Ready for more Batman! No, too bad there is another one.

  • 71 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by dvader654 (44751 posts) -

Some Gamestops have just received this new poster to put in their store.

So this is most likely Rocksteady's new game. This probably means the next GI cover is Batman Arkham beaten to death.

I love these games but Origins was it, no more can be done. Unless this has a totally different game structure I don't know if I could get that excited.

#2 Posted by Jacanuk (4726 posts) -

Wait you actually liked Batman Origins?

But if Rocksteady are back in charge of batman i am truly excited and cant wait to see what they will do next, just hope they will tone down on the AC open-world a bit and do more AA and focus on a great story, i never got into AC like i did with AA:

#3 Posted by hrt_rulz01 (6214 posts) -

@Jacanuk said:

Wait you actually liked Batman Origins?

But if Rocksteady are back in charge of batman i am truly excited and cant wait to see what they will do next, just hope they will tone down on the AC open-world a bit and do more AA and focus on a great story, i never got into AC like i did with AA:

Yes, completely agree on everything you said.

#4 Edited by Pikminmaniac (9047 posts) -

@Jacanuk said:

Wait you actually liked Batman Origins?

But if Rocksteady are back in charge of batman i am truly excited and cant wait to see what they will do next, just hope they will tone down on the AC open-world a bit and do more AA and focus on a great story, i never got into AC like i did with AA:

I completely disagree with this. Arkham City was so far superior to Arkham Asylum it's become impossible for me to go back to the first game. The open world was done so extremely well and remains to be the most well designed and content filled world of its kind to date.

But I'm more into interactivity than story personally so I guess it's just preference, but Arkham City's world is absolutely superb. I hope they expand on that.

In any case I'm excited for this. They did a good job with Arkham Asylum, but Arkham City put them on the map as one of the best developers in the business. I'm watching these guys closely right now.

#5 Posted by dvader654 (44751 posts) -

@Jacanuk said:

Wait you actually liked Batman Origins?

But if Rocksteady are back in charge of batman i am truly excited and cant wait to see what they will do next, just hope they will tone down on the AC open-world a bit and do more AA and focus on a great story, i never got into AC like i did with AA:

Yeah but Origins was the formula reaching its limit like RE0 for RE or GoW 3 for GoW. It needs a change up now it being Rocksteady I am pretty sure it will be something different. But I was still hoping for TMNT.

#6 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18509 posts) -

Batman's Creed

#7 Posted by Jacanuk (4726 posts) -

@Pikminmaniac said:

@Jacanuk said:

Wait you actually liked Batman Origins?

But if Rocksteady are back in charge of batman i am truly excited and cant wait to see what they will do next, just hope they will tone down on the AC open-world a bit and do more AA and focus on a great story, i never got into AC like i did with AA:

I completely disagree with this. Arkham City was so far superior to Arkham Asylum it's become impossible for me to go back to the first game. The open world was done so extremely well and remains to be the most well designed and content filled world of its kind to date.

But I'm more into interactivity than story personally so I guess it's just preference, but Arkham City's world is absolutely superb. I hope they expand on that.

In any case I'm excited for this. They did a good job with Arkham Asylum, but Arkham City put them on the map as one of the best developers in the business. I'm watching these guys closely right now.

I disagree here but then i am also a story above all else gamer, so considering the kinda weak story in AC and the "small" open world. no surprise there.

Also i do kinda feel that a game like Batman should stick to having a strong story and not fall prey to what Origins did and just make the world open and think thats enough.

#8 Posted by speedfreak48t5p (8144 posts) -

Never even finished the first one.

#9 Edited by firefox59 (4403 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00 said:

Batman's Creed

Vantage points to scan for bad guys and unlock the map. It hurt just to type that.

#10 Edited by ShepardCommandr (2736 posts) -

More Batman,really? Three games not enough?

Why not do another dc hero?

#11 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18509 posts) -

@firefox59 said:

@Black_Knight_00 said:

Batman's Creed

Vantage points to scan for bad guys and unlock the map. It hurt just to type that.

I was referring more to annual releases of identical buggy games, but that works as well.

