According to a investor conference call at Warner Bros. Arkham 3 will be out in 2013.
It’s not being developed by Rocksteady, who is working on a Silver Age Batman game. So I’m not sure if I should be excited or not.
Edited the thread title in 2022, because why not?
Aha, so now we now that there are two separate Batman games in development. Interesting! Looking forward to both.
Oh thank god it’s not rocksteady! I’m looking forward to it now.
Okay. I’ll bite. Why didn’t you like what Rocksteady made?
Arkham City was fine as a game and I thoroughly enjoyed what they made. I hate them because they lied to us regarding the PC release. It could have been entirely WB but rocksteady is the face the public sees in the fiasco so they get the hate. It is a shame but unless they stand up for themselves, all we can do is boycott them.
What!!
It’s just a game, bought it when it came out and both it and AA are superb.
As an adult with kids and life stuff I play the games for fun, the political side of having an issue with something like a computer game is not worth it. If the game is crap I stop playing it or don’t by it. Gaming is fun the rest I have no interest in.
Can’t wait for these 2 games either.
So… what was the lie?
I guess I didn’t follow the prerelease chatter. What lie are you talking about?
It’s probably heavily detailed in the AC thread but here’s the cliff notes:
Originally it was going to launch simultaneously on consoles/PC. Then rocksteady announced a delay for a month or two on the PC version but didn’t exactly say why. They implied polishing but in good PR fashion, didn’t actually use those words if I’m remembering right. The day or very close to the day that the console version launched, I found copies of the PC version at target and bought it. This proves that the delay of the PC version was not for polishing or bug fixing or anything legit, it was only to sell more copies of the consoles since the price was almost double. There was not a day 1 patch either, if anyone is thinking that. I still have the receipt and obviously the disks are date stamped.
Any decisions relating to delaying release dates for a finished game are going to be on the publisher, not the devs (see recent Rayman Legends stuff). So if you want your boycott to have teeth you need to avoid all WB games, not just Rocksteady.
That’s it? That’s the “lie” you’re hurt about?
Man, I can’t even summon up the energy to care about PC version delays any longer. My Steam backlog is so full, every game coming out could be delayed by another year and I’d still have new games to play.
There was a day 120 patch which fixed horrible cut scene stuttering for some that had utterly ruined the narrative elements. I’m glad they were really on the ball with that one.
Silver Age sounds interesting. Could be zany.
Man, I didn’t know they did that. And then people are surprised that no one believes developers anymore.
That’s just it, rocksteady said it wasn’t finished/ready.
The delay was only a minor annoyance. It’s the money grubbing lie that pissed me off.
So which scenario do you think is more likely:
WB wants to ship simultaneously but Rocksteady convice WB to wait.
The delay was WB’s decision but Rocksteady plays nice with their owners and parrots the official company line that the delay was because the PC version wasn’t was finished.
I think your beef is silly either way but there is no scenario here where WB is not involved in the delay so it is absurd that you would hold the dev responsible but not the publisher.
You are correct, WB had to be in there somewhere. I will add them to the boycott list, it’s getting pretty long now.
You should also probably boycott the people who bought the games and thereby directly supported their part of this fiasco. Like me. Boycott me please.
Well sorry but if you’re boycotting WB you can’t play any Batman games, no matter who is developing it