Epic shelved Bulletstorm sequel

Epic Games president Mike Capps confirms work began on Bulletstorm follow-up before People Can Fly shifted to new project; piracy hurt PC version of original.

A Bulletstorm follow-up was in the works before Epic Games moved Polish developer People Can Fly to a new project, president Mike Capps told GameSpot this weekend at PAX East.

Epic would "love" to return to the Bulletstorm franchise.

"We thought a lot about a sequel, and had done some initial development on it, but we found a project that we thought was a better fit for People Can Fly," he said. "We haven't announced that yet, but we will be announcing it pretty soon."

"I'd love to go back [to Bulletstorm]," he added. "I think there's more to do with Bulletstorm. Heck, it kind of ended wanting more. I'd love to see another project, but right now we don't have anything to talk about."

Regarding the original Bulletstorm, Capps said the foul-mouthed first-person shooter didn't live up to publisher Electronic Arts' expectations.

"I think Bulletstorm was very critically successful, and I think a lot of folks really enjoyed seeing something new," he said. "From a sales perspective it was good, but not amazing. I think EA was hoping we'd do better."

Capps also claimed that the PC version of Bulletstorm was hurt by piracy, but also admitted that it was a less-than-stellar port, which may have hurt sales, too.

"We made a PC version of Bulletstorm, and it didn't do very well on PC and I think a lot of that was due to piracy. It wasn't the best PC port ever, sure, but also piracy was a pretty big problem."

For more on Bulletstorm, check out GameSpot's review.

Got a news tip or want to contact us directly? Email news@gamespot.com

Did you enjoy this article?

Sign In to Upvote


Eddie Makuch

Eddie Makuch is a news editor at GameSpot, and would like to see the Whalers return to Hartford.



@GamerLegend10 I really do not check my account very often, so I don't even remember what we were talking about. I don't know why I came across as some kind of console elitest snob. In my time, I have owned an atari 2600, NES, Gameboy, SNES, Sega Genesis, Playstation, Playstation 2, Nintendo Wii, Nintendo DSlite, Nintendo DSIXL and an Xbox360. That is a pretty wide gamut if you ask me. all the major consoles makers are represented, but not in every generation. I think Nintendo is amazing for creating such constant characters as Mario and Link which endure to this day and almost always manage to be fresh and relevant. Yet i laugh at them for being so short sighted, as to cancel their partnership to create a CD peripheral for the SNES with Sony, to focus on the N64, forcing Sony to enter the console market with the playstation, a 32 bit system that soundly trounced the n64 (the first and not last Nintendo console to suffer from poor 3rd party support) which led to the PS2 which won it's generation, even against a new contender by the computing powerhouse microsoft, with its original xbox and superior power. But I skipped the PS3, with its full backwards compatibility (originally) and pioneering  blu-ray disc technology for an Xbox 360 and a Wii (my first Nintendo console since the SNES, not including handhelds). My roommate had a 360, and I immediately became immersed in Gears of War. He had the original xbox too, so I was fond of other xbox exclusives like Fable (though Fable 2 and especially 3 disappointed me greatly). Hearing that Final Fantasy XIII was NOT going to be a Sony exclusive and come to the 360 sealed the deal for me. I chose 360 over PS3 (since I had limited money) and there is honestly not one PS3 exclusive franchise I regret not being able to play. I got a wii because it was cheaper, and innovative with motion control and nostalgic with the virtual console. I chose the DS over the PSP because of price, and the touch screen, and the fact my wife has one, so we could play together. All logical choices with little fanboyism, as you accuse me of. But I guess your peeve is I came down on PC gaming, despite you not being an avid PC gamer. Don't get me wrong, I do play the occasional PC game. I own Heroes of Might and Magic 3, some iteration of Risk, Civilization: Call to Power, The original Sims, Sim City 2000, and Romance of the Three Kingdoms XI, not to mention still playing great oldies like Pirates! gold and colonization. But these are almost all strategy games of some nature. Most people referring to PC gaming are talking shooters, really, the Quakes, Unreal tournaments, Doom, Crysis and what not. And here is where I come down on PC gaming. I like shooters. I own most of the Halo games, all the gears of war, some Call of Duty, but PC shooters, with each new release, demand more and more from the system. The PC is modular, upgradeable, where consoles are not. Game designers take advantage of this by making PC games push the envelope, further driving hardware advances. It is an expensive habit to keep up, if you want to run a game seemlessly on the PC. That is something I don't have to worry about as a console gamer. Also, i don't have to worry about ridiculously restrictive and invasive DRM content, which kept me from purchasing Civilization IV and the Colonization remake. Oh well, i have plenty of great games to play across my wide assortment of consoles and handhelds, too much even, to really feel left out by lack of PC gaming love. But thanks for the accusations. Fanboy? whatever. I am not loyal to a single console maker, and as i said before, have representations of all the main players. I have solid, logical, unemotional reasons for owning the consoles that I do.