Director confirms Days Gone 2 was pitched, but won’t verify Sony rejection report

Days Gone’s director has responded to a report claiming that plans for Days Gone 2 were rejected by Sony.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
P_Bomb27d ago (Edited 27d ago )

Must read article for fans.

Commercial success vs Sony not having MS or Fortnite cash/renewables, to the critics’ bloodbath and the state of 120 man AAA. Bonus: shared universe mp in the pitch.

Finally, says never say never.

Sonic-and-Crash27d ago (Edited 27d ago )

what i m seeing is big efforts to slander Sony game development, without knowing a sht about what is happening inside the companies and with hidden agenda which favors the competitors (who by the way havent showed anything worthy for their next gen consoles)

the same "wannabe Journalists/insiders" why they didnt dig up the whole 343 studios demotion fiasco after Halo Infinite uproar about its qualtiy?

Atom66627d ago

I'm seeing big efforts to needlessly defend a corporation's obvious business model. I'm interested in how it's a hidden agenda to report on what devs are telling a reporter, though.

Some might say trying bury the story is signs of an agenda...

But as much as I dislike Schreier for other reasons, his reporting is actual real reporting when it comes to this stuff.

He talks on and off the record to people at these studios. You even saw him get the nod from Jeff Ross yesterday as repeated in the article here.

But it's always a conspiracy or rumor when the perception is bad for a certain corporation.

Also, I've read constant reports about the cluster at 343. In fact, it was Schreier who broke the story about Chris Lee leaving in the first place.

Whataboutism doesn't work too well on that one.


Any proof of that? Links? Source? Or just more fanboy garbage?

CaptainHenry91627d ago

Facts. We don't know anything behind closed doors. Just rumors if you ask me.

specialguest27d ago (Edited 27d ago )

Hey everyone, look! We have a surviving member of the SDF(Sony Defense Force) from a decade ago. Ok we get it, everyone's out to get Sony and bring them down. It's a conspiracy! Lol

bouzebbal26d ago

This game is hands down my last gen favorite.. I hope it comes back, and I know it will!!

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 26d ago
peppeaccardo27d ago

Thanks for suggesting reading the article .. very informative indeed.
I loved thsi game and I played it on the PS5 at 60 FPS and it looks and plays amazingly.
Probably one of the best open world out there and very engaging story.
Was so looking forward to a sequel .... finger crossed !

-Foxtrot27d ago

I wanted Days Gone 2 but


Online elements

A shared Universe

That is not something I wanted, you can’t beat a good story focused single player game

Christopher27d ago

Yeah, none of that would appeal to me. As soon as games move onto those elements, I move elsewhere. If they want a post-apocalyptic zombie world, get one of the many that already exist from third parties. Don't reinvent the wheel.

P_Bomb27d ago (Edited 27d ago )

Perhaps they could’ve done it like the Division. You see ppl at safe zones but not as you walk around the map, save for the dark zone. Perhaps in this case, areas lost to hordes?

Then like the Division, or even a Resistance, you could choose to party up or join some kind of Resistance 2 co-op thing? A DG version of GoT: Legends?

PrimeGam3r27d ago (Edited 27d ago )

Watch tte interview. He said they'd be secondary to the main game. So on top of the single player experience not instead of it.

Think the co-op missions on Splinter Cell.

Kornholic27d ago

Yeah, everytime a game is designed to have a co-op, it compromises the narrative and the single player experience. Too many games are created with co-op in mind these days.

