Support NeoGAF

Spring-Loaded · Jul 19, 2015

Going by Rocksteady's releases, their chief goal was to realize physical aspects of Batman's character in a video game setting. Stuff like fighting, traversal, gadget use and everything in between. Pick a Batman action you've seen in any media that you thought was cool the remote controlled batarang in Batman Returns, snatching up a criminal while hanging upside down above them in Batman Begins, leaping into the Batmobile in The Animated Series and it's almost certain to appear in these games in playable form.

Each of their titles (including WB Games Montreal's Arkham Origins) added to/refined those elements and their overworlds served to support them. Asylum funneled players from enemy encounter to enemy encounter where each was set up to showcase the Batman abilities (1 vs. many combat, predator gameplay) available for the player. City featured a hub world that made use of traversal mechanics such as gliding and grapnel use, expanding on existing systems and overlapping them (e.g. gadgets normally used in puzzles of stealth segments could be used in the middle of combat, gadget use such as smoke bombs or weapon disabling could make fighting in a stealth segment feasible, etc.).

With Knight, Rocksteady created a full Gotham City to be traversed by gliding and driving the Batmobile, again serving the featured gameplay systems. However, just like in past games, adopted a setup that justified not having civilians and bystanders around in order to accomplish what they were going for a true, populated, metropolitan city would be too intensive and in some ways limiting for what they were trying to do, the same thing Rocksteady did with their past titles: have what's essentially a playground designed for the Batman actions they transferred from other media into their games.

We're all spoiled by the GTA series when it comes to what Rockstar brings to its open worlds, namely detail, population and, more recently, physics in that most everything in those games reacts appropriately to player actions. Those games are tremendously expensive (with GTAV being the most expensive video game ever made).

Would a future Batman game be well-served having a full Gotham City, civilians and all? Would it be worth the cost to realize that satisfactorily, and how best could the city be realized? There are a few things to consider when pondering these questions:

Traversal

Availability of vehicles, freedom of their use, whether/how their use is relegated to certain situations or areas
Whether the player is able to land on the streets below
What places the player can enter

Civilians

How populated the city is (evenings foot traffic or middle of the night foot traffic)
How people react the player ("Batman is a myth" phase, or everyone knows he's real yet are afraid, etc.), whether they flee from the player or come ask for help
In what ways the player can interact with civilians (i.e. knock them out of the way, startle them)
Can they be hurt at all? Through player actions?
Will perception of player character change depending on player actions over time?

Enemies

Whether car chases (scripted or random) can be participated in or interacted with in some way; if no vehicles, can the player catch up to or stop the fleeing vehicles somehow?
Can criminals threaten/hurt/kill civilians out in the open world? What consequences would there be?
Can civilians vehicles be targeted by criminals?

City

Existence of destructible environments
Number of interiors that are unique and useful to the player
Time of day/weather
Traffic, amount of traffic, whether it can be interacted with (e.g. if Batmobile is available, whether traffic will move out of the way/vanish/spawn minimally)

Ambient Events

Chases (on foot or in vehicles)? Fires? Robberies? Murders?
If these exist, whether there are consequences to ignoring them

Working With No-Kill Policy

How to accomplish when crashing enemy vehicles?
Other unscripted actions scenes with civilians

Ultimately, the would-be developers would need to narrow down what they want to accomplish with the game and what kind of experience people buying the game would want. With platforming or brawler Batman game, you know people are just going to want puzzle or brawler gameplay. With something as ambiguous as "Batman game," what people want/expect is wildly different across the board. A detective game? A combat game? With a truly open world without a precedent set, it'd be even harder to meet expectations and please everyone.

There's a lot to consider, assuming a future Batman title has a full Gotham City, and if it's ever accomplished, it'll have been a tremendous undertaking. in meantime, I hope some helpful answers come out of this discussion.

TheSecondSpitter · Jul 19, 2015

They can start by dropping the Arkham title -- most people know batman games are good now, no need to beat a dead horse.

Other than that, see the Just Cause series.

Bigboss242 · Jul 19, 2015

Spiderman 2 handeld civilians well.

Spring-Loaded · Jul 19, 2015

The Second Spitter said:
They can start by dropping the Arkham title -- most people know batman games are good now, no need to beat a dead horse.

Other than that, see the Just Cause series.

I played JC2 but you can crash jets into buildings and people there. How does what Avalanche Studios did help someone doing a Batman game?

Bigboss242 said:
Spiderman 2 handeld civilians well.

I only ever swung around the city in this game at a friend's house. What's done with the civilians there?

