Alan Wake developer Remedy has explained its decision to remove sandbox elements from the long-awaited action adventure game.
"It's not a good mixture with storytelling. For it we would have been forced to make such compromises in the game that we at Remedy don't want to. The most important thing for us is a compelling story and so we decided to go in that direction" Amen. I dont mind if they removed the Sandbox part of the game because Theres WAYYYYY to many Sandbox games nowadays and for somekind of reason that's the new trend in gaming. Imagine playing a Resident Evil 1 , Silent Hill 1 type of game in a Sandbox type of game! that's a big WTF.
What he said..
Everything is not fun in a sandbox :)
Am I the last one who got to know this!? :((((((( It's no longer a sandbox game? Man, one of the MAIN reasons why I was very interested in this game is its sandbox nature with all those beautiful graphics. This is seriously a huge letdown for me. :( And to those who agree with this step by Remedy, well yeah now the game is more focused on the story but be sure that it has lost a huge portion of fun elements. I was very impressed in 2007 when I saw the first screens of the game. That stunning, dynamic world NEEDS to be free-roamed. :(
No way,I was looking forward t just driving around searching for stuff and getting freaked out if I broke my car,then having to roam the woods trying to find a hut or something. I was left slightly disappointed by the stage demo,and now this :( been waiting for it since I seen it my UK OXM all those years back so my hype has died a little. But at least the atmosphere is good,but I get a feeling the scale the people/press had once assumed from early previews was more than remedy could deliver,and i'm guessing the game was scrapped more than once during development
That it was a sand box game and looked absolutely amazing at the same time. Now I understand why the demo at E3 looked so good. They got rid of the sand box aspect of the game and were then able to ramp up the graphics. If I had it my way, I too would do as they have since sand box games are not entirely my cup of tea. We all know that most, save for inFAMOUS, sandbox games do not look as good as other genre titles because of the size and scope of the game so for them to drop the sandbox idea and make a better looking game here is the best choice possible IMHO.
I'm starting to believe they had faced some technical issues and found it best to drop the open-world elements. That "more focused storytelling" excuse I don't buy. When they showed the game back in 2007, one of the key points Remedy told us that it's a sandbox horror adventure. This is how I have always thought of Alan Wake. Until now >:[ Maybe it was a mistake to show the game to the public that early. Damn hype.
in 05 they announced it for the 360 and pc. every bit of footage they shouwed running it was on pc and it showed realtime lighting and open sand box roaming then E3 09 comes they show first footage on 360 and no longer open world!? it just makes you think. MGS4 has a great story not because its linear but because they have CUTSCENES and they dont have to sacrifice the sandbox element. they could of been innovative with the way they told the story like Splinter cell how things super impose off the walls they made this move purely because the 360 couldn't handle it and to tell you the truth i dont think the ps3 could handle it because both systems dont have enough ram and thats the most important hardware for a sandbox title thats ............
I'm glad, I can't stand sandbox games. My favourite are games with multiple routes or ways through levels, like MGS4 or Halo to some extent.
I thought it was gonna be bigger than Silent Hill games since SH is somewhat linear except for those instances when you go for a more different ending. Guess, we cant drive off cliffs or whatever crazy stuff we do in sandbox games.
and anyone else that thinks this is a problem, You have to understand this from a developer's point of view. I completely agree with Remedy on this decision because i believe a well told story is the most important aspect to this type of game, and if you try to include sandbox elements, it makes things much more difficult. Not only will you have to deal with budget concerns, but you also have time constraints, technical issues like trying to program good A.I. that will function decently is a sandbox world, and simply put, they would have to sacrifice other aspects of the game(such as story, maybe some other important details that require much attention) in order to make the sandbox style work. They would have to pure more resources into the sandbox stuff and spend less time crafting a great cinematic experience. Do you nerf the story aspects in order to make a game that many other games have already mastered? or do you make a compelling story, something that few games try to do? I am glad that the story i am looking forward is not being compromised for something that i feel is less compelling and interesting. From the start, Alan Wake was promised to be a cinematic experience, something that has drawn in gamers who enjoy a great story for 5 years now, all of them following Alan Wakes development. For me they are making a responsible decision. This sort of situation is not as easy to solve as many of you would like to believe.
