|
anilEhilated posted:What. The portal isn't open all the time and it's closed again by the end of the miniseries (though not destroyed) and while it's been awhile since I read the story, I want to say it's implied that part of the reason people at Arkham never get better (and half the doctors go bananas) is because it's sitting on the hell portal and ambient evil energy is loving everyone up. I might be mixing that up with A Serious House on Serious Earth which doesn't feature a hell portal but does state that the entire property is just bad mojo. Really Arkham just needs to stop being where it is.
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 21:18 |
|
|
Batman: Arkham Inferno. Batman heads into Hell to put the Joker down one last time. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2016 22:01
|
|
|
Now, kids, let's just have Father Batman teach you all about the evils of free will… I mean, he's not killing anybody right?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
Hobgoblin2099 posted:Batman: Arkham Inferno. While being accompanied by a very annoyed Deadman reading from the book.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
hard counter posted:The whole purpose of that sequence, by my estimation, was displaying the argument that Batman can still have blood on his hands w/o himself being a murderer (a point the thread just arguing somewhat just prior to the video). Either he lets Ras die naturally in a grey situation and his side of the civil war probably crumbles or he cures Ras and war continues outside of Gotham in yet another grey situation. Letting generic innocents die in Nyssa's place makes that point (it was her point actually; she also refuses to use Lazarus tech to save herself as a personal decision) resonate much less and it wouldn't even make sense as part of Ras' bargain was that he takes all this strife outside of Gotham should he live. The writers didn't want an easy out here. I agree with you about the purpose of the scene, and it works at accomplishing this, but I'd like to point out that the complaint here (and in other discussions of similar media) is not about Arkham Knight's plot. As an individual vignette, taken within the confines of the narrative, this scene works fine. My complaint is about the pattern: women impact the plot of this game by being imperiled or killed and in few other ways, and is as such part of a tiring trend in a litany of canonical pop-cultural works. I do enjoy comic book plots and games for the absurdity, the power fantasy, the spectacle, but this whole game for me is really marred by a stunning lack of imagination in the writing department. I agree that the writers should avoid an easy out on a thematic or plot level. From a craft standpoint though, there is literally nothing easier than killing a character to create pathos. Octatonic fucked around with this message at 22:19 on Mar 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2016 22:14
|
|
|
Octatonic posted:From a craft standpoint though, there is literally nothing easier than killing a character to create pathos. I can agree with that point for sure. Considering how much of a biting and legitimate criticism this sideplot was of Batman's general MO, this issue should not have been brought up in a quick sidequest. A more elegant telling would definitely require more time rather than a fast in, quick out plot line that's wholly resolved in a 25 minute video. However, since we haven't seen the whole game yet, this sideplot could still be contributing to the larger picture of the overarching plot which may or may not use AK to poke at Bats' other foibles. hard counter fucked around with this message at 22:22 on Mar 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2016 22:20
|
|
|
CuwiKhons posted:Especially because it's not like Ra's immediately dies. He still ends up in custody, and he probably still is on life support. He just doesn't get his magical chemical that brings him back to life again. If Batman's going to seriously consider denying Resurrection Juice to somebody equal to killing them then he might as well just go public with the poo poo and let everybody have some. Except that denying Ra's the Resurrection Juice actually will kill him, and soon. His body is shutting down without it, not because of old age or anything like that, but because it's too much a part of his physiology now. It's something that goes beyond addiction into "this is vital for all bodily functions". Essentially on a level with denying water to a regular human at this point, in terms of what it means to him. That said, gently caress Ra's, he's had way more than a good run. Everyone needs to know when to stop, and that was probably at least 3 or 4 trips into the pit ago.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
