Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 104
  1. #76
    iMan 42s
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    3,417

    Default

    Yeah I’m passing on this. I get that it’s probably Braniac brainwashing the league but I’m so fucking sick of evil superman and deconstructing superheroes. I figure it will have a story reason but damnit what is this aversion DC has to pushing superheroes?
    -----------------------------------
    For anyone that needs to know why OMD is awful please search the internet for Linkara' s video's specifically his One more day review or his One more day Analysis.

  2. #77
    Extraordinary Member Revolutionary_Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    5,867

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperiorIronman View Post
    Yeah Iím passing on this. I get that itís probably Braniac brainwashing the league but Iím so fucking sick of evil superman and deconstructing superheroes. I figure it will have a story reason but damnit what is this aversion DC has to pushing superheroes?
    DC have an issue pushing non-Batman superheroes.

    Batman and Batman-adjacent sidekicks and villains are fine and dandy.

    I mean it's not just Superman who gets shafted...you also have Green Lantern especially the greatest of them John Stewart. Other properties with potential like The Question, Mister Miracle don't get much to do either. Stuff like The Sandman has been forever stalled from being adapted properly. John Constantine has gotten a nifty TV show and focus in animation and a Keanu Reeves movie (that I thought was enjoyable the one time late at night I saw years back) but nothing much even if arguably he could outfit a Witcher 3 style game set in DC's Magic corner.

  3. #78
    Put a smile on that face Immortal Weapon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Bronx, New York
    Posts
    8,800

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Derek Metaltron View Post
    To be fair I think Rocksteady won’t care about retcons with Origins and Assault since that wasn’t their continuity. City will be where they’ll need to explain though. Maybe there’s two Deadshots and they’ll explain that away somehow.
    Arkham Knight paid a lot of respect to Origins. It made lots of references to it and fully acknowledge it. I don't see Rocksteady throwing that in the bin.

    If we progressed far enough that you retcon a characters race than fuck it. I'll roll with it.

  4. #79
    Extraordinary Member Revolutionary_Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    5,867

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Immortal Weapon View Post
    Arkham Knight paid a lot of respect to Origins. It made lots of references to it and fully acknowledge it. I don't see Rocksteady throwing that in the bin.
    I don't know what respect you talk about. I saw the opposite. Deathstroke had an overly elaborated and convoluted boss-fight in Arkham Origins, in Arkham Knight, Batman takes him out with a single punch in a cutscene. To me that felt like Rocksteady dissing Origins.

    If we progressed far enough that you retcon a characters race than fuck it. I'll roll with it.
    It's not different from James Bond movies, where Bond was played by a Scottish actor with a Scottish accent then followed by an Australian, then a Welshman, an Irishman. He used to be a brunette or black haired but then became blonde.

    Similar examples are there all over the place.

  5. #80
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    888

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperiorIronman View Post
    Yeah Iím passing on this. I get that itís probably Braniac brainwashing the league but Iím so fucking sick of evil superman and deconstructing superheroes. I figure it will have a story reason but damnit what is this aversion DC has to pushing superheroes?
    On the one hand, I totally get this. Not a Superman fan, but I've heard enough of them lament his treatment in outside media to know that it touches a nerve for a lot of people.

    But, on the other hand... who did you want the Squad to fight? There needs to be a real threat to the group, which the heroes don't actually represent under normal circumstances, because none of the major heroes kill. And fighting other villains could work, but would give players way less hype. I always figured we'd be going this route. It both lets you fight big name heroes, gives them menace and puts actual stakes on the Squad characters fighting them, and also lets the Squad ultimately be heroes when they take out the real threat and save everybody in the end.

    This feels like a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" kind of problem to me.

  6. #81
    Extraordinary Member Revolutionary_Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    5,867

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZeroBG82 View Post
    But, on the other hand... who did you want the Squad to fight?
    Anyone I should think, even the cook.

    There needs to be a real threat to the group, which the heroes don't actually represent under normal circumstances, because none of the major heroes kill.
    No way can Rocksteady's Superman actually kill Harley Quinn over the course of the game, or do anything damaging to the major DC supporting cast.

    And fighting other villains could work, but would give players way less hype.
    On the contrary fighting against other villains and threats can work better because that way you can make the violence stick and have consequences. Have the Squad kill the henchmen and minor villains and so on...that's how the hit Harley Quinn show does it. Or you know the actual John Ostrander comic, and for that matter the upcoming James Gunn movie which focuses on exploring the supervillain community.

    Obviously the Suicide Squad aren't going to end the game actually killing the Justice League. But they can kill other villains and so on.

