DC Super Hero Girls: Teen Power

 When Nine and Nine meet Nine, the depths of reason shall stir. A voice like thunder shall sound and thou shalt know- "THE DC SUPERHERO GIRLS ARE HERE TO SAVE THE DAY"

I wish I could tell you that I know nothing about this branch of the DC franchise and was just as blindsided by this game as a lot of the audience was. I wish I could say that I've never so much as heard of DC Superhero girls, and therefore have no opinion on the show. I wish I could even say that I've never watched so much as a scene, let alone a full episode, or indeed, several. Unfortunately, were I utter any one of those sentences they would be lies. Yes, even the one about watching several episodes. But before you get to judging me- huh, you're already midway through the judging? Okay, well- after you're done judging me, hear me out. So I'm desperate for my DC content, okay? The movies were mostly trash, but at least they showed off the heroes. (But because they were trash, Warner Bros didn't make many of them) The TV shows, yes the CW ones, are pretty meh too, but I've literally watched them all and am out of content. (They really don't warrant a rewatch) All I want to do is see the characters I loved doing their stuff on the moving picture box- is that a crime? No, but then resorting to watching DC Super Hero Girls on the official Youtube channel just might be.

So you might be wondering "You watched several episodes: is it any good?" to which my honest is, "It's alright." I know, not the scathing criticism you were hoping for but in fairness it's just meant to be a show for kids and as far as that goes it's actually a lot better than some of the other original kids shows debuting nowadays. (Or rather, shows debuting on TV. The Netflix original animated kids shows are all vastly superior to this) How does it shape up for someone who wants to see the heroes, or even just their personalities if not their true selves, kinda like how X-men Evolution worked? Yeah, for that it's actually pretty awful. Everyone has their personalities and individual traits drained to their most basic state, most of the episode-to-episode plots are so paper-thin you could summarise them on the back of a fastfood receipt and there's no actual conflict in the entire thing. Yeah. they're a school of superheroes (which actually isn't gender-specific like the title might suggest) ensuring they'll fight the odd crime, but nothing of any significant depth or development happens. It's essentially a show with less drive in it than Supergirl. (Bleagh, I can't believe that I said that; someone remove my tongue.)

'But that's just a TV show,' I thought, 'there's no way this property would somehow manage to become popular enough to warrant any sort of reimaging on any other forum. There's not going to a movie, comic, and certainly not a game.' Whelp, I guess that goes to show why you should never trust your gut for anything. From the very first second that I saw the trailer during Nintendo Direct for 'DC Superhero Girls: Teen Power' I thought: no. There's no way this is real and people are making this and money went behind it. Have we really reached the point where this is the limit of human ingenuity? People spent real money funding this, and now even more people are likely to spend real money buying it? Somebody stop this crazy train we call the world, I'm getting off. (And considering the year we just had, it means quite something to declare that this might be the announcement that broke me.) But then I did the unthinkable, the unimaginable, and watched the trailer with an eye to actually absorb what I was seeing. So do you want to know what I thought of it? No? Ah- well- look I'm going to tell you anyway so just go with it, 'kay?

So this game looks ugly. I do not know what it is, but you cannot sit there and tell me this has something to do with the 'lagging power of the Switch', because that console there has put out games like 'Breath of the Wild', 'Octopath Traveller' and 'Link's Awakening'. I'm talking some truly beautiful titles in it's time, but this don't hold a soggy candle to their brilliant shine. Just looking at the gross textures and shaky resolution puzzles me, this looks like a game not comfortable in it's own skin, like it was made for DS hardware and upscaled. (Which cannot be the case because the show succeeds the DS' popularity by a fair few years) There's also the design, which takes the already 'questionable' direction of the show's art and somehow makes it fall even further. This is a classic case of attempting to transport a 2D style into a 3D space without any remote consideration given to what the conversion process should look like.

As undeniably ugly as it looks, this particular shot does give me fuzzy 'Great Days' vibes. 

