Paul Dini won't write next Arkham Game
 

So, if you have not heard about it, Rocksteady announced that the next Arkham game is going to be a prequel to the series where Joker is alive and well. I honestly think that was a stupid move. It's saying that so a Batman game is only good if Joker is in it? I liked the other villains in the Arkham games and was looking forward to seeing Scarecrow again in a sequel.

Anyway, Mark Hamill already announced his retirement as Joker; he said he would return if they did like an animated movie of The Killing Joke but that's it really.

But now, Paul Dini tweeted that he won't return to write this prequel. He wrote Arkham Asylum, Arkham City, and he wrote Batman: The Animated Series. This guy made me love Batman a whole lot more.

But now that he's not coming back; I don't think I'll like this prequel as much as I did the other Arkham games.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/08/...-for-next-game

Without Hamill and Dini I won't be buying it! I am not familar with video games making pequels. The only way to spike my interest now would be if Dick Grayson is Robin since its set at an earlier time. I guess now I understand Nolan's idea of not wanting to make something for sake of making something just because of the profits involved.

So you play video games solely because of the script and voice acting, and plan to boycott the next Batman game based on that even if the gameplay is really really good? That's interesting.

Unless the entire development team is different, it will still be a good game. Arkham wasn't the first game based on a comic book to have had involvement from an essential creator from the books or other media, it was just the first one that was really fun. Most games "written" by someone from the books are mediocre-to-awful.

I love 'em both but neither Dini nor Hammill are God. The two Arkham games would have been more or less just as good if they were written by anyone else and Joker was voiced by any studio hack. Those were gifts, not an essential part of the experience.

Hamill's Joker and Dini's glorified fanfiction self wouldn't fit with what they're going for in the next Batman game.

The next game is all about the Silver Age and the wackiness that comes from that. I'm excited as all hell for that ish. I am sick and tired of fans that demand Perma-Dark Batman.

This. We're talking about a The Shadow ripp-off dressed in the same threads as Superman and uses a bat as his symbol.

And Hamill isn't the definitive version of the Joker.

I don't like perma-dark Batman and I don't like campy Batman. I like him inbetween which is why I love the New Look through Jason Todd's first appearance. That 20 year stretch is amazing. If we do get the inconic Robin and Iconic Batgirl then I am in. If not I will just have to wait and see. Prequels have the problem of knowing how it all turns out and is just felshing out a backstory and something I am not as eager for as a sequel. Time will tell I suppose.

I think of Mark Hamill as the definitive Joker. I liked his portrayal even if is vocie only better than Romero,Nicholason, or Ledger. Of course its all only one's opinion anyway.

I doubt the game is even a hard-line prequel so much as just a Silver Age Batman story. What story were they really going to tell in a sequel anyhow? The ONE dangling thread was cut off and burned in DLC (Thank christ) and the universe felt tired and played almost immediately after the first game ended.

It would take A TON of leaps in logic to get from Gorilla men and space invaders to the first Arkham Asylum game.

I love Brave and the Bold to death so I hope this game is the silly and goofy in the best ways.

Get Steve Englehart to write it. He takes credit for nearly everything Bat-related anyway.

I'm less excited for that, the "silly" and "goofy". I think some people lay the darkness on too thick with their interpretation, but I think things can go too far the other way, too. Brave and the Bold wasn't awful or even bad, but it was also aimed mostly at kids, so it was fine for what it was trying to do. I don't think that a "goofier" style will work in a more "mainstream" version of Batman, especially not in a video game that's going to follow up on the previous two which so many people felt were so "definitive".

Guess we'll see, though. I'm not a huge fan of say, Sam Kieth's super-dark Batman, or even Frank Miller's, but I'm not much a fan of 60s comics Batman either. I think the character's tone was set well in the 30s and 40s, and perfected in the mid-70s onward.

I'd dig a Neal Adams-inspired Batman universe as the setting for a new game. That'd be sort of a decent balance.

EDIT: From reading more about it, it seems more like a Justice League game with a focus on Batman, rather than a straight-up Batman game. Which is good, there needs to be more JLA games, but it annoys me to no end that it is impossible for DC to market ANYTHING without calling it "Batman (Plus These Other Guys)," as if he's the only character worth anything. Like Lego Batman 2, is there any real reason it wasn't just called "Lego DC Superheroes" or something? Meh.

Amen to both!

I don't really go on IGN much and never looked at their comments section unti just now. Are all posters on there always such whiny c*nts who know right away if something's awful even if it's not coming out for years? Seriously, f*cking internet, man...

Ask Turo. He loooooooves IGN.

The stories in both Arkham games weren't that great so who cares?

Yes, they give me the news I want, the commenters can go **** themselves.

Anyway, I doubt Rocksteady is gonna go for a goofy Batman approach. They're most likely gonna go with what made the other games popular and continue the style they have already established, while taking inspiration from the silver age of comics. They did say the game is going to involve the Justice League, maybe that's what they were referring to? Maybe Batman is gonna team up with different heroes? And if this really is a true prequel, then I hope they're using this game to open up more possibilities for a sequel while still being able to expose other heroes.

Paul Dini says he'd love to do another Arkham game, but it's not in his hands. He never says that he isn't returning at all.

From the Variety article that the game was announced in:

Doesn't necessarily say or mean "Goofy". I didn't see that anywhere.