  7. #82
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    55,694

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    Rocksteady obviously don't consider Origins canon. I mean they don't treat it as such. It was also a title that sold to far fewer people than their games did so they have incentive to discard it. If you like Origins (and honestly don't know why but you do you) that might be hard but it's what it is.
    If that was their take they really shouldn't have referenced the game as much as they did in Knight.
    Rocksteady will always consider their games to be the real canon. And again Deadshot appeared in basically two cutscenes in Arkham City and had one big side-mission, so they can ignore that and recast him.
    But that makes it sound like they're not even considering their own games canon .
    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    I don't know what respect you talk about. I saw the opposite. Deathstroke had an overly elaborated and convoluted boss-fight in Arkham Origins, in Arkham Knight, Batman takes him out with a single punch in a cutscene. To me that felt like Rocksteady dissing Origins.
    If they were truly dissing Origins I don't think they would have put so many references to Origins in Knight at all, beyond Deathstroke's presence, because they were clearly treating it as canon.

    And they got flack for how they handled Deathstroke.
    It's not different from James Bond movies, where Bond was played by a Scottish actor with a Scottish accent then followed by an Australian, then a Welshman, an Irishman. He used to be a brunette or black haired but then became blonde.

    Similar examples are there all over the place.
    A race change is a different beast than regional or hair color differences.

  8. #83
    Put a smile on that face Immortal Weapon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Bronx, New York
    Posts
    8,800

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    I don't know what respect you talk about. I saw the opposite. Deathstroke had an overly elaborated and convoluted boss-fight in Arkham Origins, in Arkham Knight, Batman takes him out with a single punch in a cutscene. To me that felt like Rocksteady dissing Origins.



    It's not different from James Bond movies, where Bond was played by a Scottish actor with a Scottish accent then followed by an Australian, then a Welshman, an Irishman. He used to be a brunette or black haired but then became blonde.

    Similar examples are there all over the place.
    Deathstroke boss fight was my favorite in Origins. In his appearance in Knight made references to it. The Deathstroke fight in Knight was trash.

    The evidence room of GCPD is a love letter to the previous games and includes Origins. A lot of cops in there talk about how the current situation reminds them of the Blackgate Riot.

    Firefly sidequest made mention how he hadn't been seen since the riot when he destroyed Gotham bridge.

  9. #84
    The Future is Now WebSlingWonder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    2,054

    Default

    This game looks...ehhh. The personalities were cool, and the actual cinematic was on point, but I agree about the Deadshot race thing: it was a totally unnecessary change that didn't need to happen, simply because he was black in the movie. (And before anyone jumps on my case about it, I'm black and would love to see more black superheroes/villains in games...this ain't it)

    And yeah, evil Superman...again. After literally just getting Injustice, then the Red Son movie last year and the countless times he's been evil before...can they do something different with him? Can't the Squad take on the League legitimately like the comics? What happened to that?

    And lastly, what's up with it being 2 years away? They had four years or so between Knight and this. What else were they doing? And before someone jumps on me and says, "Oh but Webslingwonder, Knight came out five years later." It did, but we had a game in between them. We've had NOTHING between 2016 and, now, 2022, save for Gotham Knights, which is it's own thing. So you're telling me it will take at least 6 years to make the so-called sequel/spinoff? GTFOH.

    This is really shoddy on Rocksteady's part, and I used to be a huge fan of the Arkham games.
    Catching thieves just like flies for 58 years!!

  10. #85
    King of Wakanda Midvillian1322's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    8,801

    Default

    Showed absolutely no gameplay. I'm down ill give it a try

  11. #86
    iMan 42s
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    3,417

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZeroBG82 View Post
    On the one hand, I totally get this. Not a Superman fan, but I've heard enough of them lament his treatment in outside media to know that it touches a nerve for a lot of people.

    But, on the other hand... who did you want the Squad to fight? There needs to be a real threat to the group, which the heroes don't actually represent under normal circumstances, because none of the major heroes kill. And fighting other villains could work, but would give players way less hype. I always figured we'd be going this route. It both lets you fight big name heroes, gives them menace and puts actual stakes on the Squad characters fighting them, and also lets the Squad ultimately be heroes when they take out the real threat and save everybody in the end.

    This feels like a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" kind of problem to me.
    You do know they have evil counterparts right? Bizzaro, Lex Luthor, Reverse Flash, Sinestro, Grid, Cheetah, Hush, Owl man, or even Black Adam. I don't buy for a second they needed to turn the league evil for them to have somebody to fight let alone have stakes. And aside from that if they're brainwashed then we aren't really fighting them anyway. It might as well be a Superman themed robot since he wont sound and act like Superman and it's not like he's going to be able to kill Harley Quinn anyways. So we're fighting the league for a mixture of edge and the higher ups not knowing what to do with the league aside from make them evil again.
    -----------------------------------
    For anyone that needs to know why OMD is awful please search the internet for Linkara' s video's specifically his One more day review or his One more day Analysis.

  12. #87
    Extraordinary Member Revolutionary_Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    5,867

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WebSlingWonder View Post
    And lastly, what's up with it being 2 years away? They had four years or so between Knight and this. What else were they doing? And before someone jumps on me and says, "Oh but Webslingwonder, Knight came out five years later." It did, but we had a game in between them. We've had NOTHING between 2016 and, now, 2022, save for Gotham Knights, which is it's own thing. So you're telling me it will take at least 6 years to make the so-called sequel/spinoff? GTFOH.

