When The Movie Sequel Is a Video Game
Credibility score: 52/100 — Mixed Credibility. Several questionable claims detected. Watch with healthy skepticism.
BSmeter analyzed "When The Movie Sequel Is a Video Game" and rated it 52/100 for credibility (a BS score of 48/100 — mixed credibility), on 2026-06-15. Its weakest claim — "Says the upgrade menu is copied from The SpongeBob Movie game" — scored 40/100 and was flagged as dubious. 35 claims were checked against the video transcript. Scores are produced by BSmeter's AI analysis of the transcript, not independent human verification.
Of 35 claims analyzed: 0 scored under 40, 33 between 40 and 69, and 2 at 70 or above.
Claims analyzed
Licensed movie tie-in games have sucked since gaming began — Opinion (50/100)
At 0:30
Classic blanket take — every licensed game ever was bad? That's doing a lot of work.
Why this score: Broad generalization with zero nuance.
- Speaker lumps every movie tie-in together as "sucked"
- Ignores any standout licensed titles across decades
- Sets up the video's premise but doesn't back the absolute claim
Original quote: “Well, you should. I have made a video about it. Licensed games have been around since the advent of gaming. Expanding on that, they sucked since the advent of gaming.”
Disney released a Finding Nemo game for GameCube during their push into gaming — OK (65/100)
At 2:30
Finding Nemo did come out on GameCube in 2003 — but it was a THQ-published licensed game, not a Disney-published title trying to build credibility.
Why this score: Partially accurate on the timeline and platform. Key points:
- Finding Nemo: The Continuing Adventures released for GameCube in late 2003
- Published by THQ, not Disney directly
- Disney was indeed licensing games heavily during this era but rarely self-published
Original quote: “this is around the time when Disney was really trying to get into the gaming scene to be respected as a publisher. They say as they put out Finding Nemo for Gamecube.”
Claims 90% of Rise of the Underminer is underground levels — OK (65/100)
At 4:30
Sounds about right for an Underminer villain game — but no official level breakdown exists to confirm the exact percentage.
Why this score: No hard data backs the 90% figure, but the setting makes it plausible. Key points:
- The villain is literally called the Underminer, so underground focus fits the premise
- Speaker notes occasional ice levels as the only break from dirt and machinery
- Without a full level list or developer notes, we can't verify the precise split
Original quote: “90% of this game takes place underground. And so, each level sees you surrounded by endless amounts of dirt and machinery.”
Says the upgrade menu is copied from The SpongeBob Movie game — Dubious (40/100)
At 4:50
Strong accusation but zero side-by-side proof — could be similar UI conventions rather than actual copy-paste.
Why this score: No visual evidence provided in the video. Supporting factors:
- Both games came from the same publisher era (THQ), so shared UI templates were common
- No developer interviews or code comparisons exist to confirm direct copying
- Without screenshots or assets shown, it's an assertion rather than a verified fact
Original quote: “The upgrade menu is literally a copy paste of the upgrade menu from the Spongebob movie game. It is shameless.”
Only Mr. Incredible and Frozone are playable in Rise of the Underminer — Solid (80/100)
At 5:05
Checks out with multiple sources listing just those two characters — the missed-opportunity take is fair.
Why this score: Widely confirmed across game databases. Details:
- Both GamesRadar and EarlyGame articles list only Mr. Incredible and Frozone as playable
- No evidence of hidden characters or alternate modes adding more
- The limited roster is a consistent criticism in retro reviews of the 2005 title
Original quote: “You can play as Mr. Incredible or Frozone. That's right, those are the only two playable characters, which seems like a massive missed opportunity”
Game has only 10 levels and can be beaten in ~115 minutes — OK (60/100)
At 5:25
The 10-level count appears in multiple old reviews, but the runtime comparison is rough — depends on skill and whether you do side content.
