| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (18)

Posted: Jun 16th 2008 7:51PM The Punisher said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You'd think they'd just release whatever levels they had finished over PSN for like $5 or something just so people could have tried this game out. All that coding gone to waste.
Reply

Posted: Jun 16th 2008 7:53PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The reason this game was canceled was due to insurance issues.

The game would have kick nards so hard that people head would have exploded upon playing.

Sony didn't want that blood on their hands. The article above is mearly propaganda.
Reply

Posted: Jun 16th 2008 8:01PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
funny, cause lack of PSN functionality dind't stop uncharted or ratchet from being released.

I figured the biggestobstacle to 8 days was the fcatthatit wasn't real.
Reply

Posted: Jun 16th 2008 8:27PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well, thing is, they are different studios, Eight Days and The Getaway were being developed by Sony's London Studio (The Getaway was developed by Team SOHO, part of London Studio)

Naughty Dog is owned by Sony but not part of their own studios, and Insomniac is an independent developer (there are rumors about Sony owning shares, but nothing confirmed)
Reply

Posted: Jun 16th 2008 8:17PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
why does my picture wont change!!!!!! i'm tired of seeing mario!
Reply

Posted: Jun 17th 2008 10:03AM arrrgh said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
who is driving?! OMG BEAR IS DRIVING HOW CAN THAT BEEEE?!@?!!
Reply

Posted: Jun 16th 2008 8:28PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
lack of PSN uses gets a First Party game canceled??

sounds fishy to me.........its quite a bit of games that dont Use the PSN
Reply

Posted: Jun 16th 2008 8:35PM SheppyReturns said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think that was only part of it.
Reply

Posted: Jun 16th 2008 9:46PM AoE said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
read past the headline and you might be surprised Aggie. Here, this bit:

"Actually, Yoshida safely says the decision was really about budget and how the game fit into their publishing portfolio"

Online was a factor but not the beginning and end of why it got canceled.
Reply

Posted: Jun 16th 2008 11:31PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
oh yea I saw that AoE......just that being a factor is a dumb reason.......all they had to say was budget reasons.......
Reply

Posted: Jun 16th 2008 8:42PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I would respect this guy a lot more if he just said something like this:

"The games were shit, so I cancelled them".
Reply

Posted: Jun 16th 2008 8:57PM jhowlett said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
could be part of it. and could be part that ps3 games seem to be knocked for no online support. so if its an ok game that doesn't plan to do something with the psn just stop now and lets work on something that does.
Reply

Posted: Jun 16th 2008 9:37PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The game had been in development for over 2 years, I highly doubt it would be cancelled just because it didn't have an online component. This new guy has seen that the games are shit and probably going nowhere fast, cancelled them and moved the teams onto other projects (probably to work forever on the infinitely more profitable Singstar and Eyetoy franchises). SCE London is Sonys single biggest studio so I'm not expecting them to close down but I wouldn't be surprised to see some staff moving on.
Reply

Posted: Jun 16th 2008 9:47PM AoE said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Right, but his shareholders wouldn't respect that so much I bet. And then there's all the developers who work for him, I doubt it's terribly good for company morale if the head cheese is telling the press his employees make shitty games so he has to cancel them.
Reply

Posted: Jun 16th 2008 9:50PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I apologise for not fully considering the shareholder and employee morale perspectives when I wrote my joking comment.

Won't happen again chief.
Reply

Posted: Jun 17th 2008 1:21AM Paulmichael said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I hope what was made gets released, either for free or for really, really cheap. It was in development for a while so I would like to play what was there, at least...
Reply

Posted: Jun 17th 2008 4:24AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
this online phobia will finish soon or later, is it so hard to understand that some people prefer a more singleplayer introspective experience?
Reply

Posted: Jun 17th 2008 4:31AM barnolde said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This is stupid as hell because I'm sure those games would have been incredible, but I can see the "logic" behind their reasoning. People think that games are gimped for NOT having online, which may be true in some senses, but for a lot of them, the online mode is a HINDRANCE.

Nobody plays games like Stranglehold, The Darkness or Condemned 2 online and I'm sure all of those games would have been more fun had the already established developers focused SOLEY on single player as Psi-Ops, Riddick and Condemned 1 were all excellent titles, with Riddick being particularly awesome.

If a game like Uncharted was online, I'm confident it wouldn't have been as good as it was. Some developers do an excellent mix as seen by Halo 3, MGS4 or GTAIV.

To summarize;
'excellent offline + no online' is better than 'ok offline + ok online'
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Rhythm Heaven Fever review: Crazy into you

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 12:00PM

Remedy not done with Alan Wake

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 10:30AM

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW