Batman: Arkham City - - - - - - - Part 16

[craigdbfan]

That's my view on it at the moment. Lets find out who the developer is first.

I can understand being worried though as I'm right there with you guys. Rocksteady created 2 amazing games and suddenly not having them back is more than enough reason to cause concern.

[Nathan]

I'll view it like this, even if the game should completely suck, I can easily ignore it, because it seems to take place before Arkham Asylum. If it were to suck and be an official continuation of the Arkham story line, then I'd be pissed. But I know Rocksteady is still around and obviously they must be working on something. Really crossing my fingers for a next-gen game here. And you know what, screw Batman.

[craigdbfan]

It would be the year of the Turtles. They have a great show on right now and a game by Rocksteady would only sweeten the deal.

[Shikamaru]

Are the Turtles owned by WB? I believe Rocksteady works with/for WB and can only do games based on characters owned by WB. So as long as WB has the rights to the Turtles (and I'm not sure if they do or not), Rocksteady can make a TMNT game.

[Oscorp]

I heard Activision has the rights to Turtles now. They got it pretty recently I think.

[Léo Ho Tep]

There are two things that may improve without Rocksteady though: the story, and the characterization. Both Arkham Games have pretty generic stories, if not totally average stories. and the characterization is more often than not really bad. Be it Bane, Hush (they totally wasted his potential storywise) or even Alfred and Batman. I don't think Dini is the one who decided that Batman would say "Gordon is smarter than I thought" for instance.

[Nathan]

Didn't think about that at all. Hopefully without Rocksteady, some of the designs won't be as ridiculous anymore. Should Bane appear in the game again, this should be his size.

[GREEN =w= DAY]

remember a few weeks back an article came out how WB registered several domains such as Arkham Origins, Gotham Knight, etc.?

guess now it's safe to say they have to do with the new game which seems like it could be a prequel or spinoff judging by some of the domain titles

[jacobed]

Originally Posted by Léo Ho Tep

There are two things that may improve without Rocksteady though: the story, and the characterization. Both Arkham Games have pretty generic stories, if not totally average stories. and the characterization is more often than not really bad. Be it Bane, Hush (they totally wasted his potential storywise) or even Alfred and Batman. I don't think Dini is the one who decided that Batman would say "Gordon is smarter than I thought" for instance.

I thought the characterizations were great. Bane uses his brain and uses Batman to do his bidding for him and Hush obviously there to set ground for a sequel.

[DarthSkywalker]

Wonder if this is going to be like Call of Duty. A stop gap until the next main series game. Prequel is easiest way to keep the Arkham hook around.

[Nathan]

Batman Arkham 3: 10 Things It Needs

[Léo Ho Tep]

Originally Posted by jacobed

I thought the characterizations were great. Bane uses his brain and uses Batman to do his bidding for him and Hush obviously there to set ground for a sequel.

I don't think it shows that Bane uses his brain. There is nothing smart in the way he acts. Batman plays along to get rid of the titan formula, but Bane's scheme is obvious, and anybody could come with something like that.

They totally missed the point with Hush. I liked the sidequest, because of its mood. It was intriguing at first, and creepy. But how can he be threatening now that Batman knows everything about his scheme, when Hush himself doesn't even know Bruce is Batman?

But there are worse. Strange has so much potential, and yet, they only managed to make him a pawn. He barely do anything at all in the game. The fact that he knows Bruce's identity is not even used at all. Only when you go to Park Row does it mean anything. Apart from that, it's nothing more than an empty threat.

Same goes for Ra's. This Ra's is nothing more than a dumbass. He's not even able to find Batman's true identity on his own (something that he did when O'neil created him).

There are a lot of room for improvement when it comes to story and characterization in the Arkham games. They are still awesome, but saying their stories and characterization are good is a bad move: it won't allow the creator to understand why they need to improve these stuffs, and we'll still have average stories and bad characterization in the next games.

[Léo Ho Tep]

Originally Posted by Nathan

Didn't think about that at all. Hopefully without Rocksteady, some of the designs won't be as ridiculous anymore. Should Bane appear in the game again, this should be his size.

Agreed. Bane was a joke in this game. Even in asylum, when you fight him, he's not that hard to beat, because of his dumb attack.

[jacobed]

Originally Posted by Léo Ho Tep

I don't think it shows that Bane uses his brain. There is nothing smart in the way he acts. Batman plays along to get rid of the titan formula, but Bane's scheme is obvious, and anybody could come with something like that.

They totally missed the point with Hush. I liked the sidequest, because of its mood. It was intriguing at first, and creepy. But how can he be threatening now that Batman knows everything about his scheme, when Hush himself doesn't even know Bruce is Batman?

But there are worse. Strange has so much potential, and yet, they only managed to make him a pawn. He barely do anything at all in the game. The fact that he knows Bruce's identity is not even used at all. Only when you go to Park Row does it mean anything. Apart from that, it's nothing more than an empty threat.

Same goes for Ra's. This Ra's is nothing more than a dumbass. He's not even able to find Batman's true identity on his own (something that he did when O'neil created him).

There are a lot of room for improvement when it comes to story and characterization in the Arkham games. They are still awesome, but saying their stories and characterization are good is a bad move: it won't allow the creator to understand why they need to improve these stuffs, and we'll still have average stories and bad characterization in the next games.

I definitely agree about Ras and Strange also the story. Wasted potential. Obviously Ras will be back but they could have done so much with Strange its not even funny

[Léo Ho Tep]

Originally Posted by jacobed

I definitely agree about Ras and Strange also the story. Wasted potential. Obviously Ras will be back but they could have done so much with Strange its not even funny

exactly. And since I love those games so much, it's harder for me to accept these flaws, because had they made a better characterization, it would have been legendary!

