Spector explains disparity between Disney Epic Mickey concept shots and reality
by Ben Gilbert 
{ Oct 29th 2009 at 5:40PM } 
He additionally teases, "Some of what you saw was beyond the line ... some of it was early design ideas that are no longer relevant ... some of it is stuff that's still in the game, and I'm not saying what." If the recent steady stream of information on Disney Epic Mickey continues, we'll likely see at least a few of those original concepts in their current form at a point in the not-too-distant future.
Gallery: Disney Epic Mickey
Gallery: Epic Mickey concept art
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Mama Luigi @ Oct 29th 2009 5:48PM
There. It has nothing to do with the game being on Wii; just Disney pussy footing around.
Brysonial the Bison @ Oct 29th 2009 6:06PM
I can understand it not being as nice as the concept art but COME ON it can be better than the horrible screen shots we got before.
Shagittarius @ Oct 29th 2009 6:45PM
"There. It has nothing to do with the game being on Wii; just Disney pussy footing around."
LOL!
you forgot /sacrasm off
Traceur_Ryuk [All Digital until December] (PSN: Ryuk_shinigami) @ Oct 29th 2009 5:49PM
"it is a question of finding the boundaries for not just himself and his development team"
Because of Wii? Or am I just misinterpreting it?
Traceur_Ryuk [All Digital until December] (PSN: Ryuk_shinigami) @ Oct 29th 2009 5:51PM
Also, this should totally be the cover art.
http://www.joystiq.com/photos/disney-epic-mickey/2402077/
MrWeatherby @ Oct 29th 2009 7:58PM
Pretty much due to the Wii's graphical limitations. You just can't accomplish that much fine detail on the Wii, although you can still accomplish more than what we're being shown at the moment. I think them showing the concept art first was a great idea, built hype for the game. I doubt anyone would have given a crap were in-game screens the first thing we were shown.
Courtney @ Oct 29th 2009 5:49PM
As it stands now, the concept is looking a lot more intriguing than the actual product for me.
I'm not a Disney fan, but I would take some of the concept art and hang it in my office.
Traceur_Ryuk [All Digital until December] (PSN: Ryuk_shinigami) @ Oct 29th 2009 5:54PM
I AM a fan of Disney (Excluding Jonas Brothers, Miley Cyrus, and that type of shit) and I must say I'm still pretty excited for it. Not nearly as much as I was at first though.
BananaBoat @ Oct 29th 2009 6:07PM
The concept art is epic. The actual screenshots are soul crushing.
Courtney @ Oct 29th 2009 6:13PM
Disney just announced a title change for the game:
Soul Crushing Mickey, coming to a Wii near you!
Skypp @ Oct 29th 2009 5:50PM
Let me translate:
"When we came up with the game we were going to do it on 360 and PS3, so we wanted to make something awesome looking and different than what you've seen from Disney. But then Disney called and said "hey, our CEO's read their newspapers and it says there are more Wii's out there than than PS3's and 360's." Then those same old CEO's that haven't seen a game since ET on the Atari put together a group of slightly less older people to see what kind of games have propelled the Wii to the top. So now we watered it down to what will be a totally forgettable experience. Sorry about the awesome concept guys, that's my bad, not Disney's."
Mr Khan @ Oct 29th 2009 6:24PM
No. This was *his* decision, because he felt that they could not do a Wii version if it were just a port, since Wii deserves more than that. Faced with the option of Wii exclusivity vs no Wii version at all, they decided to go with Wii.
johnnynumber5 @ Oct 29th 2009 10:37PM
Mr. Khan: forever the eternal optimist.
I'm pretty sure what Skypp theorized is more in line with what really happened. Maybe the truth is somewhere in between.
guttertalk @ Oct 30th 2009 12:37AM
@johnnynumber5: Uh, no. Go back and read the earlier article. They asked what he needed to make the game he wanted, and he said a focus on ONE platform. And he's been a fan of the Wii for a while.
But we're supposed to take the imagined dialogs of fanboys over what the man himself said happened.
tmacairjordan87 @ Oct 29th 2009 5:50PM
"some of it is stuff that's still in the game, and I'm not saying what."
Doesn't really matter anymore, because now we know it's going to look like shit and nothing like the original concept.
Mr Khan @ Oct 29th 2009 6:18PM
The game is coming out a damn year from now. Let's at least withhold the definitive statement that it *will* look like shit, since the game could take quite a major turn from this juncture.
tmacairjordan87 @ Oct 29th 2009 6:35PM
Guess we didn't learn our lesson from the Conduit did we?
ChromeAlchemist @ Oct 29th 2009 7:13PM
*sigh* There's a difference between The Conduit and Epic Mickey. One being who is behind it, and two being what was promised. Nothing was promised here, everything was promised with The Conduit. Simple.
guttertalk @ Oct 30th 2009 12:45AM
Maybe it's just me, but I think the guy who created Ultima VII, System Shock and Deux Ex is smarter and knows a bit more about great games than guys who live in the Joystiq forums.
samfish [is sad there is no Gene in Tats v Cap =( ] @ Oct 30th 2009 9:07AM
The conduit looks really good, it just lacks in art direction.
Epic Mickey lacks in art direction AND doesn't look particularly good (yet).
Some better textures and rim shading like in Galaxy could make this look really great, though.
Well, at least we know the music will be awesome.
jam @ Oct 29th 2009 5:53PM
It's best to put those early designs in the game.
Darth Bradwart, Dark Lord of the Sith @ Oct 29th 2009 5:53PM
I'd say the theories are correct: the concept art was built around the title appearing on the more powerful consoles, but had to be scaled back for the Wii. It's a shame: I'm sure the game will be good, but a lot of people have dismissed the title because of the shots.
Peter R. @ Oct 29th 2009 7:23PM
Scaling back the graphics for Wii is the secondary reason, the main reason is Disney's so-called "boundaries." Come on now, this is Disney we're talking about here, the pioneers of cutesy cartoon violence. Did anyone really think they would allow what would of basically been a Mickey version of American Mcgree's Alice for their game? So basically, no somewhat disturbing backgrounds, locals, or mangled goofy would have appeared in the game anyway, whether it was on the 360 or PS3, Disney just wouldn't allow that. Although Disney is trying a create a epic Mickey adventure, they'll still wanna keep the art in line, so the Mickey franchise is still considered somewhat cutesy in-game, the earlier concept art in definitely not what they wanted.
KaBob799 @ Oct 29th 2009 8:23PM
Nintendo didn't have any problems pulling off Twilight Princess on the Gamecube so I don't see why anybody would have trouble if they TRIED making something look good on the Wii.
Sly @ Oct 29th 2009 5:54PM
i'd imagine this was one of the beyond-the-boundary ones. http://www.joystiq.com/photos/epic-mickey-concept-art/2174613/
Filthy Assistant @ Oct 29th 2009 6:02PM
Which was also what made me interested in the game. It and that beach landing one. I'm not really that interested now that the screenshots are out.
Captain Planet [Planeteer | Power of Captain Planet] @ Oct 29th 2009 5:54PM
Sounds like excuses for shitty graphics to me. The gameplay better be utterly brilliant.
Warlock @ Oct 29th 2009 5:55PM
Haha, I said from the beginning that there was no way Disney would approve some of those designs. Looks like I was right.
To be honest though, I'm glad. I'd much rather play something like what we're getting, than the "American McGee's Mickey Mouse" that was concepted.
DBuck_Eye @ Oct 29th 2009 5:55PM
So, the screens are no longer suitably epic?
Giroro @ Oct 29th 2009 5:59PM
Nothing he says at this point will change the fact that everyone is disappointed the game isn't going to remotely compare to the concept art.
Yaanu @ Oct 29th 2009 6:00PM
Come on, Bioshock didn't look as good as it ended up being when it was revealed in Game Informer. Chances are they'll polish the textures some time before release to be a little more kick-ass.
Filthy Assistant @ Oct 29th 2009 6:06PM
It's not the textures, it's that the look in general is generic compared to what people were expecting. It simply doesn't look... Epic.
Yaanu @ Oct 29th 2009 6:13PM
Hmm. Well, they've also been showing us, like, one or two actual areas of the game. Chances are they'll let loose more screens (and hopefully videos) of other areas of the game.
Remember the concept art that looked like D-Day? Expect the video to be titled something along the lines of "The Norman-Disney Landing" or something. "Disney-Day", even.
Darth Bradwart, Dark Lord of the Sith @ Oct 29th 2009 6:01PM
Basically, they should change the title to "Not-so Epic Mickey".
makimak22 @ Oct 29th 2009 6:05PM
It's now a Wii exclusive? Might as well call it "Epic FAIL Mickey"....
Traceur_Ryuk [All Digital until December] (PSN: Ryuk_shinigami) @ Oct 29th 2009 6:06PM
"It's now a Wii exclusive?"
Keep up with the times.
"Might as well call it "Epic FAIL Mickey"...."
