Arkham Origins Announced

wow, a new game already? who wants to bet it wont be as good as the first 2?

 

personally I like the arkham games far more then the recent Nolan movies. I hope that the next batman series will be more like these games.

 

Personally I like these games far more than the Burton movies. It's about on par with Nolan's for me. Maybe a bit more.

 

good for you

 

Dunno how I feel about this. I mean the WB Games Montreal crew seems to have reverence for the franchise and all, but I can't help but feel suspicious of this potentially being an inferior game that's being rushed out so they can keep cashing in on the franchise while it's hot.

Hopefully Dini and Rocksteady will return for a true sequel to Arkham City on the next gen consoles.

Don't get me wrong though, I want this to turn out to be a good game. Open world Gotham is what I've always wanted from the franchise, but making it Christmas Eve so everything's quiet in Gotham seems like a bit of a copout. We shall see.

 

I just love to do the challenge maps.

Single player campaign , the story is kinda trash (both of them ...and grabbing all the riddler stuff , pure hell!!!) .

But achieving max scores in the challenge maps is plain awesome.

 

Probably a bit more for me also.

 

Now this I am excited for. Can't ****ing wait. I loved the first two games.

And yes, the Arkham games are way better than Nolan's overrated political thrillers masquerading as Batman.

 

So you state your opinion, he states his. And then you give this smart ass reaction? Haha wow.

 

I think it is beyond stupid for have Arkham in the title. Having it in the title of the first 2 games made sense from a story point of view. In this case, it makes no sense whatsoever why Arkham would be in the title other than because WB thinks the game somehow won't sell.

I really fear that this game is mainly being made just to capitalize off Batman's popularity in the video games. My theory is that Rocksteady is working on a big Batman game that is a sequel to AC for the next-gen but needs more time on it so WB decided to release something this year they can make money out of while Rocksteady continues working on the game they're working on. This isn't necessarily a bad thing and doesn't automatically mean the game will suck but it is a red flag for obvious reasons and things like Arkham in the title, Rocksteady & Paul Dini not being involved, and the game being announced so late all points to this theory possibly being true.

As for what we've seen of it, I do think the game looks good so far. I love the visuals and the whole concept for the story. I also think the idea of the story taking place on Christmas Eve is great, especially since I probably won't be able to play this game till Christmas Eve t:. I think Batman looks great but Deathstroke's mask bugs me. Something about his masks gives me the vibe that he was pulled straight out of a half-ass game made by a developer like Activision. The way that mask just sits on his face makes his face look oddly-shaped. It doesn't look like the shape of a head that a normal looking human in this universe would have.

 

Yeah, that's kind of how I feel. But I guess we'll have to see whether or not Arkham is ultimately relevant to the to the story.

And hey, the Arkham games wouldn't exist if it weren't for Nolan's overrated political thrillers. Guess you have something to thank the Vest for, eh?

 

The name of the franchise is basically the "Arkham games", imo, so why not? I'm hoping this makes a great "year one" for Arkham Batman. I'm loving that they're venturing even more into the realm of "being Batman"with the open world, detective missions, Crime-in-progress, etc. I hope that they aren't hasty like the side missions in Arkham City. This new developer still has something to prove, too, but I would like to see a new twist.

 

There's something called "brand equity." Batman has it, yes. But there have been Batman video games in the past. And they've been a mixed-bag. The "Arkham" games have been another animal entirely.

Yes, the "Batman" brand has that equity, but Batman: Arkham Asylum and Batman: Arkham City were both massive hits and Batman: Arkham Origins will take place within the same universe as those games, so why not capitalize on that name cache?

Think of The Dark Knight Rises. Sure, Batman Begins did well at the box office. It road the name of "Batman" (and it's own fine merits) but then The Dark Knight came along and was this whole other thing. It made more than twice the money, Oscars, and acclaim. It exploded. It was a cultural phenomenon. So for the sequel, did the studio tie it more directly with Batman Begins or The Dark Knight? It's just smart business.

It doesn't matter if it doesn't feature Arkham Asylum or Arkham City in this game. It is part of the Batman: Arkham universe. And a game in that universe and identified as such will sell a whole lot more easily than a fresh start, or a game that people don't know is set in the universe that they have now come to love.

-R

 

I said it doesn't make sense from a story point of view; I completely understand why it is there from a business point of view.

However, I don't think TDKR would have made that much less money than what it did had it not had "The Dark Knight" in the title and I don't think this game would've made much less money than what it is going to make had it not had Arkham in the title. I can understand why WB would disagree but I think most people can recognize visually that this takes place in the same universe plus there are still other ways you can advertise it using the Arkham name like attaching a sticker to it that says "The anticipated prequel to the Arkham story!" or releasing all 3 games as a pack similar to how the AMC theatres released the whole TDK Trilogy in theatres or attaching a slogan to it such as "The Arkham saga continues!", etc.

Also, the name is not going to affect the quality of the game in any way but when there is a reason other than business for why the first 2 games have Arkham in the title that this game does not have, it gives off the vibe that the game is only being made to milk the franchise Rocksteady created because Rocksteady is busy with another project at the moment. I'm not saying that this is definitely the case and most of the stuff we saw and heard so far does look good but that is not a good vibe one would want to give when they first announce news about their game.

 

I will say, I was kind of hoping the next Arkham game would be a prequel/early Batman story all along so that part of the news is a plus for me. After reading a bit more, I'll reserve judgement. The bit about "Old Gotham" and "New Gotham" is a nice touch.

I'm sure WB Montreal are going to do their best to deliver a great game, and luckily for them a lot of the foundation has already been laid by Rocksteady, so I basically think it's just their job to not screw it up and deliver a good game to tide us over until Rocksteady comes out with a true sequel.

 

Now that sounds interesting, if they can pull it off.

 

Have they confirmed whether or not Conroy is voicing the role again in this one? I'm assuming he is, but you'd think they would've thrown that in the press release to ease concerns.

 

I prefer he doesn't since this is supposed to be a younger Batman.

 

Conroy's a pro though, he knows how to portray "younger" Batman by going for a slightly higher tone of voice. Guess we'll see.