A blog about my interests, mainly the history of fighting games. I also talk about animation, comic books, car culture, and art. Co-host of the Pink Monorail Podcast. Contributor to MiceChat, and Jim Hill Media. Former blogger on the old 1UP community site, and Capcom-Unity as well.
What was the ultimate failure of the Disney Sports Network and who was to blame? What lessons, if any, did the industry learn from these games? There were four Gamecube and two Gameboy Advance titles in the DSN series. Was this brand exclusivity because the powers that be at Konami thought that Nintendo was the only platform where the titles would work? Did Konami think that Nintendo had the same family friendly reputation synonymous with Disney? What about the cast of friendly characters, were they inviting or insulting sport fans or casual game fans? Was the game too simplistic in concept and too complex in execution? Was the DSN series a case of greed, where one company licensed a popular name but placed it over as many games as they could with mediocre gameplay? If these things were true then the failure of the DSN series would fall squarely with Konami.
The new Disney President, Bob Iger, thinks the company should put more Disney games on Nintendo platforms and for that matter Marvel titles on more powerful consoles. Was this logic valid given the cold reception to Disney games on systems like the Xbox 360 and PS3 over the past decade? Or did Disney have a bad reputation among the community because their games were lackluster and the company tended to flood the market with title after title for the consoles, handheld and PC? When the titles did move off shelves was it the Disney name that sold them rather than reviews or word of mouth? Titles from Disney Interactive have not developed much of a reputation. When working in conjunction with large publishers like Konami or UbiSoft, very few of their collaborations have ever met with great success. If Disney was bad at making games and even worse at making game decisions then the failure of the DSN series would fall squarely on Disney.
Both Disney and Konami were partially responsible for the success and failure of the series. Konami made a serious attempt at creating a legitimate, well-researched and fun sports series for the Nintendo consoles. They had all of the elements to go head-to-head with EA or any other sports publisher, including Sega and Activision without actually making any sim titles. By limiting the gameplay elements to sports they could focus on getting the Disney characters "right." Any other developer / publisher would either make a half-hearted movie tie-in game or struggle to invent a plot and story to wrap around the characters. After fighting with the mechanics and gameplay the lesser studios would forget the most important thing; the amount of work it took to bring the characters to life. Konami was an exception to this because the characters took the highest priority in their games. Disney legends lent their voices to the projects and Disney family members their insight. These things were reflected in every detail both big and small. The art, the cameos, the grudges and the rivalries all seemed fresh yet familiar. Both publishers tried their best at marketing and promoting the games but few were willing to listen.
Konami of Japan shaped the canon and history of the Disney icons in sports. Not since the art of / how to videos featuring Goofy made their debut in 1941 have we seen a focused attempt at making the Disney characters relevant in sports culture. The six DSN titles released between 2002-2003 were a footnote in game history but their influence did not disappear. The Japanese take of the designs featured in the DSN series would be emulated again and again in graphic as well as figure art. The titles may have disappeared from the gamer consciousness but not entirely from the collective unconsciousness. The Japanese, more than any western developer had an understanding as to the importance of remaining true to the characters. This held especially true for modern game designers.
Fans of the Kingdom Hearts series could tell you how true Tetsuya Nomura and Square-Enix were to the source material and more important, how respectful they were of the legacy. That RPG series took many artistic liberties with the character designs of Mickey, Donald, Goofy, Minnie, Pete... well, almost all the icons that were also featured in Disney Sports Network. These stylistic changes were made because the plot demanded it. Square-Enix was able to reinvent the characters while respecting their origins and importance in the universe. They began the series in 2002, the same year that Konami was trying to make the characters into sporting icons. While the latter did not take off, the former developed a massive following, the first Kingdom Hearts game sold almost 9 million copies worldwide. Disney must thank Kingdom Hearts for giving them a good reputation among core gamers. The approach that the Japanese had with the characters settled very well with gamers. They did not simply stick the Disney characters into a typical genre and follow the trends, nor did they try to create a dumbed-down game experience and slap a character on the box. They presented the characters in roles as heroes and villains and allowed them a wide range of emotions and expressions. They were free to be brave and fierce, empathetic and angry through the series. They gave audiences a dramatic plot which was far more complex than those of typical mascot games as well as gameplay dynamics missing from most Western developed Disney titles. These things intrigued gamers, both Disney fans and not. They made the mascots more identifiable than anything Disney had done, animation-wise, in over a decade.
