Rumor: Batman: Arkham Origins Will Add 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.

 

[carlh267]

It worked for Mass Effect 3 and the Assassin's Creed games, when both had large groups of fanboys saying that they would be crappy afterthought multiplayer modes.

If its done well, multiplayer can add to the game. I'm decidedly neutral about this until I hear and see more about it.

 

[blackdwarf]

Yeah, give the games, that are solid example of commercial hits which are solo experiences, multiplayer. Everyone was asking for that.

 

[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.

 

[hazabaza1]

C'mon guys, Multiplayer is always good. I mean, look at Tomb Raider, that multiplayer... is.. still...

oh.

 

[Caffeine_Bombed]

Well, to be fair, I lost a lot of hype for this sequel/prequel when I heard "Oh we're totally gonna put the Justice League in it!". Almost as if they were trying to cash in on some sort of movie...

I want to see what happens after Arkham City with the whole prophecy/Hush/Scarecrow/creepy Joker-baby thing.
Oh and like everyone else I certainly couldn't give a rat's ass about multiplayer.

 

[The_Darkness]

On the one hand,*adopts gravelly voice* I never asked for this...

On the other hand, this could be done really well. I'm thinking predator mode, one player as Batman, the other players as thugs with some or other objective, armed with guns.
No wait, better still: The other player as a super villain directing those thugs, so that you've got a strategy mode over-view of the map along with a 'most recent sighting of Batman' marker, 'Current Guard Patrol Routes' and 'These Guards are too terrified to obey your orders'. It would be especially fun if you can go in there as the super-villain from time-to-time to get your guards to obey you again, kick Batman's ass, and set traps. Of course, if Batman takes you out when you're in Villain-mode, it's Game Over, making this a high-risk, high reward strategy.

But if there is multiplayer, it almost certainly won't be that, and it'll feel like a cheap addition designed to draw in some extra market. *sigh* I wish I was less cynical...

 

[Darth Sea Bass]

Meh to be honest my interest dropped when i heard rocksteady weren't on the case this just adds to my apathy for the game.

 

[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...

 

[Jakisall]

In Short:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umDr0mPuyQc
In Long
Seriously though depending on what type of multiplayer they have.

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...

This I could get behind. Some kind of co-op missions that involve strategy and using each character's unique abilities to try and get some villain in his hideout or etc. Sadly though the pessimist in me sees some tacked on Gotham City Imposters ripoff.

 

[Gali]

I love Batman, I love Rocksteady and what they did with their games. I'm a fan of both and I'm sure RS will be developing another Batman game. Otherwise it would be a stupid move of WB to take the IP away from the studio that made Batman a big deal in games again. Maybe while WB Montreal works on the prequel and spinoffs, RS is already developing the real deal - a sequel to AC. I don't think people care as much about a prequel as a sequel, because of the loose ends and hints we got in AC.

That being said...
Please stop bitching about a different developer and MP until we get more information like gameplay videos and so on - thank you. It's childish, give them a chance. RS was a no-name dev too, before they created the Arkham games. Also, as far as I can tell, on the official Arkhamverse forums and fansites, people do appreciate some kind of multiplayer. They are basically talking about it since AC. And tbh, there is no reason against it as long as they handle their ressources well. But since the previous games did pretty well and there are other Batman/DC-related multiplayer games out there (Gotham City Impostors, Infinite Crisis), I'm sure WB knows what the main selling point of those games is.

Edit:

I want to see what happens after Arkham City with the whole prophecy/Hush/Scarecrow/creepy Joker-baby thing.

About the last aspect you mentioned: Play the story dlc for AC (Harley Quinns Revenge).

 

[Parakeettheprawn]

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

I actually wrote up a blog post ages ago about how they could make multiplayer work in Arkham games. If they made it a co-op style dungeon crawler/horde mode experience, it would be very enjoyable, maybe even with a villains verses police mode. But instead... they're just making what sounds a bit like darkSector's multiplayer.

 

[RJ 17]

Some were disappointed to learn that Arkham Origins wasn't being developed by Rocksteady, the studio behind the first two Arkham titles. The addition of multiplayer, in turn, is likely to be taken by detractors as a poor sign of things to come.

Yeah...that about sums it up for me.

Even if it's completely optional it still reeks of an EA-like style of handling from management. I dunno, I like my traditionally single-player-only games to remain single-player-only. That said, I still say that, with a good team, the multiplayer in Assassin's Creed Brotherhood is still one of my favorite multiplayer experiences. So maybe it'll be decent...I just don't see how they'd balance it.

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.

I dunno, I just feel that they'd have to change a lot of core mechanics to do it, but who really knows.

 

[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.

 

[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.

 

[Slowbear]

R.I.P Arkham you lost me

 

[Formica Archonis]

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

 

[Something Amyss]

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.

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.

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.