hard counter posted:I'm a little worried about how much people are decrying any instance of a woman being imperiled right now. They could have used Dusan, Ras' lesser known son, in Nyssa's place to work out this plot point in this manner w/o it being problematic but does removing the well-known women of this series, just because everyone is eating poo poo in this entry, really constitute an improvement? In a vacuum, it isn't inherently sexist to have tragic circumstances befall female characters, as keeping them propped up as infallible icons is just as dehumanizing as constantly killing them off in order to provide angst and character development for a male lead. When the latter is so prevalent and recognizable as a writing flaw that it gets its own shorthand phrase based off a notable example, especially when your game is based on the medium that phrase comes from? Your game puts under more scrutiny. Having the majority of your female characters be what amounts to damsel in distress plot devices and/or be unceremoniously killed off is pretty loving bad, and literally not including them at all is a more preferential way to handle them instead of handling them this poorly. Dusan replacing Nyssa would overall improve the storyline for that sidequest, as would just not killing off Nyssa so soon after she's introduced to the plot. When "literally doing anything else" is an improvement to how female characters are represented in your story, you've fumbled your story. Octatonic posted:I agree with you about the purpose of the scene, and it works at accomplishing this, but I'd like to point out that the complaint here (and in other discussions of similar media) is not about Arkham Knight's plot. As an individual vignette, taken within the confines of the narrative, this scene works fine. My complaint is about the pattern: women impact the plot of this game by being imperiled or killed and in few other ways, and is as such part of a tiring trend in a litany of canonical pop-cultural works. I do enjoy comic book plots and games for the absurdity, the power fantasy, the spectacle, but this whole game for me is really marred by a stunning lack of imagination in the writing department. I agree that the writers should avoid an easy out on a thematic or plot level. From a craft standpoint though, there is literally nothing easier than killing a character to create pathos. Pretty much all of this. It's not qualitatively terrible because of the scenes they've chosen, it's just insultingly tone-deaf. There's a number of very simple and very minor ways to improve how the female cast is treated in AK so far, the only major change that'd happen is Oracle's kidnapping not driving apart Gordon and Batman. That's a plot point that doesn't need to change, it works perfectly fine on its own, it just stinks more and more when it's put in context with the rest of the women and how they're treated.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
Aaaaaaaaaaand now we're back to the treatment of women in videogames debate. Well that only took a few hours. Yes, it sucks that women are the damsels in distress, it's a convenient plot device that writers should use less often, and something that AK should have used a lot less. Is complaining about it on the internet going to change anything in this game that came out half a year ago? No. Can we stop? Yes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
IBlameRoadSuess posted:Aaaaaaaaaaand now we're back to the treatment of women in videogames debate. Well that only took a few hours. If the game would stop making GBS threads the bed on the topic it might stop coming up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2016 22:40
|
|
|
IBlameRoadSuess posted:Aaaaaaaaaaand now we're back to the treatment of women in videogames debate. Well that only took a few hours. If you don't like the discussion then just pick up one of the other seven threads of conversation currently ongoing instead of shitposting. Like the Arkham: Living Hell comics, this poo poo owns!  I already know I need to pick these up, it's so stupid. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2016 22:50
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:If the game would stop making GBS threads the bed on the topic it might stop coming up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2016 22:51
|
|
|
IBlameRoadSuess posted:Aaaaaaaaaaand now we're back to the treatment of women in videogames debate. Well that only took a few hours. It's almost like people started talking about it again because yet another woman in the game got screwed over. Maybe there's a connection there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2016 22:57
|
|
|
death .cab for qt posted:Pretty much all of this. It's not qualitatively terrible because of the scenes they've chosen, it's just insultingly tone-deaf. There's a number of very simple and very minor ways to improve how the female cast is treated in AK so far, the only major change that'd happen is Oracle's kidnapping not driving apart Gordon and Batman. That's a plot point that doesn't need to change, it works perfectly fine on its own, it just stinks more and more when it's put in context with the rest of the women and how they're treated. I would say, given what I've seen so far, this entry of the arkham series is not about characters showing off their strengths but facing down their weaknesses and actually getting struck by them. The actual writing of the schism forming between Gordon & Batman wasn't great, it was written like a high-school tiff, but having Gordon succumb to his paternal instincts is fitting for this particular entry even if it could have been done in a less irritating way. Not to be rude but I wonder about how certain "very simple and very minor ways to improve the depiction of