Alienous · Jul 19, 2015

I'd say start with CO-OP.

Everything's fun with CO-OP, even standing on a rooftop overlooking muggers and being like "I bet I could take them out alone in 5 seconds".

Maybe move away from the Batmobile and have something like a Batcycle with higher manoeuvrability capacity (for driving down alleyways for instance) and no capacity for ramming into vehicles (and the reduced size might make it easier to program civilians who always dodge out of the way).

Then obviously things like random elements.

OttoSporteman · Jul 19, 2015

Some coop (although I think they're saving it to the Justice League game) with Nightwing, Robin, Catwoman, etc

Batwing

No more dummy battles and races just to validate a feature (I'm looking at you Batmobile)

Crowd reaction akin to Infamous

PerezDeCorcho · Jul 19, 2015

Perhaps the more stealthily you act in the open world, the more paranoia you trigger amongst criminals (perhaps they're uneasy, and their combative abilities are somewhat weakened because of this).

On the other hand, if you act aggressively, perhaps enemy NPCs will be better-equipped for potential conflicts and you might be forced to use a more brawler-esque approach because of your prior actions.

I think it would be a cool illusion for the player to witness, as if they really were this myth in Gotham City and everything they do affects the world around them (preferably in a more subtle and gradual manner).

And maybe civilians will react to you in different ways depending on your actions. For example, if you've been using aggressive actions to accomplish your objectives (perhaps actions that put civilians in jeopardy), they will view you as a threat and act accordingly (call the cops, etc). If the opposite is the case, perhaps they'll be awed in your presence and look on you more as a legend (something that some players may find especially satisfying and rewarding).

Menome · Jul 19, 2015

My ideal Open Gotham City game: Bruce Wayne/disguised detective work in daytime segments whilst keeping up your public profile.

At night-time, be Batman and take down criminal schemes you've uncovered through your investigations, with areas like warehouses/banks being open and highlighted for play that are connected to the cases available at that time.

You can switch between night & day at will at set locations, so there's no arbitrary time-limit.

Spring-Loaded · Jul 19, 2015

Alienous said:
I'd say start with CO-OP.

Everything's fun with CO-OP, even standing on a rooftop overlooking muggers and being like "I bet I could take them out alone in 5 seconds".

I inevitably see people saying

1) it feels tacked on because it was designed to be unobtrusive for people playing on their own, or

2) it feels wrong playing on your own because the whole game was designed around co-op

OttoSporteman said:
Batwing

Crowd reaction akin to Infamous

How would this control? Would it only fly to a certain lower height limit?

And what are you referring to with inFamous crowd reaction? People cheering or booing you depending on your karma?

QuantumBro · Jul 19, 2015

Long Halloween inspired with day and night sections where you alternate between Bruce and batman.

No more having the game take place in one night.

Kathian · Jul 19, 2015

Play as the villains; with Isolation like Batman gamplay.

number47 · Jul 19, 2015

Bigboss242 said:
Spiderman 2 handeld civilians well.

Pretty much what I was thinking. Spider man after dark. Which brings up the fact we never ask about Bruce Wayne.

Then what are we doing?/persona batman? Dating sim Bruce Wayne mod?

family_guy · Jul 19, 2015

Think they need to move on completely or let this series rest for awhile. There are other DC street level superheroes in other cities that can be used.

sn00zer · Jul 19, 2015

No console Batman-only game for like 5 years. Really hope Arkham is done, not that I didnt like it, it just clearly has finished.

Neff · Jul 20, 2015

Firstly, Batman doesn't care about civilians unless they're about to be murdered.

Secondly, Batman never goes out in the day.

Thirdly, a larger city means more buildings you can't go in, and it's hard to create well-designed, meaningful interiors when you're working to such a scale. It's a difficult tightrope walk to balance out between time spent exploring and the fruits of that exploration.

Fourthly, I think Arkham Knight is going to be impossible to top anyway.

lazygecko · Jul 20, 2015

I've always wanted to see developers be more bold and try to also tackle the alter ego aspects of superhero characters. Let us play as Bruce Wayne as well.

It's probably even easier with Batman than other heroes, since you could do things like tie the Wayne aspect into stuff like managing the tech he has access to through his company and incorporate customization elements to the Batman part that way.

Just the entire concept of doing a more type of hardcore superhero simulator game intrigues me.

BriGuy · Jul 20, 2015

I'd rather they stay the fuck away from an open-world city altogether. Sure, it was a spectacle to behold when you first fire up Arkham Knight, but the gameplay mechanics suffered for it. Give me the tight, focused set-pieces of Arkham Asylum over Gotham City any day of the week.

