Rocksteady confirms Batman: Arkham City will be 'single-player only' [Joystiq]

[DP ServBot]

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.joystiq.com/media/2010/10/arkham10112.jpg (http://www.joystiq.com/2011/02/14/rocksteady-confirms-batman-arkham-city-will-be-single-player-o/)
Though rumors (and some slick yet ultimately fake video evidence (http://www.joystiq.com/2011/01/26/would-be-batman-arkham-city-trailer-is-fishy/)) to the opposite effect has been circling 'round the internet for some time now, Rocksteady game director Sefton Hill confirms in a recent IGN interview (http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/114/1149491p1.html) that Batman: Arkham City (http://www.joystiq.com/game/batman-arkham-city) will be "a 'single-player only' experience." According to Hill, the developer didn't want to lose resources that could have been spent on perfecting the solo campaign. "With the game now coming to the final stages, I can honestly say it would not have been possible to deliver Arkham City the way we wanted to if we'd have added multiplayer."

Well, shoot. We were really holding out hope for a Batman and Robin co-operative mode, in which one player does all the crimefighting while the other comments on things that are holy -- until being bound and captured by lower-echelon thugs. Oh, well!

For more info on things that are actually in the game (including classic supervillain Hugo Strange), check out Rocksteady's discussion with IGN (http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/114/1149491p1.html).
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.joystiq.com/media/feedlogo.gif (http://www.joystiq.com)Rocksteady confirms Batman: Arkham City will be 'single-player only' (http://www.joystiq.com/2011/02/14/rocksteady-confirms-batman-arkham-city-will-be-single-player-o/) originally appeared on Joystiq (http://www.joystiq.com) on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 12:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds (http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/).




Permalink (http://www.joystiq.com/2011/02/14/rocksteady-confirms-batman-arkham-city-will-be-single-player-o/) | Email this (http://www.joystiq.com/forward/19843076/) | Comments (http://www.joystiq.com/2011/02/14/rocksteady-confirms-batman-arkham-city-will-be-single-player-o/#comments)

More... (http://www.joystiq.com/2011/02/14/rocksteady-confirms-batman-arkham-city-will-be-single-player-o/)

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Mmm ... while I'd love an online multiplayer mode, I have no complaints if the sequel builds on the amazing single player experience of the 1st game.

[portnoyd]

They could have said they dropped the pack-in add-on that prints money in favor of the development of singleplayer and I wouldn't be disappointed. First game is so goddamn good, it'd be worth it.

[Kitsune Sniper]

And if anyone wants the PC version of part one, it's $7.50 on Steam for today.

[sheath]

The PC version of Arkham Asylum is terrific with modern budget video cards. Even in Direct X 9c it looked better than the console versions, but in Windows 7 and DX 11 I am just really happy with the overall improvements.

That is not a knock against the console versions by any means, I played through it on 360. I was genuinely glad to see not one but two games that year have better than average close combat engines and be well received.

I do hope that Arkham City has more combat and detective work, and less emphasis on trinket finding. I know it's essentially Metroid-man, but still.

I really just don't see Batman giving a crap about how many trophies the Riddler left in man sized air vents. Oh, and that's another thing, there must be better ways to infiltrate a building than A/C systems big enough for a dude in a SUIT OF ARMOR to crawl through.

-edit-

Also, there is just no way a multiplayer game would ever work with this type of engine. The counter system completely favors Batman, and if the other players got to play the armed thugs he really would not stand a chance in any of Arkham Asylum's scenarios.

[mdk]

This news is fine by me. Although co-op would be fun, I'm always craving a solid single player game.

[Dobie]

This thread reminds me I need to play the first one still. Which console version is the one to get? I'm assuming the PS3 due to the added content?

Oh, and the sequel looks sweet. No need for multiplayer if nobody is going to play it.

[Robocop2]

Thank God for that news. Really not everything ever even needs multiplayer.

[Emuaust]

Im happy they are dedicating there time to what made the first game so good, the single player. Assassins Creed team, please take note...

[WCP]

To me, it's hilarious that shit like this is even considered news. It's like, "How dare them to not throw in a quicky-multiplayer mode!".

The online junkies need to get over it. I know of people like this. They simply won't play a game that ins't online. It's like, if they are playing an offline single player game, then they are all alone by themselves on an island. They always have to be in an online game with other people, or they feel it's a total waste of their time, and they'd rather watch TV or a Blu Ray.



Im happy they are dedicating there time to what made the first game so good, the single player. Assassins Creed team, please take note...

The funny thing is, I've actually heard that the multiplayer in the new AC Brotherhood game is really good, really unique. I even heard that the multiplayer in Bioshock 2 is surprisingly decent. Thing is, 9 times out of ten, it's the other way around when multiplayer is added to a game known for it's single player campaign.

[Emuaust]

Im not a fan of the AC multiplayer, it is unique and well done, the point I was making is that the multiplayer came at the expense of a rushed single player experience that while good, could of used some more time and care on some big bugs.

[The 1 2 P]

Really not everything ever even needs multiplayer.

Agreed. Theres still room left for great single player games that don't need to tact on multiplayer for one more added bullet point.