females" would ultimately jive with that theme w/o lessening its telling and still be effective at its original goal. So far it seems like Rocksteady went out of its way to give Oracle a noble loss in that thugs comment on well she took care of herself (only the AK himself beat her?), it took an insider to get in, she still leverages her capture into a gain, she was working on important stuff before that Batman's only now benefiting from, Bats has to busy himself with subplots because someone less capable has to do the computer stuff resulting in delays, just from what we've seen so far, and it still isn't enough for some posters. Through her eventual defeat you could argue we've seen more of real strength under duress than we would've if she were still safe at home on OPs since we wouldn't hear about her smashing dudes with sticks or feel her loss to appreciate her contributions. I think ultimately we agree on at least a few points (all this potentially sexist stuff is distressingly front-loaded to the early game and isn't great) but imho the audience's own cultural climate shouldn't overly color their analysis of a game or other works (it should be treated like its in a vacuum) because an alternative overcompensation is nearly as dehumanizing. The telling has to be just right, and that means letting the narrative fluidly dictate what happens its characters (while allowing characters to respond in ways appropriate to themselves). Night10194 posted:If the game would stop making GBS threads the bed on the topic it might stop coming up. So far I've given AK the benefit of the doubt but if it goes on I'll be eating humble pie by end game. Veotax posted:Well, if I remember the game rightly it won't come up again for a few more episodes. lol
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
hard counter posted:I would say, given what I've seen so far, this entry of the arkham series is not about characters showing off their strengths but facing down their weaknesses and actually getting struck by them. The actual writing of the schism forming between Gordon & Batman wasn't great, it was written like a high-school tiff, but having Gordon succumb to his paternal instincts is fitting for this particular entry even if it could have been done in a less irritating way. I agree with everything in this post, and to add to it, like I said in a post before, I don't think analyzing the writing or what happens in the game immediately after seeing it is the right way to do things. As of now we've only got part the Oracle and Gordon plotlines, and part of the Riddler's kidnapping Catwoman plotline, and we can analyze whether their treatment in the first part of their story arcs is a good/bad till the cows come home and still have not seen everything the writing has to offer. I think we should let the game take a breath and show us what else it has in store before we start shouting about how sexist it is. It got off on a wrong foot with all this nonsense, and killing off Nyssa was entirely Scruffy's choice. (She's a traitor to Ra's, and he's batfuck crazy at this point, is he really going to let her live if he lives? Even if Batman stopped him momentarily, all he would need to do is go after her later.) If the writing continues to be like this in terms of its treatment of female characters, well I guess I'll just admit I'm wrong and admit that Rocksteady wrote a sexist Batman game, and move on.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2016 23:31
|
|
|
hard counter posted:I think ultimately we agree on at least a few points (all this potentially sexist stuff is distressingly front-loaded to the early game and isn't great) but imho the audience's own cultural climate shouldn't overly color their analysis of a game or other works (it should be treated like its in a vacuum) Edit: also, even if you analyze this game in a vaccuum, THIS IS THE FOURTH NAMED WOMAN IN A ROW SOMETHING LIKE THIS HAS HAPPENED WITH, AND ONLY FIVE HAVE SHOWN UP. Are you saying we analyze each individual instance like it happened in a vaccuum, separate from the others in this game? FicusArt fucked around with this message at 23:44 on Mar 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2016 23:38
|
|
|
Was that a director's chair set up on a rooftop at 5:00? Some notes on this particularly excellent chapter: 1. An arkham story unlocked by a riddle we haven't solved yet describes the moments that lead directly into the initial crime scene. 2. The Hospital is one of the most closely designed areas in the game-it's loaded with cues to the themes of what's going on. After beating the mission, an audiolog will spawn in, I think, the lobby office (the same happens in all other season of infamy missions). It's must-listen. The morgue contains the corpses of people who died in the diner attack from the beginning of the game- people we failed to save. There's also a very important easter egg there: A drawer for Talia al Ghul, which is empty. You're not just going into the morgue to follow Ra's-you're literally passing through the crematory incinerator. Note the "ROBINSON" over the top, identical to the very first shot of the game. Finally, if you choose to not administer the Lazarus to Ra's, the image of carrying Ra's out of the area is identical to the one used at the beginning and end of AC. It's made pretty clear that scruffy's choice is the "bad" one here. It doesn't have much in terms of thematic resonance (there's a ton of visual cues in the "destroy the machine" cutscene- please do watch that alternate outcome), it's foreshadowed by the audio log, it's shorter and almost perfunctory, and you wind up with one less occupant in the cell block. That last one is perhaps the biggest- the game lets players avoid actually seeing Ra's die due to the player's actions. 