American McGee, creator of American McGee's Alice and Alice : Madness Returns, says EA won't support Alice : Asylum. McGee says EA is neither interested in funding the project itself nor licensing the Alice IP to him.

Source

He probably should have got to work on it a long time whilst the games were still popular.

EA might have said no back then too, but the chances of them saying yes would have been much higher if he had asked in a timely manner.

I loved playing Alice Madness Returns. Very disappointed to know EA cancelled the sequel.

EA publishing it in the modern age means it may as well not exist to me anyhow. I hate their client and their company.

If he changes NPCs from the earlier games, like the doctor, EA can't do shit, those fucks don't own the rights to Alice in Wonderland, nobody does. He did, EA voiced their desinterest several times, this has been his passion project for years.

AFAIK, "Alice in Wonderland" and its sequel "Through the Looking Glass" are both Public Domain.
So - EA (and Disney) may hold copyrights to their particular visual interpretions, but the stories and their characters can be used by anyone.

Of course - how viable it would be to re-interpret the characters' appearances to something never used before, is up for debate, but in theory, American McGee could just create a (let's say) modernized version of the story and its characters, and nobody could do anything about it.

He would still need someone to finace the project, of course.

I always find it odd when a corporation gets handed a free product on a silver platter that is probably up to their standards, and still refuses to license it. Even Capcom endorsed a free fan game and went to publish it, despite being a series they weren't ready to kill off. I can understand (even if i disagree with them) Nintedo's position on things like AM2R and things like that, but EA's position makes little sense. Thing is, Alice in Wonderland isn't something EA has exclusive rights to, so he could very well keep the title and make different enough assets and go his own way. The original source material is public domain and while they might try to shut it down, as long as he makes it original they can't bring a tangible case against him. While i'm sure he doesn't want the controversy, he could easily go to something like kickstarter, get the funding, and stick a middle-finger to EA and see if anyone else will publish. I have a number of non-EA games based on Alice in Wonderland, so... They're being stupid, and if he comes to realize this, they're in trouble because he can more or less take it from them. Do they really want to loose another series like Dungeon Keeper to the public? I'd have to get copies of the original books, but i imagine if anything resembling a description of characters is present, EA and Disney will more or less be forced to give them up. Right now they only have Pooh's red shirt, and Pooh not specifically wearing a red shirt is fair game. There's been some memes about this a few months ago.

I really enjoyed the first game. The second I played a few months ago and it was pretty meh. Lots of janky platforming and glitches. I'd play a third game but I wouldn't have high hopes for it. I don't think I'm invested enough to be bothered too much if it never gets made.

The thing I don't understand is this:

- they won't make a new game
- they won't sell the old games
- they won't sell the IP to anyone (apparently)

So EA: "What the hell are you planning to do then, with this IP that you claim is an important part of your IP portfolio, but which has all but been forgotten by most gamers at this point?"

Sadly it's something pretty common, for a big companies like EA a license is an "asset", like a company car or a building, even if they don't do anything it still part of the company global worth.

Creating a new game is a financial risk, selling it will lower the global value of their assets, so instead they just let it rot and take the dust. In the most extreme case you even have the case were after a couple of years they don't even know for sure if they still have the license or not like what apparently happened with NOLF.

I suppose EA holds the IP in hope for it possible popularity growing in some moment to get an ideal time for remaster, sequel, remake or something else. E.g in 2006, Tim Burton started to develop his Alice in Wonderland movie, so EA managers could give a green light for Alice Madness Returns after knowing it. Until then, it's easier to be a dog in the manger and to bark at others, especially at main creator who won't obey their client-milking vision with a high probability.

This!
Owning an IP and not doing anything with it, is still better than selling it, because then somebody else may use it to make money.

Business logic 101: as long as I sit on it, nobody else can make profit with it.

If this IP has been all but forgotten by most gamers, this is the worst time to do anything with it.

Just another example of a company prioritizing their bottom line in a way that is incredibly consumer unfriendly. Arcane business litigation and market analysis can create some of the weirdest, most frustrating behavior and it seems to be getting worse.

I never thought about it this way.
All of a sudden I found a logic answer to many questions I have been asking myself for years.