Troubled doesn’t begin to cover it. The journey that World War Z has made from book to script to screen has been dogged with disaster from the start. The Hollywood Reporter did a good job describing the scene back in June, but the potted version basically involves delays, rewrites, re-shoots, the departure of key crew members, and misery on set.

So with the trailer hitting today we ask if, following such monumental problems, the film has any chance of finding an audience next summer?

First things first, the book was always going to be tough source material to adapt. Written by Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War doesn’t have a simple narrative through-line, nor the kind of linear plot that a Hollywood movie demands.

Instead, it’s a sprawling account of the zombie outbreak, detailing the spread of the zombie infection through the likes of China, South Africa, Israel and the United States. And one that feels more like it should be turned into an ongoing TV series than a standalone movie.

And so screenwriter J. Michael Straczynski and latterly Matthew Michael Carnahan were charged with the task of turning what’s essentially an anecdotal historical tome into a movie for the multiplex masses.

The plot therefore now revolves around Gerald Lane, a United Nations researcher who is sent on a fact-finding mission to discover the origin of the outbreak and to figure out how to stop it.

But while the Hollywood Reporter’s source claimed that the film’s first 45 minutes were terrific, the second half was apparently problematic, with scribes Damon Lindelof and Drew Goddard asked to help re-write the finale, leading to re-shoots and the release date being pushed back from December 2012 to June 2013.

Such a process is common practice in Hollywood however, and it's not always the disaster that commentators would have you believe. The Bourne Identity underwent both re-writes and re-shoots late in proceedings and that turned out okay. Same with The Amazing Spider-Man, which grossed more than $750m at the global box office this summer.

So what of the trailer that hit today? It certainly does a good job of building tension and once the zombie apocalypse does hit, it looks epic in terms of size and scale. But fans of the book have already taken to Twitter to not only complain that the story appears to bear only a passing resemblance to the source material, but also to bemoan the fact that the undead are slow shufflers in the book but have been transformed into speedy sprinters for the movie.

The film’s visual effects artist John Nelson told EW the reason for the change: “They are like predatory animals that can’t control themselves. I worked with tigers [while shooting Gladiator], and if you watch them when a horse goes by they go batty, even if they know they can’t reach it. When Zs see humans they do same thing, they activate. They launch themselves.

"There are a lot of things in nature we’re mining as references. They move like birds or school of fish, too, in reactive formations, and it’s not because they have a higher level of [shared] thinking or communication – it’s about their nature and the fact that their instinct to infect is so basic, efficient, and overpowering. They will go through anything. If they lose both legs, they will walk on their hands. They lock in and they’re like salmon going upstream or sperm swimming to be the first to egg.”

Speedy zombies didn’t do the likes of 28 Days Later and the Dawn of the Dead remake any harm. But Shaun of the Dead himself – Simon Pegg – tweeted this morning, “Zombies everywhere are spinning in their graves,” adding that he’d be prepared to give the movie the benefit of the doubt, but that “Fast zombies are not my bag.”

A bigger worry may be the copious amounts of CGI featured in the trailer. Both fast and slow zombies can be made to look scary, but can you do the same with artificial-looking computer-generated zombies? The effects may not be finished yet at this early stage, but the early evidence isn’t good, particularly in the scenes where the hordes attack.

Indeed, the idea that zombies can scale huge buildings and walls by piling on top of each other is cool, but seeing it in practice as the trailer’s climactic money shot is not, the execution disappointing thanks to yet more ropey CGI.

Another question that has dogged the production from the start is whether or not director Marc Forster can handle the film’s action sequences. Forster is better known for dramas like Finding Neverland and The Kite Runner, and his one foray into the genre – Quantum of Solace – was the most underwhelming of Daniel Craig’s Bond movies, with the action a particular disappointment.

He’s got a fine actor to carry the film in the shape of Brad Pitt; one who can handle both action and drama, but will the actor’s talent and popularity be enough to tempt audiences into theatres next June?

That remains to be seen, but whatever the case, it’s clear that studio Paramount has a lot riding on World War Z, with the film’s budget reportedly approaching the $200m mark. It was also hoped that the film would be the first part in a proposed trilogy. But Hollywood is a fickle place, so if the film doesn’t hit big come the summer, expect Worlds War Z to be both the beginning and the end of this particular brand of big-budget horror.

Chris Tilly is Entertainment Editor for IGN and really hopes World War Z works. His idle chat can be found on both Twitter and MyIGN.

Source : feeds[dot]ign[dot]com

For those who don't know, I've competed in a multitude of titles in the past. Although my area of expertise came from the world of consoles, I know how it feels to be in an 0-5 situation and have your back against the wall. I have both fought back and defeated in these situations and the feeling is unlike any other. Competitors and viewers alike take for granted how flawless an individual must be in order to make that perfect comeback a reality. Here at IPL, we have witnessed this first hand with Spin Move's amazing run against Epsilon in the North America Qualifier Semi-Final match-up.