Why this score: Level count is consistent in sources, runtime is approximate. Points:
- Several retro articles confirm exactly 10 levels
- The Incredibles movie runtime is 115 minutes, so the comparison is reasonable
- No speedrun data or average playtime stats are cited, so the claim stays in the plausible-but-unverified zone
Original quote: “there's only 10 levels in the entire goddamn thing. meaning you could probably beat this game in around the same amount of time it takes to watch the Incredibles movie”
Game has only 10 levels and is a basic beat 'em up with formulaic story — OK (70/100)
At 6:30
10 levels is right — the repetitive robot-smashing structure is the main criticism people had.
Why this score: Factual on structure. Rise of the Underminer is a 10-stage beat 'em up where progression is mostly linear robot fights with minimal story variation between levels.
Original quote: “Because of it being a basic beat him up and only containing 10 levels, it's unfortunate that it takes such a formulaic approach to its story. From here, they go from place to place, destroying whatever robots the Underminer sends their way.”
Calls Rise of the Underminer a good sequel overall — Opinion (50/100)
At 8:30
Pure opinion on a licensed tie-in — no objective metric exists for "good sequel" here.
Why this score: Subjective judgment on game quality.
- Speaker weighs short length and low ambition as positives compared to other entries
- Acknowledges it could have been more ambitious but still prefers it to worse alternatives
- No factual claim to verify, just taste
Original quote: “Rise of the Underminer, good sequel. Eh, I'd lean more towards good than bad.”
Game used early Shrek concept art because Chris Farley died 3 years before 2000 deal — Dubious (45/100)
At 10:30
Farley died in 1997 so the math works — but no proof they actually used old concept art.
Why this score: Timeline is correct on Farley's death. Key issues:
- No documented evidence old concept art was handed over
- Speaker dismisses the theory without sources
- Character design credited to Todd McFarlane instead
Original quote: “this is a result of them being given concept art of the film from back when Shrek looked like this. But I don't buy that. Chris Farley had passed away 3 years before TDK signed their deal with DreamWorks”
Shrek Extra Large GameCube cover features Donkey — Unverifiable (50/100)
At 12:30
Sounds plausible for a kids game cover, but no box art evidence turned up in current sources.
Why this score: No confirmation available.
- Web results don't include box art details
- Common marketing practice to put popular side characters on covers
- Can't verify without visual evidence
Original quote: “This is the one with donkey on the cover for some reason.”
Shrek 2 game looks cheap despite boasting graphical upgrades — Opinion (50/100)
At 14:30
He's calling out the weird mismatch between realistic spiders and Shrek's cartoon world — fair visual critique.
Why this score: Subjective take on art style clash.
- The speaker dislikes mixing hyper-realistic spiders with the Shrek aesthetic
- Points to title screen as evidence of cheap look
- Common complaint in movie tie-in games where tech clashes with source tone
Original quote: “I don't like that these giant ultra realistic spiders exist in the Shrek world. And again, Fiona is just kind of teepposing at the end. For a game that boasts so hard about its graphical capabilities, it looks quite cheap. I mean, what the hell is this [__] title screen? That is rancid.”
Shrek game tried to be Mario 64 but failed — Opinion (50/100)
At 16:30
Fair take — Shrek clearly chased that 3D collectathon vibe and landed in the uncanny valley instead.
Why this score: Classic platformer ambition vs execution gap.
- Speaker contrasts modest Incredibles goal with Shrek's bigger swing.
- Multiple "10 movies that got video game sequels" lists note the same Mario 64 energy without the polish.
- Verdict stays Opinion because it's a quality judgment, not a fact.
Original quote: “Shrek wants to be Mario 64. Bigger shoes to fill. So, despite undoubtedly being the more impressive game, overall Shrek is just an unpleasant experience.”
Enter the Matrix game is fully canon alongside the movies — Opinion (50/100)
At 18:30
The Wachowskis treated the game's story as canon at the time, but later Matrix entries largely ignored it.
Why this score: Canon status is interpretive.
- The Wachowskis wrote and directed the game's cutscenes, so it was presented as official at launch.
- Later films (especially Resurrections) did not reference its events, weakening the "just as canon" claim.
- Fans still debate how much weight to give it versus the movies.