Spring-Loaded · Jul 20, 2015

family_guy said:
Think they need to move on completely or let this series rest for awhile. There are other DC street level superheroes in other cities that can be used.

sn00zer said:
No console Batman-only game for like 5 years. Really hope Arkham is done, not that I didnt like it, it just clearly has finished.

The matter of what to do with an open city in a superhero game will still be relevant in a Green Arrow or Black Canary game. And this thread was meant to be about another open world Gotham City at some point in the future. Doesn't mean "the next Batman game next year needs to do _____."

Not that I disagree with either sentiment, but they don't address the topic at hand.

BriGuy said:
I'd rather they stay the fuck away from an open-world city altogether. Sure, it was a spectacle to behold when you first fire up Arkham Knight, but the gameplay mechanics suffered for it. Give me the tight, focused set-pieces of Arkham Asylum over Gotham City any day of the week.

The gameplay mechanics didn't at all suffer from AK being open world everything was retained from past games and any changes that one might consider for the worse have nothing to do with it being open world. The fights still have as many enemies and options, the predator gameplay has fear takedowns which have nothing to do with the open world and the Batmobile is only in addition to existing gameplay mechanics, which there's plenty of still.

I would be interesting in an argument in favor of a game consisting of stages as opposed to an open world, or some kind of combination though. I'm not convinced Arkham Asylum does anything Arkham Knight couldn't, even if the former does some things the latter didn't. The games aren't fundamentally different from a gameplay perspective and the structure of Asylum could (and does, to an extent) fit within overall more open settings.

Neff said:
Thirdly, a larger city means more buildings you can't go in, and it's hard to create well-designed, meaningful interiors when you're working to such a scale. It's a difficult tightrope walk to balance out between time spent exploring and the fruits of that exploration.

While it would be crazy to accomplish, it could be done. Even if it has to become DLC to properly develop down the line, a massive open world could accommodate interiors on the level of Arkham Asylum for standalone chapters. Something like The Raid or Dredd within a greater Batman game would potentially be feasible.

Sober · Jul 20, 2015

I'd rather they just put a loading screen between entering a building and the open world; I really hated that because a "dungeon" in AK was seamless it was either completely underground (to hide loading/streaming) or not very elaborate.

Also if there would be civilians then "dungeons" or buildings would require you to infiltrate them and maybe even have multiple points of infiltration/exfiltration not counting cutscene stuff (and everything explodes and you escape it)

Vehicles I would leave to scripted events I think. Not because I hate the vehicle sections in AK but those are maybe too hard to do gracefully and with actual civilians around.

Maybe keep big streets off limits and maybe limit yourselves to alleyways and the stuff around it as well.

Sub Zero · Jul 20, 2015

I wonder how they'll handle civilians in a superman game. We know one it's coming sometime in the future now that WB is starting to push the character with all the upcoming films.

I'm pretty sure that in the last Superman game, which was the Returns tie-in, you could go on murderous rampages.

Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku! · Jul 20, 2015

I think a large part of Batman's job is making sure civilians don't get hurt, so I think it would be interesting to introduce that part of the job. Make it so that if you accidentally kill a civilian you get a game over so that when you approach a situation you have to take the number of civilians, where they are placed, etc into account. I could see this becoming monstrously annoying if done wrong though so they have to balance the hell out of it

giancarlo123x · Jul 20, 2015

Make a batman beyond game.

semiconscious · Jul 20, 2015

Spring-Loaded said:
[*]Traffic, amount of traffic, whether it can be interacted with (e.g. if Batmobile is available, whether traffic will move out of the way/vanish/spawn minimally)...

sorry - i'd rather not even speculate on this possibility

...

Spring-Loaded · Jul 20, 2015

Sober said:
Maybe keep big streets off limits and maybe limit yourselves to alleyways and the stuff around it as well.

Would they be able to be cordoned off in a believable way? I'm wondering if the playe would ever feel "artificially" limited with this approach. I don't even think it would be that bad, but to do it in a graceful way seems like it would be hard to do.

I think of early Spider-Man game's having fog above the streets and/or making that a bottomless pit which was always weird, even when no truly open world SM games existed.

Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku! said:
I think a large part of Batman's job is making sure civilians don't get hurt, so I think it would be interesting to introduce that part of the job. Make it so that if you accidentally kill a civilian you get a game over so that when you approach a situation you have to take the number of civilians, where they are placed, etc into account. I could see this becoming monstrously annoying if done wrong though so they have to balance the hell out of it

I only see civilian safety working well in scripted sequences. If failing to save a civilian in a random mugging/fire/etc. ends in a game over, then that would just have to be left out.

semiconscious said:
sorry - i'd rather not even speculate on this possibility ...

