Wo­ven among the many en­vi­able strands of Rem­edy’s DNA is a trait for which the stu­dio has re­ceived less praise: its ten­dency to­wards lengthy ges­ta­tions. Max Payne was trailed in 1998, and didn’t re­lease un­til 2001. Alan Wake’s de­vel­op­ment cy­cle was longer still, nearly five full years pass­ing be­tween its E3 2005 re­veal and even­tual May 2010 re­lease.

Quan­tum Break’s de­vel­op­ment ap­pears to be op­er­at­ing at break­neck pace by com­par­i­son, due for re­lease in April 2016 af­ter its Oc­to­ber 2013 re­veal. Is there some­thing in­trin­sic to Rem­edy’s work­ing process that pre­dis­poses it to pro­tracted de­vel­op­ment cy­cles? Other than its pro­cliv­ity for con­jur­ing up brand-new sto­ries and set­tings with be­spoke game en­gines, of course.

“It’s many things,” Lake tells us. “Just think­ing about Quan­tum

Break, as an ex­am­ple, there’s a lot of new tech­nol­ogy, [Xbox One is] a new plat­form, it’s a new uni­verse, new story, there’s new core game­play. [That means] a lot of pro­to­typ­ing, and a lot of dis­cov­ery. On the whole show side, there are a lot of chal­lenges to fig­ure out. It does end up tak­ing time and, yes, we want to keep the qual­ity high, so we don’t want to make cer­tain kinds of com­pro­mises, and are al­ways mak­ing sure that this is it­er­ated enough and pol­ished enough and nd it’s as good as it de­serves to be.” e.”

By con­trast, the stu­dio is ca­pa­ble of turn­ing around a game in a rad­i­cally shorter time frame when it opts to pro­duce a se­quel. “I’m still re­ally of proud of Max Payne 2,” Lake says. “All in all, I felt that it was a re­ally pol­ished ex­pe­ri­ence [that took] cer­tain things from Max Payne fur­ther, and that took 18 months. Do­ing a se­quel to some­thing is ob­vi­ously dif­fer­ent to build­ing some­thing from the ground up.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.