-Foxtrot27d ago


Still what’s the point wasting time and resources on that when you need to focus on the single player given the first games rocky start

I liked it, solid 8/10 but I want to see time put into making that a 9/10 or 10/10 before doing online shit you can find in a dozen other titles

SlothLordPootus27d ago (Edited 27d ago )

I enjoyed Days Gone (personal 8/10). But I don't necessarily need a sequel either. The secret ending showed sequel potential, but for me, I'm more interested in a new IP from them. Also I don't think Sony has any interest in Co-op, multiplayer games. There's too much to compete with in that space at this point, whereas single player only games have a better chance. In an online game when a community is deemed "dead" no one buys it, for single player games, people will buy those for years after release.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 27d ago
neutralgamer199227d ago

So if you were to believe the rumors then it says Sony did not want to do a sequel for days gone but then they allowed a new IP. Maybe you are being naive as new IP is much more risky and more expensive than doing a sequel. So it seems Sony has confidence in Sony bend

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 26d ago
monkey60227d ago

So it was true. Sticking other teams on Naughty Dog IPs is a poor move. I loved the Uncharted games but I'd much rather a new IP at this stage or a sequel to a less developed property. Days Gone 2 would have definitely appealed to me. Although Co op would have worried me. The 1st game's 71 metacritic score is criminal

P_Bomb27d ago (Edited 27d ago )

Hopefully the PC release pads the bank for a potential sequel. All the DLC for the first game was free. Problem then becomes not having those MP style renewables to keep cash flowing for budgets on the brink.

27d ago Replies(2)
Christopher27d ago

"Asked to comment on the report, Days Gone director Ross denied suggestion that Bend was being positioned as a support studio for Naughty Dog, claiming that this was “never the reality” and that its relationship with the Uncharted studio was “collaborative” (the author of the Bloomberg story, Jason Schreier, has since suggested Ross is overstating the situation)."

It's like people don't read anymore and just go with the narrative they want.

Atom66627d ago


"Thanks to everyone who attended the podcast with Jaffe. I wish I could have been more forthright with some questions. Just remember @jasonschreier is a journalist who takes his craft seriously. And he has the luxury of being able to be more honest than I’m allowed."

Christopher27d ago (Edited 27d ago )

@Atom666: Yet, for this specific item discussed, he says that what Jason said was not right in his characterization of the situation. Interesting choice to not notice that but go ahead and post that bit you did for this specific item as if it somehow changed what he said to clarify what Jason had claimed.

Jason: Bend was forced to work for Naughty Dog.

Dev: That characterization isn't true.

monkey602: OMG, what Jason said was true!

Me: Dev didn't say that, said it wasn't true.

Atom666: But he did say that the journalist was able to be more truthful, therefore what the dev just said isn't the truth even though he specifically countered what Jason said.

Sounds logical to me.

Atom66627d ago (Edited 27d ago )

He literally says the article was true during his interview. He talks about perceptions being different based on who was interviewed, and admits that the devs who were interviewed likely characterized it in the manner it was reported.

The point you quoted doesn't even contradict Monkey's comment. He openly discussed the support role with ND. The only part you take issue with is the perception relayed by some devs that they were being positioned as only a support studio or forced into it.

You can try to be snarky all you want, but your own confirmation bias is blaring.

You: But.. this one part is seemingly different than the original report. Should I consider what he means by perceptions of the devs might be different than what he was privy to? No, there's no time!

Let me ignore all of the confirmations of the story's accuracy. Afterall, this goes against my own little rants I made when failing the original story.

Christopher27d ago (Edited 27d ago )


"So it was true. Sticking other teams on Naughty Dog IPs is a poor move."

He specifically said they weren't stuck there. He specifically said they collaborated. Even further, Jason implied they did that instead of making their own IP, which he also stated in this article that they were working on outside of Naughty Dog.

***You can try to be snarky all you want, but your own confirmation bias is blaring.***

My confirmation bias of prioritizing what a dev says over what Jason said, which was inaccurate. Yes. I agree with that sentiment.

***Let me ignore all of the confirmations of the story's accuracy. ***

Please note where I said Jason wasn't accurate in some things or that the dev didn't confirm some things? I can't find it. But, on this specific item, he refuted how Jason not only characterized it but also the fact that they were working on ND IPs and not their own.

And, do realize, that you continued this ridiculous line of reasoning on a single point in which the dev specifically said Jason was wrong. At no point did I say Jason was wrong on everything or deny that the dev didn't agree with him on some things. But, on this specific bit, which monkey brought up and you threw in a pointless quote to try and invalidate what I posted as the quote specific from the developer, that's not how it is.