Those at Square-Enix and Konami created worlds that perfectly complimented the characters. They were placed in scenarios unique to either Western or Eastern audiences or in sports leagues more fantastic than any existing ones. Kingdom Hearts and the Disney Sports Network were titles set outside of canon, yet ended up influencing all the universes involved. These things were accomplished thanks to the insight and support of the Disney family, legends and Interactive group. The Disney purist might not approve of me saying so but Mickey Mouse became relevant to young audiences because of the Japanese and their videogames, not because of Walt and his cartoons. Disney should recognize this and see how they could capitalize on this bold approach to their own characters for future games. There are many classic characters waiting for their moment to shine, for the right game to come along. Junction Point was given the creative freedom to do this, to explore the mascots in new and nostalgic ways because the road was paved by Square-Enix and Konami. Epic Mickey will attempt to make the characters relevant as both heroes and icons to the world once more. Mickey Mouse will be given the lead role in a game not designed or marketed towards young children. The decision to let the character sell the game rather than let the name sell the game will be a giant step towards making audiences embrace the name once more.
Provided that Konami and Disney Interactive had learned from their mistakes, and there are many signs that they have, then it would be great to see the Disney Sports Network return. Undoubtedly the series would be much closer to the original vision of bringing not only the Disney characters but the theme parks to life. Both studios have grown and evolved greatly since then and I foresee a time when the characters will become recognizable sports figures as much as cartoon and videogame icons.
I’d like to hear about it in the comments section. As always if you would like to sponsor me please visit my Patreon page and consider donating each month, even as little as $1 would help make better blogs and even podcasts!
Konami and Disney Interactive did not create the arcade sport experience. Nor were they the first to bring it to consoles. They did however set a standard that gamers looked for in every non-sim sport title. The best of the lot and the one most closely emulated was Disney Sports Soccer. It made it's debut in 2002 and has held up well over the years. The combination of fantastic playing fields, magical powers and appropriate redesigns of iconic characters was seen more recently in another Nintendo game.
The Super Mario Strikers series, developed by Next Level games, was first published by Nintendo in 2005. It incorporated many of the elements seen in Disney Sports Soccer and developed a few of its own. The game had a more aggressive feel than the Disney title as the field was bordered by an electric fence, which players could shove opponents into, as well as elements from the Mario series like the Chain Chomp and Thwomps which could litter the field and become obstacles. For many gamers the best thing that Next Level did with the series were the character redesigns.
Most of the Mario cast returned in this game with a visual overhaul. The colors assigned to the characters were familiar, however it was the cut of the uniforms and associated designs which showed much more attitude than gamers were used to seeing. This was especially true for the family-friendly cast. In 2007 the concept art for the Strikers sequel showed even more attitude than any Mario game to date. The once soft and round characters were now drawn with sharp angles and angry expressions. Was it pretentious to have Western developers (Next Level was a Canadian studio) redesign the popular Japanese characters or was it refreshing? That depended on many variables. The redesigns were good but ultimately dated by their design choices. They seemed too pop, owing more to the tastes and trends of contemporary character designs. Whereas the Disney titles featured uniforms, patterns and color combinations that were closer to traditional cuts but could not be dated to any particular era or design trend.
There was a fine line between updated designs that were appropriate for a character and those that were absurd. The ones that made the most sense were applied to a particular genre. In the sports world it was logical that Mario and company wore uniforms that fit on the soccer field. Running around in tight overalls and clumsy boots would not have been silly. These characters also had to be presented with stern faces and serious expressions. Sports may be fun but competition can also be highly intense. It was only appropriate that Mario and his friends be set with a hint more attitude and aggressiveness than gamers are used to seeing. This helped add a new dimension to the character, while complimenting the things that were universally understood about the character, including his bravery and selflessness. The concept art provided for the Disney sport games did much of the same thing. They presented the icons with more expressions of attitude than gamers were used to seeing. My coworker commented that Mickey Mouse should never be scowling, he was supposed to be a perpetually cheerful and friendly character. I reminded her, as Epic Mickey will remind audiences, that the Disney characters were once capable of showing a broad range of emotion, including anger, fear and resentment. These things did not detract from the characters but instead made them appear more alive and personable. Especially more than any grinning mascot on a tee shirt ever could.
Emotive qualities added a dynamic to the cast that also reflected their personality. It was something too easily missed by most designers trying to recreate or re-imagine the icons. Attitude became a replacement for substance. Iconic characters that were made famous in the 1930's soon found it hard to remain relevant, at least under modern producers. In 2004, between the Disney and Mario redesigns, the classic Looney Tunes characters were recast by Warner Bros. as superheroes with plenty of 'tude. Loonatics Unleashed failed to make a significant impact with audiences and was in fact petitioned against for having character designs that were too edgy and stylized. The series was cancelled after two seasons. Critics pointed out that the characters lacked the personality and dimension of the icons they were trying to emulate. They feared that the show was pandering to the "extreme" generation without taking into account all of the elements that made the original characters like Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck and the Tazmanian Devil work.
The problem of giving classic cartoon characters special powers was not limited to the WB. Disney brought back an old Donald Duck comic book alter ego known as the Paperinik / the Duck Avenger / Phantom Duck. The various nicknames were shortened to PK Duck and a videogame bearing his likeness was released. Despite having an actual legacy to fall back on, the reception to the character and game was chilly, scoring less than average in most reviews. Players had expected that a Disney game with Donald Duck as the protagonist would end up being more like the better received Goin' Quackers. Both games were actually developed by UbiSoft, demonstrating that some redesigns did not work well even from the same publisher of a previous solid game.
The use of attitude and contemporary design choices have not always worked well for characters. Too much reliance on visual appeal, rather than reflecting personality type, or staying true to the character's origin have sunk many cartoon as well as videogame characters over the past 15 years. When done correctly even the biggest of the names, like Mickey Mouse could be given an extreme makeover while still retaining the classic charm. Audience saw how Pete (as the enormous Julius) and Mickey swapped places in the animated short Runaway Brain. It was a clear example of how even the most extreme changes to an icon could work under the right circumstances. It demonstrated how design and purpose are meant to work together and not one taking precedence over the other.
But I digress... I was speaking more on how Konami was able to create a legacy that would be emulated around the industry.
Nintendo was not the only studio that created an arcade soccer experience. Sega had released a 3-on-3 soccer game in 2002, the same year as Disney Sports Soccer. Sega's Soccer Slam had a familiar, frenetic gameplay with over-the-top character designs, tight but memorable stadiums and special attacks. It was a very fluid game that relied on quick reflexes and expert timing to be enjoyed and was one of the few arcade soccer titles that was rated higher than Disney Sports Soccer. The use of passes, attacks and combos in dribbling was akin to the "Street" series of games that EA was producing.
EA was not asleep during the early 2000's. They had become keenly aware as to what Konami, Disney, Sega and Nintendo were producing but did not have an answer right away.
Electronic Arts was responsible for relaunching the arcade-style sports game for consoles with the debut of NBA Street in 2001, which also happened to be one of my favorite games of all-time. Considered by many to be the spiritual successor to Midway's NBA Jam series, EA was able to incorporate the MixTape style of playground basketball with high profile athletes. EA took the superstar athletes out of the stadiums, dressed them down and used actual courts from around the country. This endeared the franchise to the gamers that felt EA was spending too much time creating sim experiences and ignoring the elements that made many fall in love with the sport to begin with.
