THQ’s new boss doesn’t sound keen on making Darksiders III

Tuesday, 12th June 2012 15:46 GMT By Debabrata Nath

Newly appointed president of THQ Jason Rubin isn’t too keen on making Darksiders III, from the sound of it.

Speaking to The Verge, Rubin said Vigil may have a future in store for it other than telling the stories of the other two horsemen.

“Darksiders II is very interesting but I think I can get that team to make other very interesting games,” he said.

Darksiders II, which is in development for PS3, Xbox 360 and PC, releases on August 14 this year. A Wii U version is also in development.

Thanks, GoNintendo.



  1. The_Red

    I really hope Rubin doesn’t turn Vigil and other THQ studios into DLC / download only game factories.

    On the other hand, if this means that they will still work on big AAA games but not from that franchise, that would actually be truly welcome. It always feels a bit annoying when a studio spends decades making sequels to the same game. Even creators of my fave series (MK) have suffered from this.

    #1 3 years ago
  2. TMRNetShark

    Fans of Darksiders wanted all 4 horsemen as playable main characters (which means 4 games). On the other hand, Rubin needs to do what his company must do to survive.

    #2 3 years ago
  3. Beta

    But I just got Darksiders 1 off PS Plus :’( I think it’s one of their better franchises.

    Don’t you dare take this series off me so early Rubin! :P

    #3 3 years ago
  4. Night Hunter

    Shouldn’t he wait for it to release and see how it sells first? The first Darksiders came out amidst some competition, the release for Darksiders 2 leaves it almost unopposed. I really hope it sells well.

    #4 3 years ago
  5. DSB

    I’m really starting to like this guy.

    Darksiders isn’t a bad game and it isn’t bad business, but it’s also common as dirt. I’m not sure that’s the way to carve out your spot in the market.

    #5 3 years ago
  6. Phoenixblight

    THQ doesn’t have much franchises to survive on and if you are to cut Darksiders you are surely shooting yourself in the foot. They have Saints Row, Warhammer RTS, and Darksiders. Those games are their life blood right now.

    #6 3 years ago
  7. Edo

    @6 “…but it’s also common as dirt” something that can be said about 90% of the gaming franchises these days.

    #7 3 years ago
  8. Erthazus

    Darksiders is a poor franchise.

    first game was a mediocre pile of copy paste. Jason Rubin made a good move.

    #8 3 years ago
  9. StolenGlory


    Also, shouldn’t this guy really be quite bullish on a sequel? (even if he has no intention to see it made) Since it will surely hurt their chances at retail if people get the assumption (however wrong that may be) that the franchise has no future.

    #9 3 years ago
  10. Phoenixblight


    Yeah again shooting himself in the foot. This dude from reading the interviews and such is like a younger version of Kotick. Even Darksiders being a mediocre game had pretty solid gameplay and a unique theme. If Vigil does it right they can have a great series. From what I have read,seen and heard from my friends at Vigil. I suspect it will do far better than the original. This kind of talk from Rubin should wait until after the sequel to see if its viable. This new president is probably going to make Vigil develop a FPS in hopes of copying COD. He is just the type to do it too.

    #10 3 years ago
  11. zeus019

    Good marketing Rubin …… if he says stuff like this people will be more interested in this game and da game will sell more….. no matter what, they won’t stop making a profitable Franchise….

    #11 3 years ago
  12. DSB

    @8 And that’s exactly why it’s pointless to try. The bigger publishers are always going to be better at producing and marketing clones.

    It’s going to come down to Darksiders II. If it does roughly the same, then I think they’re better off going for something original.

    @11 Really? Bobby Kotick challenges his studios to make new IPs, instead of mass producing the ones they’ve got? Did I miss something?

    Although I agree, he should probably wait for the release.

    #12 3 years ago
  13. Ali Hayas

    Rubin keeps bragging these days.

    #13 3 years ago
  14. ManuOtaku

    I think this guy wants that Naugthy Dog will end up buying THQ, nice move man nice move, working as an infiltrator.

    #14 3 years ago
  15. TheWulf

    The problem with THQ is that they’re really too nice, they’re not cut-throat enough. They tried being cut-throat with their Saints Row: The Third and Warhammer 40k DLC, but it didn’t really work out for them. I don’t think they know how to do it in the same way that biggies like Activision and EA do.

    But, funnily enough, this is why they’re also one of the few publishers I stand by and buy frequently from. I hope that they can figure out a way to survive without losing what makes me respect them. Because of my distaste for EA, Activision, and Ubisoft, I tend to roll in my experiences of them with the games they offer, so therefore they have to try all that much harder if they want me to buy a game.

    But THQ doesn’t have to try that hard at all.

