Batman: Arkham Asylum Joker DLC will be free
by Jason Dobson 
{ Jun 1st 2009 at 9:00AM } 
Eidos has confirmed that the PS3-exclusive DLC will be free, allowing players to frolic about in the game's challenge maps as the Clown Prince of Crime when Batman: Arkham Asylum swoops onto store shelves this August.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
rov947 @ Jun 1st 2009 9:06AM
I will miss not getting the 360 achievements, but this is too good to pass up on PS3
nightmare452 @ Jun 1st 2009 9:48AM
Same here, will miss terribly the 360 achievments and driving my gamerscore up, but this is just to good to pass. And I also have to drive my trophies up! ^^
Helps its only an single player game, those I usually favor either way, if it has multiplayer, definitely 360 would have won. Played the demo at Walmart, and it was great at that time, probably will run even smoother.
Archon (PSN: Archonik, XBL: DarkARHN) @ Jun 1st 2009 10:12AM
Also, who says they didn't make a sweet deal with Sony, like:
"Hey, how about we give you some exclusive content to move some games, and in return, you pay for the Joker ads and don't charge us that download bandwidth quota thingy for the actual content?"
I could see that happening. It's a great business deal for both companies.
Archon (PSN: Archonik, XBL: DarkARHN) @ Jun 1st 2009 10:13AM
Oh, I love you joystiq. This was a reply to my own comment below.
kal326 @ Jun 1st 2009 1:28PM
So where do I send my dime to get this on the 360?
Rhamsey @ Jun 1st 2009 9:07AM
I'm really getting pissed off with what sony and microsoft are doing. exclusive games is one thing (and thats also getting old), but exclusive content is just stupid. if i pay the same for a game on either console, i expect the same amount of support.
Chris D.(PSN: Aggie_CEO | XBL:The Aggie CEO | Steam: Aggie_CEO @ Jun 1st 2009 9:17AM
you think Sony is doing this!?!?!
ROFLMAO!!!!
Edios is the one that made that decision....
Rhamsey @ Jun 1st 2009 9:22AM
now i havent been following edios, but why would they chose to support some of their consumers, but not others without insentive. just doesnt make sense to be.
The Dark Wayne @ Jun 1st 2009 9:30AM
they could release it on xbox AND ps3 as charged DLC, so obviously they have to be getting something for doing this
Jerk Face @ Jun 1st 2009 9:30AM
Sony bucks. Clearly. So you're right.
Not that I necessarily agree that it's the worst thing ever, but to say that Sony didn't provide some incentive and that Eidos just likes them better is silly.
Archon (PSN: Archonik, XBL: DarkARHN) @ Jun 1st 2009 9:42AM
Umm, how about:
"Yeah, the XBox version will sell more copies anyway, as there's a bigger install base... So what can we do, to make as many PS3 owners buy our game as possible?
How about exclusive content? It's quite inexpensive to make and might help us sell the game to that smaller market."
Sounds logical to me...
Wiizer @ Jun 1st 2009 10:37AM
"now i havent been following edios, but why would they chose to support some of their consumers, but not others without insentive."
OH MY GOD, are you SERIOUS? Have you heard of Tomb Raider Underworld?
http://www.joystiq.com/2008/10/23/tomb-raider-underworld-dlc-especially-made-for-360/
Now tell me who got screwed out of that DLC?
sam @ Jun 1st 2009 11:02AM
@Archon: How about, um, no. If this were Eidos's deal, it would be on both platforms, no question.
Moneyhatting DLC isn't exactly a new concept for console manufacturers (whether it be literal money changing hands, or free promotion, or something else, all of which are, in fact, worth money), so I don't see any room for surprise or confusion here.
This one certainly doesn't seem as big a deal as the GTA4 expansions - even if it were, there's nothing wrong with console makers paying for exclusive content. It's their money. Or are we all going to condemn Microsoft that there isn't a PS3 version of Halo 3, or Sony that there isn't a 360 version of Killzone 2?
