I’ve been burned by Tron and Clash of the Titans. Plus Thor is getting underwhelming reviews.
Die Hard Trilogy is an oldschool Playstation game that was actually pretty fun.
For more recent games, the Lego Star Wars/Indiana Jones/Batman games are fun. I’ve only played the Star Wars version, but I see no reason Indy and Batman would be different.
The recent Ghostbusters game was said to be fun but not entirely satisfying.
And, of course, Star Wars games in general have a 50/50 chance to be a lot of fun.
The Riddick games got pretty good ratings if you like the whole stealth thang.
Goldeneye is not just a good movie tie-in game, it’s generally held to be one of the best shooters ever made.
But generally speaking, movie tie-ins are trash by definition. The main problem is that they’re tied to a specific release date: the premiere of the movie. Software development is a tricky process that runs on a very different track than film production, and it’s very difficult to hit an exact date like that. So, most tie ins are either horribly buggy and incomplete, because the studio ran out of time to finish it, or are ridiculously dumbed down from the start, to make it easier to create and guarantee that they have a functional product on the shelves before interest in the movie wanes.
Games that are tied to an on-going intellectual property (such as Star Wars) tend to fare better, because they’re not tied to a specific event like a movie release. Even there, you can see the same thing in action. Out of all of the classic Star Wars games - stuff like X-Wing, or Knights of the Old Republic - how many have been directly tied to the release of a new film? The only one I can think of is the original Lego Star Wars, whose release was timed to coincide with the premiere of Revenge of the Sith. And even there, only a third of the game was directly related to the new film.
(It’s also worth noting that the Goldeneye video game came out two years after the release of the movie, and so wasn’t handicapped by trying to match the movie’s production schedule.)
Perhaps not surprisingly, the “Scott Pilgrim” video game tie-in on Xbox Live Arcade is fantastic - an old-school 2D side-scrolling beat-'em-up with 16-bit graphics and an awesome chiptunes soundtrack. It’s a better adaptation of the comic book than the actual movie (which was still pretty great).
My nephew is hugely enjoying the Lego Star Wars games. He’s 8, though.
Plus, if you don’t want to play a 14 year old game(I can’t believe it’s that old), it’s so good, they remade it for this gen’s consoles.
42 here and still enjoy them. I mean my son enjoys them.
The Warriors by Rockstargames is pretty awesome. Prequel story takes you into the movie storyline.
- Both Chronicles of Riddick games were very competent shooters and very good games on their own.
- The original Alien VS Predator game was pants-shittingly scary.
- The Ghostbusters game was solid, if largely unremarkable outside its’ IP.
- The second Godfather game was, well, not bad.
- As mentioned, GoldenEye is a top-tier shooter popular enough to be remade in current-gen.
- Some of the Lord of the Rings games were surprisingly good. Notably, LOTR Online and the Battle for Middle Earth series. Of course, it’s debatable if these were born from the movies or the books.
- Some of the Star Wars games have been playable, although as a whole the games based on that IP have been extremely hit and miss. Notably good ones have been the X-Wing series, the Jedi Knight series, Republic Commando and the first Force Unleashed game.
Seconding the recommendation for the Riddick games. They’re tough too, but well worth it.
AvP was good, AvP 2 was better. But then they weren’t based on the movies, because the movies hadn’t come out at the time. They were based around canon, but not tied in with any particular film.
The new AvP game that came out recently is okay-ish, but the AvP movie tie-in game is pants-shittingly horrific.
So much love for the Lego Star Wars games. They stay true to Canon and keep things well tied in to the story, but are accessible for all ages.
GoldenEye was pretty goddamn far from a top-tier FPS, even by 1997 standards.
Considering that it’s based off of two horror movie franchises, I’m not sure if “pants-shittingly horrific” is intended to be a warning, or a recommendation.
Horrific is never good 
It’s a very poor game.
Bwuh? GoldenEye practically invented the concept of missions in FPSs.
There’s also Harry Potter.
The 4 titles are all different, due to the requirements of the source material - you don’t need to put magic into a Batman game, for instance - but they’re all good…I assume, anyway. I’m not a fan of Indiana Jones and the Lego Star Wars games left me kind of cold (may be bad DS conversions, or may be that I’m not an enthusiastic Star Wars fan), but Lego Batman and Lego Harry Potter both rock. (Lego Batman is based on the comics with a touch of the old TV series and 90s cartoon, though…the movie connections are pretty much just cameos of the costumes.)
Well, I don’t know what you mean by “mission” but I can’t see how what you’re saying is true by any reasonable definition of “mission.” It’s not like people were running around in mazes just shooting stuff until 1997. Regardless, I don’t see how that’s the be all and end all of first-person shooters, games of the genre require far more than “missions” to be good.
GoldenEye isn’t top-tier because it had terrible controls, movement, and slowdown in multiplayer. The only things it did well were presentation and existing on a console.
Their is some buzz that the upcoming Tie-in game for Captain America could be a winner…
It’s certainly regarded as top tier, I agree that it’s not as sophisticated as most PC FPS games (although it was close at the time), but it plays very well indeed, and gets my vote. And I’m very much a PC gamer.