Yes, Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League Is Definitely a Live Service Game

Any microscopic interest I had in this game - gone.

We have known this for a long, long time. WB Montreal confirmed SS was a live game like a year ago when people were complaining about Gotham Knights, saying it was definitely a GaaS, so WBM straight up said GK wasn't, SS was.

Well that's a shame.
Pass.

I think I need a demo for this. Especially for single player to see if the bots are any good. I want to play the story and hear Kevin Conways last performance before his passing but damn Rocksteady, ya didnt need to follow the Live Service trend

In 2021 if you told me that between Gotham Knights and Suicide Squad, I'd eventually play neither of them, I would never have believed it.
Yet here we are.

So WB and Rocksteady saw Marvel's Avengers and thought we want to do that. Looks very bland, story makes no sense taking place after AK and i think the game will very much be another Marvel's Avengers.

@Atreus97 GK is a solid enough game if you like the Bat Family and don't go expecting Arkham, its not a life service and does have a decent story and character work.

So Rocksteady have become another victim of "great developer who obviously just can't be bothered anymore" ...and what's the betting they'll react like volition did with saints row "we hear your negative feedback, and we're not going to do a damn thing about it" 😔

character design looked horrendous.

actually its just terrible

Well, that’s a shame. Hope Sony didn’t waste too much money on it.

Looks abysmal I like the Arkham games for their more gritty serious tone this just looks like they decided to use Fortnite & crackdown as a template & just stick some DC characters in there 🙈 also I lost it when the bald guy started talking about brainiac 🤣

@ironcrow86 I expect the game is more WB's doing then Rocksteady.

I am confused. If this is 5 years after arkham knight, who is batman?

On one hand, Ayyy it's a birthday game!
On the other hand, another shiddy ass battle pass game.

@TheFakulty it's still Bruce Wayne, he just faked his death with the Knightfall Protocol

It looks too much like other games mashed into one. Should have just stuck to what they are good at and keep it similar to their Batman games. Why did they have to try making their own version of what other studios have been making that we have already seen too much of?!

Honestly, I'm more interested in this than before.

It looks like a 4 player Crackdown/Saints Row with some comic book shenanigans.

I'm okay with that.

I really love DC comics, but I was apprehensive from the start because I think they’re overdoing the Harley Quinn/Suicide Squad thing. Now that I know it’s a live service game I’m definitely out. Here’s hoping for some great narrative driven single player DC games in the future under James Gunn and company.

@MordmitTotschlag I remember the ending, for.some reason I had it in my head he was dead. Mixing it up with Gotham Knights perhaps

yuk!
every bit of everything shown has been done so many times in so many ways before, doesn't appeal at all.
making it a gunplay/shooter really saps any interest from the arkham world.
epic fail.

I was interested when the game was announced.

Then we found out about the focus on online and the battle pass. Turned me off but I still kept an open eye.

Now I couldn’t care less. It could be free and I wouldn’t play it.

Yeah this has actually put me off it too

I think I’ll prefer to replay the Arkham games instead then.

Or more likely Tears Of The Kingdom will obliterate everything else for a good chunk of May and thereafter.

Live service? No.

you people think it the end of the world when someone does a live service game if you don't like the suits in the battle pass don't buy it.i trust rocksteady more then crystal dynamics.and if you don't like the game at all thats why there a return button and they said it only for cosmetics

Wow ...And right after the excellent non- live service Hogwarts Legacy too from the very same publisher ...that is literally printing mad stacks right now. I guess they'll be in for a very rude awakening then in terms of comparing actual sales between the two, which could mean some very good news for the future of the industry. I'm sure as hell still not supporting any games with these things in them.

I'm an old school fan of games and honestly can't believe what you have to put up with nowadays, be it microtransactions, live services, subscriptions, passes and rushed, completely unfinished garbage. There really should be zero excuses for any of it. I know so many games that have none of it and have made literal billions regardless.

Awww its so nice of the developers to tell us this is a garbage game not worth buying LMAO

I was looking forward to this...but after seeing the gameplay, I am not so sure.