...Clever
Mr Khan @ Oct 29th 2009 6:10PM
This game is going to do very, very well. Let's get out of narrow-minded mode here
HeXeN @ Oct 29th 2009 6:12PM
What you said was Epic corniness.
Darth Bradwart, Dark Lord of the Sith @ Oct 29th 2009 6:18PM
Epic Fail, Makimak22.
That's more like it.
wattkow @ Oct 29th 2009 6:09PM
Is it safe to say epic fail yet?
NintendoJunkie @ Oct 29th 2009 7:34PM
Only if it relates to your comment.
DomoBraden @ Oct 29th 2009 6:10PM
Sad.
I think they might be able to better realize their original concept, at least visually speaking, if they were to reduce the contrast of the colors significantly. As things stand, based on what we've seen so far, the colors in the world are jarringly painful to look at. Everything is dark and almost neon looking.
Anyway, I'm reserving judgment on this at least until I read some hands-on reports.
Follisimo @ Oct 29th 2009 6:11PM
Pretty much Disney said no to all of what he wanted and then gave him ideas of what they prefer. I work at Disney World and know they are smiles and sunshine on everything that isn't their employees. They want this game targeted at children to play. If they truly made the game how we thought it would be then kids would all become scared of Disney type things or some excuse that makes them all gay.
Disney likes to play things safe.
b33z3r @ Oct 29th 2009 6:14PM
Disney not approving those concepts is very lame. Walt was willing to take risks and experiment with things a little darker with his company. Night on Bald Mountain is a testament to this. I think if Walt were still around, we'd have seen the concept work in the game, no matter what platform it was on.
embassy @ Oct 29th 2009 8:36PM
I don't think Walt Disney would like our time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1LlZ0nmOQo
Mr Khan @ Oct 29th 2009 6:16PM
Basically, he just explained the creative process (ideas change from their original conception, shocker), but certain individuals (i.e. usual suspects) are trying to spin this in the obvious, anti-Wii direction.
Some of the concept art, at least, seemed to suggest a different play-style (The beach-landing one lent itself to some sort of RTS, but the one about water towers full of paint thinner certainly seems relevant)
johnnynumber5 @ Oct 29th 2009 10:50PM
Not everything is an anti-Wii agenda.
The screen shot look like shit. Period. They don't match the concept art in the least bit possible. Stop trying to explain it all and justify in some good light. This is a travesty. This has more to do with the higher ups at Disney changing the direction than Specter evolving the concept.
I'm starting to think the game shouldn't be made at all or should be scrapped before development gets to the point that it's going to be released in this state. It's just abysmal.
Think about it man - it was going to be multiplatform. The higher ups at Disney said screw the other versions, we'll just make it for the Wii ... I'm sure Specter stayed on board with that. Then, once they saw some concept art or target renders (proof of concepts) they probably said "are you out of your fucking mind?" and put the kibosh on all the creativity and the concept.
This looks like the Batman movies when they went from dark and dreary to neon and futuristic ... it looks like pure shit. They should call it Magic Mickey or something but not Epic Mickey.
samfish [is sad there is no Gene in Tats v Cap =( ] @ Oct 30th 2009 9:31AM
"The screen shot look like shit. Period. They don't match the concept art in the least bit possible. Stop trying to explain it all and justify in some good light."
Well, there were people (me) warning people (you, others) that if you hype yourself up on concept art, you're only asking for disappointment.
Also (and I'm not directing this at you in particular), let's stop with this whole, "It was supposed to be a PS360 game" nonsense. For whatever reason, games ALWAYS start out as "intended for the PS3 and 360"...but that's in their pre-alpha phase (NiGHTS being the exception). It means nothing.
If you asked the PR people, though, they'd more than likely tell you that "the platform has not been decided".
That said, I don't fault anybody for being disappointed in those screens. Sure, it's more than a year away, but they've got a LOT of work to do.
There ARE, by the way, actual concept art shots floating around out there (unfortunately, Google only brings up the ruined looking ones and I don't care enough to hunt them down. haha). If they can hit that, though, they could end up with something really nice.
TwEE @ Oct 30th 2009 9:51AM
Oh god Mcpoop, I know you hate Nintendo but this is not a travesty.. relax.
Lmda @ Oct 29th 2009 6:18PM
I've got to be honest, the first piece of art i saw with Mickey looking as if he had gone through some major battles had me really intrigued, however the latest screens were simply a disappointment.
Going under a such a name I have no choice but to downgrade this one to *very* cautiously optimistic.