[jacobed]

Yeah I agree. They need to get a writer in here with experience in game writing since its very different than tv or movie. Have Dini or whoever watch over it as a consultant. The main reason I love these games is definitely the gameplay. Without a doubt my favorite combat system ever.

[Léo Ho Tep]

the gameplay is nothing short of brilliant. which is why most games ripp it off now.

[Fans of Reilly]

what the next game need dropping the name Arkham out of the game

There are many sites you can visit and stories if the game does not revolve around Arkham

[Samwise Gamgee]

Originally Posted by Léo Ho Tep

I don't think it shows that Bane uses his brain. There is nothing smart in the way he acts. Batman plays along to get rid of the titan formula, but Bane's scheme is obvious, and anybody could come with something like that.

They totally missed the point with Hush. I liked the sidequest, because of its mood. It was intriguing at first, and creepy. But how can he be threatening now that Batman knows everything about his scheme, when Hush himself doesn't even know Bruce is Batman?

But there are worse. Strange has so much potential, and yet, they only managed to make him a pawn. He barely do anything at all in the game. The fact that he knows Bruce's identity is not even used at all. Only when you go to Park Row does it mean anything. Apart from that, it's nothing more than an empty threat.

Same goes for Ra's. This Ra's is nothing more than a dumbass. He's not even able to find Batman's true identity on his own (something that he did when O'neil created him).

There are a lot of room for improvement when it comes to story and characterization in the Arkham games. They are still awesome, but saying their stories and characterization are good is a bad move: it won't allow the creator to understand why they need to improve these stuffs, and we'll still have average stories and bad characterization in the next games.

The games are fantastic, they did so much more right than they did wrong. The characterization of Joker, Harley, Penguin, Catwoman, Killer Croc, Scarecrow, ect... are fantastic. Even many brief appearances like Mad Hatter and Zaz were well done. Arkham City's Riddler was one of my favorite parts.

That said, I agree w/ your points. The Ra's story seemed hurried and forced....just kind of a small taste of the comic Ra's. He's a deeper character and, w/ so many other characters competing for screen time, he wasn't really done justice. He dies a lot and comes back. I hope he will one day make a comeback in a sequel and his potential will be explored more.

More could have been done w/ Hush but I felt this was just set-up to a later game so I'm giving it a pass.

Dr. Strange should have done something w/ the Bruce Wayne knowledge other than taunt Batman about his parents death. I understand that he put Batman into Arkham City in the first place b/c of his knowledge but I would have liked to see him raid the mansion or put Alfred in danger or something. I know there is a nice mansion challenge map but I would like to see that in the game.

Bane was simply a brute monster in the first game. I can see that and understand it given his long incarceration and then sudden rush of venom. In the second game though he clearly mentally re-adapted to the venom and so it would have been nice if he had have displayed more cunning.

[Léo Ho Tep]

Originally Posted by Samwise Gamgee

The games are fantastic, they did so much more right than they did wrong. The characterization of Joker, Harley, Penguin, Catwoman, Killer Croc, Scarecrow, ect... are fantastic. Even many brief appearances like Mad Hatter and Zaz were well done. Arkham City's Riddler was one of my favorite parts.

That said, I agree w/ your points. The Ra's story seemed hurried and forced....just kind of a small taste of the comic Ra's. He's a deeper character and, w/ so many other characters competing for screen time, he wasn't really done justice. He dies a lot and comes back. I hope he will one day make a comeback in a sequel and his potential will be explored more.

More could have been done w/ Hush but I felt this was just set-up to a later game so I'm giving it a pass.

Dr. Strange should have done something w/ the Bruce Wayne knowledge other than taunt Batman about his parents death. I understand that he put Batman into Arkham City in the first place b/c of his knowledge but I would have liked to see him raid the mansion or put Alfred in danger or something. I know there is a nice mansion challenge map but I would like to see that in the game.

Bane was simply a brute monster in the first game. I can see that and understand it given his long incarceration and then sudden rush of venom. In the second game though he clearly mentally re-adapted to the venom and so it would have been nice if he had have displayed more cunning.

Oh, I totally agree with you. I love those games. They are awesome. There are few flaws. But imagine if they manage to get rid of those flaws? Imagine a game as great as AA or AC, but with a mind blowing story!

[The Joker]

That was probably my main complaint about AC. As much as I love it, the story was too short, and it was basically just chase the cure, with a tiny sub plot about protocol 10 at the end.

AA's story was better and felt deeper even though it was basically just Joker trying to make an army of Titan monsters, it had more twists and turns in it like Dr. Young's involvement, the infection of Ivy with Titan, the betrayal of Officer Boles, the Amadeus Arkham story, even Scarecrow's nightmare sequences with Bruce's parents added to it.

AA also made full use of the Joker as the main villain. His presence was felt all through the game, whether he was on the TV monitors around Arkham laughing and taunting you, speaking on the intercom system, or popping up at random points throughout the game to sick some Titan monsters on you, he really felt like the main threat. Whereas Hugo Strange was barely seen or felt in AC. He turned out to be just a puppet to Ra's, too. Very disappointing.

[GamerSlyRatchet]

Originally Posted by Nathan

Batman Arkham 3: 10 Things It Needs

I stopped reading after "Needs Co-Op Multiplayer".

[Nathan]

You are no fun.

[JaD]

Originally Posted by GamerSlyRatchet

I stopped reading after "Needs Co-Op Multiplayer".

I'd love to see co-op challenges, but that's just me. I don't think it needs to be integrated into the story but the thought of Batman and Robin working a group of thugs together just seems so awesome and only something Rocksteady could pull off, considering the combat system is simply beautiful.

[GamerSlyRatchet]

Originally Posted by Nathan

You are no fun.

Neither is shoehorned, forced multi-player.