Original quote: “So, it's like an alternate version of the sequel that is also just as canon as the sequel. Got it.”
Says the new Matrix game will be the best game ever — Opinion (50/100)
At 20:30
Classic hype voice — calls it the best ever right before admitting it got worse scores than expected.
Why this score: Hype statement with zero evidence attached.
- Speaker immediately follows with "What happened?" showing they know the claim didn't age well.
- No sales data, review scores, or player metrics are given to back it up.
- Pure opinion dressed as prediction.
Original quote: “And a new story by the Wowskis. [ __ ] man. This is going to be the best game ever.”
Says he's never met anyone who likes Enter the Matrix — Personal Story (50/100)
At 22:30
Pure personal experience — can't fact-check who he's met.
Why this score: Anecdote, not data.
- Speaker is sharing his own social circle
- No broader claim about the game's popularity
- Personal Story verdict applies by default
Original quote: “I have never met anyone who actually likes this game. Although, I don't know many Matrix fans to be fair.”
Tron's three movies were all box office disappointments — Dubious (45/100)
At 24:30
Tron (1982) actually made decent money for its era — the later ones flopped harder.
Why this score: Mixed record, not total failure.
- Original Tron earned ~$50M on a $17M budget in 1982 (solid for the time)
- Tron: Legacy (2010) made $400M+ worldwide
- Tron: Ares (2025) underperformed but the blanket "none were big hits" is too broad
Original quote: “None of Tron's three movies have been that big a box office hits.”
FCON wants Encom user data for targeted ads — Just Vibes (50/100)
At 26:30
Classic early-2000s villain motivation — targeted ads as the big evil. Feels very of its time.
Why this score: In-universe plot point, not a real claim.
- Purely fictional corporate takeover
- Reflects 2003 anxieties about data and ads
- No external fact to check here
Original quote: “Encom is currently being taken over by FCON, who want to take all their user data and use it for nefarious means like targeted ads”
Tron 2.0 will age as well visually in 20 years as today — Opinion (50/100)
At 28:30
Bold take on timeless graphics — art direction can hold up, but tech always marches on.
Why this score: Subjective judgment on visual longevity.
- Relies on the game's stylized, minimalist aesthetic rather than raw polygon count.
- Many early-2000s games with strong art direction still hold up; ones chasing realism usually don't.
Original quote: “This game will look just as good as it does 20 years from now as it does today.”
Chicken Little: Ace in Action game is repetitive shovelware based on a 2-minute movie ending — Opinion (50/100)
At 30:30
Classic licensed-game complaint — speaker calls it repetitive and low-effort, which matches how most people remember these tie-ins.
Why this score: Subjective quality judgment rather than a checkable fact.
- Speaker's personal take that the game is repetitive and based on a tiny movie scene
- Matches the general reputation of early-2000s movie tie-in games
- No objective metric given, so it stays in opinion territory
Original quote: “Yeah, they made a game about that. I saw this in stores all the time as a kid and wanted no part of it. Who would want to play an entire game based around a two-minute segment from the ending of a movie? ... the game itself isn't very good either. But like, yeah, sure, it takes place after the…”
Says ASN Action isn't a real sequel to the movie — Opinion (50/100)
At 32:30
Classic 'fight me' energy on whether a licensed game counts as canon continuation.
Why this score: Pure opinion on what qualifies as a sequel.
- Speaker acknowledges the game exists and has fans
- Argues it fails the 'sequel' label despite continuing the story
- No factual claim to check — just personal definition of canon
Original quote: “If someone considered ASN action a cornerstone of their childhood, I really couldn't blame them. But dude, not a sequel. Fight me.”
Says fans might reject the game as non-canon because it resolves the original's ambiguous ending — Opinion (50/100)
At 34:30
Fair take — ambiguous endings are sacred to some fans and a 20-year-later answer can feel like overwriting their headcanon.
Why this score: Purely subjective reaction to canon decisions. Key points:
- No data on actual fan reception is provided
- Depends entirely on individual attachment to the original ambiguity
- Common pattern with long-gap sequels across media
Original quote: “Although, I do have to wonder how fans feel about it. Again, the ending to the original was left ambiguous on what happened to McCreaty. So, 20 years later, getting the answer that he survived and is willing to go back to the place and take the thing on again might come off a tad lamb.”
Wreck-It Ralph Wii game is notoriously terrible shovelware — Opinion (50/100)
At 36:30
Calling it 'infamously bad' is fair — this game gets roasted yearly for good reason.
Why this score: Personal take, not a fact-check. The speaker is sharing his long-standing opinion that the 2012 Wii tie-in is one of the worst games he's played. Community comments echo the same sentiment, with people specifically calling out the janky cutscene-to-gameplay transition.
Original quote: “Wreckit Ralph for Wii is infamously bad. I see folks [ __ ] on this 15-year-old piece of shovelware multiple times a year.”
Wants movie tie-in games to be direct interactive versions of the film — Opinion (50/100)
At 38:30
Fair take — most people buying these games expect the movie's exact world and scenes, not a random sequel.
Why this score: Speaker's preference is clear and consistent with how most movie-to-game adaptations are judged.
- Direct adaptations let players experience the film's set pieces firsthand
- This is why so many licensed games get criticized when they invent new stories instead
Original quote: “if I'm buying a game based on a movie, it's because I want an interactive version of Curious George hopping around the city. I want to control Vern the Turtle dodging booby traps around the neighborhood.”
Wreck-It Ralph Wii game graphics are shockingly bad even for 2012 — Opinion (50/100)
At 40:30
Fair take — licensed movie games often got rushed ports. — The "disgusting" part is subjective but the low effort is real.
Why this score: Subjective aesthetic judgment.
- Many 2012 Wii titles looked dated by then
- Movie tie-ins frequently received minimal development time
- Speaker's disgust is a personal reaction, not a factual claim
Original quote: “OKAY, it's the elephant in the room, right? This looks disgusting. It is unfathomable that they thought they could put this on the Wii in 2012, no less.”
Calls this the worst movie-to-game sequel reviewed so far — Opinion (50/100)
At 42:30
Pure ranking opinion — no facts to check, just his personal verdict on the game.
Why this score: Subjective ranking.
- Speaker compares this title directly to others covered earlier in the same video
- No objective metrics given, just personal experience after one playthrough
- Common in game review content where final 'worst/best' calls are taste-based
Original quote: “This is the worst one we've looked at today. Second to none.”
Ghostbusters video game is the most interesting one in the video — Opinion (50/100)
At 44:30
Pure opinion — no way to fact-check 'most interesting' when it's just his taste.
Why this score: Subjective ranking based on personal interest.
- No objective criteria given for what makes a game 'interesting'
- Speaker explicitly says 'at least to me,' signaling it's his view
- Can't be verified or disproven with evidence
Original quote: “2009's Ghostbusters the video game might possibly be the most interesting game in this entire video. At least to me.”
Ghostbusters game is better than later Ghostbusters movies as the true third film — Opinion (50/100)
At 46:30
Pure fan ranking — some agree the game feels more like a sequel than the actual third movie.
Why this score: Subjective take on canon quality.
- Many fans do rank the 2009 game above Ghostbusters: Answer the Call
- It's a common sentiment in Ghostbusters communities
- No objective way to measure 'true third film'
Original quote: “I can see why fans consider this the true third film. Definitely a better pick than any of this crap.”
Claims the game got a 2019 remaster available on Switch — Unverifiable (50/100)
At 48:30
No sources contradict it, but nothing in the web results confirms a 2019 remaster either.
Why this score: Remaster claim sits in the gray zone.
- Web context mentions the game in general but provides *no specific 2019 remaster details*
- Switch availability is plausible for older titles but unconfirmed here
- *Absence of evidence* isn't proof it's wrong — just means we can't verify it right now
Original quote: “It's so weird. I barely ever hear anyone talk about this game, but it's still getting re-released to this day. Got a remaster back in 2019. You can play this thing on your Switch.”
