The horror, The horror!
What the hell is up with my internal 'bad game' barometer of late? I used to be able to spot this stuff from a mile away, but I guess I'm getting soft in my old age or something, because I'm giving so many things the undue benefit of the doubt. I'm sold to the Harry Potter hypetrain, enough to pre-order the thing, even though I'm about 80% sure the final product is going to disappoint me in some vast way. Callisto Protocol was one of my most hyped games of the past few years, only for it to fall short of what I needed it to be in order to fill the Dead Space shaped hole in my heart. And now we've got the bigger, supposedly badder, cousin of Gotham Knights, a game I rightfully bore down upon, only to discover that this title, Suicide Squad Kill the Justice League, might just be every bit as terrible as Gotham Knights was! I used to be able to spot these things coming...
When Ubisoft killed off it's three 'in progress' games that were in development earlier this year, there was a very specific reason given. They said that the games in question 'weren't what gamers wanted'. Further, decidedly more unsubstantiated, rumours declared that they were Battle Royale titles all. But the reason I'm bringing this up is to highlight the intelligence to look at your work, look at your audience and realise that they aren't meant for each other. Maybe the trend you're chasing moved on, maybe the flow of the market is against your style, maybe you're just not on the pulse of the people anymore. Whatever the case, when I read that as an internal justification from the Ubisoft paymasters, that might have been the first time I felt respect for any decision made within Ubisoft since Black Flag, which I believe turns 10 later this year. That is a self-understanding that, if leaks are to be believed, is sorely missing from Warner Bros Interactive for the games that they're publishing. (Which again, the Harry Potter title is Warner Bros published! Can you see why I'm scared?)
I'm using hedging language merely as a shield for myself to buy the benefit of the doubt in this situation. This isn't a revealed screen of the game, but rather a 'leak'; which opens up the tiny possibility that what we're seeing is a artist mock-up of a possible direction the game could have taken, or a straight up lying composite by a simple clout chaser. But the renders are too good, the UI too ugly yet professional, there's no shadow of doubt in my mind that this leaked screenshot doing the rounds is the real, mortifying, face of the 'Suicide Squad' game that the team have been keeping under wraps for fear of the obvious hatred it would accrue. The more I think about the tiny snippets of this game we've seen, scripted cutscenes split between heavy bursts of action, and the strangely twisted gameplay details they've let slip and refused to explain; (only being able to play as one of the Squad instead of switching at will) the truth becomes clear; this was a con job from the getgo.
"But what do these leaked screens contain?", I hear you ask because I'm not going to risk uploading them up here. Well, try to picture a screenshot from the menu of Gotham Knights. Seeped in dozens of currencies, endless menus for crafting slots, and take it one step further by adding a 'mission-select' screen implying there isn't even an open world for this title. And there's your game. Gotham Knights 2.0; the game built around the core fundamentals that make a live service without any reason to be one. A style of development soundly rejected by everyone who likes the Arkham style of game that this title was supposed to be a successor to, much more so than 'Gotham Knights' was pretending to be. This was the A-team, ostensibly the same people who brought us the Arkham masterpieces, making a new title after all these years! And it looks every bit as disappointing as what the B-team farted out last year as a pale imitation of the greatness this franchise once achieved.
At this point the only question is whether or not this game is just 'live service-like' in the same way that Gotham Knights was, or alternatively the full sin itself. And unfortunately I think I know the answer. Unlike Gotham Knights which draped itself in all the annoying necessities of a live service without any of the procedurally developed benefits that supposedly make up for those issues, the new screenshot of the Suicide Squad game does tease a Battle Pass. >Sigh< Which means this is probably a full blown live service game for some sickening reason. I feel like at this point, the only people who like and benefit from making these games are the publishers; because the game is never as polished, the user experience always takes liberties in order to accommodate and the replayability of the game in the future is irrevocably kneecapped. Do you think Suicide Squad Kills the Justice League is going to be repackaged into a remastered collection 8 years from now? Of course not, because the servers won't be online anymore; thank you, live services!
The worst part of this for me, however, is the unspoken impression (by the exsistence of a mission-select menu) that there won't be any open world. Just as we could start to get excited to explore Metropolis for the first time since... DC Universe Online, I believe- it seems that this game has gone another direction entirely and is going to ward itself off into tiny snippets of concentrated enemy slog missions that'll be capped off in Justice League themed boss fight. Which would actually, increadibly, make it more restrictive than Gotham Knights already is! Assuming that my reading into the game is accurate, which I can only assume it is given that literally none of the marketing has shown off open world exploration elements at all and the team have bent over backwards not to mention anything in that vein. Which begs the question; if you know the thing you're making is going to inspire backlash to the point where you have to shut up about it's features, why dedicate yourself to making it?
For what it's worth, some outlets have gone the distance to reach out and apparently confirm the validity of these screenshots, but the sources they got in contact with seem to double as hype-men because they rushed to 'damage control' in statements made at the same time. According to these insiders, the multiple currencies are skill point tallies divided between each character, making the prospect of levelling up 4 characters individually a daunting proposition right away. They've also tried to defend progression claiming that you don't start "rebuffed and weak", instead you "start off great and get ridiculous, like Arkham's Batman." Which of course calls into question- what exactly was ridiculous about Arkham's Batman? Was it his intricate and free-flowing balance will gave him a counter to every individual enemy type he fought against? What Batman game did they play to make such a statement, because I don't think it was the same one that I fell in love with.
So I'm a little distraught by all this if you can tell. Suicide Squad Kills the Justice League was supposed to be the wine to wash down the vinegar that Gotham Knights left us all with, but now it's looking like a straight shot of unrefined oil. Rocksteady have veered hard away from everything that made the Arkham franchise great whilst keeping their public face insanely hush about everything so as to not upset a base they know is going to be ruffled. I suppose this means that the spirit of the Arkham games has been soundly washed from the hands of Rocksteady, and my dream of them one day going back to that Damian Wayne starring Arkham game after this one is dead. Or even more so than it suddenly became the day that Kevin Conroy died. Oh right, at least Kevin is in this title for his last role, guess it's worth at least watching his scenes on Youtube for that.
No comments:
Post a Comment