If they start talking about the story as the most crucial part of the game, you know the game will suck. Games that put too much emphasis on story usually have under-developed gameplay. There are certainly exceptions, but that's the general rule I follow.
they removed the open world elements out of this game. It is blatantly obvious it is because of the limitations of dvd 9.
Not only were there excuses for the graphics saying "well its because its a sandbox.. thats why it doesn't break any new ground or look like Uncharted" Remedy ran up against the reality of the 360, and now they have removed the sandbox portion from the game, which I imagine is a re-write of an entire engine, and it still didn't get any nods at e3. more than likely because this was the version they've only been working on the mechanics recently, not the PC-Tech demo version from 2005. So we are here, in 2009. Alan Wake isn't sandbox, and its visuals aren't on par with Uncharted, let alone Uncharted2. There was a ton of "wait for alan wake" talk as far as showing off the capabilities of the 360. There you go. Sure it will be a good game. But We have to go from 2009 on, since nothing else applies.
...and was not a sandbox game. I think Remedy will make a great game and fans will be very satisfied to me that's what really matters. I can't play sales. Even while the prospect of this game being sandbox at one time was very exciting it's still should be a great experience.
Who the hell was attacking/complaining about the change? They know what they are doing, its Remedy.
This game was hyped to be the best looking title to hit the Xbox 360 in the near future and now it's just another action horror game... Boy, the future sure is not as bright as it was a few months back.
Cause I've always had the feeling there aren't enough sandbox games. Especially, good ones. I don't have enough time to list cut scene, mission based games and First Person Shooters but, I guarantee there are more of them than sandbox games. On the flip side. I totally agree with their decision if it is what is best for the game. There is nothing worse than a crappy sandbox game or a sandbox game that acctually isn't (Think Driv3er). If their hearts aren't in it to make it a sandbox- so be it.
@ Blaze929: Dude, tons of people are disapointed by this. Go to the official forums and see it for yourself. I'm disapointed to be honest and my hype went down much. And I don't get how some here are comparing the success of non-sandbox games like Resident Evil or MGS to Alan Wake, lol. Those are different things. This game was first shown as an open-world horror adventure, that's the MAJOR idea the game is built upon and in a way it could have redefined the horror genre with that. It's like one of the posters here said "it's no longer the same game". It could turn out to be good (please don't be another Alone in the Dark) but it's definitely not the Alan Wake I was hyped for.
@ Marcelles25 WTF are you talking about? When was MGS4 a sandbox game? The game is linear. Just because you have a broader scope to walk around in doesnt change the fact that the game initiates cutscenes when you take the designated path. There's no side missions or alternative endings that change the initial outcome? These people did Max Payne, why would you question their decision making...you're all just nerds. These people get paid to make AAA titles and you can clearly see Alan Wake has a complicated story. Especially since light plays a big role in the game. He cannot eliminate the shadow spirits w/o light. Sometimes the flashlight batteries go out and he has to find alternate sources, so how do you encompass this element in a sandbox game? Use your f-ckin' head and stop thinking like a nerd that collects hentai pics and movies.
im gonna take it you didnt understand me look at my comment, "MGS4 has a great story not because its linear but because they have CUTSCENES and they dont have to sacrifice the sandbox element. " Rephrased,"MGS4 has a great story not BECAUSE ITS LINEAR but BECAUSE IT HAS CUTSCENES and they (being REMEDY) dont have to sacrifice the sandbox element for story telling if they added cutscenes..............