Al Pacino gave permission to use his likeness in Scarface game — Unverifiable (50/100)
At 50:30
Sounds plausible but no public record or confirmation of Pacino signing off on this specific game.
Why this score: No concrete evidence supports or refutes the permission claim.
- Al Pacino's likeness appears in the 2006 game, but licensing details are rarely disclosed publicly.
- The speaker presents it as fact without citing a source.
Original quote: “No chance of them getting Alpuccino back for this, but he did give them permission to use his likeness, which is cool.”
Calls for killing Lock, Shock and Barrel kids — Just Vibes (50/100)
At 52:30
Pure frustration at three cartoon villains who've been menaces since the original film — the tone is very "this has gone on long enough."
Why this score: This is a casual, hyperbolic reaction to the story recap rather than a serious plot suggestion. The trio are established antagonists in both the movie and this game sequel, so the comment lands as comedic impatience rather than a literal call to action.
Original quote: “Dude, they just need to kill these kids already.”
PS2 version still looks stellar and captures the film's art style perfectly — Opinion (50/100)
At 54:30
Subjective take on visuals — art style love is personal, not a measurable claim.
Why this score: Pure opinion on graphical fidelity. Key points:
- Speaker compares PS2 version favorably to Xbox One
- No objective metrics provided, just personal preference
- Visual quality is inherently subjective
Original quote: “>> It's over. I'm serious. Just who do you think you are?
>> No more singing cuss words, guys.
>> It is also a nicel looking DM. I played the PS2 version, and while I hear the Xbox One looks slightly better, I think it's pretty stellar still, perfectly capturing the film's unique art style.”
Game fails to notify player when unlocking Pumpkin King form despite notifying about other things — OK (50/100)
At 56:30
Specific complaint about missing unlock notification — plausible but no external confirmation available.
Why this score: Unverifiable without playing the game ourselves. The speaker makes a clear claim about missing UI feedback for a specific power-up unlock. No reviews or wikis in the web context address this particular detail.
Original quote: “Jack can turn into the pumpkin king. Well, he is the pumpkin king. He gets a pumpkin king outfit and you can squirt fire, but the game never [__] tells you that you unlocked it again. They notify you about everything else going on.”
Saw 2: Flesh and Blood title reminds him of Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey — Just Vibes (50/100)
At 58:30
Funny gut reaction — both titles mash a kids' property with horror gore.
Why this score: Pure association joke.
- No factual claim being made
- Just a quick pop-culture link that lands for horror fans
Original quote: “When I hear the title for this game, I just think about Winnie the Pooh Blood and Honey.”
Assumes Campbell dies in Saw game since he isn't seen again — Opinion (50/100)
At 60:30
Fair guess based on absence — but canon in licensed games is often messy and not always shown on-screen.
Why this score: Absence of a character doesn't automatically mean death in tie-in media.
- Game developers frequently leave loose ends when adapting films.
- Multiple endings are common in the Saw series itself.
- Without an official statement from the developers, both paths remain possible.
Original quote: “Which ending is the canon one? I don't know. You never see Campbell again, so I have to assume it's the one where he dies. But then what's the point in the other one? Which is supposed to even be the good ending?”
Wreck-It Ralph game is just a buggy 1-hour platformer where powers do nothing — Opinion (50/100)
At 62:30
He's roasting the gameplay loop and calling the powers useless — strong take, but it's his personal verdict on a licensed tie-in.
Why this score: Subjective game criticism. The speaker describes the Wreck-It Ralph tie-in as a short, buggy platformer whose "superhero forms" function like Mario invincibility stars and whose only post-game reward is replaying the same content.
- This matches common complaints about 2010s movie tie-ins that prioritized quick development over polish.
- No external data contradicts the description; it's a value judgment on quality and value for kids.
Original quote: “look, I know kids are stupid. I know they can put up with some trash. I know I did. But it gets to a point. Imagine being the head of a game company knowing your product looks like this. You ever wonder if they think about the kids who got this for Christmas or their birthdays over anything…”
See the full analysis with timestamps →