3. Other easter eggs: Elliot Memorial Hospital has references to several other gotham villains in plaques and posters, particularly in the lobby area: Bradford Thorne (aka the Crime Doctor), Linda Friitawa (aka Fright), and Thomas Elliot's parents. I think there are more, but those are all I can find online atm. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 00:08 on Mar 21, 2016 |
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
IBlameRoadSuess posted:I agree with everything in this post, and to add to it, like I said in a post before, I don't think analyzing the writing or what happens in the game immediately after seeing it is the right way to do things. As of now we've only got part the Oracle and Gordon plotlines, and part of the Riddler's kidnapping Catwoman plotline, and we can analyze whether their treatment in the first part of their story arcs is a good/bad till the cows come home and still have not seen everything the writing has to offer. I think we should let the game take a breath and show us what else it has in store before we start shouting about how sexist it is. It got off on a wrong foot with all this nonsense, and killing off Nyssa was entirely Scruffy's choice. (She's a traitor to Ra's, and he's batfuck crazy at this point, is he really going to let her live if he lives? Even if Batman stopped him momentarily, all he would need to do is go after her later.) I agree, these constant discussions on how the game is sexist aren't tedious because they are wrong per se, they are tedious because it honestly seems like no matter how these situations ultimately are resolved it won't matter. The Oracle plot will be sexist for involving a kidnaping. The Nyssa story is a woman in a refrigerator because, even though it worked thematically and in the other path she's capable and has agency, its pedigree involves a history of sexism. Everything is being read in the most sexist way possible, and is also tainting everything else by proximity. It's a relentlessly negative way of looking at the game that doesn't admit even a chance for the game to advocate on its behalf. If the villains kidnap Oracle because, "she's a crippled girl, what's she gonna do about it?" And she makes them eat those words I wouldn't say that having her being abducted was sexist. Maybe people disagree with that way of looking at things but I'm withholding overall judgement for now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
The truth is I have only played through this mission once before and I picked the other option. I just wanted to see what happens. The way I see it, you can either play Arkham Knight as Batman clinging as tightly to his ideals as possible, or Batman finally hitting the breaking point and just trying to fix things before he flames out. Personally I still think Batman would help Ra's, but I wish it had ended differently.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2016 23:58
|
|
|
I agree with waiting to see how the game proceeds with its writing concerning female characters before passing final judgement; it's not completely impossible that there's some twists and turns left in the plot because of Fear Toxin or something else, which would probably be stupid but would be worth analyzing in more detail at that juncture. I also agree that it has been a hilarious flaming shithole in that regard so far, and I don't have high expectations, because godDAMN they've been hammering that lovely trope like the game has you mashing the counter button. Hot loving poo poo this game has handled its small cast of female characters poorly so far.  There has been one juncture so far where a capable lady protagonist doesn't suffer a somewhat hackneyed fate, and it's an optional choice in a sidequest. Maybe that will change some and soften my opinion, but it's looking grim, and as has been mentioned, comics are often infamously bad on this subject.On another topic, I do like the theory that the writing for that particular quest, and maybe this game as a whole, is a criticism for Batman's personal framework; it hilights several glaring, problematic issues with his reasoning. Where he personally draws the line on the use of Lazarus pits is particularly interesting; he's willing to let Nyssa die without using a Lazarus pit because it's her explicit wish not to do so, but he's unwilling to let R'as die without a Lazarus pit IN SPITE OF his explicit wish earlier in the series because (???), where (???) is an unbelievably rigid and slightly warped interpretation of what it means to kill someone. He's unwilling to allow natural death to occur for a supernatural being, but is unwilling to allow anyone else to become a supernatural being where suddenly they're in the same moral category. In this way it almost feels like destroying the Lazarus pits is a way for him to cheat his