New Batman game set entirely in Gotham's iconic madhouse. By Kris Pigna, 08/13/2008 Tired of waiting for Electronic Arts to figure out what to do with their Dark Knight game? Let Eidos comfort you in their warm embrace -- in the latest issue of Game Informer, the publisher has announced Batman: Arkham Asylum, a new game based generally on the Batman comics (NeoGAF, via Kotaku).
By "based generally," that is to say Eidos owns the rights to the Batman comics (while EA owns the rights to the Batman movies), but Batman: Arkham Asylum isn't specifically based on the graphic novel of the same name. Rather, it'll reportedly pull from all 70 years of comic history, with an original story crafted by Paul Dini (who served as a writer, producer, and editor for Batman: The Animated Series), and artwork and character designs by DC Comics studio Wildstorm.
The game is in fact set entirely in Arkham, which Batman has to invade after The Joker takes it over. There will be plenty of other characters in the game, including classic villains such as The Riddler, Penguin, Scarecrow, and Killer Croc, and with Commissioner Gordon and his daughter, Barbara, serving as allies. According to a NeoGAF member's report of the Game Informer article, the persistent yet enclosed setting supposedly gives the game more of a BioShock or Chronicles or Riddick feel, as opposed to the usual open-world superhero games. It's running on Unreal Engine 3, and is played from a third-person, over-the-shoulder view, with emphasis both on combat and detective work.
The fighting system works with just three buttons -- attack, stun, and throw. There will also be stealth (or as the developers call it, "predatory") elements to the action, and some boss fights will even incorporate Zelda-like puzzle solving, with Batman needing to use his gadgets in certain ways to take down foes. The detective elements will also focus on puzzle solving, with gameplay features similar to Metroid Prime's scanner visor -- Batman will use a visor that'll highlight "points of interest," as well as forensic devices that, as one example, will allow him to detect and follow trails of fingerprints.
BioShock, Metroid Prime, Zelda -- those are some lofty names to be dropping, but all the elements that Arkham Asylum seems to be borrowing do sound like the ingredients of a great Batman game, and it seems like a lot of thought has gone into fitting them together. The game's not set for release until sometime in 2009 (for PS3, 360, and PC), so there's plenty of time to hope that Eidos will be able to pull it all off.
batman don't have a stellar, rated A record, but they're not all garbage. at worst, many of them get lost in a sea of mediocrity.
i really liked the animated series game on the SNES and the two on gamecube, so there's definite potential for them being good. the movie-based ones on the NES and SNES were pretty good, though they got a little tedious, but thats a general commentary on a ton of 8/16 bit games. i thought batman begins was pretty poor, as was batman forever and batman and robin. there was another comic-based one for the gamecube whose name i can't remember (dark tomorrow?) but that was pretty bad.
no idea what to expect from this one -- we dont really know what type of game it'll be, nor have we even seen a screen shot. im a big paul dini fan, so thats at least a good start.
i will say i find it pretty amazing that there's no "the dark knight" game yet. this might be the first blockbuster to not have a subsequent game in years.
i will say i find it pretty amazing that there's no "the dark knight" game yet. this might be the first blockbuster to not have a subsequent game in years.
It's cause of the late release date of the Begins game. That and poor sales of recent movie adaptations...uh...to video games.
Adventures of Batman and Robin for SNES was really fun.
Batman Returns for SNES was ok but got boring quick, i think it was one of those games that wouldn't let you save progress so you had to start over when you died.
Batman Vengeance for PS2 was great, like playing new episodes of TAS. And fun.
Batman Dark Tomorrow for XBox was shit. terrible controls, fixed cameras that made walking down a hallway difficult. I didn't get past the first level or so. just too annoying.
Batman Begins was fun, but at times the stealth aspect got a bit boring. but overall it was an interesting game. not great, but interesting.
They're making a Dark Knight game to coincide with the DVD release. I really hope there is some free roaming to it. Ever since Spider-man 2 I have wanted a good DC game with free roam like that. Superman Returns did that but didn't have much non-game content to keep things interesting, Batman would be perfect with a GTA type game.
Originally Posted By: Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man
I have wanted a good DC game with free roam like that. Superman Returns did that but didn't have much non-game content to keep things interesting, Batman would be perfect with a GTA type game.
Totally! I thought the same things when I read about this mediocre game they're talking about. I do not know, or understand, the financial and legal aspects as to why DC or Marvel haven't gone to Rockstar and begged them to do a free-roaming Marvel New York or DCU. It just seems obvious to me. Can you imagine how awesome a comic-based game with the graphics and detailed style of GTAIV? My god, it would sell trillions...
The Dread Pirate Westley argumentative User only mostly dead 300+ posts Wed Aug 13 2008 10:34 PM Reading a post Forum: Arcade Room Thread: Batman: Arkham Asylum
i will say i find it pretty amazing that there's no "the dark knight" game yet. this might be the first blockbuster to not have a subsequent game in years.
It's cause of the late release date of the Begins game. That and poor sales of recent movie adaptations...uh...to video games.
EA shit the bed with the game. They were making it to release with the movie, but it sucked.
MisterJLA talkative Moderator Epic Take Maker 15000+ posts Wed Aug 13 2008 11:10 PM Making a new reply Forum: Arcade Room Thread: Re: Batman: Arkham Asylum
Originally Posted By: Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man
I have wanted a good DC game with free roam like that. Superman Returns did that but didn't have much non-game content to keep things interesting, Batman would be perfect with a GTA type game.
Totally! I thought the same things when I read about this mediocre game they're talking about. I do not know, or understand, the financial and legal aspects as to why DC or Marvel haven't gone to Rockstar and begged them to do a free-roaming Marvel New York or DCU. It just seems obvious to me. Can you imagine how awesome a comic-based game with the graphics and detailed style of GTAIV? My god, it would sell trillions...
in all fairness, Marvel has the Spider-man free roam games. They're really detailed, have lots of side things to do and crimes to stop, and Ultimate has human torch races. But yeah, they both need to crank out free roam games. I'm hoping that's what the MMORPG will be.
Originally Posted By: Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man
I have wanted a good DC game with free roam like that. Superman Returns did that but didn't have much non-game content to keep things interesting, Batman would be perfect with a GTA type game.
Totally! I thought the same things when I read about this mediocre game they're talking about. I do not know, or understand, the financial and legal aspects as to why DC or Marvel haven't gone to Rockstar and begged them to do a free-roaming Marvel New York or DCU. It just seems obvious to me. Can you imagine how awesome a comic-based game with the graphics and detailed style of GTAIV? My god, it would sell trillions...
You guys do realise that the last few Spidey movie games were free roam yeah? They were also pretty shitty!
Originally Posted By: Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man
Originally Posted By: Prometheus
Originally Posted By: Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man
I have wanted a good DC game with free roam like that. Superman Returns did that but didn't have much non-game content to keep things interesting, Batman would be perfect with a GTA type game.
Totally! I thought the same things when I read about this mediocre game they're talking about. I do not know, or understand, the financial and legal aspects as to why DC or Marvel haven't gone to Rockstar and begged them to do a free-roaming Marvel New York or DCU. It just seems obvious to me. Can you imagine how awesome a comic-based game with the graphics and detailed style of GTAIV? My god, it would sell trillions...
in all fairness, Marvel has the Spider-man free roam games. They're really detailed, have lots of side things to do and crimes to stop, and Ultimate has human torch races. But yeah, they both need to crank out free roam games. I'm hoping that's what the MMORPG will be.
Originally Posted By: Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man
Originally Posted By: Prometheus
Originally Posted By: Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man
I have wanted a good DC game with free roam like that. Superman Returns did that but didn't have much non-game content to keep things interesting, Batman would be perfect with a GTA type game.
Totally! I thought the same things when I read about this mediocre game they're talking about. I do not know, or understand, the financial and legal aspects as to why DC or Marvel haven't gone to Rockstar and begged them to do a free-roaming Marvel New York or DCU. It just seems obvious to me. Can you imagine how awesome a comic-based game with the graphics and detailed style of GTAIV? My god, it would sell trillions...
in all fairness, Marvel has the Spider-man free roam games. They're really detailed, have lots of side things to do and crimes to stop, and Ultimate has human torch races. But yeah, they both need to crank out free roam games. I'm hoping that's what the MMORPG will be.
I had actually forgotten about the Spider-Man games, as they're not at all realistic, or on the level of GTA. But, you're right, it is free-roam. I don't know, though. It just seems too weak. I want a game where I have virtual freedom. Where I can do anything in either identity (what if I wanted to send Batman out into Gotham without the mask? I want to be able to do that). As for side-missions or whatever, I'd love it if you're, say, running across the moonlit rooftops, and you hear/see a small explosion about four or five blocks away. And instead of it being this directed mission, or even one of those Green Blips Spider-Man had, it was just happening in real-time and you could choose to go over and assist/investigate or not. Total freedom.
I guess I want the fantasy Marvel or DCU game-meets-Oblivion-meets-GTAIV-meets-Army of Two. I want a damn epic comic book universe inspired game for a modern console...
Eidos and Warner Bros. have confirmed that Mark Hamill, the voice of The Joker in Batman: The Animated Series, will reprise his sadistically animated take on the Clown Prince of Crime in Batman: Arkham Asylum. Additionally, the Caped Crusader himself will be voiced by Kevin Conroy, recognized as the voice of Batman in numerous animated series and games.
While we remain largely undecided regarding Rocksteady Studios' "graphically distinct" take on Bruce Wayne's alter ego (spoiler! - Ed.), today's news brings us dangerously close to being pulled off the fence as we continue to wait for Batman: Arkham Asylum to ship next summer for the Xbox 360, PS3 and PC.
i knew about dini, and he's awesome, so that was awesome. but i haven't been overly impressed with his comic book take, so i didn't know what i'd think with this "realistic" comic game. however, also getting hamill and conroy in on the mix instantly bumps it up another few notches.
Eidos and Warner Bros. have confirmed that Mark Hamill, the voice of The Joker in Batman: The Animated Series, will reprise his sadistically animated take on the Clown Prince of Crime in Batman: Arkham Asylum. Additionally, the Caped Crusader himself will be voiced by Kevin Conroy, recognized as the voice of Batman in numerous animated series and games.
While we remain largely undecided regarding Rocksteady Studios' "graphically distinct" take on Bruce Wayne's alter ego (spoiler! - Ed.), today's news brings us dangerously close to being pulled off the fence as we continue to wait for Batman: Arkham Asylum to ship next summer for the Xbox 360, PS3 and PC.
AWESOME-O
Although I'd feel more comfortable if Paul Jenkins was writing the story instead of Dini. Then I could say I had two Jenkins games in my library--Assuing AA turns out well of course.
It may take a bit longer for the Caped Crusader to round up his Rogue Gallery in Batman: Arkham Asylum, as "sources close to the game" tell Game Informer that the title has been pushed back from its expected June release until sometime later this year.
Despite impressing us earlier this year, the unspecified sources tell Game Informer than the game will now ship sometime in 2009's fourth quarter. If true, and while disappointing, the delay will give us more time to work on work on our Batarang hurling technique. Neither Eidos nor Warner Bros. have reportedly offered a comment on the cause behind the delay, though we have reached out to both ourselves for more.
Ahhh, Eidos and Warner Bros. Interactive confirmed it. Dang! Although it frees up more time for InFamous, Prototype, Wolverine, and maybe Ghostbusters.
Batman: Arkham Asylum Gets Dated Written Friday, May 29, 2009 by James Parkin
Remember when Batman: Arkham Asylum was delayed? No? C'mon now, don't you read the news on X360A? Well, at the beginning of the month Eidos officially stated that Batman: Arkham Asylum was in fact delayed, and would no longer be released in June like planned. Horrible news for gamers and fans of the renegade hero.
Thankfully, in Eidos' E3 line-up news we posted earlier, Eidos let slip the new release date. "The game will be available in North America August 25th and throughout Europe August 28th."
While it's not as good as a June release, at least we don't have to wait until the holiday season.
