Online Pass Required to Play as Arkham City's Catwoman

[the spud]

How major a feature is Catwoman going to be in the game? Because if she turns out to be a significant part of the game I am going to be pissed.

 

[thepyrethatburns]

*Shrug* At this point, I don't even get mad about it anymore. It's like the tale about the Scorpion and the Frog. Expecting the industry not to sting us seems naive.

 

[Ldude893]

Ohhhh boy.

Internet outcry shall commence in 5...4...

 

[Tommeh Brownleh]

Eh. We're just gonna have to deal with dick devs. I'm not getting the game anyway.

 

[Aprilgold]

Honestly who actually cares about being able to play as Catwoman anyway? Last time I checked the title it said "Batman: Arkham City"

its a whole fairly large gameplay segment with entirely different gameplay and its own plot developments. Its a fairly big part.

Aside from all that, im fine with it. People SHOULD buy new anyway, used games dont support the industry end of.

Its not trying to give incentives to buy the game new, their only trying to make you buy it new. A good incentive is if every new copy gave you Robin, that would be fine, or alternates or whatever, extra things. This is forcing you to buy new to access a key component of the game. And I don't want any of this 'BUT ITS NOT!' It is about 10% of the game, which could mean several good, solid hours of Cat Woman, who was supposed to launch fully with the Dark Night on 10.18.11 and now won't do so if the person borrows it from a friend and ETC.

 

[IceStar100]

It's going to drive me crazy becuase with out Cat women you cat (Can't) get all the riddler stuff.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

I don't support this kind of business practice at all. How many times do you have to explain these people that it's in gaming industry's best interest to leave used sales alone?

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Catwoman's suit is dumb, but Catwoman's had a sexual edge and flirted (or more) with Batman for what, 70 years?

There's a big difference between flirtation and BDSM though. That's not Catwoman's "thing". She's always been more of a tease than a provoker anyway.

Poison Ivy's been perhaps more varied, but certainly had numerous sexual interpretations.

Yeah but...she likes women...Hence Harley.

It manifested a little differently, but even in "Mad Love" Harley is pretty clearly a) sexual (dontcha wanna rev your Harley) and b) crazy, mentally ill and obsessive about Joker. Calling Harley a spacecake acrobat is almost as bad as calling The Joker "eccentric."

But it's a very different relationship. Joker is an insensitive psychopath and Harley is struggling with her own personality. She knows she's crazy, she just can't help it. She feeds off his rejection.

Certainly, they could have gone with less sexualized versions, but this is hardly out of left field or abnormal.

Neither is the new Starfire, or the new Catwoman. But it's hardly adding to their character, is it?

Creating a separate canon means exactly that, retaining what the artist wants and altering or inserting anything they want.

But they have to make it clear which canon they're following, or the viewers suspension of disbelief is gone.

If they want to make Batman an alien, great. But at least give us a few clues, and KEEP them straight. If this is a "What If?" Batman, then the least they could do is show us information about why it's different.

Remember the brilliant part in Arkham Asylum where you swear at your computer because you think it's broken...and then you realise that it's actually Scarecrow's fear gas working on Bruce?

Without the knowledge that Bruce is Batman because of that event, it has no meaning. Now imagine the same with Catwoman...which version of Selina Kyle do you have?

The African American Business owner? The prostitute turned crime fighter? The daughter of murdered Thomas and Martha Kyle?

Without a solid canon, you can't have scenes like the Fear Gas scene; and that's what made Arkham Asylum.

 

[THAC0]

I don't see a problem with this. want to play the game 100%? play as Batman and go on with your day.

Want to play as an extra character? well, if you buy the game new, you get to play as Catwoman for free. if you buy it used, you can pay a bit and download her.

This is really a pretty good way to handle this.

 

[Lunar Templar]

Here's the problem: Think about it a few years down the line. It's nary impossible to buy a new copy then, in any way that would affect the developer. Get it used, and you'll have to pay even more for what will seem like, to you, cut content. That's not likely to endear one to the developer, or publisher

And most of the money from a new sale goes to the Publisher. You know, some of whom are trying to prevent us from suing them in a class action. Or the ones who put always-online DRM on their PC launch.

just as adding to this, they might not be supporting said DLC a few years from now

OT: bummer, this kinda sucks, but given I've no money now, :/ wont effect me in the least, still, sucks for every one who will have to deal with it

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

Oh look, I don't care because I am not:

A. Behind the times and not connected to the internet.

B. Buying a game I really really want used.

C. Even if I were buying used, I'm not buying for Catwoman but rather Batman. I didn't rage because my 360 version didn't include the PS3 Joker maps. I wouldn't rage about this either.