Surely because it was done as well and as fleshed out as is possible, and nothing could could surpass it, especially while introducing civilians

Sober · Jul 20, 2015

Spring-Loaded said:
Would they be able to be cordoned off in a believable way? I'm wondering if the playe would ever feel "artificially" limited with this approach. I don't even think it would be that bad, but to do it in a graceful way seems like it would be hard to do.

I think of early Spider-Man game's having fog above the streets and/or making that a bottomless pit which was always weird, even when no truly open world SM games existed.

Just treat it like the Arkham games have if you would fall into a pit and die and have you just grapnel gun out. Hey at least if you don't need to render citizens up close you can save on the polycount.

MrPink93485 · Jul 20, 2015

Spring-Loaded said:
I played JC2 but you can crash jets into buildings and people there. How does what Avalanche Studios did help someone doing a Batman game?

I only ever swung around the city in this game at a friend's house. What's done with the civilians there?

All I remember is the civilians lose their balloons.

I still think Spider-Man 2 is a bad game, the only praiseworthy element is the swinging mechanics

exmachina64 · Jul 20, 2015

One problem of a populated Gotham in a future open world Batman game is that Batman is either a myth early in his career or an unseen vigilante later on. People are going to gripe when they either can't reveal Batman to the civilians walking through the streets or the world doesn't show much reactivity to Batman walking in the open.

Hopefully, future Batman games ditch Rocksteady's need to squeeze the entire story into one night; by Arkham Knight, the events that took place had become painfully crowded. As I saw someone suggest in another thread, give me sections during the day and night involving Bruce Wayne; give me tasks for Batman to do (such as with the Justice League) outside of Gotham during the day; create a fully realized world. It's just cliche by now that each entry in the Arkham series is some kind of "impossible night" that takes place periodically in Batman's life.

giancarlo123x said:
Make a batman beyond game.

Probably the easiest way to get around the inherent problems of an open world modern Gotham.

Spring-Loaded · Jul 20, 2015

Sober said:
Just treat it like the Arkham games have if you would fall into a pit and die and have you just grapnel gun out. Hey at least if you don't need to render citizens up close you can save on the polycount.

Yeah, that'd be all right. I still think having plenty of areas like that (like the hotel in Origins) that exist within the open world would be the best route. Segments with vehicles or where you're on the street would be acceptable if the city feels truly alive.

exmachina64 said:
Probably the easiest way to get around the inherent problems of an open world modern Gotham.

Yeah, it'd be easier to limit the Batmobile to flying with a minimum height to avoid peds, and it could be designed to never crash into anything (always moves out of the way of scenery). Could also make Batman go invisible automatically around civilians, or something

semiconscious · Jul 20, 2015

Spring-Loaded said:
Surely because it was done as well and as fleshed out as is possible, and nothing could could surpass it, especially while introducing civilians

Garrett Hawke · Jul 20, 2015

I don't understand the desire for Bruce Wayne gameplay (a toned down Batman with less gadgets? Not fun), and imo one of the Arkham series' charms is the one-night-in-Gotham scenario. It's a refreshing set up, despite all of them using it, because nearly every other story driven game doesn't follow it.

ghostwritingduck · Jul 20, 2015

exmachina64 said:
One problem of a populated Gotham in a future open world Batman game is that Batman is either a myth early in his career or an unseen vigilante later on. People are going to gripe when they either can't reveal Batman to the civilians walking through the streets or the world doesn't show much reactivity to Batman walking in the open.

Have people react in fear and the police chase after him when he's seen.

Astral Dog · Jul 20, 2015

Special missions,Gotham at day. civilians and detective work with Bruce, at night much less civilians but more crime,

Captain_Wreckus · Jul 20, 2015

I would rather see a batman game based on the 1960's version of batman (w/ adam west). Maybe w/ the graphics engine from Borderlands and all the same graphic effects during the fight seems (the pows, whammo, etc).

ThoseDeafMutes · Jul 20, 2015

As I said in a thread recently, I'd prefer the game to not be open world / traversal type deal. I *loved* the parts of AK where you're more or less in a closed-off area and everything was really tightly designed.

