Batman: Arkham Origins - Part 4

[MarvelWarrior]

http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2013/10/batman_arkham_origins_and_blackgate_delayed_in_europe

 

[Shikamaru]

Apart from being underused, I don't think any of the characterizations were bad other than Bane's.

 

[Two-Face=Badass]

Apart from being underused, I don't think any of the characterizations were bad other than Bane's.

Really? Even Catwoman and Two-Face?

 

[Jick]

Yes. They were like slightly different take on the characters, but their core is still there.
As for Bane, he was just a rampaging brute.

One of the reasons I'm not *****ing about Bane in AO is because they seem to be doing right, this time. This seems to be the Bane I wanted.

 

[Two-Face=Badass]

Yeah, Bane looks great. Very much looking forward to him in the game.

Catwoman and Two-Face were my only real disappointments in terms of characterisation in the Arkham games. Two-Face for being a cheap thug with a 'two' gimmick and no underlying depth, and Catwoman for being purely a pun-spouting flirt with likewise not much character underneath. She has what, all of one scene to demonstrate there is more to her as a person than a sexy cat thief?

What makes it weird is that Paul Dini is among the few writers to really 'get' Selina, just look at his detective comics run and the conclusion to Heart of Hush, which makes me think other forces above him as a writer mandated the pure sex kitten angle over something more nuanced.

 

[Shikamaru]

Really? Even Catwoman and Two-Face?

Really? I found nothing wrong with them. I'm kinda surprised tbh.

There are some that I thought could have been done better (i.e. Deadshot and Zsasz in Arkham Asylum) but that's different from them being bad. None of them were bad IMO (except Bane). I really liked the vast majority of characterizations.

 

[The Joker]

Really? Even Catwoman and Two-Face?

There was nothing wrong with their characterizations.

 

[zeptron]

Yes. They were like slightly different take on the characters, but their core is still there.
As for Bane, he was just a rampaging brute.

One of the reasons I'm not *****ing about Bane in AO is because they seem to be doing right, this time. This seems to be the Bane I wanted.

Yeah, looks like Bane is finally getting some justice in this franchise. Beforehand most adaptations didn't display his intelligence and he was mainly dumb muscle. The only exceptions I can think of are TDKR(despite how some people feel about his appearance and not being pumped on Venom) and maybe his ending in Injustice.

 

[Shikamaru]

Yeah, Bane looks great. Very much looking forward to him in the game.

Catwoman and Two-Face were my only real disappointments in terms of characterisation in the Arkham games. Two-Face for being a cheap thug with a 'two' gimmick and no underlying depth, and Catwoman for being purely a pun-spouting flirt with likewise not much character underneath. She has what, all of one scene to demonstrate there is more to her as a person than a sexy cat thief?

What makes it weird is that Paul Dini is among the few writers to really 'get' Selina, just look at his detective comics run and the conclusion to Heart of Hush, which makes me think other forces above him as a writer mandated the pure sex kitten angle over something more nuanced.

Two-Face didn't come off as a thug to me. He was one of the major mob bosses in Arkham City, even though he wasn't seen much in the game. I also don't remember much of a 'two' gimmick other than Batman briefly mentioning something about that when tracking Catwoman down. As for him having no depth, I don't see what depth you could have given him with the screen time he got. There is a huge difference between no depth and not enough screen time.

As for Catwoman, again, I thought she fit the specific story at hand and there wasn't a lot you could do with her other than just, basically, letting her be Catwoman and have her having fun in Arkham City. Plus I thought the tapes added depth to her and to her relationship with Batman.