Breakdown Breakdown.

"Are you really going to sit there and harp on about the visuals?" It's a pretty big deal from where I'm sitting! Part of the 'appeal' of DC Super Hero Girls (if, indeed, it has any appeal at all) is the way in which it softens the hard-edge visual style that the DC universe is know for in order to make it more appealing for, well, teenage girls. This game has made no efforts in that regard and simply regurgitated the show's work without putting any time towards learning why that worked. (if you consider it to have worked at all.) In fact, this actually instinctively reminds me of all the old school girls-themed shovel ware that the Wii generation used to have. You know, like the extended Barbie collection of games, (Pick any, none of them were good) Bratz's games, or the Monster High console games. None of these are free browser-based time killers. (or rather, none of the specific examples I'm referring to) I refer to console releases that attempt to box a lump of coal and sell it on the same shelves as genuine games, whilst having been developed on a shoestring in a few months by some small contracted studio just trying to keep the lights on between real projects. I can't think of a single well developed girl-targeted game, and it's honestly shocking how many I know about in order to make that observation. 

Of course, that isn't to say that DC Super Hero Girls is necessarily all bad. I did actually see some gameplay trickled in there that almost looked reminiscent of old school action adventure titles. There was some rudimentary fighting, possibly a little exploration, perhaps even some collectibles; basically enough ingredients to make a good time. So just because the art department dropped the ball, that doesn't automatically make the entire game trash, in fact, I'd go so far as to say this is probably the best looking girl-targeted game I've ever seen; but that is such a low threshold to cross I wouldn't celebrate just yet. At the very least I can say there's a husk of a game here, and with that present I don't quite mind all the emphasis on the irrelevant stuff because there's some small substance here; thus all the clothes shopping and amateur Intragram modelling isn't meant to be the substance.

Jeez, am I really splitting hairs about what makes a worthwhile kids game? Perhaps it would behove you to share my expectations for what a kids game could be. I was raised on a bunch of games that were absolutely not designed for kids, but I did dabble in the department of younger-target content over the years. So an example of a fantastic kids game would be, in my mind, something along the lines of the Lego games in general. What spectacularly realised games in artistic intent, gameplay content, replayability and just raw enjoyment. (Confer 30 points of raw enjoyment to the caster) The Lego games serve as irrefutable proof that a game made for and targeted at children doesn't need to be a bad or underdeveloped game by any stretch of the imagination. They can look great, be imaginative, challenge minds, and devote a following of dedicated fans. Even on it's best day and wearing it's finest dress, 'DC Super Hero Girls: Teen Power' is not that.

Honestly, it sort of looks like a mobile game ported for the Switch, and for the eye-watering price of £60, it really needs to be a lot more than that. The infuriating thing though, the gnawing tadpole worming around in the back of my brain threating to eat my cortex, is that I cannot find out who the developer is. Not for the life of me. I can't check their work to see if they're competent, or to shame them is this turns out to be as soulless of a cash grab as I presume it to be, I've just got absolutely nothing to go on. So either someone really doesn't want to have their name attached to this game or Nintendo is too embarrassed to reveal whatever inexperienced contractor they roped into this job. (Given that they are, inexplicably, the publisher) Neither option is all that appealing to be brutally honest. I don't know whether to anticipate this oncoming train wreck or observe it with a fine eye, but rest assured, this won't be the last time we hear of this obnoxiously subtitled girls game on this blog.

Gotham Knights; What aren't you telling us?

Enter the Knight

What a knight we've had. (See what I did there? Knight?) In the vein of all events like these, DC fandome has come and bombarded us all with an absolutely nauseating amount of filler with a slant few actual trailers and announcements thrown in there. And As someone who as never been the most out-and-out DC fan I must say, everything I saw actually did seem at least somewhat cool. That teaser for The Batman looked great, Synder's Justice League cut looks intriguing enough to give a shot (Fool me twice...) and the two games they announced seemed pretty solid and interesting. That's right, as you'll probably have known by now, DC announced two new games in the near-to-far future and I intend to talk about both of them in great detail in the months to come. For now, however, I want to address the rollercoaster of emotions I had when hearing about 'Gotham Knights'.

So here was a game which was apparently leaked the night of this event, so most everyone knew it was coming, but I was a rube who was still waiting for 'Suicide Squad' and thus I was pleasantly surprised to see that Warner Bros. Interactive were hard at work on a whole other game inbetween. Whatsmore, this game is set in Gotham and was dealing with the Bat family! And the trailer even started with the chilling announcement that Bruce Wayne, and through him Batman, is dead. "Oh my," I immediately thought, "Are they picking up the Arkham-verse? Is this a direct continuation on from 'Arkham Knight'?" To which the answer is a pretty decisive, 'No'. The trailer then went on to show us that Commissioner Jim Gordon was also dead (Something which never even happened in 'The Dark Knight Returns') and that his daughter, Barbara, was suspiciously non-crippled. Evidence if ever you needed it that this was not an Arkham-verse game. Despite the fact that Warner Bros. literally own Rocksteady so what would the actual harm be in borrowing their storyline? And why have your game set-up be so oddly similar to the last Batman game's leaving off point? And why not hire Kevin Conroy to do Batman? (So it's safe to say that 'immediate disappointment' was the first emotion I associated with this product.)

As it happens what this game is actually about is another version of Gotham city wherein Batman is presumed dead under mysterious means and thus he's called upon his extended Bat-family to take up the mantle in his stead. That means Batgirl, Robin, Nightwing and- Red Hood? Have joined the fight. Hang on, Batman called up Red Hood before calling on Kate Kane? Doesn't Batwoman operate out of Gotham too? She wouldn't even have to relocate! (This some straight bull.) And, once again, this is proof that Arkham's storyline is not being considered, because despite the odd character shift that the Arkham Knight went through in the last few minutes of the story, I doubt Batman would give him the keys to protecting the city. In fact, even without the whole 'Arkham Knight' story this still rings odd to me; Red Hood kills people, no? Isn't that adverse to Batman's entire ethos? But hey, maybe he'll need that sort of hardline willingness to break the rules given the fact that these Gotham Knights are set to go up against The Court of Owls.

That's right, afterall this time of speculation we're finally getting a Batman game featuring The Court of Owls, and it's not being made by Rocksteady. I mean, not to knock on Warner Bros. Interactive, but that's a big shame. Rocksteady proved for years that they had that special eye for capturing the heart of the Batman's rogue's gallery, and I feel like no matter how good The Owls are bought to life, Rocksteady would have done it better. But I should probably spill in case you're unaware. The Court of Owls was a rare example of a newer comicbook hero storyline that introduced a brand new enemy and yet still proved to be neither overly derivative nor lazy. It introduced a new criminal organisation into Gotham that was formed off of some of Gotham's oldest and most influential families, all dead-set on playing the 'shadowy cabal that guides the hand of politics'. And they also happen to dress like owls, a natural predator of bats. (Apparently these guys have secretly been around for generations, so that was just a coincidence.)

So there we have it, a new Batman to get all riled up for. Except; Warner Bros. were nice enough to give us a little bit of a Gameplay demo so we could see exactly what this game has in store for us (Isn't that nice) and what we saw was instinctively troubling to some. Before I address this I must say, this perception is in no way WB's fault, they were just a victim of bad timing and the industries' bad habits. The second any of us saw that this game would feature 4 heroic main characters and multiplayer, the Avengers game popped to mind alongside those accursed words 'Live service'. Now I don't have the strength to get into why a live service Superhero game sounds pretty crappy, but judging by the dubious reactions around the Internet I don't even need to. Matters were only worsened bit way through the trailer when we saw enemies with level numbers above their heads, and splash text with damage indicators. In short; Warner Bros. did everything in their power to make this game appear to be a Live Service, thus putting the fear of god into all us Batman fans who just wanted a good game, not another second job. And the funny thing is; I don't even think this game is actually a live service at all. Actually, I think it sounds like a pretty cool little game.

