The Arkham games set the standard for Superhero games and created our expectations for narrative and mechanics. The design directive was to create gameplay that makes the player feel like the titular characters.
Arkham’s legacy was further cemented by two factors. One, it stayed spiritually true to the comics from which it was inspired. And two, the game featured legendary voice actors from the celebrated show, Batman: The Animated Series. This combination coupled with the gameplay created an expectation that has now become the curse that haunts Rocksteady’s Suicide Squad game.
Where the Arkham games were narrative-heavy combat games with many ‘Batman’ features, Suicide Squad is a 3rd-person, live-service, multiplayer looter-shooter. This massive deviation from what everyone knew and loved is the reason why this game will probably never succeed to the point that it could.
But, as a result, it won’t fail as much as it could have either.
Suicide Squad’s Performance Thus Far
It has been over two weeks since this title was released, and we are finally beginning to see review scores for this game. The title was heavily delayed by the fact that the press wasn’t given access codes before release, a potential result of the generally unfavorable reaction to the preview last year.
After the release, critic reviews have been slightly more forgiving as every one of the reviewers has been able to spend more time with the game. However, on average, all of those reviews, from critics and players alike, are still overwhelmingly “meh”.
This game’s overall User Score (from Metacritic) has been a measly 3.8/10. But on Steam, it has an average rating of 4/5. Despite that and an approximate sale of 90k on the platform, the number of active players over the past week has been really low. A pretty damning sign.
This is startling for a game made by a studio like Rocksteady. The reasons for this lackluster performance sit within the reviews and streaming videos. What has me more concerned is that the fans weren’t shy about their feedback or concerns about gameplay videos or announcements, yet, the studio stayed the course. I can’t help but wonder why.
But, before we consider that, we need to look at what the game is at this moment.
Breaking Down The Reviews
Heads up, I haven’t played this game. As a fan of the Arkham games, I couldn’t find it in my heart to do so.
But morbid curiosity has had me looking at every stream, review and playthrough that I could. I kept hoping to find a reason to try this game, to see something different from what concerned me in the preview videos released by Warner Brothers. I haven’t yet, and I am heartbroken about it because every review has stated that this game has some truly good moments.
As expected of Rocksteady, the art and writing are spectacular. Every cutscene is beautifully rendered, with excellent performances from the cast of voice actors. That being said, everyone seemed torn about the story, disappointed by some of the narrative and character decisions the team made, as well as the ending.
This is a game, and while the narrative is important to me, the gameplay is what makes the title endure. This is where it gets a lot shakier and more subjective. Fans of the grind didn’t mind that element of the game even though they did admit that this game’s mission system is repetitive and subpar at best. Even worse, it doesn’t feel like these missions are impacting the game’s enemy in any way.
This defeats the game’s attempt to set up its live service aspect. No one, absolutely no one in the world likes doing something that feels like busy work. A lot of the reviewers and users said that while they might come out to check the new content for Season 1, they have no interest in staying in the game past the campaign.
Kill The Justice League has been slammed for having very shallow gameplay despite doing some objectively brilliant things. Reviewers say that these elements are exciting but not developed in any meaningful way.
For instance, the traversal system is brilliant and features unique elements for each character. Also, despite a similar combat system, the guns and skill tree can be built out to have some unique elements based on character skills. But every boss fight plays out the same way, despite the god-like potential of the Justice League. They are bullet sponges that have to be sniped at, taking away the ability to apply those cool traversal mechanics and gunplay features in a fight that matters.
Similarly, most of your upgrades can take place in the campaign itself, making it unnecessary to keep grinding through repetitive annoying missions after. One reviewer stated that it was the first time in their life that they were excited for a, still horrible, post-campaign escort mission. And that’s just because it was something different from the 4-5 recycled missions.
There are a lot more details to cover, mostly negative. But I am going to summarize it with the one quote from Zanny that made me do a spit take.
“This game does a great job at making me want to play another game.”
Live Service Shouldn’t Be A Thing
Sure, it can be said that a lot of this feedback can drive back to the expectations from the Arkham games. But when you go through all the reviews, you can quickly spot a larger theme.
Live Service isn’t something gamers want.
It had its moment, with Destiny and Fortnite, but that genre has fallen out of favor. Everyone now sees it for what it is- a way for the studios to keep beating a dead horse for more money. Especially since all of this often comes at the cost of gameplay and results in too much repetition. After a certain point, it is no longer fun.
We seem to see this here. This game doesn’t feel like a Rocksteady game. The differences in genre and feel are too jarring, and the game feels like the reins are being held by someone else. It feels like a Warner Brother corporate scheme that was forced on Rocksteady, the probable reason why the founders left the studio in 2022.
By forcing this path, the game fails those few shining moments that could have made it legendary. The excellent writing is destroyed by a plot setup that can carry over the long term. It has led to a conflict, that even after 9 years of development, has resulted in a game-world (the city of Metropolis) that is gorgeous but so empty.
This conflict, of what the game could have been (what the developers may have intended) and where it is now, has led to all the problems that plague all the other live service titles. There is nothing new here, nothing innovative, even though there is the potential for it.
The State Of The Market
The worst part of this conversation is that according to Griffin Gaming Partners, 65% of studios are working on a game with live service elements. This seems to be the current solution preferred by the market to combat the rising cost of game development.
Fortnite or The Finals, without an intense storyline, work better as live-service titles because the concept supports and allows for repetitive gameplay. But so far, it doesn’t seem like the studios can create well-designed, narrative-heavy, impactful games while balancing live service requirements.
This is because narratives have to have an end, which by its nature goes against the live service requirement. The challenge here would be to find a viable reason for the story to not end without the player feeling like they wasted their time. Something Suicide Squad failed at. Even a successful example of a narrative-heavy title like Destiny 2 was barely able to work, requiring a lot of rebalancing and rework through every season.
Not every title can or should be made for the live service format. The designer in me hopes that it is possible to find that balance, because we have to find a way to compensate for the cost of game development. However, the gamer in me doesn’t want a live service game. I have already paid enough for my game.
Considering The Consequences
I believe Suicide Squad, like all of the other live service titles, has failed at finding that balance. Two weeks after its launch, I am worried about what this will mean for Rocksteady and its roster of amazing developers. I hope this doesn’t end up costing the studio too much or result in them shuttering. I wish I could see what the original intentions were for this game. I am sure it would have been magnificent.
If studios are forced to keep turning all of their games into live service titles, we will lose the foundational element that makes gaming art. The elements of gameplay and story that stay with us and shake us.
Studios need to be able to do what would be best for their game and for the gamer rather than caving to the false lure of continuous income. We need different ideas and approaches to help offset development cost instead of forcing games into a model that clearly doesn’t work.
