bit-gamer.net

Arkham City DLC plans confirmed

Arkham City DLC plans confirmed

Batman actor Kevin Conroy says he's already recorded lines for DLC for the forthcoming Arkham City.

In an interview with ComicBooked, voice actor Kevin Conroy has revealed a few details about the forthcoming Batman game, Arkham City, including the existence of future downloadable content.

While the interviewer didn’t get anywhere with a blunt question about what we could expect from the new game, Conroy opened up when asked a slightly softer, more open question about what he would be up to in the near future.

'Gaming is a big, new thing,' says Conroy. 'The thing about Arkham City is that it’s going to be an ongoing game. You’re going to be able to download future episodes of it, so it’s going to be going on for quite a while.

Kevin Conroy has played Batman, in either animated or game form, for 20 years now, eclipsing Christian Bale, Val Kilmer and even Adam West with his longevity.

Batman: Arkham City is currently set for release on 21 October on PC, PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360. You'll find the latest trailer for the game below, but in the meantime tell us whether you’re looking forward to seeing a regularly updated city in the forums.

19 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
kylew 23rd July 2011, 11:42 Quote
So they're talking DLC before the game's even out? :/
Gigglebyte 23rd July 2011, 12:10 Quote
DLC before the game is released. [sarcasm]I love modern gaming.[/sarcasm]
V3ctor 23rd July 2011, 12:27 Quote
It's like those "incentives" to pre-buy games... Like TDU2, u had 3 or more different stores selling the game, and every single store had an unique car to unlock in the game... That is just bull***...

I don't think that this can be considered as "DLC" because of this

'The thing about Arkham City is that it’s going to be an ongoing game. You’re going to be able to download future episodes of it, so it’s going to be going on for quite a while.’

I think that the game will have "Episodes"
GregTheRotter 23rd July 2011, 13:08 Quote
Bit off topic, but an interview that was done for arkham asylum, the first game with kevin conroy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdvEtzqdgiE
Salty Wagyu 23rd July 2011, 13:17 Quote
As long as it doesn't go store specific I guess it's fine. Nothing worst than store specific DLC which is annoying.
Yemerich 23rd July 2011, 13:17 Quote
Holy DLC Batman!

Sorry I couldn't resist...
I know I LOVE Batman AA. I hope this one keep the good job.
r3loaded 23rd July 2011, 15:40 Quote
I think I'll buy it next year, when the game and the dlc willbe released in one pack for the same price as the game itself costs at launch.
altdoom 23rd July 2011, 17:51 Quote
This game just keeps looking better, can't wait.
Eiffie 23rd July 2011, 18:24 Quote
Normally I'm a hater of any DLC news for a game that isn't even out yet BUT I recently picked up the first Arkham Asylum game on steam for $5 and it's a truly great game. If the level of quality that was put into that game carries over I simply don't see a problem with picking up some DLC for it.
sotu1 23rd July 2011, 22:20 Quote
Oh get over it. You guys never bought an expansion pack before it was renamed DLC?
Bauul 23rd July 2011, 23:16 Quote
I think it's premature to dump on simply the fact that they've announced DLC.

True, DLC is usually pointless additions that don't deserve the cost, but we've been having expansion packs for years. How do we know the DLC (read expansion packs you download) won't be worthwhile and fairly costed selection of additional content, delivered long after the game comes out that expands to length of play time?

Personally, I think before they say actually what the DLC is, it's only fair to give them the benefit of the doubt.
fluxtatic 24th July 2011, 01:30 Quote
Depends on the DLC - is it expanding an already-complete game, or did they rush the game out the door half-done and are now selling us the content for the rest of the game? I'll guess (and hope) the former. If it's the latter, vote with your wallet, people. The studios will stop half-assing it when it's demonstrated they can't make money releasing incomplete games and then charging full price for the half-done product and incrementally more for the DLC that should have been there in the first place.
chemo 24th July 2011, 02:33 Quote
i hate DLC culture like this :(
Toploaded 24th July 2011, 21:35 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by r3loaded
I think I'll buy it next year, when the game and the dlc willbe released in one pack for the same price as the game itself costs at launch.

Yeah, probably cheaper in fact, always pays to wait 12 months at least right now and it's not like it will look out of date then with the current rate of progression in games.
kylew 25th July 2011, 09:33 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by sotu1
Oh get over it. You guys never bought an expansion pack before it was renamed DLC?

Some DLC is what you would consider an expansion pack, but not all DLC is what you would consider an expansion pack. There's absolutely nothing wrong with "DLC", but developers are giving DLC a bad name with how often they're taking content from the finished game to sell either at a later date, or as day one "DLC".

Look at Bioshock 2, and how the "DLC" was already included in the release build of the game, so what for those that bought it, they were buying something they already had.

When developers are talking about DLC well before the game's released, it looks like they're doing what the Bioshock 2 developers did. Some devs know how to do DLC, look at Borderlands, great DLC or "Expansion Packs" which added a lot of content to the base game, they charged a reasonable price and put effort in to it.