    I guess it’s true what I’ve said that people like being told what to buy by Daddy Fashion and Mummy Marketing, because otherwise publishers like EA, Activision, and Ubisoft would be doing poorly, and THQ would be doing great.

    It really is a shame.

    #15 3 years ago
  16. Phoenixblight


    Yeah because Activision a year ago said they will be only focusing on the bigger franchises like COD and have 7 studios for one franchise. Thats totally innovative, oh wait, no it isn’t. Outside of Blizzard, Activision has COD, Skylanders, Transformers, Prototype, Spiderman than the movie game contracts. Yep, ripe with new IPs.

    #16 3 years ago
  17. TheWulf

    Weren’t Transformers and Skylanders (Skylanders especially, being by Toys for Bob) brought to Activision from outside developers?

    The point I think is being made here is that Activision’s in-house development wouldn’t know a thing about creativity if they were murdered and then resurrected by it, and given a sermon on imagination, and then lectured for a hundred years on the tenets of good design.

    Skylanders was good, yes. But that’s because it was (to say it again) Toys for Bob. And Activision don’t own Toys for Bob. In fact, they don’t own any of the games they’ve published that have any worth.

    I make this distinction because games that are brought to a publisher are games that just need a publisher. And those games can be quite good, on occasion. But games that are developed in house by a publisher are usually incredibly shit.

    #17 3 years ago
  18. DSB

    @17 But…. Rubin is saying the exact opposite of that. He’s not happy churning out relatively succesful generic clones. He wants the quality to be a factor too.

    So, by doing the exact opposite of Kotick, he becomes Kotick?

    How does that make sense?

    THQ has tried to be EA and Activision for the better part of a decade. It hasn’t served them well. Rubin is trying to style the company after the likes of Take-Two. I think that’s pretty obvious.

    #18 3 years ago
  19. The_Red

    I wouldn’t call DS1 a clone. If that’s the case, then we should return to calling every FPS a Wolf 3D / Doom clone, every modern RTS a StarCraft clone and so forth.

    Titles like Doom, Diablo, StarCraft and yes, Zelda are sto influential and important that many other games WILL try to take inspiration from. Plus with DarkSiders 2, they’re actually doing something rather unique. They’ve taken the INSANE loot formula from Diablo and mixed it with action / adventure nature of Zelda. Borderlands did the same with crazy loot and FPS which resulted in one of the most successful and beloved new IPs of this gen.

    #19 3 years ago
  20. Phoenixblight

    @19 Read his articles he may said that in this article but in other articles he is saying another. Take Two is only on the map because of Rockstar, THQ sadly does not have that type of talent.

    #20 3 years ago
  21. viralshag

    @16, what are you basing your thoughts on other than your own imagination? If I remember correctly, THQ had a better last qtr report thanks to its digital sales, including higher than expected sales of its pass and DLC. So how exactly did it not work out for them?

    And on topic, I would like to see another Darksiders game if II turns out to be good. But I don’t think famine and pestilence/conquest could have as much of a cool imagining to them.

    I would love to see a possible 4-player co-op with all of them in the fourth game though.

    #21 3 years ago
  22. Edo

    @13 I don’t think that THQ can afford themselves to be “original” at this point without selling well…a lot of people seem to be forgetting that and I don’t think that even this guy is well aware of that.

    #22 3 years ago
  23. DSB

    @20 You can argue semantics for a long time like that.

    There were plenty of FPS’s that were Wolfenstein clones, like Blake Stone, or Doom clones like Rise of the Triad.

    To me that’s the category that Darksiders falls into. Generic, utterly familiar gameplay in a different artstyle.

    You’re allowed to like it obviously, but I can’t see how it would ever be called original.

    @21 Whether you agree with it or not is up to you, but I don’t see how THQ can survive trying to compete with EA and Activision on generic titles. Big publishing will always have them beat on production values and marketing budgets, which is all that matters when you don’t put the focus on design.

    Darksiders is one of their rare successes of that strategy, it’s not even close to being the rule.

    @23 What choice do they have? They tried releasing generic action crap for the better part of a decade, and it nearly sunk the company. Quite arguably the best period in the company’s history was when they were doing original stuff that was actually worth noticing.

    Are the guys playing Gears of War suddenly going to jump to Space Marine? Is the MOBA crowd going to jump on Dawn of War II? Are the CoD and BF players going to jump on Homefront? Was the MMO crowd going to rally around Dark Millenium?

    It simply wasn’t going to happen in this universe.

    If you can’t beat them on size and exposure, then you have to beat them on smarts and quality.

    #23 3 years ago
  24. Gigabomber

    Darksiders is one of their better franchises and one of the best open world adventure/metroidvania 3rd person titles. This guy is a tool.

    #24 3 years ago
  25. Hellhound30x


    #25 3 years ago
  26. Khan979

    This Rubin guy is an idiot. Dark siders was a really good game…..sure it could have used a bit more polish before it was released, but overall it was very fun.

