Batman: Arkham 3

[RoJoHen]

http://batman-news.com/2013/02/12/ba...-2013-release/

So I guess a couple weeks ago it was confirmed that a new Arkham game would be released later this year. I just got finished playing through a bunch of the downloadable content for Arkham City, and I am more than ready for another installment.

Points of interest: It looks like Rocksteady will not be developing this new sequel, which could end up being a good or bad thing (who knows?).

There were also a rumors of a new Silver Age Batman/Justice League prequel, which may or may not be this new Arkham game. I personally hope that they are different games, as Arkham City's story did certain things that set it up for a continuation.

If they want it to be a multi-character game, I'd rather they do what they did with Arkham City by including Catwoman. You could also throw Robin or Nightwing in there if you want, but I'd prefer the story to be solely in the Batman universe.

[AlphaMan]

Not developed by Rocksteady? This game just went from "definite buy" to "wait and see."

[Hartzilla2007]

AlphaMan wrote:

---

Not developed by Rocksteady? This game just went from "definite buy" to "wait and see."

The article makes that sound like thats a rumor and not definate.

[Timby]

AlphaMan wrote:

---

Not developed by Rocksteady? This game just went from "definite buy" to "wait and see."

We have no concrete information. We know precisely three things: That there is a new Arkham game in development, that Rocksteady has been working on a new project since Arkham City was locked, and Paul Dini is not involved.

We literally know nothing more than that.

[RoJoHen]

Frankly, I'm just happy that a new game has officially been announced.

[Reverend]

That reminds me, I really ought to finish Arkham City one of these days...

Also pencil me in for "interested but wait and see." If neither Rocksteady nor Dini are in then I don't see how exceptions could be very high at all.

[Timby]

Reverend wrote:

---

If neither Rocksteady nor Dini are in then I don't see how exceptions could be very high at all.

Dini isn't a great loss. Arkham City is a great game, but the writing and plot structure are easily its weakest links (unless you're a fan of relentless misogyny and Jeph Loeb-style "shove everyone into the story regardless of whether it makes sense" plotting).

[RoJoHen]

Timby wrote:

---

Dini isn't a great loss. Arkham City is a great game, but the writing and plot structure are easily its weakest links (unless you're a fan of relentless misogyny and Jeph Loeb-style "shove everyone into the story regardless of whether it makes sense" plotting).

For a video game, I don't mind that kind of storytelling. All it means to me is longer game play!

[Infern0]

cool looking forward to this, hopefully rocksteady are doing it

[AlphaMan]

RoJoHen wrote:

---

For a video game, I don't mind that kind of storytelling. All it means to me is longer game play!

I agree. The rogue's gallery of Arkham City certainly enhanced the game play. Had it been a movie or animated feature, it would've been a disaster. I give kudos to Dini for recognizing the difference.

I'm still on the wait and see list. It's hard for me to get excited about another Arkham Game that might be by an unproven studio and another writer.

[Timby]

Isn't it a little premature to say that one is in a "wait and see" mode when we know nothing about the game, only that it exists? It's like saying, "Oh, there's a new Star Trek movie, but we don't know who's directing or starring or writing or what it's about, I'll wait and see."

[RoJoHen]

Premature? No. I'm pretty sure the only option right now is to wait and see.

[Timby]

I'm just saying that it's a meaningless statement. No shit, we'll wait and see, because we don't know a single thing about the game. It's like saying "XYZ could be good, if they do it right." Again, no shit.

[RoJoHen]

No need to get crabby about it.

[Reverend]

Timby wrote:

---

I'm just saying that it's a meaningless statement. No shit, we'll wait and see, because we don't know a single thing about the game. It's like saying "XYZ could be good, if they do it right." Again, no shit.

The distinction is one of expectations. If we knew for sure that it'd be the same key players coming back, then expectations would be high. Since all we know is that there's another game in the series that may not include *any* key players, then expectations are of course going to be low to neutral. Premature is probably the last thing this is.