And for what it's worth, "Silver Age" and "Goofy" aren't interchangeable terms. Comics didn't suddenly become all serious and "dark" overnight in 1985, it just seems that way sometimes. The Silver Age had its share of depth, especially Batman. In fact, I would be surprised if the prequel was more "Adam West" Batman, sounds more like "Neal Adams/Denny O'Neil" Batman to me.

But it's too far away to tell. I just hope Superman's wearing his real costume and not that goofy new one.

Man, I'm really not sure how they can top themselves after two amazing games. I'm guessing Hamill is pretty much recorded his last Joker lines, so I can't see recasting him just to bring him back from the dead.

I'm also sad to admit that I've never even played either Arkham game. I'm thinking about holding out for the Wii U version and see if it's worthwhile.

EDIT:
Okay, this concept actually does intrigue me.

You say they're two amazing games then admit you haven't played either one of them.

Alrighty. What?

What can I say? I am wowed by pretty screencaps, previews, and positive reviews.

You don't have to point out every example of my logical flaws, Stryker. Trust me, I make a bunch of them on a daily basis. ;)

Yeah....don't do that.

One thing I really appreciate about the Batman franchise is that he can be done well as a dark, moody character (post Frank Miller), but the more optimistic Silver Age "team player" interpretation still works just as well in the proper context.

Batman is a versatile character, and I hope he always will be in popular media.

Great? Because that's done already. Batman, Spider-man and Superman are worldwide cultural icons.

To keep this somewhat relevant, the Arkham games though are just ok. I never get the Game Of The Year talk surrounding those games.

Screw Paul Dini, good riddance. He "wrote" Bane in both games like he was in the Batman & Robin movie... that bothered me -- a lot.

New voice actors? No problem. TMNT fandom is the only place I've seen there being this weird god-like reverence for voice actors.

Hi, are you new to the internet?

I think Dini was one of those creative types who always looked at Bane as a gimmick character unworthy of the Batman rogues gallery. I don't think he or Timm & Co ever had much respect for characters born out of the "Doomsday" mold who were invented simply to kill or cripple major heroes.

Regarding the VA thing... I think just about every fandom obsesses over their favorite ones. Didn't fan-pressure get Peter Cullen the role in the Transformers films?

But this is a prequel and other people have voiced the Joker before. So why not bring in someone else like Kevin Michael Richardson or something?

Just because you and Jester worship them, doesn't mean everyone else does.

Andrew, you kind of have a point, but I would argue Batman fans can be the same way regarding Kevon Conroy and Mark Hamill.

I'll be excited for whatever Batman game Rocksteady cooks up at this point. They have earned my trust, overall.

What the hell are you talking about?

Bane in Schumacher's movie was just a muscle bound idiot.

Dini's version and Schumacher's version are different.

That's his point.

There were differences though between the two versions.

You probably hit the nail on the head. So screw him.

From everything I recall reading at the time they signed him pretty much from the gate, fan pressure or no fan pressure.

Probably.

How? Both in the Arkham games and Batman & Robin he's portrayed as a short, skinny man that suddenly inflates to cartoonish proportions when injected with venom (these are the only two universes where this happens)... and his intelligence doesn't rise beyond, "RAHHHH!!!!" or other stupidity. It's literally like Dini based his Arkham Bane off of Batman & Robin Bane and nothing else.

Both are the antithesis of Bane in the comics.

WHat about when Dini wrote Bane in the animated series and he wasn't like he was in that movie? Specifically the episode where Barbara dies. He wasn't a musclebound idiot. he was just a Merc working for Gordon, someone to track down Batman with his particular set of skills--Not the Venom injections, but actual skill.

Dude....we're tame in comparison to some of the people outside this site elsewhere on ye olde Interwebs.

No, not everyone does, but there are people out there that are worse than either me or Ninji.

Seems like a dumb move to do something as big as kill the Joker only to take the story back to where he was still alive. Would it be that hard to have a new main villain? Joker was the big bad of the last two games we really don't need another focused on him. I know he's Batman's main bad guy but when he gets over played he loses a lot of his kick.

I like Hamil's Joker but I don't care if he's the voice. They shouldn't be doing a prequel anyway. I haven't played the DLC yet but they left a good bit of dangling plot threads in AC for a sequel. The biggest being all the Scarecrow stuff. There was also Hush. I think it's time the game evolves to a full open world game with Gotham open to the player. They danced around it in AC by having a bigger out door environment then the first but it's time to deliver.

Here's the thing though. Rocksteady would not be able to pull that off. Even this bigger out door environment you're talking about was nothing more than an empty hubworld for the fetch quests that made up the game.

I know a completely open world Batman game is this giant fantasy for a lot of people but I don't believe Rocksteady is the company you're looking for here.

I just realized that I don't give a f*ck about Bane in any Batman medium. I haven't liked ANY of his incarnations.

They got the bones they just need to do a little more work. Having thugs to fight constantly helps quite a bit to give you things to do during and after you beat the game. I think if it took place in Gotham having random crimes to stop would be the next logical step. Collectibles, riddles, side quests, and so on would add plenty to do for an open world game. I can't complain about fetch quests because every open world game has those. It's kind of a staple. Batman broke it up by having you travel to buildings and do things in there or playing with the forensic mechanics. That would be another thing, have Batman try to solve murders and be more of a detective. Any extra stuff that doesn't just involved punching things is welcome.

Clayface or bust.

Which is why it's even more puzzling why Dini chose to write Bane as his Batman & Robin incarnation in the Arkham games. You take away Bane's brain and machinations then you kill the whole point to the character.

wasn't Bane high on Titan in Arkham and not venom, making him dumber?