Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League was meant to be a smash hit for Warner Bros. The latest game from lauded Batman Arkham studio Rocksteady, it was in development for close to a decade, finally releasing a few months back, in February. But it goes without saying that things haven't gone to plan. Relative to the publisher's immense expectations, the co-op shooter has been nothing short of a disaster — and that's now being fully reflected in Warner Bros' financials.
Year-on-year, the company has taken a $200 million hit to its Q1 revenue following Suicide Squad's floundering. That's because back in February 2023, it launched Hogwarts Legacy — which would go on to become the best-selling release of the year. Suicide Squad didn't even come close to emulating that level of success.
It's a cautionary tale, really. While Hogwarts Legacy obviously has the weight of a colossal franchise behind it in Harry Potter, it's a single-player action adventure — the kind of title that big publishers have been so desperate to distance themselves from. Suicide Squad, meanwhile, is a live service shooter that's built to keep players hooked for who knows how long. Only one of them has made Warner Bros a ludicrous amount of money.
What do you make of all this? When will Warner Bros reveal the inevitable live service Harry Potter game? Leave the Justice League alone in the comments section below.
[source ign.com]
Comments 53
Eh, too bad.
If they're gonna waste such a talented studio on a live service game, then let them make it right. What a damn shame.
Same goes for Naughty Dog and Factions 2. They were already working on it for years, so just let them fkng finish ffs.
All this crap along with all the incompetent heads running xbox or Bathesda or the lead writer at Bathesda, the industry is filled to the brim with clueless people running the industry to the ground
Not delivering a great game because of bugs and technical issues is one thing. Not delivering great games because fundamentally the game at its core just isn't good, conceptually.... that's one of the biggest issues with modern gaming.
Hopefully they get the hunt and not just focus on live service titles and understand strong single player games sell.
You would think that publishers would learn from their mistakes and be more attune to what is successful. But isn’t Warner Brothers making a multiplayer quidditch game next?
Clearly they need to double down on live service games to turn around their fortunes.
Even if they nailed SS, it would never beat the sales of Hogwarts, the IP of that game is just far too strong.
You could see this coming a mile off!
Two main thoughts would be, why keep pushing the live service games when only a couple of them have really properly taken off? It seems such a high risk, high reward strategy?!
Secondly, why not invest some more money into focus groups and genuinely researching what consumers want? It surely can’t be that hard! Did anyone REALLY ask for a Gollum game? Do people REALLY want a suicide squad game considering the last couple of attempts at films were flops?
Ask the people what they want, and then they will buy…
I just want Mad Max 2. I'll even tolerate a few micro transactions if they must.
Steam counts have fallen below 100 player on a few occasions. After seeing devs of successful games being shuttered recently im rather concerned that Rocksteady will go the same way.
@Balosi I second this. I'd contribute to a Kickstarter.
Guess they'll just have to make another mp game to compensate...
It’s Microsoft’s fault.
Welp...can't say I'm shocked. I know they said they want to double down on GaaS but quite clearly it did not work out for them. If they truly do decide to double down on this type of game it's only going to get worse from here.
Please somebody, anybody that is a higher-up at WB. Wake up. See the damage you have done and do better.
Question: does suicide squad have offline content? I want it, but not if it is online only.
Well, the only thing to do is to double down, no, triple down on GaaS.
Hunting that elusive Live service cash cow
vs
One of the best single player games of this generation (and technically excellent given the framerates in normal performance mode now far exceeding 60 if your TV can do it).
Hopefully they learn, before they decide to kill Hogwarts Legacy 2, and a lot of other games, by trying to make them live service.....
And if they dont learn quickly, sadly I think we will be reading about WB studios closing in a few years.
@Balosi you've got my vote, I would spend anything they asked for Mad Max 2.
Making Hogwarts legacy story DLC would likely have made them a decent amount of cash, for a modest investment... yet no sign of any yet.
They could even have done year 2 as a massive DLC and I would have been up for it.
@Ryu_Niiyama I think it can be played as a single player, but unsure if it has offline content/capability.
I'm not surprised it flopped, wasn't exactly a great dev ride. Stuck in almost dev hell, but why WB didn't stick to traditional gaming is a shocking misjudgement. The 4 Arkham games before this were all great in their own way, even Origins MP was interestingly made. Live service games suck the life out of the industry & there's no actual metric of guarantee the one you're making will actually gain the positive & sustained attention of the audience.
I find it ironic people actually like Gotham Knights more & see it more of a spiritual successor to the Arkham games than SS.
But their brain-dead CEO already bet everything on live-service, even tho Hogwarts Legacy was the most successful game last year even ahead of Call of Duty.
It's crazy because the Suicide Squad game is way more polished that Howard's Legacy, that game felt rushed.
@EchoRange The game literally didn’t work for all people who paid for early-access, what are you talking about?
Clearly less single player and more failed live services is the answer.
Pay these execs millions for their amazing insight and decision making! 🤣
Why on god's green earth is WB so insistent on making Suicide Squad a thing? Several movies, a game, comics, a damn anime....
@Jdubz Or, ya know, use the IP in a way that makes sense.
Why TF would the Suicide Squad ever be set up against Brainiac AND the most powerful heroes on the planet? It's dumb even by comic book standards.
If you want a Suicide Squad game, take equal parts Ghost Recon Wildlands and the old Mercenaries IP, blend it with full four-player Suicide Squad shenanigans and crank it up with some good uber violence.
Make a game that makes more sense than a poor looter shooter grindfest.
So armed with so this data, Warner will drop single player, Microsoft will raise subscription prices, Embracer will shuffle brand names, and Ubisoft will make a dozen AC games with a coat of Minwax on their PS360 games. Another glorious day in gaming. How did this industry survive this long?
@Haruki_NLI I guess it must have a fanbase, somewhere.
It's exactly BECAUSE it's a high risk, high reward strategy that they're drawn to it like moths to a flame. Can you imagine the career boost if you're the exec who green-lit the next Fortnite?!?! You put all your chips on one number and spin the wheel - you'll probably lose, but if you win you win HUGE!
I bet if Rocksteady made another great Arkham game, they would have matched or exceeded Hogwarts Legacy's revenue.
I'm guessing we should expect a DC variant of Marvel Rivals some point in the future.
@The_Wailing_Doom the arkham series is done though; a trilogy and a prequel (that had good multiplayer btw) , what more can they do besides milk it??
More layoffs I’m guessing
I always laughed off the idea of another crash in the game market but it seems more and more likely everyday. The corporations think people will just buy anything and spend every moment on it.
@nomither6
There are tons of Batman stories they can tell that are adjacent to the events of the current Arkham games or perhaps they can tell so many after Arkham Origins before the main trilogy. Heck, a reboot altogether would be much better.
@Zenos
Your first sentence makes literally no sense, but the second one totally does. What a rollercoaster.
Well, guess we know where the next round of layoffs and studio closures is coming.
Oh no, what a completely predictable series of events!
This is the way of all cash grab live services that don’t respect the player’s time.
@Ryu_Niiyama You can play single player with AI teammates, but as of right now, there is no offline mode. That was supposed to be added down the line according to Rocksteady, but who knows at this point.
The whole premise of Suicide Squad bothered me from the start. Most people don’t want to see the good guys die.
@The_Wailing_Doom @LowDefAl true
Kinda feel like a single player version of this game in the Arkham vein could have been a lot of fun. But I also guess everyone is trying to build the next Fortnite.
@Haruki_NLI Because they want their own version of the Guardians of Galaxy hype... WB/DC has fallen so far behind Disney/Marvel.
How about a live service game where you are a CEO trying to run a company into the ground with terrible decision-making?
It's very rare that I buy a live service game. Mainly because I know its not mine to keep. As we have seen with the crew, even if you have the disc it means nothing. I prefer my games as stand alone single player experiences. That's the reason I had no intention of buying suicide squad and by sales figures I don't think I am on my own with those thought's
They should have seen the writing on the wall when it became obvious that nobody wanted this game. They could have flipped all the assets into a good Batman game instead.
And no one was surprised. Hogwarts Legacy while expected to do well exceeded all expectations, even toppling COD of it's throne... whereas Suicide Squad...
I, like MANY gamers, could see this happening regardless. The fact that WB couldn't/didn't, especially with other games - like Marvel's Avengers, proving that 'Live Service' isn't what the gamers want.
Publishers see the 'success' of some Live Service game, the sales of MTX in those, and think EVERY game should be made into a 'Live Service' - thinking more about the cosmetics, the 'grind' etc instead of focusing on the Game-play, story, character development etc. Not only is everything so 'mediocre', its often repetitive, grindy and a weak 'story'.
Hogwarts, despite its 'Controversy' was a game that focused on Story, Game-play and what a 'Gamer' would want from that IP and as a result, succeeded...
Offline single player games toooooootally belong in the past. They should double down on crappy GaaS and invest heavily in AI and NFTs. That's definitely what everybody wants.
Solid game vs whatever the hell SS ended up being.
@pyrrhic_victory Thank you! I will wait to see if the offline mode is added.
I knew that SS wasn't gonna be good even if the sales is on the top chart on some areas.
Abso hate live content gaming it’s awful it’s a rip off and it is really a future worry for gaming full stop.
If your going to incorporate greed on that level and creep it into gaming which it has and was accepted but now it’s on steroids.
WB I certainly will not be buying any live titles you create or anyone else and if you make Harry potter legacy 2 and live then that’s just commercial suicide. Listen to your customers if you want them to stay customers
PS I mean really it boggles beyond belief truly.
It’s been announced that Hogwarts Legacy has sold 12 million copies in its first two weeks since launch, which translates to $850 million in revenue.
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...