    DarkSiders 2 looks like it is going to be even better and hopefully will sell more. I really hope he doesn’t cut off this IP too soon.

    #26 3 years ago
  27. Ireland Michael

    Wait… people are complaining about *not* getting tonnes of rehashed sequels?

    Good god, make up your minds.

    Personally, I thought Darksiders was as dull and unoriginal a game as they come, with weak combat, generic art design and an utterly dull story, but even if I didn’t feel that way about it, I still don’t understand why people would rather see sequel after sequel after sequel over ew franchises and ideas to invest themselves in.

    Blows the mind.

    #27 3 years ago
  28. freedoms_stain

    @28, Darksiders has an overarching story that likely won’t be finished with Darksiders 2.

    That’s not rehashed sequelisation imo.

    #28 3 years ago
  29. Ireland Michael

    @29 “Darksiders deliberately has an “overarching” storyline in the hope that it will convince people to buy the sequels.”


    Modern Warfare had an “overarching” storyline as well. Just saying.

    #29 3 years ago
  30. ManuOtaku

    Well i think this is somewhat a new ip and for that is a little bit to soon to say this kind of things, really is very very alarming, if number 2 is like the first one, and i mean doesnt improve or stablish new gameplay mechanics, then i think he is right, but if the game is keep evolving with each iteration, and for that making the game better and shine, then why not, why is that bad, all of our beloved series that form part of each console manufacturer are done this way, why cannot darksiders too.

    And is really very resonant words, prior the launch of said tittle, i wonder what is the main reason for this, it has to have a purpose good or bad, but i think it has one, maybe he is testing the popularity of this franchise perhaps, in order to see our reaction, or is something more darker, i dont know, but it is pretty strange.

    #30 3 years ago
  31. OrbitMonkey

    Darksiders was ok, lets not get all passionate about that eh? Rubin wants something more than ok and that’s not a bad thing.

    #31 3 years ago
  32. DSB

    I don’t think there’s any doubt that Rubin wants to play the badass. And if he fails, then everybody gets to laugh at him.

    But I do respect the fact that he goes into a company that is practically worthless, and starts talking about developing Skyrims and Red Dead Redemptions, for less money.

    I think the negativity towards that statement is more of a kneejerk reaction than anything else. I didn’t like the sound of it at first, but the more he maps it out, the more I see the idea.

    Change sucks, but if anyone needs it, it’s THQ.

    If he can match his attitude with smarts and hard work, I think Rubin could be the man for the job.

    @29 You can say that about a lot of games though. Modern Warfare has been busy fighting World War 3, it doesn’t make it less of a mass production.

    @31 Good point.

    #32 3 years ago
  33. NeoSquall

    @30 WAIT A MINUTE.
    Call of Duty has an overarching storyline?
    More like Call of Duty has ANY storyline?

    #33 3 years ago
  34. Ireland Michael

    @33 Well yeah, of course. Doesn’t really stop it from being true in this case one way or the other.

    @34 Believe it or not, yes it does.

    #34 3 years ago
  35. Edo

    @24 The only choice for them is to improve the present franchises such as Saints Row,Darksiders,Warhammer and others.Saints 3 sold 4 million copies and was also critically acclaimed(at least by THQ standards)I honestly don’t know how many sold copies from other franchises will satisfy them or should I say how many will be enough to keep them solvent…

    #35 3 years ago
  36. DSB

    @36 Darksiders may be popular, but I think you’re overestimating how well it actually did. If these franchises were so good, then THQ wouldn’t be in this situation.

    I think it’s pretty obvious that if Saints Row The Third hadn’t hit paydirt, then THQ would be gone right now.

    Franchises haven’t done that much for the company. Saints Row is the only one at the moment. DoW II did well at first, but the expansions didn’t. UFC did well at first, but the sequels didn’t.

    Their biggest hits have been with the games that people couldn’t get anywhere else. That’s why I think Rubin is onto something here.

    There’s not much left to lose, risking a little or risking a lot is virtually the same thing for THQ at this point.

    @35 I inadvertently made the same point you did earlier, aimed at the same guy. Didn’t see it :P

    #36 3 years ago
  37. SplatteredHouse

    It was interesting in light of this statement, to find a new advertising campaign kicked off on TV for Darksiders II. They’re not keen on making more DS apparently, yet they ARE keen to tie up multiple segments per break of commercial ad time (expensive?) to publicise the coming one…

    But again, the sequel comes after a multi-year gap since the release of Darksiders. If that cycle had to be repeated again, if they had to wait that time to capitalise, maybe that’s part of what would hold a DS3 back from being made.

    #37 3 years ago
  38. back_up

    Darksider 3 ? lol
    secong one is yet to release

    #38 3 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.