Atom66627d ago Show
monkey60227d ago

What are you talking about? I don't "want" any narrative. I took the rumour posting with a grain of salt prior to this but it has been confirmed now as at least mostly accurate.

The level of hostility on this site has become sickening and Christopher you only seem to insite it. You could definitely do better to lead by example here.

27d ago
gravedigger26d ago (Edited 26d ago )


Don't let Jason Schreier brainwash you. 2 things from Jeff ( which was a director for Days Gone ) contradicts Jason statements in the article

Jason said during 2019 Days Gone was pitched. Jeff said Days Gone 2 was in the development before he left Bend 4 months ago - also, very important thing, Jason called Jeff a liar basically because of that on ResetERA :

2nd thing is that Jason said Bend's developers feared they might be absorbed into Naughty Dog as a support studio - Jeff claimed that is FALSE.
He also said that Bend was helping Naughty Dog in a limited way, collaboration he called it
It was to give some devs at Bend something to do while they had nothing else going on early in pre-production

It's clear Jason's article was designed to try to push a narrative that would cause drama, but in fact, everything that was in his article was totally normal by industry standards, and nothing is wrong at PS Studios. I expect Bloomberg reporting to be above this kind of 'tabloid' style drama reporting... I mean look at the narrative that the headline even tries to push!
The “accuracy” of what he said is not so much the issue, but rather how he tried to frame it as “unrest” at PS when in fact, Jeff said that Sony gives their studios lots of creative freedom, Jim Ryan and Herman Hulst are brilliant at their job, Bend employees helping with other projects during the downtime was great as it meant they kept their jobs and didn’t have to downsize when in between projects etc. Jason tried to frame this in a completely different light to try to get clicks and create a scandal, when in actual fact, everything that was going on was completely normal.
Turn 10 become a support studio for 343i to finish Halo Infinite. Is there a problem in that? Nope. It is normal in gaming industry.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 26d ago
TheTony31627d ago

"Asked to comment on the report, Days Gone director Ross denied suggestion that Bend was being positioned as a support studio for Naughty Dog, claiming that this was “never the reality”

And Naughty Dog, Bend Studios and Santa Monca are working on a new IP.

Silly gameAr27d ago

Who needs facts when we have rumors and misinformation, and people willing to spread those rumors and misinformation?

gravedigger26d ago

Actually, Jeff said for Bend to be support for Naughty Dog is false, Jason Schreier mentioned the opposite in the article.

Quote :

I loved the Uncharted games but I'd much rather a new IP

Bend is literally working on a new IP.

monkey60226d ago


See that's an excellent response. Full of facts and your own personal take on something without turning to sly remarks or insults.

I had read they had returned to an original IP alright but thought maybe that was a result of some fallout from the original move. Didn't really consider that being the norm I guess

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 26d ago
waverider27d ago (Edited 27d ago )

I dont agree wth the sales argument on the news. Days gone was one of the biggest seller of a new ip in 2019. Box and digital. The sales were much higher then many thought, because of poorly reviews. Just shows that reviews and sales dont mean much. But a new game that sells 4.5 or 5 millions arent low. But its funny to see now so many saying how amazing Days Gone is. I think the game is cool, but i read so much stuff from people that didnt even play the game...

27d ago Replies(2)
Christopher27d ago

@waverider: You do know that

1. A $60 game sale doesn't mean $60 profit for Sony, let alone for the dev studio as there are costs in various areas (publishing and marketing).
2. Those sales include sales for much lower than $60.
3. The game was delayed twice and was ramped up to a team of 120 just to complete, which is AAA size and budget numbers.

Atom66627d ago

He addresses this in the interview. Sales success is relative. The budget grew over time.

Return on investment is more than just being profitable in Sony's business model. Size of profit is what matters.

Levii_9227d ago ShowReplies(3)
Show all comments (96)
The story is too old to be commented.