Now I'm not going so far as to call it a worthy successor to the Arkham games, but even without that title this footage did work to scratch my Batman itch somewhat. Set in an openworld of Gotham, likely adapted from Rocksteady's work on Arkham Knight, 'Gotham Knights' feels like 'Middle Earth: Shadow of War' bought to the world of Batman. Which is strange, as 'Shadow of War' actually adapted it's gameplay from the Arkham games. (Funny how cylindrical things can be.) So whilst the combat lacks the impact of previous Arkham titles, there's still that level of fluidity and agility which made Arkham such a great power trip. Throw that base ontop of the fact that all the hero's of the game seem to have their own movesets and gadgets, and there's a solid foundation right here. Speaking of those other heroes, they can join the player through the co-op system which ,strangely, is said to consist of only one to two people, making for some great dual takedown opportunities.

So this isn't some hub-based mess like Avenger's is shaping up to be, that's good, and it appears to just have some RPG mechanics and systems thrown in rather than turning out to be another soulless Live Service, that's great! But that doesn't automatically mean the game is any good, and indeed some of what we saw did sort of hit my 'mediocrity' bone a little bit. First off, the mission we saw in the trailer depicted Batgirl racing on her bike in order to stop >sigh< a portal shooting up into the sky. Really guys? Isn't a meme by now for how lazy a plotpoint this is for Superhero stories? Fan4stic, Suicide Squad, Avengers, Man of Steel, Ghostbusers, Star Trek and I think Justice League, (I forget) it doesn't really bode well for your narrative ingenuity. Then there is Batgirl, who was the focus this gameplay, (and who's likely my future main.) she just felt off. Not to say that every version of a character should be a carbon copy, but there are a few running personality traits characters keep in order to make them recognisable. Batgirl is one of those that has changed considerable over the years, not as much as Supergirl has (in the comics, not that abominable CW show which I still watch. Send help.) but enough to be a great character capable of holding their own story. Thus it's not as though there's no precedent for Batgirl to play the wise-cracking aloof hero, but when that's the stereotype for every screen hero ever, (such to the point where DC is literally re-releasing Justice League in order to pivot from that stereotype. Along with other things) it makes all of her witticisms stick out like poor, unfunny, cringe-soaked, thumbs. And then finally there is the boss of this encounter, Mr Freeze. His bossfight just looked super generic from what we saw of it, a far cry from his depiction in the Arkham series as one of most ingenious and memorable encounters from 'Asylum' and the 'Origins' DLC 'Cold, Cold Heart'. It's just more fuel for the fire which says that Batman license was in better hand with Rocksteady, they knew how to play to a villian's strengths beyond his apparent powers and make a setpeice worth remembering.

Yet even with my criticisms, and they go on beyond the three I mentioned, I haven't written this game off nearly as hard as I've written off Avengers. In fact, I haven't written off Gotham Knights at all. I like the idea of a co-op adventure with the Batfamily, and am glad for the small miracles coming out way such as the open world aspect and the ability to play solo. The RPG aspect coming to the game has, if done well, the potential to really throw some growth into the gameplay and though I've already picked Babs as my goto, there's not a hero on offer here that doesn't appeal to me on some level. I want to play as them all and that's one of the most important desires to establish off the bat. (I did it again! Didn't even mean to that time.)Who knows what this game could be capable off once it fruitions? Individual character narratives as they each undergo their growth into becoming the sorts of heroes they need to be in order to live up to Bruce's name? Will we get some interpersonal drama as Red Hood clashes with the others over his penchant for killing? Probably not, but I can look to that great batsignal in the sky and hope.