History of Batman Video Games: Why Preparation is Key

     As far as I have known video games, I have never seen a video game that was "a mistake" and a success at the same time. Video games, unlike art, cannot be critically acclaimed if there is no effort involved. I am sorry to say, but all Duchamp did was stick a toilet in some plaster and called it art. It may have transformed the art world as we know it, but a game cannot do the same thing. You cannot stick a character in an open world with nothing to do and call it a "self-reflecting" video game. It's just plain boring. Allocating controls to random buttons on a controller isn't a Pollack, it's just an absurd mess. Video games are limited in their creativity because they must work on a logical level. Part of the art of a video game is in the way it flows and how intuitive it can be. The variability seems limited to the user input, story, the graphics, the combat and the genres that the game claims to be. Fortunately, this is enough to give video games a near infinite amount of "creativity work room."

    So if games can't be mistakes and good, then how do games transcend genres and transform the way games are played? There are many parts, but one thing I am totally sure of is this: Preparation is key. I am sure many people have heard of the word "shovelware." These are filler games that seems to invade store shelves like how locusts eat up crops. These video games rarely have anything innovative and rarely go through much of a planning process. Most of the games are directed toward kids who, apparently, do not have the minds to determine what is good or bad. Developers found that kids will just go ahead and play a game that has their favorite Disney/Nickelodeon character in it rather than enjoying a polished product. As Though I hate there way of thinking, it's true. These games may be down right horrible to play as an avid gamer, but are bought in just enough amounts to be profitable. As long as we keep having kids who watched Nickelodeon obsessively, we will have these games.

    So let's take an example of a license that has been hurt, in my opinion, continuously through its horrible video games yet has been saved through the careful, meticulous planning of one developer (Rocksteady). It's also a kid favorite as well. Many of you know who I am talking about. Yeah, that's right: Batman. Probably my favorite super hero of all time.

So angry from all the bad games...

   

       I have played many of the video games that had the nerve to call themselves Batman games. I hated just about every single game that came out save a few (which I will go through first). I am not going to go in chronological order of release. Instead I'll just go through the way I played them.

+EXHIBIT A: BATMAN (NES)

Is Batman purple? Really? Purple?

     This game isn't bad. It's actually pretty good for a Nintendo game. But as someone who played every Mega-man game from 1-6 twice, experiencing platforming at it's finest, I just can't let the small problems of this game go. Castlevania has the same style of jumping and hitting that this game does, but it did it 10x better. Batman's game suffers from the TMNT jumping constriction. The platforms are spaced just far away from each other that you have leap right at the edge to make it to the next ledge. It's ridiculous. They did do one thing right, in my opinion, they got down the dreary, dark tone of the post-Frank Miller batman.

      Even for a Nintendo games, you have to get down every gameplay mechanic down to a science. Challenge should never be equal to struggling with user input. It should be about the reflexes of the player. There is one more game that was actually an amazing game in terms of using a license to it's fullest potential.

+EXHIBIT B: BATMAN RETURNS (SNES)

 

Batman doing what he does best: Saving the ladies and beating up Big Head Mode Characters

  I was about 4 when this game came out. My brother got it for his birthday and it costed our family 70 big ones. The whole day we just played this game and loved every minute of it. I remember having to use all the test tubes to get through a level and barely made it if ever. Apparently my brother traded it with one of his friends for Super Mario All-Stars (50 dollar game) and then his friend lost Batman Returns and I cried and cried. I missed the variety in gameplay, where you were driving and fighting and swinging and everything was merry. It was a very short game, unfortunately, which was its biggest drawback. That and how Catwoman was so damn fast!

It's No Use--the ice cream truck got away...

Not what you'd call a great first date

      Batman Returns, though, wasn't revolutionary. But it was done right. And since I was 4, it was enough for me to love everything about that game (my family rarely bought video games for us). It was smooth, no hiccups, and it was right in every way. The game was great because it never got boring. It never suffered the repetitiveness of levels and enemies. They had just enough variety to keep you going. The problem was that it was over too fast. It's not its fault though, it's based on a movie- what can you do? This was one of  the first Batman games I had ever played and sadly set me up for all the failures that came afterward.

      Let's now take a trip down Hell's lane as we explore why Batman's reputation as a video game character has been tarnished, stepped on, and pooped on.

-EXHIBIT C & D: BATMAN FOREVER (SNES) AND BATMAN & ROBIN (PSX)

Watch me dance, Robin!

     These two games combined should never have existed. They were probably the sole two reasons why I thought every Batman game succeeding these would be a disaster. Batman Forever dealt you the sucker punch in 1996 and then Batman & Robin came into to knock you out two years later. There was no salvation, your thumbs would beat you up every night for the torture you put them through. Yes, it was that bad. It's funny because I wasn't expecting too much since both of the movies were so far out there in terms of staying true to Batman's character. I never thought the game was going to be worse than the movie, but it was. 

