That’s right, in the latest effort to sway gamers to avoid buying used and purchasing copies “New”, Batman Arkham City publisher’s Warner Bros. and Developer’s Rocksteady have jumped into the VIP Online Pass bandwagon. In order to play as Catwoman in the single player missions that have been widely advertised for months, gamers will either have to purchase the game new and enter the supplied VIP Online Pass code, enabling the ON DISC feature, or – if purchasing the game used – pay$10 USD (800 Microsoft Points) for the DLC Online Pass.
In addition to Catwoman, Arkham City will also feature two other “Pay To Play” characters – Tim Drake as Robin and Dick Grayson’s Nightwing. But these two characters will NOT be included in the VIP Pass, but rather will be offered in the first weeks of November as DLC characters costing $10 USD (800 Microsoft Points) a piece (although if one were to pre-order at Best Buy they’d have early access to the Robin character).
Batman Arkham City hits store shelves next week, October 18th, on Xbox 360 and PS3. The PC version hits later in November.
I find these stories fascinating. Everybody wants a bigger piece of the pie and nobody's happy.
I find this trend annoying and stupid but still nothing I'd avoid a game over. But it definitely compromises some of the "completeness" of a game, which is already a problem DLC and preorder bonuses was making. I don't think it can be argued that in ME2 Zaeed felt awkward compared to the other characters so he could be completely removed on a whim, and everything about his participation in the game and story sticks out like a sore thumb as a result. On a different note in Dragon Age Origins, I read zero spoilers and I completely missed the Shale character, who was only made available for free to people who bought the game new. I didn't even realize I was missing him until I finished the game and read up on the internet. (I also missed Dog, but only because I didn't finish his quest before the bad guys overran that town).
I'm not a big fan. I prefer to the content and design of my games not be affected by marketing or resale concerns.
I just find this particular instance of this latest trend to be slightly insulting.
Since very early this year - like January/February this year - the Catwoman segments were announced as part of the game, in order to keep building the hype. And over the year gamers have been treated to JUST as much Catwoman hype as Batman hype, for every article I read that focused on the Batman side of the story it seemed there was a Catwoman article just around the corner to talk up that aspect of the game. Aside from a couple of brief mentions of a Robin exclusive costume and a couple of challenge maps for pre-ordering, nothing was made of the inclusion of Robin and Nightwing. Now today comes this announcement that this seemingly major part of the game (at least major enough to devote a ton of media to) will only be available for free to those who buy new.
Of course since I buy new almost exclusively and have had this game pre-ordered and paid for for most of the year this bit of news is really just a "blip" on my radar, I kinda have to feel that those folks who were looking forward to trying out Catwoman, but had decided to wait for a used, "cheaper" copy may feel a bit more shortchanged than usual.
who cares, it'll cost like five dollars on steam in about a year anyway
But won't somebody think of the children!
All of this is done to eliminate Gamestop. You would think they would do something to fight back. But I guess they are kinda powerless in this regard.
they are doing things to fight back
remember when they pulled the onlive codes from copies of deus ex?
they've got their own onlive/steam hybrid service that they're hoping will keep the company afloat when their pawn shop business model eventually becomes untenable (fat chance)
So if this is a way to fight Gamestop then why does Gamestop get codes to give to customers that buy the game used? http://kotaku.com/5849828/dont-fret-...ity-purchasers
Talk about totally defeating the purpose of doing this in the first place.
Get More: GameTrailers.com, Gametrailers, PC Games, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360
Dang looks like they nailed it.
I don't think I'm going to have time to play this one right away though, so I'm actually going to wait before I buy it. I can barely believe it.
I really enjoyed the original. I don't know that I would've bought the game anyway, because I'm not really playing games lately. But I will not now. Between this, and the online passes, and $70 games when the CAD's at par or above... WB's cranking up the dick dial.
Be assured that Amazon will be selling this game at some point for 29.99 before Christmas, they manage to do this. So if price is really a bother then wait. I heard Robin was going to be playable, not Catwoman, but to me its no biggie, wont be playing it for a while. I did thoroughly enjoy the first game, a majorly fun game...
I only recall that as it was what drove me to preorder at Best Buy - I think it came out to $46 after tax or something. I was hoping for a hilarious price glitch as with Arkham Asylum, but I'll take what I can get.
Apparently I pre-ordered Batman at EB. I'm sure it was one of those situations where I took the money off another game I didn't want, and threw it on something I would surely want, well in the future. And now here we are. I think I have $30-something on Uncharted 3 as well.
And evidently Arkham City is not on Steam to buy on Steam when it's $5.
http://store.steampowered.com/search...12&term=arkham
You got a promo code though, right?
it won't be five dollars for like a year no hurry
Why wouldn't it be on Steam? The original is and its not like WB is EA.
I hate videogames.
Knee jerk reaction, Bio. After all those loading times, user agreements, update downloads, 14 year olds, exclusive vendor pre-order bonuses, lack of originality, hackers stealing credit card information, recycled gameplay mechanics in every game, and developer/publisher quarrels, behind all of that is at least some fun.
Did I miss something?
Yes hats.
I don't know if it was purposeful towards halting selling your copy of the game or not - but if you get the Collectors Edition of Batman Arkham City the set does NOT come with a standard game case. Instead the game disc is inside the (nifty) art book - in a plastic "standard" CD tray.
I know most game stores will take bare discs for trade ins, but I doubt anyone will want to trade in their art book - or even if Gamestop would even take them.
The statue is pretty freaking awesome though.
http://store.steampowered.com/news/6548/
And you can get both for $20 at the moment.
http://store.steampowered.com/sub/11992
or it'll be five dollars if you wait a year
Or two months 'til the Christmas sale.
For Lego and Asylum, I mean. City might hit 33% off by then.
well I'm pretty sure that asylum has been five dollars already (I'm pretty sure I paid five dollars for it last year)
I bought a physical copy (PC) for $6 at the Target clearance bin.
I am reasonably sure that someone will have Arkham City for $40 or less in about five weeks.
Now, if it was a Ubisoft game, they would fall, and fall fast. I learned my Assassin's Creed lesson with them, twice - Assassin's Creed 2 I bought for $40 less than two weeks after the game came out, and Brotherhood I got for $20 about three months after it launched.
I meant it in the context of Black Friday. Otherwise, I agree, it would take a while, especially considering that Arkham Asylum is STILL $30 for consoles.
Ah right, I keep forgetting about Black Friday. Too used to boxing day.
I also can't believe Arkham Asylum is still priced so high.
Is that the Game of the Year Edition or standard?
both
they're having a party
It's only $20 on Steam, though.
It's $20 at Target, K-Mart, Wal-Mart, etc. around here.
But Wal-Mart is still selling the combo pack of both Bat-Games for $60.
Well I was just browsing the Games for Windows Marketplace to see if they ever got around to putting Halo or Halo 2 for PC on there, and while they still haven't, they did inform me that if you haven't purchased Arkham Asylum yet and want to, but don't feel like paying a reasonable price, MS is totally willing to sell you the game for $50 right now.
Why does any other company even bother trying to compete with Steam if they can't be bothered to be, you know, actually competitive?
I actually bought it on sale from GFW when they had it on sale.
And I meant $30. Everyone had it for $30.
I think I paid $5 for Arkham Asylum on PC. Or maybe ten bucks. I don't really remember - I just remember that I paid $40 for the 360 version on launch due to that hilarious pricing glitch in Canada.
I paid $5 for it on steam and I don't know why anyone would pay more
Arkham Asylum is fucking fantastic but if it makes you feel better to act like it's only a five dollar game go ahead. Pretty much everyone on the planet disagrees with you but go ahead.
why would you pay more than five dollars for something that can be bought for five dollars from time to time
seems like a pretty big waste of money
don't worry guys batman is here with the groceries
(looks at his copy of Uncharted 2 still in the shrink wrap)
well the basic point I was making is it's been out two years now and has been sold for five dollars
at that point why would you pay more than five dollars for it
Between Steam discounting pre orders, Amazon giving $20 credit for buying seemingly any blockbuster title through them, and various retailers having their buy-2-get-1 sales, I hardly ever pay full price for a game anymore. I paid full price for Dark Souls, though, because hell if I'm going to let the community pull way ahead of me and start playing only to get massacred by folks who are taking their third character through and know the game forward and backwards.
Also, I've finally been learning my lesson and buying fewer games overall. Having a decent PC helps, because now I can wait for X months and get a game I really wanted for dirt cheap. That's what I'm doing with Arkham City, a game I just wouldn't have time to play right now.
Yeah, the past year or two have been pretty crazy with preorder discounts. Even Canada, which usually gets the shaft, has had some $20 off preorders this year. Other than Forza 4, where the LE never had a discount (and I'm a complete Forza whore), I haven't paid full price for anything this year.
And some publishers (like Ubisoft) I've learned to not buy on release, as they drop so fast. Revelations, for example, should hit $40 within a month and $20 a few months after that, if Assassin's Creed 2 and Brotherhood are any indication.
that is literally my idea of the worst reason to have to play a video game ever
Well if you don't like the online components you can always shut them off, but where is the fun in that.