In the days of retail expansion packs, it was generally all good content with a lot of hours of play time and a good price, some devs now *cough*Activision*cough* think that £10 map packs is worthy of being paid for DLC. It's embarrassing.
liratheal 25th July 2011, 11:04 Quote
You know what. I'm tired of seeing this bull**** on every news article about DLC announcements.

It needs to stop. Soon.

You people disgust me, purely because I know, you know, and everyone else knows, that you've bought "DLC" before, be that through the old-school expansion packs that bought in a store, or an expansion you bought through Steam (All those "game extending" cheap bits of downloaded stuff for Fallout 3, or Mass Effect, or just about any game ever).

Some of you whinge because "DLC is pointless ****!" you know what? Don't buy it. It's not like buying the game is going to force you to choose between buying the new car skin or the new character skin. I enjoyed Just Cause 2, and I didn't buy a single piece of DLC for that. You're a**holes for letting the DLC that's in existence for the people that want to buy it ruin your enjoyment of a game. Ever heard "cutting off your nose to spite your face"? That's what not buying something because it has DLC is.

Revolutionary new idea: Don't like DLC, don't buy it.

Some of you whinge because you're self entitled gits with an attitude that rivals that of a cave troll. You're the "It should be included from the start!" crowd, and you're just as bad. You seem to be of the opinion that, because you shelled out X GBP, you're somehow entitled to life-lng servicing by the game. Do you go to a movie theatre, buy a ticket for Harry Potter 1, and then demand to see the next seven for free because "It should have been in the first one"? No, because only a daft ***** would do that. Although there are strong arguments that the "It should be in there from the start" crowd are daft pricks..

Now, of course there is bad DLC. Kylew mentions Activisions policy of £10 map packs for CoD games - A perfect example of the worst way to do DLC, and no doubt taint peoples taste for it. There are the re-skinned guns, cars, clothes etcetera that appear in other games, too (Just Cause 2, for example) that look over priced.

Tarring all DLC with the same brush, though, is functionally retarded. The Fallout 3 expansions (DLC for those not following the thread of this rant) were reasonably cheap, and thoroughly enjoyable (Some more than others, but still, all worth the money). They were good DLC (Expansions).

Don't want to buy DLC? Simple. Don't. Enjoy the game, and put it away never to look at it again because you're too tight fisted to part with another couple of your hard won pounds for an entire team of peoples hundreds of man hours just to entertain you for another hour or two.

For the love of God, this "OMG **** THAT GAME THEY WANT TO DO DLC (Expansions) IT SUXXOMGOMG" needs to die in a fire.
Grimloon 25th July 2011, 14:59 Quote
lirathael, I reckon a fair few of us get "irritated" about some of the stock responses. Maybe not quite so close to rage induced apoplexy though. :o

However, I do get a little bit narked whenever DLC is mentioned before the game has been released - which appears to be pretty much all the time nowadays. That, to me, smacks of milking the cash cow, someone in the coloured pencil office asking "How can we make people pay more for less? Lock half the game content and call it DLC!"

I'll withhold judgement until it's released and make my usual decision - is the additional content worth it to me? I can't help but be very suspicious and a touch disheartened by this sort of announcement regarding a title I was looking forwards to though.
woods 25th July 2011, 17:24 Quote
I just wish all dlc was like Grand Theft Auto iv's or even Fallout 3, Fallout New Vegas's Old World Blues is ok
liratheal 25th July 2011, 17:55 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimloon
lirathael, I reckon a fair few of us get "irritated" about some of the stock responses. Maybe not quite so close to rage induced apoplexy though. :o

However, I do get a little bit narked whenever DLC is mentioned before the game has been released - which appears to be pretty much all the time nowadays. That, to me, smacks of milking the cash cow, someone in the coloured pencil office asking "How can we make people pay more for less? Lock half the game content and call it DLC!"

I'll withhold judgement until it's released and make my usual decision - is the additional content worth it to me? I can't help but be very suspicious and a touch disheartened by this sort of announcement regarding a title I was looking forwards to though.

I honestly don't see how someone mentioning DLC for a game is tantamount to problems with the game.

All it means is, they're planning to expand on the base platform they ship when the game goes gold - DLC is <i>exactly</i> the same as an expansion pack for games of old, when digital distribution wasn't so far reaching.

I think it's incredibly unfair to assume that "half the game" is going to be locked and only unlocked when you give them more money. I cannot think of a game where, without buying DLC, my experience has been hampered. In fact, I put it to you that for the vast majority of popular titles, DLC has been nothing but an expansion, and has not - In fact - just been a locked "half of the game". I know there have been quirks of DLC that've actually just unlocked something included with the game (Resi 5, I think it was, and some multiplayer mode or other being an example).

I think it's incredibly pathetic for the gaming community as a whole being such a bunch of whining little bitches about DLC - Much more so when DLC is announced before the game is released.

Sure, if a game comes out and it turns out that DLC purchases are the only way to play the game, then moan like buggery, but as it stands?

It's just childish to do so.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums