Connect with us

Editorials

EXCLUSIVE: Red Barrels Confirms ‘Outlast 2’!

Published

on

I’ve known for awhile now that Outlast developer Red Barrels had begun working on a mystery horror game, seemingly immediately after wrapping up Outlast: Whistleblower. I didn’t know what it was until today, but that didn’t make the wait to share this exciting bit of news with all of you any less excruciating.

Outlast is one of my new favorite horror games, and at some point in the future it will get a sequel. We won’t know much about it until development is a little further along, so until then we’ll have to make due with the few precious details Red Barrels co-founder Philippe Morin was able to share with me for this exclusive reveal.

BD: Between the release of Outlast and its Whistleblower expansion, it’s been an exciting year for Red Barrels. You’ve left an indelible mark on the horror genre and made an impressive debut for such a new studio. What did it feel like being able to wrap up the story of Mount Massive Asylum?

We always intended to do a DLC for Outlast. It made sense production-wise to do it, because the programmers would be busy working on the PS4 and XB1 ports, so we couldn’t jump on a new project right away. Right from the start, we had a few ideas of what the DLC could be, but it was only a few weeks after shipping the game on PC that we decided exactly what we were going to do.

We took some time to gather all the feedback we could find and decided that the DLC needed to start before the events of Outlast, but end after them. For Outlast, we always wanted a dramatic ending, but we wanted something different for Whistleblower. Although both games have a different protagonists, we approached it as if it was one journey, because after all, it’s more about the player.

Some of us spent 3 years inside that Asylum. We started working on our trailer to help us find the money back in February 2011 and we shipped the game on XB1 back in June 2014, so the ending of Whistleblower meant a lot to us and we wanted players to share those emotions.

BD: Did anyone on the team need therapy (or at the very least, a well-deserved vacation) after it released?

Making the game was our therapy! We had fun coming up with ideas and situations we knew could be disgusting, scary or provocative. We’re in the business to deliver emotions and we like the idea of going places where others don’t go. That’s part of the advantages of being a small independent studio, we don’t have to worry about diluting the experience to please a wider audience.

Outlast2_2

BD: Outlast spread like wildfire online. Its gorgeous visuals, jump scares and streamlined mechanics made it the perfect kind of game to play through on video sites like YouTube. Was designing a horror game that’s as fun to play as it is to watch others play it a goal early on, or was it a happy accident?

I have to be honest and say it was a happy accident.

When we started production, we were not really familiar with the whole YouTubers phenomenon. But we quickly realized the opportunity it represented and we decided to take full advantage of it. Our budget was tight and we didn’t have a lot of money for marketing. So, YouTubers were a great help and we thank them. So far, Outlast has been downloaded by more than 3 million people across all platforms and YouTubers have played a big part in its success.

And, it was also a way for us to get useful feedback because we could see when and how people reacted to the events in the game.

BD: I’m sure the Murkoff Corporation has plenty evil left in them to warrant a sequel; are you interested in returning to the series down the road, or is its fate undecided?

We based Murkoff on some of the big corporations founded in the late 19th century or early 20th century. A lot of these companies made their money drilling for oil and then eventually became so powerful they could expend their activities to a lot of other areas, including scientific or medical research. These corporations have become so powerful, that it’s unthinkable to get rid of them these days. Governments come and go, but these entities are like immortals.

BD: I could happily chat about Outlast all day, but the world wants to know: what’s next for Red Barrels? What can you tell us about your next game?

It’s important for us to be passionate about whatever we’re working on, because we believe it’s the only way to achieve quality.

After shipping the XB1 version of Outlast, we took some time to analyze our situation and we quickly realized we had at least another horror game in us.

So, yes, we are working on Outlast 2.

The game will be a survival horror experience and it will take place in the same universe as Outlast, but it will have different characters and a different setting. We might go back to Mount Massive Asylum one day, but for now we have new ideas and themes we’d like to explore and we think we’re cooking up something special.

We’re still a small indie studio (12 people), so we’ll need a little bit of time to ship our next game, but hopefully it will be worth it.

BD: Outlast set the bar pretty high for the future of the series; how are you planning on surpassing it?

We really want to keep on improving our craft, but ultimately we’ll approach things the same way we did with the first game, which was to make a game we’re scared to play ourselves and trust our instinct.

Outlast2_3

BD: Will Outlast 2 tie into the events at Mount Massive in any way, or is this story going to be totally different?

Part of the fun of playing a horror game is the sense of discovery and progressively understanding “wtf” is going on. So, I’d rather not say too much at this point.

BD: Fair point! One of the things that really stood out to me about Outlast was its simple design. It didn’t waste time burdening players with complex mechanics or controls. Will Outlast 2 play like its predecessor, or are you taking a different approach with the sequel?

Our goal is still to give players first and foremost an emotional ride, so every design decision will be based on how it affects the experience and if it serves it.

