Infinite Rush represents a substantial structural change from the Hot Wheels Unleashed games, building the experience around four explorable islands. What did an open-world structure allow Milestone to do with Hot Wheels that wasn’t possible with the previous games?

The biggest change for us was moving away from the classic structure where you just jump from one race to the next through a list of menus. By bringing in exploration, we wanted to fill the gap between events with actual gameplay. As you drive around the islands, there’s always something to do, secrets to uncover, or optional challenges to try out with your cars. It gives players total freedom to set their own pace and experience the Hot Wheels world in a much more dynamic way, rather than just focusing on the finish line.

The ability to leave the orange track is one of Infinite Rush‘s defining ideas. How do you maintain the precision and spectacle associated with traditional Hot Wheels tracks while also allowing players to find their own routes through the environment?

The orange pieces definitely aren’t gone. We integrated them directly into the environment alongside iconic playsets, giant loops, and classic toy structures. One second you’re driving on dirt or asphalt, and the next you’re launching onto a massive orange ramp.

These Hot Wheels elements also serve as a spectacular backdrop across the islands. Having recognizable pieces framing the landscape keeps that crazy stunt vibe alive everywhere you look. Even when players leave the track to find their own path, they always feel like they’re racing in an authentic Hot Wheels world.

On top of that, for tracks set directly on the natural terrain, we created a special “invisible” module. Instead of traditional orange plastic walls, it uses semi-transparent holographic barriers. This guides players along the route without blocking the view, letting them race freely while taking in the environment.

Rush Squad allows players to rapidly switch between the four vehicle classes. How do you design events so that choosing the right class is meaningful without simply creating situations where there is one obvious ‘correct’ vehicle to use?

For structured track races, the track itself dictates the required class. Having four distinct vehicle classes pushed us to rethink track design: instead of forcing every car type onto the exact same course, we built tracks specifically designed for each category. We developed specific design rules for every class, shaping track layouts, interactive objects, and animated modules around their unique strengths and weaknesses. Races are now strictly class-vs-class, which gave us the freedom to create much more distinct courses that highlight the identity of each vehicle type.

Free roaming, on the other hand, is all about player freedom. Out in the open world, we want players to experiment and express themselves however they like using the tools available. Figuring out which vehicle class works best for a specific objective or activity is a part of the challenge and a core element of exploring the islands.

Vehicles can also be enhanced through perks. How extensively can those upgrades alter a car’s behaviour before it begins stepping on the role of another class, and how important was preserving the identity of Drifters, Speeders, Versatiles and Titans?

Preserving class identity was our top priority, especially since track design relies so heavily on those unique mechanics. Perks are designed to refine your playstyle, not erase what makes a category special.

The system spans four ranks (C, B, A, and S), built around a clear principle: the stronger the perk, the greater the trade-off. Ranks C through A let you fine-tune handling, boost, and physics parameters, but always with balanced compromises. S-Rank perks, which sit at the top, are class-exclusive. Rather than changing a category’s identity, they push its defining traits even further with dramatic gameplay twists.

For example, a Speeder can drastically increase its boost recharge at top speed, but its brakes become much more reactive, requiring extreme precision. Or a Titan can charge its boost much faster, but overcharging it results in a much harsher slowdown penalty. This ensures vehicles stay true to their core identity while still giving players total freedom to tune their setup.

Each island eventually builds towards encounters with Rushers and Rush Masters. What can these boss-style races do mechanically that a conventional race or event can’t?

Mechanically, we wanted to keep the focus on pure racing, but the 1v1 format fundamentally changes the tension compared to a standard event. When you’re facing a Rusher or a Rush Master, it becomes a high-stakes duel. The AI is tuned to be much more competitive, meaning that getting into first place is only half the battle—maintaining that lead until the finish line requires absolute concentration and precision.

Ultimately, these races act as a final test for everything that specific island throws at you. It’s less about managing a full grid of cars and more about a focused, head-to-head battle where a single mistake can cost you the match.

The Track Builder can now interact much more closely with the open world and even use action markers to control AI behaviour. How do you make sure AI racers can reliably understand and complete the more extreme tracks that players are inevitably going to build?

To help the AI handle complex creations, we give players three main AI markers in the Track Builder, which are simplified versions of the same tools we use internally. You can place speed-up markers, slow-down markers, or direction markers on either side of the track to guide the AI’s racing line.

That said, adding AI and setting up these markers is completely optional, and tracks undergo a separate validation process if you choose to include them. We expect the most patient and experienced players to build some truly crazy tracks that the AI can actually race on, but we ultimately leave it up to the player to decide how deep they want to dive into those features.

With user-created tracks becoming such a large part of the experience, what systems are you putting in place for discovering, rating and sharing good creations rather than having the best tracks disappear beneath thousands of uploads?

To make sure the best content rises to the top, we built a rating system based on likes and favorites. It ranks community creations across three timeframes (all-time, monthly and weekly) so the community naturally highlights what’s worth playing. For online races, the game mixes official tracks with UGC ones that have reached a certain threshold of likes. This keeps multiplayer events fresh while ensuring you’re always racing on high-quality tracks.

On top of that, we have a dedicated section called “Recommended”, which features our Developer Picks. We regularly curate and spotlight our favorite creations to give players a quick way to discover wild new tracks that might have otherwise been missed.

You’ve already announced substantial post-launch additions, including new vehicles and the Ferrari expansion. How do you introduce additional cars over time without creating power creep or making paid vehicles disproportionately competitive?

Avoiding pay-to-win dynamics is a top priority for us. When we introduce new vehicles, including those in the Ferrari expansion, our goal is to satisfy fans and collectors rather than shifting the competitive balance. Every new car is tuned to fit directly into our four existing vehicle classes: they follow the exact same performance standards and trade-offs as the base roster, giving players new options and driving feel without any unfair performance advantage. DLCs and expansions are built to enrich the experience and expand player choice, while keeping every category balanced and competitive for everyone.

The PS5 version is confirmed to be PS5 Pro Enhanced. What specifically does the Pro version improve over the standard PS5 release, and what resolution and frame-rate targets are you aiming for across PS5, Series X and Series S?

On PS5 Pro, we are pushing performance up to 120 FPS compared to the 60 FPS on the base console, using PSSR to keep the image razor-sharp at up to 4K resolution. Across the board, our main goal is simply making sure the game runs smoothly and feels great to play on every platform. So to sum it all up:

• PS5 Pro: 4K resolution with PSSR, up to 120 FPS
• PS5: 4K resolution at 60 FPS
• XBOX Series X: 4K resolution at 60 FPS
• XBOX Series S: 1440p resolution at 60 FPS
• Nintendo Switch 2: 1080p resolution at 30 FPS

Switch 2 races are limited to six competitors rather than the twelve supported elsewhere, and the platform is excluded from full cross-play. What technical or design considerations led to those differences?

There seems to be a bit of a misunderstanding here. The vehicle limit on Switch 2 is not a general restriction for the entire game, but applies specifically to local split screen mode. In split screen, the total number of vehicles participating in the race is capped at six. Depending on how many human players are competing, from two to four, AI cars will fill out the remaining slots up to that six car limit. The reason is purely technical. In split screen, the engine has to render the game world and its physics multiple times simultaneously, once for each player’s viewport, which places a heavy demand on the hardware. To maintain a stable frame rate, we had to make a few performance compromises. That said, as we gain more experience working with Switch 2 hardware in the future, we hope to optimize performance even further.

Infinite Rush is also targeting hardware ranging from Switch 2 to devices such as ROG Xbox Ally. How much does the density or complexity of the open world scale between those machines and the more powerful consoles and PCs, rather than simply reducing resolution and visual quality?

We put a substantial effort into keeping the overall density and complexity of the open world intact across all platforms. Rather than stripping away core world elements, we tuned finer details and specific parameters, such as draw distances for lower-tier assets and geometry LODs. The vast hardware gap meant using different rendering technologies depending on the machine. For instance, we leverage Unreal Engine features like Nanite and Lumen on PS5 and XBOX Series X, whereas hardware like Switch 2 rely on more traditional pipelines. This approach allowed us to find the right balance between smooth performance and visual fidelity without compromising our artistic vision on any system.

Classes were present in the original Aliens: Fireteam Elite, but their identities could take some time to fully emerge as more abilities were unlocked. How has Aliens: Fireteam Elite 2 changed that early-game experience so that each class immediately feels distinct?

Brock Robin – Systems Design Lead: We started by trying to distill the class down to specific roles in combat. These were things such as is this class good at killing single high value targets, eliminating swarms, dealing crowd control, supporting and enhancing other classes or even controlling space. We then leaned into those when creating and modifying each class’s suite of abilities.

Then when designing each class’s progression, we looked at how a replacer or perk would improve or modify their identity or forge a slightly new one. I’ll provide a few examples:

Overclock is a beloved Aliens: Fireteam Elite ability that increases the fire rate and reload speed of weapons of everyone around you (including yourself). While it did enhance the damage dealing capabilities of the Gunner it felt like more a support ability suited to the Medic. The Medic starts off being more purely heal and support focused, but Overclock as a replacer for Combat Stims allows them to support their teammates in a way that makes them feel different.

A Hunter at their core is designed to disable high value targets. They do that through a combination of a high single-target damage beam and a slow effect that, with some skills, can be attached to those high-value targets. Through upgrades they can either lean further into being purely damage dealing or purely crowd control, but their role at disabling targets is still preserved.

Aliens: Fireteam Elite 2 features several different enemy factions alongside different damage types and weaknesses. How aggressively will the game push squads to change their builds and tactics rather than settling on a single optimal loadout?

Ron Allen – Systems Director: In Aliens: Fireteam Elite 2, we took a deeper look at the damage system and introduced specific damage types — electric, fire, cryo, and piercing — then built out a set of weaknesses and resistances for our enemies based on those types. From there, we tuned our weapons and abilities to lean into them, making the right loadout genuinely matter depending on what you’re up against.

On Casual and Standard you’ll still feel the difference, but resistances ramp up significantly at higher difficulties, giving you real incentive to bring the right tool for the job — or know when to switch on the fly. And while it might sound like you’re locked into whatever a weapon comes with, that’s not the case. As you progress, you’ll unlock a growing set of customization options that go well beyond what the first Aliens: Fireteam Elite offered. We’re not just talking attachments — you can change a weapon’s base damage type, alter how it fires, or swap out its trait entirely to behave differently in the field.

Robin: On Casual and Standard difficulty – not very much, it’s still very viable to take your favorite build in and enjoy destroying Xenos with your friends. On higher difficulties, however, you’re not going to be able to rely on a flamethrower to take out synthetic enemies without risking getting out-ranged and overwhelmed.

There are enough inputs for damage types across a player’s weapons, attachments, items, perks and abilities that let you distribute them more evenly. For example, if your favorite build relies on Phosphorus rockets to burn enemies but you’re facing synthetic opponents, you might want to bring an electric weapon or EMP grenades to augment it. Of course you can always coordinate with your friends, so in your capacity as the “incinerator” deal with threats that might be weak to that while your buddies handle other targets.

We are very excited to see how players engage with this system, but so far we’ve been able to show that a variety of builds and classes are capable of taking on our toughest challenges.

You’ve spoken about enemies being smarter and more aggressive this time around. What can the AI actually react to during combat – player positioning, repeated strategies, chokepoints, squad composition, or something else?

Allen: If you’ve played the first Aliens: Fireteam Elite, you’re going to feel the difference in Aliens: Fireteam Elite 2 pretty quickly. Enemies are faster, more aggressive, and will swarm you if you give them the chance — they enter the scene a lot closer to you now and almost never let up, so staying mobile is key. As you push into higher difficulties, you’ll also start seeing more special and elite enemies in the mix, which can lead to some genuinely tense moments. Standing still is a death sentence, and if you’re not keeping an eye on the motion tracker, you might not last long at all. Aliens: Fireteam Elite 2 rewards players who stay sharp and keep moving.

Chris Cross – Studio Design Director: A ton of work has gone into increasing situational awareness for all enemies and also the Companion Bots. A couple examples include adding evasion and dodge abilities to Xenos when you’re aiming at them head on, Companion Bots consider the Player and their environment constantly and will attempt to stay out of the Player’s line of fire, but some of my favorite behaviors we can’t discuss until after launch when all enemy types are known.

How will Horde mode’s progression work alongside the campaign? Will rewards, weapons and class progression carry between the two, or does Horde have systems that are exclusive to it?

Robin: Everything that you can earn and use in the regular campaign can be used in Horde Mode; there are no specific restrictions there. There are a handful of perks that you’ll unlock by playing Horde Mode that ONLY have an effect in Horde Mode. For example, one gives you escalating damage or max health for each wave you complete, allowing you to get stronger over time. Beyond that, Horde Mode does unlock some unique cosmetics like outfits.

Another example of this is that Challenge Cards in Aliens: Fireteam Elite often had mission specific restrictions (e.g. you can only play it on Mission Y). With the exception of a few cards that can only be played while solo, there are no such restrictions on other cards – allowing players to engage with the content wherever they like to.

With four players potentially entering a mission with very different skill levels and levels of progression, how do you balance encounters without either overwhelming newer players or making things too easy for veterans?

Robin: Adding a fourth player definitely forced a re-thinking of spaces and tuning values. We started by trying to address many of the common complaints with your allied bots to make them more useful and reliable to ensure that solo players could enjoy more success than Aliens: Fireteam Elite.

We added mechanics like crouch so that even within the claustrophobic spaces that the Aliens IP is known for, players could occupy a similar sized area but avoid shooting each other in the back.

Generally, I’d say that the standard difficulty, because of the bots’ increased effectiveness, while still challenging, is a bit easier than Aliens: Fireteam Elite. We wanted players to be able to get a taste for the game and hook them on all of our interesting and varied progression – only for them to graduate to higher difficulties as they get better.

Beyond that we also had to think of how balance should play out across different permutations of players and companion bots. For example, bots don’t have access to any of your high-powered abilities, so enemy health and damage actually increases a bit the more players you have – otherwise it was too easy.

Lastly, we have very granular and varied Challenge Cards which give players even more agency over the level of difficulty they experience.

Aliens: Fireteam Elite 2 tells a self-contained story within the established Alien universe. How do you balance recognizable locations, creatures and lore from the films with the need to give players environments and threats they haven’t already seen before?

Nic Stohlman – Art Director: I like to ease players in with something familiar, then start to add new and strange things as the game progresses. It sets a recognizable tone for the game— that way we can add new elements to the story and have it harmonize with the Alien universe. We want to show you we can play the hits before we go into our new jams.

There is an inherent challenge in making Xenomorphs frightening when players may kill hundreds of them over the course of a shooter. What are you doing to ensure that individual Xenomorphs – or particular variants – can still make experienced players panic deep into the game?

Cross: Making sure the Xenomorphs and enemies in general stay scary and fun is definitely a challenge in a game with massive firepower like ours. Besides the visceral and visual differences in the many Xenomorphs in the game the solution is in how they are placed. Mainly we’re spacing out the enemy introductions, then staging the presentation of those moments and supporting them with set-piece lighting and audio.

With the Specialist eventually allowing players to combine abilities from different classes, how do you prevent that flexibility from making the five core classes feel less valuable in the endgame?

Robin: We felt it was more important to allow unparalleled flexibility and buildcraft than making all classes relevant in the endgame. The journey we wanted was for the player to experience what each class has to offer, while enriching their overall experience and options for the Specialist. This is something we’ve debated internally, and we’ll be monitoring on release, as we have some potential solutions depending on how the player base at large reacts to it.

What resolution and frame-rate modes are you targeting on PS5, PS5 Pro, Xbox Series X and Series S, and how difficult has it been to maintain those targets during the largest four-player battles with potentially huge numbers of enemies on screen?

Arnel Lim – Engineering Director:

• PS5: 1440p @60fps
• PS5 Pro: 4k @60fps
• Xbox Series X: 1440p @60fps
• Xbox Series S: 1080p @30 fps

Maintaining those targets during our largest four-player encounters has definitely been one of the challenges of development. We establish performance budgets for things like encounter complexity, environments, characters and effects, but as the game evolves and everything comes together, we’re constantly profiling real gameplay and making adjustments to stay within those targets.

Sometimes the biggest costs aren’t necessarily where you’d expect them. At different points in development, effects associated with things like cryo mines and flamethrowers had a significant performance impact when combined with large numbers of enemies.

Those are exactly the kinds of scenarios we’ve been profiling and optimizing—looking at everything from effects and rendering to what happens when weapons interact with large numbers of enemies simultaneously. It’s been an ongoing process of finding those hotspots and optimizing them while preserving the scale and intensity we’re aiming for.

With the Switch 2 version arriving later, what has been the biggest technical challenge in translating the game’s larger hordes and four-player encounters to the hardware? Are you aiming for complete gameplay and multiplayer parity with the other versions?

Lim: Yes, our goal is to preserve the same core gameplay and multiplayer experience on the Nintendo Switch 2, including the four-player co-op experience and the larger-scale encounters that are core to the game.

The biggest challenge is ensuring we can maintain that scale and intensity while delivering consistent performance on the hardware. A lot of the optimization work we’ve done for Switch 2 – particularly around how we manage and render larger encounters – also benefits the game across our other supported hardware configurations.

Beyond that, it’s largely about tuning the appropriate platform-specific settings to get the best balance of performance and visual quality without compromising the core gameplay experience.

The published PC requirements currently target 1080p at both the minimum and recommended tiers. How far does the PC version scale beyond that in terms of resolution, frame rate, enemy simulation and visual settings, and what upscaling or frame-generation technologies will be supported?

Lim: The PC version scales well beyond the 1080p targets listed in our minimum and recommended specifications. Resolution can scale up to the capabilities of your display, with a range of visual settings available to balance image quality and performance based on your hardware.

We also support NVIDIA DLSS and AMD FSR for upscaling and frame generation, giving players additional options for targeting higher resolutions and frame rates.

Enemy simulation and the core gameplay experience remain consistent rather than scaling based on the performance of your PC, so players aren’t getting a different gameplay experience simply because they’re running higher-end hardware.

Now that Last Variable has launched and reviews are out, how closely has its reception matched your expectations for the expansion?

Marcin Łazowski: It exceeded my expectations, I am very happy about the reception!

Reviews have generally praised the expansion’s new management systems, but the overall critical reception has been more divided than it was for the base game. What do you think caused that difference?

Łazowski: We decided to modify our approach for the DLC. While the base game emphasized the story and it drove the experience forward, with the DLC we wanted to focus on the players who enjoyed the base building, economy and planet exploration gameplay most and wanted more of that.

Several critics felt that focusing exclusively on different versions of Jan Scientist resulted in a cast that lacked the emotional and professional variety of the original Alters. How do you respond to that criticism?

Łazowski: We found it was a great opportunity to increase the humour of the DLC’s story, but personally I believe that the Scientist’s alters are still complex, with different personalities and emotions. While on the surface the professional variety may seem lackluster (they are all men of science), in the game’s mechanics we actually introduced a double skill system so that there are more combinations of how to utilize your team.

Katarzyna Tybinka: The question I’d ask is: why would we want them to be more varied? Look at it this way: in the base game, Jan wanted to create Alters with completely different life choices in order to be able to revisit what he thought were his mistakes. In the DLC, the Scientist creates versions as close to his original self on purpose, in order to assemble a team of like-minded people who will only echo his own ideas. The paradox is that he ends up with a bunch of guys with a superiority complex who will constantly challenge him, precisely because they are like him. And it’s exactly this kind of mirror that he needs to see to learn more about himself and the reasons why he really stayed behind to study that planet.

Was creating a more intellectually driven and emotionally restrained group of Jans a deliberate narrative risk, even knowing that some players might find them less immediately relatable?

Tybinka: It simply felt like a natural choice given the protagonist’s personality. But it also opened up new narrative possibilities, such as a whole new theme of perfectionism. While base Jan struggled with his regrets, the Scientist has to face his ego and in that way his Alters are equally challenging to him. The fact that they don’t require constant attention doesn’t mean that they don’t offer deep, emotional stories allowing the player to access unexpected layers of the Scientist’s humanity.

The original game derived much of its tension from forcing together Jans with substantially different lives, skills and emotional baggage. What was the biggest challenge in recreating that tension between characters who are all variations of a scientist?

Tybinka: Actually, it was fun. I come from a family where a scientific career was quite prevalent and I always found it fascinating how different scientists can be: from pompous academics, introverted eccentrics, to whacky Peter Pans. Take that and add the signature “what if” Alters component and you’re imagining all sorts of ways in which a career can vary depending on the environment, people or even pure chance. As for the tension, it comes from a similar place as in the base game: the fact that despite their differences, they are the same man. The difference is that in the base game it was Jan’s insecurity that caused all the problems, in the DLC it is the Scientist’s ego. They all share it at the core, so tensions are inevitable. This time though, we wanted them to be a little more tongue in cheek.

Some critics praised Last Variable‘s narrative depth and ending, while others felt that its major revelations and final twist were not sufficiently supported by the preceding events. What did you want players to take away from the conclusion?

Tybinka: As in the base game, the goal was to make this experience as personal as possible for the player. Regardless of whether you identify with the Scientist’s perfectionism or not, you put a lot of effort into completing the game. The ending asks the player to give their own meaning to this effort and, truthfully, any other kind of struggle we willingly choose to go through in our lives – whether it is for the sake of achievement, personal satisfaction or idealistic reasons.

How has actual player behaviour compared to your expectations regarding Cryosleep? Are players carefully planning each cycle, or are they finding ways to bypass some of the pressure the mechanic was intended to create?

Łazowski: The Cryosleep mechanic’s goal was to give the control over the game’s pacing to the player. The original game had a strict time limit, but this time, as long as you can go to cryosleep, you can take as much time as you want or proceed to the next cycle. We’re finding that generally the players still feel pressure and want to squeeze as much as they can out of each day, at least in the early and mid game.

Terraforming has been one of the expansion’s most widely praised additions. Which part of that system underwent the most significant changes during development?

Łazowski: The general idea of terraforming didn’t change much during development, however after playtesting we were tweaking the details. I think the pipe connection system overall received the most changes, we were testing different UI and UX approaches. One big change was that at the beginning you were required to connect all the pipes to a placed down terraformer, but we iterated that because it caused much backtracking. Placing a pipeline along another pipeline going in the opposite direction just felt wrong, and instead of complicating the system more we decided to simplify it and add complexity elsewhere.

The Sinking City 2 is much more explicitly a survival horror game than its predecessor. What part of Frogwares’ traditional investigation-focused design was absolutely non-negotiable during that transition, and what did you deliberately leave behind?