The success of NBA Street caused EA to launch an entire franchise of games, covering many of the same bases as the Disney Sports titles over the next eight years. A sequel to NBA Street in (2003) and even and the first entry of NFL Street (2004) were released before they created a soccer entry for their catalogue. There were some great elements in FIFA Street. Lessons that they learned from the other entries in the series. Not the least of which were the high-profile names to attach to the project or the dazzling locations found outside of the stadiums.
Unfortunately, like Disney Sports Soccer, EA found that it set a high mark with it's first game but was unable to recreate the magic in other genres. The NBA Street series managed to maintain consistently high scores yet NFL Street rated slightly higher than average and FIFA Street barely average scores after debuting. It was the last version, FIFA Street 3 released in 2008 which had the most dramatic overhaul to the visuals and controls. The game incorporated nuances from the NFL title, in which characters could run along walls for short bursts to get around opponents, as well as build a combo meter to unleash a powerful strike. Despite these things the game failed to break into the scores seen for the NFL and NBA games. The perfect arcade soccer formula had managed to elude EA, in this regard Konami and Disney had upset the behemoth. What EA did manage to accomplish was become one of the first western developers to clue into the use of exaggerated proportions for sport titles.
EA had been using exaggerated proportions early on in the franchise. Characters in their respective sports looked like distorted versions of actual athletes. American Football players were thicker and more muscular, NBA players taller and lankier and soccer players very diverse in their proportions. To get a sense as to how far EA has stretched the proportions over the years compare the realistic style of the characters in Madden 11 for the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 to the cartoonish athletes for the Nintendo Wii. The use of simpler models for the Wii might be due to the limited processing power of the console, however the character designs had become very popular in gaming regardless of system. The last of their Street titles, which happened to be the FIFA game, highlighted this transition from realistic to cartoonish proportions.
Other studios in the west were keen on this style of art and presentation and began incorporating it into their own games. When Academy of Champions Soccer was announced I was intrigued with how UbiSoft was going to approach the arcade soccer style. Would it have the same charm of Disney Sports Soccer? The fast paced matches of Sega Soccer Slam? The polish or Mario Strikers? Or would it fail to make a significant impact among gamers? One thing was certain, the 2009 title had a very bold artistic style. It was something that I covered in a blog titled How sports changed the 3D aesthetic. The game itself had an arcade feel and introduced adventure-style quick time events to shake defenders from steaking the ball. This element slowed down the pace of the game and possibly did not work well for a sport title, but the other elements seemed to work very well together. The artistic direction was unique, the level designs meant to conjure up images of magic and super powers for the young football stars, and cameos from the UbiSoft library appeared as playable characters.
The control had incorporated a very progressive gameplay tool. Players could mark where on the net they planned to strike via a red bullseye and could concentrate on passing the ball and setting up the shot instead. Players could freely move this target as they progressed up the field. It was something that I do not think had ever been done before in any soccer game and a minor gameplay element which made the game special. UbiSoft managed to rate higher than all of the FIFA Street games, according to Metacritic, but failed to approach the reactions set by Sega Soccer Slam or Disney Sports Soccer. The question for the industry was what else they learned from the attempt to get the Disney Sports Network off the ground? I shall go over this in my next and final blog on this series.
Did you play any game in the DSN series? Were you a fan of any of the arcade style sports games? I’d like to hear about it in the comments section. As always if you would like to sponsor me please visit my Patreon page and consider donating each month, even as little as $1 would help make better blogs and even podcasts!
Konami was spread thin over the four Disney Sports titles released in 2002 for Gamecube and the two above-average titles released for the GBA in 2003, Disney Sports Motocross and Disney Sports Snowboarding. Even for companies as large as Konami and with Disney Interactive backing the series, it was simply too much to launch a franchise series of six sport titles within a year. The lack of experience and familiarity with any sport other than football / soccer showed for Konami. The lack of familiarity with an entire subculture, like skateboarding, was evident as well.
