• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

5+ Million Console Sales, 1.5m+ PC Sales and still no chance of Days Gone getting a sequel

SkylineRKR

Member
It is not cringe because there is an explanation to that scene, the chick also think that the joke is cringe and she jokes about that scene, she is not serious... have you played the game or you are just parroting shitty reviews like the one from gamespot?!

Yeah this is a good example of how parroting and showing things without context in general can create a certain narrative. I only saw that scene way back, and thought it was some awful writing. If you push that part hard enough, readers will assume so.

Without context, its incredibly dull. But as it turns out, the game has another scene later on that explains why she did it. And then its actually not bad or offensive at all. She hated bikers and their traditions, shes taking the piss.
 
Last edited:

Hunnybun

Member
I think it was mainly the bad review scores that did it, along with the politically correct whining about some scenes in the game. Above all else I get the impression that Sony wants their first parties to be seen as really bastions of excellence, even above their commercial performance. That's what I took from their obvious pride in Returnal, for example, despite its mediocre sales.

That and its closeness to TLOU were probably the 2 biggest factors.
 

Shubh_C63

Member
Many of them sales were from Sony name alone and how many in those 6 Million have mostly negative things to say about the game.

I for one liked it and no way in hell was captivated enough to finish it, got tired around 10% mark honestly.

A sequel would have sold even less. Sony made the right decision, there are too many themes to explore when publisher like Sony is letting you run wild as a dev.
 

Clear

Gold Member
I love Days Gone, and although I'd like a sequel I'm quite content with it being one and done. Reason being its a nice self-contained story with a complete and satisfying character arc for its leads.

Too many times I see franchises getting extended past where they really need to finish; frankly TLOU2 is a great example. I understand people wanted more Joel, but the reality is there wasn't actually much travel left in his arc. Basically what we got of him in the second game was as much as was warranted. Deke in a direct sequel would have the same core issue in that there isn't much left to explore about him that's not been covered already. They are both redemption arcs and so that end-point being reached you either flip-flop them hard or just leave them as static anti-hero types, neither option being particularly compelling in my view.

This accepted, what's left are just variations on your standard post zombie-apocalyptic dystopia, which is pretty generic and played out at this point. Doing some sort of spiritual successor type of deal a few years down the line seems the right choice to me.
 

yurinka

Member
Didn't watch the interview, but it seems he said 100m+:
The game media was unfair not only bashing the game, but also lying in reporting the interviews Jaffe did to the two directors of the game. As an example, he didn't say Sony is placing too much emphasis on Metacritic scores. The 'he described what he sees as an issue of games being developed based on Metacritic scoresn issue of games being developed based on Metacritic scores' is also a lie.

He never said that in the interview. He said that Sony higher ups were always supportive with them and their vision for Days Gone, how the game released and with negative reviews and said he doesn't know what Sony uses to decide to greenlight a game because he worked on the creative and narrative part of the game, not in the business side of the game, so he wasn't involved in the process of greenlighting the game. Specially regarding the Days Gone sequel, since he retired when released the game, and the sequel wast pitched months after that, when he no longer was there, so he didn't know the results of that pitch or the reasoning for prefering to greenlight a new ip instead.

He said that he personally thinks that a company like Sony, as in the case of a company like Disney, should always try to excel in these developments where they are spending over a hundred million dollars (again, he didn't know the exact budget of the game because that is under the 'business' part of the game and he only was involved on the creative side). So he personally think a company like Sony wasn't/shouldn't be happy with a 71 metacritic, so he thought that a creative director wouldn't continue being creative director of an IP that got a 71 MC. This doesn't mean they fired him due to the metacritic, he retired because he's fifty something years old and Days Gone took around 7 years to be developed, so considered that he'd be too old when releasing the next game, so retired before starting to work on the next one.

The other director left (but months later, after greenlighting the sequel) for more or less the same reason: in his case he said he also was around 50 something years old and prefered to ship a couple of shorter games before retiring than another huge AAA open world. So he moved to Netherrealm.


I love Days Gone, and although I'd like a sequel I'm quite content with it being one and done. Reason being its a nice self-contained story with a complete and satisfying character arc for its leads.

Too many times I see franchises getting extended past where they really need to finish; frankly TLOU2 is a great example. I understand people wanted more Joel, but the reality is there wasn't actually much travel left in his arc. Basically what we got of him in the second game was as much as was warranted. Deke in a direct sequel would have the same core issue in that there isn't much left to explore about him that's not been covered already. They are both redemption arcs and so that end-point being reached you either flip-flop them hard or just leave them as static anti-hero types, neither option being particularly compelling in my view.