It all looks like a huge step back from Rocksteady's previous work. I'll remain cautiously optimistic here given the developer's pedigree.

The solo play needs to be "on point".

Good news, I saved a bunch of money by not purchasing this “Live Service Game”.

@Bestsuperherofan Because its battle passes on top of a $70 game. No need except for a cash grab.

Ign says it requires an internet connection to play so no offline mode

@ironcrow86 The stock response to gamers who express dismay is "you're all entitled". Keep an eye out for it on Twitter !

A real shame, because the gameplay actually looks solid. But I definitely won't be picking this up anymore, even if it reviews well. Like c'mon, did it really need a battle pass? How tone deaf can they get?

Wasn't interested in this before and not interested in this now.

I'm surprised people thinks the style is worse than Arkham? The aesthetic is largely the same. I love the Arkham games but I thought the character design was hideous. This is just more of the same IMO.

@Thumper I would, except I believe twitter to be the scourge of Satan 😄

This game looks pretty sterile and mediocre. Void of all that art design and atmosphere in the arkham games. What I find most baffling those is that lack of vision. This game has been in development for a minimum of 5 years, and potentially far longer. In that time we have seen numerous games just like this land hard and ultimately fail.

Why they continued to press on with so many of the now dated and largely disliked looter shooter live service elements as all this has been taking place with similar failed titles over the years is pretty weird. The fact they turned this into such a shallow third person shooter focused affair instead of at the very least embracing comic book like combat in a coop setting feels,... frankly lazy. It looks like another title solely existing to justify monetization and grind with the aspiration of charging for additional slices of grind over time.

Too many developers and Platforms including Sony are chasing a white rabbit that has way too far a head start and far too little meat on its bones for all these attempts to feed off of it.

This bummed me out. The live service cosmetics isn't even that big of a deal on its own, it's the fact the combat relies on everyone using guns and the always online requirement (which of course means you can't even play the game anymore when the servers are taken down).

@Would_you_kindly

Oooooh for the god of love. Always Online too?

Can't people learn from souls games and monster hunter?

It looked like it could be solid fun...but there's no chance I would come back for the ongoing content side of it. If I'm going to play something online for the long run it needs to have some sort of competitive angle to it.

A coop shooter game just doesn't make any sense for this model to me. Nonetheless it does look like it could be a fun if somewhat mindless time so I might still pick it up on a sale.

It's getting torn apart on twitter this could be one of the biggest flops in gaming history

Rocksteady, one of the best single player game developers in recent years decides it wants money over it's reputation. The thing is, they'd still make money if they stuck to what they're good at and what gamers with an attention span actually want.

I think it’s WB that have pushed this rather than Rocksteady themselves. I actually really liked to look of the game with the cutscenes I had seen, but the gameplay looked so far removed from what Rocksteady do, it’s unreal and I don’t think I want to play this at all. If I was Rocksteady/WB, I would have made this a 4 player coop game without anything remotely live service. I’m a huge fan of Rocksteady, but I think I’ll pass on this in its current form. It’s not worth the disc that it will come on. Also, I really felt sorry for the talented people at Rocksteady trying to hard sell this. Even their smiles looked pained with what they were saying.. oh man..

Went from a day one buy to never with the confirmation of it being a live service game.

This is probably one of the reasons Sefton Hill is leaving Rocksteady. With the direction that WB is probably forcing them to go into.

This is the kind of game I would never purchase.

@Thumper To be fair, I think paying customers should be entitled, I mean that is what they're paying for, entitlement to play their game whenever they like.

I'll pre order street fighter 6 instead...

@WallyWest I'm not for decent with these amount of other great games.

Rocksteady "Buy our £70 always online game with microtransaction, but don't worry our microtransactions are only cosmetic."

I hope it crashes and burns. Predatory and greedy games like this SUCK.

@stvevan no one said you have to buy it

@Loftimus
That would be wise. 😄

So Harley Quinn is basically spider-man?