The answer takes us somewhere slightly unexpected. Every game is built on a core gameplay loop. For a detective game, that loop is explore, find clues, make deductions. For a survival horror game, it’s explore, deal with enemies, get back to safety. Those two loops have almost nothing in common. In TSC1, combat sat on the secondary loop. In TSC2 it sits on the core one. The short version is that investigation moved from the core loop to the secondary loop.

That said, we looked closely at what players loved most about our investigation mechanics and trimmed the parts that could be confusing or outright blocking. The number one fan favorite is piecing clues together, so that’s what we built on for The Sinking City 2. We made it optional, because we didn’t want a situation where missing a clue stops you from progressing the story. Optional doesn’t mean an afterthought, though. Investigation works as a layer that blends into exploration and combat.

Optional investigations can reward players with safer routes, supplies and upgrades. How do you make those rewards valuable enough to encourage investigation without making supposedly optional detective work feel mandatory?

That’s up to each player in the end, but with scarcity and danger in the mix, players tend to answer their anxiety about surviving by being completionists. We know how investigation works and which triggers get people on board. Having the choice to investigate rather than being forced into it changes a lot. Players approach it with less pressure, and it doesn’t have to interrupt their flow the way it does in a pure investigation game.

The rewards come in two kinds. The first is practical: inventory and weapon upgrades, perk points, and metagame points you can spend on rewards that carry from one playthrough to the next. The second is set pieces, discoveries that pay off on an emotional level, the kind that bewilder and fascinate.

Arkham is a more contained, semi-open environment compared to the first game’s open world. How has that changed the way you approach backtracking, shortcuts, locked areas and resource placement?

Designing the playable area was probably as big a challenge as reimagining combat. A creative process like that needs your full attention, and being absent-minded simply isn’t an option. But the war didn’t only mean constant air raid sirens and sleepless nights. It also meant:

• We could not meet at any point to see and play the game together. We could not build a common experience or share opinions outside of video calls, which can be awkward and not particularly productive.
• We could lose team members for days, for weeks, or completely, because of conscription, or the absence of electricity, water or heating, or worse.
• On the business side it meant no partners, no financing, and no possibility to hire people with survival horror experience.

So we studied the survival horror genre in real depth and created our own system or playbook. Essentially a tension beat method to build the gameplay flow, and to give ourselves some guarantee of success in doing it. The method or system is based mainly around a tension and intensity curve. Nothing in the game happens just for the sake of it.

It covers metrics, the position of key items, shortcuts and backtracking sections. Rooms, discoveries and monsters are all designed and placed to produce a curve of emotions with a beginning, a middle and an end, often reaching a cathartic moment. As a player you can’t really put your finger on when or how it happens, but you still feel on some level that every step you take has deliberate design behind it.

We then trained every team member in this system / method so that we all had the same shared experience and vision. It sounds easy to work on a game together, but it isn’t, especially when it comes to reaching a common vision with everyone physically separated. Once everyone had learned and practiced it, we could start creating the game effectively, with the emphasis on effectively.

We also have our own management methodology for tracking progress, plus internal and external playtesting tied to a deep telemetry system that closes all the loops. That is what it took to create a survival horror game from scratch, and we hope you will like it.

A major part of survival horror is deciding whether fighting an enemy is worth the resources. How are you balancing ammunition, crafting, enemy durability and opportunities to retreat so that combat isn’t always the obvious solution?

TSC2 uses a dynamic soft drop system that adapts to the difficulty the player is actually facing. If you are too good at the game, you may simply find fewer health items and less ammunition.

In practice, the system reads what you are carrying. If you are low on ammo, it will give you ammo for the weapon in your hands, and the same applies in arenas and boss fights, where you can’t run back to a safe room to re-equip. If you already have plenty, it starts pushing you toward the weapons sitting in your stash instead, so you don’t spend the entire game with a single favorite gun. It only does that when you are not in a critical state resource-wise and when you have access to a safe room stash. Say you are playing on Easy with full pockets. The system might start dropping ammo for the Thompson you left behind, and you are free to go back, pick it up and spend all of it to your heart’s desire. Compare that with fixed ammo loot, where the game doesn’t care that you want to play with a handgun. There is shotgun ammo in this room, so you go back to your stash and fetch the shotgun.

That flexibility is fairly new for horror games, where drops are usually hard-coded and identical no matter how you play, and it lets us tune the experience per difficulty level. If you want an easy ride, you can kill everything. On higher difficulties you’ll need other strategies, because you won’t be able to bulldoze your way through every monster. The method I described earlier is what makes room for retreat and for breathing space, which is the “back to safety” part of the core loop. Depending on your skill level, and your willingness to destroy your gamepad sticks, the game will let you either clear everything or use everything at your disposal to survive, including environmental hazards and other enemies.

Dream Essence feeds into the game’s Talent system. How dramatically can those Talents change the way a character is played, and can players build meaningfully different versions of the protagonist rather than simply unlocking incremental upgrades?

Just enough, I would say. Perks are not exactly upgrades, they are tactical helpers, and combined properly, they sustain a play style. They also give you a sense of progression and work as a satisfying element in themselves, letting you kill monsters faster and, I might say, cooler.

For example, an axe attachment for your shotgun lets you land a powerful melee hit after firing a single shot. That saves bullets and pushes you toward a more aggressive playstyle. Another example is stacking weapon upgrades and talents that deal extra damage to enemy weak points, so precision shots are rewarded with faster and gorier kills.

Flooding is such a major part of Arkham’s identity. Does the water itself have a systemic gameplay role – changing routes, threats or opportunities – or are flooded areas primarily authored as part of the level design?

The flood is not a dynamic gameplay element. We played around with the concept at the very beginning of production and eventually decided against it. In our game the flood is part of the setting, inside and outside, a way to enhance the atmosphere and mark the player’s actions. It finds its explanation in the story, and it carries a deeper symbolism as you progress.

It also serves as a respite. Sitting in your boat and taking in the environment can be quite therapeutic after a visceral fight in a tight corridor.

The Sinking City 2 takes place in the same universe and period as the original but follows a new protagonist and story. How much connective tissue should returning players expect in terms of lore, organizations, characters or consequences from the first game?

There is no direct link between the two stories, but there are dozens of small setting connections between Oakmont and Arkham. Anyone familiar with TSC1 will probably catch themselves smiling more than once. Charles Reed even gets mentioned, in unexpected ways.

Because the core gameplay loop is so different, though, there was very little room to bring back characters or organizations. Frankly, that wasn’t our goal for this story.

What resolution and frame-rate modes are you targeting across PS5, Xbox Series X and Series S? Given the game’s reliance on Lumen, Nanite and other UE5 systems, are there substantial differences in lighting, reflections or world detail between the three consoles?

We don’t see a big difference between PS5 and Xbox Series X. Both offer two modes: a quality mode with better visuals at 30 fps, or a performance mode with certain optimizations to reach 60 fps. The Series S runs at 1080p and 30 fps.

Are you planning specific PS5 Pro enhancements for The Sinking City 2, and if so, is the priority higher image quality, improved ray-traced effects or higher frame rates?

At the moment we are focused on shipping the game on all target platforms. Once that is done, we will look at what else can be done. My guess would be higher frame rates in quality mode, since we are quite happy with how the game looks.

The current recommended PC specification is comparatively demanding, targeting 1440p/60 at Balanced settings with an RTX 4070 Ti or RX 7900 XT and 32 GB of RAM. What is the main workload driving those requirements, and which DLSS, FSR, XeSS or frame-generation options will be available at launch?

Starting with the upscalers: the game supports DLSS 4.5 and Frame Generation as well as TSR at launch. FSR will be added as soon as AMD releases its plugin for UE 5.8. Without it, we can’t integrate it.

The Sinking City 2 is a story-driven game, where lighting, shadows, reflections, level detail and even the quality of a character’s hair all play a huge role in creating the right kind of immersion. We built the game to take full advantage of the engine, and we spent a lot of time optimizing it to run on a wide range of cards, including the ten-year-old GTX 1070.

Now that Moss: The Forgotten Relic has launched, how has its reception compared with the expectations Polyarc and Blackbird Interactive had before release? Has anything about the response particularly surprised the team?

From the beginning, we knew it would be difficult to predict how expectations would shift across mediums by bringing Moss: The Forgotten Relic to PC and consoles. Now that the game has launched, we couldn’t be happier with the reception from both players and the press. It’s been incredibly rewarding to see it welcomed as a new addition in the Moss universe.

The game was intended to introduce Quill’s story to people who could not experience the original VR releases. What can you tell us about the balance between completely new players and returning Moss fans so far?

Our biggest goal was to allow more people to meet Quill and experience her story, regardless of where they play. What surprised us most was just how many players were already familiar with Moss and had been waiting years for the opportunity to play without VR. We certainly expected to introduce Quill to an entirely new audience, but it’s been equally rewarding to see longtime lurkers finally able to join Quill’s adventure.

Before launch, the central question was whether an experience originally constructed around VR could retain its identity on a standard display. Having now seen players complete the game, where do you believe the transition succeeded most strongly?

At its core, Moss is a classic adventure game built around exploration, platforming, puzzles, and combat, and would translate well beyond VR. What we knew we absolutely had to preserve was the emotional connection between the Reader and Quill. We wanted that relationship to feel just as meaningful for players on a TV or monitor, and from the reactions we’ve seen, we believe we’ve accomplished that! When Quill looks up at you, your first celebratory high-five, asking for help… these moments emotionally resonate and fortify the bond between player and hero, regardless of platform.

Conversely, is there any part of the original VR experience that proved impossible to reproduce completely on a flatscreen, regardless of how much it was redesigned?

It’s impossible to recreate the feeling of physical presence that VR offers on a television or monitor. Any VR developer will tell you how difficult it is to communicate or capture that in a screenshot or gameplay trailer.

Rather than trying to imitate VR, we focused on what a traditional display could do exceptionally well. That gave us the opportunity to lean into cinematic camera work and carefully composed scenes that feel almost like a director’s cut, allowing us to emphasize the story and emotional beats in ways that simply aren’t possible in VR.

What has player feedback revealed about the new camera system? Have players generally understood why the game retains its composed, diorama-like perspectives rather than using a conventional freely controlled camera?

We’ve been really pleased with how players have embraced the new camera system and cinematics in Moss: The Forgotten Relic. We intentionally kept the handcrafted, storybook framing because it’s fundamental to the world and Moss’ core identity. Instead of giving players complete camera control, we wanted every composition to support gameplay, readability, and the subtle beauty of Moss that can be appreciated in those intimate, vignetted moments.

The Forgotten Relic combines Moss, Moss: Book II, and the Twilight Garden expansion into one continuous package. What changes were required to make content originally developed at different times feel like one cohesive adventure?

Narratively, Moss: Book I naturally flows into Moss: Book II, so there wasn’t much we needed to change there. Twilight Garden is also presented the same way it was in the VR version, remaining an entirely optional realm for players who want to explore it.

We also chose to keep both Books accessible separately within the menu so returning players could jump back into the point where they left off in VR. For new players, though, we definitely recommend starting from the beginning to experience Quill’s journey as one continuous adventure.

Did combining the two main games require changes to progression, difficulty, abilities, tutorials, or pacing so that the transition between them felt natural?

There was some balancing required as players progress from Book I into Book II, but there’s also a natural evolution as Book II expands how you solve puzzles, approach combat, and tackle increasingly complex challenges.

