It's been nearly half a year since we last heard from Ubisoft about the long ago teased I Am Alive, but an Australia game rating classification for the title popped up yesterday, indicating it may be closer to release than we once thought. The listing doesn't reveal anything beyond what we already know about the game, granting it an MA 15+ "Strong Violence" rating.
I Am Alive was first officially revealed at E3 2008, and other than a new trailer shown at E3 2010, has been conspicuously quiet over the past couple years. When it was last spoken of by Ubisoft during a financial call, it was pushed to an amorphous "post-April 2011" launch window. As inferred by its title, it seems that the project is still being worked on somewhere, likely Ubisoft Shanghai, and that amorphous launch window may become more defined in the not-so-distant future.
Reader Comments (16)
Posted: Jun 29th 2011 12:05PM Tihn said
eeYES pa-ra-yus Je-a-sus!!
Posted: Jun 29th 2011 12:06PM Truant said
The handling of this title has been atrocious. I hope it's not indicative of the work that will (maybe) be done on this game.
It seems like a cool concept, but kinda hard to tell since no one will talk about it.
It seems like a cool concept, but kinda hard to tell since no one will talk about it.
Posted: Jun 29th 2011 12:24PM Urethra Alfredo said
@Truant
Yeah, the premise intrigued me from the start. I've been hoping this game would see the light of day.
However, an Australian Rating Board classification means very little considering that, in the last three years, I have yet to see a single in-game screenshot. Ever. Pre-rendered cinematics don't exactly leave me feeling sanguine.
Christ, Ubisoft, can you at least pretend like this is a tangible product?
Reply
Yeah, the premise intrigued me from the start. I've been hoping this game would see the light of day.
However, an Australian Rating Board classification means very little considering that, in the last three years, I have yet to see a single in-game screenshot. Ever. Pre-rendered cinematics don't exactly leave me feeling sanguine.
Christ, Ubisoft, can you at least pretend like this is a tangible product?
Posted: Jun 30th 2011 3:18AM wcarnation said
@dpaul420 Long development times aren't a bad thing.
Reply
Posted: Jun 29th 2011 12:07PM Dance Mofo said
Is that Mario Van Pebbles?
Posted: Jun 29th 2011 12:31PM Dance Mofo said
@chocobox thanks +1 for your charitable contribution
Reply
Posted: Jun 29th 2011 12:08PM lonecow said
At first I thought this was a game based on one of those "I shouldn't be alive" TV shows, then that got me thinking.
Has there ever been a game based on a true story? Or a biography of someones life in game form? I'm sure there has to be.
Someone needs to make a game based on Miyamoto's life, with the gameplay segments like the movie Big Fish, where you see the world from his wacky perspective. As a kid little Miyamoto walks home and passes a normal dog, but then it turns into a Chain Chomp1 etc etc.
But I digress.
Has there ever been a game based on a true story? Or a biography of someones life in game form? I'm sure there has to be.
Someone needs to make a game based on Miyamoto's life, with the gameplay segments like the movie Big Fish, where you see the world from his wacky perspective. As a kid little Miyamoto walks home and passes a normal dog, but then it turns into a Chain Chomp1 etc etc.
But I digress.
Posted: Jun 29th 2011 1:21PM Once known as Shadsy said
@lonecow Nothing's coming to mind right now, but I think one reason it's not popular is because a game is by design interactive and deviates from the story. Look at Six Days in Falljuah. That was supposed to be a very accurate account of the battle, but because it's interactive and puts you in the role of real soldiers and potentially lets you do inaccurate or "offensive" things.
I can't imagine anyone would fork over the rights to their story if they knew players could dick around and do the wrong thing. There's a balance between fun and accuracy to be had there, and I think that's one of the fields where games just don't do well.
Reply
I can't imagine anyone would fork over the rights to their story if they knew players could dick around and do the wrong thing. There's a balance between fun and accuracy to be had there, and I think that's one of the fields where games just don't do well.
Posted: Jun 29th 2011 1:42PM DarknessBear said
@lonecow They cant find a person that shot enough people in the face and wasnt crazy.
Reply
Posted: Jun 29th 2011 12:39PM JakeAuditore said
Oh snap, I'm officially excited again.
Posted: Jun 29th 2011 12:44PM captplut9465 said
It is alive?
Posted: Jun 29th 2011 1:26PM Gaddes said
Looks like I AM Alive...
*sunglasses*
...is still alive.
YEAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH
*sunglasses*
...is still alive.
YEAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH
Posted: Jun 29th 2011 1:38PM PANdaRUS said
Hopefully this game won't be like the result of tossing the source code of Heavy Rain, Fallout 3, and Motorstorm Apocalypse into the air and patching together the jumbled mess that lands with cut scenes from Uncharted 2.
The idea seems cool but history doesn't play nice with off the beaten path titles like this that strain through production timelines.
The idea seems cool but history doesn't play nice with off the beaten path titles like this that strain through production timelines.






