Quick Quotes: Vigil’s Jay Fitzloff on why Darksiders was such a risky venture

Tuesday, 27th March 2012 20:45 GMT By Stephany Nunneley

“Darksiders was a huge risk because it was an old game in a new shell for us and for THQ because it’s a new studio, nobody there had made a console game before and it was a new IP. On paper, to be honest I don’t know why THQ went for it. I mean, the tech demo really nailed it, but I think any other publisher would just say ‘No way, but more power to you’, but they did. Then the game itself was a risk – we’re talking about a game that has an almost old-generation mentality where we’re willing to challenge you and not spoonfeed you the whole time. We had a strong tech demo and it looked really good, plus we had an engine. We created that engine, so I’m sure that if Darksiders had failed, there’d still be that engine there that’s worth pursuing.” – Vigil Games’ Jay Fitzloff to MCV on the riskiness of Darksiders.



  1. LOLshock94

    so ironic how people can love this game and not zelda when darksiders is a shitty version of zelda

    #1 3 years ago
  2. ManuOtaku

    Well i love zelda and i did like a lot darksiders, really i did enjoy both, but iam happier with darksiders because it is a new IP by a new developer, and for that they had my support, the same goes for kingdoms of amalur

    #2 3 years ago
  3. DSB

    Yeah, making a Zelda/God of War clone really isn’t risky in any possible sense of the word.

    If they had actually tried to do something with it, that would be different.

    #3 3 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.