Rumor: Batman: Arkham Origins Will Add Multiplayer

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Oh Fuck, fuck fuck fuck fucking no!
FUCK!
Fuck!
God dammit.

Ahem...
This sounds like a terrible... AHHHHHHHHHHHHH FUCK!

Learn your god damn lesson games industry! and learn it fast!
If you keep alienating single player gamers you are going to die.

It doesn't even make sense from a business perspective.
Who has more discretionary cash than the depressing forever alone types who spend all their time and money on video games.
Target games at us... I mean them... I mean us!

I love gaming. But if you're going to shit all over the good aspects of it then FUCK YOU Publishers who only care about competing with Call of Duty and Developers who don't have the balls to jump off the sinking ships.

If you don't figure out that there are at least 20 niche... No at least 20 HUGE under served markets out there that are dying for a rewarding single player experience then the industry will die.

Dead Space 3 supposed to sell 5 million copies. Don't make me fucking laugh.

R.I.P Arkham you lost me

I eagerly await being able to recreate such classic scenarios as Batman teabagging the Riddler while Robin says "lol u fag".

The Hungry Samurai:
Remember when Harmonix gave Guitar Hero to Activision so they could run it into the ground while they made the indisputably superior Rock Band.

Here's hoping that while this game is tinkered into oblivion Rocksteady surprises us all shortly afterward with a Justice League game.

Or a Batman Beyond game... I really want a Batman Beyond game.

Mikeyfell:
Oh Fuck, fuck fuck fuck fucking no!
FUCK!
Fuck!
God dammit.

Ahem...
This sounds like a terrible... AHHHHHHHHHHHHH FUCK!

Learn your god damn lesson games industry! and learn it fast!
If you keep alienating single player gamers you are going to die.

It doesn't even make sense from a business perspective.
Who has more discretionary cash than the depressing forever alone types who spend all their time and money on video games.
Target games at us... I mean them... I mean us!

I love gaming. But if you're going to shit all over the good aspects of it then FUCK YOU Publishers who only care about competing with Call of Duty and Developers who don't have the balls to jump off the sinking ships.

If you don't figure out that there are at least 20 niche... No at least 20 HUGE under served markets out there that are dying for a rewarding single player experience then the industry will die.

Dead Space 3 supposed to sell 5 million copies. Don't make me fucking laugh.

I never get this line of reasoning.

How are they alienating you?

The presence of a multiplayer doesn't affect the single palyer. Plenty of the best singleplayer games that came out in the past few months had tacked on multiplayer, if you don't want to play them... just don't.

It's not really such an issue.

Personally, I'd like a coop element to it. Just to see how that would play. I've got a few friends who I play through coop games with. And we all seem to like stealth heavy games so... good match.

Krantos:
While it's true that we don't know that such an addition would be bad, name me one single-player series that was improved in anyway by adding multiplayer. You know, let's make it easier, name which ones were not lessened with the addition of multiplayer.

Because, frankly, the only one that come to mind is Splinter Cell. And how many have been worse off for tacked on multiplayer? Loads. Loads and loads.

Mass Effect 3 wasn't worsened by teh multiplayer. You could argue the merits of the game, but honestly, the multiplayer wasn't a negative impact on the game itself.

the Assassin's Creed series seems in a similar boat. Maybe annual releases worsen the quality, but that has nothing to do with there being multiplayer.

kailus13:
How exactly? How would that even work? Co-op would either make things far too easy, or ramp up the difficulty enough that you need to play in groups to beat it.

It doesn't sound like co-op, for one.

bigfatcarp93:
Article: "Let's try to avoid knee-jerk reactions."

Everyone: "KNEE-JERK REACTION!"

Seriously, how do you know this doesn't just mean a Batman and Robin/Nightwing/Batgirl/Catwoman co-op mode. Sheesh, are people these days are just panicky, paranoid lunatics or what...

BUT IT'S THE WORST THING EVARRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!

And of course we're panicky paranoid lunatics. We're gamers, dammit!

>.>

But seriously:

Though offering scant details on what and how many modes would be added, they described one scenario putting players in the role of famous villains trying to bring down Batman and Robin.

I'm not saying it's going to suck, or even that I know what form this will take, but it doesn't sound like co-op.

Fu11Frontal:
Honestly, there's one way to do this. Everyone is Batman. No, seriously. One player is Arkham Batman with all his powers, one character is TAS Batman with all of his stuff, one is Batman Beyond, one is Adam West Batman, one is Nolan Batman, etc. And they all fight all over Gotham city, because Batman. You'd level your Batman up, and Kevin Conroy could yell at whoever they'd get to pretend to be Christian Bale for that god awful voice he uses for Batman.

At first I was absolutely horrified at the idea of multiplayer I have to see, who could ever relinquish the joy you'd get by playing as Adam West batman. I bet he would probably still do the voice.

Oh how many are willfully ignorant, the MP for ME3 was a stand-alone project that was eventually put together with ME3 so it was of unusually good quality for a tacked on MP.

Tacked on MP has always been horrendous if it was done by the same development team.

It sounds like the game is in the hands of madmen and work-experience kids, desperate to impress the boss with their bold new ideas for the direction of the game.

That said, there are a few ways that multiplayer could work. What about a kind of co-op timed boss rush, where one player as Batman and a second (possibly more) as someone else have to playthrough the entire map, beating the big-bads with a time limit. You have two strategies. Stick together and have an easier time against each boss or split up and cover more ground. That could even work as a kind of hunting game, where a villain is somewhere on the map and you have to hunt them down and stop them, after a certain amount of time they could cause some kind of mayhem that the Bat-team have to stop which gives you some idea of where the enemy is. Again you have the option for one player to go straight after the villain whilst the other helps damsels in distress/defuse bombs/solve riddles/spray sharks or stick together.

Finally, a reason to try out the franchise!

I skipped out on Bioshock 1&3 because of lack of multiplayer.
I heard Mass Effect 1&2 were decent but I'll never know.

Abandon4093:

I never get this line of reasoning.

How are they alienating you?

The presence of a multiplayer doesn't affect the single palyer.

Time, money, disk space, and personnel are all finite resources.
Anything not going in to the single player experience is effecting it negatively.

That's the case with any game, but Batman? The Arkham games amazing single player experiences. Awesome stealth, cool puzzles, a lot of exploration and an amazing combat system.
It's tight, that's the only word for it. Adding a Coop player is just fluff at best.
And could easily mean cutting whole levels to balance the enemy AI for Coop, or making the difficulty trivial on Coop, or stupidly hard on single player

Plenty of the best singleplayer games that came out in the past few months had tacked on multiplayer, if you don't want to play them... just don't.

Spec Ops, Xcom EU, Farcry 3 (If you're willing to forgive the crap UI), Tomb Raider(And I'm being generous here)
So 4 primarily single player games that were good despite having tacked on Multyplayer in the last 12 months.

Walking Dead, Bioshock Infinite, Lollipop Chainsaw, Mark of the Ninja, Dust an Elysian Tali (Again I'm being generous) 5 good single player games in the past 12 months and 3 of them came out on Xbox Arcade.
(Yes I don't play on PC)

And going back another year I can only add Catherine, Dark Souls and Assassin's Creed Revelations to the list of single player games that are good despite the tacked on multyplayer.

And you can look me in the text and say multyplayer doesn't effect the single player.

Mikeyfell:
Oh Fuck, fuck fuck fuck fucking no!
FUCK!
Fuck!
God dammit.

Ahem...
This sounds like a terrible... AHHHHHHHHHHHHH FUCK!

Slowbear:

R.I.P Arkham you lost me

Keep jerkin' dem knees, Escapist.

Captcha: Face the Music

Something you all may very well have to do if this winds up NOT killing the game, a possibility you all seem quite happy to ignore.

bigfatcarp93:

Keep jerkin' dem knees, Escapist.

Captcha: Face the Music

Something you all may very well have to do if this winds up NOT killing the game, a possibility you all seem quite happy to ignore.

Between this news and the developer change I will eat much more than my words if this doesn't kill the game.

You have to trust me that seeing the Arkham series die is the last thing I want to see.

Hazy992:
Oh for fuck's sake... I was worried about this game as soon as I found out Rocksteady wasn't developing it. This just adds to my apprehension.

Seriously, stop fucking adding tacked on multiplayer modes that add nothing to the game, simply take dev time away from the main campaign and probably won't be played in two months anyway!

Have games like Skyrim, Bioshock Infinite and the absolute wealth of awesome indie content taught publishers NOTHING?!

I have nothing to add, well said.

Well, multiplayer could go either way, if it even exists at all. It's the different developer that will put me off getting this on day one. Definitely going to wait to see the reviews for this.

SWEEEEEEEEEEET 1 on 1 character fights all with unique fighting styles, and co-op heros versus waves could be

AWE
SOME

We need this.

Add in the lack of Rocksteady and I'm not too hopeful for this game.

Then again I'm not hopeful for any AAA game in general.

