I got to thinking the other day about the idea of video games that turn into movies and TV shows. It’s no surprise, since I’m finally getting around to watching the Fallout series on Prime Video. But this isn’t really an article about that. That sort of article would be more appropriate for my Streaming Saturday series. I was just thinking about how we got here and how surprising it is — or isn’t — that video games are now fodder for dramatic fare.
Video games in the 20th century were relatively plotless affairs. And honestly, that’s how we liked it. Home video games evolved in tandem with arcade games back then, and it was impossible to get a lot of character development if you had to feed in a quarter every few minutes. No, what you wanted then was action, action, action. And those old games delivered. At least, sort of.
Home video games were simple by necessity in the early days. In order to be inexpensive and rugged enough to work at home, early devices used paltry amounts of memory and processors that wouldn’t even power a digital (non-smart) watch today. But, pressed to their limits, they were able to provide great gameplay as you can see in this playthrough of Atari’s COMBAT. Often packaged as the default game with the system, you and a friend tried to shoot each other’s tanks in a blocky maze. Don’t knock it, it was a lot of fun. But character development? I don’t think so.
Maybe the first character-based game to break out was, of course, Super Mario Bros. Mario had been around for half a decade already, having made his debut in the arcade version of Donkey Kong. But, Mario really made his impact on life in the 20th century with the NES version of Super Mario Bros. I would argue that there have been sequel after sequel and the original is still the most playable.
Start with a recognizable character, easy-to-understand game mechanics, and an absolute banger of a soundtrack, and you had instant success. But, as Hollywood soon found out, that didn’t translate out to the kind of intellectual property you could bank on. At least, it didn’t… yet.
No, not that one. If you’re thinking of the recent animated smash, think again. There was a 1993 movie adaptation of Super Mario Bros. which might have been the very first video-game-to-movie adaptation. And, it was darn near the last. It’s easy to see why:
Despite top-tier talent and a lot of money spent on effects, this was a horrendous movie. It was just plain stupid and not even fun-stupid. It didn’t really have a lot to do with the video game, which isn’t surprising since the video game had very little plot anyway. Look, this would have been a bad movie if it weren’t based on a game, but the fact that it was meant video game adaptations were essentially dead for years to come.
One of the first video games with cut scenes and a first-person perspective was Wing Commander. I played this game at the time and was pretty blown away. The sequels kept getting better too, with 1995’s Wing Commander III: Heart of the Tiger having real full motion video in cut scenes featuring Mark Hamill. This was a game with a legitimate plot and it should have made for a great movie. Fox thought so too because they made it.
Again, through no fault of the video game itself, this was a horrible movie. Like Super Mario Bros. it would have been a horrible movie if it hadn’t been based on a game. The characters were unlikeable, the effects barely above those of the actual game, and there was simply no plot to be found, as I recall it.
After two big swings, the movie industry seemed about done with video game adaptations
By the dawn of this century, you were finally starting to see video games that had some significant plot and backstory. One of the first and best was 1997’s Fallout, the one that started the series. The gameplay was primitive by today’s standards, not even up to what you get on a free phone game today. But at that time it was incredible. Take a look at this retrospective.
The big problem with adapting a video game to screen is the fundamental nature of how you experience the game. If you’re playing a relatively modern game, you’re taking on a character, making decisions, and driving the plot by what you do. It’s an active experience. On the other hand, watching a movie or TV show is a passive experience. It’s watching someone else make decisions and that’s just not what a gamer really wants.
Hollywood is starved for recognizable characters. Movies today routinely cost over $200 million to make and for that kind of coin, investors want some promise of a return. The easiest way to do that, they’ve found, is to adapt something with a built-in fanbase. While you run the risk of alienating long-time fans of the material, they’ll usually at least see your movie before hating it. The need to find a sure winner drove Hollywood to adapt TV shows in the 1990s and 2000s and comics in the 2000s until today. It was only a matter of time before someone created a video game adaptation that actually worked.
And of course we all know what that was.
Starting with one of the best-written video games, 2014’s The Last of Us, HBO was finally able to deliver a video game adaptation worth watching. They began with a shot-for-shot recreation of the beginning of the game, and expanded the world out so that you felt good about watching (not playing) the action.
How did they do it? Honestly, it boils down to some of the most basic parts of the experience: writing and acting. The game had great writing, dialogue, and pretty good acting to start with. Adding top-notch directing and acting talent to the show meant it was eminently watchable even if you had no idea what the game was about. (That is, unless you had to watch it on broadcast.) Even before they were sure The Last of Us would be a hit, cash-flush Amazon greenlit Fallout, giving it a huge budget and a 10-episode commitment. Creators Jonathan Nolan and Lisa Joy were known at that time for creating the successful Westworld, and although that show simply cratered, Amazon obviously realized that it was too late to put the brakes on anything new.
Good thing they did too, because Fallout is a lot of fun with a decent story, dark humor, and a very realistically-rendered world. If The Last of Us proved that game adaptations could be successful, Fallout proved that it wasn’t just one stroke of luck.
You can always count on Hollywood to absolutely wring every bit of money out of an idea, and since comic book movies are played out, expect video game adaptations to be the next big thing. So, if you’re a studio head, give me a call or shoot me an email. I have an idea for Pong: the movie that you’ll love.
A scrappy traveler named “Ball” is constantly torn between travels in two different areas, bouncing between them. They’re always being treated poorly, pushed away from both sides until they can make the point that they belong on one side or another. Eventually, Ball manages to get past the emotional defenses thrown at them and finally score.
All it takes is one phone call folks, and about $50 million in my pocket. Look for it in theaters by the end of 2026.
The post FUN FRIDAY: Video Games that turn into movies and TV shows appeared first on The Solid Signal Blog.
