According to the Quantum Break Creative Director, Sam Lake, he initially pitched in an idea for Alan Wake 2 and that he wanted to do the sequel, but Microsoft wasn't interested in doing a sequel and wanted something entirely fresh.
QB was ok but probably would have been better of with Alan Wake two considering that's what a lot of people have been asking for. Who owns that IP?? Now that they're going multiplat, can they make the sequal now or does MS own it??
Remedy owns the QB and Alan Wake IPs!
You might want reread the part of where MS own QB IP in the article .
Microsoft don't own Alan Wake
and what new game did we get by sacrificing alan wake 2??? "_______________" - correct...we got nothing instead
I'm okay with it. Some things just need to stand on their own as a one and done great experience. Bioshock and Dead Space should have done the same.
I was soooo disappointed in QB, and wished they had did AW2 instead since i loved the first one.
“Microsoft Wanted Something New That's Why Alan Wake 2 Didn't Happen“ Microsoft not listening to consumers as usual. I’m pretty sure nearly everyone was asking for Alan Wake 2.
People around here are always saying that MS only does sequels and when they try to make a new IP, they're not listening to consumers? Wich one is it? Sequels or new IPs?
Think, if Horizon Zero Dawn did poorly and people didn't like it people will be saying okay GG go make a true Killzone sequel. If The Last Of Us did bad, people would say ok ND go back to Uncharted. What people want are hit games that CAN have a sequel. QB was a good game but it wasn't a hit game or a system seller even though. MS is great at marketing so we all thought QB was going to be this huge game but in reality it was a decent game. I am happy they did QB because that shows me that MS is trying to get some new IPs out there which I am all for.
@The Infected Come on, you're better than that. You know as well as I do that MS since phil took over have been listening to customers a LOT.
Maybe I'm the minority here, but I enjoyed QB a lot more than Alan Wake. Sure AW was good, but QB was amazing IMO. The gameplay was similarly enjoyable, but the story in that game had me gripped from beginning to end. I love stories where you don't get the entire story until the end. Made me want to play it again to notice all the things I missed the first time. The story was so tight and enjoyable. Alan Wake seemed like a Stephen King novel to me. Alan Wake seemed like the dude from "Bag of Bones" but especially "The Dark Half". I enjoyed those books tremendously, but Alan Wake seemed like a blend of those two books. The Main character from Bag of Bones in the world of The Dark Half. I didn't enjoy this story as much because it seemed like the concept has been done before. QB's story seemed much fresher. So I enjoyed it more.
I liked QB. Wasn't anything special but still enjoyable. Played Alan Wake once and just couldn't get into it. Didn't like how it played at all.
MS owns the QB IP
Quantum break was a good game, just not an amazing game. Alan Wake was certainly better. The thing is Quantum break has a lot of potential. If they ditched the tv series aspect and addressed some of the flaws a sequel could be amazing. Unfortunately i think ms will abandon any new ip that is not amazing on its first outing. We probably wont be seeing QB2 and it wouldn't surprise me if Alan Wake 2 came out on other platforms as well. This is the issue with ms not developing their big games in house.
They should follow through with that idea and not give up after one try. Keep making new IPs, some will fail completely, some will be okay but can be improved upon in a sequel, some will be very successful, but keep going! And of course also make sequels as well! Just do both basically! And if you hit the jackpot with a new IP make sequels for that as well! And for the love of console gaming, hire more developers! The teams you have are excellent, let them hire more so they can have more than 1 complete team! It's crazy that a company that is mostly about software has troubles doing this. I think it has something to do that some higher ups and/or shareholders don't like to take too many risks, but am sure it's bound to be successful in the long run if they keep trying!
Game development is a business. Platform holders need to sell these games at a profit or they risk studio closures. This is why Sony closed Evolution Studios, Guerrilla Cambridge and parted ways with Ready at Dawn as a second party studio. It is also why we seen Microsoft shut down Lionhead, Press Play and cancelled Scalebound. Making games just to say you have them is bad business. Platform holders need to make games that actually sell which is the hard part.
Alot of gamers have that bad when they want companies to revive super niche titles for nostalgia purposes when it wont sell well and will lead to layoffs. I cant imagine a game like Battletoads or some of the less known about games getting a sequel.
"Game development is a business." And yet its often defended as an art. And as bad as studios overextending their finances on a project that they close down if it fails utterly, doesn't make a specific level of profit, its worse when publishers force them to cut corner and push them towards deadlines under those same conditions. And the studios still catch a majority of the blame.
@Godmars290 Games can be considered art on the outside, but on the inside it's still a business. Which is why most artists are broke.
@Godmars290 You do realize so many aspects of art is also a business right? Rather it's in a gallery/ museum setting, music, movies, comics and video games. Hell most galleries/ museums you're required to have a background in business for the position.
@ Godmars290 Books, movies, music... are art forms but they're also industries.
An artist friend of mine(painter not graphics art), said the difference between a successful artist and a starving artist is that a successful artist knows how to sell their work. The talent is usually irrelevant. In gaming, the talent is also important, but not always completely necessary, as formulistic releases can also do well.
Sometimes giving up after one game means a series can never reach it's full potential. Without risk, there is no reward....unless you make games by the numbers, but when those numbers don't work out on release, you tend to lose more.
Alan Wake 2 would of been excellent but i thought Quantim Break was complete trash and dont even get me started on them stupid tv shows every five mins. I wanted to play a game not watch a tv series .
" i thought Quantim Break was complete trash " No doubt.
Quantum Break was garbage. Yet, watch them release a QB2.
Angry Joe thought it was trash too https://www.youtube.com/wat...
Quantum Break was a fun ass game. Much more fun tha Alan Wake.
@GamesMaster1982 "them stupid tv shows every five mins" There were only 4 or 5 live action sequences in the entire game. These "TV show" episodes were an OPTIONAL component and could be skipped if the player so choose. I found them to be completely engrossing. The excellent production values and onscreen talent provided one of the most immersive experiences I've had playing a video game.
I'm with you. I enjoyed QB but I did think AW was the better of the 2 games. I feel people hate on qb and aw because they are on Microsoft platform but for me ide take a number 2 of both.
QB wasn't perfect...but it wasn't trash either. I think there is a good game to be found they just need to refine and change some things. Narrative wise, its solid and I liked the overall story but I think I would suggest a full animated experience this time. Don't get me wrong...I did like the TV episodes but I felt it was a bit jarring going from the animation to the FMV. I am just not a fan of mixing the two. Gameplay wise, I think QB's biggest flaw was a lack of a proper cover system. I know they wanted to push players to use the powers but frankly the game screamed 3rd person cover shooter so not just allowing for that always made combat feel like it was gimped and overly frustraiting when you tried to use cover. Let me go into a proper locked cover and I will still use my time powers if you give them to me. I would even say the time mechanics would have been even better if you the player felt more confident about being able to stay in cover to use them. And, they also probably need to work on their boss fight difficulty given how the last one turns out. Anyway, I would welcome a QB 2.
The production value?? The production value on those "episodes" were a joke! Indie films look better than that. Cable tv shows even have better production value. It looks like one of those fan made "tv shows" that is hosted on like YouTube or something
@BiggerBoss "Indie films look better than that. Cable tv shows even have better production value" Your comparison is irrelevant since you are referring to a different medium. Indie films and cable TV shows can have budgets that can exceed $10,000,000 (per episode for shows like ER, Friends, Rome, Game of Thrones). The creators of such have the luxury of focusing all of their time and resources into making a singular product, instead of, you know, making a AAA video game too. "It looks like one of those fan made "tv shows" that is hosted on like YouTube or something" Please list the GAMES that you believe have better production values in their live action cut scenes than Quantum Break.
@xavier Umm, Microsoft is one of the richest companies on earth. There's no excuse for the live-action cutscenes to not be film-level quality.
@ BiggerBoss What does Microsoft's current market value have to do with this debate? MS did not develop or produce Quantum Break. They published it. Even if MS did create the game their vast amount of revenue would not guarantee a quality production. There are countless 100 million dollar films that are poorly produced, some of which are far worse than the live action sequences in QB. You still didn't answer my request. Name a GAME that has better live action cut scenes (film-level as you put it) than QB.
Immersive in a video game usually doesn't mean taking one out of the game for 22 minutes at a time. The production quality was just above SyFy mini-series quality, and the acting was OK. As far as being skippable, doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose of having a story driven game? QB on the game side was decent enough, although a bit repetative the further it went on. It had it's faults, but generally no major complaints But I'd say it was average. nothing bad, but nothing spectacular. The story presentation of the game though made it a chore to get through.
There were 4 live action episodes that occurred at the end of the first 4 chapters. They certainly were not every 5 minutes. You were also able to skip them, no need to watch any of the episodes. QB was around 10 hours long (average play time according to HLTB), which means a live action episode roughly every 2 hours for the first 4 chapters.
Anyone who has played both games know they are pretty much the same thing. Alan Wake suffers in that the gameplay is boring same as QB. Only difference is QB has a good story.
I can't wait for Alan Wake 2 to eventually be done. I adored that game on my 360.
Hopefully, Remedy doesn't have to run their ideas by Microsoft anymore.
I knew it. They wanted something new because Alan Wake didn't sell that well...they thought if they tried again and did a new IP it would have another chance to appeal to a bigger audience again Typical of them...if Remedy went multiplatform earlier or went to Sony we'd be looking forward to the reveal of Alan Wake 3 by now.
So by comments u would continue to invest in a IP that failed . As for typical all companies do as such .
It hardly failed and as a big fanbase. It released the same day as Red Dead Redemption. Why not give a sequel a chance anyway, fix what was wrong with the first and give them a chance to finish the story.
@ Foxtrot "Xbox has no exclusives or original IP!" -- N4G Users **Microsoft decides to forego making a sequel to a moderately successful game and instead invests in a new exclusive title** "Xbox should stop making new games! They should focus on multiplatform sequels!" -- N4G Users Make up your minds, people.
Why are you quoting as if n4g has one voice?
Typical commen from you. Pointing to Sony for everything right and blaming MS for everything wrong. Can't ever read your comment here without cringing.
I hardly ever say that but if there's one game I can say that about and behind if it was Sony it would be Alan Wake I'm only blaming MS because that's what had happened. They wanted something new because they didn't want another failure despite AW selling pretty well considering it was up against Red Deac Stop making it into a childish fanboy thing trying to ignite something...that's cringy
"Stop making it into a childish fanboy thing trying to ignite something..." Temet Nosce.....
No where did Same Lake even say that MS didn't want Alan Wake 2 because it failed. And you really think that if they went through Sony we would be on part 3? If that were the case where's my Legend of Dragoon 5? Alan Wake had a great premise but I still found the games combat very monotonous, something I heard was also a problem with QB. As for the TV part I always felt Remedy was going in that direction even with Alan Wake the way they set up the chapters was episodic complete with "last time" edits. I thought that was one of the coolest parts of the game. Here's hoping for a part 2 sometime in the future to both games.
I love how every Xbox fan loved Alan wake and wanted a sequel after QB, but now, after this article, oh "it failed" and "didn't sell well anyways" You guys are such nihilists
@Biggerboss Exactly which Xbox fans are saying all this? Point them out in between the "QB was trash" comments.
@ BiggerBoss "You guys are such nihilists" That word doesn't mean what you think it means.
Except Sony want to own and hold onto any new IP... Hence why Insomniac went to Microsoft for Sunset Overdrive. Some developers want to hold onto their IP's, but Sony wants to swallow them up. Remedy wouldn't have made an exclusive deal with Sony, 3rd party would have been more likely.