This is sad. Alan Wake was hyped up to be an epic game of epic size and scope with a huge world to explore. And of course, the huge world PLUS the great graphics is part of why people payed attention to it (much like the original Far Cry and Crysis: size + graphics). But now we're saying goodbye to the open world. Oh well. I'm sure the media will find a way to spin this around and make it look good. I'm gonna laugh when next week we see some article titled "Uncharted 2 isn't open-world because of limitations in the Cell".
Lol? They said that there's still exploration in the game. The only people who are complaining from what I see are people who's comments do not even belong in this thread. "This game's gonna suck! We all know how Remedy is! They make terrible games and lie to us and have ever since FOREVER!" First off, the whole "sandbox" thing? Yeah, that was talked about back in 2005 and then went into the shadows. So I'm not sure where you guys are getting the fact that 2005 = 2009. If you saw the footage/gameplay/screenshots back then and saw what it is now, it's almost done the Splinter Cell: Conviction. Secondly, just shut up. None of us have played the game. The only justification of how good this will be is to look back at their past creations. Which, to say the least, were revolutionary. Time to round um up. SL1M DADDY Greywulf Shingo Dustgavin Vx_ Mods, where are your bansticks?
i'm probably talking out of my ass, but could it be that free roaming would be too much for the 360 to handle? i mean from what i saw during tech demos on the PC, i couldn't possibly see the 360 or even the ps3 pulling it off. not taking potshots at anyone, just wondering if there was actually technical limitations with the console version which forced them to pull back some features and gameplay elements. i could all be wrong and just speculating, but i know there has been a lot of bullshit talk from developers and PR's in the past such as sony saying the reason they got rid of rumble for the sixaxis because it was "last gen" and it interfered with the sixaxis motion sensor in the controller when it was actually because of a lawsuit. i do agree that the sandbox style of gameplay could have possibly compromised the story, but i still think the story could've been perfectly in tact no matter what. imo, it's possible to make a very linear game out of a sandbox game (no matter how oxymoron that sounds.) just my two cents.
Because it's obvious. They were shooting for the stars. The limitations of their hardware didnt even let them out of the atmosphere. The PR they're doing with the excuse that they needed to focus on the story more is just nonsense... A very ambitious game that turned out to be overly ambitious. But at least there are Developers out there trying new things.
If Remedy thinks this decision will make a better more focused game on storytelling, and gameplay rather than sacrificing a bit of one of these more important elements for "free raoming" then I'm all for it....the game is looking amazing and the E3 demo looked like spooky fun game, so strip away the open-world aspect and you're left with a awesome action-horror game.....I'll take that any day vs an unfocused game that had so much potential but ultimately wasn't as good as it should of been because the dev's didn't make the right decsions for the game. Remedy knows what their doing....I don't make a lot of predictions, but I'm usually right when I do, you watch, AW will be awesome....well based on what we've seen so far and Remedies track record its really a no brainer. JOY
Go cry to mommy little one. It's called an opinion and last time I checked, it was OK here to have one. If you don't like it then make your own website and play Nazi and ban anybody that doesn't agree with you.
"LOL @ the fanboys that defend this crap." "@ Pennywise Not true!!! If it were released on two discs, then it could be officially called last gen." "What do you mean no weather? No night? No ralley racing? What a joke! I was at least expecting that with two DVD's and only 400 vehicles that they could at least toss in a night driving level or some dirt tracks. And this is supposed to compete with GT? Really?" These aren't opinions. This is trash. Especially in a place where you do not even like the thing they're talking about. That, by the way, is trolling. Open Zone is your turf.
splinter cell conviction's half stealth half sandbox, crackdown2 is a sandbox, assassin's creed 2 an other sand box game, GTA4's 2nd dlc......more sandbox. i got over 150 hrs of sandbox rigth there, do i really need 20 hrs more? people, has anyone yet gotten the chance to fully complete gta4...once. (let alone twice like i have :) ok with that out of the way, frankly it didn't even cross my mind that this game was going to be a sandbox game. (if you look at the gameplay it all points to a "pre-determined" pathway, if you correctly look at it.) http://www.gamersyde.com/st... honestly i'm fine with whatever gameplay style remedy wants alan wake to be, i just want the game to look like the way it does right now, and to be done.
AW will still probably be good but I think the main reason it stood out is because of the sandbox aspect. I'm sure they can take it out and rework the engine/game so that its still a good game but I don't think it will be as memorable as if it followed through with the sandbox side of it. Only thing I question is how long did they change this and why are they now telling the fans/followers of the game of these details. I don't really care why just seems like they would have had to make this decision awhile ago and if that's true than why we hearing about it now.
THE REASON WHY THIS GAME WAS GNNA BE BIG IS BECAUSE IT HAD GOOD GRAPHICS AND WAS AN OPEN SANDBOX....THATS WHY THERE WAS SO MUCH HYPE BEHIND IT and now remedy cant live up to what they PROMISED at the beginning and then they use a cover up like,...Well we needed to have a good story well if they are good developers (which they are) they should of found away to incorporate the story in a unique and more interesting/innovative type of way
"Alan Wake isn't sandbox, and its visuals aren't on par with Uncharted, let alone Uncharted2." Wow...trolling at it's finest lol.
"Lol? They said that there's still exploration in the game. The only people who are complaining from what I see are people who's comments do not even belong in this thread." Exactly. It's the same usual suspects Greywulf, TallTony, Sl1mDaddy. It's the same PS3 fanboys that whine and complain about 360 constantly. These guys could give 2 sh*ts about this game and they are acting like drama queens. I'm on the Remedy forum and people are NOT freaking out about this. This is FN Remedy and they have their reasons and don't give this DVD9 crap a go when you have no grounds for any of your slams on this game. Their is still exploration, the graphics still look off the hook and the atmosphere is still the same and looks excellent.
the game will still be good.
I think we can give them the benefit of the doubt, it's Remedy. Max Payne & 2 were amazing games.
then why did it take 5 years for them to come to this descision?. It really dosen't look good for them or this game. Sounds like Too Human to me.
The game STILL has exploration....however it is understandable if some 360 fans are dissapointed that it won't be a full sanbox game, honestly I didn't know it was originally suppose to be a sandbox title until recently. Reading the forums and previews I always thought the hook was the story and the use of light/dark was what many talked about, including weather and graphics. All of that is still there...so I don't see anything worth "defending" on Remedys part...and not surprising the ones complaining the loudest are the usual ps loyal folks. JOY
Just imagine if it was a PS3 game that went through this. The internet would self-destruct with the amount of articles claiming Sony's death.
I think Alan Wake is going to be hyped into something that it wont be able to deliver. If the removal of the sandbox environment does lead to a compelling story then I will be all for it. I'm going to be sitting on the fence until I play this.
Well, there's of course always the risk removing features is just that - a feature that is removed, and the game is less for it. I think this seems like a positive change though...
It's worrying though isn't it? A very long development period and changes so late in the day?
not really. Remember SplinterCell:Conviction's 1st Style of Game? it was kind of a Sandbox game but in the end they went back to the board and came up with this new Style that looks even better than what they had showed us at the past E3s . plus its remedy we're talking about! Only Quality! :)
Are these changes late in the day, though? Bear in mind we haven't really heard anything about Alan Wake in a long, long time - E3 was the first "reveal" we've had on it for what seems like years. This might've been in the works for awhile.
Come to think of it, Max Payne is a pretty good comparison for them to make. In much the same way, we had absolutely no info on that for ages and it started popping up on vapourware lists before there was the big reveal and media blitz just prior to release, with a lot of stuff (as the post said) changed.
Fair point and I do have some faith in Remedy. Just wasn't convinced by the E3 demo.
da game guna be shorter for sure
Guerilla were practically getting hatemail for not having Co-Op in Killzone, and now Remedy remove basically the entire gameplay, form a game with an even longer development cycle, and suddenly this is a 'great move'? I hope this gets ripped to shreds by reviewers.
^^^^^ Grow up!
@KingsOmega While I may understand your feelings there is not need to hate the game. Ontopic: I'm wondering what have been doing Remedy all this time? probably trying to push the hardware?, trying some new gameplay mechanics?. AW is a very good looking game, I hope Remedy got some innovative gameplay in there. That said, I didnt like the whole "narrative" style.
Poor bots. The limitations of the 3fixme continue to hold back games. Now Alan Gimped is just some Alone in the Dark clone. Poor welfare bots will gimp FFXIII just like Alan Gimped.
Sorry you can't play it. Nice double post by the way /facepalm
just to get it to run on the gimpbox 360.
Ill get it for PC but with the nerfs they are doing to the game (so that it can run on the 360) Ill be waiting for reviews 1st. graphic nerf = check game's environment size nerf = check
Nerfs? You're probably a World of Warcraft player. Sorry bud but your bad computer won't be able to run this game. @ Loney guy AKA 1.3 - It's already running on 360 sorry to disappoint.
"next they'll have to downgrade the graphics, drop the frame rate, and cut a few chapters" -- no see, this is an XBOX 360 game, they usually only have to do those things on the PS3. By the way Frayer, if you actually read the article, you'll see that they did that for storyline reasons and not limitations.
btw my PC run most 360s games and they even look better(was playing the crap ME game), additionally i can add different patches to the game,, bet you don't even know what um talking about
God I really hate the way you type lol.
LOl! 360 fans actually think that they made the changes for storyline reasons. Nope. It is because of the Dvd9 limitations showing their true colors.
why would u say somthing retarded like that when i can get it for my pc
Don't get me wrong, I'm sick of sandbox games, but I always loved how the old school Resident Evil games were like mini-sand box games. They just let you loose in an environment(mansion, police station, lab) and you had to find your way around, a lot of time revisiting the same locals, but that made the puzzle elements funner. The whole open world theme works well w/ horror games(Resident Evil, Legacy of Kain, Silent Hill)
double face palm lol, frayer is gimped!
what makes it so special compared to say silent hill or RE5? the graphics they showed at E3 was no better than those two.. it looked good for a sandbox game but it was no better than RE5
My anticipation for this game grows more and more each day
You have no need to defend anything if you have a good game on your hands. I do not think any developer should explain themselves to anyone other than their publisher.
So you think they shouldnt explain themselves to gamers and fans that have been following the games for 5 years ?! I think its the least they can do plus it allows people to know what the game is really about. Its like Lionhead deciding to make Fable a hack and slash and not telling anyone. Thats pretty stupid in my opinion.
No they should not. If they think the new direction the game is headed in is the correct direction for them, then they should not explain it to the gamers. Only the publisher they should explain that to.
well i personally think they should tell us when they change something as big as this. sure its not a "must " like we the games are going to hunt them down and shoot them for not telling us... and yes the only people they really have to answer to is the publisher. but you announce you are adding such and interesting dynamic to a game and then cut it out it can really bend the way the game is perceived. If they are not sure about what direction they are taking a game, then they should just not say anything about it at all, instead of telling all the fans we are doing this and this and then do a u turn and not deliver. If they don't want to answer to us in the first place then don't promise us anything, don't tell us anything, don't get us involved at such an early stage of development. I am the sort of gamer that will instantly toss a game out if i feel i have been lied to ( ok, maybe thats a harsh way of looking at it ) let's just say really under deliver. In the case of Alen wake, the story is more important and i hope it is for the better. still i am slightly disappointed. The point with most sandbox games is the story is linear anyway, but the you can go of the straight and narrow story path to explore, mess around, or do some little side missions which just give you a reason to keep going back for some light hearted gameplay anyway, i am still looking forward to it and of all the 360 lineup at E3, i was most impressed with this game, followed by Forza 3 and SC.
That's a lot of BS, look at Mafia for the PC. Amazing story/pacing in a sort of open world design. It used open ended exploration and travel as a pacing tool between the purposely built levels in it and it had one of the best stories in a game in the past few years.