Batman: Arkham Knight - Part 4

[jmc]

hmmm I'd say the reason they rehash stories & don't kill off some characters or have an over use of certain characters is cause they are afraid to loose certain cash cows . the problem is some characters became cash cows cause more talented writers took risks with a good story that was told while others that are of lesser talent see that as a reason to over use certain characters and put far too much energy/ attention into that one character or thing.


like I said once they did right with the golden age with batman to a degree there both death & there were other alliterative like batman becoming commissioner & they let his former sidekicks take over while he helped in other ways and took over in other ways.

It doesn't always have be death, but there are tons of ways with progression & also there's this stubborn I want this character in this same position for ever mentality with some writers & fans that stunting the growth.

captain America / Steve Rogers as director of shield or one of the many directors agenys have more the one in real Life, yeah let bucky should have stayed as cap. If steve Rogers wants to be in the field again have another alias related to the united states, but his rank should be above captain (there are far too many captain's) but still show he's moved on. Seriously why does there have to be alot of captains from the 40/60's any way? that obsession was a bit of weird trend especially now with Carole danvers .


the problem there is alot of the people that grew up with characters from the silver age that are afraid to let go. they leave come back (like casual readers) & say what happened? (when they weren't keeping up or fallowing heavily ) and want things back to the way it was when they read it and it seems like bickering and nothing moves forward or it's reverted back. there's always a way for progression and an alternatives. The problem is some people don't like change at all. but there's always room & death isn't always the only way for permanent progression to have happen.

That change with Bruce Wayne becoming commissioner was a smart move so was bat man incorporated, and the many teams batman made before that are in the books that are the Justice league and batman beyond . there's a happy middle ground there with batman to be explored there . same can be said for alot of other stuff


I don't think comic's are the problem in that they are stuck. it's just some of the certain people running the ships. Cause of how they want things to be, but a verity of stuff can be done still.


Look what happened when the do take risk and are rewarded like when Luke cage was pushed to the for front with marvel for example. I've always said it's a matter of "want and don't want " and most importantly execution.


I will agree though the other mediums are kicking the comic's industry butt these days. I see it all the time. but it's happening to some game makers as well. it just means it doesn't matter what medium it is. What matters is what's done in them .

There is a lot of red tape within the comic world for these characters, the problem is the nature of the medium. For games, TV and movies you can have a definitive story that has an ending, it why Rocksteady can kill off The Joker for real or why Nolan can give Bruce Wayne a life. In comics the nature of the beasts makes it near impossible for any character to truly be removed from the series or for there to ever be an ending to a story. Ideas may come about but they're never pushed as far as they're allowed to for risk of alienating people, too much emphasis on preserving what's there instead of pushing things forward. It's both a corporate issue and a fan issue whereby everyone is trying to find a middle ground to suit several generations of readers, the downside is things move at a slower pace with this arrangement. I'm willing to bet a lot of people at DC would love to have been given the freedom the likes of Rocksteady and Nolan were given. Of course execution is always the most important thing, even the most cliched idea can be given a fresh coat of paint, at the same time other mediums are the ones progressing the mythology more and more than the original source material. In the end though it's probably a good thing that the mythology is no longer bound to the comics, it means Batman is not just a comic character, he's simply a part of our modern mythology.

 

[DeadPresident]

I said this many times before but I think Rocksteady will take the same path as the batman TAS like Mask of the phantasim & Mystery of the Bat woman where they are characters that didn't exist in the comic's & also people he had just met for those stories . Only this time it'll be in video game form . This character will hopefully be an original made one . & will leave a mark to a degree that those animated movie made as well cause they added something as far as characters are concerned .

If they manage to pull that off in AK it'll be very impressive. MOTP is one of the examples of an introduction to a new character being handled very well. The part I'm concerned about though is if it's a new character are they going to have the necessary (possibly lengthy) story-telling time to make people care enough by the time the unveiling occurs?

One reason I think the "new character" thing might be a red herring is people are going to be looking for it as soon as they play the game. They're going to have to have multiple possibilities throughout the game to keep it interesting, otherwise as soon as a new male (could AK be female?) character pops up everybody's first thoughts will be "That's Arkham Knight". IMO, if they want to introduce a new character and have the reveal be significant they'll need to invest a similar amount of cutscene/story time into that character as we saw in a movie like MOTP. Hopefully there will be flashbacks or dreams or something where you interact with this character and build some kind of history for the players.

It would be pretty anticlimactic if they unveil [Random guy with grudge against Batman] that has the resources/training but there's no time dedicated to making people care about why. I'm wondering if it isn't Anarky.