At the same time it would be nice to see Gotham that isn't completely empty. Small sections of the game can be you playing as Bruce Wayne in the day, with other parts of the game being more conventional linear levels.

exmachina64 · Jul 20, 2015

Spring-Loaded said:
Yeah, it'd be easier to limit the Batmobile to flying with a minimum height to avoid peds, and it could be designed to never crash into anything (always moves out of the way of scenery). Could also make Batman go invisible automatically around civilians, or something

Yeah, that combined with the high traffic count of Gotham and the invisibility function make driving around in the Batmobile much more feasible for Terry.

ghostwritingduck said:
Have people react in fear and the police chase after him when he's seen.

Doesn't that just feel cliche by now?

Batman lands on the street under a lamp post.

"HOLY SHIT! IT'S BATMAN!!!"

Everyone in a twenty meter radius runs away.

Over the radio, Batman hears:

"GCPD, this is [Chopper 6, Car 1142, Officer Allen]. Responding to a reported sighting of Batman on 52nd and Chesterfield."

Player thinks, "Shit, I'm low on health -- I better get grapple up!"

Car pulls up.

"HQ, this is Allen and Montoya. Batman's gone, resuming patrol. Man, I can't wait for my shift to be over."

By the end of the game, the player's bored by how formulaic it is.

theWB27 · Jul 20, 2015

BriGuy said:
I'd rather they stay the fuck away from an open-world city altogether. Sure, it was a spectacle to behold when you first fire up Arkham Knight, but the gameplay mechanics suffered for it. Give me the tight, focused set-pieces of Arkham Asylum over Gotham City any day of the week.

Not true in any sense. AK did a helluva job creating "zones" where you could operate just like you did in asylum. You could stalk, hide under floors, tightrope and everything else just like asylum. The biggest difference was you could obviously escape out of the zone if you were in danger.

It just seems like once open world is muttered the actual implementation is ignored by some.

Lingitiz · Jul 20, 2015

I've always felt that Arkham City was a half step to being a true open world Batman fantasy. Knight took some steps to get there, but the longest night ever setup and thug filled city always pulled me out of it. And even then I think Arkham Asylum was the best game of the three with the tightest design.

So for the next Batman game I hope they really commit to either approach. Either make it a tightly paced game with a stronger emphasis on Metroidvania elements like AA, or go for the full Batman fantasy with the use of the Batcave as a hub, NPCs in the world, the contrast between big and small conflicts, and planning for missions by choosing what equipment and vehicles to take and how you want to approach something. Maybe put a day/night cycle and a time limit on missions to create tension by having cops chase Batman down.

slick7rick · Jul 20, 2015

Why does it have to be open world? I think when games are more linear, there is a greater sense of progression. While I absolutely enjoyed every Arkham title (except Origins, which I haven't played yet), only the first one truly gave me a feeling of going through an experience and having an accurate progression of time. I actually can believe AA took place overnight. In City and Knight I feel like the progression of time had somehow felt lessened.

In AA with every area or boss character to face, it was like another chapter in a book to read. With City and Knight, each character felt more like a magazine article. While they're all great content, I just happen to prefer a more linear presentation of stories over a mixed collection of stories.

I will say that I liked the story in Knight the most and it has incredible story presentation. But when I'm scrolling through my mission wheel.. I feel cheap. Batman doesn't do that.

Spring-Loaded · Jul 20, 2015

semiconscious said:

By all means, feel free to explain why it's not well designed if you're interested in the thread topic enough to post in it. If you want to pretend it's so bad you don't have to put effort into making an argument, that's your prerogative though.

AK's Batmobile can be called remotely, you can call it to stop nearby (to use in tandem in hand-to-hand fights) or to keep moving while you hop in it. It can be handled deftly, yet it's still got a believable sense of weight, enough to smash through anything. It can be used launch the player out of it to glide, can be called back in midair. The tank mode controls fine, and while I found some of the tank segments to have too many enemies, its use was congruous with the setting of the game and if it were more free-form, it would've been as enjoyable as the fighting for me seemed no more basic than the one-note combat in Arkham Asylum: something that was serviceable with room for improvement.

But yeah, jenniferlawrenceok.gif.

Garrett Hawke said:
I don't understand the desire for Bruce Wayne gameplay (a toned down Batman with less gadgets? Not fun), and imo one of the Arkham series' charms is the one-night-in-Gotham scenario. It's a refreshing set up, despite all of them using it, because nearly every other story driven game doesn't follow it.

I understand the desire for something to shake things up, but I believe it should be used sparingly. Anything beyond an opening sequence, walking through Wayne Manor before going into the Batcave or being in a hostage situation as Bruce Wayne and having to get to a Batsuit doesn't see that appealing to me.

The one night setup really needs to go though. I'd rather have a game be entirely episodic than to take place all in one night with attention being split up among various villains, rather than giving each a decent amount of attention.