In regard to tutorials, one of the larger changes was to the number of things we tutorialized. In the VR version, reaching out and interacting with the world is much more intuitive. For the PC and Console players, not everything was immediately obvious. Moments like high-fives, collecting items from Quill, and even basic actions like Jump needed more explanation.

How extensively were the original environments rebuilt or modified for the new cinematic camera system, rather than simply being adapted from their existing VR layouts?

We were careful to preserve the original layouts and handcrafted feel of every diorama, rather than fundamentally redesigning the game. At the same time, bringing Moss to modern consoles and PC gave us the opportunity to elevate lighting, visual effects, resolution, and overall presentation.

Revisiting the world reminded us just how timeless Moss is. We never wanted this to feel like a complete remake, but we did take the opportunity to carefully review every environment and identify places where we could enhance the visuals to meet each device at the possible highest fidelity.

How were responsibilities divided between Polyarc and Blackbird Interactive during development, and what expertise did Blackbird bring to the process of rebuilding Moss for conventional platforms?

It was a true collaboration from the start. Polyarc remained deeply involved in preserving the identity of Moss: its world, characters, gameplay philosophy, and creative direction. While also contributing to much of the development of the core game systems, such as authoring the camera and developing the Reader’s cursor movement. Blackbird Interactive not only brought tremendous expertise in adapting that vision across multiple platforms, but they were also equally impactful in the creative exploration of how we translate the game’s controls and presentation for players. The project wouldn’t be what it is without that partnership.

Did working with an external development partner change the way Polyarc approached its own world, characters, and technology?

Throughout development, we constantly challenged our own assumptions about what absolutely had to remain the same and where thoughtful redesign could improve the experience for a different audience. Overall, the collaboration was so seamless that it felt less like we needed to change our ways and more like we found partners who shared our same perspective on game development. It helped that they were also big fans of the Moss franchise and wanted to preserve as much of the soul of the original games as possible.

Does the launch response make another flatscreen adventure featuring Quill more likely, whether that takes the form of a new Moss chapter or a continuation of the existing story?

We’re thrilled by how players have embraced Quill on consoles and PC. Right now, our focus is on supporting The Forgotten Relic, listening to player feedback, and taking a moment to celebrate everything the team accomplished. We love this universe, and we’re incredibly proud of what we’ve built, so we’re excited to see where the future may lead.

Has The Forgotten Relic changed Polyarc’s view of Moss as primarily a VR franchise, or do you still see virtual reality as an important part of its future?

VR will always be an important part of Moss‘ history and our studio’s identity. At the same time, The Forgotten Relic has shown us that Quill’s story resonates well beyond VR. That’s incredibly exciting because it means even more players can experience this world.

Could future Moss projects be designed for VR and flatscreen platforms simultaneously, or do the differences between those formats require each experience to be created independently?

Every project deserves the platform that best serves the experience we’re trying to create, and we’ve learned an incredible amount from bringing Moss to traditional platforms.

But perhaps the biggest lesson is that Quill was never defined by the platform she lived on. Players connect with her because she’s brave, expressive, and hopeful, whether they’re meeting her in VR or on a TV for the very first time. Seeing that connection endure over the years has meant more to us than we can express. We’re incredibly grateful to everyone who has shared this adventure with us, and we hope Quill’s story continues to inspire courage and kindness wherever players discover her.

Mistfall Hunter has already gone through multiple beta tests. What has been the most valuable feedback from players so far, and how has it changed the game?

After several rounds of beta, the most valuable feedback we received wasn’t any single point. It was a very clear consensus: players want Mistfall Hunter to keep its high-stakes tension, but they don’t want that pressure arriving too early, hitting too hard, or feeling unfair. That pushed us to make a lot of pressure-relief changes. We reworked the early game so progression feels smoother, overhauled core combat systems to soften the sting of failure, and added a no-shrinking-zone mode to the new map so players can explore more freely. To us, good pressure should come from decisions and mind games and not from a steep learning curve or losses that feel pointless.

The other key piece of feedback was how much players value the PvE side of the game. People often ask whether an action extraction game should lean PvP or PvE. Our take: PvE isn’t map filler. It sets the floor for every dive into the Mist. It’s what makes exploration, routing, resource investment, and in-the-moment judgment calls actually matter. So in upcoming versions we’re continuing to deepen bosses, map zones, and combat layers, while making sure the game never slides into a pure loot-grind PvE experience. PvE is the skeleton of a raid. PvP is the variable that truly changes the game.

Beyond that, so many passionate players sent us detailed suggestions on class mechanics and balance. That feedback has been enormously helpful in refining how each class feels to play.

The extraction genre has become increasingly crowded. Beyond the dark fantasy setting and RPG mechanics, what do you think makes Mistfall Hunter stand apart from other extraction games?

What really sets Mistfall Hunter apart isn’t just the dark fantasy setting or the RPG progression, it’s that we put genuine third-person action combat at the heart of the extraction structure.

Traditional shooter extraction games are built on sightlines, cover, holding angles, footsteps, and information warfare. In Mistfall Hunter, those duels get rewritten: attack direction, wind-ups and recovery frames, dodge-roll timing, stamina management, weak-point targeting, skill trades, and squad positioning. It’s not about who scopes in first. It’s about who can execute a full sequence of actions, resources, and risk calls more completely… and who can sync with their teammates so that one plus one is far greater than two.

And we didn’t just stack action, PvE, PvP, and extraction on top of each other. We worked to make them interact within a single raid. Fighting a boss, looting, reading the situation, deciding whether to push your luck, and then that heart-pounding extraction: it’s all one continuous experience. We didn’t simply swap gunplay for melee. By building around squad-based action combat, we restructured the levels and progression systems from the ground up into one organic whole. The result genuinely feels new.

Have you ever considered adding PvE-only modes or PvE-focused content for players who are interested in the world and combat but less interested in direct PvP?

We’ve thought about this seriously, and internally the answer is clear: a pure PvE mode is on the roadmap. We just can’t commit to a firm date yet given our current production bandwidth.

Beta feedback showed plenty of players who love the world, the bosses, and the action combat but don’t want the constant pressure of direct PvP. We get it and it’s a completely fair ask. Our approach isn’t to strip the risk out entirely, but to make sure players with different preferences can each find their own way into Mistfall Hunter.

Right now, our priority is continuing to polish the core PvPvE experience while steadily adding richer PvE content, practice scenarios, and low-stakes ways to learn the combat. Post-launch plans already include things like a PvP practice/brawl mode where you can get comfortable with the combat system without putting everything on the line. Pure PvE is still coming, we just want to make sure it fits the long-term ecosystem rather than splitting the game into two disconnected products.

Players can go in solo or as part of a squad. How different is the experience for lone-wolf players compared to three-player teams?

Solo and three-player squads are, at their core, two completely different rhythms.

Going lone-wolf is all about stealth, routing, reads, and risk decisions. You have full control of your own information, you move more freely, and it’s easier to avoid fights, slip around them, or cherry-pick your targets. The trade-off: your margin for error shrinks, and every mistake gets magnified.

A three-player squad is more like a tactical system. Class synergy, positioning, focus fire, peeling for teammates, and resource distribution all swing the outcome. Teams handle high-intensity PvE more reliably and can pull off combos and baits in PvP, but the cost is more communication overhead, a bigger profile on the map, and real organizational pressure when it’s time to extract.

Our goal isn’t to make the two identical: it’s to make each one work on its own terms. We’ve already done dedicated monster placement and mode design for solo play in testing, and we keep a close eye on solo class balance, because the same class in solo versus squad play is often two entirely different problems to solve.

One more thing: through skills, talents, and items, we’ve made it genuinely viable for solo players and duos to queue into three-player matches short-handed. In our last test, a lot of players tried exactly that and had a blast doing it.

What were some of the biggest balance challenges when designing very different playstyles, especially when some players focus on melee aggression, others on ranged pressure, and others on magic or support?

The biggest challenge isn’t getting every class to a similar win rate, it’s making sure every playstyle has room to succeed somewhere.

Mistfall Hunter has a lot of balance dimensions. Solo is different from squad play. PvE is different from PvP. Low gear is different from high gear. Players who prefer farming up, running loot routes, or actively hunting fights are all different again. Melee aggressors live on close-range pressure and engagement timing. Ranged classes care about space control and damage windows. Magic and support classes add another layer entirely: how do you translate utility into combat value? Stack all of that together, and any single strength can get amplified in a scenario you never expected.

"Mistfall Hunter has a lot of balance dimensions. Solo is different from squad play. PvE is different from PvP. Low gear is different from high gear."

So our philosophy isn’t chasing a static “perfect balance.” It’s continuously watching data, feedback, and real match scenarios to make sure every class has clear strengths, clear weaknesses, and clear counters. Balance isn’t sanding every character down into the same shape, it’s making sure players understand why they lost, and why they won.

Honestly, beyond balance, what we care about most is variety. We want every class to support as many viable builds as possible, each with an environment where it shines so combat stays rich, colorful, and full of surprises.

How challenging has it been to balance utility and support-focused magic against more damage-oriented classes, especially in PvP situations?

This one is genuinely hard, because utility abilities break out of numerical frameworks by nature.

With a damage class, strength is easy to feel: bigger numbers are bigger numbers, and a higher execute threshold speaks for itself. Support and utility are different animals. Heals, shields, invisibility, crowd control, blinds, roots, escapes, repositioning – none of it shows up on a stat sheet, but in PvP it can completely reshape the tempo of a fight and how much room for error each side has.

Take the Seer, one of our support-leaning designs. We want it to bring real team value, not a “fake support” nobody picks unless the numbers are overtuned. But we also can’t let it erase every other class’s risk through pure utility in coordinated, high-level squads. In an extraction game especially, anything that lowers extraction risk, improves clutch potential, or changes the terms of an engagement is far more sensitive than raw damage.

So we’re deliberately cautious here. Strong support tools like healing and control get introduced and tuned very carefully. Utility classes should absolutely be able to swing a fight, but casting those abilities should always carry a real decision cost.

Since death means losing your spoils, how do you balance punishment with long-term progression so that players still feel they are making progress even after a bad run?

This is one of the core questions of the entire extraction genre. We’ve always believed death has to cost something and without that, extraction means nothing. But if one failure makes players feel like all their time just evaporated, long-term retention doesn’t work either.

So our approach isn’t to soften the risk itself. It’s to protect the feeling that “even if I lost this raid, it wasn’t wasted.” That feeling comes from a lot of places: you know the map and its monsters better, you understand your class and build more deeply, you’ve upgraded your camp, you’ve unlocked more permanent out-of-raid abilities, you’ve learned sharper risk decisions… or you simply know where not to get greedy next time. All of that is progression.

On the design side, we keep building pressure valves too. We tested a spirit-run revival mechanic to soften early PvE frustration, we’ve continued improving the performance of Pip’s Pocket, and our matchmaking has gotten smarter about keeping players out of that miserable loss-streak-into-bankruptcy spiral.

"Our approach isn’t to soften the risk itself. It’s to protect the feeling that “even if I lost this raid, it wasn’t wasted.”"

What resolution and frame rate targets are you aiming for on PS5, Xbox Series X, and Xbox Series S? Will there be separate Quality and Performance modes?

Yes — there will be separate Quality and Performance modes on consoles.

The PS Store listing mentions PS5 Pro optimization. What improvements can players expect on PS5 Pro?

