going to be a Ghost Busters 3, though it would be fully CGI. I really hope that this is what became of the rumors. The film would have sucked, no-doubt. A videogame has the chance to at least be decent however. It worked pretty well for Tron 2.0 ;)
  • I loved the first Ghost Busters. The second one sort of sucked. The problems with sequels is that some of the greatness of the original is the newness of the concept. Once the "newness" is gone, or you are at least comfortable with the concept, you are left with unoriginal crap.

    Take the Marx Brothers movies, someone watching them for the first time today will find them boring because *everyone* has ripped off the Marx brothers to the point where they are not even funny anymore. Everyone knows every punchlin
    • by QuantumG ( 50515 )
      I've seen Ghost Busters and Ghost Busters II so many times that I sometimes forget what happened in which. The (fictional) mythology of II was superior to the (fictional) mythology of the first one I feel.

  • Ghostbusters Doom (Score:4, Interesting)

    by fredrikj ( 629833 ) on Thursday November 15, 2007 @05:13PM (#21370265) Homepage
    Hah, this won't hold a candle to GhostBusters DooM2! [doomworld.com]
  • by MrCopilot ( 871878 ) on Thursday November 15, 2007 @05:36PM (#21370553) Homepage Journal
    Ok, She's a Dog.

    Yes, Its true this man has no Dick.

  • by PixelScuba ( 686633 ) on Thursday November 15, 2007 @05:38PM (#21370579)
    Awww, I thought it was gonna be He-Man.
  • Wii (Score:2, Insightful)

    by techstar25 ( 556988 )
    The Wii was designed for a game like this. Imagine the potential of four players with Wiimotes. If they don't design this game from the ground up for the Wii, it would be a major travesty.
    • by SmallFurryCreature ( 593017 ) on Thursday November 15, 2007 @05:49PM (#21370751) Journal

      We know nothing about this game except that it will be a sequel to a movie and you claim it was meant for the Wii? What on earth are you smoking and how deep is that Wiimote up your ass anyway?

      It could be an adventure, it could be a sim, it could be a management game, it could be a shooter, it could be a stategy game.

      What makes this game a Wii game? Take one look at the released screenshot, does that look like something the Wii can pull off?

      About the only Wii connection I can think of is using the remote to control the beams, possibly a fun way of doing it, but nothing you couldn't do as easily with a mouse.

      Anyway the story so far is that it is going to be on all the platforms. This usually means the game is going to suck some major donkeyballs as it will have to fit to the restrictions of ALL the platforms.

      If anything, I hope that this game will have some bloody humor in it for once. The hotel shootup in game form, oh yeah, I pay for that.

      • a) I would have been very worried about you if you didn't think of "using the remote to control the beams." Because that would be soaked in awesome juice if done right.

        b) For the record, it's streams.

        c) Regarding the hotel shootup: "I feel so funky."
  • ...in the videogame store
  • What about the fourth, African American Ghostbuster? Won't HE be back too?
  • by UglyRedHonda ( 893014 ) on Thursday November 15, 2007 @06:41PM (#21371411)
    Yes, have some!
  • by Champion3 ( 599877 ) on Thursday November 15, 2007 @07:05PM (#21371701)
    There's a way more informative article with additional screen shots here [variety.com]. Looks like Ernie Hudson (Winston), Annie Potts (Janine), and William Atherton (Peck) are signed on!
  • One game that's been hanging around my local Gameworks for years is "Brave Firefighters", a Sega game (in Gameworks, so that part isn't surprising) which involved the player using a fire hose apparatus (decorative; it was essentially a standard light gun past that) that strapped over the shoulder in an effort to stop a raging fire in a mansion.

    As soon as I put this thing on my shoulder, I looked at what I was wearing: what looked like a long blaster with a hose extending behind me. Past that, there was one
  • 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*.
  • by Ed Avis ( 5917 ) <ed@membled.com> on Thursday November 15, 2007 @09:19PM (#21373039) Homepage
    Ah, Ghostbusters. I remember that on the Spectrum. The weird crackling noise at the start which someone explained to me was meant to be a speech sample. Driving around the map running over ghosts so that later (in what now seems a masterpiece of boring gameplay) you could suck them up with your ghost vacuum. The boxing glove on a spring which jumped up to catch ghosts (was that in the movie?). The rather anticlimactic Marshmallow Alert when all you had to do was put down ghost bait and you could run him over on the map screen. And what was the point of the game anyway? It ends when the ectoplasm count reaches 999, but should you try to slow that down or speed it up by letting ghosts reach Zuul so you can get to the end quicker?

    Good theme music though.

I've never been canoeing before, but I imagine there must be just a few simple heuristics you have to remember... Yes, don't fall out, and don't hit rocks.

Working...