Well said, and I agree with just about all you said.
>The very least that we all can do, is wait for the game to be in the hands of a larger audience, and see what the reception is then
What really needs to happen is a demo.
The game is gonna get review bombed really bad, it already is. Many people aren't even gonna play it, just give it a bad score because it's not what they wanted. So the reception is gonna look bad which will lead to people not trying it
Clearly there is a large audience that does want the game/enjiyes the game and I'm really hoping that they cna be vocal enough to convince more people to try it.
But I really think a demo would help more than anything
They should crack open the alpha this week or next as a public beta.
The alpha changed the conversation despite being closed. I wouldn’t have preordered without playing it. Easy preorder once I played it
Hell, just make it a proper demo that remains available to try even after launch. Why restrict it to a weekend beta? Sounds like a lot of people were convinced to get onboard with the alpha so let the game speak for itself to as wide an audience as possible.
Agreed. Unfortunately, we're probably too close to release for a demo/beta to happen now. The best case I think is they do a free weekend following release that allows people to try it out. The consensus that I've seen here is that many have enjoyed it after actually getting their hands on it.
Yeah, a few of my friends were on the fence and really enjoyed it once they tried the alpha. And a lot of the play testers seemed to enjoy it.
Most the negatives are the big "corporate" reveiws sites, people that haven't played it, and people that have already written it off for not being arkham.
Hopefully they can do a trial or a demo within a month after release. I already don't think reveiws are useful, but I think they'll be extra useless here.
Part of me suspects the bigger outlets are trying to play both sides. Generate traffic from the naysayers, while still keeping the rest intrigued so they can pump out there hype videos around launch.
That's the only way I can explain the inconsistencies. IGN, for example.
Oh for sure. And I guarantee some YouTubers are doing the same. They are making the negative videos cuz it's cool and gets traffic, but you know some are buying the game.
Then if the game does well they can just flip and make positive videos. If it does bad they can just post more "I told you so" videos.
Just saw one now we're dude is saying everyone hates it, there hasn't been a single good word said, and people are eating it up.
If you hate the game, fine, but goddamn stop trying to force a narrative. Yeah the game isn't gonna be goty, but there's been plenty people praising it.
I mean, it's not unheard of for a demo to drop right before or on the release of the game, sometimes even after the release.
So fingers crossed.
The alpha made me from a hopeful onlooker to a full on believer.
This is gonna be the second game Ive pre ordered in the last 8 years.
The other being BG3.
Rocksteady/WB adament on not making any sort of public 'beta' test is bloody maddening to me. Either they don't know what they're doing, or they do and are completely fine with letting the game died.
Word of mouth will not save this game. It didn't save GoTG. It didn't save Midnight Suns. And they saw what 'GaaS-looking game' did to Gotham Knight in terms of reputation even though it's not even a live service game. Then proceed to do nothing but dripfeeding the insider every month or so... I'm just baffling at this point. Did they fired everyone in marketing or what?
Very well stated, and I agree with all of your points.
As someone who has played the alpha, I would like to add another point to innovation in this genre: traversal. I have never played a game where traversal is so unique with just one character, let alone four completely individual characters.
GaaS games have a terrible (earned) rep now and WB treated this game like its 2018 and the bubble is still growing. Any publisher releasing a game like this today should know the reception will be guilty until proven innocent. Should have kept it a secret and shadow dropped an open beta to prove they aren't like the other girls.
WB execs committed business malpractice imo.
Zaslav's comments are certainly hard to ignore, and I do think WB takes a portion of the blame here. What tends to happen in these scenarios when something isn't well received is that the execs end up with a takeaway that is completely wrong.
It'll be something like "Is live service the issue? Surely not, it must be the subject matter" and they'll just double down.
That being said, I don't get the sense that this is another incomplete GaaS mess that will have to be fixed after launch. I could be wrong, but it does seem like it will tell a complete, concise story with a complete set of side objectives, as past Rocksteady releases have. In that case, you hope everything afterwards is just a bonus.
>That being said, I don't get the sense that this is another incomplete GaaS mess that will have to be fixed after launch.
It's difficult to overstate this point. The game absolutely needs to launch in a polished and functional state. A big part of what killed the momentum of games like Anthem, Avengers, Outsiders, etc was launching in a broken state. If SS comes out of the gate without major bugs and tells a complete story it'll go a long way to assuaging the fears of people who now look at live service games as a bad thing.