own morality, since it's just enough steps removed from killing someone to permit, whereas as long as they exist, apparently, he's going to go out of his way to allow R'as to continue using them. It's almost like having especially rigid and arbitrary moral boundaries where you paint issues in black and white is likely to cause problems down the line. I think choosing the 'allow R'as to finally loving die maybe' option was built explicitly to contrast the more obviously 'Batmany' option. Everyone's (mostly) happy, nature takes its course, and the only person with sour grapes over the issue is Batman, because he's driven by the Gotham-sized chip on his shoulder. E: Edited the first bit to include the word 'protagonist'. Arguably, Poison Ivy doesn't really give much of a poo poo about her temporary imprisonment, and Harley Quinn is out and about and doing Harley Quinn things just fine last we saw, I believe? Harley Quinn is ALSO a character that is difficult to handle well, and most comics...don't, but the game hasn't really done anything especially troubling with her that we've seen so far, and even she seems to be questioning her devotion to her now-deceased Pudd'n. Shady Amish Terror fucked around with this message at 00:10 on Mar 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 00:05
|
|
|
akulanization posted:I agree, these constant discussions on how the game is sexist aren't tedious because they are wrong per se, they are tedious because it honestly seems like no matter how these situations ultimately are resolved it won't matter. That's exactly the point to be made, here. It doesn't matter how many rainbows and sunbeams the story gets wrapped up in, it doesn't start off "sexist" and flip around to "not sexist" because the characters went through an arc. It starts off at "sexist" because of the complete lack of agency some of the female characters have been given, and will still be sexist at the end of things because two female characters have been unceremoniously killed off and one's entire inclusion in the plot (and, likely, for the rest of the game if previous Riddler questline lengths are anything to go on) is that she'll also be killed unless Batman can be her knight in riddle-solving armor. One or two of these storylines wouldn't have been entirely problematic, but all of them together paint a gross pattern of lovely writing that can't just be made up for because everything gets better. It isn't solely the actions that are happening to the characters, its the singling out of almost only female characters that get this treatment, the complete lack of other female characters that aren't getting written in as plot devices and corpses, and the complete lack of stakes being raised for Batman's male companions. hard counter posted:
I agree that going too hard the other way is dehumanizing, but "not killing or removing all agency from the only female characters you have introduced so far" isn't going too far in the other way, and your narrative isn't a naturally-occurring beast that can't be stopped, it's a calculated and edited story that can be changed for its benefit. There isn't an inherent benefit to writing the women in the story this way, there's nothing too integral to the overarching story that couldn't be sacrificed or written around for the sake of improving the character writing in leaps and bounds. If your storytelling gravitates toward exploiting nearly all of the female cast in order to tell a story about the male characters, then your storytelling is poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 00:21
|
|
|
FicusArt posted:; That's not analyzing it in a vacuum (even within the game itself) in the sense that you're not considering what has been happening to comparable men. Nightwing has also gone down untriumphantly too (taken down by women, as a point of consideration) and Gordon is almost certainly going down a bad road. Nearly every firefighter/cop we've come across has been a damsel in distress and they're primarily men. Ras, Batman's number 2 adversary of all time, was Nyssa's precise mirror in this most recent side plot, sharing a linked fate hinging on Batman's critical thinking, making the two exactly comparable. If it turns out that everyone goes down at some point in this game then their gender literally won't matter for this presentation - this will just have been a game where everyone had their nose bloodied. Recall that the opening monologue references the point that even Batman goes down at some point.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