I had the chance to catch up with TCM's Luxxiz's and asked him about his fondest comeback memory:

"Making comebacks is always so nice, when you get into the momentum and nothing can stop you. I remember one time in an EU league, we were up against GamersLeague and on their map Archway they were leading 5-0, but we felt it, we really motivated each other on teamspeak and just pumped us up, we turned it around, everyone just stepped up and we won 7-5"

Communication is important in those all-or-nothing situations and Luxxiz couldn't have said it any better. When it's your turn to attack and put the team on your back you get into this groove and feel unstoppable. Granted, it's not always like that and you, sometimes, fall apart but like Luxxiz said it's all about your team continuing to motivate one another, even in defeat.

One of the reasons I find ShootMania to be such an intense game is due to the importance of the attacking rounds and how it can make or break a team and when everything is on the line. The 1v3 situation is a unique take on team based game play that puts the pressure on you out of the gates and I will be as bold to say that no other game has done that in the past.

Follow Alex "GoldenboyFTW" Mendez on twitter!

Source : feeds[dot]ign[dot]com

In an era of fantasy football and exploding statistical obsessiveness, it's surprising to think EA has only just now settled on bringing Madden Social into the world. Though it may have tarried, the interconnected Facebook and iOS app due out this fall offers a pretty smart balance of fantasy player trading and actual Madden gameplay.

Like most Facebook-based games, Madden Social is a simple turn-based game for two players that don't have to be online at the same time to play together. The game is heavily focused on offense, so players will take turns trying to guide a drive into their opponent's endzone.

When you're on defense the stats and arrangement of your players will matter, but everything else is automated. Played over Facebook, the game is shown as a top-down view of the entire playing field. You'll choose what players you want on the field and which plays you want to run, and then the computer does all the math simulating the outcome. You can also keep multiple games running while you wait for player 2 to log back on to Facebook.

When played on iPhone of iPad, you'll be able to control actual plays. There's a virtual analog stick if you want total control of movement, though you can ignore it and focus on simple swipes for jukes or stiff-arms. You can also choose which receiver to throw to by either tapping them on screen or hitting one of five virtual buttons in the bottom right corner of the screen.

It's a simpler version of the action-oriented version of Madden that's been available on iOS for a couple of years as a purchaseable App, but Madden Social is free to download and connects you to those that have a statistical obsession with football but may not be interested in actually playing the second-by-second simulation.

Facebook developers have larded the media with talk of asynchronous gameplay for years, meaning both players don't have to be connected to the game at the same time to play with one another. Madden Social pushes asynchronicity in another direction, allowing players to compete strategically while potentially playing very different games. I may prefer the chessboard presentation of Facebook and you may prefer the adrenal improvisations of the iOS version, and Madden Social translates one style of play to the other. It's not just playing at different times, but actually playing in different ways to best accommodate the platform.

The game economy is driven by buying or unlocking new plays and new packs of player cards to improve your team over time. You'll start with 25 random players, which you'll have to assemble into a team, and by winning games or pulling off big plays you'll earn coins that can be used to buy new player card packs. You'll be able to buy one-star, two-star, or three-star packs, each coming with five player cards of increasing skill, depending on how much you want to splurge. There's also an Auction House where you can sell your player cards you don't use anymore.

The playbook is also fairly limited at the outset, but you'll be able to buy new plays, or just earn enough coins to unlock them over time. There'll be another kind of consumable -- energy units -- that limits just how much you can play without taking a break, though if you become insatiable Facebook will gladly sell you more units. Playing one entire drive will cost you one energy unit, and though the game is still being balanced, at present you're scheduled to get roughly one energy unit every 15 minutes.

Madden Social doesn't connect to the console versions of the game, which might have been another way of entreating long-time fans to noodle with the Ultimate Teams or Online Leagues from the office or on the bus. Yet, what it does do is offer a simple and surprisingly unique experience to bridge people's common interest in football through a medium flexible enough to support different preferences of play.

For years, game fans have said things like "it's just not your type of game" to answer complaints from those interested in a game but thrown off by a particular kind of gameplay. We all like playing games in our own way, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't play together.

Madden Social seems like a small but worthwhile step toward making that approach commonplace. With Smart Glass, Wii U, Vita/PS3 connectivity, and a plethora of Android and iOS devices out in the world I think there could be real advancements made breaking out of the single-platform, singular-gameplay model that has so far dominated our understanding of what a videogame can be.

Madden Social doesn't have a specific launch date yet, but it will be released sometime this fall.

Michael Thomsen is a freelancer writer based in New York City.

Source : feeds[dot]ign[dot]com