PS5 Pro players can expect the most refined console version of Mistfall Hunter. The additional GPU headroom lets us push higher rendering resolutions and more stable frame rates across both Quality and Performance modes, along with sharper image quality through enhanced upscaling.

In a game where reading an enemy’s wind-up or nailing a dodge-roll can decide whether you extract with everything or lose it all, that extra clarity and smoothness genuinely matters. We’ll share exact PS5 Pro details closer to launch.

Are you using DualSense features on PS5, such as haptic feedback and adaptive triggers, to make melee attacks, parries, or extraction moments feel more physical?

Not at launch, but DualSense support is absolutely on our radar. Haptic feedback and adaptive triggers are planned to roll out gradually in future updates. Melee impacts, parries, and those white-knuckle extraction moments are exactly the kind of thing that deserves to be felt in your hands, and we want to do it right.

Since Mistfall Hunter is coming Day One to Xbox Game Pass, how does that affect your expectations for the launch community, matchmaking population, and long-term support?

For us, the biggest win of launching Day One on Game Pass is speed: we can build a genuinely multi-platform, multi-audience community from the very first day. For an extraction PvPvE game, community size, matchmaking pool quality, and the diversity of classes and playstyles you run into all directly shape the player experience.

Game Pass lowers the barrier for players who might have stayed on the fence: they can jump in, try our combat, and explore our world, and that makes the whole ecosystem healthier. But it also raises the bar for us. It means the launch version has to deliver on stability, anti-cheat, fair matchmaking, and a strong content update cadence. We take that responsibility seriously.

Will Mistfall Hunter support full cross-play and cross-progression across PlayStation, Xbox, Steam, and Xbox on PC?

Full cross-play is supported across PlayStation, Xbox, Steam, and Xbox on PC. Everyone plays together.

For cross-progression: Xbox and Xbox on PC share progress with each other. The other platforms do not currently support cross-progression.

"Game Pass lowers the barrier for players who might have stayed on the fence"

For PC players, what can you tell us about system requirements, graphics options, ultrawide support, unlocked frame rates, anti-cheat, and upscaling technologies such as DLSS, FSR, or XeSS?

Happy to run through the full list.

Minimum Requirements

• OS: Windows 10 64-bit
• Memory: 12 GB
• CPU: Intel Core i7-4770 / AMD Ryzen 5 1400
• GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 / AMD Radeon RX 580
• DirectX: Version 12

Recommended Requirements

• OS: Windows 10 64-bit
• Memory: 16 GB
• CPU: Intel Core i7-9700 / AMD Ryzen 5 3600
• GPU: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 / AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT
• DirectX: Version 12

Graphics options: PC players get a deep suite of custom settings, including anti-aliasing/upscaling method, upscaling mode, DLSS frame generation multiplier, ray tracing, shadow quality, view distance, texture quality, effects quality, post-processing, motion blur, and global illumination.

Ultrawide support: Yes, fully supported.

Unlocked frame rates: There is no frame rate cap on PC.

Upscaling technologies: We support TSR, TAAU, DLSS 4.5, and FSR 3.

Anti-cheat: Mistfall Hunter uses Bellring Anti-Cheat, backed by a dedicated anti-cheat team. We won’t pretend it’s been a spotless journey! Beta 2 saw some fairly aggressive cheats. But we eradicated those vulnerabilities, and across our last two tests the game ran clean and stable. Our countermeasures against both cheating and illegal teaming keep maturing, and protecting fair play is a commitment we intend to keep long after launch.

How do you expect the move from World War 2 to the Vietnam War to affect gameplay beyond the obvious change in weapons?

Ruschynsky: The asymmetrical sides truly shake up the gameplay from World War 2, resulting in contrasting gameplay depending on the side you choose. That, combined with the faster pacing of combat and new ways to manoeuvre around each map, makes it feel like a familiar game at its core but fresh in the moment-to-moment action.

Additionally, the battlefields are distinctly different to fight within. They’re built around wet dense jungle, winding river networks, farmland and rice paddies, remote villages, and steep natural terrain. Vegetation specifically massively impacts visibility and movement, making it a defining feature of the battlefield that changes how you interact with it.

"The map variety in Hell Let Loose: Vietnam is diverse."

What kind of map variety can players expect from Hell Let Loose: Vietnam, especially given how important terrain, visibility, and verticality are to the setting?

Robinson: The map variety in Hell Let Loose: Vietnam is diverse.

It was important for each map to have its own identity; its own unique look and feel, not just in the chosen jungle, grassland, and desert biomes, but also in the gameplay opportunities each map offers and the tactics players can employ to take advantage of those opportunities, such as mountainous terrain, caves, and flooded villages.

Each map needed to deliver a different battlefield experience, with players facing new challenges, tactical opportunities, and intense & immersive moments.

Will players be able to contribute to battles in ways beyond direct combat, such as traps, fortifications, supply roles, or other support mechanics?

Ruschynsky: Direct combat has never really been the focus of Hell Let Loose, and we lean into this further by adding more deployables to the battlefield, such as Anti-Air Guns, by bringing in more roles that focus on support, like the Helicopter unit and providing more tools to engage with tactical manoeuvring, namely the NVA tunnels.

To succeed in Hell Let Loose: Vietnam, a good kill/death ratio will help, but ultimately it’s about the team effort and working towards shared tactics, relying more on effective communication than anyone’s shooting skills.

Are stealth mechanics being expanded in Hell Let Loose: Vietnam, or is stealth still primarily driven by player awareness, positioning, and communication?

Ruschynsky: The dense jungles naturally offer players more opportunities to act stealthily, and it was important from a gameplay perspective that this natural cover doesn’t slow down the pacing or encourage stealth too much. So through both audio and visual cues, we make sure that players are both heard and seen whenever they’re moving through the jungle to give players a fair chance of reacting to them.

Blackley: During early playtests, we identified a need for players to be able to hear if an enemy is sneaking through the undergrowth around them. What audio cues to give the player is important in a game like Hell Let Loose: Vietnam, especially when a lot can be happening around you. Player movement sounds scale dependent on a player’s speed and also whether you are a friendly or an enemy in the vicinity of the player.

"We knew early on that the tutorials would need to be a single-player experience"

What have been the biggest challenges in designing onboarding and tutorials for a game built around large-scale, tactical warfare?

Robinson: We knew early on that the tutorials would need to be a single-player experience, so it was important not only to teach the player the game’s fundamentals in a clear, understandable, and engaging way, but also, where appropriate, to teach the strategic intent behind certain actions.

The challenge here was finding the balance between teaching the player what they needed to know and giving them the bigger picture and the influence each role and vehicle has on the battlefield.

Will Hell Let Loose: Vietnam feature any form of meta progression, or are you keeping progression focused around roles, teamwork, and match-to-match mastery?

Ruschynsky: The focus is still very much around roles, teamwork, and match-to-match mastery, however we expanded upon the role progression with the addition of a weight-based loadout system. By levelling up each role, you’ll unlock more slots and be able to carry more weaponry and equipment into the battlefield, giving you more flexibility to tailor each one to your playstyle.

Are there plans to expand the weapon, map, role, or game mode offerings through post-launch updates?

Ruschynsky: We’re excited to continue supporting Hell Let Loose: Vietnam after launch, working directly with the community to expand and evolve the game over time. Right now, we’re very much focused on ensuring we have a smooth release for players across all platforms.

How difficult has it been to balance the game around asymmetrical warfare? For example, what tools will Vietnamese forces have against US aerial firepower?

Ruschynsky: Balancing is the single biggest challenge we have. We’ve really leaned into the asymmetrical gameplay between the United States and the North Vietnamese Army (NVA), which means that we’ve had to make sure that both sides have ways to counter the enemy’s strategy. For example, the US might have helicopters to take to the skies, but the NVA can deploy Anti-Air guns to control the airspace. And the NVA’s tunnels can be collapsed by the US, bringing down entire underground networks and killing anyone that might have been in them at the time.

"PC also offers full freedom over your resolution, including Ultrawide (21:9) and Super Ultrawide (32:9) support."

Since Hell Let Loose: Vietnam is coming to PS5, Xbox Series X/S, and PC, what resolution and frame rate targets are you aiming for on each platform?

D’Archambaud: All consoles are specifically targeting a 60 frames per second experience, whilst on PC, you can push it as high as your hardware will allow! PC also offers full freedom over your resolution, including Ultrawide (21:9) and Super Ultrawide (32:9) support. Whilst the consoles each have different internal resolutions and different resolution output targets (scaled with TSR), along with DRS for a smoother experience.

Ruschynsky: We’ve added lots of new Image Reconstruction video settings to allow you to scale the experience relative to your PC hardware, with DLSS 4.5 with Frame Gen for those with Nvidia GPUs. And those with AMD GPUs will have access to TSR for both scaling and anti-aliasing. On top of that, PC users have the ability to enable Hardware Lumen, which uses various raytracing effects to improve the lighting and shadowing.

From a developer perspective, what are your thoughts on PS5 Pro, and how does its added GPU power change what you can deliver compared to the base PS5?

D’Archambaud: Any time we have more powerful hardware, we are keen to utilise it to the best we can. We offer a number of high-end graphical features on PC, and leading up to launch, we are working to enable and optimise as many as possible on each console.

Are you planning to use PSSR on PS5 Pro, and what kind of visual or performance improvements could it allow for a large-scale shooter like Hell Let Loose: Vietnam?

D’Archambaud: We do plan to integrate PSSR, however, this may be an improvement that is added as a free update in the months after initial launch.

On PC, what kind of scalability are you targeting across lower-end and high-end hardware, especially with large maps, vehicles, foliage, and dense combat scenarios?

D’Archambaud: As well as all the normal quality settings you would expect on a modern PC game, we offer image reconstruction options such as DLSS and TSR. If choosing TSR, you can define the resolution scale to use. You can choose to use frame generation and hardware Lumen, too. As well as all these options, optimisation work is ongoing across all areas of the game as we approach launch.

"From an audio perspective, we are using an entirely new voice chat system"

How are you approaching crossplay, server browser support, and platform parity between PC and consoles?

D’Archambaud: We have reworked all network aspects to ensure 100% platform parity across all game features. We realised partway through development that the work done means that we can offer full crossplay too. Of course, not all players want this, so we have been careful to allow full configuration on both the server (for community server owners) as well as on the game client, too, so both players and server owners can configure the experience that they desire.

Given how important communication is to Hell Let Loose, what improvements are you making to voice chat, squad coordination, and command tools in Vietnam?

Blackley: From an audio perspective, we are using an entirely new voice chat system, which in turn is being piped into our audio middleware, FMOD, which is also new for Hell Let Loose: Vietnam. This enables the audio design team to adjust how voice chat is experienced by players, so things like effects and custom distances can be set on specifics such as the proxy chat – a huge part of Hell Let Loose. We are also anticipating players needing this even more with the addition of boats and helicopters to the game. We have already witnessed increased team coordination and fun interactions from the increased distance players can be heard from, which has been great to see and hear! This is an area we plan to develop further from player feedback, post-launch, so watch this space for more.

Ruschynsky: Voice chat via the radio across the three hierarchical channels is central to communications, but players will also be able to text chat, use pings in the action and place down markers on the tactical map. The latter have been updated with more contextual information that will aid you in quickly informing your teammates of threats or actions you need them to perform.

The trailers have shown off a wide range of enemies, environments, and boss encounters. In the full game, how much variety can players expect across Arsilthus in terms of regions, enemy factions, dungeon design, and encounter types?