A jaded gamer would say that Konami was exploiting the license for maximum profit rather than trying to make a sincere attempt at a sports series. The work that the studio and publisher put into the games should never be forgotten or talked down, especially for how it shaped the gaming industry and Disney itself. Let's look at the facts, the published games and the concept work.
Sports games are a big part of the gaming, and entertainment industry. It was suggested in Barron's financial magazine in 2008 that 40% or more of Disney's entire value came from the ownership of sports broadcaster ESPN. There was tremendous cash flow generated by the broadcaster on a year-to-year basis. It would be foolish to overlook the importance of sporting as both a money maker and as a culture. Game publishers, like EA, have just about cornered the market on sim sport titles, owning contracts with the biggest franchises, including the NFL, NBA and FIFA. Going head-to-head with EA would be a struggle, even for Disney. Konami had an inside track however, as their Pro Evolution Soccer series was on par, if not better than any soccer sim from EA. Beginning with a solid soccer game, which was the number one sport in the world, and tying it into the Disney universe would just about guarantee that Konami would get off on the right foot.
The Disney license made sense for a sports series to rival anything out of EA. Konami and Disney would find their niche in the sports world by providing an experience that was not purely sim. Combining cartoon graphics and an arcade experience would be unique to all the genres. They would be able to saturate the market with sport games that were outside of the norm and challenge the stranglehold from EA other publishers. It was a bold move but one that made tremendous sense.
The entire Disney Sports Network concept was set to be more than a gimmick featured in the opening cinema.It was going to cover the spectrum of the traditional and action sports while not being locked into a certain mode. Players would have continued to see elements like magic shoes, and impossible "cartoon physics" framing the game. Moreover the DSN world was set to be an ongoing series with sequels and different genres being tackled. Might we have seen Disney Sports Bowling, Tennis, Baseball or Hockey?
Had Konami's original series done well, and if every game in the genre had the same amount of polish and dedication of the soccer title, then that might have been the case. It would be entirely possible for Konami to have followed up with four or more Nintendo-exclusive games that were not sequels given how quickly assets were moved between the studios. Even EA was exploring the possibilities of a Disney sports franchise the same year as Konami when they published Disney Golf in 2002.
Konami and Disney made a favorable impression with editors and gamers alike early on. Unfortunately the reviews for the other titles in the series were very unfavorable and rightfully so. Players that were delighted with the soccer game struggled with unfinished and unpolished experiences in the skateboard, basketball, and football titles. Those other games killed the momentum of the soccer title and caused Konami to let the DSN concept die and the license with Disney expire. Ultimately that was a sad but understandable decision. Both Disney and Konami went wholeheartedly into the venture. Key members of Disney Interactive, as well as the Disney family including Roy Disney and the actual voice talents, lent themselves and their insight into the development of the franchise. Continuing to invest time and money on a franchise that was one of the poorest rated ever would not make much sense to either party. To understand more on how it failed from something other than a gameplay aspect we have to see how the partnership itself hamstrung the series.
The specifics of the license with Disney limited the experience. Konami was going to get exclusive use of certain characters, and only those characters for the DSN games. Konami had to build an experience around key icons and only those characters. They had to create an entire world that held the Disney flavor without stepping into other IP. The work that went into teammates, logos, costumes and especially level and stadium designs most likely originated from Konami. These things were brilliant in concept and visually breathtaking. They created a Disney feel without having anything to do with the company directly.
However these things were not enough to keep the franchise alive. The lack of identifiable characters, outside of the star players, was not the reason the series failed. At least not in concept. The games worked with the original supporting cast of unknown cartoon characters. Over-saturating the series with Disney characters as teammates would not have helped the games at all. Fanservice and cameos alone could not have made up for poor controls and lackluster gameplay.
Looking back gives perspective on where the license with Disney might have been too restrictive. The vision that Konami and Disney wanted to present were in both the concept art as well as in the games themselves. The wonderful themes and game elements presented in the opening cinemas for each title, as well as several of the levels across all four Gamecube, and both Gameboy Advanced titles were ripe with potential. Presenting the ideal games however eluded the developer and publisher. The best versions of the titles would not only have had the polish in the control, features and gameplay, but they would have also incorporated elements from the theme parks as well.