I think the difference between you and me is how we view these games as a whole. I didn't have a problem with characters like Two-Face not having enough screen time due to the way I look at these films. In my mind, these are comic book stories in a video game and could fit into the actual comics in terms of look, feel, tone, and characterizations. Arkham Asylum felt like it could have been a Batman graphic novel while Arkham City felt like it could have been a big Batman event. Due to that, the reason I didn't mind Two-Face not having enough screen time is because, in my mind, he had development in previous stories and can always appear in the next issue after the Arkham City story arc, even though there is technically no "next issue" since it's a video game. Basically, I don't have a problem with Two-Face getting so little screen time for the same reason I wouldn't have a problem with him getting little screen time if the next arc after Zero Year opened with Batman stopping one of Two-Face's schemes only for him to not play a big part in the arc after that.

On the other hand, I did have a problem with Two-Face having little screen time in something like The Dark Knight. This was because Nolan's universe was clearly a separate one from the comic universe and it didn't feel like it could take place in the main DC universe in the comics, thus I didn't get the "Two-Face can always appear in the next issue coming out next month" mentality.

 

[The Caped Knight]

Really? Even Catwoman and Two-Face?

I found nothing wrong with them at all, their characterizations was typically as I expected. Selina was out to further her own goals as a result of Arkham City. Harvey was trying to get himself established as a major player in Arkham City against Joker & Penguin.

 

[Two-Face=Badass]

Interesting view you hold Shikamaru. I understand what you say, but my general sentiment is that if something can not be given enough to time, it should not have been included. That's economy of storytelling 101, and it applies to every medium, be it comicbooks or movies or games. Two-Face was in the game because the developers wanted him there, even though it turned out to be to the detriment of the character because there was no room for him to be properly established or developed.

I don't get how people can say there was nothing wrong in Two-Face's characterisation however. There was barely any trace of Harvey in him. And you might as well call him one-face if there isn't a trace of good in him, since its pretty much central to him as a character.

 

[Shikamaru]

Interesting view you hold Shikamaru. I understand what you say, but my general sentiment is that if something can not be given enough to time, it should not have been included. That's economy of storytelling 101, and it applies to every medium, be it comicbooks or movies or games. Two-Face was in the game because the developers wanted him there, even though it turned out to be to the detriment of the character because there was no room for him to be properly established or developed.

Fair enough. To each his own. I'm just saying that I felt as if I have already seen these characters be developed due to how comic booky the whole universe feels.

I don't get how people can say there was nothing wrong in Two-Face's characterisation however. There was barely any trace of Harvey in him. And you might as well call him one-face if there isn't a trace of good in him, since its pretty much central to him as a character.

We saw the two sides arguing over whether or not to kill Catwoman in the beginning. Plus some writers, including Dini, have portrayed the darker side as being the stronger side most of the time.

 

[Two-Face=Badass]

We saw the two sides arguing over whether or not to kill Catwoman in the beginning. Plus some writers, including Dini, have portrayed the darker side as being the stronger side most of the time.

Yes, but the debate was over whether to kill her or subject her to a Stalinist show trial. Doesn't exactly gel with the whole obsession with fairness thing.


But I utterly understand where you are coming from. The strengths of these games far outweigh their weaknesses. It's a pity I was never a Joker fan, I could have far more satisfied.


On a more positive notes, with little time to go, here's one of my favourite Shiva moments from comics, which is hopefully a bit like her characterisation in the game:

Spoiler

 

[GamerSlyRatchet]

Yeah, Bane looks great. Very much looking forward to him in the game.

Catwoman and Two-Face were my only real disappointments in terms of characterisation in the Arkham games. Two-Face for being a cheap thug with a 'two' gimmick and no underlying depth, and Catwoman for being purely a pun-spouting flirt with likewise not much character underneath. She has what, all of one scene to demonstrate there is more to her as a person than a sexy cat thief?

What makes it weird is that Paul Dini is among the few writers to really 'get' Selina, just look at his detective comics run and the conclusion to Heart of Hush, which makes me think other forces above him as a writer mandated the pure sex kitten angle over something more nuanced.

I'd disagree with Selina for a bit. Yeah, she started out cringeworthy and shallow, but playing alongside her quest, she does have established relationships to other characters and has a specific goal. Hell, her saving Batman was a nice bit of characterization and showed how she really cared about it. She's not the type of person to wear her emotions on her sleeve, so she didn't have any dramatic scenes about it, but they were able to show that just fine.

Agreed with Two-Face, though. He was just a dumb thug with a gimmick. I honestly think they should have saved him for the third game and had Black Mask fill out his role as Catwoman's enemy.

 

[Rodrigo90]

That would've been so great.

For Two-Face to have been in Black Mask's role for this game. Bruce's former friend and Gotham hero placing the bounty on Batman.

And it would've made more sense for Black Mask to have been in Two-Face's role in AC.

Never mind.

 

[Shikamaru]

That wouldn't make sense since Harvey Dent isn't scarred at this point in his career. The scarring happens after the "rise of freaks", which in this game will be after Christmas Eve.

 

[Shikamaru]

Yes, but the debate was over whether to kill her or subject her to a Stalinist show trial. Doesn't exactly gel with the whole obsession with fairness thing.

It wasn't. This is the exact dialogue:

Good Harvey: "The only way to get by in this place is to get ourselves some respect."
Bad Harvey: "Fear. That's how we get respect. Show them all how we do things."
Good Harvey: "We should be fair though. This is a place of justice after all."
Bad Harvey: "Screw justice. Kill her and they'll all fear us."

Sounds to me like Good Harvey believes killing Catwoman is wrong and that he wants people to see he still has the respect and integrity he had when he was a district attorney. Letting Catwoman go would be the first small step on a long road to redemption in his mind. A redemption he always seeks that always gets suppressed by Bad Harvey who always sends him back to square one.

On the other hand, Bad Harvey just wanted her dead and told Good Harvey he could shove his justice and moral views where the sun doesn't shine because he wants to rule throughout Arkham City with fear and intimidation.

That's how I always saw it.

 

[badgrammar]

Really? Even Catwoman and Two-Face?

Catwoman had her own Freaking DLC quest. How could you be upset with that? That is like you being angry at life for finding a 5 dollar bill instead of a 20 dollar bill.

 

[Nathan]

I actually get annoyed when I have to play the Catwoman bits. I just want to continue Bat's adventure, and then I have to make some tedious detour, before I can continue.

 

[badgrammar]

And don't tell me that I should be happy with Bane in AA and AC, because I consider that to be the equivalent to finding dog **** under my sneaker.

 

[badgrammar]

I actually get annoyed when I have to play the Catwoman bits. I just want to continue Bat's adventure, and then I have to make some tedious detour, before I can continue.

I don't remember you had or were forced to play as her. Do you?? It's been a long time since playing that game.

 

[Nathan]

No, you have to play as her, when you have the DLC installed. Or own the GOTY/PC version. There's no way around it. That was one of the parts that majorly pissed me off. I beat the game, wanted to dive right back into Gotham and do all the optional stuff, but had to beat Two-Face as Catwoman first, before I could switch back to Batman.

 

[Shikamaru]

I loved playing as Catwoman. It was a nice break from Batman to a new style. I enjoyed both.

And don't tell me that I should be happy with Bane in AA and AC, because I consider that to be the equivalent to finding dog **** under my sneaker.

lol

 

[badgrammar]

By the way, I am also a Two-Face fan. I love his characterization in the game, but felt disappointed on how much he was used in the game. AC to Two-Face fans is like the equivalent to boba fett fans watching the original Return of the Jedi movie.

 

[DareDemon]

I thought Two-Face was fine, he just wasn't in the game very much. I don't see how that makes him a bad character. This will be less popular, but Bane as well. We saw him for ten seconds in each game, did we even have enough time for him to have a chance at showing his intelligence?

Catwoman, while being forced to play her on all my playthroughs and not really liking her, was my least favorite but I don't care much for Catwoman anyway. She's overly sexual in a lot of incarnations, I can't say the game is wrong for her portrayal.