Ehh Not to hype about this. I like SA because ridicilous comics have always been fun to read but an ARKHAM GAME as a prequel in The SA?

Hopefully their doing the same thing Assassin's creed did make two extension games while working on the true sequel.

What do you guys think?

Why not just continue where Arkham City left off? They left SO MANY plots left open to explore, from Hush, to Scarecrow, to Batman's growing detachment from the world after Joker's death, and not to mention the prophecy foretelling the end of Gotham and Batman. Are they really going to throw all of those possible plot lines away from some Silver Age prequel? If that's what they're planning on doing I must say that I will be utterly disappointed...

buuut @War Killer they are maybe using more time to fine tune the story? so thats why they are making a prequel to give them time?

To the best of my knowledge Rocksteady have not confirmed anything about the rumored Batman: Arkham Prequel, speculation is ok that's what the rumors are for but in all honesty I don't think Rocksteady are doing a prequel let alone a silver age prequel. And as for the assassins creed route that makes sense but I would still bet that Rocksteady is not doing that, but I do think Arkham 3 is on its way in the dark and gritty form we know from asylum and city.

@FatihBATMAN said:

buuut @War Killer they are maybe using more time to fine tune the story? so thats why they are making a prequel to give them time?

Tuning up the story? Why? It's just story, and it's not like they did that for the two previous games. Asylum had a stolen premise (from Grant Morrison's Arkham Asylum), and the TITAN stuff was really boring and didn't really fit Batman. City had an even weaker story that was all over the place, not to mention a disappointing conclusion for Hugo Strange's arc.

@SmashBrawler said:

@FatihBATMAN said:

buuut @War Killer they are maybe using more time to fine tune the story? so thats why they are making a prequel to give them time?

Tuning up the story? Why? It's just story, and it's not like they did that for the two previous games. Asylum had a stolen premise (from Grant Morrison's Arkham Asylum), and the TITAN stuff was really boring and didn't really fit Batman. City had an even weaker story that was all over the place, not to mention a disappointing conclusion for Hugo Strange's arc.

@nickzambuto: Oh, come on. I love the games for their gameplay, voice acting, graphics, music (in Arkham City), use of the Batman mythos and certain moments during the main campaign that are really awesome, but they're not perfect, and the weakest part of them is definitely the story. And I hate saying that, because Paul Dini wrote one of my favourite Batman runs ever.

@SmashBrawler said:

@nickzambuto: Oh, come on. I love the games for their gameplay, voice acting, graphics, music (in Arkham City), use of the Batman mythos and certain moments during the main campaign that are really awesome, but they're not perfect, and the weakest part of them is definitely the story. And I hate saying that, because Paul Dini wrote one of my favourite Batman runs ever.

You're the only person I've seen who doesn't love the story.

@nickzambuto: Really? I've come across quite a few. Anyway, if you're interested on knowing why I really don't like the plot of these games (you aren't, nobody is), I think Asylum had the best story, because it was pretty straightforward. The villains Batman encountered were met in a way that felt natural: many of them were running around free in Arkham, and the ones Batman confronted fit nicely in the story. The only problem I have is the unoriginal premise and the TITAN stuff, which is nothing more than just an excuse to have giant enemies, really.

Arkham City is were the problems begin: the story is all over the place; many moments feel like unnecessary padding; the Penguin stuff puts the story in an absolute halt, since many of the stuff there could've been solved quickier (and no, I don't want a shorter story mode, I want a well-written one); Ra's al Ghul was absolutely pointless, undermining the excellent work made with Hugo Strange; and the ending felt lackluster, with many plot elemments being just flat out forgotten about (for example, the victims Joker poisoned, not even the DLC gave a definitive ending to that).

@SmashBrawler said:

@nickzambuto: Really? I've come across quite a few. Anyway, if you're interested on knowing why I really don't like the plot of these games (you aren't, nobody is), I think Asylum had the best story, because it was pretty straightforward. The villains Batman encountered were met in a way that felt natural: many of them were running around free in Arkham, and the ones Batman confronted fit nicely in the story. The only problem I have is the unoriginal premise and the TITAN stuff, which is nothing more than just an excuse to have giant enemies, really.

Arkham City is were the problems begin: the story is all over the place; many moments feel like unnecessary padding; the Penguin stuff puts the story in an absolute halt, since many of the stuff there could've been solved quickier (and no, I don't want a shorter story mode, I want a well-written one); Ra's al Ghul was absolutely pointless, undermining the excellent work made with Hugo Strange; and the ending felt lackluster, with many plot elemments being just flat out forgotten about (for example, the victims Joker poisoned, not even the DLC gave a definitive ending to that).

Not saying it's perfect, but from what I've seen, the story is unanimously praised and often cited as one of the best things about the series.

@nickzambuto: Yeah, I've seen that praise. Never agreed with it, really. But everyone's free to like whatever they want.

@SmashBrawler said:

Arkham City is were the problems begin: the story is all over the place; many moments feel like unnecessary padding; the Penguin stuff puts the story in an absolute halt

i loved the penguin part...ate it up :>