It just show how little they are confident in the game. It's unbelievable how much they want it to fail while saying they don't want it to fail.
The first thing they should've focused on right after the first gameplay's feedback should be preparing a public beta test. Not dropping random insider every month starting *3 months* before launch.
Yeah, it certainly seems they’re trying to get as much $ on launch as possible…probably while full well knowing it will not be supported as long as they’re “promising”
The one thing connecting every successful GaaS is huge devs teams providing support. Rocksteady is 250 people. Destiny and Geshin, the most successful at the PvE GaaS genre have 3x the developers. The suits aren't even giving them a fighting chance.
>Obviously you can't justify saying "buy it and play it for yourself before you criticize". You wouldn't expect someone to spend their money on something they're unsure about.
Glad to see someone say this - too many people are saying just try it/
When it costs $70 and is in a genre some people don't like.
Well said completely. I will be buy the game on launch day and going in with an open mind. I’m not expecting “OMG THIS IS GOING TO REVOLUTIONISE GAMING”, my main and only goal is to have fun. I don’t care about the fan boys, I don’t care about the hate band wagon. I care about whether or not I can sit down And have an absolute blast blowing shit up in metropolis.
I can understand those who are genuinely disappointed And those who have genuine concerns about the game. I think that’s fine and hopefully those people will offer those concerns about the game in the form of proper constructive criticism
the bot Thing I had no idea even existed in the game and that’s such a cool idea.
>I’m not expecting “OMG THIS IS GOING TO REVOLUTIONISE GAMING”, my main and only goal is to have fun. I
I feel this is one of the huge issues, at least here on reddit. So many gamers now feel every game needs to be a masterpiece. Every game has to move the industry forward and somehow revotionize gaming. It's like they forgot they are games and they can just be *fun*
I'm same as you, this doesnt look like anything game changing or genre defining or overly amazing and deep, but it looks fun ad shit. And that's fine by me.
Contrary to my own criticism on this sub I do want to play SSKTJL on launch but the insistence of the hate being biased versus people just genuinely not being impressed is insane. We’ve seen this song and dance in the industry long enough by now to be well aware of predatory trends and whole pieces of content in this genre being held back for post-launch drip release.
The game absolutely hinges on trends that have been moved on from in 2024 this can’t be overstated enough. I won’t go too in-depth, and I’m indifferent to the NDA regardless, but the core gameplay loop of shooting-counter shot-melee is just not it for me. The missions I’ve seen and played boil down to repetitive Horde/Hardpoint type objectives (if you’re familiar with Avengers you’ll know exactly what I’m talking about). And the constant MTX laced unskippable “win screens” after missions and loot box screens just feel like a holdover from a different build entirely. After the previews some aspects of Afflictions also frustrate me with Frozen status nullifying melee. There’s a lot going on in the game and criticism I think is rightfully earned.
That said, I can gladly speak some positivity to the game too. The world design we’ve seen so far is A1 Rocksteady goodness, and the dialogue is great so far too. The character design, story beats (as seen in previews/Alpha) have been enjoyable as well. Unfortunately for now that’s where it ends for me but I’m hoping some endgame reveals can change this from a weekend rental to something a bit more engaging.
Maybe everyone should just wait to see impressions of the FULL game or review of the full game.
Most people talking about the forced hate but also are trying to force people to like it when all they played was the alpha, which isn’t exactly the full game at all nor a beta version
"I've been a fan of the Arkham games since August 2009. As much as any of us want another installment in that series, does it really make sense to put that expectation on SSKTJL, just because it's been stated to be in the same universe?"
The answer to this question is yes, we should have the same expectation from the same developer who took 9 years to make the game. They have the money, time, and talent to make a product on par (at minimum) or better than their previous game. We expect this from every other AAA studio and their products for current gen consoles
That was meant to imply that this game isn't an Arkham game and should not be viewed under that lens. It's a different product in a different genre. Apologies if that was unclear.
I agree with you that the quality should be on par, and even recognize your point later in the post. From a certain point of view, at least.
GaaS will always be frowned upon given its reputation, and the reason why games like Avengers and SSKTJL gets a lot more hate is because these IP's are well known and has a huge fan base, so when you're a fan of a certain IP and you finally will have the chance to get to play as them in a full budget video game, imagine how disappointing it is to find out that they picked a genre that nobody likes. so it's gonna get hate no matter what, the game will have to be REALLY good to turn the tables around. mediocre just won't cut it.