#12 Edited by ZZoMBiE13 (22911 posts) -

Are we sure that's not just promo materials for the console release of Arkham Origins: Blackgate? It was already out on the Vita and 3DS but is coming to the Xbox and PS3 this month.

If it is indeed a Rocksteady entry into the franchise, then I am very interested. If it's another game from WB Montreal that follows Origins lead, then I'll take a pass.

Arkham Origins was one of the biggest letdowns I can recall, and Blackgate was woefully dull. So I'm pretty much not interested in any Arkham that doesn't have Rocksteady printed on the box.

#13 Edited by Ballroompirate (23029 posts) -

@ZZoMBiE13 said:

Are we sure that's not just promo materials for the console release of Arkham Origins: Blackgate? It was already out on the Vita and 3DS but is coming to the Xbox and PS3 this month.

If it is indeed a Rocksteady entry into the franchise, then I am very interested. If it's another game from WB Montreal that follows Origins lead, then I'll take a pass.

Arkham Origins was one of the biggest letdowns I can recall, and Blackgate was woefully dull. So I'm pretty much not interested in any Arkham that doesn't have Rocksteady printed on the box.

That's my guess as well, it's probably the console version of Blackgate.

#14 Edited by Metamania (12015 posts) -

@dvader654 said:

@Jacanuk said:

Wait you actually liked Batman Origins?

But if Rocksteady are back in charge of batman i am truly excited and cant wait to see what they will do next, just hope they will tone down on the AC open-world a bit and do more AA and focus on a great story, i never got into AC like i did with AA:

Yeah but Origins was the formula reaching its limit like RE0 for RE or GoW 3 for GoW. It needs a change up now it being Rocksteady I am pretty sure it will be something different. But I was still hoping for TMNT.

No, Origins was such a terrible Batman game in many respects. It was very glitchy, the mechanics had a lot of problems going for it, the story wasn't up to par in comparison to Asylum or City, etc. Origins is such a fucking mess that WBM refuses to fix all the bugs and glitches for it. What a piece of shit!

On top of that, if you liked a game that was THIS BAD, then the impression I'm getting from you, with all due respect, is that you prefer shitty developers who make shitty games. I can't believe there are people out there who think Origins was remotely that good when it had so many problems going for it. I'm only going to be playing Origins one more time due to the DLC that's coming out soon, but that's it.

That being said, Rocksteady knows what they're doing with Batman and I hope they take what made Batman awesome and keep going with it while learning from their mistakes. Asylum was focused on its story and it's actually better than what City provided, in some respects in terms of story, but I also enjoyed the nice freedom and open-world gameplay that City offered even more (not that Asylum was not open-world, but it was very limiting in that aspect). Also, I prefer City over Asylum just because it improved on nearly everything Asylum did and more. Reminded me of Assassin's Creed II basically improving everything over the original, thus making it my favorite AC game of all time. :)

As far as TMNT goes, Rocksteady would be the only developer that I trust to develop something based on the series, so that's something I can agree with you on, for sure. Can you imagine an open-world NYC, with all the Turtles having their own objectives to complete? The combat system would take obvious elements of the battle system in the Arkham games and used here to great effect. Something along those lines...when was the last good Turtles game that did come out? IMO, it would have to be TMNT IV: Turtles In Time on SNES. It captured everything I wanted out of a Turtles game at the time. Since then, all we've been getting is one crappy Turtles game after another every now and then, although the TMNT 2007 game wasn't bad as much as I thought it would be.

#15 Posted by Metamania (12015 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00 said:

Batman's Creed

Probably not, since Batman doesn't kill. :P

#16 Edited by Black_Knight_00 (18509 posts) -

@Metamania said:

@Black_Knight_00 said:

Batman's Creed

Probably not, since Batman doesn't kill. :P

Today's pussy batman doesn't. He killed aplenty in Bob Kane's original 1940s and up to the 1980s comics. Link

#17 Posted by _HazBro_ (124 posts) -

That's disappointing if that's what Rocksteady's new game is. I like the Batman games a lot but I really don't have any interest in playing another one.