Or you can just walk around as a zombie all the time then no one can invade your game. But your character will be so ugly.
yeah all three of those options sound just so awful I don't understand
The whole Souls series sounds unbelievably stupid to me
it seems like a really great idea that someone decided to couch in the most bizarre masochistic framework that I'm basically just ???
It's fun and it's innovative while feeling like a game from long ago while still being modern. It completely bucks the recent trend of making games like interactive movies with lots of hand holding. It's not about scripted moments or cutscenes or Nathan Drake pointing out exactly what you need to do next if you get stuck for three minutes or trying to mash as many genres as possible together. It's hard without being cheap (most of the time), it has an amazing sense of place and atmosphere. It gets in your head, making you feel when the stakes are high, and will turn a grown man in to a tense nervous ball as he oh so slowly proceeds forward in the hopes of finding the next checkpoint before he loses all his hard earned humanity. It lets you truly craft your characters abilities without forcing you down any paths, so if you think a wizard decked out in armor is the way to go (that's how I've played), you're free to do it. And the online features are amazing.
I realize it's not for everyone, but brutally hard should not automatically mean bad game. Demon's Souls was one of the most satisfying outings of this generation, and Dark Souls is shaping up to be even better. I wouldn't recommend it universally but from a design standpoint it's doubtlessly an achievement.
She wears a full on helmet now.
I spent a while in the character creator but I couldn't end up making a face I deemed attractive, so I just went with one of the presets (the third, maybe, they're all ugly too).
I could never get a female face I was happy with in Mass Effect/2 either, for that matter. I wish all games were like Guild Wars in that they just give you a selection of maybe a dozen faces, all fantastic. Actually, despite being a grindy free to play game, Forsaken World has some fantastic looking characters.
Demon's/Dark Souls, not so much. Heck, they even have a gender SLIDER.
You guys and playing female avatars again.
Still getting in touch with your feminin side?
Speaking of L4D, Dan, it's on sale on Steam for 66% off RIGHT NOW.
(hint- that means you should go buy it)
Like seemingly everyone else, I made what looked like an attractive lady in Mass Effect who then had weird swan neck when I actually played as her. But in Mass Effect 2 and the opportunity to redesign the character, I made some small adjustments and was super happy with it.
Souls really isn't about attractive people, but I was happy with what I finally got to in Dark Souls. But yeah. Zombie form. Scary.
And heck yes I am getting all kinds of in touch with my feminine side, especially if it's a third person game.
I was always bill
and I would constantly tell everyone that I needed a nap and to get off my lawn and can we find a fred meyer because I need to stock up on adult diapers.
It's one thing to get stuck or request the female characte in a 4 person co-op game, but in a solo game to choose to be a female has always struck me as odd. I always try to be a big muscular guy, not because I like looking at his back side, but because I'm role-playing and that is my mental picture of myself (even if the real thing is a little flabby).
no way man dudebutts are where it is at
I'm more into the role play than I am at staring at butts.
role playing what a dude with a butt you like to state at
If only we lived in a world where there were no padding of games, no key-questing, no running all the way back across the level you've already cleared of enemies to flip a switch to move on. But we don't live in that world. We live in a world where Solid Snake spends 3 hours running up and down stairs.
If I'm actually role playing myself or a character is an avatar for myself, I'll go with the dude. But I don't typically role play myself in BioWare / Bethesda style games. In the case of BioWare especially, if there's a lady on lady relationship to be had, I am all over that fanservice. Having my renegade lady Shepard reunite with Liara in Shadow Broker or seducing Leliana and turning her away from her goody-two-shoes religion before talking her into a three way with Isabela are pretty good for a cheap thrill. If it's an action game, a fighting game, or a third person game I'm usually going to lean towards the lady. If it's L4D, I'll take Zoe because I love to make her laugh all the time.
I'm just saying I know what I like.
Lilith in Borderlands fits that description too - I love her cackle when you headshot an enemy.
(plus, Phasewalk is so much better than any of the other skills)
I find I play female characters in certain role-playing games because it makes being an evil character much easier. In Mass Effect, it's much easier to distance myself from picking the evil option (and again, it's also an easy choice because Hale's voice acting is so much better than man-Shep's).
Oh yeah I definitely dig lady-shep's voice.
I've never really done a pure evil runthrough of a Bioware game though. Them evil choices sometimes get a little too evil. But in the case of Mass Effect, it was pretty easy to raise both Renegade and Paragon levels without being too much of a dick or too much of a goody two shoes, and I liked the results much better than the usual GOOD/EVIL binary system.
I did play through Fallout 3 as a muscle bound male asshole who hammered everything to death though. I liked my stealthy compassionate science lady better tho.
marlin do you think it was a good comment though
Considering his love of digital asses (P.N. 04), it makes sense.