While I completely agree with your comment, it's highly likely that if Sony ended up getting the SO IP, they likely would have done a lot more to get the title to sell. Would have helped that the game itself is something that typically sells better on PS platforms. It's sort of a trade off for the developers. You get to keep your IP, but that IP may not have as much a chance for success. Take Fuze for instance. Highly anticipated Insomniac game they got to keep the IP for. EA as the publisher made Insomniac completely butcher the artistic presentation to make it something more realistic. In doing so, everyone excited for the game became mad that they weren't getting what looked like an Insomniac game. On a game play level, it was very much insomniac, but most of the "heart" was squeezed out of it. So, where is Fuze now? Insomniac owns an IP they were passionate about that not many people played, and no one even remembers, and they likely will never be able to do anything with it again. There's more hope for SO, but I doubt MS is going to publish for them again. Since the game didnt' sell that great, it's hard to say if any other publisher would either. This means that Insomniac has to self fund, which isn't something they do for their big games. Owning an IP means very little if you can't do anything with it.
So they should've done a sequal to a game that didn't sell yet you seem mad that they went for a new IP instead which is what people keep saying that they should do, so why is there this weird standard that people hold MS/Xbox to
Alan Wake did OK for the long haul. It was one of those long burn games. Lots of people picked it up as more people kept talking about it. I think initially it didn't light any fires, but as sales happened more people got into the series. It was a good game overall. I really enjoyed it. I don't think MS was involved with all the sales of the game though, so it's possible they had a different view of it. I honestly think AW2 probably would have sold better than QB. Way too many people seem to appreciate the game for it to be a low seller.
Its funny the games gamers ACTUALLY ask for MS ignores, all the while giving games noone asked for.
All I read from fanboys is how MS needs NEW IP's....now you're saying no one is asking for them?
They can do both
Why don't they stop making HALO OR GEARS and give us a new game?? Alan Wake only had ONE game!! We've had 5 Gears and 800 Halo's
@2pac, So you're are asking why didn't REMEDY do both? Because it's REMEDY that made the game not MS. @Biggerboss "Why don't they stop making HALO OR GEARS and give us a new game??" ...Quantum Break.... "Alan Wake only had ONE game!!" So are you asking for a new game or another sequel...I'm confused...
@biggerboss Not counting remaster we have 7 real halo games in 15 years. (Including reach and odst) in 10 years we are going on to our 6th uncharted game (including golden abyss and lost legacy) but we don't talk about uncharted when we talk about series being overdone do we
@gangsta You're being deliberately obtuse. I would've been fine with Alan wake 2, because there's only been ONE game over 5 years ago. What I WANT, is new IP from a studio like 343, who's been doing NOTHING except for Halo since its inception. Naughty Dog gave us TLOU while still working on uncharted, why can't 343 do the same?
@krib Not counting the remaster there's only been 4 console Uncharteds in 10 years. Four. 5 years between uncharted 3 (2011) and uncharted 4 (2016). What's overdone about one in the last five? That's half a decade. Golden Abyss is a vita exclusive. I couldn't play it on my PS3 or PS4 if I wanted to. I *could* play Halo Wars + Halo Wars 2 though. So that's two more for that IP on console. You're counting an expansion pack (lost legacy) that's a dlc they included with the UC4 season pass? Is the Following a new Dying Light game too because it's a new, bigger map than the main game? Or is it still just an expansion? RDR Undead Nightmare DLC had a disc release too. Doesn't make it RDR2. GTA4 released their story DLC as a disc later too. If DLC counts, should we mention remakes like Halo Anniversary then with some Halo MCC and Halo Spartan Strike for good measure? Just lemme pop in some Halo Forward unto Dawn and Fall of Reach on Netflix in the background while avoiding the bits of Halo Lego on my carpet. Then we'll talk about overdone ;)
@Biggerboss "What I WANT, is new IP from a studio like 343, who's been doing NOTHING except for Halo" So you want a new IP from a studio who is not only named after the Halo franchise but was assembled for the sole purpose of creating Halo games and content? Listen... that's all well and good and we can sit here and "well Sony does it how come...." all day but as of now it doesn't look like it's gonna happen. So why care and what does it have to do with MS providing new IP's through other methods? Has nothing to do with me being 'obtuse', has everything to do with people being unreasonable.
"Microsoft Wanted Something New That's Why they cancelled scalebound" "but ok with Quantim Break"
Scalebound was obviously having development issues.
Now you are just twisting things and QB released way before Scale bound was fully conceived