I read "multiplayer, and instantly thought about "Batman/Robin" or even Nightwing (it looked cool in AC) fighting together during the campaign, but then I remembered how many bugs I found in Arkham City because of it being bigger. And also the PC delay due to the Physx "integration" (worthless piece of shit).

StewShearer:
an anonymous source indicated the new game would be adding multiplayer components.

image

While the multiplayer could actually be a ton of fun, I still don't like it when rumors started by sock puppets (anonymous sources) are covered as a genuine news article. Maybe we should have a sister forum to the News Room and call it the Rumor Mill.

kailus13:
How exactly? How would that even work? Co-op would either make things far too easy, or ramp up the difficulty enough that you need to play in groups to beat it.

Well, there is this thing called scaling depending on how many people are playing. It's been done since 80's.

OT: I'm not sure if I like this, it doesn't have to be bad just because it gets multiplayer as long as we still get the same solid single player experience from the first two games. I am just concerned that Roscksteady isn't making it to be honest. So few superhero games manage to be good, so many are plain bad and then there are the horrible ones.

All that said though. This game is coming out the day before my birthday and I am thinking this will be a day one purchase for me despite what I've heard so far. There's still time for me to change my mind though.

As one of the people who legitimately enjoyed ME3's multiplayer, I'm going to hold out on judging this too hard. I'm more concerned about the dev switch than the addition of MP.

StewShearer:

but there's no reason that Arkham Origins' multiplayer can't be a fun and valuable experience. Considering the size of Batman's retinue and rogue's gallery, it's not hard to envision a few fun ways a solid multiplayer mode could take shape.

Even with role playing as a villain considered, I cannot imagine multiplayer in a game like the Arkham series, how exactly would you implement the free flow combat? or the navigation? The previous games were in some ways very old school in their approach to game design, it reminded me of the old PS1 game Spiderman: Enter Eelectro a thoroughly single player experience. I really can't see how multiplayer can be anything other than a shoe-horned in a stunted form. whether or not it will influence the single player experience, in regards to development focus, is the only thing I am afraid of.

If they want to make a multiplayer batman experience they should make a separate game, kind of like Bethesda they didn't force Skyrim to have multiplayer instead they developed another game entirely.

Well as long as the multiplayer doesn't effect or take away from the singl.........God I can't finish that sentence of course it will >_<

But considering the fact that I couldn't play as catwoman despite the fact that I preordered the game and payed $100 for it because I don't have xbox live and as such missed out on half of the experience I'm used to being screwed over by the Arkham series.

RJ 17:
Think of the boss fights in the games...yeah some of them were tough but, true to Batman's nature, he always spotted an easily exploitable weakness to make every boss fight pretty easy if you knew what you were doing. They'd have to give the villian's a way of countering Batman's Anti-Thing Spray so they could have a chance.

That was definitely true in Asylum, especially with

But in Arkham City, well...

Yeah...not a big fan of non-multiplayer franchises adding multiplayer to new entries. It just seems to me like they're trying to hard to be cool kids. But alright, I can't judge it until it is released, if it turns out to be more than just a rumor. I'll wait and see.

Oh for fucks sake. I wasn't too worried when I heard it would have multiplayer... I wasn't too worried when I heard it wasn't rocksteady... but both? So the new developer has come in, and decided that it needs multiplayer? Grand. Fucking grand.

DataSnake:
Snip

:P Unfortunately it looks like your image failed. But judging by the url it looks like you were trying to show a pic of Mr. Freeze. And while I can understand where you'd be going with that, on the other side of the coin is the fact that he's the biggest example of what I'm talking about. The entire objective of the Freeze Fight is to exploit ALL of his weaknesses (especially if playing on hard or New Game +). Granted, you've gotta diversify your tactics in the sense that he always compensates after you take him down, but still, you're essentially pulling off a Flawless Victory on the guy by attacking his shortcomings. Against Penguin you just keep out of his line of sight until you circle around behind him and use the jammer on his freeze gun...then you fight Grundy and have to blow up those three electric things a bunch of times.

The Joker fight in AC is pretty much the only straight-up fight there is. Beat the crap out of the Joker, his gang, a one-armed mercenary, and a Titan thug. No weaknesses to exploit, just a good ol' fashioned brawl. I suppose technically the same could be said about the Ra's fight too, but that brings up the combat mechanic of flipping around, punching a guy and jumping over to the next in a free-flow combo...how could you do that with two people fighting against each other?

Like I said, I just don't see how they could pull it off very well. Either the enemy is so powerful that Batman has to use all of his cunning and to get a perfect victory because being spotted means getting his ass kicked (i.e. the Freeze Fight) or he's flying from one thug to the next in a massive combo, beating the piss out of everyone (i.e. the Joker Fight). Either way I don't understand how they could balance it out without changing some major mechanics of the game.