D. I don't believe I am entitled to anything except what I pay for. Buy a used car, don't expect it to run like new. Buy a used game, don't expect to get everything with it.

 

[ACman]

Quick. somebody call Jim Sterling so we can watch him froth at the mouth.

 

[meiadose]

WTF i have my special collectors edition on pre order so it won't affect me,but still i think that´s just wrong,this and the thing with the extra costumes locked to specifics retailers when in the old times (before the all dlc money grabbing schemes) the costumes came has in game rewards

 

[Da Orky Man]

The problem with Online Passes in single player games is obvious. NOT EVERYONE IS CONNECTED TO THE INTERNET. Older 360s require people to own a separately purchased adapter just to connect to the internet via wi-fi.

At least with multiplayer online passes, people who need it can redeem it.

Not older, EVERY xbox apart from the very newest model needs an adapter for wifi. I was offline for three years before I connected.

 

[username sucks]

ill just wait a few months and ill probably be able to get the game about $20 and even if ii buy the online pass i still save money off of buying it new. simple solution, although it does piss me off that they are trying this hard to prevent secondhand sale. The video game companies are rich already

 

[ImSkeletor]

Oh look, I don't care because I am not:

D. I don't believe I am entitled to anything except what I pay for. Buy a used car, don't expect it to run like new. Buy a used game, don't expect to get everything with it.

Yeah but if you buy a second hand dvd you don't expect there to be random missing scenes.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

Here's the problem: Think about it a few years down the line. It's nary impossible to buy a new copy then, in any way that would affect the developer. Get it used, and you'll have to pay even more for what will seem like, to you, cut content. That's not likely to endear one to the developer, or publisher

The console games have a much shorter shelf life mainly due to the used market. PC doesn't have the same used market and you could find games up to 10 years after release still selling.

If used games were eliminated then the market they would occupy would be filled by the publishers because hey... there are people who want to buy product and they got product.

And most of the money from a new sale goes to the Publisher.

Now not strictly true.
They get about 27 dollars per copy sold, but only start making an actual profit AFTER about a million copies has been sold (depending on the scale of the budget, but its in that ballpark for your standard AAA title): Ofc after that its pure profit, but you still need to make quite a lot to justify a 3 year investment of about 25-30 mill dollars.

You know, some of whom are trying to prevent us from suing them in a class action. Or the ones who put always-online DRM on their PC launch.

Yeah they might have a case if the DRM did things they didn't agree to. But as far as I know there hasn't been any real movement because of that. When you are told that part of the software is there and what it does, you dont have have a case.

In order of the points
1) Nothing is preventing publishers from opening up their own second hand stores. I can find no law or regulation to prevent it. They could also buy back games themselves, and give you credit towards their own titles. But they won't, because that would require thinking.

2) I meant in terms of Publisher/Developer. They get more money, so the whole "Help the starving devs" argument doesn't really stand up

3) I don't doubt it's legal. It's stupid. I was saying you shouldn't feel sorry for the publishers

Allow me to quote a man over at Destructoid

Onered said
It comes down to one thing, regardless of argument: publishers have zero proof that used games cost them any money. None. Nada. It is all conjecture, and a fair amount of hubris. Again, publishers have zero proof used games cost them money, they are not even actively trying to prove it.

I can, however, prove that Gamestop alone buys $1 billion worth of murchandise from gamers a year, and according the their president, more than 75% of that is used on new product in the same visit, and more than 95% is used in the same visit on everything in general. In simple terms, Gamestop, the evil empire of games retail, adds $1billion to gamer's pockets anually, the vast majority of which is spent on new product before walking out of the store. Numbers.

Publishers cannot prove that used games cost the industry money, they don't want to try. I've said it before, when your weapon of choice is conjecture, you have to keep your image squeaky clean. If big publishers could prove anything, they would have. They know that the second they put the effort into doing just that, they lay waste to the image they've been perpetuating, as the actual numbers would be incapable of perpetuating it for them.

 

[Zero_ctrl]

Sounds fine by my standards. I always try to buy new.