In the full version of The Relic: First Guardian, the core experience we focused on most is exploration. We did not want players to simply move from one combat area to the next. We wanted them to walk through the world of Arsilthus, discover something on their own, and have that discovery naturally lead into story, rewards, and boss encounters.

The basic flow of the game is close to exploration, discovery, story, reward, and boss battle. Players will explore mist-covered forests, dark and humid swamps, plains under the evening sun, areas filled with starlight, traces of ruined kingdoms, mines, fortresses, sanctuaries, corrupted villages, and ancient ruins. Each region is not only visually different, but also designed to carry its own history, faith, tragedy, and emotional atmosphere.

The monsters and enemies encountered in the field are also built around the environment and world of each region. Players will face Brutals connected to the collapse of the world, raiders, fallen knights, humans consumed by madness, and beings tied to the ecology or tragedy of specific locations. They are not just obstacles placed for combat. They are part of how the player understands where they are, and what happened to that land.

Bosses, on the other hand, are not placed simply as stronger enemies. Many of them are built around their own stories and incidents, and their existence is often the result of tragedy, desire, regret, or obsession. When players follow clues through field pages or hidden traces and eventually face the boss at the end, we wanted that battle to feel less like a random challenge and more like the conclusion of that story.

Dungeons were also designed not just as combat spaces. Some places contain records left behind by someone. Others show traces of the tragedy that occurred there. Some locations are structured so that the boss battle itself feels like the final scene of that story. As players explore, they discover field pages and hidden clues, follow those stories, and are led toward equipment, relics, rewards, or new battles.

Many events and side stories are also inspired by Korean folktales and legends. However, we did not simply recreate them as they are. We mixed different folkloric motifs or reinterpreted them in new directions so they could feel natural within the world of Arsilthus. We wanted players to discover a small trace in a place they pass through, follow it, and eventually reach a tragedy or truth hidden within that location.

"Many events and side stories are also inspired by Korean folktales and legends."

Ultimately, we did not want to create a game that was simply about having a large map or many bosses. We wanted to create an action RPG where players understand the world through exploration, approach its stories through discovery, and encounter rewards and battles at the end of that process. In the full version, players will experience different atmospheres, emotions, enemy types, bosses, dungeon structures, and combat encounters across each region.

The Relic: First Guardian is Project Cloud Games’ debut title. Looking back at development, what were the biggest lessons the team learned while building a full-scale action RPG for the first time?

The biggest lesson we learned was the importance of focus and selection.

Project Cloud Games is a small studio, and The Relic: First Guardian is our first title. Even so, we did not want to make a game that felt small in ambition. We wanted to build a full-scale action RPG with exploration, combat, bosses, progression, and story.

However, during development, we learned that it is realistically difficult to give every element the same amount of depth. So the most important question for us became not “What more can we add?” but “What must we protect until the end?”

What we wanted to protect most was the dark atmosphere of the game and the emotions within its stories. Combat, bosses, exploration, equipment, and progression systems are all important, but what mattered most to us was how all of those elements would remain in the player’s memory emotionally.

There is one phrase we kept returning to while making the game:

“Everything remains as a story.”

This is also the slogan of The Relic: First Guardian, but it was also a standard that guided our decisions throughout development. Combat, exploration, equipment, and bosses all needed to remain in the player’s memory as part of a story.

So the biggest lesson we learned from this project is that a small team should not simply try to do more. We have to understand what atmosphere and emotion we must protect, and then focus on those things until the end.

The game has been described as a semi-open world action RPG. How much freedom will players have when exploring Arsilthus, and how do you balance open-ended discovery with a focused narrative?

The Relic: First Guardian is not an open world that removes all sense of direction. It is closer to a semi-open world action RPG where players follow a clear journey, but find their own paths and build discoveries along the way.

As players explore the major regions of Arsilthus, they can find branching paths, hidden spaces, optional bosses and events, powerful equipment, and relics. They do not have to follow only the main route. Depending on which path they choose and what they discover first, the density and shape of the experience can change.

"As players explore the major regions of Arsilthus, they can find branching paths, hidden spaces, optional bosses and events, powerful equipment, and relics."

What mattered to us was not simply offering a wide space, but making exploration lead to real rewards and stories. In one place, players might discover hidden field pages. In another, they might find a dungeon where someone’s tragedy remains. In another, they might eventually face the boss at the center of that story. We designed the player’s progression so it would not feel like simply following markers on a map, but rather a natural flow of exploration, discovery, story, reward, and combat.

Of course, the game has a clear central journey surrounding the collapse of the world and the fragments of the Great Relic. We maintained that larger direction so players would not completely lose their way or lose sight of the story. But within that flow, we wanted players to personally discover the incidents, hidden places, equipment, bosses, and truths of each region.

For us, open-ended discovery and focused narrative were not opposing ideas. Exploration itself was one of the most important ways to deliver the story. When a player finds someone’s trace in a quiet ruin, follows that record, and eventually encounters an intense battle or reward, that place becomes more than a background. It becomes a memory.

Ultimately, what we wanted was for players to freely explore and, when they look back later, feel that the traces they discovered were not just lore entries or collectibles. Every discovery is part of a story, and that story is ultimately about people who tried to survive in this broken world. Desire, regret, faith, survival, choices, and the feelings left behind are scattered throughout Arsilthus, and players encounter them directly through exploration.

The Relic: First Guardian does not use a traditional character level system. What pushed the team toward progression through relics, runes, items, crafting, and equipment instead?

This idea began with a very simple question.

“Does a weapon obtained early in the game always have to be weak?”

“If a player likes a weapon, shouldn’t they be able to stay with it until the end?”

In traditional RPGs, early equipment is often naturally discarded as time passes. But we did not want a weapon or piece of equipment to lose its meaning simply because the player obtained it early. If a player grows attached to something, we wanted that attachment to matter.

We did not want equipment to feel like disposable pieces of data. If weapons and armor have their own stories, identity, and emotional weight from the moment they are obtained, we believe they can remain in the player’s memory for much longer.

"Every discovery is part of a story, and that story is ultimately about people who tried to survive in this broken world."

Just as old fossils remain through time, are discovered, and are remembered, we wanted equipment in the game to feel like relics being unearthed rather than simple numbers. When players obtain equipment, we wanted them to feel that they had discovered not only a new reward, but also the memory and value contained within that item.

That is why each weapon and piece of equipment was designed to have more than stats or rarity. We wanted them to have their own background, role, combat identity, and narrative. We wanted some weapons and armor to feel like objects that still carry someone’s memory, choice, sacrifice, or regret.

Crafting and enhancement are also connected to this idea. For us, crafting is not simply a process of replacing equipment with a higher-tier version. It is closer to a system that allows players to refine the equipment and relics they have discovered, adapt them to their own combat style, and continue using them.

This naturally led us away from a traditional level system. Instead of expressing the character’s strength through a level number, we wanted progression to come from which relics the player discovers, which runes they choose, which equipment they wear, and how they combine their skills.

For us, progression is not simply about a number going up. It is a process of exploring Arsilthus, discovering stories, facing memories, and understanding the meaning behind the equipment players find.

In that sense, progression in The Relic: First Guardian is less about a level number and more about how deeply the player comes to understand the world. The stories and memories the player discovers accumulate over time, and that experience becomes the player’s own form of growth.

Combat seems to emphasize aggression, rhythm, and survival, with stamina reserved for defensive actions rather than attacks. How did that change the way you designed encounters compared to more traditional stamina-based action RPGs?

As mentioned earlier, we wanted weapons and equipment to be more than differences in stats. We wanted each of them to have its own story and unique identity. That idea naturally carried over into the combat system.

If each weapon has its own characteristics, then the rhythm and feel of combat should also change depending on the weapon the player uses. Some weapons create opportunities by quickly closing the distance. Others are slower, but can shift the flow of battle with one powerful strike. When skills, runes, and relics are added to this, players can approach combat in their own way.

In many traditional stamina-based action RPGs, attacks, dodges, and defense all consume the same resource, limiting the player’s actions through one shared system. We chose a slightly different direction. Rather than tying attacks heavily to stamina, we wanted players to use weapons and skills more actively and take control of the tempo of battle themselves.

"We wanted weapons and equipment to be more than differences in stats."

Instead, stamina is focused on defensive actions such as dodging and guarding. This was not a choice made to make combat easier, but to make the player’s judgment clearer. Players can take offensive opportunities more freely, but if they push forward without thinking, they will be in danger. If they misuse dodges, guards, parries, or spacing, they may not survive at a decisive moment.

The combat we imagined was not about memorizing complicated controls. We wanted the basic controls and skill usage to be as intuitive as possible. What matters more is moment-to-moment judgment. Players must decide when to go in, when to stop, when to dodge, and when to attempt a parry within a very short window of time. In a true duel, you have to judge everything instantly and move accordingly in order to win. We wanted our combat to carry that feeling.

We also believe this connects to emotion. The tension, fear, hesitation, and satisfaction of landing an attack at the last possible moment cannot be created by numbers or systems alone. When players make a decision in a split second and feel the result of that decision directly, combat becomes a stronger emotional experience.

Some bosses also react by dodging or even parrying the player’s attacks. Because of that, combat is not one-sided aggression. It becomes an exchange of judgment in short moments. Some relics allow more aggressive actions by using stamina, but at its core, stamina is an important resource for survival decisions.

Ultimately, the combat we wanted was not about waiting defensively. It is fast-paced combat where players actively push forward with weapons and skills, but must never lose their survival judgment until the very end. The controls and skills are easy to approach, but in actual battle, every moment of judgment can decide victory or defeat.

With five weapon types and multiple skill trees, how different can two players’ builds feel by the end of the game?

What mattered to us was not simply that each player’s stats or damage numbers would be different. We wanted the way players approach bosses to feel different.

The Relic: First Guardian has five weapon types, and each weapon has a different sense of range, attack speed, risk, impact, and combat rhythm. Some weapons are strong at quickly closing the distance and creating repeated attack opportunities. Others are slower, but can deal heavy damage in a short opening. Others are designed to work well with stable spacing or a more defensive playstyle.

When skills, runes, relics, and equipment effects are added, two players can approach the same boss in completely different ways by the later parts of the game. One player might combine a fast weapon with aggressive skills to constantly pressure the boss. Another might focus on a heavy weapon and look for short windows to land a powerful hit. Another player might strengthen guard and survivability, endure enemy attacks, and wait for a chance to counterattack.

In some builds, defensive actions themselves can become part of the offense. For example, blocking an enemy’s attack may deal damage back to the enemy, or certain relics and equipment effects may allow the player to turn dangerous moments into opportunities. We did not want players to simply search for the “strongest weapon.” We wanted them to build around the rhythm of combat they personally enjoy.

"We wanted the way players approach bosses to feel different."

Elements and consumable items also play an important role in boss battles. Using elemental effects that fit a specific boss or preparing consumables before a battle can significantly change the difficulty and flow of the fight. We wanted players to think not only about attack power, but also about the boss’s characteristics, their own weapon, skills, relics, runes, and consumable items together.

Of course, no matter what build the player chooses, reading boss patterns, judging distance and timing, and surviving dangerous moments remain important. In our game, a build does not replace the player’s judgment. It is a way for the player to choose how they want to express that judgment.