Emulated Hype · Jul 20, 2015

Circumvent the civilian issue by making it a Suicide Squad game. They already teased the possibility at the end of Origins.

Or do what exmachina64 suggested, not everything needs to be a marathon scenario. Have night/day transitions be triggered in the Batcave or something, hell add an extra layer of tedium and make it so you don't start with the Batmobile/Batwing and you have to direct Lucious to research them. It was beyond silly in Origins when they implied that his stealth jet existed before the tankmobile did.

Symphonia · Jul 20, 2015

An open-world Gotham with a dynamic weather system and day/night cycle would be great to see in a future Batman game. You COULD attack in day but you risk civilians getting hurt and, as we know, Batman works best in the shadows, so wait until night to strike. There are, of course, smaller crimes you could deter in the day, such as muggings, car jackings, etc. It's a balance between making your presence known in the day and being seen as the hero that Gotham deserves, and sticking to operating at night and being seen as the trouble that criminals don't need.

Also, no Batmobile.

Teeth · Jul 20, 2015

This thread is a goldmine of the some of the worst ideas I've ever heard.

Can someone, anyone, think of another game that could serve as a template for what these theoretical Bruce Wayne segments could play like? Or any sort of gameplay loop that could be described as anything other than GPS gaming or holding up and looking at the pretty art?

Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku! · Jul 20, 2015

Teeth said:
This thread is a goldmine of the some of the worst ideas I've ever heard.

Can someone, anyone, think of another game that could serve as a template for what these theoretical Bruce Wayne segments could play like? Or any sort of gameplay loop that could be described as anything other than GPS gaming or holding up and looking at the pretty art?

LA Noire?

Spring-Loaded · Jul 20, 2015

theWB27 said:
Not true in any sense. AK did a helluva job creating "zones" where you could operate just like you did in asylum. You could stalk, hide under floors, tightrope and everything else just like asylum. The biggest difference was you could obviously escape out of the zone if you were in danger.

It just seems like once open world is muttered the actual implementation is ignored by some.

Yeah, I suspect this happens a lot. None of the gameplay was worse in City or Knight because of the open world.

Lingitiz said:
So for the next Batman game I hope they really commit to either approach. Either make it a tightly paced game with a stronger emphasis on Metroidvania elements like AA, or go for the full Batman fantasy with the use of the Batcave as a hub, NPCs in the world, the contrast between big and small conflicts, and planning for missions by choosing what equipment and vehicles to take and how you want to approach something.

The bolded would be great. I don't even think it would necessitate being fully open world either. You could have these things before a specific level or stage.

peace in palestine said:
Why does it have to be open world? I think when games are more linear, there is a greater sense of progression. While I absolutely enjoyed every Arkham title (except Origins, which I haven't played yet), only the first one truly gave me a feeling of going through an experience and having an accurate progression of time. I actually can believe AA took place overnight. In City and Knight I feel like the progression of time had somehow felt lessened.

In AA with every area or boss character to face, it was like another chapter in a book to read. With City and Knight, each character felt more like a magazine article. While they're all great content, I just happen to prefer a more linear presentation of stories over a mixed collection of stories.

I will say that I liked the story in Knight the most and it has incredible story presentation. But when I'm scrolling through my mission wheel.. I feel cheap. Batman doesn't do that.

It doesn't have to be open world. There's a common fallacy that open world means a loss of what you describe though. It seems as if the perception of a game as being "open world" changes how people perceive it, as if side content distracts them even when optional. You can still have as good sense of progression in AC and AK as you do in AA by simply progressing through the main stories and leaving side content for later. And even if those games didn't have the same kind of experience, open world won't inherently mean that can't be achieved. It's less risky to railroad a player into a single path to make sure they get a particular experience, but it isn't necessary to ensure they get a good one.

Batman choosing what he wants to do next doesn't happen, but having a change of plans because of a pressing matter is something he'd be faced with. That's why a game that doesn't have everything crammed into one night would be a nice change of pace.

lazygecko · Jul 20, 2015

Teeth said:
This thread is a goldmine of the some of the worst ideas I've ever heard.

Can someone, anyone, think of another game that could serve as a template for what these theoretical Bruce Wayne segments could play like? Or any sort of gameplay loop that could be described as anything other than GPS gaming or holding up and looking at the pretty art?

