• Language
  • £
  • Login

Hill: Arkham City multiplayer would’ve taken away from campaign

Rocksteady co-founder Sefton Hill’s has said adding multiplayer to Batman: Arkham City would have ruined the single player experience, hence the reason not to include one.

Speaking in a recent interview with CVG, Hill said that sometimes gameplay and story is more important than the ability to play online.

“We looked when we were making the game at what’s important for the game… what’s really important for the story we wanted to tell. And the thing we wanted to do, the thing that got us really excited was taking Batman in to this huge district of Gotham City and telling that story.

“So really that’s the filter by which we looked at what we were going to do. We looked at multiplayer and said, ‘is that essential to tell that story? It’s not’.”

Hill did admit that adding multiplayer would have been an easy decision to make, however he feels that if the studio did this then the game’s Gotham City would have suffered and the multiplayer would have been “average.”

“I think it would’ve looked good on the box but at the end of the day as a studio we’re all about gameplay, we’re a gameplay driven studio.

“We firmly believe that what you do with your hands when you’re playing the game and your interaction with the game is king. We just didn’t feel that multiplayer was adding anything to that – it was taking away from that.

“It is a bold decision, but the thing I’ve been really happy with is how the fans and the players have come back to us and said, ‘it’s the right decision. If I want to play multiplayer, I can buy a multiplayer game. If I want a great story and a great single-player game, I can buy Arkham City.’”

Hill concluded by saying, “This game wouldn’t be the game it is now if it had multiplayer in. I can’t absolutely guarantee that.”

Arkham City is out on October 18 for PC, PS3, and Xbox 360 and you can pre-order a copy by following the links.

Edited On 13 Jun, 2011

( 0 )

Please describe the nature of the abuse: