Perhaps unsurprisingly, when “Superman: The New Superman Adventures” finally debuted, it was far from the game Eric Caen had envisioned. The open world mechanic had been scrapped and the game was full of rings through which players had to guide Superman using some of the most frustratingly unresponsive controls ever developed. Supes would also frequently get stuck in various parts of the map for no obvious reason. As such, the game’s reviews were incredibly harsh and criticized its many bugs, enemy AI, the way environments would seem to clip, and its general unfinished feel.
Advertisement
Matt Casamassina wrote a review for IGN that essentially amounted to a take down of “Superman,” ultimately describing the game as “a huge, whopping disappointment” that is “so all-around poorly executed that it’s downright offending to people like myself who have enjoyed the comic books, movies, television shows, and more” Casamassina also dubbed the game “one of Nintendo 64’s worst” and criticized the “horrible control, unforgivable frame rates, and more bugs than can be counted.” Just to rub salt in the wound, he finished up by claiming that Titus “should be absolutely ashamed of this awful game.”
In the years since its release, the game’s reputation hasn’t improved, with Playboy referring to it as “one of the most hated games ever made.” According to Caen, however, this was all DC and Warners’ fault. The Titus co-founder claimed during a 2011 interview that the licensor caused so many problems that the “final quality of the product” was solely down to them. (Hey, it wouldn’t be the only time Warner Bros. botched Superman.) Though he admitted that the initial design was “too ambitious compared to what an N64 was able to deliver,” he maintained that the roadblocks he and the team faced were insurmountable. “The licensor refused to let Superman kick ‘real’ people,” Caen explained. Asked why Superman’s powers were limited in the game, he simply replied, “It wasn’t our decision,” before going on to state that “politics” and the approval process had taken up too much time during development.
Advertisement
Interestingly enough, Caen claimed that “Superman” actually sold well, turning a profit for Titus. However, the profits were quickly negated when the company was forced to scrap the PlayStation version at the behest of Warner Bros. despite the fact it had been, according to Caen, 75% developed. This, apparently, cost Titus a lot of money. Eventually, the company went bankrupt in 2004, and while that wasn’t directly related to the “Superman” debacle, it couldn’t have helped.
In his 2011 interview, Caen reflected on the creation of “Superman” and admitted that he and his company bore at least some of the blame for the games’ failure. “Superman is a cult character,” he remarked. “I don’t think it is easy to deliver even a portion of players’ expectations, and we were probably too ambitious and a bit presumptuous at that time.” Still, the developer maintains that the game’s terrible reputation is “exaggerated” mainly due to the Man of Steel’s pop culture status.