Thank you. I have always wanted to "play with your box". I imagine it would feel really good to hold your "joystick" in my hands, and assumed that it would allow me to "push all the right buttons" and we could stay up till the wee hours of the morning playing "co-op" and a little "deathmatch" here and there. After all that time playing videogames maybe we'll have sex.
What's with the goofy grin? Did you dip into the jar of Smilex, or are you just giddy that playing as the Joker in Batman: Arkham Asylum won't cost you a dime?
Eidos has confirmed that the PS3-exclusive DLC will be free, allowing players to frolic about in the game's challenge maps as the Clown Prince of Crime when Batman: Arkham Asylum swoops onto store shelves this August.
What's with the goofy grin? Did you dip into the jar of Smilex, or are you just giddy that playing as the Joker in Batman: Arkham Asylum won't cost you a dime?
Eidos has confirmed that the PS3-exclusive DLC will be free, allowing players to frolic about in the game's challenge maps as the Clown Prince of Crime when Batman: Arkham Asylum swoops onto store shelves this August.
So the question has to be, why not just include it in the game anyway?
But thats no reason why they couldnt have just included it in the game. Dont forget the Spiderman 3 game on the PS3 could be bought from certain game shops in the US with the Goblin as a playable character on the special edition version, but later made it downloadable for the standard version.
If they were gonna charge for the Joker, then I understand why they are making it downloadable, but as its a freeby, they might as well have included it with the game.
E3 2009: Batman: Arkham Asylum Hands-On The Dark Knight has a poor bedside manner. by Hilary Goldstein June 2, 2009 - Batman: Arkham Asylum is one of the most anticipated titles of the summer and after a long wait, I finally had a chance to play it. Thanks, E3 2009!
Set inside of Arkham Asylum, which has been overrun by its psychopathic inmates, the latest Batman game holds the promise of finally doing the Dark Knight justice. This is not a mindless beat-em-up. Instead, Arkham Asylum requires you to play Batman similarly to how he's portrayed in the recent films. To survive, you must sneak up on enemies and take them out silently. That might mean moving through an air duct to get at your enemies backside or using your grappling hook to gain elevation before dropping down on enemies. Your reward for using these gameplay tactics are quick knockouts. Go in Batarangs blazing and you're going to die pretty quickly.
This is perfectly demonstrated in the E3 demo build of Arkham Asylum. Mr. Zsasz has taken a hostage and strapped him to an electric chair. If he sees Batman coming, he'll kill the poor man. To get to him, I had to run up some stairs to get to the observation deck. From there I switched on the detection vision. This unlimited resource highlights enemies (even through walls) and any interactive object. This includes the numerous gargoyle statues you can grapple.
From the higher station, Batman has some contextual options. He can hang from the statue, glide down, glide kick a targeted enemy or perform a special drop and snag attack. Or you can keep zipping around on different objects.
Mr. Zsasz is a pushover so long as you drop behind him. Knock him down and you can perform a ground attack that takes him out. It's just a teaching tool, to get players used to the system. And it's necessary for the section that follows.
Now sooner is Mr. Zsasz in la-la land than Harley Quinn appears on a monitor. This Harley is not quite like the one that debuted in Batman: The Animated Series. She's more frazzled and a little less of a cartoon. I like her a lot. She's threatening someone else. She thinks she's sealed Batman in, but that's not so. There are air ducts throughout Arkham and a detective with a sharp eye can spot them.
From the demo, it seems that there is almost always a direct option for an objective and a stealthy solution. After you get past Harley you come across a large, multi-tiered room with numerous patrolling enemies. If you charge in, you will die. Trust me. I charged in and died. Anytime you face enemies with guns, you have to divide and conquer. Even if you quickly take down one enemy, if two more spot you and start shooting, you won't last long.
The trick is to move along the upper tier and slowly pick them off one or two at a time. It's definitely a very different gameplay style for a Batman game. Sure, there's still a hand-to-hand combat system, but it can't be relied upon all of the time.
The demo ends after the room is cleared, with the Joker making a threat and releasing some sort of abomination at Batman.
There are some elements of Arkham Asylum I really dig. The stealth aspects and the fun gadgets are solid and the visuals are impressive. But there's something about this Batman game that just seems off. It might be that when walking around Batman takes up half the screen or that the camera swings with each punch thrown. It's great to have a Batman game with great production value and well-thought out gameplay, but Warner Bros. needs to reexamine its camera and default perspective. Fortunately, there's still time before this releases for some minor tweaks.
It's true, you can snag Batman: Arkham Asylum from Amazon for only $47.99. There's no need to pull out your handy Bat-Price-Reducer either. You need only place a pre-order for the Xbox 360 or PS3 version. Then, at checkout, simply enter the code 5OFFARKM for five smackers off Amazon's asking price of $52.99. Using free shipping, that's a brand new copy for $48. Even better, using the same coupon, the PC version can be had for only $40.
That's a deal only the Joker could refuse. After all, saving money is no laughing matter.
9.3 - Batman: Arkham Asylum is the greatest comic book videogame of all time. This is an adult Dark Knight story that is well-told, packs some truly fun gameplay elements, has topnotch voice talent, and feel like it's part of Batman cannon. If I have to nitpick, I wish the cutscenes looked better as they can distract from the tale and that the AI was a bit more responsive, but those are tiny flaws that shouldn't distract from the big picture.
Rocksteady nailed what Batman is supposed to feel like. Fans, rejoice.
I read that it only takes 12 hours to achieve everything possible in the game...that's not a ton of replay value. Best Buy and Toys R Us have good deals on the game this week, though...
Looks like I am gonna get a big fat bonus with this one. I preordered the special edition version months ago, and Amazon.co.uk had it up for £55. It doesnt come out here til the 28th, but they have already upped the price to £100. Luckily the pre-order price promise comes into effect, so I still get it at the price I pre-ordered it at (plus free one day postage of course).
Hope I dont have to wait as long as I had to do with the GTA IV special edition, where it took the courier til nearly 4pm to deliver it!
Looks like I am gonna get a big fat bonus with this one. I preordered the special edition version months ago, and Amazon.co.uk had it up for £55. It doesnt come out here til the 28th, but they have already upped the price to £100. Luckily the pre-order price promise comes into effect, so I still get it at the price I pre-ordered it at (plus free one day postage of course).
Hope I dont have to wait as long as I had to do with the GTA IV special edition, where it took the courier til nearly 4pm to deliver it!
Today the highly anticipated Batman: Arkham Asylum™ game has been awarded a Guinness World Record for the ‘Most Critically Acclaimed Superhero Game Ever’.
Batman: Arkham Asylum has been given top scores across the board from National newspapers and specialist game reviewers. The game has broken the Guinness World Record in this category by achieving the highest average score of 91.67 from reviews around the world.*
Developed by Rocksteady Studios and based on DC Comics’ Batman license, Batman: Arkham Asylum offers players diverse gameplay that pushes the envelope for action, adventure and superhero games and exposes players to a unique, dark and atmospheric adventure taking them to the depths of Arkham Asylum.
Gaz Deaves from Guinness World Records states, “We are so pleased to be awarding Batman: Arkham Asylum a Guinness World Record. It is a fantastic new game and due to the reaction of gaming experts we believe it has a well deserved place in the Guinness World Records book.”
In Batman: Arkham Asylum, BATMAN finds himself trapped inside the confines of Gotham’s psychiatric hospital for the criminally insane, ARKHAM ASYLUM. THE JOKER has set a trap for the DARK KNIGHT and has conspired with the deranged inmates to eliminate BATMAN once and for all. Adding to the authenticity of the game are veteran animated Batman voice talents Mark Hamill and Kevin Conroy, who reprise their roles as The Joker and Batman respectively.
Batman: Arkham Asylum features an original story by Paul Dini, Batman writer and five-time Emmy Award winner whose credits include Lost and Batman: The Animated Series. Gamers will move in the shadows, instill fear amongst their enemies and confront The Joker and Gotham City's most notorious villains, including HARLEY QUINN, BANE, KILLER CROC, POISON IVY and SCARECROW, who have taken over the asylum.
Batman: Arkham Asylum, co-published in North America by Eidos Inc. and Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment, is rated “T” for Teen and is available for PLAYSTATION®3 computer entertainment system and Xbox 360® video game and entertainment system from Microsoft for the suggested retail price of $59.99. It will also be available for Games for Windows® LIVE at retail outlets for the suggested retail price of $49.99 on September 15, 2009. For more information, please visit http://www.batmanarkhamasylum.com.
Well finally got the game today (fucking shit postal service should have got it to me on Friday, but they are useless cunts).
Havent checked out the DVD or booklets yet, but the Batarang looks nice (until you look closer at it and see its a cheap piece of hollow plastic covered in scratches). Not sure if this was with the standard version, or will be available later to everyone else, but there was also a redemption code in the box to get the Crime Alley challenge map (I could post the code here, but I assume each obe is unique and can be used only once).
Game itself is as good as the demo indicated, so overall, a nice little special edition.
Sure. If you can pull off a free flow, it looks really cool, but it's fucking difficult to tell if they're just waiting in line to hit you or if the guy is the next one up to do it.
I'm not sure if I've just been spoiled by Uncharted or if Rocksteady's just counter-intuitive, but Batman's inability to jump from one ledge to another or use the grapple while hanging sucked. He also should have been able to peek over a wall while hanging if need be; that's just common sense. There were also some parts where Batman could have just run up the wall but, of course, you're not able to do that, so you're forced to use the grapple for just a larger than average jump. And finally, the glide feature, while cool, is too difficult to implement. Instead of immediately starting the glide from the top of the wall, you have to carefully time a double-tap of the X button to pull off a decent glide. If you miscalculate for just half a second, the glide is fucked. Also, on a lesser note, I think you should have been able use the grapple mid-glide.
And the writing--FUCK! His discussions with Oracle just hurt the integrity of the writing so much--they used their actual names over a frequency that Batman already knew was compromised by Riddler for crying out loud! Then there was the fact that he was corresponding with the cops the entire time, just walking with them into the depths of Arkham as if he was a public official rather than a vigilante. Then there was Jim Gordon's very non-discrete praise of him throughout the game to other law officials--he shook his bloody hand in public! And the fact that he just walked up to talk to people and have detailed conversations as if it were some kind of role-playing game. Then there was poorly handled soliloquies: I wouldn't have had a big problem with them if they weren't spoken with such Superfriends-like inflections. Think more along the lines of Riddick soliloquies and you'll get an idea of what I wanted. And Barbara....Seriously, what the fuck!? Were they that desperate for a token female character? There was simply no reason for her to be there. Alfred would have made a lot more sense--even Dick would have been more appropriate.
Either Dini got lazy or he simply didn't enforce a consistent nuance with the developers.
Still, overall, pretty good. I had some problems with the aesthetics; Batman was built more like Superman and he wasn't as wraith-like as I wanted him to be, but those can easily be overlooked.
All the credit for the game's good qualities go towards the devs. Dini, however, screwed the pooch.
Sure. If you can pull off a free flow, it looks really cool, but it's fucking difficult to tell if they're just waiting in line to hit you or if the guy is the next one up to do it.
Not fucking hard ay all to work it out. If they are gonna sneak attack you, they have lightning bolts over their fucking heads, if not, just select the direction you want your next hit with the stick, and press square...fucking simple, so cant see your problem.
Quote:
I'm not sure if I've just been spoiled by Uncharted or if Rocksteady's just counter-intuitive, but Batman's inability to jump from one ledge to another or use the grapple while hanging sucked. He also should have been able to peek over a wall while hanging if need be; that's just common sense. There were also some parts where Batman could have just run up the wall but, of course, you're not able to do that, so you're forced to use the grapple for just a larger than average jump. And finally, the glide feature, while cool, is too difficult to implement. Instead of immediately starting the glide from the top of the wall, you have to carefully time a double-tap of the X button to pull off a decent glide. If you miscalculate for just half a second, the glide is fucked. Also, on a lesser note, I think you should have been able use the grapple mid-glide.
