This post has not been edited by the GamesBeat staff. Opinions by GamesBeat community writers do not necessarily reflect those of the staff.
Editor’s note: We’ve all read rants about game franchises being farmed out for cash-cow sequels. In his piece, Michael avoids this compulsion and artfully dissects why making a second Arkham Asylum seems particularly unnecessary. – James
I
cringed a little when developer Rocksteady recently announced Batman: Arkham Asylum 2 at
the Spike TV Video Game Awards. A few weeks ago, I had the chance to play
through the original. Its presentation impressed me. But while I have no doubt
that the creators will be able to deliver a great product twice, I don’t think
we need another Arkham Asylum so soon…or ever.
That’s not to say that I’m against another title starring the World’s Greatest Detective — just another
Arkham-centric game. I believe that the island-asylum premise should remain a one-shot
in Rocksteady’s established universe.
Most previous Batman games focused entirely on one aspect of the
character: his combat prowess. In the past, game designers often got stuck in the
rut of using the license to make platformers or beat-em-ups. Arkham
Asylum is different.
In a way, the game begs a sequel. It’s a great experience. It accurately portrays all of Batman’s key characteristics. The
ability to smash heads is definitely in there, sure, but so are the ingenuity, the
deductive acumen, the stealth, and the value for human life that make the
character so beloved. Whisking each part of the Caped Crusader’s unique style into a
single, potent mixture, Rocksteady succeeded in creating the most faithful
Batman game ever.
Moreover, Arkham Asylum wasn’t perfect. It featured some repetitive
sequences. Also, some contrivances, like the conveniently placed gargoyle
statuaries in each room, felt like uninspired gameplay capitulations that took
away from the overall immersion. Solutions to these problems would be welcome.
So if the game is great, and it contains a few unpolished features, why am I not clamoring for a sequel?
I don’t think more of the same — or even more of the improved — would do Rocksteady’s
first breakout game any greater justice. I felt very satisfied when I finished foiling the Joker’s plan. The length was just right — nothing dragged on too long
or felt rushed. I fought all the villains I really cared to encounter, and, for
me, the credits rolled at just the right time. My contentment with the length
doesn’t come from frustration — quite the opposite: Arkham Asylum has an impeccable sense of
pacing and flow. “Complete” is the best word I can think of to describe it as a
product.
A sequel — especially one year after the fact — seems premature and a
little unnecessary. In this economic climate, I can understand the desire to
develop stable, money-making franchises. Batman’s brand recognition is a key
boon, too. But as a fan, I feel that Batman: Arkham Asylum could be sullied artistically
by piling on more levels, more villains, and more locales.
Please Rocksteady, take what you learned and explore another part of the Dark Knight’s canon — find a setting that works the way Arkham did. Come up with a fresh take
on the subject matter and a new title for the game. Don’t just transplant Arkham’s gates into
Gotham, polish the product incrementally, and
release the same game again. Give us another novel experience in the Batman universe
— a new way to don the cape and cowl of one of popular culture’s most iconic heroes.