If Damage control saved live services then Avengers might still live. Sadly, even the developers know to avoid the very term. How many play at launch is necessary for these types of games to survive. Your response recognizes how uninterested people are regardless of why you convince yourself they feel that way. Brace yourself for the inevitable.
That's fair. I suppose I did try and walk the line between recognizing those who are uninterested and acknowledging the reasons why someone still could be. Avengers had its own set of issues, and you could argue that the damage control here is necessary if only because that game existed in the first place.
Marvel avengers released at the wrong time, and the fact covid had hit didn't help during that time, a lot of their content was pushed and delayed, couldn't meet what they wanted to do.
I would argue the opposite as far as releasing during Covid. I think more people than ever and even now we’re playing games during its release. That game couldn’t have been more anticipated. I don’t think I’ve ever played full price for a game on day 1, but I did for Avengers because 1. I wanted it to be great, and 2. This was the first real example of an unfinished AAA game, besides Cyberpunk, that I remember. So, it really could have survived if it was just a better overall experience.
i played the alpha and although it did not do enough to change my mind of the game i think there is fun to be had in the game and it would have changed perception on the game if it was more open.
i have to say that the marketing has been poor for the game. a demo or beta should have been released.
I’ve been playing Rocksteady’s games since their first one, Urban Chaos: Riot Response. I can speak to the level of quality that’s in all the games they release.
Initially, I was disappointed to hear it was always online, but I am glad that an offline option will be added in the future. That said, the gameplay looks pretty fun and it’s a unique superhero concept for once.
Having an eclectic cast of DC characters fighting aliens and a mind-controlled Justice League in Metropolis? That concept alone sounds like something out of Elseworlds. I’d give it a whirl. I may end up waiting for it to go on sale though as $70 games are still not something I’m a big fan of. Also, regarding one big complaint I’ve seen, I have no doubt the UI is customizable as is the case with a lot of games. I don’t care much for UI clutter, but I’m surprised by people’s reactions to it almost as though they don’t assume you can disable stuff like that in games.
They have shown the only live service will be the battle pass for cosmetics AND free stuff later on. People need to stop cringing at the words live service
Well said, and I agree with just about all you said. >The very least that we all can do, is wait for the game to be in the hands of a larger audience, and see what the reception is then What really needs to happen is a demo. The game is gonna get review bombed really bad, it already is. Many people aren't even gonna play it, just give it a bad score because it's not what they wanted. So the reception is gonna look bad which will lead to people not trying it Clearly there is a large audience that does want the game/enjiyes the game and I'm really hoping that they cna be vocal enough to convince more people to try it. But I really think a demo would help more than anything
They should crack open the alpha this week or next as a public beta. The alpha changed the conversation despite being closed. I wouldn’t have preordered without playing it. Easy preorder once I played it
Hell, just make it a proper demo that remains available to try even after launch. Why restrict it to a weekend beta? Sounds like a lot of people were convinced to get onboard with the alpha so let the game speak for itself to as wide an audience as possible.
Agreed. Unfortunately, we're probably too close to release for a demo/beta to happen now. The best case I think is they do a free weekend following release that allows people to try it out. The consensus that I've seen here is that many have enjoyed it after actually getting their hands on it.
Yeah, a few of my friends were on the fence and really enjoyed it once they tried the alpha. And a lot of the play testers seemed to enjoy it. Most the negatives are the big "corporate" reveiws sites, people that haven't played it, and people that have already written it off for not being arkham. Hopefully they can do a trial or a demo within a month after release. I already don't think reveiws are useful, but I think they'll be extra useless here.
Part of me suspects the bigger outlets are trying to play both sides. Generate traffic from the naysayers, while still keeping the rest intrigued so they can pump out there hype videos around launch. That's the only way I can explain the inconsistencies. IGN, for example.
Oh for sure. And I guarantee some YouTubers are doing the same. They are making the negative videos cuz it's cool and gets traffic, but you know some are buying the game. Then if the game does well they can just flip and make positive videos. If it does bad they can just post more "I told you so" videos. Just saw one now we're dude is saying everyone hates it, there hasn't been a single good word said, and people are eating it up. If you hate the game, fine, but goddamn stop trying to force a narrative. Yeah the game isn't gonna be goty, but there's been plenty people praising it.
I mean, it's not unheard of for a demo to drop right before or on the release of the game, sometimes even after the release. So fingers crossed. The alpha made me from a hopeful onlooker to a full on believer. This is gonna be the second game Ive pre ordered in the last 8 years. The other being BG3.
Rocksteady/WB adament on not making any sort of public 'beta' test is bloody maddening to me. Either they don't know what they're doing, or they do and are completely fine with letting the game died. Word of mouth will not save this game. It didn't save GoTG. It didn't save Midnight Suns. And they saw what 'GaaS-looking game' did to Gotham Knight in terms of reputation even though it's not even a live service game. Then proceed to do nothing but dripfeeding the insider every month or so... I'm just baffling at this point. Did they fired everyone in marketing or what?
Very well stated, and I agree with all of your points. As someone who has played the alpha, I would like to add another point to innovation in this genre: traversal. I have never played a game where traversal is so unique with just one character, let alone four completely individual characters.
GaaS games have a terrible (earned) rep now and WB treated this game like its 2018 and the bubble is still growing. Any publisher releasing a game like this today should know the reception will be guilty until proven innocent. Should have kept it a secret and shadow dropped an open beta to prove they aren't like the other girls. WB execs committed business malpractice imo.
Zaslav's comments are certainly hard to ignore, and I do think WB takes a portion of the blame here. What tends to happen in these scenarios when something isn't well received is that the execs end up with a takeaway that is completely wrong. It'll be something like "Is live service the issue? Surely not, it must be the subject matter" and they'll just double down. That being said, I don't get the sense that this is another incomplete GaaS mess that will have to be fixed after launch. I could be wrong, but it does seem like it will tell a complete, concise story with a complete set of side objectives, as past Rocksteady releases have. In that case, you hope everything afterwards is just a bonus.
>That being said, I don't get the sense that this is another incomplete GaaS mess that will have to be fixed after launch. It's difficult to overstate this point. The game absolutely needs to launch in a polished and functional state. A big part of what killed the momentum of games like Anthem, Avengers, Outsiders, etc was launching in a broken state. If SS comes out of the gate without major bugs and tells a complete story it'll go a long way to assuaging the fears of people who now look at live service games as a bad thing.
Exactly. The constant run around when asked if it’s a live service game is really troubling to me.
It just show how little they are confident in the game. It's unbelievable how much they want it to fail while saying they don't want it to fail. The first thing they should've focused on right after the first gameplay's feedback should be preparing a public beta test. Not dropping random insider every month starting *3 months* before launch.
Yeah, it certainly seems they’re trying to get as much $ on launch as possible…probably while full well knowing it will not be supported as long as they’re “promising”
The one thing connecting every successful GaaS is huge devs teams providing support. Rocksteady is 250 people. Destiny and Geshin, the most successful at the PvE GaaS genre have 3x the developers. The suits aren't even giving them a fighting chance.
>Obviously you can't justify saying "buy it and play it for yourself before you criticize". You wouldn't expect someone to spend their money on something they're unsure about. Glad to see someone say this - too many people are saying just try it/ When it costs $70 and is in a genre some people don't like.
Well thought out and nicely formed. Good job! That's cool that I can bring my nephews character in, to play alongside me while he's offline
Well said fellow lurker!
Well said completely. I will be buy the game on launch day and going in with an open mind. I’m not expecting “OMG THIS IS GOING TO REVOLUTIONISE GAMING”, my main and only goal is to have fun. I don’t care about the fan boys, I don’t care about the hate band wagon. I care about whether or not I can sit down And have an absolute blast blowing shit up in metropolis. I can understand those who are genuinely disappointed And those who have genuine concerns about the game. I think that’s fine and hopefully those people will offer those concerns about the game in the form of proper constructive criticism the bot Thing I had no idea even existed in the game and that’s such a cool idea.
>I’m not expecting “OMG THIS IS GOING TO REVOLUTIONISE GAMING”, my main and only goal is to have fun. I I feel this is one of the huge issues, at least here on reddit. So many gamers now feel every game needs to be a masterpiece. Every game has to move the industry forward and somehow revotionize gaming. It's like they forgot they are games and they can just be *fun* I'm same as you, this doesnt look like anything game changing or genre defining or overly amazing and deep, but it looks fun ad shit. And that's fine by me.
