Well this shouldn’t come as a surprise…or should it? Granted its predecessor had players “riding solo,” can a video game in this day and age succeed with only a singleplayer campaign? (Of course it can.)
Now to clear up a bit of misconception, Darksiders developer, Vigil Games, claim to have in fact would have loved to see multiplayer as a part of the game, but the challenges were overbearing.
“When we put together the pitch for Darksiders 1, we wanted it to be multiplayer then,” Director Marvin Donald told IGN. “It’s just too much work when you’re starting a brand new studio with a new [intellectual property] and you’re building your own technology. We’re also evolving the series into more of [a role-playing game], which was something else we wanted to do from the beginning, but we just didn’t have the resources or time or money to do it the first time around and do it justice.”
Now before gamers get up-in-arms as we are known to do, Donald explains the complexities that Vigil Games will be dealing with if multiplayer were to indeed be added to Darksiders II:
Each character — War in the first game, and Death in the sequel — has its own animation set consisting of 800 to 1,000 animations. That might not be an issue if animations could be shared between characters, but that’s not possible because each has different proportions.
To the credit of Vigil Games, they are focusing on an incredible and in-depth singeplayer campaign, rather than leaving it out to dry and tacking on a horrible multiplayer experience. Kudos to them!
Thanks 1UP!
