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

[Iceman]

I don't buy that. For making it a prequel, then maybe. But they focused less on the story because they were working on the MP. They stated that.
GOW2 also came with the end of the PS2 and they worked as hard on that one as they could, specially since they knew how to push the limits of the system. Same here.

But even if it had multiplayer I doubt they'd have cut corners on the single player on a main God of War game. If they're going to experiment let them do it in the side title. Uncharted 3's campaign didn't seem to suffer too much from whatever resources were used up for the multiplayer. The Gears of War single player campaigns don't seem to suffer much from having extensive multiplayer & co-op modes and a 4 player co-op campaign. On the same note I'm not expecting anything huge from Gears Judgment...as it's a side title like Halo: ODST.

 

[Jick]

U3 and Gears' campaigns didn't suffer from the multiplayer but, apparently, GoW already did.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

That's assuming co-op shortened gow .... There's also sequels to games that just simply not as long. It happens

 

[Nathan]

Especially since it's a prequel, where he can't go killing any of the greek gods. Also, at this point, he doesn't have a reason to. It's only natural that the story would be shorter.

 

[Soapy]

Batman Arkham 3: 10 Things It Needs

10. Rocksteady Must Develop It

Disagree. Rocksteady clearly has a great handle on Batman and understand why people like it, but Batman is very popular, I'm sure there are other devs who "get it" too.

9. Save It For Next Gen

Definitely agree. We've seen what a great Batman game looks like on current hardware twice now. Nothing can be gained from using the same hardware a third time.

8. Co-op Multiplayer

Agree. Playing a Batman game co-op would a lot of fun. Anyone who disagrees is just being stubborn.

7. Justice League Cameos

100% vehemently disagree. I detest that Batman is a part of the wider DC Universe and I'll just leave it at that.

6. Vehicles

I have no opinion. If the game world is big enough for vehicles to be an interesting or necessary addition, then okay. If not, then I don't need them put in there "just because".

5. Gotham City

Agree, though it will be a very tough undertaking. The open world structure in Arkham City felt completely pointless to me because they didn't really do anything to take advantage of it. If they were to do a real Gotham City game, then they need to come up with interesting gameplay mechanics and scenarios that justify and take advantage of an open world.

4. No Harley Quinn

Agree. I love the character, but she's been in two games in a row now and without the Joker there doesn't seem to be much point in her hanging around in a meaningful way.

3. Batman and Robin

This seems to be just reiterating number eight on the list. I still agree I guess.

2. Scarecrow Is The Main Villain

Disagree. Scarecrow was a great surprise in Arkham Asylum, and his sections were among the standout moments, but I feel like they went to the well one or two too many times in that game. It also doesn't help that they tried to imitate them in the sequel, but they just weren't as cool the second time around.

1. No More Titan

Agree. Titan has run its course.

Heh, co-op in a Batman game, so utterly inconceivable.

I call Alfred!

 

[craigdbfan]

Rockstar's Batman. I know it would never happen but imagine that.

No one knows crime better than they do. It would be one of the greatest things ever.

 

[Soapy]

If only they knew about good gameplay.

 

[Drz]

100% vehemently disagree. I detest that Batman is a part of the wider DC Universe and I'll just leave it at that.

But the concept of Batman family but the DC universe nowhere being seen would be such a huge stretch. It doesn't have to be the most powerful and colorful characters like Wonder Woman or Superman if you wanna keep things "grounded", but you have characters such as the Question, Green Arrow, Deathstroke, Black Canary to name some examples. I mean, we did see Solomon Grundy & Deadshot, non-Batman villains.

 

[zenith16]

Solom Grundy is from Gotham though and so is Black canary they can work in this and most people know dead shot from being a batman character before he showed up in most other Dc stuff like their tv shows. ask any other Batman fan that knows the comic's.

I do agree how ever if they show other people as "co-op help" the lesser knowns like Green Arrow and Question will work and help Dc in better way since they use this as promotion for their comic's etc . and they've been on that path already. so they should use those ones.

 

[Drz]

they can work in this and most people know dead shot from bea batman character before he showed up in most other Dc stuff like their tv shows.

Well hey we just had a whole Batman: the Brave & the Bold show and we've had plenty of other cartoons showcasing the entire DC universe with all heroes and villains alike from Kamandi the last Boy on earth to Sportsmaster to Batman's most nefarious villain yet:

the Eraser.

 

[Team Andino]

Agree. Playing a Batman game co-op would a lot of fun. Anyone who disagrees is just being stubborn.


100% vehemently disagree. I detest that Batman is a part of the wider DC Universe and I'll just leave it at that.

Some people could say the same thing about your stance on the wider universe.

 

[Soapy]

Okay?

 

[zenith16]

Well hey we just had a whole Batman: the Brave & the Bold show and we've had plenty of other cartoons showcasing the entire DC universe with all heroes and villains alike from Kamandi the last Boy on earth to Sportsmaster to Batman's most nefarious villain yet:

the Eraser.

lol sports master maybe he did seem dangerous in the now canceled young justice animated series. LOl ,But I don't think other people will agree with you on "the Eraser" other then comedy relief. which doesn't happen often when people want villains for this title.

 

[Team Andino]

Okay?