This accepted, what's left are just variations on your standard post zombie-apocalyptic dystopia, which is pretty generic and played out at this point. Doing some sort of spiritual successor type of deal a few years down the line seems the right choice to me.
Even if the arc of a character is complete, any competent writer could find the way to create a new arc for a new character in a sequel or prequel.
 
Last edited:
I dont think the general gaming public would be excited to see Days Gone 2 announced at E3. That would be a disappointment.
Also…
Took them 7 years?! Game must of somehow just paid for the studios existence. Thats horrible management from the studio leads.

Give the studio “The Order:1886”, they can’t fuck it up. Anything they do will be better than Readyatdawn.
 

Clear

Gold Member
Even if the arc of a character is complete, any competent writer could find the way to create a new arc for a new character in a sequel or prequel.

It gets tricky, you start afresh or go off on a tangent with a new protagonist and it ends up alienating the core fanbase anyway, and often ends up treading the same basic path because you are trapped by the format of the previous game(s).

Show me an example of where this is done right, because off the top of my head I can't think of any. Think of direct, numbered sequels and how this sort of thing plays out.
 

yurinka

Member
It gets tricky, you start afresh or go off on a tangent with a new protagonist and it ends up alienating the core fanbase anyway, and often ends up treading the same basic path because you are trapped by the format of the previous game(s).

Show me an example of where this is done right, because off the top of my head I can't think of any. Think of direct, numbered sequels and how this sort of thing plays out.
I can give you a good and a bad example in TLOU2: the sequel wasn't needed because they had a good ending with the first one. But they added a new good arc for Ellie. It is a good example. A bad example is what they did with Joel and Abby: they are too woke, so they consider that it's too bad, toxic and racist to have an heterosexual white male as protagonist, so had to replace him with a man-like woman who has a trans kid as sidekick.

Another example is MGS: they could have ended after the 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th chapter. But always found a new way to continue the story both including sequels or prequels.

And well, there are tons of other games, specially the ones where story doesn't matter like Zelda, Mario, fighting games, Mega Man and so on. You can always find a new bad guy/danger/menace, to tell some part of the past/origins of main characters or bad guys.

They could make a Days Gone sequel where Deacon moves to a new city or country and joins a bike gang where there is an old friend from his previous gang, so they can talk about friendship, brotherhood, family or treason. They can add co-op multiplayer for the bike gang, something they originally planned for the first one but had to cut it and left it for a potential sequel. For the zombies and bad guys thing, they can make that the Oregon stuff was a small part of a bigger picture. That bad guys organization being only part a leg of an international corporation so Deacon goes to another area to find the source of that, and can find there thare there are the previous zombies plus new, more evolved types.
 

mrBandoza

Neo Member
I think the point is: Do we really want sequels just because? I mean the gam was ok gameplay wise but I don’t long for a sequel. One game was ok.

I think it is more interesting to see the team learn from the experience and create something new instead.

Its almost the same with Horizon. The story is told and the world explored. Perhaps it’s better to leave it at that and create something new.

But it seems that sequels is what people want so that’s what we get.
 

Papacheeks

Banned
Let's get a Driveclub sequel first.

Why not port that over to PC with all the content? I think a game like that would do really well on PC. But that would mean SOny would have to re-open server space for its online functions, and that is super expensive especially if they want to have cross play.

But I think Gran Turismo will be the bigger game on PC. That game with VR ready out the gate for Ocuslus, VIVE will sell gang busters. Especially for people big into Simulation driving like iRacing. Those type of people have insane setups, with those force feedback wheels.

You missed those long Jaffe podcasts, I guess. The devs literally stated they don't even how much it cost and when asked did it reach/pass $200+ mildly approved.

Yea maybe by the end it cost 200Million with advertising costs. There were a lot of scenes done with Sam Witwer but I doubt as an actor he is expensive. The biggest money sink from what I know was them being in concept for so long and taking a long time to build the mechanics in engine. They hadn't made a console game since Syphon Filter on PS2.

So from my understanding running studio with 80+ people for first couple years then needing to actually make a map that large they took on more people to 120 people and outsourced for the home stretch. I still dont think it was at 200Million Production wise unless they were working for those 3 years with 80+ capacity pre-concept? Their last game was a vita game in 2012?

I guess we will never know, but It wouldn't surprise me if Sony Spent ridiculous amounts in advertising /Promotion which in total with a long development cycle came near the $200 Million mark.

Who knows?
 
Last edited:

Bo_Hazem

Gold Dealer
Yea maybe by the end it cost 200Million with advertising costs. There were a lot of scenes done with Sam Witwer but I doubt as an actor he is expensive. The biggest money sink from what I know was them being in concept for so long and taking a long time to build the mechanics in engine. They hadn't made a console game since Syphon Filter on PS2.

So from my understanding running studio with 80+ people for first couple years then needing to actually make a map that large they took on more people to 120 people and outsourced for the home stretch. I still dont think it was at 200Million Production wise unless they were working for those 3 years with 80+ capacity pre-concept? Their last game was a vita game in 2012?

I guess we will never know, but It wouldn't surprise me if Sony Spent ridiculous amounts in advertising /Promotion which in total with a long development cycle came near the $200 Million mark.

Who knows?

Makes sense. It's like some reports, not sure if accurate, that GOW cost like $100M in prototype phase then $80M when they settled down to it. That explains Cory's repeated comments about Sony's budget and he always sneaks in something, and explains him crying after getting the 10's ratings as he must be in so much stress. Could all be BS and the whole thing just cost $80M.
 
I feel like the people that trash this scene are the same ones that trash the laughing scene from FFX.

Judging random scenes with not context is peak internet for sure...

The scene is actually funny if you play the game and not cringe at all...and this is coming from me, who didn't really love the game.
 
Last edited:

skit_data

Member
Well, I tried Days Gone for the second time and I simply can’t get into it. It’s not my cup of tea gameplay wise and Deacon feels pretty unsympathetic as a character.
I imagine this was supposed to release a lot earlier into the gen than it actually did.

Sony probably took a look at this and said
”We already have a much more succesful post-apocalyptic zombie franchise” *snip snip*.

Can’t say I blame them, especially if it cost as much as $200 million. That kind of money could have covered the costs of at least 2 much higher quality games.
 
Last edited:

oldergamer

Member
No chance this game cost 200 million. Where are you guys getting crazy figures like that?

This game did move a lot of units but only after it hit the bargin bin. Pretty sure i saw it as low as 20 bucks CAD.
 

GymWolf

Gold Member
I think the point is: Do we really want sequels just because? I mean the gam was ok gameplay wise but I don’t long for a sequel. One game was ok.

I think it is more interesting to see the team learn from the experience and create something new instead.

Its almost the same with Horizon. The story is told and the world explored. Perhaps it’s better to leave it at that and create something new.

But it seems that sequels is what people want so that’s what we get.
Both days gone and horizon have gigantic plot misteries to solve, the story is not done in the slightest.
 

bitbydeath

Gold Member
Thoroughly enjoyed Days Gone, but I just want Bend to return to Syphon Filter. Wishful thinking, I know…
Days Gone is a direct sequel to the events of the last Syphon Filter. Logan died, making Deacon the new star of the series, and with that came changes to the name and game mechanics etc.

The next game might be following the ending of Days Gone which will then bring on another new star, title and differing mechanics.
 

RJMacready73

Gold Member
I'm really looking forward to what these guys do next, no matter what you feel about Days Gone the engine is AAA, it can display beautiful vistas far off into the distance, handle a shit ton of NPC's on screen at the same time not to mention excellent animation, driving mechanics and detailed world's... Now that they've got a handle on it, experience with it AND the power of PS5... they can shoot to the moon
 

Papacheeks

Banned
Days Gone is a direct sequel to the events of the last Syphon Filter. Logan died, making Deacon the new star of the series, and with that came changes to the name and game mechanics etc.

The next game might be following the ending of Days Gone which will then bring on another new star, title and differing mechanics.

I always loved the beginning part of Last of us, seeing how the outbreak went down and how nutts it was. What if we played before days gone events happened? What if we play as a Syphon filter agent, who's name is unknown. I think something like that would be awesome. Also would love if gabriel and Xing had a kid, that they kept hidden and was the syphon filter agent in this game.

I think introducing that and connecting Sarah's work to the syphon filter virus, and is what bring about the days gone premise.


To me that would be dope.

I'm really looking forward to what these guys do next, no matter what you feel about Days Gone the engine is AAA, it can display beautiful vistas far off into the distance, handle a shit ton of NPC's on screen at the same time not to mention excellent animation, driving mechanics and detailed world's... Now that they've got a handle on it, experience with it AND the power of PS5... they can shoot to the moon

Days Gone ran on Unreal 4.
 