Octatonic posted:This for example, couldn't have happened? Oh yeah sure, we could analyze every beat in the game and "make it better", but I don't see how that positively contributes to any conversation. Could they have rewritten things to your liking? Yes. However, again, there are Arkham Knight save files where Nyssa survives and continues being the leader of the assassins. You can't complain about her being "fridged" if you're the one killing her. That's not the fault of the writers. akulanization posted:I agree, these constant discussions on how the game is sexist aren't tedious because they are wrong per se, they are tedious because it honestly seems like no matter how these situations ultimately are resolved it won't matter. The Oracle plot will be sexist for involving a kidnaping. The Nyssa story is a woman in a refrigerator because, even though it worked thematically and in the other path she's capable and has agency, its pedigree involves a history of sexism. Everything is being read in the most sexist way possible, and is also tainting everything else by proximity. It's a relentlessly negative way of looking at the game that doesn't admit even a chance for the game to advocate on its behalf. If the villains kidnap Oracle because, "she's a crippled girl, what's she gonna do about it?" And she makes them eat those words I wouldn't say that having her being abducted was sexist. Maybe people disagree with that way of looking at things but I'm withholding overall judgement for now. But really this is all I can focus on. Complaining about this Oracle plot as it's only just begun is like calling a rollercoaster boring while you're building up to the first drop. Maybe go through a loop first. What's the alternative here? Oracle, Catwoman, and Nyssa can't be injured, attacked, kidnapped, die, or really be in any danger whatsoever because history has a precedence of bad things happening to women in comic books?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 00:50
|
|
|
Yeah, destroying the machine is the "good" choice, imo, and it's the one that should be taken. Even with batman's weirdo mentality it's hard to justify curing him, especially since batman has probably killed plenty of people indirectly already.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 00:50
|
|
|
The Nyssa stuff isn't actually in the original game, which probably makes it worse that she dies in this case. I agree though that not saving Ra's Al Ghul is probably the ''correct'' choice. I still think Oracle's plot line is actually not that bad, at least not intentionally so. She's a vital part of Batman's system even if the game is bad at showing it and the fact that someone knew about her and successfully captured her is meant to make Batman scared of who the Knight is, or at least worried, because only someone who actually worked with him in the past would know about her. Catwoman and Riddler is pretty bad, and on further thought I actually wish it was Nightwing that Riddler has. The explanation for him being there given during the Harley Quinn DLC. It would certainly make a later side quest more interesting too, or at least funnier. Basically the Oracle stuff is probably a necessary evil although it could easily have shown up later then it does, Catwoman is interchangeable with any other ally and Nyssa shows a remarkable blindness to how the rest of the game was considering it was made afterwards.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
SonicRulez posted:But really this is all I can focus on. Complaining about this Oracle plot as it's only just begun is like calling a rollercoaster boring while you're building up to the first drop. Maybe go through a loop first. What's the alternative here? Oracle, Catwoman, and Nyssa can't be injured, attacked, kidnapped, die, or really be in any danger whatsoever because history has a precedence of bad things happening to women in comic books? If this is the argument that's going to keep cropping up, then I fully endorse we table the conversation until we hit a salient point for it, either through the rift between the game's depiction of male and female characters closing, or it widening even further.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
So, aside from you you seem to think regular firefighters are comparable to women like Poison Ivy and Nyssa. And that largely, named male characters like the Riddler, Scarecrow, the Arkham Knight, the Mad Hatter, and such have had plenty of agency in what happens to them and those around them, and on screen. But hey, you say we'e got two directly comparable things going on here so let's compare. hard counter posted:Ras, Batman's number 2 adversary of all time, was Nyssa's precise mirror in this most recent side plot, sharing a linked fate hinging on Batman's critical thinking, making the two exactly comparable. When you side with Nyssa, and she tries to finish off Ra's, batman easily stops her, and she leaves. Ra's approves of Batman not reviving him, because Batman's actions line up with what Ra's wanted. When you revive Ras and he goes to kill Nyssa, Batman watches him do it, and she's helpless against him despite also being a highly trained ninja. Then Ra's escapes, to lick his wounds because he apparently just killed a ninja and escaped batman without issue while still being out of it from his fresh revival. Then Nyssa uses her dying breath to validate Batman's choices and let us know his dead girlfriend would have approved.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 01:02
|
|
|
Don't forget Batman easily stops the same attack after watching Nyssa get gutted.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 01:05
|
|
|
Speaking of dead companions, has Jason Todd come up at all in the Arkham universe? I don't remember him ever being mentioned, which is really weird considering this features both Dick and Tim. It seems strange to completely gloss over that major death for Batman in these games, for how heavily death has come up in the games. Assuming he exists in this universe/continuity/whatever, I suppose.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 01:09