Lets break this down cause you seem to be an idiot. You can jump from one ledge to another, using run or glide for slightly further ones, how comes you havent spotted this?
When you are hanging from a wall, why do you need to peak when you can rotate the camera and do ledge attacks to pull people over the edge using triangle. Plus, factor on the detective mode, and you can fucking see through walls and through ledges.
Once again, something you appear to have no spotted is that Batman does run up a wall to reach ledges etc, but only if its something a human could reach. He isnt Spiderman or Bouncing Boy for fucksake, so he isnt gonna be able to reach ledges higher than is the capability of a normal human, cause he isnt superpowered.
The glide function works perfectly as well. No fucking glider works from the moment its on the ledge as it has to drop slightly first so that it can catch the air, and start operating properly. His cape is a glider, not fucking wings, so no way should it start operating until it has dropped slightly first. And whats with the double tapping? Just walk off a ledge and hold the button.
How would he use a grapple mid glde when he is using both arms to operate the glider function of the cape? As soon as he lets go of one section of the cape to use the grapple, he would plummet....its called physics.
Quote:
And the writing--FUCK! His discussions with Oracle just hurt the integrity of the writing so much--they used their actual names over a frequency that Batman already knew was compromised by Riddler for crying out loud! Then there was the fact that he was corresponding with the cops the entire time, just walking with them into the depths of Arkham as if he was a public official rather than a vigilante. Then there was Jim Gordon's very non-discrete praise of him throughout the game to other law officials--he shook his bloody hand in public! And the fact that he just walked up to talk to people and have detailed conversations as if it were some kind of role-playing game. Then there was poorly handled soliloquies: I wouldn't have had a big problem with them if they weren't spoken with such Superfriends-like inflections. Think more along the lines of Riddick soliloquies and you'll get an idea of what I wanted. And Barbara....Seriously, what the fuck!? Were they that desperate for a token female character? There was simply no reason for her to be there. Alfred would have made a lot more sense--even Dick would have been more appropriate.
Either Dini got lazy or he simply didn't enforce a consistent nuance with the developers.
Absolutely nothing wrong with the writing. Its not the comic books continuity, so it makes sense that Batman would have close ties with the police. Fer fucksake, for years in the comics he was given a deputised police status anyway, and has been part of a UN sanctioned JLA, so he has always had a semi official status with officials anyway, and has rarely been viewed as a vigilante for fucksake. And anyway, why would the police have a fucking huge signal on their roof if they didnt openly cooperate and work with him? Fuck all wrong with the dialogue as well, you are just being gay. As for the Riddler frequency..do you think communicator the likes of which Batman has, wouldnt have some other frequencys on it? Plus, at no point does Batman communicate with the Riddler, so there is a good chance hacking into it only gave Riddler one way broadcasting capablilities, and he couldnt actually hear any of what was said on it. And with Oracle...thats the whole fucking point of her character. Since when are Alfred and Dick able to do all the computer shit she can?
Quote:
Still, overall, pretty good. I had some problems with the aesthetics; Batman was built more like Superman and he wasn't as wraith-like as I wanted him to be, but those can easily be overlooked.
All the credit for the game's good qualities go towards the devs. Dini, however, screwed the pooch.
Batman has always been big built, and in fact should be bigger built than Superman as he has to work out all the time. Christ, from all the comics I have read over the years, Batman and Superman have always had the same build anyway, so I dont get what your issue is here.
You are a picky twat who obviously didnt work out half of the controls, so shut the fuck up and go back to playing Resistance, or whatever other game you have been wanking over recently!
If they are gonna sneak attack you, they have lightning bolts over their fucking heads,
They don't show up for me....Is it because I have it set to hard?
Quote:
Lets break this down cause you seem to be an idiot. You can jump from one ledge to another, using run or glide for slightly further ones, how comes you havent spotted this?
When you are hanging from a wall, why do you need to peak when you can rotate the camera and do ledge attacks to pull people over the edge using triangle. Plus, factor on the detective mode, and you can fucking see through walls and through ledges.
Once again, something you appear to have no spotted is that Batman does run up a wall to reach ledges etc, but only if its something a human could reach. He isnt Spiderman or Bouncing Boy for fucksake, so he isnt gonna be able to reach ledges higher than is the capability of a normal human, cause he isnt superpowered.
The glide function works perfectly as well. No fucking glider works from the moment its on the ledge as it has to drop slightly first so that it can catch the air, and start operating properly. His cape is a glider, not fucking wings, so no way should it start operating until it has dropped slightly first. And whats with the double tapping? Just walk off a ledge and hold the button.
How would he use a grapple mid glde when he is using both arms to operate the glider function of the cape? As soon as he lets go of one section of the cape to use the grapple, he would plummet....its called physics.
I would simply like the option to jump from one ledge to another while hanging when it would be most appropriate. There are a couple of spots where that would have been convenient.
Sometimes you're hanging behind a wall with a snip on the other side, which is the situation I faced. I wanted to peak over to throw a batarang or use the claw while hanging because it would have been slightly more convenient.
I'm thinking more along the lines of Prince of Persia where the grip is just out of his reach so he has to do a gymnastic run up the wall to grab it before he loses momentum--just because I don't want to use the grapple for every single thing. There were a couple situations like that.
Yes, I know it would be slightly non-sensical to have it catch air pre-jump, but the problem here is that you don't catch air as soon as you jump off. There's a frustrating lag that I've had to overcome with a double tap.
I know he'd begin to plummet, that's what the grapple is for!
Quote:
Absolutely nothing wrong with the writing.
No no. There is. You're just a fuckwit.
Quote:
And with Oracle...thats the whole fucking point of her character. Since when are Alfred and Dick able to do all the computer shit she can?
Barbara is a cunt who's presence is only motivated by tokenism. I'm suddenly reminded of how everyone whined about she didn't make an appearance in Year One, so Dini figures he has to force her into Batman's continuum to act as an innocuous protagonist female voice. All she's done is look up a bunch of shit about criminals and officials and make easter egg references to the movies by mentioning Lucious being a gadgeteer rather than an executive at Wayne inudstries (either Alfred or Dick could have done that kind of work from Batman's computer, and the fact that they have more exposure than she does as extensions of Batman would have made them more appropriate mentions than she was). And, oh yeah, she has a couple of emotional conversations with "Bruce." Like the game really needed that.
Stop fellating the bitch and acknowledge that she was a stupid inclusion.
Quote:
Batman has always been big built, and in fact should be bigger built than Superman as he has to work out all the time. Christ, from all the comics I have read over the years, Batman and Superman have always had the same build anyway, so I dont get what your issue is here.
I'm thinking more along the lines of Kelley Jones musculature since he always draws him with a more lean shape that always seems to float around people. From the back, he looked decent, but when he's less obscured, his body builder look just starts reminding me of Superman. I though they'd have the sense of decorum to move away from that kind of superhero-clone tendency.
BTW: How do you destroy the destructible walls where you can't find a spot to put the gel from. I'm trying to reach one in the medical foyer and another in the X-Ray room, and I can't reach them.
If they are gonna sneak attack you, they have lightning bolts over their fucking heads,
They don't show up for me....Is it because I have it set to hard?
Yes. I played through on normal first time, and they are there. When you start playing it on hard, it says that the warnings are removed after you click on accept. I am currently on the final mission on hard level, so it still doesnt make it that difficult not having the warning.
Quote:
BTW: How do you destroy the destructible walls where you can't find a spot to put the gel from. I'm trying to reach one in the medical foyer and another in the X-Ray room, and I can't reach them.
You have to wait til later in the game when you get an upgraded version of the grappel gun in the batcave. The intital one only fires a single cable, which enables you to pull down grates etc, but the upgraded version fires three cables enabling you to pull down the weak walls and ceilings.
Some of the stuff in the game can only be reached once you have all the correct equipment such as the triple grapple and the thing where you can fire a line to get over large chasms etc.
Also, once Ivy pops up, there will be places that are no longer reachable until she is defeated.
Just for the record though, if you want to collect all the riddler clues etc, once the game is finished, you can free roam to collect them all (in fact, you have no choice in the penitentiary.)
I'm thinking more along the lines of Kelley Jones musculature since he always draws him with a more lean shape that always seems to float around people.
This just dawned on me, but Kelley Jones is even worse for making Batman hugely muscled. I fucking hated his art.
What is so lean about him in these pics? This is exactly what I hated about Jones, his distorted, inhuman figures he used to draw. The guy was inconsistant. He would draw Bats as this huge distorted monster, then once he wrapped the cape around him, he would become thinner than a pencil.
Alright, finished it today. Went back and picked up all the Riddler stuff then I went to try out some combat challenges. Those extreme ones are just evil...
I cant work out though how you get 100% completion in the main game (I've completed the game twice now, once on normal and once on hard). I have finished the story, collected all the Riddler stuff and revealed the spirit of Arkham, and still only have 90%. The only thing I didnt do, was knock out all the party guests, but surely that doesnt equate to 10%.
I got pissed off with the challenges. The extreme ones are fucking annoying, with the exploding gargoyles, as there is no point having them (might as well just remove them as you cant actually use them in all reality). What has really pissed me off is the fact that I have completed two predator challenges using only silent takedowns, and it will not recognise it in the trophies.
Oh, and last night, just for a laugh I loaded up Playstation Home, and set the Batcave as my living quarters.
I got pissed off with the challenges. The extreme ones are fucking annoying, with the exploding gargoyles, as there is no point having them (might as well just remove them as you cant actually use them in all reality). What has really pissed me off is the fact that I have completed two predator challenges using only silent takedowns, and it will not recognise it in the trophies.
Oh, and last night, just for a laugh I loaded up Playstation Home, and set the Batcave as my living quarters.
Hah, no kidding! I've taken to just using the exploding gargoyles for distraction in stealth takedowns. The combos are tough especially in the Extreme challenges. I will get a combo started with three strikes and then I know the counter is coming but then I will get knocked out of the chain just random like. I don't see myself completing any of those 100%.
I have got some of the fighting ones with two bat medals, but just always seem to come up a lil short on getting the third.
The predator challenges are actually easier to get all three medals, as all you have to do is make sure you take at least 3 people out using the 3 methods specified. The only ones that are tough are the ones in the extreme challenges, like explode three walls at once, with each wall taking out at least one bad guy.
Still getting pissed off with that silent takedown trophy, as I have now done that 4 times and still wont get that trophy for some reason.
Well I have now sussed out that the 100% game completion includes the challenge mode, not just the story. As far as the ingame medals go for the challenges (not the trophies), I have managed to get all 3 medals for all the predator challenges, expect one, as its almost impossible to get the two that I have been trying to get. As for the fighting challenges, I dont see me ever getting all three medals on some of them.
These challenges are really for true hardcore gamers, who take this shit seriously.
The Joker challenges are fucking hard as well, because you dont have the gadgets available to you like you do with Bats. All you get is a pair of x-ray specs, which unlike the detective vision, cannot be left on. You also get a pair of Joker teeth and a gun, but both are only good for one shot. You can grapple, cant glide and have no way of doing most of what Batman can do.
More free downloadable content available today, with a couple of new challenges. Managed to actually get a freeflow combat multiplier of 60 today on one of them.
The combos are tough especially in the Extreme challenges. I will get a combo started with three strikes and then I know the counter is coming but then I will get knocked out of the chain just random like. I don't see myself completing any of those 100%.
Been trying to get all the challenges done, and get all the medals so I can get 100% game completion. Managed to finally get all three medals a few days ago in the one Predator challenge that had me stumped, and am now trying to get all the medals in the combat challenges. All I need is two medals (one in Shock and awe extreme and one in Rumble in the jungle extreme), but unless you can string together a really good freeflow sequence, you have no chance (Rumble is 50,000). I was on a roll a few days ago, as I completed a whole bunch of the combat challenges one after the other, with some great scores, but those two just keep coming up short (I even got the perfect freeflow trophie, which had elluded me for ages).