BD: Is there a chance we’ll be able to defend ourselves from the monster(s) that hunt us this time, or will the emphasis again be on flight over fight?

Too soon to say. Part of the beauty of game development is its iterative process!

That’s all the details Red Barrels is prepared to divulge to us for now, but it’s enough to get me sufficiently excited for the future of one of the scariest video game series I’ve played in a long time. When they’re ready to give us a release window and/or an idea of which platforms Outlast 2 will come to, you can be sure I’ll share that here.

Huge thanks to Philippe Morin for taking the time to chat with us!

If you missed our review of Outlast: Whistleblower, you can check that out below.

YTSub

Gamer, writer, terrible dancer, longtime toast enthusiast. Legend has it Adam was born with a controller in one hand and the Kraken's left eye in the other. Legends are often wrong.

Editorials

What’s Wrong with My Baby!? Larry Cohen’s ‘It’s Alive’ at 50

Published

on

Netflix It's Alive

Soon after the New Hollywood generation took over the entertainment industry, they started having children. And more than any filmmakers that came before—they were terrified. Rosemary’s Baby (1968), The Exorcist (1973), The Omen (1976), Eraserhead (1977), The Brood (1979), The Shining (1980), Possession (1981), and many others all deal, at least in part, with the fears of becoming or being a parent. What if my child turns out to be a monster? is corrupted by some evil force? or turns out to be the fucking Antichrist? What if I screw them up somehow, or can’t help them, or even go insane and try to kill them? Horror has always been at its best when exploring relatable fears through extreme circumstances. A prime example of this is Larry Cohen’s 1974 monster-baby movie It’s Alive, which explores the not only the rollercoaster of emotions that any parent experiences when confronted with the difficulties of raising a child, but long-standing questions of who or what is at fault when something goes horribly wrong.

Cohen begins making his underlying points early in the film as Frank Davis (John P. Ryan) discusses the state of the world with a group of expectant fathers in a hospital waiting room. They discuss the “overabundance of lead” in foods and the environment, smog, and pesticides that only serve to produce roaches that are “bigger, stronger, and harder to kill.” Frank comments that this is “quite a world to bring a kid into.” This has long been a discussion point among people when trying to decide whether to have kids or not. I’ve had many conversations with friends who have said they feel it’s irresponsible to bring children into such a violent, broken, and dangerous world, and I certainly don’t begrudge them this. My wife and I did decide to have children but that doesn’t mean that it’s been easy.

Immediately following this scene comes It’s Alive’s most famous sequence in which Frank’s wife Lenore (Sharon Farrell) is the only person left alive in her delivery room, the doctors clawed and bitten to death by her mutant baby, which has escaped. “What does my baby look like!? What’s wrong with my baby!?” she screams as nurses wheel her frantically into a recovery room. The evening that had begun with such joy and excitement at the birth of their second child turned into a nightmare. This is tough for me to write, but on some level, I can relate to this whiplash of emotion. When my second child was born, they came about five weeks early. I’ll use the pronouns “they/them” for privacy reasons when referring to my kids. Our oldest was still very young and went to stay with my parents and we sped off to the hospital where my wife was taken into an operating room for an emergency c-section. I was able to carry our newborn into the NICU (natal intensive care unit) where I was assured that this was routine for all premature births. The nurses assured me there was nothing to worry about and the baby looked big and healthy. I headed to where my wife was taken to recover to grab a few winks assuming that everything was fine. Well, when I awoke, I headed back over to the NICU to find that my child was not where I left them. The nurse found me and told me that the baby’s lungs were underdeveloped, and they had to put them in a special room connected to oxygen tubes and wires to monitor their vitals.

It’s difficult to express the fear that overwhelmed me in those moments. Everything turned out okay, but it took a while and I’m convinced to this day that their anxiety struggles spring from these first weeks of life. As our children grew, we learned that two of the three were on the spectrum and that anxiety, depression, ADHD, and OCD were also playing a part in their lives. Parents, at least speaking for myself, can’t help but blame themselves for the struggles their children face. The “if only” questions creep in and easily overcome the voices that assure us that it really has nothing to do with us. In the film, Lenore says, “maybe it’s all the pills I’ve been taking that brought this on.” Frank muses aloud about how he used to think that Frankenstein was the monster, but when he got older realized he was the one that made the monster. The aptly named Frank is wondering if his baby’s mutation is his fault, if he created the monster that is terrorizing Los Angeles. I have made plenty of “if only” statements about myself over the years. “If only I hadn’t had to work so much, if only I had been around more when they were little.” Mothers may ask themselves, “did I have a drink, too much coffee, or a cigarette before I knew I was pregnant? Was I too stressed out during the pregnancy?” In other words, most parents can’t help but wonder if it’s all their fault.