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:Don't forget Batman easily stops the same attack after watching Nyssa get gutted. http://www.tubechop.com/watch/7807705
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 01:11
|
|
|
So, uh, does the game ever explain why Rā's doesn't just toss Talia into a Lazarus pit after he recovers between City and now? 'Cause he was pretty dead as well, so it's not like there wasn't an active Lazarus pit within reach of the League.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 01:12
|
|
|
death .cab for qt posted:Speaking of dead companions, has Jason Todd come up at all in the Arkham universe? I don't remember him ever being mentioned, which is really weird considering this features both Dick and Tim. It seems strange to completely gloss over that major death for Batman in these games, for how heavily death has come up in the games. Assuming he exists in this universe/continuity/whatever, I suppose. He comes up. berryjon posted:So, uh, does the game ever explain why Rā's doesn't just toss Talia into a Lazarus pit after he recovers between City and now? 'Cause he was pretty dead as well, so it's not like there wasn't an active Lazarus pit within reach of the League. Batman blew it up, because he's an rear end in a top hat.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 01:17
|
|
|
death .cab for qt posted:Speaking of dead companions, has Jason Todd come up at all in the Arkham universe? There were wink wink, nudge nudge references in Asylum and City, but no reference by name. berryjon posted:So, uh, does the game ever explain why Rā's doesn't just toss Talia into a Lazarus pit after he recovers between City and now? 'Cause he was pretty dead as well, so it's not like there wasn't an active Lazarus pit within reach of the League. Talia's body is missing from the morgue, so he might have done just that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 01:19
|
|
|
He also dropped a massive contaminant, Clayface, in the thing. So it probably doesn't work anymore.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 01:21
|
|
|
SonicRulez posted:You can't complain about her being "fridged" if you're the one killing her. That's not the fault of the writers. I'm not going to go on beyond this, because I've said my thoughts on the matter as succinctly as I can, but yes, this is exactly the fault of the writers, who wrote what your choices were and what the consequences were. This is a videogame, and its story is an entirely deterministic, created text, not some sort of emergent system, duder.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 01:27
|
|
|
SonicRulez posted:You can't complain about her being "fridged" if you're the one killing her. That's not the fault of the writers. Uh, is the player psychic? Are they supposed to be able to guess that by saving Ra's, Nyssa will get offed in embarrassing fashion with one slice from a man who can barely stand up? You can argue it's not fridging all you want but don't try to shift blame here. Players are not being presented with the option of "Kill Ra's" vs "Kill Nyssa", they're only being asked to decide the fate of Ra's and have no control beyond that. At any rate, the Lazarus Pit doesn't work anymore because Clayface got slam dunked into it and gummed up the works. And Ra's probably didn't bring Talia back because he doesn't loving care about her. CuwiKhons fucked around with this message at 01:39 on Mar 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 01:36
|
|
|
death .cab for qt posted:If you don't like the discussion then just pick up one of the other seven threads of conversation currently ongoing instead of shitposting. Like the Arkham: Living Hell comics, this poo poo owns! I feel like half of Batman's problems could be solved by him being a full-time security guard at Arkham.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 01:40
|
|
|
ManlyGrunting posted:I feel like half of Batman's problems could be solved by him being a full-time security guard at Arkham. But then who'd punch the Blackgate criminals?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 01:41
|
|
|
death .cab for qt posted:Speaking of dead companions, has Jason Todd come up at all in the Arkham universe? I don't remember him ever being mentioned, which is really weird considering this features both Dick and Tim. It seems strange to completely gloss over that major death for Batman in these games, for how heavily death has come up in the games. Assuming he exists in this universe/continuity/whatever, I suppose. I mean, the Arkham Knight is almost definitely Jason Todd. It's being telegraphed so heavily the bigger twist would be it being someone else. He just knows too much about how Batman operates.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 01:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 21:18 |
|
|
Does Arkham Knight still use the same one-autosave-per-game save system as its predecessors? If it had manual saves or a handful of rolling autosaves you could go back to, I could maaaaaaybe see this as a "you chose wrong, idiot". Otherwise it's just a blind alley into...well, everyone's already covered that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 02:05
|
|