Vcize @ Jun 1st 2009 11:18AM
Archos, if that sounds logical to you, then you really do live in your own little world.
ALBGunner04 @ Jun 1st 2009 11:30AM
I understand what you mean by exclusive content being old, but not quite about exclusive games. If it weren't for exclusive games, there would be no need for different consoles. That would just drive down competition between the many companies in this industry, which would eventually lead to a lowered quality of standard. I den't think anyone wants that, so thank god for exclusive games, but I agree, exclusive DLC needs to go.
Archon (PSN: Archonik, XBL: DarkARHN) @ Jun 1st 2009 11:55AM
@Vcize
What's so farfetched about it? Sony said times and times before, that they don't support paying for exclusivity. BUT they mentioned that they are willing to cooperate in terms of, for instance, not charging/dropping the price for download bandwidth if the content is exclusive or helping in the advertising department. It's symbiotic and fair for both companies. Eidos/Rocksteady don't lose anything in that deal and might gain some sales. And Sony needs another "IN YOUR FACE, 360", because it doesn't have to many of those.
Also, you typo-d "Archon" in a way a person not knowing the word would. That might mean that the world that I am locked up in is the world of "people-who-know-about-video-games", which you might not be in at all. This word is important to the world of gaming on so many levels!
Jason @ Aug 3rd 2009 7:29PM
same goes with xbox 360 with the GTAIV expansions..... right? THIS is part revenge on what micosoft did TO us PS3 users. sux right now to own a xbox 360 with that lawsuite that could prevent production of the units until who knows when? that said it also sux to own a 360 because the joker is exclusive just like before i said the GTAIV titles were. And they didn't even have to PAY 50 million... sad and pathetic on microsofts behalf, if they wouldn't had did that then maybe both consoles would have the joker. But that's how these people work and i'm on Sonys side due to PS3 fans getting screwed over WAY more with game exclusives than Xbox 360 fans do from sony making exclusives. Anyways good luck xbox 360 users, hope your console doesn't break while playing the game neither, looks like it's gonna push the 360 pretty hard too.
.jpg @ Jun 1st 2009 9:14AM
can they just pick a fucking release date for this game already?
baby sea tuna @ Jun 1st 2009 9:25AM
They have. Our Joystiq pals were even kind enough to include a link in this very article!
rohan @ Jun 1st 2009 9:31AM
is it moved back to august sometime, i saw a poster at EB first saying releasing in July then they covered it and put in August
dark_inchworm (on Steam!) dark inchworm (on XBL!) @ Jun 1st 2009 9:49AM
Can you just read the fucking article already?
Chris D.(PSN: Aggie_CEO | XBL:The Aggie CEO | Steam: Aggie_CEO @ Jun 1st 2009 9:18AM
Well thats nice to know as I would not have paid .99 for the Joker...
Overgauss @ Jun 1st 2009 7:14PM
Well with current DLC pricing you can expect that if you had paid, it would have been around the 4.99 to 5.99 for the Joker (or more!) and maybe .99 for a henchman. And by DLC pricing I mean dollaring-and-dollaring as we are well past nickel-and-diming by now. Even adjusting for inflation.
Look at Capcom DLC pricing for example. Heck, Resistance 2 charged 99 cents for a female skin that should have been gratis.
So yeah I'm totally digging free DLC. Anti-nickel-and-diming, the gaming wonderdrug.
THANKS Eidos!
I initially was very skeptical, but now I am cautiously and highly enthusiastic! If the default game difficulty is medium-high rather than easy towards the medium end then I think we have a winner.
Just because Batman makes it look easy, doesn't mean that the difficulty should be as well.
Also is it too late to de-bimbofy H.Q.?
Overgauss @ Jun 1st 2009 7:24PM
D'oh R2 didn't charge 99 cents, but I think Insomniac games had something to do with it.
Omni @ Jun 1st 2009 9:19AM
"I will miss not getting the 360 achievements, but this is too good to pass up on PS3"
Odds are the trophies will be the same. No loss :)
Gun Barrier @ Jun 1st 2009 9:33AM
It's just... It's just not the same.
Not to an achievement whore at least.
Ghen @ Jun 1st 2009 11:13AM
Nobody says "how many bronze trophies do you have?"
Aggregate score is much better. Besides, in most games the hardest achievements are all bronze.. at least in multiplayer.
todd @ Jun 1st 2009 9:22AM
What's the deal with the 360 Gamestop preorder Villain thing? Thought that was a Joker level or something?
The Dark Wayne @ Jun 1st 2009 9:27AM
probably bane or croc or something
OLDMIKE @ Jun 1st 2009 11:10AM
from what i read its just more of you as batman fighting them not you being them
baby sea tuna @ Jun 1st 2009 9:23AM
I'll forsake the Joker levels in order to not have to play this game with a Dualshock.
Xizer @ Jun 1st 2009 9:55AM
Agreed! One of the worst, most uncomfortable controllers in gaming history. The Dual Shock is the McDonald's of video game controllers.
NaeemTHM @ Jun 1st 2009 10:01AM
I thought the Dual Shock solved all the problems of the sixaxis. Either way I agree....you have to have crab hands to enjoy playing games on the Playstation controller. I hate the position of the analog sticks!
And now they've even moved the PSP's analog nub in a weird position. WHY?!?!
dark_inchworm (on Steam!) dark inchworm (on XBL!) @ Jun 1st 2009 10:02AM
Another non-fan of the Dualshock here. I don't play on the Sony systems much... that may be why.
NaeemTHM @ Jun 1st 2009 10:11AM
Strangely, why I don't prefer the PlayStation controller, I don't mind playing games with it.
It may have to do with the fact that I've been gaming on Playstation machines since I was 13. My hands look like this now:
http://www.slantmagazine.com/images/film/scarymovie2.jpg
The Dark Wayne @ Jun 1st 2009 10:13AM
what's wrong with McDonald's?
dark_inchworm (on Steam!) dark inchworm (on XBL!) @ Jun 1st 2009 10:14AM
It's all in the analog sticks for me. Not only the placement, which becomes uncomfortable quickly, but also the movement. When I push around the analog sticks, they feel floaty, for lack of a better word. The sticks on a 360 controller are firm, but not too much so. Quite comfortable, I think.
baby sea tuna @ Jun 1st 2009 10:17AM
Playing inFAMOUS for the past week has reminded me why I rarely use my Playstation. If I was saavy enough to figure out how to pop DS3 guts into a 360 pad shell, or even a Wavebird, I might play it a lot more. D-Pad, analog, analog might work great for JRPGs...but when your system now has like a 4:1 shooter-to-RPG ratio, it's time to rethink your controller.
Samo @ Jun 1st 2009 10:43AM
Huh, I've only had limited use with the X360 pad, but I think I'm a rarity here in that I think the DualShocks are fine and even comfortable to use. I can think of two reasons right now:
a) I'm oriental, so I have smaller hands than the Yanks, so have it doesn't feel like crabbing my hands, and
b), like NaeemTHM, I think it also has something to do with using a DS pad for eons.
To each their own, I suppose
Archon (PSN: Archonik, XBL: DarkARHN) @ Jun 1st 2009 10:55AM
Whoa. How more moany can you get?
Years ago, when my cousin gave me my first console - his old Atari 2600, I used the abysmal Atari controller AND THESE WERE THE BEST F'IN YEARS OF MY LIFE.
And now? What do I hear? "I refuse to play this game on that system, because the analog stick is positioned in a different way than I would like it to be and I find it uncomfortable at times". Grow up people. It's like, buying a TV based on the remote control that comes with it. Geez.
I hate what's happening to the society, nowadays. I love all the advancements in technology, but listening to that, I think that the future depicted in Wall-E will become reality sooner than we think. What's next? "I refuse to play that game, because it makes me use a controller."?
NaeemTHM @ Jun 1st 2009 11:00AM
^Dude we only complain because we have a choice. During the Atari days, we really didn't have much to choose from. That's why you loved it so much!