I also have to say I'm quite bored with most of the big AAA titles being announced for next generation. I'm really not excited about playing another iteration of a game from the previous generation in such quick succession. I'm having a hard time trying to think about how they can differentiate a new Batman game from the last 3.

It'd really have to have some interesting new mechanics for me to be excited. If it's simply just another Batman game in the exact same style but with prettier graphics I won't be excited.

#18 Posted by Metamania (12015 posts) -
@Black_Knight_00 said:

@Metamania said:

@Black_Knight_00 said:

Batman's Creed

Probably not, since Batman doesn't kill. :P

Today's pussy batman doesn't. He killed aplenty in Bob Kane's original 1940s and up to the 1980s comics. Link

Huh, didn't know that. Still, I prefer Batman defeating his enemies instead of killing them, but that's just me.

#19 Posted by ZZoMBiE13 (22911 posts) -

@_hazbro_ said:

That's disappointing if that's what Rocksteady's new game is. I like the Batman games a lot but I really don't have any interest in playing another one.

I also have to say I'm quite bored with most of the big AAA titles being announced for next generation. I'm really not excited about playing another iteration of a game from the previous generation in such quick succession. I'm having a hard time trying to think about how they can differentiate a new Batman game from the last 3.

It'd really have to have some interesting new mechanics for me to be excited. If it's simply just another Batman game in the exact same style but with prettier graphics I won't be excited.

What if they hired Adam West to do the VO and did it all up in a 60s T.V. Batman & Robin style? Complete with "BAP!" and "WHAM!" visual sound effects? :P

#20 Posted by bezza2011 (2548 posts) -

Sick of batman and i didn't even play origins, i just think they have done enough for what i wanted out of batman for now, i mean looking back the fighting was so repetitive Arkham City bettered Arkham Asylum on gameplay but not story and honestly I just want to have a break from batman now, there is something called over indulging and i think if batman is done again it maybe a step to far for me personal but it's coming there is no doubt about that, 2 developers working on batman games it seems.

#21 Posted by Ariabed (1123 posts) -

@Pikminmaniac: I agree with u AC is the best batman game, ever and one of the best games I've ever played, you really get a feel for what it's like to be batman, and how he strikes fear into his enemies. But I don't know how they can improve on AC apart from adding batwing and batmobile lol

#22 Posted by mjorh (802 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00 said:

Batman's Creed

Nah , it's not Ubisoft !

@Black_Knight_00 said:

@Metamania said:

@Black_Knight_00 said:

Batman's Creed

Probably not, since Batman doesn't kill. :P

Today's pussy batman doesn't. He killed aplenty in Bob Kane's original 1940s and up to the 1980s comics. Link

:D, so if u don't kill some one you're a "pussy" ?

+

Can't wait to the official announcement, i believe in Rocksteady !

#23 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18509 posts) -

@Metamania said:

Huh, didn't know that. Still, I prefer Batman defeating his enemies instead of killing them, but that's just me.

Fair enough, I always found it unrealistic: you'd think that after the 10.000th innocent killed by the Joker, Batman would stop delivering him to the same prison he ascaped from 50 times and just break his neck and stop his killing spree once and for all. That or freeze him in carbonite or something.

#24 Edited by ZZoMBiE13 (22911 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00 said:

@Metamania said:

Huh, didn't know that. Still, I prefer Batman defeating his enemies instead of killing them, but that's just me.

Fair enough, I always found it unrealistic: you'd think that after the 10.000th innocent killed by the Joker, Batman would stop delivering him to the same prison he ascaped from 50 times and just break his neck and stop his killing spree once and for all. That or freeze him in carbonite or something.

Well if you want to talk about realism, if Gotham City were a real place they would have enacted the death penalty after the first or second Joker spree. There wouldn't be any Arkham Asylum to hang green question marks in. There's just be a little room with a metal slab and a bunch of syringes.

But realism has no place in comic books. :P

#25 Posted by Randolph (10542 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00 said:

@Metamania said:

Huh, didn't know that. Still, I prefer Batman defeating his enemies instead of killing them, but that's just me.