     Batman Forever utilized motion-capture animation (like Mortal Kombat) instead of sprite based animation. This made the game ugly as well...you know. Hit detection was horrible and the game was just too disgusting to look at. The sad thing was that the game was worse in every aspect than its predecessor Batman Returns. How can anyone do that? I don't know, but Acclaim sure did.

Seriously, what the hell is a "Bat-Bola?"

     Next up, we have Batman and Robin. There is no question that this is quite possibly one of the worst Batman game of the 20th century. Sure it had the variety of Batman Returns and even involved the revolutionary 3-D gameplay that was implemented at the time. But it was a far cry from anything decent. I think the picture below describes the entire game in a nutshell. 'Nuff said.

Batman Fat Face

-EXHIBIT E: BATMAN DARK TOMORROW (GCN)

     Well, this is a masterpiece if nothing else. This is a modern example of to not judge a book by its cover. Look at the trailer.It's a pretty nice. But then why are the reviews like this? And this? And the list goes on and on...

       This game was horrible. It was funny, I remember reading that the game was delayed and delayed and developers would not divulge as to why the release of the game was being pushed back. My guess is that the people at Kemco just didn't want to let anyone see the hideous monstrosity that was lurking in their laboratories. My other guess is that they were trying to make the graphics so good that the people would buy the game based solely on looks. I would say it was probably one of the biggest sirens of video gaming. It looked so promising, the videos looked amazing (cut scene or not), but alas, the gaming just plainly sucked. The biggest problem with all the critics was the camera which tried to pull a fixed Resident Evil style camera position. It failed because the flow of running from room to room just didn't make sense. If you held the left button you would run into the room to the left. In the next room, the directions were all switched meaning that you might actually re-enter the previous room you were in. The second big problem was that the fighting was horrible. The gadgets were mainly useless and handcuffing every single enemy just got tiring.

      Any who...the reviews I posted should sum up the game very well. Let's move to the last case against the Batman franchise and move to the conclusion.

Ugh...for Batman, it's going to be a very dark tomorrow...

 -EXHIBIT F: BATMAN BEGINS (GCN)

      Let's go back to Batman Returns. The movie was maybe not good to some but good to others. The game itself was arguably a great game. Konami did a great job in making a tight knit, responsive, fun game. 

        Now, take a look at Batman Begins. One of the biggest blockbusters of the century. Before Dark Knight, it was the best Batman movie to date. Very few people gave the movie a bad review (maybe complaining about Christian Bales dog-like Batman voice). But the writing was awesome, the fights were great, and the detective work was sweet. The dark tone really set everything in the right pace and actually followed a decent comic book (Batman: Year One). I loved it, personally and have watched in numerous times. 

       The video game? Nooooot so much...I probably wouldn't take the game from you even if you offered it to me for free. It just wasn't a good game. It was too short, it was too static and it was too linear. Sure, it was a "stealth" game, but in the world of splinter cells, you need to have a stealth game with options. Batman presents none. And since when does Batman double jump? Out of all the super heroes, Batman is the last man to double jump. 

The man played this game and is begging Batman to throw him in the blaze

 CONCLUSION

       So why did I just go through a history of Batman games for you? I wanted to show you how bad games can get when developers try to cash in on a licenses and movie tie-ins without living up to the superhero's name. Batman is an exception man who will probably be written down in history along with our founding fathers. His games should make proud, not sad or angry. After all these "almosts" and "so close's" what do we have to show for it? 

Thank God.

         After years and years of patiently waiting for a game worthy of Batman's name, a novice developer outclasses all the big shots! Rocksteady had everything to prove but nothing to lose. They went for the whole she bang. Right from the get-go, the tone is set with Batman and the Joker in the car together. The dialogue is perfect and voice acting is superb. The gameplay is without a doubt fluid and deep. Stringing combos was a thrill. The stealth parts gave you the "whatever way you want" approach as well. Batman's gadgets were never phoned in. The game was gorgeous (except for the eye popping of the NPCs). One of the best things about the game? There was an amazing amount of re-playability! Except for the Animated Series video games, no other Batman video game got a sequel...I wonder why? This one is. Arkham City is going to be one of the best games in the 2011 years because the developer knows what to do. Take their system and build on it with not only more, but with more complexity. Now you can use all the gadgets in battle. There will be multiplayer. You bring in a more open world for Batman to fly around. Most of all, you fix the problems that hurt the last video game you made. It's not rocket science, but many developers overlook this fact. 

       There are many video games that had great preparation and planning and, as a result, did very well in sales and in reviews. God of War, Uncharted, and Halo are to name a few. It's not just the name, these developers are quite talented and know what makes a good video game. Anyway adios!

Forgive me for my wrongs,

     Suleyman Kazmi 

Batman, are you trying to make me play this game or seduce me?