• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League Official Co-Op Gameplay - “No Matter the Cost” ( Game releases on 05-26-23)

I'd rather play Gotham Knights.

At least it has Batgirl.

2XBlHiK.gif
 

FunkMiller

Member
Get fucked.

Seriously.

This looks like every other hyper-active, generic looking, greed fuelled GaaS in existence.

We could have had a single player Superman game, or a single player DC character game of anyone else. But instead, it's this shit.
 
Last edited:

MiguelItUp

Member
yeah thats fine honestly, but as I said the closed beta feedback of Squad so far has been nothing but glowing because unlike Anthem, Avengers and all the failed games inbetween, the game has solid itemisation / customisation and of course gameplay. being disappointed that WB refused projects from Rocksteady since AK is something else entirely. The game is good

like let that sink in : it has a better looting aspect than Division, Anthem (lol but still), Avengers and other games. Fans of the genre will like it, others will pass its that simple
That's cool, I had no idea anything positive was even said about it, but it's all subjective. I guess we'll just have to see how everything pans out. It may simply be one of those things that's just isn't for me, lol.
 
They released the 3 games of the Arkham Trilogy in 6 years. It took them 8 years to develop this garbage, a colorful coop shooter with a battle pass? Good lord. The Arkham games were great because people love playing as batman in Gotham City. They've lost 90% of the appeal of an Arkhamverse game just taking the game from Gotham and having you play as someone who isn't Batman. Then you add in the coop, battle pass, the shooting giant purple orbs over and over (Arkham was great bc of the awesome hand to hand combat, why the hell did they develop a shooter?)... I just can't believe anyone pitched this game 8 years ago and people thought it was a great idea. Honestly, for Batman fans (you know, the people who would buy Rocksteady's games), the non-Rocksteady Gotham Knights actually has more appeal, and no one even wanted to buy that.
 

ResurrectedContrarian

Suffers with mild autism
DC has Marvel envy here, gross.

The whole reason DC's Batman world was perfect for Rocksteady game was the unique solitary/gothic/noir/Batman-the-Animated-Series tone... which is the exact opposite of the cornball, ragtag-team, quip-filled comedy of this Disney/Marvel style trash.
 

Nydius

Member
The more I see of this the more I get bad flashbacks of The Avengers. From the always online requirement, the coop design, the microstransaction/battle pass focus, janky combat and graphics, loot with gear score … it looks awful.

I got fooled by Avengers so I’m not touching this with a ten foot pole until well after release when I’ve seen how it plays out.
 
Last edited:

FunkMiller

Member
I genuinely don't think I've ever seen a sadder sight in the video games industry in all the years I've been following it than a bunch of Rocksteady developers trying their very hardest to persuade the audience that this corporate mandated, multiplayer, live service, Fortnite baiting shit is going to be good.

Truly pathetic by every conceivable measure.
 

hyperbertha

Member
They released the 3 games of the Arkham Trilogy in 6 years. It took them 8 years to develop this garbage, a colorful coop shooter with a battle pass? Good lord. The Arkham games were great because people love playing as batman in Gotham City. They've lost 90% of the appeal of an Arkhamverse game just taking the game from Gotham and having you play as someone who isn't Batman. Then you add in the coop, battle pass, the shooting giant purple orbs over and over (Arkham was great bc of the awesome hand to hand combat, why the hell did they develop a shooter?)... I just can't believe anyone pitched this game 8 years ago and people thought it was a great idea. Honestly, for Batman fans (you know, the people who would buy Rocksteady's games), the non-Rocksteady Gotham Knights actually has more appeal, and no one even wanted to buy that.
I'm 100 percent sure this game has went through multiple redesigns and reboots over the years. It was conceived at a time when gaas looked like it could never fail. Then the failures started coming in and they pivoted to a half assed coop game much like Gotham knights.
 

RoadHazard

Gold Member
I see no way this isn't a massive flop and probably the end of Rocksteady. Who does this appeal to? Not many people is my guess, and it seems like they know that as they were desperately trying to sell it as "an extension of the Arkham universe" during the SOP.
 

Ristifer

Member
Lol people thinking that this somehow makes Gotham Knights better.

It’s okay to think that two games can be shit.
 
I love the Arkham games; I've played through them countless times. If they released a new one of those every few years that was just a derivative but well-made copy (maybe one time it's Nightwing in Bludhaven, then it's Green Arrow in Star City the one after that, whatever), I'd buy it up.

SS: KTJL looks like utter shit. You took one of the best developers in the business and somehow made them spend 8 years making something that looks simultaneously exactly like and worse than the Marvel Avengers game that they are turning off after just a few years. We can guess what happened, I think (idiotic, greedy upper managers dictated what kind of game they'd make), but it's still incredibly frustrating. The trailer was just telling us we'd be grinding for hours just to shoot the same glowing spots on the same tanks over and over again. GTFO with this stuff and bring back good single-play, story-driven games.

(I know there are still companies making what I want, I'm just pissed right now!)
 
GAAS can be done very well, and there are some legitimately good games that are GAAS and even one’s with a decent story, but this just looks stupid as shit from the concept level.
 

BadBurger

Banned
So glad wb didnt fuck with hogwarts legacy. Surprising even.

Thankfully Hogwarts Legacy partially exists to maintain interest in and generate sales for The Wizarding World - physical merchandise sold on their website, visits to the theme parks, renewed interest in existing and future movies and TV shows and books, etc. WB didn't need Hogwarts' to be some kind of on-going live service game, but I have a feeling they're at least giving very strong thought to prolonging it via DLC and such now.
 

ACESHIGH

Banned
Honestly, if you are fucking dumb enough to buy into this shit in 2023, after every other GaaS game failure - especially The Avengers - then good luck to you, and your extremely smooth brain.


b5YmqzL.jpg

Damn man that screenshot is like the most potent summary of everything wrong with modern gaming. The Great Value superhero with his stupid grin (he can't look serous as kids love Marvel these days, execs must have thought) his "legendary" customized gun with a terrible colour pallette (it has to be customized by the user so he/she can feel unique) the numbers going up to give a false sense of progress, the generic UI, those social, battle pass and store options to drive "engagement"... its a masterpiece.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom