And that kind of bums me out. I really like what they have done with Dead Space, and to see them get assigned to this kinda sucks.

This is "Visceral Montreal." Different dudes.

@Jeff said:

This is "Visceral Montreal." Different dudes.

Oh, is it? What has Montreal worked on previously?

Wikied it... Did they just rename EA Montreal Visceral? So the same studio that developed the previous Army of Two games is working on this one?

So Visceral is the new Bioware?

I'm still trying to process the fact that they're trying another Army of Two game.

It appears that it is being developed at EA Montreal who developed the previous games. Visceral Montreal is a part of EA Montreal so I guess they are basically just using the Visceral name.

Looks like its going to be running on the Frostbite 2 engine. Dated March 2013.

Seems to still be focusing on two-player coop (split-screen supported), no mention of the rumored four-player coop.

@Jeff said:

This is "Visceral Montreal." Different dudes.

Wow thanks for clarifying, man. Can you perhaps also clarify why Ryan would say on the Bombcast that DS3 has a new studio? To this day, I still can't figure out what he meant. Is that Dino guy not still working on the UI?

Or you guys could just totally ignore my topic. That works too, I guess.

@Napalm said:

Or you guys could just totally ignore my topic. That works too, I guess.

I made mine first. ;)

@Barrock said:

@Napalm said:

Or you guys could just totally ignore my topic. That works too, I guess.

I made mine first. ;)

By two minutes, and you didn't bother sourcing a news article or posting any information which facilitated discussion. So, pat yourself on the back.

@Jeff said:

This is "Visceral Montreal." Different dudes.

The guys behind Dante's Inferno were also different dudes.

@Napalm said:

@Barrock said:

@Napalm said:

Or you guys could just totally ignore my topic. That works too, I guess.

I made mine first. ;)

By two minutes, and you didn't bother sourcing a news article or posting any information which facilitated discussion. So, pat yourself on the back.

No need to be that way. I'm merely stating that I didn't post in your thread because when I looked your thread didn't exist yet. Had it existed I wouldn't have created this topic.