Fair enough, I always found it unrealistic: you'd think that after the 10.000th innocent killed by the Joker, Batman would stop delivering him to the same prison he ascaped from 50 times and just break his neck and stop his killing spree once and for all. That or freeze him in carbonite or something.

I read an what if style alternate take that had Joker kill yet another Robin, Tim Drake this time, and Batman beat him within an inch of his life. So Joker starts in on him about he'll just keep killing and Batman crushes his neck with a sudden sharp blow and destroys his vocal chords, rendering Joker totally inert when he realizes he can't even hear himself laugh anymore.

So he could stop him without killing him, he would just have to be a little more cruel than usual. At least as cruel as the Dark Knight Returns version of himself, or the All Star Batman and Robin version that would break a rapists leg and hand horribly so that he would suffer from excruciating arthritis for the rest of his life and remember what he tried to do every time it rained.

#26 Edited by ZZoMBiE13 (22911 posts) -

@Randolph said:

At least as cruel as the Dark Knight Returns version of himself

But the Dark Knight Returns version of Batman killed the Joker.

#27 Edited by Randolph (10542 posts) -

@ZZoMBiE13 said:

@Randolph said:

At least as cruel as the Dark Knight Returns version of himself

But the Dark Knight Returns version of Batman killed the Joker.

Actually he didn't. He broke his neck, but it wasn't fatal. Joker twisted his neck around the rest of the way and finished himself off. Only watch the vid if you have already watched or read this masterpiece. Or just don't care. :)

#28 Posted by ZZoMBiE13 (22911 posts) -

@Randolph: I know that how they showed it in the cartoon. Now that I stop and think about it, I honestly don't recall if that was the same way it happened in the comic or not.

My memory is so awful these days anyway. He could have tickled the Joker all the way back to Arkham where the two shared lime sherbet and pillow fights and I would have trouble remembering. lol

#29 Posted by Randolph (10542 posts) -

@ZZoMBiE13: *tsk tsk tsk* It's a "feature length animation", not a cartoon. ;)

#30 Posted by ZZoMBiE13 (22911 posts) -

@Randolph said:

@ZZoMBiE13: *tsk tsk tsk* It's a "feature length animation", not a cartoon. ;)

Heh.

They did do a really good job with that car... err, "feature length animated film". Of course all the DC animated stuff has been sublime, but that one in particular really captured the book and it's style.

#31 Posted by Randolph (10542 posts) -

Flash Point Paradox was brilliant as well. That one had the Thomas Wayne Batman, who was essentially the Punisher wearing the cowl.

#32 Posted by ZZoMBiE13 (22911 posts) -

@Randolph: I did enjoy that one. It was about as dark as I've ever seen the DCAU though. You'd have thought it was the 90s all over again. lol

I'm really looking forward to their take on the Arkham versions of Batman that they are supposed to make a film about later this year. Should be interesting to see how they translate the game's aesthetic to their animated style.

#33 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18509 posts) -

@ZZoMBiE13 said:

Well if you want to talk about realism, if Gotham City were a real place they would have enacted the death penalty after the first or second Joker spree. There wouldn't be any Arkham Asylum to hang green question marks in. There's just be a little room with a metal slab and a bunch of syringes.

But realism has no place in comic books. :P

The death penalty is not applied everywhere though and since Gotham is supposed to be New York City, where death penalty has been outlawed since 1963... ;)

#34 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18509 posts) -

@Randolph:

That's my point: Batman is a scientist with unlimited money, surely he could come up with some way to permanently neutralize supervillains without killing them instead of committing them to the same facility that has been show time and time again to have more holes than Captain Holes. But no... DC would rather sacrifice logic in order to have a recurring villain, especially a cash cow like the Joker.

#35 Edited by ShangTsung7 (247 posts) -

@Jacanuk said:

Wait you actually liked Batman Origins?

But if Rocksteady are back in charge of batman i am truly excited and cant wait to see what they will do next, just hope they will tone down on the AC open-world a bit and do more AA and focus on a great story, i never got into AC like i did with AA:

wait you actually DIDN'T like the open world in Batman AC? lol

see, i'm with you but in a complete opposite fashion. i'm hoping like hell rocksteady returns for the next Arkham game "cause Origins sucked balls!" and i'm wanting them to INCREASE on the sandbox to give us a greater world to explore, don't get me wrong the sandbox in AC was great and i loved it but it did leave a bit to be desired and it certainly wouldn't hurt to expand on it a little.

#36 Posted by Vatusus (4691 posts) -

Maybe is just a bundle of the three games?

#37 Posted by Randolph (10542 posts) -

@Vatusus said:

Maybe is just a bundle of the three games?

I would like that, so long as they take the time to put some polish on the amateur job that was on Origins.

#38 Posted by SlyRoxas97 (59 posts) -

I haven't played Arkham Origins yet so I can't decide whether I should be excited for a new Batman game or not, but if it was made by Rocksteady I'd be really excited.

#39 Edited by ZZoMBiE13 (22911 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00 said:

@ZZoMBiE13 said:

Well if you want to talk about realism, if Gotham City were a real place they would have enacted the death penalty after the first or second Joker spree. There wouldn't be any Arkham Asylum to hang green question marks in. There's just be a little room with a metal slab and a bunch of syringes.

But realism has no place in comic books. :P

The death penalty is not applied everywhere though and since Gotham is supposed to be New York City, where death penalty has been outlawed since 1963... ;)

If NYC had a Joker, it wouldn't be outlawed. ;)

I never really thought of Gotham as NYC though. Metropolis seemed more "New Yorky" than Gotham to me. I always thought of Gotham as a Detroit analog. Detroit by way of Robocop anyway.

Of course they've both had statues of Liberty in one version or another so I guess it's up for interpretation. And I think Metropolis is in Kansas now if Smallville is to be believed?

lol. Ohh DC Comics, don't ever change, you crazy diamond.

#40 Edited by cooolio (496 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00: If you did not realize it already, it could be said that batman is somewhat crazy himself. He is a man driven my his desire to make his parents death mean something, to give reason to them. He faces every criminal and cannot bring himself to kill because his parents were killed. Anyway, I prefer not to think about it that deeply because it makes all stories seem shallow. Why is it so hard for people to compare bruce wayne's voice to batman's? Why can no one do the same with superman? Has no one ever seen Clark Kent without his glasses? Then again I have only enjoyed maybe 4 comics so far in my 20 years of life, so I am sure my knowledge and insight pales in comparison to yours.

And you have to have a real strong will to not kill someone. Be that at is it may, I see nothing wrong with a hero making someone wish they were dead and torturing them or paralyzing them from the waist down.

#41 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18509 posts) -

@ZZoMBiE13 said:

@Black_Knight_00 said:

The death penalty is not applied everywhere though and since Gotham is supposed to be New York City, where death penalty has been outlawed since 1963... ;)

If NYC had a Joker, it wouldn't be outlawed. ;)

I never really thought of Gotham as NYC though. Metropolis seemed more "New Yorky" than Gotham to me. I always thought of Gotham as a Detroit analog. Detroit by way of Robocop anyway.

Of course they've both had statues of Liberty in one version or another so I guess it's up for interpretation. And I think Metropolis is in Kansas now if Smallville is to be believed?

lol. Ohh DC Comics, don't ever change, you crazy diamond.

I moved a very similar objection to a DC-phile priend of mine and he explained to me that Gotham is "NYC by night", while Metropolis is "NYC by day".

Whether that is correct or not I cannot say.

#42 Edited by Black_Knight_00 (18509 posts) -

@cooolio said:

@Black_Knight_00: If you did not realize it already, it could be said that batman is somewhat crazy himself. He is a man driven my his desire to make his parents death mean something, to give reason to them. He faces every criminal and cannot bring himself to kill because his parents were killed. Anyway, I prefer not to think about it that deeply because it makes all stories seem shallow. Why is it so hard for people to compare bruce wayne's voice to batman's? Why can no one do the same with superman? Has no one ever seen Clark Kent without his glasses? Then again I have only enjoyed maybe 4 comics so far in my 20 years of life, so I am sure my knowledge and insight pales in comparison to yours.

And you have to have a real strong will to not kill someone. Be that at is it may, I see nothing wrong with a hero making someone wish they were dead and torturing them or paralyzing them from the waist down.

Ooh, I have one more for you: how come Bruce Wayne has commissioned his own industries to produce all his toys, ranging from the Batmobile and the Batplane to grappling hooks, batarangs, gas grenades, bat-suits and so on... but not one of his workers is able to piece together that the bulky millionaire who has them build Batman's toys is the bulky vigilante who uses and wears all those toys?

Also, someone had to build all that stuff he has in the Batcave: the hangar for his plane, the giant rotating platform he uses to rotate his car, all those computers, pipes and cables. Not one of the dozens of engineers, masons and electricians he simply had to employ is able to figure out he's Batman :P

#43 Posted by Jacanuk (4726 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00 said:

@cooolio said:

@Black_Knight_00: If you did not realize it already, it could be said that batman is somewhat crazy himself. He is a man driven my his desire to make his parents death mean something, to give reason to them. He faces every criminal and cannot bring himself to kill because his parents were killed. Anyway, I prefer not to think about it that deeply because it makes all stories seem shallow. Why is it so hard for people to compare bruce wayne's voice to batman's? Why can no one do the same with superman? Has no one ever seen Clark Kent without his glasses? Then again I have only enjoyed maybe 4 comics so far in my 20 years of life, so I am sure my knowledge and insight pales in comparison to yours.

And you have to have a real strong will to not kill someone. Be that at is it may, I see nothing wrong with a hero making someone wish they were dead and torturing them or paralyzing them from the waist down.

Ooh, I have one more for you: how come Bruce Wayne has commissioned his own industries to produce all his toys, ranging from the Batmobile and the Batplane to grappling hooks, batarangs, gas grenades, bat-suits and so on... but not one of his workers is able to piece together that the bulky millionaire who has them build Batman's toys is the bulky vigilante who uses and wears all those toys?

Also, someone had to build all that stuff he has in the Batcave: the hangar for his plane, the giant rotating platform he uses to rotate his car, all those computers, pipes and cables. Not one of the dozens of engineers, masons and electricians he simply had to employ is able to figure out he's Batman :P

Well, if you see the Bale Batman movies the director takes a lot of liberties but Batman builds most of his gadgets himself, and in the comics he has Fox (Morgan Freeman) and Albert to help him, besides that Wayne Tech is a multi-billion $$$ company making tech and weapons so as the owner he gets to have a huge R&D department which allows for him to get prototypes and plans before most even sees it and he of course then improves and alters to suit his needs, so no one thinks about connecting the dots because there are almost no dots to connect.

As to the batcave it was done by his ancestors, back then not as a batcave of course but as a cold storage and also to move slaves during that time. As to the modern cave well, most was already there so Bruce Wayne just upgraded it and with his fortune its easy enough to make "workers" disappear if he had the need for help.

Also Batman is a comic book superhero and he doesn't really exist ;)

#44 Posted by turtlethetaffer (16789 posts) -

I'm not terribly certain what more they could do as far as expanding the gameplay goes. AC was pretty much the ultimate realization of what Rocksteady set out to do.

#45 Edited by Jacanuk (4726 posts) -

@turtlethetaffer said:

I'm not terribly certain what more they could do as far as expanding the gameplay goes. AC was pretty much the ultimate realization of what Rocksteady set out to do.

What a crazy and sad statement to come with.

No game is so perfect it can't be improved, and what a sad gaming world we would have if people in the industry actually ran around thinking that. Infact if you ever sit down and think anything is perfect you might as well be dead. And AC certainly wasn't that perfect, in fact it was broken in not so few places and for people who play games for the story, it was a weak halfdone story that was just lacking a lot of what made AA so great. Particular the boss battles in AA was a area where it was better than AC´s

#46 Posted by lumzi32 (332 posts) -

Arkham Asylum is the only one I played and to be honest, while I found it pretty cool, it did not really match the hype. It doesn't help that I am generally not stealth friendly, either.

The bits of the story I encountered weren't that great and the combat is probably its most overrated feature. The gadget and detective mode things were rather great, though.

I personally would like a Batman game in Gotham proper and not another Arkham location.

#47 Posted by cooolio (496 posts) -

. I would not mind seeing more emphasis put on batman using the darkness to his advantage. Maybe have him throw a batarang at the one light in a room and see enemies fire off into the air as you take down their allies. Actually being able to drive the Batmobile and Batwing would be awesome. Next gen visuals and new animations for combat and characters in general can add more. If I am not mistaken, Batman's cape is flame retardant so fire could pose be an environment threat. It would be awesome to save someone from a burning building with batman jus holding up his cape and rushing through the fire.

There is also the possibility of car chases, more emphasis on collecting information, gangs, more gadgets, team ups with Nightwing, Robin, etc.

#48 Edited by Netret0120 (2198 posts) -

Milk

milk

milk

milk

Milk it till it dies!!!!

#49 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18509 posts) -

@Jacanuk said:

Well, if you see the Bale Batman movies the director takes a lot of liberties but Batman builds most of his gadgets himself, and in the comics he has Fox (Morgan Freeman) and Albert to help him, besides that Wayne Tech is a multi-billion $$$ company making tech and weapons so as the owner he gets to have a huge R&D department which allows for him to get prototypes and plans before most even sees it and he of course then improves and alters to suit his needs, so no one thinks about connecting the dots because there are almost no dots to connect.

As to the batcave it was done by his ancestors, back then not as a batcave of course but as a cold storage and also to move slaves during that time. As to the modern cave well, most was already there so Bruce Wayne just upgraded it and with his fortune its easy enough to make "workers" disappear if he had the need for help.

Also Batman is a comic book superhero and he doesn't really exist ;)

Yeah, I bet Batan has cast and hammered down the bat-shaped steel plates of his Batplane in his basement. Also the fact he has exclusive access to prototypes further proves my point: if they are one of a kind prototypes, it would be even easier for the people who built them to piece together that he's Batman! "Uhm... isn't that thing in the back of Batman's car the same reactor we delivered to Wayne manor last week...?" ;)

Come on man, you are defending the indefensible :D

#50 Posted by turtlethetaffer (16789 posts) -

@Jacanuk said:

@turtlethetaffer said:

I'm not terribly certain what more they could do as far as expanding the gameplay goes. AC was pretty much the ultimate realization of what Rocksteady set out to do.

What a crazy and sad statement to come with.

No game is so perfect it can't be improved, and what a sad gaming world we would have if people in the industry actually ran around thinking that. Infact if you ever sit down and think anything is perfect you might as well be dead. And AC certainly wasn't that perfect, in fact it was broken in not so few places and for people who play games for the story, it was a weak halfdone story that was just lacking a lot of what made AA so great. Particular the boss battles in AA was a area where it was better than AC´s

My point was that it improved so much on AA that it's very difficult to see where they cam vastly improve the next game. I did not say the game was perfect because I'm not a moron who thinks that things made by humans an be perfect. Obviously there's room for improvement in small places, but my point is that AC blew AA away in terms of gameplay; it smoothed out combat, gave Batman a lot more tools and improved the AA formula with its side quests and more open environment. Didn't people widely pan Origins simply because it wasn't a big improvement over AC? Sure there were story and balance issues but the biggest criticism I have seen about Origins is that it didn't change or improve much over City.

There's no need for the condescending tone, either :/

Neither story in the games were that great, and the boss battles in AA really were not that good to begin with. Honestly, the bosses in AA and AC are basically on the same level for different reasons. Sure, AA was a tad more focused, but the fact is that there's not that much to do in the game world outside the story and the combat is clunky as hell when compared to AC.

I'm not saying either game is perfect. Yes, there's room for improvement in AC. My point is that it likely won't be as well received because the enxt Arkham game likely won't be a huge step up from AC unless they go for something completely and totally different.