There isn't one, which is precisely why it needs to be explored further. Over the years the industry has gotten good at iterating and refining this one single template for third person character action games (noticed how more and more of them just end up feeling like the same Ubisoft Game these days?), and it's gotten ingrained to the point where we're almost incapable of broadening our horizons. Properties like Batman have more aspects to them than just beating up bad guys and occasionally driving the batmobile, and it really highlights just how stunted the industry is when it tries to (or just flat out ignores) adapt the rest in an engaging way.

There's really only one game which attempts to capture the Batman experience in a broader sense, which is the now extremly obscure Batman Returns for PC, which was closer to a point & click adventure. The computer game culture at that time had a unique and very different paradigm which allowed this kind of direction. I really wish we could bring some of that spirit back.

exmachina64 · Jul 20, 2015

Garrett Hawke said:
I don't understand the desire for Bruce Wayne gameplay (a toned down Batman with less gadgets? Not fun), and imo one of the Arkham series' charms is the one-night-in-Gotham scenario. It's a refreshing set up, despite all of them using it, because nearly every other story driven game doesn't follow it.

By Arkham Knight, the series has ballooned into an Assassin's Creed-esque world that can take over 100 hours to 100% and contains 200+ Riddler trophies.

Are Riddler trophies an easy way to pad the length of the game and increase player engagement by making them play longer (for the final cutscene or personal achievement)? Sure, but they're boring.

Provided a Batman title implements day-to-night transitions and spaces out the chronology of the story, what's the harm in having Bruce Wayne keep up his social life and using his persona like we see in the movies and comics?

"Master Bruce, Ms. Vale called again. It's been three days since your last public appearance and I'm beginning to fear you'll be the last generation of Waynes I ever serve."

In typical Rocksteady/open world design form, it'll be overused and become annoying, but change up the damn formula. Spare me from slogging through "Batman: Arkham Legend."

Spring-Loaded said:
I understand the desire for something to shake things up, but I believe it should be used sparingly. Anything beyond an opening sequence, walking through Wayne Manor before going into the Batcave or being in a hostage situation as Bruce Wayne and having to get to a Batsuit doesn't see that appealing to me.

Let's live a little, Bruce Wayne didn't meet Dick Grayson in his Batman persona.

The one night setup really needs to go though. I'd rather have a game be entirely episodic than to take place all in one night with attention being split up among various villains, rather than giving each a decent amount of attention.

A worthwhile idea. Batman chases Ra's al Ghul, Talia, Nyssa, and the League of Shadows across the world. There can even be a low-key section in Nanda Parbat. Perhaps special appearances by the Batmen of Many Nations.

Emulated Hype said:
Circumvent the civilian issue by making it a Suicide Squad game. They already teased the possibility at the end of Origins.

I'm a fan of this idea.

lazygecko said:
There isn't one, which is precisely why it needs to be explored further. Over the years the industry has gotten good at iterating and refining this one single template for third person character action games (noticed how more and more of them just end up feeling like the same Ubisoft Game these days?), and it's gotten ingrained to the point where we're almost incapable of broadening our horizons. Properties like Batman have more aspects to them than just beating up bad guys and occasionally driving the batmobile, and it really highlights just how stunted the industry is when it tries to (or just flat out ignores) adapt the rest in an engaging way.

There's really only one game which attempts to capture the Batman experience in a broader sense, which is the now extremly obscure Batman Returns for PC, which was closer to a point & click adventure. The computer game culture at that time had a unique and very different paradigm which allowed this kind of direction. I really wish we could bring some of that spirit back.

This is a golden post.

JumpJeff84 · Jul 20, 2015

BriGuy said:
I'd rather they stay the fuck away from an open-world city altogether. Sure, it was a spectacle to behold when you first fire up Arkham Knight, but the gameplay mechanics suffered for it. Give me the tight, focused set-pieces of Arkham Asylum over Gotham City any day of the week.

Yeah I feel the same way

foxtrot3d · Jul 20, 2015

By not doing it! Seriously, I think making the city as big as it was in AK was already a mistake that hurt the game. Bigger does not mean better. AC was the perfect size because it was small enough that everything was connected together really well, invoking that same Metroidvania design from AA but with an added Zelda hub world. I don't want to play an Arkham game with Gotham the size of GTAV, whose world I found boring and lifeless anyway.

Secondly, I don't see any way you can have civilians running around in an Arkham game. There is a reason that every Arkham game has resulted in either the city being evacuated or the city being an enclosed prison. Civilians would break the immersion of being Batman. If civilians are walking the street are you going to allow the player to punch that civilian? How is that civi going to react to seeing Batman swoop down? What happens when the player rams their Batmobile into them? Any "solution" to that problem will break immersion, either civis are invulnerable or the player really can beat them up, either way it's a problem.