I just found it odd that you could say that if someone doesn't support the multiplayer feature they're being stubborn but since you "vehemently" against a wider universe that it's clearly the only way to go.

 

[jacobed]

As long as they keep the same combat in it, I could careless who makes it. If they change the combat system I won't even bother, simple as that.

 

[TheBat812]

If only they knew about good gameplay.

The irony is that I've never had such a frustrating experience with shooting, but had so much fun in a game. Maybe they'll finally get it all right with GTAV

 

[Naked Shia]

I think coop could be a lot of fun. But I also think MP doesn't take away from the SP, if the developers are serious enough. Take Assassin's Creed III for instance. Regardless of what people think of the game, the SP is huge, and so is the MP.

 

[Naked Shia]

I wouldn't say Rockstar knows nothing about good gameplay. Max Payne 3 was awesome gameplaywise.

 

[hellblazer103]

Rockstar's Batman. I know it would never happen but imagine that.

No one knows crime better than they do. It would be one of the greatest things ever.

grand theft auto : gotham.

based off the brian azzarello/ lee bermejo joker graphic novel.


and it gives you the choice to play the story from johnny's perspective, or joker's.


THAT'D be badass. or maybe i'm just insane.

 

[GREEN =w= DAY]

i would love to know who the hell is developing the new game. that way we get an idea of what we are getting. imagine if it's Naughty Dog

 

[Iceman]

Disagree. Rocksteady clearly has a great handle on Batman and understand why people like it, but Batman is very popular, I'm sure there are other devs who "get it" too.


Definitely agree. We've seen what a great Batman game looks like on current hardware twice now. Nothing can be gained from using the same hardware a third time.


Agree. Playing a Batman game co-op would a lot of fun. Anyone who disagrees is just being stubborn.


100% vehemently disagree. I detest that Batman is a part of the wider DC Universe and I'll just leave it at that.


I have no opinion. If the game world is big enough for vehicles to be an interesting or necessary addition, then okay. If not, then I don't need them put in there "just because".


Agree, though it will be a very tough undertaking. The open world structure in Arkham City felt completely pointless to me because they didn't really do anything to take advantage of it. If they were to do a real Gotham City game, then they need to come up with interesting gameplay mechanics and scenarios that justify and take advantage of an open world.

Agree. I love the character, but she's been in two games in a row now and without the Joker there doesn't seem to be much point in her hanging around in a meaningful way.


This seems to be just reiterating number eight on the list. I still agree I guess.


Disagree. Scarecrow was a great surprise in Arkham Asylum, and his sections were among the standout moments, but I feel like they went to the well one or two too many times in that game. It also doesn't help that they tried to imitate them in the sequel, but they just weren't as cool the second time around.


Agree. Titan has run its course.

Agreed with all on your 1-10 with the exception of 7. Although I can see why people want Batman to be separate. I'd like to see Arkham games continue as a franchise independently of the rest of the DC universe but also have a Justice League / DC Universe franchise with Batman in a major role.

 

[The Caped Knight]

I'm very fearful of Rocksteady's absence from the development of this next game be it threequel or a prequel. What the hell is Warner Bros. doing?

 

[HELL N' SPIDERS]

I think they are trying to capitalize on the success of Asylum and City quickly and since Rocksteady already has prior plans and commitments they are switching teams for the sole purpose of getting a game out there every two years. I am hopeful it will work, but also scared that it won't be as fun or well made.

 

[BatLobster]

This is exactly how I feel.


I also think it may be possible that this upcoming game may not be the sequel to Arkham City but the prequel to Arkham Asylum that was rumored to be in production last year while the sequel to Arkham City is still in production and is being saved for the next console generation. If this is the case, then that's probably why Rocksteady isn't the studio working on the game coming out this year (because they're working on the sequel to AC). Notice how the article never says "Arkham 3". It just says "Next game of this franchise" and all that indicates is that it takes place in the same universe so a prequel or spin-off is a possibility.

It also makes sense to do this from a financial point of view. You still get the sequel to Arkham City down the line with the Rocksteady name attached to it that will guarantee sales but you also release a game in-canon to the Rocksteady Batman universe to have a way to make more money out of the franchise while the long-awaited sequel to AC is in development. Basically an appetizer for both WB and the fans before the next big meal comes. I hope this is the case.

This is the best case scenario. The only thing that worries me is that if Rocksteady is working on the Silver Age Batman title, could they also be working on the next gen Arkham title simultaneously?

But yeah, gotta admit it's weird right now to know there's an Arkham sequel coming without Rocksteady's involvement and no word on Dini's involvement.

 

[Shikamaru]

I don't think they're working on them simultaneously. I think if there is a Silver Age game planned, that's the game coming out this year and it's not made by Rocksteady because, as both WB and Rocksteady have said, they're busy with a different project at the moment (hopefully the sequel to AC).

Maybe WB's plan is to release a Batman game at least once every 2 years. If Rocksteady can't meet that due date, then they'll hire a different studio to work on a different Batman game that can be released by the due date while Rocksteady continues working on the project at hand until they finish it without rushing through it. If this is WB's plan, I'm fine with it as long as we don't get any average to bad Batman games just because WB wants to make money off Batman games every 2 years (which is the case with Activision's Spider-Man games at the moment).