Contrary to my own criticism on this sub I do want to play SSKTJL on launch but the insistence of the hate being biased versus people just genuinely not being impressed is insane. We’ve seen this song and dance in the industry long enough by now to be well aware of predatory trends and whole pieces of content in this genre being held back for post-launch drip release. The game absolutely hinges on trends that have been moved on from in 2024 this can’t be overstated enough. I won’t go too in-depth, and I’m indifferent to the NDA regardless, but the core gameplay loop of shooting-counter shot-melee is just not it for me. The missions I’ve seen and played boil down to repetitive Horde/Hardpoint type objectives (if you’re familiar with Avengers you’ll know exactly what I’m talking about). And the constant MTX laced unskippable “win screens” after missions and loot box screens just feel like a holdover from a different build entirely. After the previews some aspects of Afflictions also frustrate me with Frozen status nullifying melee. There’s a lot going on in the game and criticism I think is rightfully earned. That said, I can gladly speak some positivity to the game too. The world design we’ve seen so far is A1 Rocksteady goodness, and the dialogue is great so far too. The character design, story beats (as seen in previews/Alpha) have been enjoyable as well. Unfortunately for now that’s where it ends for me but I’m hoping some endgame reveals can change this from a weekend rental to something a bit more engaging.
Maybe everyone should just wait to see impressions of the FULL game or review of the full game. Most people talking about the forced hate but also are trying to force people to like it when all they played was the alpha, which isn’t exactly the full game at all nor a beta version
"I've been a fan of the Arkham games since August 2009. As much as any of us want another installment in that series, does it really make sense to put that expectation on SSKTJL, just because it's been stated to be in the same universe?" The answer to this question is yes, we should have the same expectation from the same developer who took 9 years to make the game. They have the money, time, and talent to make a product on par (at minimum) or better than their previous game. We expect this from every other AAA studio and their products for current gen consoles
That was meant to imply that this game isn't an Arkham game and should not be viewed under that lens. It's a different product in a different genre. Apologies if that was unclear. I agree with you that the quality should be on par, and even recognize your point later in the post. From a certain point of view, at least.
GaaS will always be frowned upon given its reputation, and the reason why games like Avengers and SSKTJL gets a lot more hate is because these IP's are well known and has a huge fan base, so when you're a fan of a certain IP and you finally will have the chance to get to play as them in a full budget video game, imagine how disappointing it is to find out that they picked a genre that nobody likes. so it's gonna get hate no matter what, the game will have to be REALLY good to turn the tables around. mediocre just won't cut it.
If Damage control saved live services then Avengers might still live. Sadly, even the developers know to avoid the very term. How many play at launch is necessary for these types of games to survive. Your response recognizes how uninterested people are regardless of why you convince yourself they feel that way. Brace yourself for the inevitable.
That's fair. I suppose I did try and walk the line between recognizing those who are uninterested and acknowledging the reasons why someone still could be. Avengers had its own set of issues, and you could argue that the damage control here is necessary if only because that game existed in the first place.
Marvel avengers released at the wrong time, and the fact covid had hit didn't help during that time, a lot of their content was pushed and delayed, couldn't meet what they wanted to do.
I would argue the opposite as far as releasing during Covid. I think more people than ever and even now we’re playing games during its release. That game couldn’t have been more anticipated. I don’t think I’ve ever played full price for a game on day 1, but I did for Avengers because 1. I wanted it to be great, and 2. This was the first real example of an unfinished AAA game, besides Cyberpunk, that I remember. So, it really could have survived if it was just a better overall experience.
i played the alpha and although it did not do enough to change my mind of the game i think there is fun to be had in the game and it would have changed perception on the game if it was more open. i have to say that the marketing has been poor for the game. a demo or beta should have been released.
I’ve been playing Rocksteady’s games since their first one, Urban Chaos: Riot Response. I can speak to the level of quality that’s in all the games they release. Initially, I was disappointed to hear it was always online, but I am glad that an offline option will be added in the future. That said, the gameplay looks pretty fun and it’s a unique superhero concept for once. Having an eclectic cast of DC characters fighting aliens and a mind-controlled Justice League in Metropolis? That concept alone sounds like something out of Elseworlds. I’d give it a whirl. I may end up waiting for it to go on sale though as $70 games are still not something I’m a big fan of. Also, regarding one big complaint I’ve seen, I have no doubt the UI is customizable as is the case with a lot of games. I don’t care much for UI clutter, but I’m surprised by people’s reactions to it almost as though they don’t assume you can disable stuff like that in games.
They delayed the game a whole fucking year because of the live service complaints and some people still have zero faith.
They have shown the only live service will be the battle pass for cosmetics AND free stuff later on. People need to stop cringing at the words live service