Continue reading...
Pong: the movie?
Video games in the 20th century were relatively plotless affairs. And honestly, that’s how we liked it. Home video games evolved in tandem with arcade games back then, and it was impossible to get a lot of character development if you had to feed in a quarter every few minutes. No, what you wanted then was action, action, action. And those old games delivered. At least, sort of.
Home video games were simple by necessity in the early days. In order to be inexpensive and rugged enough to work at home, early devices used paltry amounts of memory and processors that wouldn’t even power a digital (non-smart) watch today. But, pressed to their limits, they were able to provide great gameplay as you can see in this playthrough of Atari’s COMBAT. Often packaged as the default game with the system, you and a friend tried to shoot each other’s tanks in a blocky maze. Don’t knock it, it was a lot of fun. But character development? I don’t think so.
The coming of characters
Maybe the first character-based game to break out was, of course, Super Mario Bros. Mario had been around for half a decade already, having made his debut in the arcade version of Donkey Kong. But, Mario really made his impact on life in the 20th century with the NES version of Super Mario Bros. I would argue that there have been sequel after sequel and the original is still the most playable.
Start with a recognizable character, easy-to-understand game mechanics, and an absolute banger of a soundtrack, and you had instant success. But, as Hollywood soon found out, that didn’t translate out to the kind of intellectual property you could bank on. At least, it didn’t… yet.
Super Mario Bros. – The Original
No, not that one. If you’re thinking of the recent animated smash, think again. There was a 1993 movie adaptation of Super Mario Bros. which might have been the very first video-game-to-movie adaptation. And, it was darn near the last. It’s easy to see why:
Despite top-tier talent and a lot of money spent on effects, this was a horrendous movie. It was just plain stupid and not even fun-stupid. It didn’t really have a lot to do with the video game, which isn’t surprising since the video game had very little plot anyway. Look, this would have been a bad movie if it weren’t based on a game, but the fact that it was meant video game adaptations were essentially dead for years to come.
Wing Commander: a misstep that shouldn’t have been a misstep
One of the first video games with cut scenes and a first-person perspective was Wing Commander. I played this game at the time and was pretty blown away. The sequels kept getting better too, with 1995’s Wing Commander III: Heart of the Tiger having real full motion video in cut scenes featuring Mark Hamill. This was a game with a legitimate plot and it should have made for a great movie. Fox thought so too because they made it.
Again, through no fault of the video game itself, this was a horrible movie. Like Super Mario Bros. it would have been a horrible movie if it hadn’t been based on a game. The characters were unlikeable, the effects barely above those of the actual game, and there was simply no plot to be found, as I recall it.
After two big swings, the movie industry seemed about done with video game adaptations
The fundamental problem with video game adaptations
By the dawn of this century, you were finally starting to see video games that had some significant plot and backstory. One of the first and best was 1997’s Fallout, the one that started the series. The gameplay was primitive by today’s standards, not even up to what you get on a free phone game today. But at that time it was incredible. Take a look at this retrospective.
The big problem with adapting a video game to screen is the fundamental nature of how you experience the game. If you’re playing a relatively modern game, you’re taking on a character, making decisions, and driving the plot by what you do. It’s an active experience. On the other hand, watching a movie or TV show is a passive experience. It’s watching someone else make decisions and that’s just not what a gamer really wants.
Still… it was just a matter of time
Hollywood is starved for recognizable characters. Movies today routinely cost over $200 million to make and for that kind of coin, investors want some promise of a return. The easiest way to do that, they’ve found, is to adapt something with a built-in fanbase. While you run the risk of alienating long-time fans of the material, they’ll usually at least see your movie before hating it. The need to find a sure winner drove Hollywood to adapt TV shows in the 1990s and 2000s and comics in the 2000s until today. It was only a matter of time before someone created a video game adaptation that actually worked.
And of course we all know what that was.
Starting with one of the best-written video games, 2014’s The Last of Us, HBO was finally able to deliver a video game adaptation worth watching. They began with a shot-for-shot recreation of the beginning of the game, and expanded the world out so that you felt good about watching (not playing) the action.
How did they do it? Honestly, it boils down to some of the most basic parts of the experience: writing and acting. The game had great writing, dialogue, and pretty good acting to start with. Adding top-notch directing and acting talent to the show meant it was eminently watchable even if you had no idea what the game was about. (That is, unless you had to watch it on broadcast.) Even before they were sure The Last of Us would be a hit, cash-flush Amazon greenlit Fallout, giving it a huge budget and a 10-episode commitment. Creators Jonathan Nolan and Lisa Joy were known at that time for creating the successful Westworld, and although that show simply cratered, Amazon obviously realized that it was too late to put the brakes on anything new.
Good thing they did too, because Fallout is a lot of fun with a decent story, dark humor, and a very realistically-rendered world. If The Last of Us proved that game adaptations could be successful, Fallout proved that it wasn’t just one stroke of luck.
So… getting back to Pong: the movie?
You can always count on Hollywood to absolutely wring every bit of money out of an idea, and since comic book movies are played out, expect video game adaptations to be the next big thing. So, if you’re a studio head, give me a call or shoot me an email. I have an idea for Pong: the movie that you’ll love.
A scrappy traveler named “Ball” is constantly torn between travels in two different areas, bouncing between them. They’re always being treated poorly, pushed away from both sides until they can make the point that they belong on one side or another. Eventually, Ball manages to get past the emotional defenses thrown at them and finally score.
All it takes is one phone call folks, and about $50 million in my pocket. Look for it in theaters by the end of 2026.
The post FUN FRIDAY: Video Games that turn into movies and TV shows appeared first on The Solid Signal Blog.
Continue reading...