Ultimately, build differences in the later game are not simply about being stronger or weaker. They change what the player sees as an opportunity, what rhythm they use to apply pressure, and how they survive against the same boss. We wanted players to feel that there is not only one correct way to defeat a boss, but that they can find the solution that fits them.

The game features a large number of boss encounters, many of which seem tied to personal stories and tragedy. How do you ensure these bosses feel mechanically distinct while also making them meaningful from a narrative standpoint?

We did not want bosses to be simple obstacles or just powerful enemies. Many bosses in The Relic: First Guardian are the result of tragedies left behind in a region, or beings who reached the end of certain choices and regrets. So the first question we asked when creating a boss was, “Why did this being become this way?”

The most important idea is that the story of this game is ultimately about people. On the surface, they may appear as Brutals, fallen knights, monsters, or bosses. But if players follow what lies beneath, they will find someone’s desire, regret, love, sacrifice, anger, or despair. We wanted players to feel not just that they defeated a strong enemy, but that they encountered the choices a person made, what they tried to protect, and why they collapsed.

This approach directly influenced the combat design of the bosses. We did not want to simply give each boss a different appearance and attack pattern. We wanted their stories and emotions to appear through the way they fight. One boss might express obsession and anger through fast, violent pressure. Another might convey regret and a heavy fate through slower but powerful attacks. Some bosses dodge or parry the player’s attacks, making them feel less like targets that simply take damage and more like opponents who exchange judgment with the player in short moments.

The location of each boss battle was also important. The space where a boss appears is not just an arena. It is closer to a final stage that shows what that person experienced and what they lost. Players discover field pages or environmental traces through exploration, follow those stories, and eventually face the boss at the center of them. We wanted boss battles to feel like conclusions reached through exploration and discovery, rather than sudden fights that appear without context.

Many events and boss stories were also inspired by Korean folktales and legends. However, rather than directly adapting the original stories, we mixed several folkloric motifs or reconstructed them in entirely different ways so they would become new stories that fit naturally within Arsilthus. Some stories are about sorrow. Others are about sacrifice, hope, despair, anger, regret, or obsession. But at the center of all those emotions, there are people.

"Some stories are about sorrow. Others are about sacrifice, hope, despair, anger, regret, or obsession."

Mechanically, we also spent a lot of time making bosses feel different from one another. Attack range, movement speed, pressure, reactions to dodging and parrying, phase changes, combat space structure, and the distance and timing each boss demands from the player are all designed differently. Some bosses constantly close the distance and pressure the player. Some force the player to precisely take advantage of short openings. Others create tension by fighting together with the surrounding space.

What mattered to us was not only the number of bosses or their difficulty. We wanted players to finish a fight and remember more than “that was a hard boss.” We wanted the boss’s story, atmosphere, and the emotions of that battle to remain in the player’s memory. Why the boss changed, why they were in that place, and what emotion they left behind at the end were all important to us.

Ultimately, a boss battle is an intense combat encounter, but it is also the moment when the story of a person discovered through exploration is finally revealed. We wanted players to feel that they had not simply killed a monster, but had faced the end of someone’s story.

With the main campaign and optional side content included, roughly how long do you expect most players will take to complete The Relic: First Guardian?

It will vary depending on playstyle, but we expect most players to take around 30 hours.

Players who actively explore, challenge optional bosses, discover hidden events, collect equipment, and experiment with runes and skill builds can spend much more time with the game. The Relic: First Guardian is not simply a game about following the main route. A large part of the experience comes from discovering the stories and bosses left behind in each region.

The game launches first on PS5 and PC, with Xbox Series X/S and Nintendo Switch 2 versions arriving later. What were the main technical priorities for each platform?

We are a small studio, and The Relic: First Guardian is our first game. Because of that, rather than trying to offer every possible feature broadly, we chose to focus on what we believe is essential for an action RPG. For us, the atmosphere of the world, combat, and stable gameplay were the main priorities.

For the Xbox Series X/S and Nintendo Switch 2 versions, we will also prioritize a stable console experience. Our approach is not simply to reduce visual quality, but to preserve the core atmosphere and combat experience of the game as much as possible.

"The Relic: First Guardian is not simply a game about following the main route."

On PS5 and PS5 Pro, what resolution and frame rate targets are you aiming for? Will players be able to choose between Quality and Performance modes?

The PS5 and PS5 Pro versions are currently in the final optimization stage, and as an action game, stable frame rate and combat responsiveness are our top priorities.

Whether Quality and Performance modes will be available, as well as the final resolution and frame rate targets, will be confirmed based on the final build and announced before release.

For PC players, what can you tell us about system requirements, graphics settings, ultrawide support, frame-rate options, and upscaling technologies such as DLSS, FSR, or XeSS?

For the PC version, our main priority was not to provide a large number of highly detailed graphics options, but to make the game run and play as stably as possible across a wide range of PC environments.

The Relic: First Guardian is Project Cloud Games’ first title, and we are a small studio. Because of that, rather than offering a very granular set of graphics options, we focused on what matters most for an action RPG: combat responsiveness, stable frame rate, readability during boss battles, and preserving the overall atmosphere of the game.

The graphics options will be provided in a simplified form rather than through a highly complex settings menu. Within that structure, we focused on optimizing the game so that as many PC players as possible can play it stably.

System requirements, frame-rate options, ultrawide support, and the range of supported upscaling technologies will be confirmed based on the final build and announced officially before release.

The Switch 2 version is especially interesting for a dark fantasy action RPG with fast combat and large boss encounters. How are you approaching performance, visual quality, and handheld play on that platform?

At this stage, it is difficult for us to share specific performance targets or a release window for the Nintendo Switch 2 version.

However, the direction is clear. The Relic: First Guardian is a game where dark atmosphere, fast combat, large boss encounters, and the tension of exploration are all important. So our approach is not simply to reduce visuals, but to preserve the core atmosphere and experience of the game.

For handheld play in particular, we believe enemy movement, attack timing, UI readability, and input responsiveness are very important. We will share more specific information about this version once development has progressed further.

"The Relic: First Guardian is a game where dark atmosphere, fast combat, large boss encounters, and the tension of exploration are all important."

Are there any PS5-specific features planned, such as DualSense haptics, adaptive triggers, 3D audio, Activity Cards, or PS5 Pro enhancements?

For the PS5 version, our most important priorities are stable gameplay and combat responsiveness.

Features such as DualSense haptics, adaptive triggers, 3D audio, Activity Cards, and PS5 Pro enhancements are certainly attractive. However, The Relic: First Guardian is our first title, and we are a small studio. Rather than trying to include as many platform-specific features as possible, we focused first on making sure the core game experience is delivered reliably.

The feel of combat, boss battle responsiveness, frame stability, and the atmosphere of the dark world are our main goals. If there are confirmed details regarding platform-specific features or PS5 Pro support based on the final build, we will announce them officially before release.

Finally, if The Relic: First Guardian finds an audience, do you see this as the beginning of a larger world or franchise for Project Cloud Games?

We sincerely hope so.

The Relic: First Guardian is not just our first title. It is the starting point that shows what kind of games Project Cloud Games wants to create. Our slogan is “Everything remains as a story.” That phrase is not only about the world of the game, but also about the kind of experience we want to give players.

We did not want to simply tell players one story. We wanted players to walk through Arsilthus themselves, fight, discover, sometimes stop and read the traces left behind by someone, and remember that entire process as their own experience.

Personally, I like stories such as The Little Prince or The Alchemist, stories that can come back to you even after a long time. The same story can feel completely different when you read it in your twenties and when you read it again in your forties. What we hope for is something similar. We hope The Relic: First Guardian does not remain only as a game players cleared, but as a game that comes back to them later through certain scenes, bosses, stories, or emotions.

There are still many histories, characters, regions, beliefs, and tragedies within Arsilthus that we have not yet shown. If players remember this world, its characters, bosses, and stories through this game, we would like to expand that world further.

We hope The Relic: First Guardian will not end as just one game, but become the first chapter of the dark fantasy action RPG world that Project Cloud Games will continue to build.

Dinoblade has one of those concepts that immediately grabs attention: a Spinosaurus wielding a greatsword. What was the original spark behind the idea, and when did you realize it could become a full game rather than just a striking visual concept?

In early 2022, I decided to try and find another animation position but since my demo reel was out of date, I had to start making new pieces. I focused heavily on combat and creature animations. At that time, I also noticed that a friend of mine on twitter had one of his animations go viral which gave me more motivation since I’ve always wanted to go viral at least once in my life. I kept putting out new animations, growing my account and at the same time strengthening my demo reel. One day, I decided to go easy and just reupload an old animation but maybe change something on it to be silly. I grabbed an old Spinosaurus Walk Cycle I made and put a Buster Sword in it’s mouth. This animation didn’t go viral but I liked how it looked and thought it would be fun to see a combo from it. I made a 6 ish second combo clip of the Spinosaurus using a giant Buster Sword and that clip went viral, gaining over 6 Million views on Twitter alone. Many comments mentioned if this was part of a game, or telling me to make a game out of it but I would reply saying it’s only for my demo reel thinking that it was impossible for me to make a game out of this idea alone.

The premise is inherently wild, but the game also seems to be treating its action-RPG combat seriously. How do you balance the absurd appeal of “dinosaurs with swords” with the need for combat weight, challenge, and genuine player mastery?

The idea is silly and people may think it’s more of a game that would make them laugh but the original animations were appealing because it shows how a Dinosaur could wield a giant sword from its mouth in a realistic way so I ran with that idea but pushing it a bit to be more fantasy since I’m a big anime fan. I’m also a big fan of fast paced combat, so the animations have to be quicker during these moments but weighty on the recoveries. I also don’t want combat to be mindlessly spamming to win so finding ways to make players stay on their toes and focus is important to keep the game engaging.

"The idea is silly and people may think it’s more of a game that would make them laugh but the original animations were appealing"

Dinoblade features rival dinosaurs, some of whom also wield weapons. How do you design believable combat readability around creatures that are not humanoid but are still participating in sword-based combat?

There’s very limited movement a Dinosaur can do while wielding a weapon with its mouth so focusing on readability was a bit challenging. Players have had concerns mentioning that they can’t read when the Dinosaur is about to attack versus them playing hit reactions so 1 way is to add Red Glints which are Attacks that can not be blocked. They can still be parried but mistiming it will be punishing. The Red Glints also have a sound effect to it to make it even more intense. While not all attacks are Unblockable, normal ones tend to have a long enough windup pose that players will learn to distinguish vs a hit reaction, the longer they play.

What kind of structure should players expect from Dinoblade? Is it a mostly linear action-RPG with handcrafted encounters and boss progression, or is there meaningful freedom to explore, backtrack, and discover optional areas?

Half of the maps are linear and a few are more open to explore. Player’s will want to explore to find all the mini bosses which on defeat, will give the player Boss SP to use an unlock or upgrade their abilities. Defeating bosses also allows Players to summon them and each Summon has their own passive. Players can also find Extra Boss SP hidden around the map, as well as Health Stones which are like a heal flask, and weapons. Players can also travel back in case they miss something. I would say the game is more focused on Boss Rush similar to Black Myth Wukong.

The Steam page mentions multiple biomes and Alpha predators ruling different regions. How important are these Alpha encounters to the game’s overall progression and sense of scale?

Each Alpha, which are the main bosses that’s blocking the path to the next map, will reward Players with 3 Boss Sp and potentially a new weapon to unlock. You can’t summon the main Bosses normally but there are ways to summon these Alphas that players have to unlock to do so. The Boss Fights are the main reason why players want to play, and towards the end of the game, Players will discover the lore by defeating these bosses. Each Alpha Boss Fight will be a completely different, unique encounter with their own unique movesets so the game will not get repetitive in boss fights.

What can you tell us about Dinoblade’s progression systems? How deep do skills, combos, parries, dodges, rolls, and abilities become as players move further into the game?

There’s a Souls Art Tree, basically a skill tree with 4 abilities you can unlock plus a single passive which you can unlock 3 levels of. Each time you unlock the new level of the abilities, they become stronger with a new visual look or effects to it. One of the abilities is to stun the enemy but if you unlock level 2 and further, you start transforming to the Dinosaur you’ve binded with. You also have Attribute system where players can put their SP points into 1 of the 4 stats, Health, Strength, Resonance and Stamina. Health for a tanky build, Strength to increase physical damage like light and heavy attacks, Resonance to increase spell damage plus increase the amount of Resonance the player has and Stamina to let player fight longer before waiting for stamina to regenerate as well as Stamina being tied to the Transformation form.

Since every major character is a dinosaur, what kind of storytelling approach are you taking? Is the narrative told through cutscenes, environmental storytelling, creature behavior, or something else entirely?

The story is told through mostly short cinematics which the player will see more of towards the 2nd half of the game. There are also some clues in the environment before each Boss Fight stage. I also want the player to figure out the story on their own, piece it together rather than explaining everything.

"Half of the maps are linear and a few are more open to explore."

What were the biggest challenges in telling an emotional or dramatic story in a world where the cast is made up entirely of weapon-wielding dinosaurs?

The biggest challenge was to decide whether the dinosaurs have dialogues or not. I decided to add some dialogue lines which include voices but they should sound more like talking through telepathically rather than verbally. Only a few special ones have dialogues while every other is not fully bound to their soul warriors to be able to have dialogues.

Will Dinoblade mainly stick to real prehistoric creatures, or does the cataclysmic/fantasy angle allow for more exaggerated, mythical, or even dragon-like designs?

Players will have to play to find out.

Are there plans to introduce other weapon types beyond the greatsword, or is the focus on expanding and deepening the core blade-based combat style?

The plan is for each Dinosaur to have their own type of weapon type. Currently players can only play as the Spinosaurus but there are plans to add more playables for Boss Rush Mode, each with their own weapon style similar to classes.

Are you looking into Steam Deck compatibility or verification? Given the action-heavy nature of the game, how much work is going into controller support, UI scaling, and handheld readability?

I’ve already had a player test the full game using Steam Deck and he had no issues. I’d love to get Steam to do a verification. There is full controller support.

Has feedback from the Steam demo changed any major elements of combat, camera behavior, difficulty tuning, UI, or performance optimization?

Yes, I tried to read as much feedback as I can and apply where it makes sense. I’ve fixed a lot of camera clipping, added an option for players to change target lock system, and heavy focus on optimization. I’ve also made Resonance Attribute to increase spell/magic damage and allowed 95% of unblockables red glint attacks to be deflectable/parriable. There are probably more polish changes but I just don’t remember at this moment.

Are console versions something the team is considering after the PC launch, and if so, what would need to happen technically or commercially before Dinoblade could come to PlayStation, Xbox, or Nintendo platforms?

Absolutely. My 100% focus right now is delivering the absolute best version of Dinoblade possible for the PC launch on Steam. A console port is entirely dependent on our Steam performance. If the game finds its audience on PC and the demand is there, then porting to other platforms makes sense as the next step.

Outward 2 was recently delayed from its planned July 2026 Early Access launch to 2027, with the team saying beta feedback made it clear the game needed more time. What were the biggest areas of feedback that convinced you the delay was necessary, and what should players expect to feel has changed the most when they next play it?

Stability is the big outlier. Optimization and debugging takes a lot of time and Outward 2 is a very big game. Expectations for Early Access games are that it’s okay to have some bugs, but the experience should be pleasant. Crashes and disconnections while playing in multiplayer were frequent, and we’ve noticed some specific hardware and OS configurations that slowed the game’s performance to a crawl. So if you mix bad stability along with many small things that need work, such as economic or combat balance feeling off, you end up with frustrations and apprehensions in too many areas at once and instead of a sense of curiosity. We decided to extend the game’s development not to add more things, but to offer a tighter package that announces more clearly where we want to go from there.

You’ve said the goal is for there to be a “stark jump” between the beta and the Early Access launch. Does that primarily mean better stability and polish, or are you also using the extra time to rethink balance, onboarding, combat feel, quest structure, and world readability?

The biggest jump should be in making an experience that feels solid rather than holding together with duct tape. So debugging is important, but also the impact of balance changes can’t be understated. The balance in the playtests were not final, but clearly it’s been a sticking point for many players. Balance is something that is very easy to iterate on during Early Access, and it’s one of those things that is a lot easier to tweak just right when you have a dialog with your players. But we’ll need to be closer to the final intent to keep our players engaged. Something as trivial as how much stamina you recover from drinking water can impact a player’s experience.

As for onboarding or quest structure, while we do intend to improve the tutorial, it will remain a separate mode and we don’t intend to hold the player’s hand once they start their adventure. It’s part of the vision of Outward to feel overwhelmed at first. But we need to make sure we give enough tools to the player to overcome those initial challenges.That’s the fine line we need to hit in the balance.

"The biggest jump should be in making an experience that feels solid rather than holding together with duct tape."

The first Outward built its identity around immersion through friction – preparation, navigation, survival, danger, and consequences. With Outward 2, where did you draw the line between preserving that friction and making the game feel more responsive and approachable?

Essentially, we never thought about it in terms of if there was too much friction or not enough. Instead, we focused on whether or not that friction was going with or against the sense of immersion. How stiff combat was in Outward 1 was due to technical/budget constraints, not intentional friction. However, making the combat feel very deliberate was important. If we can make combat deliberate without making the player frustrated that their avatar is unable to do something they could do themselves, it’s a gain worth pursuing.

As for making the game more approachable, part of it is having a compelling carrot. In Outward, many players felt that the story was an afterthought unless they played through all factions and realized how complex of a tapestry of events and motivations the story actually was. So having more compelling characters, story beats, a better rhythm and, eventually, fully voiced dialogs should give some motivation to keep pushing initially. So if the experience is less clunky, more visually appealing, with a more involved story and a world that feels more fleshed out, I think that we’re giving a better reason to stick through the friction than we did in Outward 1.

Outward 2’s combat is noticeably more fluid, with dodge steps, rolls, cancels, dual-wielding, smoother blocks, and more flexible weapon combinations. Since players now have more control in combat, how have enemies, stamina costs, encounter placement, and punishment been rebalanced to keep the game difficult without feeling unfair?

The speed and flexibility we gave to the player had to be matched with higher aggression from the enemies, and we also gave them more ways to attack from a distance. We also still need to work on what are the proper stamina costs for actions now that they are faster, since it means there are more opportunities to land multiple hits, or more attacks to dodge in a shorter amount of time.

We want to be very careful with the number of enemies we have to face at a time. So our levers of balance are more based on behaviors and statistics.

At the end of the day though, the lesson is that real combat is not fair. You should give yourself an extra edge if you want to survive a 2 versus one encounter, or to fight against a monster that is multiple times your size. I think the worst thing we can do is to pretend that it’s fair while it’s not. If, from the outset, you understand that the world is unfair towards you, then you start approaching combat differently. That’s when it pays to be clever and prepared.

"At the end of the day though, the lesson is that real combat is not fair."

The Exercise system sounds like a major shift away from traditional XP and levels, tying growth to finite micro-achievements across combat, crafting, and survival. How does this system change the way players naturally build their character, and how much room is there for non-combat-focused progression?

I foresee two different approaches. Either the player will choose the upgrades that naturally offer themselves to them as they play with whichever playstyle came organically to them, or they’ll make a plan of where they want to take their characters and influence how they play to speed up their ascension. Both approaches are fine and viable. While some requirements are tied to non-combat gameplay, the rewards are always at least in some fashion relevant to combat aptitudes. The reason for this is that the other things we can do rely more on know-how than on statistical advantages.

I think the biggest impact is that your character will grow more slowly but also more gradually. In Outward 1, once the ball started rolling, finishing your character’s build could go very fast. Now, instead of a final growth spur, your journey will reward you gradually, which in my opinion better simulates the experience of learning and growing.

Early Access is planned to launch with three of four regions and only part of each faction questline, while the full game is targeting four regions and three major questlines. How are you structuring Early Access so that it feels like a meaningful adventure rather than an incomplete slice of the final game?

There’s custom content such as level design and story, then there’s systemic content such as character builds and mechanical exploration. At first, we will lean more into the sandbox experience to keep our players busy, but it’s our intent to prioritize the rest of the story and regions within the first big updates to come, so that they quickly get a sense that almost all of it is there. That’s when we can start surprising them with extra layers of depth!

Narrative delivery seems to be one of the big areas you want to validate during Early Access, especially before committing to full voice acting. What did you learn from the first game’s more emergent storytelling, and how much more authored, character-driven, or faction-driven will Outward 2’s story be?

The story in Outward was mostly about witnessing a series of events enacted from enormous factions, as just one among many to serve the organizations and without ever being at the center of the attention. This time around, in order to feel more the stakes of the story and get a deeper connection with the characters, we came up with smaller factions, also implying that your role is more central for that smaller group. The stakes are just as high as in Outward 1, but there is more space to intimately know who is involved. I rarely feel like the characters are really important in open world games, so this approach is our attempt to break the pattern.

Outward 2 is adding a more alive world through seasonal changes, region-specific hazards, patrols, dynamic encounters, and stronger navigation demands. How are you making the world denser and more readable without compromising the series’ refusal to rely on GPS-style guidance and hand-holding?

Honestly my only answer to this is a simple one: aside from maps, add more signs on the roads to help figure out the way

"I think the most frustrating elements are when you feel like there’s nothing you could have done to reach a different outcome."

Preparation seems even more central this time, with traps, poisons, potions, sigils, specialized gear, backpacks, mules, camping equipment, food, weather protection, and wound management all playing into survival. How do you make these systems feel like meaningful strategy rather than busywork?

In most survival games, you fill up your needs to get rid of handicaps. In Outward, that’s the first step but then eventually you do it instead because it strengthens your playstyle. So your choice of tent, backpack, food all might change based on the fact you want to play a mage, for instance. So you go from doing it because you need to, to doing it because you want to.

Of course you probably don’t want a sprained ankle and a concussion, but that’s different. For wounds or illnesses, we went with something that was more mechanically complex than just a lowered stat that can easily be healed whenever. That way, we make the player shift their mindset and acknowledge the consequence of their state, rather than just power through it.

Defeat scenarios, wounds, time skips, stolen gear, quest timers, and Hardcore mode’s permanent-save risk all sound like they could create amazing stories, but also real frustration. After the beta, how are you tuning those consequences so setbacks remain memorable and fair rather than demoralizing?

I think the most frustrating elements are when you feel like there’s nothing you could have done to reach a different outcome. For that, we need to ensure that we distribute enough tools (such as traps, potions and ammo) and enough knowledge about those tools (such as hints through dialogs, crafting recipes, early opportunities).

During the beta, I feel that we could have done a better job with that early distribution, in order to get them started. Our approach is to subtly nudge, but never to push them outright towards the answers. Some people might not catch on and that’s a risk we’re quite willing to take.