New Batman: Arkham game this year

News Aaron Birch 12 Feb 2013 - 17:45

The Batman: Arkham series may return this year, according to recent Time Warner investor call…

With a slew of possible names already rumoured (Next Batman: Arkham game named?) and, more importantly, massive critical and commercial success behind it, it’s certainly no surprise that another Arkham game is on the way, but it appears that it could be as soon as this year.

According to a transcript of a Time Warner investor call, the next Arkham title may well be released within 2013.

In the call, John K. Martin, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Administrative Officer of Time Warner said “...we also have a strong games release this year, which will include the next release in the Batman Arkham franchise. So all in all, we expect Warners to post another very strong year in 2013. And with a little luck, the year should be as good or maybe even a little bit better than 2012.”

There’s also the possibility that Rocksteady won’t be at the helm. VG247 is reporting that, according to its own sources, the original developer won’t be undertaking the next game. This is surely cause for concern, and always is when an original developer lets go of a great IP, but we’ll have to see what shakes out of the tree in time.

The investor call dating could also mean that the next Arkham game will be out in the next financial year too, so a 2014 release is still possible. More news as we get it.

Time Warner investor call transcript


Follow Den Of Geek on Twitter right here. And be our Facebook chum here.

Disqus - noscript

The series has just got better every time. It's the best super hero series ever for me, it is the only one which has really realised the character's potential bar Spider Man 2 and the combat is far superior in it. Hope the next one carries on the fine tradition.

If Rocksteady isn't developing it then I'm not playing it...

My GF and I must be the only people that loved Arkham Asylum but thought Arkham City was a bit rubbish. The attempt at open world didn't work - the place felt cramped and the constant respawning was annoying - and the storyline was nuts, cramming in as many characters as they could without any thought as to whether it made much sense...Then there was the fact that some missions could only be done once you'd received equipment at the end of the game, and some that had to be done when the main quest was still active, but they didn't tell you which was which...

Arkham City is incredibly frustrating. I got stuck with one these preposterous combo challenges and was unable to go any further in the game. Never went back.

yes they did. If you looked on at the map and it would give you the option of looking at your side missions, which clearly mean are side missions not main missions. It also sounds as though you rushed through the game as well and didn't level up which would of given you access to some equipment early, The respawning isn't constant only. It only occurs if you go from one side of the map to the other. or enter and exit a building but then you could just beat the people up quickly and get more xp but as you rushed the game you probably didn't notice

I didn't think 'City was rubbish by any stretch, but I definitely preferred 'Asylum. The plot flowed much better, and the characters that mattered got a proper look in. 'City cast aside Poison Ivy and Harley Quinn (excusing the DLC), and even Killer Croc. I accepted Scarecrow's absence, particularly given the exciting hints about him in 'City suggesting a return at some point.

But yes, Asylum felt like a proper event of a game. 'City, though brilliant felt like it was plundering through the archives too much to deliver such a powerful punch of a story.

We only rushed in the sense that we knew there'd be a free roam mode at the end and wanted to get the main story out of the way first, and then do the rest at our leisure.

Sponsored Links