I would have to say that the Spider Man PS game has been about the best superhero game (based off an actual superhero) I''ve ever played.

quote: Original post by fisheyel83l
Freedom Force was good

I liked it, but it introduced more secondary characters too early in the game, making your personal character feel less important. I think a Superhero game where you control ONLY ONE CHARACTER would be great.

I''ve been postponing responding in this thread for about three days now. But I guess I might as well speak my piece.

quote: Original post by fisheyel83l
...what would otherwise be a mindless, liscensed beat-em-up.

...

Some of my ideas: A Batman game where detective work, and not combat, is the primary focus.

I''m trying to think of a game where detective work played a major part and worked well... Mm, nope. What you end up with is a puzzle game, which might be entertaining, but only if executed properly - which also holds for beat-''em-ups. The problem with superhero games is not the genre, but the imagination put into realizing them. Usually, they are product tie-ins released to capitalize on the habitual frenzy associated with a motion picture release (Superman: Shadown of Apocalypse and the Maximum Carnage releases are notable exceptions to this trend). The reality is that most of Batman''s detective work is abstracted away, even in the comics. What we see instead are action sequences and dramatic encounters - revelations of diabolical plans, elaborate attempts to kill Bats and/or Boy Wonder, genealogy lessons - might as well be a soap opera.

I was recently perusing user comments about Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman on IMDB and I was surprised at the number of people moaning that the series "degenerated" and there wasn''t enough of Superman or his special powers. It wasn''t a Saturday morning kids show; it was a good attempt at an adult treatment of this extraordinary individual''s life (yes, there were enough campy sequences, but it was pretty intelligent overall). Superheroes have always been prototypical characters through whom human nature could be explored and commented on. Spiderman - the famous tagline, "with great power comes great responsibility"; X-Men - difference, diversity and discrimination; Superman - ideals, nobility, honor (though the comics consistently made him quite a jackass as far as his treatment of Lois Lane); Hulk - what happens when people stop holding in their frustrations and let them all out? Those characters are the most popular not just because they have "teh k3wl n3w p0wars!" but because their themes resonate with people. How do you reflect that in a video game?

There haven''t been many games that plumb the depths of human emotion and response, partly because we haven''t developed the techniques for doing so, partly because of the economic model of the industry and the low likelihood of a publisher taking a chance with something like that, and mostly because there are no input and feedback devices to allow the game developer "steer" the gamer - break down the "fourth wall" of the screen and suck him into the experience. TV and film don''t have this problem because the fundamental perspective is that of unobserved observer; games place you at the center of the action, so dissociative elements are that much more jarring IMO.

I might as well insert this coda here: games that do emphasize an emotionally intense experience in their stories actually create a role duality for the gamer - observer and observed. Every cutscene brings you out of the driver''s seat and into the audience, which is rewarding but doesn''t create the tight continuum under which involved stories really thrive.

quote: You, as Batman, would patroll Gotham City''s skyline at night, scouting for signs of crime, tailing the low-level criminals, or beating info out of them. Then you''d compile the clues and prevent a crime that''s unfolding in real-time. Combat, at least against common thugs, is swift and easy, but gunshots are fatal, requiring the use of batarangs and stealth techniques. That''s the Batman of the comics in action. MGS-style, to an extent.

It''s an intriguing idea. I''d probably give it a whirl. Gunshots can''t be instantaneously fatal, though, unless the shooting process was slow enough to give even the slowest player plenty of reaction time. They''re not immediately fatal in MGS for a reason.

Before you point out the seeming disparity in enthusiasm before and after that comment, note that MGS isn''t a detective game - it''s a tactical espionage and stealth game. The detective-ing is generally handled via cutscenes, and doing the same with Batman isn''t a bad idea. Bats tends to either call Alfred, talk to Robin (if you choose to include him in your game) or pass data to the Batcomputer for analysis.

quote: A Spiderman game: Introduce Peter Parker''s career and home-life. Make him balance the weight of a secret identity, by allowing him to slip in and out of his costume at any time.

The problem I have with this is that a single slip of the fingers could completely blow the game for the player. Also, if you''re a fan of the Spiderman comic books, you''ll know that Peter Parker''s home life is rather on the boring side. He''s either struggling to pay rent, trying to satisfy J. J. Jameson or torn over MJ. Not a whole lot of gameplay potential there, unless you''re a fan of The Sims...

quote: What if one of the goals of the game was to maintain the secret identity? I think I''d be interesting to have Parker walking around in a city full of citizens, taking on assignments from the Bugle, interacting with people, etc. Then, when a crime happens to go down, the player has to duck away (which could be part of the challenge) and reappear as Spiderman, whereupon he''d perform the role he always plays in videogames.

Here''s another problem: any game that has radically different play modes as a staple tends to be problematic. Besides, Peter doesn''t even have friends (Harry''s dead, Flash is a non-factor and MJ''s his wife), so what''s he going to be doing as himself (okay, now that he''s married that''s another question entirely...)

Superhero games as more than action games are difficult to pull off because there''s not a whole lot of interesting material outside the superhero persona, and that persona''s primary activity is kicking ass. There''s no exception. Name a superhero who isn''t generally slugging it out with this or that individual and I''ll point out a non-superhero to you.

I think there''s more detective work in the tv shows of batman. Turns out comics when translated to tv aren''t that long.


as to other points, contrast and compare(on your own)

Lois and Lane: The New Adventures of Superman(good show)
and
Superman (the cartoon, the one usually played alongside batman cartoon on cartoon network, both good shows)

quote: Original post by Anonymous Poster
I think there''s more detective work in the tv shows of batman. Turns out comics when translated to tv aren''t that long.