RJ 17:
Like I said, I just don't see how they could pull it off very well. Either the enemy is so powerful that Batman has to use all of his cunning and to get a perfect victory because being spotted means getting his ass kicked (i.e. the Freeze Fight) or he's flying from one thug to the next in a massive combo, beating the piss out of everyone (i.e. the Joker Fight). Either way I don't understand how they could balance it out without changing some major mechanics of the game.

I agree completely. My point was just that the boss fights were less a case of "find the exploit" than in Asylum.

*snaps own neck*

DataSnake:

RJ 17:
Like I said, I just don't see how they could pull it off very well. Either the enemy is so powerful that Batman has to use all of his cunning and to get a perfect victory because being spotted means getting his ass kicked (i.e. the Freeze Fight) or he's flying from one thug to the next in a massive combo, beating the piss out of everyone (i.e. the Joker Fight). Either way I don't understand how they could balance it out without changing some major mechanics of the game.

I agree completely. My point was just that the boss fights were less a case of "find the exploit" than in Asylum.

Yeah, and I still say that the Freeze fight is one of my all-time favorite boss fights, especially on the harder difficulties when you have to find a way to pull off literally every single possible takedown. The first time I played through it I got him down to one hit and for the life of me couldn't figure out which takedown I was missing...not knowing that you can do a takedown from the line-launcher. :P

Ukomba:
Devil is in the details, but I could see enjoying a Co-op or even vs Arkham Game.

Oooh... co-op I would consider. Sort of like Splinter Cell but with all the gadgets and hand to hand of Batman. However competitive MP means no sale for me.

Sounds less like a "This game will have multi player" and more like "I really hope they make multiplayer."

And let's be honest, games like Bionic commando could have been made...i don't know passable single player games if not for the lame forced Multiplayer.

Really people, keep multiplayer to sports and FPS... otherwise it really detracts from the game, maybe a few rts games splashed in. But seriously...Multiplayer wouldn't -help- this game at all.

Wait....Rocksteady is not developing it? (How did I miss THAT!?) And now this? Son of a.... And I actually had high hopes for this game.

Mikeyfell:

Abandon4093:

I never get this line of reasoning.

How are they alienating you?

The presence of a multiplayer doesn't affect the single palyer.

Time, money, disk space, and personnel are all finite resources.
Anything not going in to the single player experience is effecting it negatively.

That's the case with any game, but Batman? The Arkham games amazing single player experiences. Awesome stealth, cool puzzles, a lot of exploration and an amazing combat system.
It's tight, that's the only word for it. Adding a Coop player is just fluff at best.
And could easily mean cutting whole levels to balance the enemy AI for Coop, or making the difficulty trivial on Coop, or stupidly hard on single player

Bollocks.

They have separate teams for multiplayer and single player components. They're essentially just giving the multiplayer guys something to do whilst the rest of them work on the single player.

And disk space.......... really?

Who gives a shit if it's fluff at best? That still doesn't tell me how it negatively effects your single player. It's still there, exactly how it would have been if they hadn't tacked on a multiplayer. And I'm not talking about changing the single player experience to allow coops in. I'm talking about what most modern games do for coop. Add a separates, shorter campaign.

Plenty of the best singleplayer games that came out in the past few months had tacked on multiplayer, if you don't want to play them... just don't.

Spec Ops, Xcom EU, Farcry 3 (If you're willing to forgive the crap UI), Tomb Raider(And I'm being generous here)
So 4 primarily single player games that were good despite having tacked on Multyplayer in the last 12 months.

Walking Dead, Bioshock Infinite, Lollipop Chainsaw, Mark of the Ninja, Dust an Elysian Tali (Again I'm being generous) 5 good single player games in the past 12 months and 3 of them came out on Xbox Arcade.
(Yes I don't play on PC)

And going back another year I can only add Catherine, Dark Souls and Assassin's Creed Revelations to the list of single player games that are good despite the tacked on multyplayer.

And you can look me in the text and say multyplayer doesn't effect the single player.

That's exactly what I will do. Any single player game that is bad and has multiplayer was going to be bad even if it didn't. There are probably exceptions to the rule, but yea. Don't blame tacked on multiplayer for already poor games.

Abandon4093:
I'm talking about what most modern games do for coop. Add a separates, shorter campaign.

Which is also a waste. They could've just put those missions in the singleplayer, making it even better.

Instead they force you to play online with screaming 12 year olds if you want to play those missions, because they've got to attract the Call of Duty crowd somehow.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here