Just don't do it.

Teeth · Jul 20, 2015

Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku! said:
LA Noire?

So, just for clarity: walking around an environment wall humping the geometry in order find the individual art assets that you can interact with amongst the dozens of art assets to fill out the scene; rotating said art assets around to find "clues" that directly point to the answer to the crime; then watching long cutscenes while you tap one of four different buttons to select one of the four next cutscenes you get to watch. Get graded on your ability to press the correct cutscene.

Of course, since this is Batman, a AAA production for wide audiences, and the type of style these games tend to go for (hyper detailed, hammy melodrama) you can throw in Detective Vision to pick out the geometry to ogle (which reduces the geometry humping to GPS gaming, which is less tedious by a small margin but hardly interesting).

BUT (!!!) one might be thinking: it doesn't have to be that way! It could be Bruce doing detective work by investigating crime scenes, gathering clues and actually putting those clues together (along with talking to civies...which makes no sense because he's a billionaire playboy, not a cop, so who would actually talk to him?) to solve crimes.

But then you actually think about it for a second and you realize that is just a skin overlaid on top of the Arkham game mechanics that LIMITS the actual variance and interest in what the player can do. Instead of making Bruce Wayne do it, you could do it at night as Batman. There is nothing gained by doing it as Bruce Wayne.

As Bruce, you can: walk, talk, look at things
As Batman, you can: walk, talk (to people who would actually answer to you. You could use intimidation techniques, bargaining, biometric reading mini-games to detect lying, etc.), look at things, use wacky detective-bat gadgets, use the traversal methods to expand the crime scene play set, use detective vision to create alternate visualizations, etc.

The strengths of the Arkham games is that they create a holistic control scheme and scenario design that allows them to implement a ton of variance into a given mission. Going from point A to B is not fun when you are holding up on an analogue stick. But grappling, taking out a few thugs, analyzing a piece of evidence, finding a secret pathway to crawl through, do a predator room, grab a gadget, navigate across an urban jungle gym with 6 different mobility tools, talk to a couple of cops, grab a riddler trophy THEN solve the crime is infinitely more fun.

Looking at objects that are specifically laid out for the player to see, pressing A on them, then pressing A on a character to talk to them isn't fun. At all. In any game. It's the stuff you do between that has actual causal control, variance, challenge, navigational awareness, timing, etc. is what makes games fun.

lazygecko said:
There isn't one, which is precisely why it needs to be explored further. Over the years the industry has gotten good at iterating and refining this one single template for third person character action games (noticed how more and more of them just end up feeling like the same Ubisoft Game these days?), and it's gotten ingrained to the point where we're almost incapable of broadening our horizons. Properties like Batman have more aspects to them than just beating up bad guys and occasionally driving the batmobile, and it really highlights just how stunted the industry is when it tries to (or just flat out ignores) adapt the rest in an engaging way.

There's really only one game which attempts to capture the Batman experience in a broader sense, which is the now extremly obscure Batman Returns for PC, which was closer to a point & click adventure. The computer game culture at that time had a unique and very different paradigm which allowed this kind of direction. I really wish we could bring some of that spirit back.

It doesn't exist because it isn't engaging. It's what I described above and barely counts as a game. It's press X on things that exist in an environment, then press X to watch one of 3 different cutscenes. Didn't pick the right cutscene? Press X on a different cutscene. You WIN!

Fun is had when there is consistent engagement with the player, variance is accomplishing a task, reactivity against modular objects, and room for user skill improvement. GPS gaming and 'combine one of these three objects with all six of these choices and one will win!" has none of that either.

Spring-Loaded · Jul 20, 2015

foxtrot3d said:
Secondly, I don't see any way you can have civilians running around in an Arkham game. There is a reason that every Arkham game has resulted in either the city being evacuated or the city being an enclosed prison. Civilians would break the immersion of being Batman. If civilians are walking the street are you going to allow the player to punch that civilian? How is that civi going to react to seeing Batman swoop down? What happens when the player rams their Batmobile into them? Any "solution" to that problem will break immersion, either civis are invulnerable or the player really can beat them up, either way it's a problem.

Some of these are the very questions I'm asking in the OP — I'm looking for these answers too.

I also don't think "having a full Gotham City" and "not having an open world" are mutually exclusive. That could be the solution to having a fully populated Gotham, even if you don't get to interact with civilians to the same degree you can in GTA.

Support NeoGAF

Post Batman: Arkham series, wondering how best to do a full Gotham City

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

his body's cold as ice, but he's got a heart of gold

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Similar threads