For a pop culture icon that’s seen success in a multitude of media forms, Batman’s history with video games has been relatively hit or miss (with an emphasis on the miss). In fact, until 2009 saw the release of “Batman: Arkham Asylum,” Batman video games have almost never been critically applauded.
Luckily, U.K.-based game developer Rocksteady was more than up to the challenge of reinventing Batman for the modern gaming age. With the release of “Arkham Asylum,” Rocksteady had forever raised the bar of not only what superhero games should be, but also what adventure games in general should strive to be. The game proved to be a modern gem of storytelling, presentation and gameplay by both implementing smart design choices and squeezing the most possible out of the production budget.
So now, two years after the release of the groundbreaking “Arkham Asylum,” Rocksteady must face the immense pressure created by the hype for their follow-up game, “Batman: Arkham City.” Was Rocksteady able to revolutionize the Batman franchise once again by introducing open world gameplay? Or does “Arkham City” simply rehash everything that was successful from “Arkham Asylum”?
In terms of story and plot, “Arkham City” is refreshingly darker than “Arkham Asylum”’s “poison the water supply” run-around. The basic premise takes place almost immediately after the events of “Arkham Asylum,” when Mayor Quincy Adams has authorized the sectioning off of the Gotham slums to turn them into a giant prison, aptly named Arkham City. Mayor Adams, for reasons explained later in the game, places Dr. Hugo Strange in charge of the whole operation, and since Dr. Strange is the only villain who knows that Bruce Wayne is really Batman, Mr. Wayne begins campaigning to shut Arkham City down. But, thanks to a series of inexplicable events (and the need for plot progression), Bruce Wayne is arrested and thrown into Arkham City with the rest of the inmates. It’s then his mission to find out how and why everything has gone to shit within the walls of Arkham.
Now, to go any further into the plot of the game would be to teeter on spoilers, so I’ll just move ahead into how the story is told throughout the game. “Arkham City” is by far one of the most satisfyingly cinematic games to date. There are moments within the game (mainly the introduction, climax and resolution) where the line between video game and film is wiped completely off the board. This is only helped by the brilliant combination of a powerful graphics engine and an art design team that is able to gracefully walk the line between realistic grit and fantastical characters. Nothing looks, or sounds, for that matter, out of place in this world.
As for gameplay, well, it’s basically the same as in “Arkham Asylum,” but that’s not necessarily a bad thing. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. Why change gameplay mechanics that are nearly perfect?
Now, that’s not to say that everything is exactly the same, but the main two modes of the game, stealth and combat, remain relatively unchanged. The fighting now feels more refined and even more responsive than the first game (if that’s even possible), and there’s also a wealth of new gadgets to play around with during combat. Stealth, however, remains largely similar to “Arkham Asylum”’s stealth sections, but again, that’s not really a problem.
What is new to “Arkham City” is Batman’s ability to glide. Gliding off rooftops and maneuvering around buildings really keeps the game’s plot moving at a brisk pace, and this is a huge improvement over “Arkham Asylum.” Whereas in “Asylum” you had to walk or jog around the building in order to get from point to point, “City” allows you to fly over obstacles and even dive-bomb in order to maintain altitude. This keeps the whole game feeling fast paced, and that’s good for a game that’s all about beating the clock.
The only real shortcomings this game has are with the villains or, more accurately, their character development. The writers of this game seemed more interested in doing their fans a service than putting together a completely cohesive story, and because of this, many villains are thrown into the mix as nothing more than side missions. Even the main villains of Batman don’t get enough screentime to make their presence last. With the exception of the Joker (whom Mark Hamill voices fucking brilliantly as always), the villains are all forgettable in their roles. None of them feel very threatening, and they mostly feel shoehorned into the game in order to appeal to Batman fanboys.
Luckily, these are just a few little quips I had with the game, and because the writers got so much right with “Arkham City,” it’s easy to overlook what they got wrong. Nothing in this game is broken, which is exactly why it’s so much fun to play. Even after you beat the main story there are plenty of side missions and collectibles/unlockables to keep you busy, not to mention the potential for downloadable content down the road.
All in all, “Batman: Arkham City” is a wonderfully well-rounded action/adventure game that tops its predecessor in nearly every way. If you’re a fan of anything Batman, or even anything remotely entertaining, then you owe it to yourself to pick up a copy of “Batman: Arkham City.”