    This is really shoddy on Rocksteady's part, and I used to be a huge fan of the Arkham games.
    I agree with most of your post, but in this case I think Rocksteady should be cut some slack.

    Their Suicide Squad game is going to be a proper Next-Gen title, i.e. it's made for PC, PS5, and the new version of Xbox. Compare that to Gotham Knights which will be ported on PS4 and XBONE. What that means is that Gotham Knights is still current-gen, and iterating on the assets of Arkham Knight whereas Rocksteady are the ones who are taking advantages of the new hardware and tech to go all out.

    A new console shift will always be hard at first and it needs longer time to get right. Plus I think the PC port could use the extended lead time after the fiasco with their previous release.

    Above that...Rocksteady's Suicide Squad is a new IP, and is set in a new city, so that means that they had to go to the drawing board to dream it up. For instance in the trailer of Suicide Squad, it's all set in broad daylight and bright sunshine...whereas the Arkham games are famously all set at night (with the exception of one of the AK DLC where you play as Nightwing). So basically that's a lot of work to think about lighting, costumes, colors, sets, and levels and so on. Also they need to think of the new technology and what it can bring to the table because Rocksteady games are expected to be the ones who set the bar (Arkham Knight for instance when it came out was among the first games to show what the PS4 could really do...no loading screens when you enter and exit from interiors to exteriors for instance).

  13. #88
    The Future is Now WebSlingWonder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    2,054

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    I agree with most of your post, but in this case I think Rocksteady should be cut some slack.

    Their Suicide Squad game is going to be a proper Next-Gen title, i.e. it's made for PC, PS5, and the new version of Xbox. Compare that to Gotham Knights which will be ported on PS4 and XBONE. What that means is that Gotham Knights is still current-gen, and iterating on the assets of Arkham Knight whereas Rocksteady are the ones who are taking advantages of the new hardware and tech to go all out.

    A new console shift will always be hard at first and it needs longer time to get right. Plus I think the PC port could use the extended lead time after the fiasco with their previous release.

    Above that...Rocksteady's Suicide Squad is a new IP, and is set in a new city, so that means that they had to go to the drawing board to dream it up. For instance in the trailer of Suicide Squad, it's all set in broad daylight and bright sunshine...whereas the Arkham games are famously all set at night (with the exception of one of the AK DLC where you play as Nightwing). So basically that's a lot of work to think about lighting, costumes, colors, sets, and levels and so on. Also they need to think of the new technology and what it can bring to the table because Rocksteady games are expected to be the ones who set the bar (Arkham Knight for instance when it came out was among the first games to show what the PS4 could really do...no loading screens when you enter and exit from interiors to exteriors for instance).
    I get that, but that still feels like an excuse. I don't mind 2022; I just mind showing me a cinematic trailer and no gameplay, and then telling me "Oh, it's coming in 2 years." Really? They may as well have waited until it was closer to being done.
    Catching thieves just like flies for 58 years!!

  14. #89
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    888

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperiorIronman View Post
    You do know they have evil counterparts right? Bizzaro, Lex Luthor, Reverse Flash, Sinestro, Grid, Cheetah, Hush, Owl man, or even Black Adam. I don't buy for a second they needed to turn the league evil for them to have somebody to fight let alone have stakes. And aside from that if they're brainwashed then we aren't really fighting them anyway. It might as well be a Superman themed robot since he wont sound and act like Superman and it's not like he's going to be able to kill Harley Quinn anyways. So we're fighting the league for a mixture of edge and the higher ups not knowing what to do with the league aside from make them evil again.
    You're thinking like a comic book fan, and not a general audience gamer.

    Ask yourself this: You're tangentially aware of superheroes and comics, but you don't read them. You see the movies. But you love video games. And along comes this game, with some characters you've heard of because movies, called Suicide Squad. It's from a studio you know makes kick ass superhero games, like Arkham. But no Batman in this one. And they make clear you get to fight some villains who you've maybe heard of, because movies. Are you hyped? With no gameplay revealed? Really?

    Now instead, you hear about a similar game. But now you get to fight Superman.

    Yeah, exactly. One of those games sells to comic book nerds and does ok, and one goes insane with pre-orders and makes all the money. Can you guess which is which?

  15. #90
    Extraordinary Member Revolutionary_Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    5,867

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WebSlingWonder View Post
    I get that, but that still feels like an excuse. I don't mind 2022; I just mind showing me a cinematic trailer and no gameplay, and then telling me "Oh, it's coming in 2 years." Really? They may as well have waited until it was closer to being done.
    That's a fair hit.

    Yeah, dropping the trailer for this game at DC Fandome kind of feels a little desperate. WB Games, the department which owned Rocksteady was on the chopping block for a few months with AT and T considering to sell it off. They did an about face but it seems that DC Editorial got the axe instead. So I think dropping the trailer was a way to tell "we are still here" to investors and others and get excitement about their most respected studio.

    It also serves Rocksteady because they got to distract people from some sexual harassment claims made by the former writer of this game and complaints about toxic workspace.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •