I take no issue with that, everyone has their own aesthetic preferences. I just take issue with you saying that anything that's stylized and colorful is WOW-style.

I don't own the game. My only references is youtube and game review sites. I'm looking forward to buying and playing this game. But from what I'd see, the graphics and character styles are 'WoW' reference. I'm more into Diablo 1 and 2 art direction. So I don't buy Torchlight, Diablo 3, Darksiders 1 and 2, and other cartoony looking games because it's not my type. Even they say the gameplay is good or awesome. If you have issues, then don't listen to me. You can play or buy any games that you want and i buy and play games that I want.

But playing a game with a title like Darksiders is a let down for me. You play a character like Death and or War but the game is aimed for the kids who played only in consoles. The settings should be gloomy, brutal, with a dark cloudy sky but what we got? a happy color palettes. Characters are straight from the comic book with the same happy color palettes. With Joe Madureira gone, maybe they could make Darksiders in the adult route and make the graphic looks like Metro 2033.

They usually are underpaid, but having voice actors AT ALL greatly increases the cost of making the game, especially if you have a lot of dialog. For action games it's usually not much of an issue, but for RPGs and the like with hours and hours of voiced dialog, it can get very expensive.

You can also run into production problems, because all of the lines from a specific actor are normally done at once. If the devs decide to change something later, they have to bring everyone back in to re-record the things that changed, which is often viewed as an unnecessary cost, or may be impossible due to contract or schedule conflicts. (This is the source of a lot of the discrepancies in fully-voiced games.)

I really hope that they DO release a Darksiders 3, the two released games are absolutely fantastic. I really enjoy the theme, the story and the characters, but my only real request would be that Death had of looked a touch more emaciated though that is really no big deal. I don't really get people's issues with the series, I really like the graphic novel/comic astethetic and rather dark fantasy tones.

I accept that not everyone will like these, and that's fine, but I think a more photo-realistic and "brighter" game really would have detracted from the game. Is the game perfect? no. However, I personally find it great and very entertaining.

For those who said the art style is comic-style thus for children, I am not a child and I still enjoy comics both adult and youth oriented. I should also point out many comics exist both with traditional and unusual art styles aimed at an older audience. But, it's all opinions really, that's my two cents. :)

Dude, you're ignorant and shallow. Are the games heavily stylized and colorful? Yes. But do they look the way they do just to appeal to kids? Hell no! Yeah, the games are in the style of comics and the characters do look like comic book superheroes and villains but heck, that's not a downside at all. The games are recognizable and original and I'm just glad that they don't go the standard "oh so realistic and dark" route. The dev team's vision of a post-apocalyptic world is the most original one I've seen in ages - dead ruined cities mixed with beautiful views where nature is taking over the creations of man? Dude, that left some huge impressions on me. That you can't appreciate it is your problem, not the game's. And frankly War's overly stylized and bulky look makes him a far more interesting protagonist than Altair or even Rocksteady's Batman.

I am not surprised, but that is not because Darksiders 2 was a bad title. On the contrary, it is a very good game although far from perfect (few games can be given that remark in todays market). The problem is not its aestethics as some people point out, but the fact that competition was rather solid in 2012.

I think they wasted too much on production since they put a big gamble on the title, be it marketing or otherwise, and that the price (while fair enough) scare gamers like me away who would love to play the game but simply have to prioritise what they buy due to a small budget. Which is why my biggest output actually is spent on old classics I have not tried before for a cheap sum rather than fully priced titles.

It takes something special to make me blow the budget these days, such as what The Witcher 2 was in 2011. 2012 had much sharper competition, especially when you look at titles like Dishonered which had been expected for quite some time. It just did not seem possible for Darksiders 2 to strike gold in the manner they wanted.

1) The franchise is fairly new and far from completely mainstream.
2) The game itself seems to be good, but it does not outshine its competition.
3) A fully priced (unless I am mistaken) launch increases the risk of not meeting the 2 million mark, if the previous two criterias are in place.

As for the rant about aestethics going on in here: some of your nonsense about WoW is simply outdated. The most prominent factor which is valid for the debate in this case would be that many developers go for the longevity (your game will age well) rule where these kind of aestethics have become very typical. This have happened a lot outside of the MMO-market lately. Depending on how it is done the game gets a more solid characteristic feel to it, but that gets quickly cancelled out when everyone and their mother does it.

I doubt there will be a third title in this franchise, and it does sadden me. It looked like a fun game, but I just couldn't afford it up until now.

Simply put: it was somewhat unrealistic to think that Darksiders 2 had that much potential that it could carry them through in a breeze. If it was Saint's Row 4 it might have managed. Maybe. And that is a well-established franchise in comparison to Darksiders.

I never really got the "anything colorful or vaguely comic/cartoonish is for kids" thing either, but if he doesn't like the style, that's his option. Personally, I enjoy a bit of variety in art styles.

Hello, back at ya!

This is what happens when you piss off the "I just want to fucking play my game" console crowd;)

I have absolutely nothing but my own opinion to back up the above, but since I want it to be true, that's good enough for me!
There's really too much value in the brand. There will be some sort of game carrying the Darksiders name in a few years, whether it's a game any of us would want to play or not is not so certain.

EDIT: On another note, this game has tons of DLC, mostly cosmetic, not included in the season pass. Plus there's Season Pass DLC, but I don't think they've gotten more than 1-2 of their promised DLCs. It would be interesting to see what happens if this is the first Season Pass to not fulfill its end of the bargain. Most of these ring in to the tune of 30 bucks (so you only get like 1 DLC for free, which I consider to be a pretty weak discount), so TOS terms forbidding class action or not, I bet they get their asses handed to them in court.
Yeah, out of all the legit criticisms of Darksiders, the art style being "copy-cat" is not one of them. They poured a metric fuckton of effort into it and it shows.
That's like saying "I can pound in finishing nails fine with a standard hammer", both true and "wtf, why?" at the same time.

That is up for discussion. I recall reading a few industry statements saying companies often refrain from selling their new games at lower prices to keep the masses from thinking it's a "cheap" (as in, lower quality) title. Sure, the current indie wave and developers with games like Torchlight II are slowly turning this tide, but it sure is something to consider.

Runic has specifically had to work against this mindset. It's been hard but I think they've made more than they've lost. Still, you have to work at it and they're primarily PC, not console, so that makes a difference.

I had something important to contribute to this thread, then by the time I got to the end i forgot what it was.

So instead, I will say I am saddened by the news, but 2 million copies to break even? WTF did they do, spend 120 million on development? That's insane if you think about it.

No game should cost 120 million to make. The ones that do, besides one, have typically failed in one form or another, and the one that didn't fail is starting to see its age catch up to it as its primary playerbase starts turning into adults and realizing how much of their childhood they lost to it.
~Cym

If they needed 2 million sales just to break even then, well, they;re just fucking idiots really. The games industry is brutal and colossal mistakes like this are punished harshly. Things like this explain why THQ is on the verge of total collapse.

What I meant is that gamepad offers no advantage in this case. Because it really doesn't. This isn't DMC that has very limited camera control.

they probably needed the 2m for THQ to break even, no way did they spend 120 million making it.

FFS that is pushing SW:TOR figures and even in the realm of MMOs that was outrageous.

probably spent 20-40 million on it but THQ was really hoping on getting an extra 100 million out of it to pay off the "U Draw"