Once I get those two medals, no only will it be 100% game completion, but will give me 100% trophies as well.
Well, finally did it. Got the Rumble in the jungle one last night, and just got the Shock and awe one a few moments ago, meaning the game is 100% complete, and I have 100% of the trophies as well.
does anyone have that gamestop exclusive scarecrow challenge? my wife bought this for me from walmart or something. I know its on the disk I just need to know how it's unlocked.
From what I have heard, the Scarecrow challenge is pretty weak. Its probably not on the disc, its more than likely the same as all the add on challenges, the Crime Alley and the Joker one for the PS3, downloadable.
With the Crime Alley challenge, you get a code which you then have to enter on the Playstation store to redeem code and download the pack. Its probably the same for the 360 Live as well.
Each code is one time usable so the only way to get it is to get the game from the shop in question, or search eGay to see if someone is selling an unused code!
fuck that then. I refuse to pay for all that shit. and that microsoft points shit is such a scam. i have to pay to for little digital clothes for my avatar? really? how fucking gay!
That scarecrow design if friggin' awesome. Especially like the fear gas sequences.
I was kinda split on the Scarecrow design at first as to whether it was good or not, but the more I saw it, the more I loved it and thought that he should have always looked like that.
That scarecrow design if friggin' awesome. Especially like the fear gas sequences.
I was kinda split on the Scarecrow design at first as to whether it was good or not, but the more I saw it, the more I loved it and thought that he should have always looked like that.
The gas mask in the mask was a nice touch, but it's the fucking syringes on the fingers that make it bad ass.
That scarecrow design if friggin' awesome. Especially like the fear gas sequences.
I was kinda split on the Scarecrow design at first as to whether it was good or not, but the more I saw it, the more I loved it and thought that he should have always looked like that.
The gas mask in the mask was a nice touch, but it's the fucking syringes on the fingers that make it bad ass.
I think thats why I think I was split on it initially, then realised how cool it was. At first I thought it just didnt sit right, but the more I saw it and compared it to the comic book version, the more gay the comic book version looked.
The mask is fucking awesome, but the needle fingers kind of push him into Freddy Krueger territory.
Yeah. There's a very good story here. The graphics and having the BTAS series Batman, Joker, and Harley going at it just makes it that much cooler.
I must admit I have never been a huge fan of Harley (the one in the Bat universe, not the one who used to post here), but for me, she was the star of this game character wise. Joker was ok, but for me Harleys lines were just so much funnier.
That scarecrow design if friggin' awesome. Especially like the fear gas sequences.
I was kinda split on the Scarecrow design at first as to whether it was good or not, but the more I saw it, the more I loved it and thought that he should have always looked like that.
The gas mask in the mask was a nice touch, but it's the fucking syringes on the fingers that make it bad ass.
I think thats why I think I was split on it initially, then realised how cool it was. At first I thought it just didnt sit right, but the more I saw it and compared it to the comic book version, the more gay the comic book version looked.
The mask is fucking awesome, but the needle fingers kind of push him into Freddy Krueger territory.
scarecrow has always been shit. only the most recent BTAS look, where they introduced the true "hanged corpse" style, did he have the opportunity to look cool. undertakerish, even.
the games version is beautiful in its own right. the design resembles the BTAS world, but takes a few more logical leaps -- having a gas mask (which is a purdy scary look) makes sense to combat his own toxins, and the krueger-like "claws" as needles again makes sense, playing up the "broken scientist" mentality of the character.
After seeing the trailer again I have to say its based on No Mans Land. There might be no earthquake in the game but everything else looks like it will be based on one of the best Batman crossovers of the last couple years.
I read Knight fall years after it came out and I don't think its that good. Did the same with No Mans Land and loved it. Knight fall was more about the shock of a "new Batman".
Holy strategic acquisition, predictable Batman reference! Warner Bros. Home Entertainment Group has announced its purchase of a majority stake in Rocksteady Studios, the developer responsible for towing Batman's star vehicle out of a muddy Gotham ditch. Rocksteady's Batman: Arkham Asylum debuted in 2009 to critical applause and has since shipped over three million copies.
Jamie Walker, studio director of Rocksteady Games, expressed pride in the deal -- the cost of which has not been disclosed. "We are proud to strengthen our association with WBIE, a world class publisher that we have enjoyed working with since we began developing Batman: Arkham Asylum," he said. In addition, games director and excellent sniper position Sefton Hill noted, "The Rocksteady team is very much looking forward to creating more great games based on widely recognized Warner Bros. brands like Batman."
What Warner license will Rocksteady revive next? Whatever it is, it'll have to wait until construction is completed on the unnamed Arkham Asylum sequel.
[Update: Square Enix Europe (Eidos) has confirmed that it still retains a 25.1 percent stake in Rocksteady.]
finally got to play this game all the way through. so fucking aweshome. cheap heations bewear: of course i loved it because it was a batman game, but as it did not appear on a nintendo console, the factors should balance out!
the attention to detail was awesome. the pacing was awesome. the voice acting of the main characters were phenomenal - particularly mark hammil's joker. i never really give voice acting the appreciation it's due, but his joker is always awesome. and in this game, he kicks it up a notch, giving the character a much less silly, much darker, more maniacal tone. a very subtle but very incredible difference. kevin conroy's batman is always spot on, as it has been for nearly 20 years, though the inflection (and i blame the game engineers, not the actor) was often confused -- like, the bits were angry or slow when that didn't fit in the storyline context. the other characters were passable, but often awful, particularly the commish, the warden, some of the doctors, etc. but that's mostly a passing remark.
the renders of the characters were awesome. batman looked so very kick ass, the joker looked so very evil, croc was intimidating, harley was hot, scarecrow's new design was ultimate -- maybe not as cool as the later BTAS "corpse" style, but a very close second. the lip-syncing was more off than on, and a bit of a distraction, but the mannerisms and actions were probably the best i've ever seen. i'm not sure if the character animations were choreographed in a "polar bear express" fashion, but it certainly seemed so. incredibly life like.
one related caveat i did not like was the occasional full motion video rendered cut scenes. when the in-game model characters look that good, don't break the flow by introducing a different cinematic feel.
the game's story line was to-be-expected, but they way it allowed them to position the pacing and progression was brilliant. beating up 15 thugs at once is exactly what batman should be able to do with relative ease - unlike the representation in every other batman game, where 2 or 3 regular bad guys can accidentally kill you double-dragon style. giving the player "predator view" and slowing down the action matrix-mode is such a great technique to give the player the feel of actually being batman. they're not cheats, he's just that good.
Mark Hamill has said that the sequel will be the last time he does the Joker voice.
That breaks my heart.
I don't know why. you can always go back and watch the old Batman and JL shows (or the Trickster episodes of the live action Flash show or the Hobgoblin eps of the Spider-Man cartoon from the 90's). jeebus, the man's done that voice for a long time now. let him do something else.
Mark Hamill has since said that he will be voicing the Joker in DC universe. If that game is a success you will be hearing him as the Joker for years.
The sequel to "Arkham Asylum" is now titled "Arkham City". I don't care for that title but it does sound like they are going with the No Man's Land story line, which is a very good thing.
"Written by Batman: The Animated Series writer Paul Dini (who also penned both Arkham games) and drawn by Batman: Arkham Asylum and Batman: Arkham City concept artist Carlos D’anda, BATMAN: ARKHAM CITY picks up one year after the original game, where former Arkham Warden turned newly elected Mayor of Gotham City Quincy Sharp has decided to close down the infamous institution. In its stead, he establishes “Arkham City,” the new maximum security “home” for all of Gotham City’s thugs, gangsters and insane criminal masterminds. Set inside the heavily fortified walls of a sprawling district in the heart of Gotham City, inmates can roam free and do whatever they want as long as they don’t try to escape. To run this urban prison, Sharp has appointed Dr. Hugo Strange, a man who knows that Bruce Wayne is Batman."
That ending scene doesn't bode well. Are we going to have yet another session of 'Joker isn't really crazy, he's just acting up' bullshit.
i believe its a reference to the earlier trailers that showed how sick (physically ill) the joker was. and now, in this scene, he doesn't seem sick at all. still crazy, just not dying.
Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment and DC Entertainment today confirmed that Robin will be a fully playable character in the new and improved challenge mode in Batman: Arkham City. The Tim Drake Robin pack is currently available exclusively to North American fans who pre-order the game from Best Buy for Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and PC.
Robin will come complete with his own unique gadgets and special moves, and will be playable in all challenge maps in the game, as well as two additional challenge maps that are included with the pack – Black Mask Hideout and Freight Train Escape. The pack will also contain a bonus Red Robin character skin.
The reason Legends of the Dark Knight started sucking so much is because it took more and more emphasis off of Batman and started making everything a "family" affair.
Do people really want that to be a trend in the video games?
the reason legends of the dark knight started sucking is because legends of the dark knight started sucking. robin was a casualty as much as batman. the dark knight returns and the morrison batman and robin are two examples of how robin is a great addition. its the story, not the character.
i prefer a loner batman as well, but throwing in some bonus content and an (optional!) playable robin doesn't, at all, on paper, take away from the game. now, maybe robin will be terrible, and the game will be terrible, and aw hole buncha other stuff will be terrible. only prometheus can know for sure.
but if the game is anything like the first, and robin's role is exactly as described in the only piece of information we have on his role then there's no reason to think anything will be a detractor, let alone "suck"
I didn't say it wasn't optional or that the whole game is gonna suck because of it. I said it can create a trend--and that tends to happen.
Batman and Robin's good numbers has more to do with Grayson faggots and Morrison zombies than anything else. Throw in the obligatory scumbag Collector ratio and you have better than average sales.
I'm not saying it was a weak point of the book or anything, but do you really believe that Carrie Kelly was a major selling point of DKR?
I didn't say it wasn't optional or that the whole game is gonna suck because of it. I said it can create a trend--and that tends to happen.
i guess the counter argument here is: there's no trend. like doc (and the article) said, this is an optional, playable character, on non-storyline events. i believe it's even less game-impacting than the optional-playable joker character in the first game. it's also less of a story-based-role (and thus less destracting) than gordon and/or oracle in the first title -- which, as we all recall, was a fucking awesome game. and that is the only "trend" worth basing the sequel on.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
Batman and Robin's good numbers has more to do with Grayson faggots and Morrison zombies than anything else. Throw in the obligatory scumbag Collector ratio and you have better than average sales.
i'm a big morrison fan, but i disliked the latter (significantly more confusing) chapters of his JLA run. i also didn't really enjoy the whole batman RIP storyline. hell, i didn't even like damian being introduced / reintroduced. and i sure as fuck don't like anyone else being batman besides bruce wayne. however, all that said, the dynamic between grayson/batman and damian/robin was awesome. the first dozen or so books (or however many until morrison left) were incredibly enjoyable.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
I'm not saying it was a weak point of the book or anything, but do you really believe that Carrie Kelly was a major selling point of DKR?
i wouldn't call her a "selling point", but i'd certainly say she's a major factor to how much i enjoyed the book. even if taken at the very base of her description, in which miller refers to her (and "robin", in general) as a tool to make batman look cooler. from that very core, basic aspect, she ruled. beyond that, i think she was a perfect fit for a batman long-since retired, who had a bitter falling out with the first robin and a more destructive ending with jason, the "final" robin. an excellent, and dynamically new, compliment to that aging dark knight.
i liked the tim drake / jason todd hybrid robin in the new BTAS cartoon (though not so much the dick grayson robin of the earlier BTAS toon). i liked the incredibly odd and whimsical stephanie browne robin issues of a few years back. i liked the all star batman and robin development, before that was cut.
generally speaking, i think i enjoy stories where batman is the supreme commander in an army, and robin is his most loyal soldier, and all of these examples fit that. the main exception to that is the damian robin, but that whole dynamic was so awesomely backward and new.
i guess the counter argument here is: there's no trend.
My point was that it could develop into a trend and become something less optional. This kind of stuff gives precedent for DC/Warner to tell Rocksteady that they'd prefer more family exhibition within the story. At least with optional characters like Joker, I don't have to worry about that kind of stuff.
Your preferences aside, there's not really a great deal of credence for saying that she was a major factor of enjoyment for the majority of DKR readers. Not saying they didn't enjoy her presence, but that wouldn't mean she was a necessity for the book's positive reception--or at least, for as much positive reception that it received.
As for Morrison: most of the people who bought his shit prior to Batman and Robin went on and on about how much they absolutely LOVED it (). If there was a pattern among readership similar to your own experience with his relatively recent stuff, I could better acknowledge your opinion as a reflection of the general feel towards his writing.
My point was that it could develop into a trend and become something less optional. This kind of stuff gives precedent for DC/Warner to tell Rocksteady that they'd prefer more family exhibition within the story. At least with optional characters like Joker, I don't have to worry about that kind of stuff.
but that's a theory based on nothing. there's no indication robin will ever become a "starring role" in this game, this franchise, or future bat-titles. there's no indication that this was a move DC/warner brought to rocksteady. there's just as much credence to the theory that hugo strange will be batman's father. the only thing introduced is bonus content for those looking for it. playable robin, playable joker, playable catwoman... they're all the same little "oh, neat!" attributes. there's no reason to speculate beyond that, least of all to outright proclaim "[this now] sucks"
Originally Posted By: Pariah
Your preferences aside, there's not really a great deal of credence for saying that she was a major factor of enjoyment for the majority of DKR readers. Not saying they didn't enjoy her presence, but that wouldn't mean she was a necessity for the book's positive reception--or at least, for as much positive reception that it received.
as said, i don't think she was necessarily a "selling point." batman is always the [only] selling point. but i think there's certainly intrigue about her character, and the story's evolving role of robin. carrie kelly was awesome, and i thought a great example of how robin could be well utilized. my suspicion is a large group of fans thought the same, and i can only assume frank miller, king of the "dark, grim, gritty, loner, rebel, crazy, kickass, rockstar-based-their-character-on-my" batman did as well, having created her. most certainly, i think she exceeded the role of being a "DC forced move; sucks" type.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
As for Morrison: most of the people who bought his shit prior to Batman and Robin went on and on about how much they absolutely LOVED it (). If there was a pattern among readership similar to your own experience with his relatively recent stuff, I could better acknowledge your opinion as a reflection of the general feel towards his writing.
who knows what the general populous thinks. but, also, who cares?
any pre-conceived bias for the book is countered by the pre-conceived bias against it. did you ever give it an honest try?
Something relevant to the topic: I just read in Game Informer that Catwoman is a mandatory participant during a couple intermittent segments of the game. Sucks.
Quote:
but that's a theory based on nothing. there's no indication robin will ever become a "starring role" in this game,
If you're going to use quotes, then make sure they actually quote me.
I didn't say that he or any other family member would have a "starring role" (wouldn't surprise me if Batman was switched out for Grayson in a salute to Morrison though). I've been pointing out that future installments might call for more mandatory inclusions based on his acknowledgement in this game. I say this keeping in mind the past 70 years of comicbooks branching off an increasing number of sidekicks and associates from the main characters of the serials.
Quote:
as said, i don't think she was necessarily a "selling point." batman is always the [only] selling point. but i think there's certainly intrigue about her character, and the story's evolving role of robin. carrie kelly was awesome, and i thought a great example of how robin could be well utilized. my suspicion is a large group of fans thought the same, and i can only assume frank miller, king of the "dark, grim, gritty, loner, rebel, crazy, kickass, rockstar-based-their-character-on-my" batman did as well, having created her. most certainly, i think she exceeded the role of being a "DC forced move; sucks" type.
A tad off topic: It's funny you should bring up Frank Miller since he didn't actually warm up to Robin until he started writing All Star B&R. Even when he was writing DKR, he felt the whole adolescent sidekick idea was creepy. I think that was his point when Alfred was arguing with him over Kelly going back to the cave with them: Batman had bought into the hype and romanticism just like everyone else.
I couldn't tell you if it was a DC forced move or not. My point is simply that she was not a crucial element to the book's success.
Quote:
who knows what the general populous thinks. but, also, who cares?
If that's your approach here, then your arguments have been unintentionally stuffed with straw. My initial point was that 'family' trends tend to kill the writing and that this is a reflected by a decline in patronage.
Quote:
any pre-conceived bias for the book is countered by the pre-conceived bias against it. did you ever give it an honest try?
I read a handful of the issues if that's what you mean.
Did I approach them thinking they had any hope of veing decent? No.
But it's all pretty irrelevant since Morrison's B&R is one of the root problems I have with the idea of building 'families.' After all, the book is called "Batman," but it's not actually the original character. On the contrary, it's his ward. The character that gave all these late-20s-to-mid-30s Nightwing fans Peter Pan complexes is wearing his face. And it was specifically because he was the first 'family member' to show up that all the writers and readers felt there was precedent for putting him there.
Something relevant to the topic: I just read in Game Informer that Catwoman is a mandatory participant during a couple intermittent segments of the game. Sucks.
that description makes catwoman's involvement not that dissimilar to roles other characters played in the first game. which, again, was awesome. (actually, that's a good point - do i recall you not liking the first game...?)
Originally Posted By: Pariah
I've been pointing out that future installments might call for more mandatory inclusions based on his acknowledgement in this game. I say this keeping in mind the past 70 years of comicbooks branching off an increasing number of sidekicks and associates from the main characters of the serials.
so, "[this now] sucks" is you being upset that future games (not this one) might (not will) feature occasional (not starring) participants? a theory based on DC (not rocksteady) and their convoluted comic book franchises (not video game franchise) over the span of 70 years (not 3). ...that about it?
Originally Posted By: Pariah
My point is simply that she was not a crucial element to the book's success.
no one is arguing that point with you. the success of any batman book or game is solely due to batman. however, the quality of that book (grouping the four together) was increased because of robin. granted, that's simply my opinion, but i'd wager miller would agree, having used the character so prominently - particularly when you consider he invented the role having killed off one robin and distanced another.
did you not enjoy carrie's role in the story? did she add nothing to it for you?
Originally Posted By: Pariah
My initial point was that 'family' trends tend to kill the writing and that this is a reflected by a decline in patronage.
your critique on quality is an opinion. your critique on sales is fabricated. your critique on future trends is guesswork. there's not much to build on here, other than your glorious seal of disapproval.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
Did I approach them thinking they had any hope of being decent? No.
As for Morrison: most of the people who bought his shit prior to Batman and Robin went on and on about how much they absolutely LOVED it (). If there was a pattern among readership similar to your own experience with his relatively recent stuff, I could better acknowledge your opinion as a reflection of the general feel towards his writing.
who knows what the general populous thinks. but, also, who cares?
any pre-conceived bias for the book is countered by the pre-conceived bias against it. did you ever give it an honest try?
Exactly. To be honest, I found Morrison's Batman to be quite a tedious read at times. However, in retrospect, I find it quite enjoyable now that I see how a lot of the pieces fit when they seemed so terribly random. Is the run perfect? No. But, when I read it from that random ass issue of 52 all the way to B&R 16, I find it to be a compelling read.
Pariah, quit being so damned obstinate and disapproving all the time. You might find you actually like something.
that description makes catwoman's involvement not that dissimilar to roles other characters played in the first game. which, again, was awesome. (actually, that's a good point - do i recall you not liking the first game...?)
The player wasn't required to man any of the other characters in the previous game to keep the story moving. That will apparently be Catwoman's function in this game. Sucks.
Quote:
(actually, that's a good point - do i recall you not liking the first game...?)
I had problems with it, but I felt it was a great game overall.
Quote:
so, "[this now] sucks" is you being upset that future games (not this one) might (not will) feature occasional (not starring) participants?
Yes.
Quote:
a theory based on DC (not rocksteady) and their convoluted comic book franchises (not video game franchise) over the span of 70 years (not 3). ...that about it?
Rocksteady is owned by Time Warner, which in turn owns DC, who oversees all contents of the game. It's the iron triangle of comicbook media.
Quote:
did she add nothing to it for you?
Nope. I was entirely indifferent towards her presence.
Luckily she wasn't like Todd or Grayson or that would have killed it.
Quote:
your critique on quality is an opinion. your critique on sales is fabricated. your critique on future trends is guesswork.
Thought experiment time: do you personally believe that DC would still be in the decline that it is without being totally congested by the consistent creation or rehashing of more and more family/associates?
Forget about story for a second and think about the burden that an increase in character accountability puts on the writing. It's one thing to say a capable writer can handle it, but it's quite another to consider how practical it would be for said writer to implement it. At some point, one has to acknowledge that additional characters are an inherent strain on the serials.
I had problems with it, but I felt it was a great game overall.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
Rocksteady is owned by Time Warner, which in turn owns DC, who oversees all contents of the game. It's the iron triangle of comicbook media.
see, i guess this is the dichotomy i see in your thoughts; you loved the first title, and the team is back together to make a second game. most would simply assume there's another pile of goodness on the way, rather than jump to the conclusion that everything they've ever hated out of two converging mediums would asplode in their face.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
Quote:
did she add nothing to it for you?
Nope. I was entirely indifferent towards her presence.
i find that disappointing. there's so much to the character, particularly her relationship with bruce. adds a deeper level to the story i'd think you're missing out on.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
Thought experiment time: do you personally believe that DC would still be in the decline that it is without being totally congested by the consistent creation or rehashing of more and more family/associates?
my personal opinion? i largely dislike the batfamily. i hate huntress, batgirl, azrael, orpheus, spoiler, etc. i tolerate robin, nightwing, and oracle. i prefer a loner batman, or atleast a streamlined batfamily. and, as said earlier, i'm only willing to accept a grouping if batman is their undisputed leader -- none of this "ill show him" bullshit. batman is better. and should take a stronger stance on others in his city than saying "this is my city." while i do enjoy a select few takes on the team (many mentioned earlier) my preference is almost always a solo batman.
all that said... i think that has absolutely zero to do with DC's (or the entire industries) declining stance. in fact, if anything, i think the expansion of the batfamily likely sustains and increases an audience for the dying medium. batwoman isn't the reason less people are buying comic books, comic books are the reason less people are buying comic books.
at least that's the economic / industry stance. if you're asking about the quality of the books, and how that is in a decline due to character expansion, then again i point to it being a opinion point. i think there are a million quality stories left to be told, and i don't think that has any bearing on the character pool - it's the creators who must be taken to task. cartoon network's justice league unlimited is probably some of the absolute best story crafting i've enjoyed in the comic book world, and that's dozens of characters. the latest morrison batman and robin story is a brand new batman paired with a brand new character, both of which i dislike in principle, and i loved it.
Thought experiment time: do you personally believe that DC would still be in the decline that it is without being totally congested by the consistent creation or rehashing of more and more family/associates?
You really do just make up your own facts to suit your arguments.
I believe DC's decline is related to the decline of print media in general, their over reliance on event books, and the up-coming company wide mini-reboot of the DCU. Nothing to do with the Bat-family.
Since when does arguing against the principle of creating an overdose of characters equate to only the Bat-family?
What you're talking about is exactly what I'm referring to. Constantly creating more characters encourages more obligatory synergy. Next thing you know, you have arcs or entire serials expressly devoted to team ups. And that inevitably leads to colossally homosexual crossover events.
My fear is that this phenomenon makes its way to the gaming medium and Warner/DC tells Rocksteady, "We could really do with the inclusion of this/these character(s) in the next game." I don't expect a Crisis sub-plot to rear its head, but I do expect them to use the game as a springboard for other characters in the same way they used Batman comics in regards to Bordeaux (admittedly, that had more to do with Rucka), Kathy Kane, Manhunter, Montoya, Grayson, and Damien.
Originally Posted By: Rob
see, i guess this is the dichotomy i see in your thoughts; you loved the first title, and the team is back together to make a second game. most would simply assume there's another pile of goodness on the way, rather than jump to the conclusion that everything they've ever hated out of two converging mediums would asplode in their face.
I didn't say the game was gonna suck. I've said that aspects of it suck.
Quote:
all that said... i think that has absolutely zero to do with DC's (or the entire industries) declining stance. in fact, if anything, i think the expansion of the batfamily likely sustains and increases an audience for the dying medium. batwoman isn't the reason less people are buying comic books, comic books are the reason less people are buying comic books.
Which begs the question: what makes up the itinerary of contemporary comic books?
Just writing? Certainly not. It's a continuum of character debuts/showcases, extended families, team ups, replacements, clones (see also: Batman Inc.), and universal crossovers that are all being micro-managed by one person (Didio).
I give the main brunt of writers out there a lot of shit. But I cannot expect any writer to work well under those kind of conditions.
Quote:
at least that's the economic / industry stance. if you're asking about the quality of the books, and how that is in a decline due to character expansion, then again i point to it being a opinion point. i think there are a million quality stories left to be told, and i don't think that has any bearing on the character pool - it's the creators who must be taken to task. cartoon network's justice league unlimited is probably some of the absolute best story crafting i've enjoyed in the comic book world, and that's dozens of characters.
The show is completely modular where the characters come and go in manageable numbers as the writers please. It doesn't have to put up with an ever expanding and changing continuum.
Even if the current DC writers were decent, the setup they're forced to deal with is impractical.
Quote:
the latest morrison batman and robin story is a brand new batman paired with a brand new character, both of which i dislike in principle, and i loved it.
By that token, it doesn't have to be a Batman comic then for you to enjoy it. Or rather, it doesn't have to be Bat characters even if it's a Batman book....Kinda defeats the purpose.
Constantly creating more characters encourages more obligatory synergy. Next thing you know, you have arcs or entire serials expressly devoted to team ups. And that inevitably leads to colossally homosexual crossover events. My fear is that this phenomenon makes its way to the gaming medium and Warner/DC tells Rocksteady, "We could really do with the inclusion of this/these character(s) in the next game." I don't expect a Crisis sub-plot to rear its head, but I do expect them to use the game as a springboard for other characters in the same way they used Batman comics in regards to Bordeaux (admittedly, that had more to do with Rucka), Kathy Kane, Manhunter, Montoya, Grayson, and Damien.
none of this parallaxian fear relates to arkham city. your argument is referring to a world of video games that do not exist. you're already upset with the third title in the arkham trilogy, as well as the new franchise of superman and wonder woman games, months before the second batman game has hit shelves. ...and, notedly, only a few years after the first title impressed you so. even prometheus waits until he sees a rendering.
looking at just what we actually have to look at here, there's a single video game title. which you enjoyed. that same team is back, building a follow up. those are all the cards we have to play with. making any type of comparison to 70+ years of messy comic book continuity or marketing ploys is silly.
if you're whole argument is you "just saying it could," well then, ok, sure. but i'd counter we've seen no indication that this is the direction rockstar will head. they've already bucked years of bad comics, and a decent supply of shitty batman video games, to bring us a kick ass title. i'll give them the benefit of the doubt on a not-yet-released sequel.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
Which begs the question: what makes up the itinerary of contemporary comic books? Just writing? Certainly not. It's a continuum of character debuts/showcases, extended families, team ups, replacements, clones (see also: Batman Inc.), and universal crossovers that are all being micro-managed by one person (Didio). I give the main brunt of writers out there a lot of shit. But I cannot expect any writer to work well under those kind of conditions.
a disadvantage i will grant the world of comics is the serial nature of having to come up with "something else" every 30 days. but shitty conditions are a shitty excuse for a bad story. a writer can bob-and-weave through the nonsense to pull something magical out of his ass. miller didn't invent batman. neither did christopher nolan or rocksteady. however, each was able to craft a tale how they wanted to, all based on the same premise, each different, and all awesome.
you also have to remember that if catwoman or joker, or even the paranoia-fulfilling huntress appears in arkham asylum 8, they will be rockstar's versions of the characters, designed to fit in their universe. similar to how miller's superman was a government punk, batman & robin's bane was a mindless goon, BTAS's mr. freeze was an awesomely complex villain, etc. the varied interpretation means, by default, they're not going to be who you "know" them to be.
and all that aside: you, personally, can instantly toss aside teamups and replacements and expanding families as bad stuffs. fine. but let's look at the flip side: have you liked every solo batman adventure? my guess would be a "no," and very likely a "of course not." that would again point to the quality of the story, itself; and have no bearing on the quantity of characters.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
Quote:
the latest morrison batman and robin story is a brand new batman paired with a brand new character, both of which i dislike in principle, and i loved it.
By that token, it doesn't have to be a Batman comic then for you to enjoy it. Or rather, it doesn't have to be Bat characters even if it's a Batman book....Kinda defeats the purpose.
i've been known to enjoy stories that weren't batman stories, yes. however, the dick grayson / damian wayne "batman & robin" title was deeply affixed within the batworld. it was their dynamic together, as well as their misplacement in their own universe (namely: the batuniverse) that i found enjoyable. not necessarily dick continually questioning "am i as good as bruce", which is what most hacky writers have been breathing through grayson for years. instead, he flat out knows he's not -- and/or at least acknowledges he's different. further, it's having damian continually point out "he's not as good as bruce" that adds the unexpected and dynamic element of fun to the story.
and, please note: this is a story i am enjoying, not a premise. the two or three issues i've read thus far that carry a new writer (i believe starting with B&R 15?) have been poo. same characters, same world, different outcome.
They really need to lay off the "get down on your knees and slide under something" move. It doesn't really look that cool when you do it in slow motion.
none of this parallaxian fear relates to arkham city. your argument is referring to a world of video games that do not exist. you're already upset with the third title in the arkham trilogy, as well as the new franchise of superman and wonder woman games, months before the second batman game has hit shelves.
What I am upset with is certain trends found in serialized media. I haven't given any exact descriptions with regards to future DCU-based games. Just general predictions. And from what you've been saying, that's only "Parallaxian" because it has yet to happen. And if and when it does, you're telling me that you reserve the right to say that there was no original precedent for such a thing since you don't hold comic books in the same esteem that you do other forms of media. That kinda ignores the point of being able to identify them both as "media" outlets. Video games don't consist of serials all of a sudden?
Quote:
a disadvantage i will grant the world of comics is the serial nature of having to come up with "something else" every 30 days. but shitty conditions are a shitty excuse for a bad story. a writer can bob-and-weave through the nonsense to pull something magical out of his ass. miller didn't invent batman. neither did christopher nolan or rocksteady. however, each was able to craft a tale how they wanted to, all based on the same premise, each different, and all awesome.
This bares repeating: "At some point, one has to acknowledge that additional characters are an inherent strain on the serials."
By your logic, the powers that be could force another major crossover event on the continuum--the implementation of which the writers had no power over--and there'd be no question that the ensuing disaster would be entirely on the writers according to you. Additionally, none of the examples you offered up had the writers forced to work in correspondence with an entire universe of characters. Miller's stories were contained, Nolan crafted his own origin, and Rocksteady got to pick and choose their comic references without an editor breathing down their neck.
Quote:
fine. but let's look at the flip side: have you liked every solo batman adventure? my guess would be a "no," and very likely a "of course not." that would again point to the quality of the story, itself; and have no bearing on the quantity of characters.
Barring some specialized circumstances, I'll know it wasn't the inherent strain of additional characters that weighed down its quality.
Originally Posted By: Rob
i've been known to enjoy stories that weren't batman stories, yes. however, the dick grayson / damian wayne "batman & robin" title was deeply affixed within the batworld. it was their dynamic together, as well as their misplacement in their own universe (namely: the batuniverse) that i found enjoyable.
Following "deeply affixed in the batworld" parameters, Bullock and Gordon dressed up as Batman and Robin would be a workable setup.
What I am upset with is certain trends found in serialized media. I haven't given any exact descriptions with regards to future DCU-based games.
being here in the batman: arkham city video game discussion thread, you can see my confusion.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
you don't hold comic books in the same esteem that you do other forms of media.
that's not a point i've made. i adore comic books as well as video games. does this really need to be said on a forum bearing my name with sections like: comic books and video games?
but having respect for the medium doesn't force the correlation between the two you're demanding and/or fearing.
there's been ONE batman game in this line. there's been hundreds of bat-titles over the years. there's not a great deal of synergy between the two visions. looking at the current books, films, tv cartoons, and video games, there are four very different types of media, each with their own parameters. hell, there are other batman video games available now or soon (DCU online, mortal kombat vs. dc comics, guardian of gotham, the brave and the bold, imposters, lego, etc.) that bear no semblance to arkham city/asylum or the DCU comic books, let alone each other.
there need not be a correlation, attributes of one need not cross into the other, and every bit of established "proof" screams that. in fact, looking at the breadth of variety between media types, as well as within a specific medium, and you should actually be praising the gods of WB for their tolerance and variety.
could there be some game that relates to your specific concern? sure. but there's no more reason to believe that than any other theory, including those directly opposing.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
This bares repeating: "At some point, one has to acknowledge that additional characters are an inherent strain on the serials."
and this bears stating: ongoing serials are an inherent strain on serials. in other words, a solo batman book can get old and bad just as quickly as a batfamily book. the evidence, again, is in a number of failed titles and arcs. thus, the arguments cancel out, and everything reverts back to a perspective of story quality, not character quantity.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
By your logic, the powers that be could force another major crossover event on the continuum--the implementation of which the writers had no power over--and there'd be no question that the ensuing disaster would be entirely on the writers according to you.
if your job is to write, you're under the expectation to write well. that doesn't mean the situations wont occasionally overpower the role. however, that also doesn't mean it's a guarantee the role will succeed in a "regular" scenario. a good writer is a good writer and bad stories are bad stories. that description holds true for firefighters, nurses, groundskeepers, janitors and every other role.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
Additionally, none of the examples you offered up had the writers forced to work in correspondence with an entire universe of characters. Miller's stories were contained, Nolan crafted his own origin, and Rocksteady got to pick and choose their comic references without an editor breathing down their neck.
the last line makes me question what we're discussing here.
the remainder, answered above.
Originally Posted By: Rob
Following "deeply affixed in the batworld" parameters, Bullock and Gordon dressed up as Batman and Robin would be a workable setup.
honestly, that'd probably be hysterical. it'd be a fun ride. i don't need every batman tale to be this epic journey through the darkness, with rooftop joker battles to the (near)death. personal preference? sure, i lean towards the dark knight as he was meant to be. but why would anyone shut themselves out of a good story and/or a fun adventure because things weren't what "they were supposed to be"?
What I am upset with is certain trends found in serialized media. I haven't given any exact descriptions with regards to future DCU-based games.
being here in the batman: arkham city video game discussion thread, you can see my confusion.
"...Just general predictions."
Originally Posted By: Rob
that's not a point i've made. i adore comic books as well as video games. does this really need to be said on a forum bearing my name with sections like: comic books and video games?
"Esteem" was a poor choice of words; I wanted to say "literary esteem," but that wouldn't have made sense. I'm not trying to say you dislike one more than the other. What I'm pointing out is that you're trying to draw a distinction between the contents of the two mediums using solely the differences in presentation and the fact that video games simply haven't had as much coverage as comicbooks yet. But that does not address the serial nature that video games have in common with comicbooks.
Batman is clearly developing its own larger serial niche as a video game. There has been an undeniable interest in this development (see also: Warner Bros. buying Rocksteady)--especially with its continuum being based on the current era of books. This tells the powers that be that the game reaches out to the same demographic. The potential promotional uses for the game with regards to the DCU and its characters is evident without "Parallaxian fear."
There can very clearly be seen a correspondence between the two mediums after all. If you haven't noticed the "Arkham City" campaign in the DCU already, just pick up the latest issue of Wonder Woman. It has a mini written by Paul Dini at the end depicting Joker and Harley and their thoughts at the end of "Arkham Asylum" and their foreshadowing for the sequel. This kind of marketing is easily reciprocated.
Originally Posted By: Rob
that bear no semblance to arkham city/asylum or the DCU comic books, let alone each other.
Wait. Are you saying Asylum/City don't bare a resemblance to the current DCU?
Originally Posted By: Rob
there need not be a correlation, attributes of one need not cross into the other, and every bit of established "proof" screams that.
I do not recall using the word "need."
Originally Posted By: Rob
and this bears stating: ongoing serials are an inherent strain on serials. in other words, a solo batman book can get old and bad just as quickly as a batfamily book.
Nine times out of ten it probably won't be "just as quickly." Which is the point.
Writing is not a strain unto itself. It's the weight of the device that strains the writing. Thus, there are certain things that are more difficult than others to write.
Originally Posted By: Rob
the evidence, again, is in a number of failed titles and arcs. thus, the arguments cancel out, and everything reverts back to a perspective of story quality, not character quantity.
That all depends on your practical examples. Not the principle of writing in and of itself. From story to story, certain tropes have a tendency to manifest what's generally considered to be bad writing. Not sure why it's so incomprehensible that writing tends to be bad for a particular reason.
Originally Posted By: Rob
if your job is to write, you're under the expectation to write well. that doesn't mean the situations wont occasionally overpower the role. however, that also doesn't mean it's a guarantee the role will succeed in a "regular" scenario. a good writer is a good writer and bad stories are bad stories. that description holds true for firefighters, nurses, groundskeepers, janitors and every other role.
Sounds like me Pre-Crisis when I was preaching to Mxy about writers not having an excuse not to know every square inch of the DCU and its trappings at any given time.
Everyone is expected to do a job. But most employers can acknowledge when certain circumstances are impractical. Or in this case, fanboys.
I'm not gonna call someone a bad fireman/nurse/cop because they're unable to save everyone or anyone in a set of particularly heinous circumstances. Likewise, I'm not gonna call someone a bad writer if they can't juggle "families" of characters and extraneous crossovers while they're writing a serial in which they're ideally charged with only a main protagonist and a scant amount of support characters. Even in JLU, the writers only focused on a few characters at a time per episode.
Originally Posted By: Rob
honestly, that'd probably be hysterical. it'd be a fun ride. i don't need every batman tale to be this epic journey through the darkness, with rooftop joker battles to the (near)death. personal preference? sure, i lean towards the dark knight as he was meant to be. but why would anyone shut themselves out of a good story and/or a fun adventure because things weren't what "they were supposed to be"?
Fair enough, but again, the lack of convention really defeats the purpose of actually calling it "Batman."
What I'm pointing out is that you're trying to draw a distinction between the contents of the two mediums using solely the differences in presentation and the fact that video games simply haven't had as much coverage as comicbooks yet. But that does not address the serial nature that video games have in common with comicbooks.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
Originally Posted By: Rob
there need not be a correlation, attributes of one need not cross into the other, and every bit of established "proof" screams that.
I do not recall using the word "need."
well, you're doing an awful lot of worrying about something that "need not happen".
the games will share similarities with the books. and the cartoons. and the movies, from today or the 90s. and these will be seen in content, presentation, distribution, etc. each also features it's own serialized franchise goal. they all also feature batman.
but there's no reason to think the "similarity" will bring your fears to fruition. in fact, looking at the "evidence" amongst all that is available and reviewable over the past 2 or 20 years, there's so, so much more reason to not be concerned. there's also so, so much more you could be fearful of, where a connection is significantly more imminent and apparent. but i don't see yours, and i don't think there's a reason to.
arkham city is not the first batman game to be successful. the 90s batfilms and 90s toons were both popular - in fact, much more so. there were correlations, synergies, and comparables, but in the end, they each remained their own world. the 90s batfilms went "family", but the characters also went "fruity", not to mention public.
looking at AA, there's a guy named batman and a cop named gordon. but they're independent from their comic book counterpart. just as a bold example, there's no "arkham city". the nolan films and timm toons have the same uniqueness amongst them. each had their own handling of the franchise, the content, the universe, the characters -- hell, even the costume.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
Originally Posted By: Rob
and this bears stating: ongoing serials are an inherent strain on serials. in other words, a solo batman book can get old and bad just as quickly as a batfamily book.
Nine times out of ten it probably won't be "just as quickly." Which is the point.
that is, actually, the point. this is your opinion. with emphasis both on "your" and "opinion." you have pre-emptively dismissed any batfamily type story, with promethean precision. if a single person out there prefers batfamily to solo-man, then the perspectives are nullified. i've read a lot of shit batman stories over the years, and i'd say nine times out of ten, the reason for "shit" had nothing to do with batfamily or crossover.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
I'm not gonna call someone a bad writer if they can't juggle "families" of characters and extraneous crossovers while they're writing a serial in which they're ideally charged with only a main protagonist and a scant amount of support characters. Even in JLU, the writers only focused on a few characters at a time per episode.
i feel you're ignoring the loophole of there being no "perfect environment." like, ok, maybe its annoying and restricting writing about the sun being eaten by ...uh... a sun eater, and how that affects the real-world batman universe. but isn't that just as restraining / exhausting as explaining how the joker escaped arkham for the 50th time? the batfamily and/or crossovers are just one of many bits of history and continuity that the writer has to deal with.
brubaker can't pick up with a detective comics run, quickly kill off alfred, then tell the tale of how batman has no father figure. thats out of his control. what he could do, is creatively separate batman from alfred with a heart attack, or vacation, or whatever. its the writer's job to find a way to tell a good story in his way, regardless of the external issues.
for the record, in addition to already knowing these aspects of the job before you become a writer, i think it's also the writer's job to enjoy these challenges. whether its dealing with a time-flashing-zero hour, the hatred of another new robin, or a disinterest in batman's cape -- whatever the writer has a personal grief with, you'd think they'd have to / want to see these aspects as liberating, not just imposing. you get to create a world that does the shit you want it to do. geoff johnns, though message boardily hated, got to make a brazillion changes to GL within the confines of history, simply by tweaking what he could.
Originally Posted By: Rob
Fair enough, but again, the lack of convention really defeats the purpose of actually calling it "Batman."
damian/grayson is not something i'd want to see permanently, nor is it something i think could continue to hit. i'd also, as said, greatly prefer bruce wayne batman. but it was incredibly well done, and perfectly suited for the title - especially with so much of the tale revolving specifically around bruce and his absence. if you give it a fair shot, there's a good deal there to enjoy
They really need to lay off the "get down on your knees and slide under something" move. It doesn't really look that cool when you do it in slow motion.
Maybe I'm missing something but this game looks a hella more like the "real" Batman (ie, the O'Neill/Adams/Englehart/Rogers/Dini/Timm Batman) than anything Morrison's shat out since "Gothic." I'm almost hoping it DOES become "canon" Batman.
well, you're doing an awful lot of worrying about something that "need not happen".
Really?
Originally Posted By: Pariah
Sucks.
I suppose that is an awful lot of worrying....
Or are you implying that me taking the time to clarify my meaning at length qualifies as some kind of obsessive fearfulness? I'm only following your example here.
Quote:
but there's no reason to think the "similarity" will bring your fears to fruition.
Actually, circumstances being what they are between the two mediums (which I've already mentioned), I'd say the concern is well placed.
Also, you have a bad habit of abusing quotations. I didn't use the word "similarity."
Quote:
arkham city is not the first batman game to be successful. the 90s batfilms and 90s toons were both popular - in fact, much more so. there were correlations, synergies, and comparables, but in the end, they each remained their own world.
The consumer climate today is much different from the 90s when the videogame demographic was in its infancy and consisting of mostly sub-20 something year olds. And nowadays, people have a lot more to lose; there's more incentive to encourage and/or enforce synergy. Viral promotional campaigns that cross mediums (beyond just ads in comics) is really not that hard of a concept to grasp.
Originally Posted By: Rob
that is, actually, the point. this is your opinion. with emphasis both on "your" and "opinion."
I've been speaking generally throughout this thread. I know you've been desperately trying to keep me from doing so in an attempt to confine my meaning to a matter of personal preference. But I've been paying very little attention to your efforts.
Enjoyment is subjective. Quality can be quantified. And--again--generally, the former is correlative to the latter. Just as certain literary tropes are correlative to overall bad writing. Sales tend to be a reflection of this.
If you just have a problem admitting that writing you like happens to be low quality, that's understandable but it completely ignores the point here. I mean, I'll admit I enjoyed a lot of Joe Kelly's run on JLA; a lot of fan-service there that made me giddy (of course, now that I've grown up a bit, it's harder to admit). But I'll always be able to acknowledge that the writing was terrible: all flair, zero quality.
However, if you really want to argue that quality doesn't tend to wain noticeably with an increase in bodies, that's your prerogative, but don't expect me to correspond with ignorance based on the sheer principle of "yeah, well...that's just like...uh...your opinion man."
Quote:
i've read a lot of shit batman stories over the years, and i'd say nine times out of ten, the reason for "shit" had nothing to do with batfamily or crossover.
If every Batman story up till now used only a minimal amount of characters, refrained from a barrage of team ups, kept the character from corresponding with crossover events (be they family or otherwise), the sales would be two to three times better than what they have been. Bad solo stories and all. Because the writing would be better.
"that's just yer opinion pariah!"
Yeah. But it's the correct one.
Quote:
i feel you're ignoring the loophole of there being no "perfect environment." like, ok, maybe its annoying and restricting writing about the sun being eaten by ...uh... a sun eater, and how that affects the real-world batman universe. but isn't that just as restraining / exhausting as explaining how the joker escaped arkham for the 50th time?
No. 'Cuz regardless, there's still fewer characters to deal with. Not saying its easy to come up with decent Joker scheme. But focusing your energy on that is more practical than juggling a boatload of characters. The book says "Batman." Not Batman family. Or Flash family. Or Superman family. Or Wonder Woman family...
Quote:
its the writer's job to find a way to tell a good story in his way, regardless of the external issues.
And you think it makes sense to make it as difficult as possible for the writer to do said job?
Again, I'm not going to put blame squarely on the writer when the conditions are ridiculous and beyond the hope of any writer no matter how good he or she is.
Quote:
for the record, in addition to already knowing these aspects of the job before you become a writer, i think it's also the writer's job to enjoy these challenges.
Whether they enjoy writing within those confines or not isn't going to make the writing practical or even decent.
Originally Posted By: Rob
damian/grayson is not something i'd want to see permanently, nor is it something i think could continue to hit. i'd also, as said, greatly prefer bruce wayne batman. but it was incredibly well done, and perfectly suited for the title - especially with so much of the tale revolving specifically around bruce and his absence. if you give it a fair shot, there's a good deal there to enjoy
Wouldn't this mean that it simply would have been better to give the two characters their book rather than something showcased as a Batman feature?
well, you're doing an awful lot of worrying about something that "need not happen".
Really?
yes.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
The consumer climate today is much different from the 90s when the videogame demographic was in its infancy and consisting of mostly sub-20 something year olds. And nowadays, people have a lot more to lose; there's more incentive to encourage and/or enforce synergy. Viral promotional campaigns that cross mediums (beyond just ads in comics) is really not that hard of a concept to grasp.
and yet, nothing you've discussed has happened. not in the cold and distant 90s you remember, nor this current era. there's also no plans for such things, at least in the foreseeable future. so, it's possible you're absolutely correct about everything, and not only are the rest of us in this thread incorrect, but so are the media companies you're referencing. to which i concede a mighty bravisima.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
I'll admit I enjoyed a lot of Joe Kelly's run on JLA; a lot of fan-service there that made me giddy (of course, now that I've grown up a bit, it's harder to admit). But I'll always be able to acknowledge that the writing was terrible: all flair, zero quality.
that's all fine. everyone has geek out moments. but your base claim that batfamily books are of definitively lesser-quality than solo-batman books is still an opinion. potentially one i would even agree with, but something i'd clearly identify as an opinion. and one you paint with incredibly broad strokes, not giving those stories you've graded a fair (or simply "a") try.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
If every Batman story up till now used only a minimal amount of characters, refrained from a barrage of team ups, kept the character from corresponding with crossover events (be they family or otherwise), the sales would be two to three times better than what they have been. Bad solo stories and all. Because the writing would be better. "that's just yer opinion pariah!" Yeah. But it's the correct one.
it's an illogical one. based on nothing. like, really, nothing. i mean, hell, at the very core, the batfamily star "robin" was created only months after batman, and boosted (significantly) the sales of the titular character's books. your theory has already been incorrect for over 70 years!
Originally Posted By: Pariah
there's still fewer characters to deal with. Not saying its easy to come up with decent Joker scheme. But focusing your energy on that is more practical than juggling a boatload of characters.
i don't follow - why?
also, what is "too large" a family for you? it sounds like robin is out, but what about alfred? gordon? bullock? penguin? arkham? batmobile? is there a method to your theory? would the "magic number" translate to other characters, like superman? other media, like harry potter? was the cast of cheers too large? or less successful than the more streamlined fraiser spinoff?
Originally Posted By: Pariah
And you think it makes sense to make it as difficult as possible for the writer to do said job? Again, I'm not going to put blame squarely on the writer when the conditions are ridiculous and beyond the hope of any writer no matter how good he or she is.
conditions suck. in their job and in ours. writers are paid to make them unsuck as much as possible. granted, i'll readily admit some side stuff (be them crossovers or whatever) are messy, unnecessary, and detrimental. i imagine there are some mornings a writer wakes up, checks his email, and just shakes his head in woe. but until the reverse is true, and the 10 months without "events" produce issues of glorious perfection, i just can't shake the notion.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
Wouldn't this mean that it simply would have been better to give the two characters their book rather than something showcased as a Batman feature?
in other cases, maybe. but with morrison's run, it's the very clash of them being batman and robin that makes the pairing work [for me]. damian acting very much like the cocky asshole version of bruce wayne's son, critiquing the pretender in the cowl, in the middle of a joker attack, etc. there's a great "negative space" aspect to the run.
worth mentioning, as much as i didn't like the idea of the character, i really enjoy damian, at least morrison's. tim is tollerable, if not forgettable. grayson i prefer as nightwing, and out of gotham. every other sidekick (from jean-paul to huntress to spoiler to batgirl to batwoman) i'd much rather not be in my story, and not be in gotham. but damian, very quickly, became very awesome. he's a little shit, but for all the right reasons. there's an ultimate respect for bruce, and an inherent hatred for everyone else. he doesn't feel like he has to prove himself to anyone; rather, everyone has to prove everything to him. he's actually a better bruce than bruce most of the time. the fact that he's like 10 just makes it all the more awesome.
yes. taking the time to clarify your meaning at length qualifies as some kind of obsessive fearfulness.
Roger.
Originally Posted By: Rob
and yet, nothing you've discussed has happened.
I've already pointed out how the game's been given promotional content within the comicbooks. It's stands to reason that execs would be inclined for that arrangement to work in reverse if they so wished.
Say 'it hasn't happened' all you like. But don't disregard the precedent of the scenario.
Originally Posted By: Rob
that's all fine. everyone has geek out moments. but your base claim that batfamily books are of definitively lesser-quality than solo-batman books is still an opinion. potentially one i would even agree with, but something i'd clearly identify as an opinion. and one you paint with incredibly broad strokes, not giving those stories you've graded a fair (or simply "a") try.
Quality isn't subject to opinion though. That was my point.
Consider a movie with high production values but bad writing. One could argue over the story all they like, but the film itself couldn't be touched.
Originally Posted By: Rob
it's an illogical one. based on nothing. like, really, nothing. i mean, hell, at the very core, the batfamily star "robin" was created only months after batman, and boosted (significantly) the sales of the titular character's books. your theory has already been incorrect for over 70 years!
Batman got a boost in sales because he got his own book apart from Tec. Batman's staying power is built on Batman. Not extraneous characters. This is especially true today. It's specious to say that other characters aside from him are responsible for his popularity spurts. By your logic, the issues that didn't feature Robin should have killed the sales.
Originally Posted By: Rob
i don't follow - why?
Quite frankly, I think it's self evident.
Instead of spending an ungodly amount of time organizing characters and budgeting their time according to the scenes at hand, you're just concentrating on the actual conflict of the story. Nine times out of ten, the former will be far more contrived than the latter regardless of what the conflict is.
Quote:
also, what is "too large" a family for you? it sounds like robin is out, but what about alfred? gordon? bullock? penguin? arkham? batmobile? is there a method to your theory? would the "magic number" translate to other characters, like superman? other media, like harry potter? was the cast of cheers too large? or less successful than the more streamlined fraiser spinoff?
The phrase "minimal amount" isn't equivalent to a "magic number." The key here would be having as few as possible. This, of course, conflicts with the modern principle of creating as many family members and associates as one thinks he or she can get away with and giving them all some face time at every available opportunity.
The point is that Batman was designed to only have a few close family members being Alfred and Robin. And circa 86, Robin was given less and less face time. In which case, Batman worked quite well with just Alfred the majority of the time. Being more practical as a loner character, the stories tended to have more quality to them. This was especially true of Legends of the Dark Knight since it didn't need to worry about family members or main continuity.
Bullock and Gordon are auxiliary characters. Villains like Penguin are simply apart of the conflict for the most part. However, there can be an overdose of them too--as Loeb has shown us time and again.
In the case of other characters, the minimal amount would seem to depend on their level of social extroversion or lack thereof. In the case of Superman, I'd say a healthy supporting cast is not impractical according to his openness with people. However, as is the case with all serials that emphasize the qualities and exploits of an individual character, too many egos apart from the main attraction will inevitably distract from it. So while a goodly sized "family" may or may not be practical for the character, the writer will still be stuck trying to balance the exploits of the main character with the participation of the family. And again, if it's too big, the writing will be impractical even if implementation of additional characters makes sense. As such, all main characters could stand to do with less "family" support regardless of whether or not their presence makes sense.
Originally Posted By: Rob
but until the reverse is true, and the 10 months without "events" produce issues of glorious perfection, i just can't shake the notion.
I wouldn't expect perfection. Just better, more practical writing on average.
Originally Posted By: Rob
in other cases, maybe. but with morrison's run, it's the very clash of them being batman and robin that makes the pairing work [for me]. damian acting very much like the cocky asshole version of bruce wayne's son, critiquing the pretender in the cowl, in the middle of a joker attack, etc. there's a great "negative space" aspect to the run.
I'm curious: would it have made you unhappy to have the book published as "Dick Grayson and Robin" even if the writing was exactly the same?
yes. taking the time to clarify your meaning at length qualifies as some kind of obsessive fearfulness.
Roger.
that's ironically somewhat spot on. well played.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
Say 'it hasn't happened' all you like.
"it hasn't happened" is really all that needs to be said for your argument to not have a point.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
Quality isn't subject to opinion though. That was my point.Consider a movie with high production values but bad writing. One could argue over the story all they like, but the film itself couldn't be touched.
that's a premise based on someone establishing the writing was bad and/or the productions were high. it's all based on perspective and subjective opinion. for a more detailed example, this difference of opinion is clearly evidenced in every episode of siskel and ebert, every oscar nominee or snub, every discussion on the view, every purchaser of a liefeld book, every reteller of the referees at the super bowl, and every utterance on the internet. ever.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
Batman got a boost in sales because he got his own book apart from Tec. Batman's staying power is built on Batman. Not extraneous characters.
adding robin to the batman comic, months after batman was introduced, boosted sales significantly. there's no debate or nitpicking here, that's simply what happened. this, quickly, defies your two points: (1) that batman has to be a solo character, when his solo run lasted less than a single year and the launch of his solo title featured robin on the cover. and (2) that batbooks with other characters reduce sales, when the number of prints doubled because of the addition of robin.
this, really, would conclude those specific points. in 1940.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
By your logic, the issues that didn't feature Robin should have killed the sales.
i wouldn't make a claim that my personal preference is where sales are won or lost. that would be silly. books that i think are awesome can sell well or sell poorly, regardless of: author, artist, characters, extended families, crossovers, etc. personal opinions are not individually part of the industry's driving force, which is reinforced, every day, by... well, the industry.
we live in a world where american idol is by far the #1 show. where the kardashians are hollywood icons. where comic fans rave about captain america and poo on green lantern, but the box office is split between them by about 10%. with all the stuff continually being published or produced that you, specifically, loathe, i can't believe how that point isn't sitting with you.
as said very early on in this thread, i actually agree with you on my bat-interests. i am more often than not interested in the "dark" stories, the solo stories. i'd rather not have any of the added family, even robin. i'd rather have a black cape than a blue cape. i'd rather gotham not relate to other, more "comic booky" cities in the DCU. i'd rather the batmobile, hang glider, smoke pellets, and other tools didn't feature a batman logo on them. but i'm very clear on all of this being my opinion, and having no real basis on how the universe, as a whole, sees and/or buys the character.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
Instead of spending an ungodly amount of time organizing characters and budgeting their time according to the scenes at hand, you're just concentrating on the actual conflict of the story. Nine times out of ten, the former will be far more contrived than the latter regardless of what the conflict is. {SNIP} The key here would be having as few as possible. This, of course, conflicts with the modern principle of creating as many family members and associates as one thinks he or she can get away with and giving them all some face time at every available opportunity.
does that make the episodes of justice league and/or justice league unlimited the "10 out of 10"? or the authority's original run? the legendary claremont x-men years? batfamily involving bat arcs, like no man's land? does this de-qualify the millions (!) of batfans that prefer batfamilies? or the obviously-numbers-based-decisions to create (and recreate) characters like batgirl, batwoman, batman inc., etc.?
these are beloved tales and characters to some folks out there, who would argue to the end that they are the higher quality, and that 70 years of "batman versus bad guy" story lines would be on the lower end. i mean, geebus, there's a whole world of fans that like the fucking legion of super heroes. the legion of super heroes! i likely can't make a stronger argument about quality (and grouping size) being more subjective than the fucking legion of super heroes! (the legion! of super heroes!!)
Originally Posted By: Pariah
The point is that Batman was designed to only have a few close family members being Alfred and Robin. And circa 86, Robin was given less and less face time. In which case, Batman worked quite well with just Alfred the majority of the time. Being more practical as a loner character, the stories tended to have more quality to them.
to you. and, quite frankly, to me. and, certainly, lots of other folks out there. who share our opinion.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
Originally Posted By: Rob
but until the reverse is true, and the 10 months without "events" produce issues of glorious perfection, i just can't shake the notion.
I wouldn't expect perfection. Just better, more practical writing on average.
i'm quite certain you wouldn't need my help in naming dozens of bat books, miniseries, titles, and even eras where a solo batman book (or cartoon, or movie, or tv series, or video game) was shit.
Originally Posted By: Pariah
I'm curious: would it have made you unhappy to have the book published as "Dick Grayson and Robin" even if the writing was exactly the same?
i honestly don't care much for what the book is called. in fact, i probably refer to it as "morrison's run" or "morrison's batman" more than "batman and robin." but, getting picky, naming it "dick grayson and robin" makes as much sense as calling other books "bruce wayne and robin," or "batman and damian" versus "batman and tim drake." grayson was (playing the role of) batman in the book - he was referred to as batman. and, again, one of the great joys i had in the book was the over-the-top obviousness of grayson not being batman. damian noted it, gordon noted it, alfred noted it, and grayson noted it.
it was interesting to see the dynamic of how respect had to be earned, or was outright taken away. it was refreshing to see a new pairing between "established" characters. it was awesome to have the continual deference to bruce wayne's awesomeness.
you and i aren't all that dissimilar on our personal preferences, and i think you're really short changing yourself by not giving the first dozen or so issues a try.
). If there was a pattern among readership similar to your own experience with his relatively recent stuff, I could better acknowledge your opinion as a reflection of the general feel towards his writing.