I mean if I had the choice to play a game on a controller I prefer, why the hell would I choose anything else?
Archon (PSN: Archonik, XBL: DarkARHN) @ Jun 1st 2009 11:04AM
Well, yeah. I'm cool with that. There are games that I like my DS more than I love my XBox controller and vice versa.
But I would NEVER say that I'll skip something just because of the controller. Especially, when the modern console controllers aren't really that bad. It's just a matter of getting used to it. Also, if the controller is so bad, why own the console if you're not planning on using it? And if you don't own the console, why post a comment like this.
NaeemTHM @ Jun 1st 2009 11:09AM
"Also, if the controller is so bad, why own the console if you're not planning on using it?"
For the awesome exclusives you goose!
baby sea tuna @ Jun 1st 2009 11:12AM
@archon
Uh, I DO own the console in question (in case you didn't notice I said I'd been playing inFAMOUS for the past week,) and I AM planning on getting this game. Nowhere in my post did I say anything that suggested that I was going to skip it based on the fact that I'd have to use a DS3 to play it. I merely stated that I'd gladly trade the exclusive Joker levels to play it on a controller that I find far more comfortable. Considering the next several replies to my comment, I'm not the only one that isn't a huge fan of the button layout/ergonomics of the PS controller.
dark_inchworm (on Steam!) dark inchworm (on XBL!) @ Jun 1st 2009 11:19AM
"It's like, buying a TV based on the remote control that comes with it."
Um, no the fuck it's not. You don't have to use a remote to watch a television. You *do* have to constantly use a controller to play a video game. (insert corny Xenosaga/MGS4 joke here)
I just happen to find the Dualshock uncomfortable. Fascinating how I was downvoted for voicing a personal preference and nothing more.
dark_inchworm (on Steam!) dark inchworm (on XBL!) @ Jun 1st 2009 11:23AM
Also,
"Also, if the controller is so bad, why own the console if you're not planning on using it?"
Just because it's uncomfortable doesn't mean I can't stand to use it at all. I've played many, many hours on my PS2. The Dualshock just happens to wear my hands out much more quickly than a 360 controller.
Archon (PSN: Archonik, XBL: DarkARHN) @ Jun 1st 2009 12:01PM
Wait. I never said that it IS comfortable and stuff... And I even said that I prefer to play some games on the 360 and that I understand that.
What I don't is writing a very sarcastic comment to point out that the PS3 controller is crap and DLC doesn't change it. It's the way that it was written: "not have to play", that I found to be quite sad.
So from now on, every single multiplatform game article should have a couple comments about how we preference the console based on the controller, as it seems to be restricted to fighting games only now.
Why am I being shouted at, again? Oh, yeah. We're on the internet.
SimbaDogg @ Jun 1st 2009 12:13PM
@ baby sea tuna, xizer, inchworm
Mmm...every tried playing street fighter on a 360 controller? yeah...your dpad is the sucks. there are no perfect controllers....sorry
dark_inchworm (on Steam!) dark inchworm (on XBL!) @ Jun 1st 2009 12:24PM
"Why am I being shouted at, again? Oh, yeah. We're on the internet."
I personally wasn't trying to attack you, though I didn't hesitate to condemn your poor remote/controller comparison. Really, though. "Whoa. How more moany can you get?" and "Grow up people." If you don't want people on the internet to cut you down, don't egg them on.
@Simba: Most definitely, but I don't usually play fighting games, so it's rarely a problem for me. I think it irritates me most when I'm typing in a redemption code and too lazy to dig up a USB keyboard. >.
el serpiente @ Jun 1st 2009 12:35PM
I love it. The PS3 gets a little exclusive DLC, and the 360boyz lacking any kind of legitimate argument against it, (as MS has been doing it all this generation) need to roll out the old 'DA CONTROLLER IT CRIPPULZ ME!' argument.
Quit bitching, babies. Welcome to the competitive marketplace.