At one point in the film, Frank goes to the elementary school where his baby has been sighted and is escorted through the halls by police. He overhears someone comment about “screwed up genes,” which brings about age-old questions of nature vs. nurture. Despite the voices around him from doctors and detectives that say, “we know this isn’t your fault,” Frank can’t help but think it is, and that the people who try to tell him it isn’t really think it’s his fault too. There is no doubt that there is a hereditary element to the kinds of mental illness struggles that my children and I deal with. But, and it’s a bit but, good parenting goes a long way in helping children deal with these struggles. Kids need to know they’re not alone, a good parent can provide that, perhaps especially parents that can relate to the same kinds of struggles. The question of nature vs. nurture will likely never be entirely answered but I think there’s more than a good chance that “both/and” is the case. Around the midpoint of the film, Frank agrees to disown the child and sign it over for medical experimentation if caught or killed. Lenore and the older son Chris (Daniel Holzman) seek to nurture and teach the baby, feeling that it is not a monster, but a member of the family.

It’s Alive takes these ideas to an even greater degree in the fact that the Davis Baby really is a monster, a mutant with claws and fangs that murders and eats people. The late ’60s and early ’70s also saw the rise in mass murderers and serial killers which heightened the nature vs. nurture debate. Obviously, these people were not literal monsters but human beings that came from human parents, but something had gone horribly wrong. Often the upbringing of these killers clearly led in part to their antisocial behavior, but this isn’t always the case. It’s Alive asks “what if a ‘monster’ comes from a good home?” In this case is it society, environmental factors, or is it the lead, smog, and pesticides? It is almost impossible to know, but the ending of the film underscores an uncomfortable truth—even monsters have parents.

As the film enters its third act, Frank joins the hunt for his child through the Los Angeles sewers and into the L.A. River. He is armed with a rifle and ready to kill on sight, having divorced himself from any relationship to the child. Then Frank finds his baby crying in the sewers and his fatherly instincts take over. With tears in his eyes, he speaks words of comfort and wraps his son in his coat. He holds him close, pats and rocks him, and whispers that everything is going to be okay. People often wonder how the parents of those who perform heinous acts can sit in court, shed tears, and defend them. I think it’s a complex issue. I’m sure that these parents know that their child has done something evil, but that doesn’t change the fact that they are still their baby. Your child is a piece of yourself formed into a whole new human being. Disowning them would be like cutting off a limb, no matter what they may have done. It doesn’t erase an evil act, far from it, but I can understand the pain of a parent in that situation. I think It’s Alive does an exceptional job placing its audience in that situation.

Despite the serious issues and ideas being examined in the film, It’s Alive is far from a dour affair. At heart, it is still a monster movie and filled with a sense of fun and a great deal of pitch-black humor. In one of its more memorable moments, a milkman is sucked into the rear compartment of his truck as red blood mingles with the white milk from smashed bottles leaking out the back of the truck and streaming down the street. Just after Frank agrees to join the hunt for his baby, the film cuts to the back of an ice cream truck with the words “STOP CHILDREN” emblazoned on it. It’s a movie filled with great kills, a mutant baby—created by make-up effects master Rick Baker early in his career, and plenty of action—and all in a PG rated movie! I’m telling you, the ’70s were wild. It just also happens to have some thoughtful ideas behind it as well.

Which was Larry Cohen’s specialty. Cohen made all kinds of movies, but his most enduring have been his horror films and all of them tackle the social issues and fears of the time they were made. God Told Me To (1976), Q: The Winged Serpent (1982), and The Stuff (1985) are all great examples of his socially aware, low-budget, exploitation filmmaking with a brain and It’s Alive certainly fits right in with that group. Cohen would go on to write and direct two sequels, It Lives Again (aka It’s Alive 2) in 1978 and It’s Alive III: Island of the Alive in 1987 and is credited as a co-writer on the 2008 remake. All these films explore the ideas of parental responsibility in light of the various concerns of the times they were made including abortion rights and AIDS.

Fifty years after It’s Alive was initially released, it has only become more relevant in the ensuing years. Fears surrounding parenthood have been with us since the beginning of time but as the years pass the reasons for these fears only seem to become more and more profound. In today’s world the conversation of the fathers in the waiting room could be expanded to hormones and genetic modifications in food, terrorism, climate change, school and other mass shootings, and other threats that were unknown or at least less of a concern fifty years ago. Perhaps the fearmongering conspiracy theories about chemtrails and vaccines would be mentioned as well, though in a more satirical fashion, as fears some expectant parents encounter while endlessly doomscrolling Facebook or Twitter. Speaking for myself, despite the struggles, the fears, and the sadness that sometimes comes with having children, it’s been worth it. The joys ultimately outweigh all of that, but I understand the terror too. Becoming a parent is no easy choice, nor should it be. But as I look back, I can say that I’m glad we made the choice we did.

I wonder if Frank and Lenore can say the same thing.

Continue Reading