Last edited:

yurinka

Member
I enjoyed it a lot....not surprised about no sequel though,given how video game development is these days.
Sony never said it won't have a sequel, they only said that their next game is going to be a new ip. So they can release a sequel after the new ip.
 

yurinka

Member
No chance this game cost 200 million. Where are you guys getting crazy figures like that?
The directors of the game and the previous chairman of SIE Worldwide Studios mentioned budgets of way over 100 million in development. Then add aprox. the same amount in marketing.

Then you should consider that each new generation the AAA budgets sky rocket, almost doubling. So a sequel would be way above that.
 

mrBandoza

Neo Member
Both days gone and horizon have gigantic plot misteries to solve, the story is not done in the slightest.
True, you can go on forever. But will it be interesting? I liked the gameplay in Days gone but would rather see another game and setting completely over a sequel.

It’s all personal opinions but I think we shouldn’t scream for a sequel just because. Sometimes it’s better to leave it where it is. Days gone is one example where I feel it would be more interesting to see something new. :)
 

Perrott

Member
Money wasn't the problem, but rather the fact that there was no solid creative vision for the sequel due to the departure of Days Gone's creative director and writer John Garvin.
 

GymWolf

Gold Member
True, you can go on forever. But will it be interesting? I liked the gameplay in Days gone but would rather see another game and setting completely over a sequel.

It’s all personal opinions but I think we shouldn’t scream for a sequel just because. Sometimes it’s better to leave it where it is. Days gone is one example where I feel it would be more interesting to see something new. :)
After just a single game is kinda hard to feel fatigue for a brand personally.

And the secret finale in days gone was by far the best story bit in the entire game, i was really hyped to see where the story was going...
 

Men_in_Boxes

Gold Member
Days Gone 2 was always a bad idea. Hell, Days Gone hardly made sense considering zombie fatigue was in full effect by 2018 and one of Sonys flagships was a...ya know...zombie game.
 

Belthazar

Member
In this case it's more about the critical/audience reception for Sony. I think the damage this game did to the perception that Sony's exclusive blockbusters were always top tier critically acclaimed games is more meaningful than what it actually sold. I mean, it became a meme at launch with videos of how buggy it was.

Not to mention the game was HEAVILY discounted very close from release, so who knows... Maybe it sold that much at very deep discounts, while Tsushima was kept at almost full price.
 
Last edited:

FingerBang

Member
Why is everybody acting like a sequel needs to be green-lit right after the previous game ships?

Days Gone hasn't even been out for 3 years and this guy is waah waaah they didn't let me make another game. The Last of Us 2 came out 7 years after the first one, which was a critics and commercial success. I'm happy if we get a DG2 in the next few years, but I don't get why the expectation was to start working on a sequel right away.
 

yurinka

Member
Why is everybody acting like a sequel needs to be green-lit right after the previous game ships?

Days Gone hasn't even been out for 3 years and this guy is waah waaah they didn't let me make another game. The Last of Us 2 came out 7 years after the first one, which was a critics and commercial success. I'm happy if we get a DG2 in the next few years, but I don't get why the expectation was to start working on a sequel right away.
Maybe Sony was ok with making a sequel but looking at the porfolio for the few upcoming years, looking at all the 1st+2nd party games under development, they considered that they already had too much sequels+remakes+remasters+ports under development so the next few games to be greenlighted at that moment needed to be new ips to balance the catalog.

So maybe they said "a sequel is ok but later, now we need new IPs".

I think he already mentioned it while ago, maybe in the interview with Jaffe. It must be now over 10M copies, maybe even without considering the PC sales. They are working on a new IP, but let's hope after it they make the Days Gone sequel. Or that if they grow enough, they are able to make a 2nd team to work in Days Gone 2.
 
Last edited:

Kokoloko85

Member
Why is everybody acting like a sequel needs to be green-lit right after the previous game ships?

Days Gone hasn't even been out for 3 years and this guy is waah waaah they didn't let me make another game. The Last of Us 2 came out 7 years after the first one, which was a critics and commercial success. I'm happy if we get a DG2 in the next few years, but I don't get why the expectation was to start working on a sequel right away.

Fingers crossed they dont make a sequel.
They cant have every top WWS making sequels. We have God of War Ragnarok, Horizon 2, Spiderman 2, Ghost of Tsushima 2, GT7 etc. Plus in my eyes Days gone didnt match any of those games and a new IP or different IP would be way better.

I cant believe Days Gone has sold more than Ghost of Tsushima
 
Top Bottom