 

[DeadPresident]

The other thing that points to it being an existing character is interviews with the character designers from the game show them saying that the AK is familiar with Batman's history and the events of AA and AC. Which would mean it could be some NPC that we've already encountered throughout those games, possibly in side missions.

The more I listen to how the devs describe AK's personality and his reactions to Batman the more I think this is going to be an adaptation of Under the Red Hood, it sounds like he's a cocky and aggressive guy that's younger than Batman. The possibilities seem limited.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Does Rocksteady consider their games a Trilogy? Ignoring Origins?
Because in Trilogies, most of the time, a story comes full circle.

I'm going by what Randy says in Scream 3

Anyway, the reason I am here is to help you so that my death will not be in vain; That my life's work will save some other poor soul from getting mutilated. If this killer does come back and he's for real, there are a few things that you gotta remember. Is this simply another sequel? Well if it is, same rules apply. But-here's the critical thing-if you find yourself dealing with an unexpected back story and a preponderance of exposition, then the sequel rules DO NOT apply. Because you are not dealing with a sequel, you are dealing with the concluding chapter of a trilogy.
That's right, it's a rarity in the horror field but it does exist, and it is a force to be reckoned with. Because true trilogies are all about going back to the beginning and discovering something that wasn't true from the get go. Godfather, Jedi, all revealed something that we thought was true that wasn't true. So if it is a trilogy you are dealing with, here are some super trilogy rules: 1. You got a killer who's going to be super human. Stabbing him won't work. Shooting him won't work. Basically in the third one you gotta cryogenically freeze his head, decapitate him, or blow him up. 2. Anyone including the main character can die. This means you Bruce. I'm sorry. It's the final chapter. It could be ****ing 'Reservoir Dogs' by the time this thing is through. Number 3. The past will come back to bite you in the ass. Whatever you think you know about the past, forget it. The past is not at rest. Any sins you think were committed in the past are about to break out and destroy you. So in closing, let me say good luck, God speed, and for some of you, I'll see you soon. 'Cause the rules say some of you ain't gonna make it. I didn't, not if you're watching this tape.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Even if not a trilogy, it's still the last Arkham game...all bets are off

 

[The Joker]

Does Rocksteady consider their games a Trilogy? Ignoring Origins?

They consider Origins canon;

'"We definitely consider it canon," Hill says. "There are things through [all] the games, obviously. They have Barbara Gordon in as well and Oracle plays a very key role in our game. So there are things that are connected, for sure. But the events of Asylum and City are actually nearer to the events of Knight so it's easier to tie in to those events."'

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/featu...tudios-comments-on-batman-arkham-origins.aspx

 

[jmc]

If they manage to pull that off in AK it'll be very impressive. MOTP is one of the examples of an introduction to a new character being handled very well. The part I'm concerned about though is if it's a new character are they going to have the necessary (possibly lengthy) story-telling time to make people care enough by the time the unveiling occurs?

One reason I think the "new character" thing might be a red herring is people are going to be looking for it as soon as they play the game. They're going to have to have multiple possibilities throughout the game to keep it interesting, otherwise as soon as a new male (could AK be female?) character pops up everybody's first thoughts will be "That's Arkham Knight". IMO, if they want to introduce a new character and have the reveal be significant they'll need to invest a similar amount of cutscene/story time into that character as we saw in a movie like MOTP. Hopefully there will be flashbacks or dreams or something where you interact with this character and build some kind of history for the players.

It would be pretty anticlimactic if they unveil [Random guy with grudge against Batman] that has the resources/training but there's no time dedicated to making people care about why. I'm wondering if it isn't Anarky.

The other possibility is we never find out who AK actually is. I get what you're saying, but I also think that even if what you describe eventuates it's far better an option than dragging out some existing character as AK, at the very least we might get a new interesting character.

 

[Rodrigo90]

He's probably a machine under the control of somebody

 

[Rodrigo90]

They consider Origins canon;

'"We definitely consider it canon," Hill says. "There are things through [all] the games, obviously. They have Barbara Gordon in as well and Oracle plays a very key role in our game. So there are things that are connected, for sure. But the events of Asylum and City are actually nearer to the events of Knight so it's easier to tie in to those events."'

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/featu...tudios-comments-on-batman-arkham-origins.aspx

Then I guess they consider AA, AC and AK their storyline trilogy. With AO being in the background.
Like they wouldn't use AO as a full circle sort of thing.

I'm curious with this game. It is the last of the Arkham games. And so you're left wondering, who will live and who will die and will this tie back to AA?

 

[DeadPresident]

The other possibility is we never find out who AK actually is. I get what you're saying, but I also think that even if what you describe eventuates it's far better an option than dragging out some existing character as AK, at the very least we might get a new interesting character.

It's possible, but I find it unlikely. I feel like since the announcement of the game both public attention and the details released by the studio have been focusing on AK's identity. If they don't actually reveal who he is or only hint to it the reaction would be worse than if it's a lame character or badly executed.

The danger for them is that the writing needs to be really good for this not to come off as an episode of Scooby Doo. A completely new character (what everyone seems to be expecting) is somewhat unfamiliar territory for the Batman stories of late. If it turns out to be a new character, it'll have to be well done. If they make it an existing character people are going to feel cheated or even see it coming unless they adapt an existing character in a different way.

It'll seem stupid if the reveal is out of nowhere, without any sort of discussion beforehand, but it's the route they may have to take if they don't want to give it away half way into the game. I'm intrigued to see how they'll handle it, it could go either way.

 

[LEVITIKUZ]

Then I guess they consider AA, AC and AK their storyline trilogy. With AO being in the background.
Like they wouldn't use AO as a full circle sort of thing.

I'm curious with this game. It is the last of the Arkham games. And so you're left wondering, who will live and who will die and will this tie back to AA?

I'm thinking the game will end at Arkham. End where you began.

 

[Rodrigo90]

That would be interesting.

Who reckons the Arkham Knight is Frank Boles?

 

[hafizbat]

Man, this game has to end at Arkham Asylum.

They killed off the Joker in AC, which I thought was pretty extreme. Does anyone else think they might even kill off Batman in a last heroic act? Or Alfred...

Whatever the ending is, it's going to be a big bang, I'm sure.

 

[hafizbat]

It's been pretty quiet from Rocksteady since they announced the release date. When can we expect new info or another trailer?

 

[Rodrigo90]

Is the Arkham Knight out to kill the villains?
I think anyone of them could end up dead.

I really wouldn't be surprised if Batman dies either.

 

[TheVileOne]

Is the Arkham Knight out to kill the villains?
I think anyone of them could end up dead.

I really wouldn't be surprised if Batman dies either.

He's a mercenary. When we meet him in the game, he's working for the Scarecrow.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Ah. So he's aiding the villains?

I really have no idea who he is then

JPV and Jason Todd are vigilantes, so it can't be them, I don't think.
and he has all this Milatary like gear, that's helping the villains and attacking Batman

He knows a lot, calls him "old man" (potentially indicating youth and the phrase can also mean "father")
The League of Assassins usually have that kind of heavy hardware.
Arkham Knight could be Damian...

Probably just is what he apparently is, a new character.

 

[LEVITIKUZ]

That would be interesting.

Who reckons the Arkham Knight is Frank Boles?

Won't lie. I have considered that. I also thought his voice in the leak footaged sounded like Aaron Cash a bit.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Man, this game has to end at Arkham Asylum.

They killed off the Joker in AC, which I thought was pretty extreme. Does anyone else think they might even kill off Batman in a last heroic act? Or Alfred...

Whatever the ending is, it's going to be a big bang, I'm sure.

My expectation: Harley will die.
AC has a big scale of villains killed, Joker, Clayface, Hugo Strange, and Ra's AlGhul (not Raysh, Raas. His name is Ogre's Head, not feathers).
Not sure if I should include Solomon Grundy.

 

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

So... we're all expecting the game to end on Arkham Island where The Joker is revealed as the big bad?

 

[zenith16]

lol How ever it ends I'm sure it'll be with Batman headed to his next case or batman being called by super man & man hunter cause the league needs via radio com or telepathy. & that's all will see/ hear from superman. killing off Batman it over done to a degree with some of the other mediums starting with some of the comic's. And people/ some certain fans will be weird about it.

 

[LEVITIKUZ]

This is Rocksteady's FINAL Batman game. If done right like how the Ultimate universe killed off Peter Parker, people will love it.

 

[RedIsNotBlue]

Whether Arkham Knight ends up being a pre-existing character or not I am sure there will be at least one major red herring. Just to throw even more random AK speculation fuel to the fire what about the possibility of them doing a Long Halloween scenario where

Spoiler

multiple villains end up being Arkham Knight?

 

[Bruce Malone]

Even if not a trilogy, it's still the last Arkham game...all bets are off

It is Rocksteady's trilogy and they consider it such. While they don't discount Origins, from interviews it is clear the story they set out to tell has gone from Asylum to City and now Knight. So they consider Origins WB montreal's story that happened to be set in the universe they created.

 

[terry78]

I know Dini wrote the last two, but are they just using their own in house people to craft this story or what?