Rocksteady is done. Suicide Squad hit WB wallet with a $200M catastrophic loss. Its over.

F*ck around and find out🤷‍♂️

We won the fight, dogshit live service failed miserably, but at the same time, there's a 80% chance that within the next few months, WB will announce the closure of Rocksteady. Over 8 years of development and a loss of over $200M is not something that they'll accept, especially nowadays where everyone is being fired, or, Microsoft style, being completely shut down. Its over. RIP.

I can see one of these c-suite types who might be a gamer and believes in integrity finally speaking up and being like "Hey, guys, how about we just make games and we do our best and if it's good, it will sell" and then everyone just looks at him like he has a dick where his nose should be, then they laugh and say business lingo like "synergy" and "cross-stream revenue sources" and "blah blah blah profit blah blah blah growth" and they don't learn from it.

Anyway, point is, I hope they learn the right lesson, but chances are they will learn the wrong lesson. That being that instead of not squeezing the bruised and bloody teet of an exhausted and drained and disinterested gaming population, they instead will squeeze the teet even harder.

Won't miss them. Still working on my Arkham super critique. Thought the trilogy was a 3/5, but replaying Arkham City to inform my critique corrected the score to 1/2. 2/5 if I use the 5 point scale without decimals.

@hardwenzen said:

...

Damn...139 peak? Game just came out.

Yeah and don't forget the absolutely terrible state that Arkham City was released in. Just completely unplayable for a large number of people.

I won't talk about that. Not my style.

that only on steam no where else players....

@mrbojangles25 said:

@hardwenzen said:

...

Damn...139 peak? Game just came out.

@warm_gun said:

Won't miss them. Still working on my Arkham super critique. Thought the trilogy was a 3/5, but replaying Arkham City to inform my critique corrected the score to 1/2.

Yeah and don't forget the absolutely terrible state that Arkham City was released in. Just completely unplayable for a large number of people.

Good. Someone else will take their place.

Whenever I see these huge financial gambles backfire I feel nothing.

WB is going all in on live service even after this

I could live 10 years off WB for 100 million.... Call me WB. I'll save you cake.

Good. WB deserves a fine of $200 million for trying to bring that abomination to the world.

Rocksteady should probably close down. They made the game after all. After Arkham Knight and this, I don't think they have much more to give.

Was hoping for a TMNT game from Rocksteady, but after their last two games, not so much.

Not sure they should be closed, I mean who's decision was it to make a live service game? Surely it was WB decision. Can't really blame Rocksteady for it being live service.

If Rocksteady is not allowed to go back to what they are good at and their future would be live service trash, then might as well close them down as they are already dead to me. It's sad to see how the mighty have fallen.

All they had to do was make another Arkham game, but WB makes shit so complicated. This game was a AAA monstrosity that did... not... pay... off. It's always tough to see beloved devs flounder over their parent companies' horrible decisions

@BenjaminBanklin: ANOTHER Arkham game? You know Batman isn't just Arkham Asylum, right? What are we talking about here, ANOTHER area of the city evacuated and locked down for prisoners? How incompetent is the mayor? Or is it administration after administration of idiots?

Eh, just a drop in the bucket for'em. ;o

Nothing ventured nothing gained. lol :P

Eight years is sooo long. Imagine working on something for that time and when it comes out it’s garbage. Like how do regroup?

The entire concept was awful, so it’s not like they didn’t know. Must be pretty rough to motivat yourself to go to work on monday morning 😞

Game flops, doesn't flop, studio closes, game becoming live service 🤷‍♂️

If there was a shortage in games I would care about their fate but there are so many freaking games on the market as is.

Arkham is the franchise name for Warners' major games starring Batman, it doesn't literally have to be tied to Arkham Asylum, it's just Batman's rogues gallery all end up there. It's a legacy title if anything. Better than trying to force Suicide Squad into the lexicon again. Nothing about that game was appealing to anyone

@BenjaminBanklin: If it's called Arkham, then it has to be about Arkham Asylum and the aftermath, and if WB can't separate the name from the hugely popular Batman IP in a new game, then they are even dumber and more spineless than suspected.

It's really frustrating to watch. Like, two solid developers make two DC live-service games that bomb, an unproven developer makes a single-player Harry Potter game with no DLC that OUTSELLS COD; and these big-brain overpaid millionaires sit around in their super-yachts saying, "imagine how much money we would have made if that Harry Potter game had been live-service".

How does one fail so far upwards like this? How does it fucking happen?

Living large I take it, on a 100 mill you could live comfortably for your entire life.

Well, considering they blew 200 over ten I thought I'd give them a discount.

this is clearly because of Game Pass and the ABK deal..

thanks Phil..

Because this is what happens when you have a gaming industry ran by people who know nothing about games. These people do nothing but chase charts and trends and all they can see is the potential for revenue. Everybody wants the next Fortnite but the reality is for every Fortnite there's dozens of failures and they will gladly sacrifice any studio to get the next live service hit.