@Robocrop_Duster lol

Avengers 2: Age of Liveservice

Why does the art direction look so bland? I can't believe this is from the same developer as the Arkham trilogy.

Absolute shame. I just want to play the story, but if it’s not free I’ll be waiting for this thing to either get real cheap or inevitably hit PS Plus

I thought this looked horrible. I didn't see hardly a moments gameplay where the characters weren't flailing around in the air 🤣

Great comments but I don't think WB had anything to do with pushing a live service game, esp when they knew how popular the single player batman games were.
What surprises me is why they thought green lighting 2 games in the same genre.

When these games were first announced I actually didn't like the look or promise of suicide squad and actually was more intrigued with Gotham Knights but that completely flopped and I never bought it.

This news and this reveal has well and truly put the final nail in the coffin for me. I dont want a live service game, I dont want spongey grindy gameplay to level up.

Its so funny how RockSteady paved the way in a sense for stellar comic book serious games, which inspired others to make great comic book games, Spiderman for one and even Guardians of the galaxy to an extent.

Yet after a stellar 3 game run with batman. They had the chance to choose and do anything.

They could of given us a decent try at a Superman game, or even AquaMan, Green Lantern, The Flash, even the rumoured teenage mutant Ninja Turtles (co op i may of agreed with a little).

But the stella can't do know wrong single player masters RockSteady decided that what we needed was a live service always online designed to be played as a multiplayer game, with spongey grindy enemies with a marvel comic sheen to it. Was the best way forward.

So after all that, I am 100% bowing out of this game. I just can't support the team on this and its such a shame.

Its like they've done what they have done with the films rushed them to make a justice league movie instead of a natural flow in which Marvel did all those years ago.

What does me in is why couldn't they of come up with a live service single player game. Give me an open world, give me a great story, and then slowly add new stories, characters, areas, within the game.

I'm just still confused on how it can be a live service game because once the story is over and ive killed the justice league, am I just rehashing the same game with new cosmetics and events.

At least Avengers I could see how that could be a live service game because of new threats and new stories, new avengers and there side stories. Which was just implemented extremely badly and poorly.

I also could of seen how a Justice League Live service could of played out.
But the suicide squad? A team of misfits who was put together to help take down the justice league

I need to stop hahaha
I'm out.

Color me surprised, I guess. Just yesterday I commented, that surely Rocksteady could make this look more appealing than Gotham Knights, but here we are. Just very underwhelming looking.

I guess at this point I can only be surprised positively when the game actually comes out, but it’s not looking promising at the moment. I guess the only way I could be more disappointed would be, if AK didn’t already come out eight years ago. In that time, I have stopped counting days until Rocksteady’s new game, as much as I liked the Arkham trilogy.

Why everyone in it is flailing in the air?
And it's look like that characters are almost the same.
And you have to connect to internet to play even for single player.
I'm disappointed

I was looking forward to this, a different angle on the superhero game. Could be great chaotic fun. However, as a GaaS? No thank you, not interested. I barely get enough time to play mere “games”, never mind those “as a service”.

To me, it looks like the GaaS types are only servicing their paymasters and not the gamers.

Rocksteady spent 7 years on working on this!? This is basically the DC equivalent of Marvel's Avengers. I hope Rocksteady won't be negatively affected if SS underperforms commercially.

"Yes, Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League Is Definitely a Live Service Game"

Thought this was already common knowledge?
Either way any interest I had in SS was already long gone before this. Its just another game I will be seeing on youtube for the story.

The gameplay looks fun but very generic and surely to become boring after a bit. The weapons are just super generic and "normal", the special attacks don't seem to have enough variety and it just has too many purple weak spots.
Yikes Rocksteady...just stick to the formula you perfected

I wasn't expecting this type of gameplay at all. I am still intrigued and will still get it at launch. But this is in no way comparable or at all similar to the Arkham series. It also gives Fortnite vibes.

I was already on the fence about it since not much had been shown since it was announced. But after the State of Play, I have zero interest in the game now. Gameplay looked too much like a Fortnite/Battle Royale style game and that is definitely not a genre I'm into.