The parks, after all, not only incorporated the vision of Walt Disney himself, but his most trusted artists and imagineers all had a hand in shaping how every theme worked individually and collectively as well. No detail was too small to be overlooked, no project too big to be deemed impossible, from colors to sounds and even smells, everything that went into the creation of the Disney parks was an amazing collective effort. The most creative minds in animation and entertainment shaped the elements that many now take for granted. Had these lessons and park features been incorporated into the DSN series then Konami would have had something truly spectacular. A heavy use of the theme parks is something that designer Warren Spector foresaw and that his Junction Point studio was incorporating with the development of Epic Mickey.
The stadium levels created by Konami were amazing for the traditional sports, they all had that special Disney Magic. This applied to the football, basketball and soccer stages. The fantasy-inspired Charmers Castle, with its towering spires, elegant banners and mix of romantic and modern elements was the home arena for the Charmer's basketball team. Instead of a bench for the team each player had a golden gothic-looking ornamental chairs and the scoreboard was built into a sculpture with gothic numbers displaying on the wall. The Steamrollers home stadium, an enormous dome had to be as large and as imposing as the home team, headlined by Pete. The field was a steel frame with gigantic visible gears turning underneath, steam would shoot up from the grates sporadically and arcs of electricity would shoot up the metal goal posts. Above the bleachers and facing the end zone was a series of gears perpetually grinding away, turning the ornamental beams across the dome. The industrial design was as awe inspiring as it was amazing.
The deficiencies in the universe were not present until the series took gamers out of the stadiums and onto the streets. It was the world presented in Disney Sports Skateboarding that demonstrated the vision that Konami wanted to present to gamers. There were many hints in concept art and in level designs for the stages themselves, unfortunately Konami could probably not incorporate these things in because the use of park assets was not in the licensing arrangement. It was painfully obvious in the Dreamland Funpark. That level took a heavy dose of Fantasyland and put it in the game, more so than even the Charmer's Castle. It was a mix of the Magic Kingdom and a Roller Coaster Kingdom without quite recreating the Disney magic. Dreamland Funpark was not the only level that "could have been."
The suspended track of the Hystaria level had strong hints of the beloved Windy Valley from Sonic Adventure. As it turned out there were also major cues from the Disneyland Big Thunder Mountain railway on the level as well. Twisting, broken railways, rocky cliffs with steep drops and tunnels mixed with suspended tracks, rails and zeppelins. It was also not the only level that could have been based on an actual theme park ride. The level Moon of Iota was set out in space and had the futuristic stylings, colors and atmosphere that hinted heavily at the iconic Space Mountain.
Even with the use of the iconic mouse ear balloons and an assortment of hidden Mickey's everywhere, none of these levels took direct quotes from the Disneyland attractions, however they all hinted very strongly at them. The perfect DSN license would have and should have included permission to use the elements from the theme parks. It would have grounded the Disney characters better than the pocket universe Konami had created for them. It would also have been a consolation to those wishing to see more Disney characters in the series. The use of theme park cues might have allowed designers a faster turnaround with the game and possibly would have freed up the developers to focus on control issues instead. No amount of concept art, no matter how well presented, could make up for the lack of time and focus that went into the gameplay.
Each title needed the entire focus of Konami and not solely shared assets and voices among them. Only then would the DSN series had survived and flourished. Did the failure of the DSN series verify that there could not be any good Disney games or any good licensed games? Was this proof that Konami went into the series with too much ambition? Perhaps that is the case but to sum it up by looking at so few variables we miss the bigger picture. Konami had a profound influence on the industry thanks to the Disney Sports series and we shall highlight this in the next blog.
Did you play any game in this series? What did you think? I’d like to hear about it in the comments section. As always if you would like to sponsor me please visit my Patreon page and consider donating each month, even as little as $1 would help make better blogs and even podcasts!
