Furious 4 Leaves Brothers In Arms Franchise as New IP | |
Good move here now they can be as creative as they want without being tied down with the brand name of Brothers in Arms. Seemed like a completely different game in the first place anyway so it makes sense. | |
seems more like they heard all the bitching from the fans of the series and realised how bad this move can turn out to be. | |
They already went "against the grain of the game's origins" the second they thought of mixing Inglorious Basterds with Borderlands and slapping the name "Band of Brothers" on it. It was already way beyond the name of Band of Brothers, so what new gameplay elements are they adding NOW that is deviating even further away? A gun that shoots swastikas covered in poo and lightning? Or, it's as simple as the fact that someone noticed that they did a big mistake about naming it Band of Brothers in the first place, simply because the actual game had NOTHING to do with the franchise, and now they're trying to cover their asses. Good thing people got angry about this, or they would've just continued on using the Band of Brothers name, regardless if they added new "gameplay features" o not. | |
I'm a huge Brothers in Arms fan and I did nothing but applaud Furious 4 upon its first revelation. So yeah, I'm just happy it's still coming! | |
Same here, I want the story to be wrapped up, of course. But honestly, this looked so fun I didn't care that they were making this under the name. | |
I'll be curious to see if simply removing the name from the box will placate the folks who were pissed off at Furious 4. People can be such funny creatures. | |
It will be nothing like the ME3 threads thankfully | |
It went from ire, to apathy. For me at least. At least they've finally changed it, though. It should never have been part of the Brothers in Arms franchise in the first place. Imagine the next Half-Life game suddenly featuring a talking, chainsaw-wielding puppy instead of Gordon. Sure, it might be more fun but it doesn't fit in. Half-Life is Gordon's story. Brothers in Arms is Baker's story. No need to suddenly act goofy. | |
I always knew this one was adopted. | |
Must.... resist... Portal... quotes.... willpower... failing... | |
The game had no business having the Brothers in Arms name attached. It was blatant name recognition whoring. Glad to see they've dropped it. +2 internets Gearbox | |
...yay? | |
I don't see what the big problem was. It was obviously a spin-off title. Whatever, still cool to know this game still exists. | |
I am oh-so-very relieved they are separating these IPs. When they first announced this as a Band Of Brothers game, I was so conflicted between thinking the game looked awesome, and being angered over the betrayal of the serious tone of Band of Brothers. | |
Very cool of them for doing this. Most companies wouldn't care what the fans felt about it and would keep the brand name on there for sales. Now that they already have the attention of Brothers in Arms fans, this deviation will create more attention for the game from others now. At least, that's how I view it. I like it. | |
A lot of gamers are stuck up a prissy about things like this. It's a smart move to carefully label yourself. God job guys, I hope you aren't too late. Yet after the reaction I saw from E3, you might be. Regardless, not every gamer gets their panties in a twist over a name. I look forward to learning more about this title. | |
I don't think that the game is bad by itself but it seems more than a little like exploiting the reputation of an established franchise when you're emplying that this has ANYTHING to do with this: | |
When this was announced as brothers in arms in the first place I nearly gave up on them as a company. | |
A most brilliant tactic Gearbox. Simply genius. I applaud them for this. Not only do they get attention by originally calling it Brothers in Arms, but then when there is enough publicity they drop the Brothers in Arms name so they can make it into its own series and keep the faithful happy. And now they have brought attention to the game that otherwise wouldn't have been there. | |
Still a blatant Basterds rip off. I know shooters tend to be fairly blatant with their inspirations (Halo *cough* Aliens *cough*), but this whole thing seems to be trying to cash in on the success of Tarantino's latest. A comedic take on WWII is perfectly fine. A comedic take involving a band of psychopathic American guerilla Nazi-hunters planning to take down Hitler while gunning down comedically inept Germans reeks of nothign but 'rip-off'. Especially with the whole 'branding the Nazis' bit. I mean jesus christ, Gearbox, you couldn't at least have made your characters British or French to make them stand out just a little? | |
pity they dropped the Brothers in Arms name; heaven forbid the series actually get some legitimate personality for once. Though this also means that Furious 4 got enough attention to where it doesn't need to weld itself to another franchise to garner buzz. Definitely looking forward to this as the wackiness of it is a breath of fresh air in the overly grim FPS genre | |
Thank god, this single-handedly makes me interested in Furious Four. The cognitive dissonance before was just way too jarring. | |
It was completely retarded to associate it with Brothers In Arms in the first place, but what actually pissed me off was that the game was announced not too long after Inglorious Basterds and you can see it was totally inspired by it. This isn't bad by itself, but it was like it had no originality. Compare Red Dawn to Freedom Fighters/Modern Warfare 2/Homefront (let's not forget the huge time gap between the 80's film and these videogames).
Just take anything considered sacred in any medium, rape it and people will be pissed off. It's not exclusive to gaming. If I made Citizen Kane 3D: Now with Explosions and Flying Knives even people who weren't fans of Citizen Kane would speak against it. People would be rioting if Inglorious Basterds had Schindler's List 2 on the title.
So FPSes are too grim (they aren't) but Brothers In Arms doesn't have any personality although it had a big emphasis on the dramatic events during war *way* before games started being gritty?
No, but they have a "token" Mohawk native American guy to dilute the "white power".
While not exactly realistic, the Call of Duties in WWII were actually pretty serious if you exclude that part with the Nova and the SAS. | |
Imagine if, say, Call of Duty in its WWII days, was named and branded as being a continuation of, "Schindler's List". Wouldn't the dissonance between what it's portraying itself as, and what it actually was, be jarring and downright offensive? Well I'd say that the jump from Brothers in Arms to Furious Four is even worse. At least CoD pretends to be serious. | |
Well you can count me as one. I love Bothers in Arms and hate Borderlands so I'm happy they aren't trashing a great IP to try and make a quick buck. I mean I won't be buying it eithrr way but now I might buy a Gearbox game in the future, if they ever make one worth playing. Maybe this could be the beginning of the end for bone-headed reusing of classic IP? | |
My thoughts exactly. Using Brothers in Arms' brand as a slingshot to get recognition is, quite frankly, excellent marketing. Having said that: I'm interested. Gearbox has proven themselves quite capable of turning goofy games downright awesome. | |
Fantastic! Ever since the game was first revealed I was among the naysayers of the game being tied to the Brothers in Arms franchise, and I genuinely hoped they would just drop the pretense of it being a Brothers in Arms game, and make it a stand alone title. Hmm, that cheered me up in a quite saddening way. Anyway, fingers crossed the game turns out well. | |
Whilst BIA itself eventually became nothing like BIA this was just a step to far. We basically had an Inglorious Bastards game trying to sell itself using an established franchise. A franchise which sadly has not seen a good game in quite a while or any game for that matter. | |
I remember saying that I might give this game a chance if it didn't have Brothers in Arms in the title, but since it did, I would be too busy wondering where the hell Baker went to even bother. Now...I don't know. Maybe I will. | |
As much as I hate to rely on the "they were there first argument" They were. Brothers in Arms was telling a single story of World War II without relying on self empowerment fantasy to drive it. Most FPS's don't do that, they simply say "this is a grim gritty world and you're the only one that has a chance to save it" (ex: see Gears of War). They don't say you're the only one to save Freedom from the nazi's, it's about getting your squad out alive and eventually the resulting PTSD. The only game that tells a story like that, (and at least just as well, though it's not a FPS) is Spec Ops: The Line, a game that came out nearly a decade later after the original Brothers in Arms. These games aren't a dime a dozen, and it's unique combination of serious story telling mixed with historical accuracy, and smooth and rather unique game play that served the story well, gave it it's own tone and personality. Maybe that kind of thing isn't your thing but it is certainly mine. | |
Seriously, you guys disturb the hell out of me. It wasn't a reboot or trying to cash in some trend or a new direction of a franchise, it was a god damn spin-off/off-shot/alternative flavor/etc........are gamers these days unable to tell the difference anymore, even when it's night & day!? | |
Hallelujah! | |
Furious 4 Leaves Brothers In Arms Franchise as New IP
Gearbox Software's president says the game's development has "evolved" beyond the original series.
Brothers In Arms: Furious 4 was revealed as a radical departure from the World War II squad-based shooter series. The Escapist's E3 2011 preview showed that Gearbox's latest vision favored cartoonish visuals, comedic dialog, and RPG-style leveling over somber, dramatic storytelling and careful suppress-and-flank maneuvers. Now, it seems that the changes have run so deep that Furious 4 will no longer be part of the Brothers In Arms franchise.
Gearbox Software president Randy Pitchford announced at PAX that Furious 4 will be spun off into an separate brand. He stated that the game had "evolved" since its inception, and that the game's developers "pushed the gameplay loop" and "got into a place that got away from the core" of the original franchise. As a result, the company made the decision to "unshackle" the brand from the re-imagined title.
Pitchford explained that by removing the reference to Brothers In Arms, the developers were able to experiment with new gameplay features that would've gone against the grain of the game's origins. He also suggested that Furious 4 will combine gameplay genres, similar to the meld of first-person shooter and RPG mechanics in Borderlands, although he declined to provide further details until the Gearbox Software community day in Dallas, Texas on September 15th.
Announcements on Furious 4 had remained quiet since its reveal in Ubisoft's E3 conference, which featured a band of four soldiers hunting down Hitler in a style that appeared to be highly inspired by Quentin Tarentino's Inglourious Basterds. Given the reaction from Brothers In Arms fans over the abrupt shift in tone, it seems like a good decision to separate Furious 4 from the heroic exploits of the 101st.
Sources: Kotaku, Polygon
Permalink