Yep. The written form is always longer that the spoken or seen in terms of time to consume. Ever see the graphic novel for Batman Returns? You could finish it in a day, but it took some heavy determination to do so.

quote: Lois and Lane: The New Adventures of Superman(good show)

Uh, Lois and Clark, perhaps? I''m off to watch episodes 7 and 8, taped this morning... right after I go get new tapes for 9 and 10 tomorrow - and the remaining 78.

I think there hasn''t been too many superhero games because they don''t make good Wolfenstein 3D clones. They take place in crowded New York City instead of a deserted castle/outpost, there''s a lot of jumping, swinging or flying and melee combat sucks in first person. We''ll probably see a lot more now that every game is a 3rd person platformer.

quote: Original post by Anonymous Poster
I think there''s more detective work in the tv shows of batman. Turns out comics when translated to tv aren''t that long.

Well, those were really supposed to be two different points, forgot to hit enter.

quote: Lois and Lane: The New Adventures of Superman(good show)

lol, thanks for catching

I always imagined the "detective work" would be along the lines of tailing criminals, planting and monitoring microphone bugs, stuff like that. Turning a Batman game into a puzzle game would contradict the point of this thread. Rather, the player should be able to play out a scenario similar to the following:

Batman''s up on the rooftops, patrolling the city. He hears some gunshots and immediately leaps into action, soaring from building to building through a combination of acrobatics and his trademark gadgets. He perches himself on top of a building near the source of the gunshots, and observes some criminals escaping from a bank with bags of cash in hand. At this point, the player could choose to swoop down and stop the criminals, or tail them and find out what happens next. If the player chooses to tail the bandits, he might be able to observe the drop-off and pick up some clues about the operation (who''s in charge, what the money''s for, etc.). If the player is clever, he could plant some bugs, tail some more guys, apprehend and question some criminals, and eventually intecept the ringleader.

This kind of a structure would introduce climaxes into the game, and give the player a real sense of achievement. It would be cool if all of Batman''s enemies were loose in the city, each with his own agenda. Two-face could be looting banks to fund the import of weapons into Gotham, Joker could be scheming to kidnap Inspector Gordon, etc. If all these things are at work behind the scenes, then playing as Batman becomes a much greater responsibility. The goal of the game could be to round up all the villians. But instead of doing it one mission at a time, the player is thrust into a living, breathing Gotham City, where the action is waiting to unfold.

quote: Original post by fisheyel83l
I always imagined the "detective work" would be along the lines of tailing criminals, planting and monitoring microphone bugs, stuff like that.

And that''s supposed to be entertaining? The fact that you, personally, may want to viscerally live out a Batman fantasy - I know I''ve been through that phase - doesn''t mean that a literal translation of the character''s myth would make a good video game. Monitoring microphone bugs and tailing criminals involves too much of the routine, and routine is booooooring!

quote: Batman''s up on the rooftops, patrolling the city. He hears some gunshots and immediately leaps into action, soaring from building to building through a combination of acrobatics and his trademark gadgets.

Sounds interesting, except... How does he determine which direction the gunshot came from? The player needs to invest in a 3d surround sound setup and listen attentively? Or do you simply place a nice big Bat-arrow to point the way - uh-oh, abstraction.

Acrobatics and trademark gadgets, probably requiring deft manipulation of triggers and buttons to pull off successfully, all just to get to the scene of an event - not even necessarily a crime! I can see the gamers now: "Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we..."

quote: He perches himself on top of a building near the source of the gunshots, and observes some criminals escaping from a bank with bags of cash in hand. At this point, the player could choose to swoop down and stop the criminals, or tail them and find out what happens next. If the player chooses to tail the bandits, he might be able to observe the drop-off and pick up some clues about the operation (who''s in charge, what the money''s for, etc.).

But why go to all the work? If Batman tails every single crime he observes, he''s likely to be mired in irrelevance. In the comics, Batman doesn''t go after every incident he''s aware of. He leaves some routine stuff to cops. What he does is intervene in situations he is present at or close to, and tie the criminals up with a note for the cops. He leaves routine processing of criminals to the police - it''s their job.

For significant crimes, he also doesn''t generate initial leads by himself very often. What happens instead is that the police do their job, and at any point where they think this may be larger or more complex than their officers are trained to handle - maniacal, criminally insane elements, escapees from Arkham Asylum - they fire up the Batsignal (you do remember the Batsignal, don''t you?) and brief Bats on the 4-1-1 and let him do some snooping of his own.

quote: This kind of a structure would introduce climaxes into the game, and give the player a real sense of achievement. It would be cool if all of Batman''s enemies were loose in the city, each with his own agenda. Two-face could be looting banks to fund the import of weapons into Gotham, Joker could be scheming to kidnap Inspector Gordon, etc. If all these things are at work behind the scenes, then playing as Batman becomes a much greater responsibility. The goal of the game could be to round up all the villians. But instead of doing it one mission at a time, the player is thrust into a living, breathing Gotham City, where the action is waiting to unfold.

I think it''s a worthwhile idea, but I think you need to streamline it a lot. There''s too much redundancy in your current pitch; consider having Batman patrol sections of the city and intervene in situations, hand them over to the cops and return to the rooftops. If called by the Commish, he hops to PD HQ (great place for a cutscene - manually requiring the gamer to navigate their in unnecessary and a time waster). Presented with evidence - or alterted by the Batcomputer to any anomalies it has deduced from analysis of police crime reports and the like - he then begins to formulate a hypothesis and investigate it.

Now that is a more accurate representation of Batman, while remaining a moderately interesting game to play. I wouldn''t play it, of course; I don''t have the time to sit through the "development" of the plot. I''m only interested in games that I can play for 15 minutes or 3 hours in a sitting, as I choose.