Catwoman will be playable in Batman: Arkham City . Based on the feedback we've heard, she offers an excellent contrast to the Caped Crusader, as she's faster and more agile.

But if you want her, you better buy the game new. If not, you'll have to pay for her, as reported by Eurogamer . …just try to keep the torches and pitchforks in the sheds, okay?

Like many games these days, Arkham City will feature an Online Pass-like system; EA, THQ, and Sony are other game publishers that utilize the program. Basically, it discourages used game sales, as they force you to pay for online play if you buy the game second-hand. If you purchase it new, there's no additional charge. In this case, Warner Bros. is charging for the extra Catwoman content; she'll cost $10 extra if you get Batman used. < /p.

Boy, ten bucks. She's a cheap date. You'd figure with all that leather, she probably has this dominatrix thing going and that usually costs extra, so… Okay, never mind. We assume gamers aren't gonna like this, even if Catwoman is only playable for a short amount of time. And obviously, you don't have to sample her to complete the game.

Related Game(s): Batman: Arkham City

Subscribe
Notify of
110 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
maxpontiac
maxpontiac
9 years ago

10 bucks is the new free.

daus26
daus26
9 years ago

I guess it's better than paying for online gaming. For that alone, I have no problem supporting Sony's first party titles and few deserving multi-plats, but there are just some DLCs out there that I think are just really in it for that extra cash. This is one of those. Perhaps it was one of the early methods to gain lost revenue with these DLCs. Now we have online passes. What's next?

I have to admit, it's a clever solution. With this online pass stuff though, I hope some developers out there will consider in not charging us for small DLC extras that releases like in the first week of release. I mean it's not exactly "extra," post release effort.

fatelementality
fatelementality
9 years ago

Online pass………hmmm……..PASS!

Jawknee
Jawknee
9 years ago

If you work tirelessly to make a game would you want to get paid for it? Or would you prefer a third party who had nothing to do with making your game get paid instead?

Cesar_ser_4
Cesar_ser_4
9 years ago

It's called pimping Jawknee, hehehe

NoSmokingBandit
NoSmokingBandit
9 years ago

Yeah, libraries should be closed!


Last edited by NoSmokingBandit on 10/14/2011 6:06:46 AM

WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
9 years ago

I'll pay ten dolla to play with Anne Hathaway

Snaaaake
Snaaaake
9 years ago

I already paid mine so you can't anymore 😉

playaplus
playaplus
9 years ago

if im not excited enough to get a game at launch, i most likely dont get the game…idk what the problem is w online passes i mean…it helps the devs

kris22
kris22
9 years ago

The best way to some this up…

"It is illogical to the extremes of insanity for a company to think they should be paid TWICE for a product they sold ONCE…"

I am getting sick of entering all these damn codes, mandatory updates, shady, misleading TOS, and DLC or disc-locked content in some cases. This has to go to court eventually. This is the second implementation of an OFFLINE pass(Rage being the first i believe) unless something is done it is only going to get worse and it hurts seeing how some gamers are accepting this as the new norm. All businesses make and lose money. Nobody can name one game company that has gone out of business because of used game sales and there is something to be said in light of that fact… Sony,Thq, EA, WB, Ubisoft, and Bethesda are gaming powerhouses who know damn well that used games are not putting their companies in jeopardy in the slightest. 🙁

What happened to the good old days of popping a game in and just PLAYING? Now we have to deal with all this extra crap…

Jawknee
Jawknee
9 years ago

What do you purpose be done about it? I fail to see how the developer is getting paid twice. If you buy a game used you're paying a third party who had ZERO to do with the games development and distribution. So the developer is losing out on a potential sale. You want to be a cheapskate and support places like Gamestop instead of the people who make the games then you're going to miss out on some perks the developers have to offer unless you're willing to support the developer in some form or another. It's perfectly fair.

It's fine if you want to buy used games but please don't delude yourself into thinking that used sales don't hurt the industry and the developers who create these games you want to play.

Gabriel013
Gabriel013
9 years ago

The production team produces the box of stuff. The box of stuff then get's sold to reseller.

At this point the original production company should have no say nor restrictions as to what happens with their [entire] box of stuff as long as it isn't duplicated; The 1 box should always only ever be the 1 box.

The reseller selling to the end user and whatever cycle of resale the box of stuff then takes should be of no concern to the original producers.

As far as the original producing company should be concerned, the 1 box of stuff they produced will only ever be used by 1 end user at any given point in time. Whether that box of stuff is used by 1 end user for it's entire lifespan or used by 100 different end users it DOES NOT MATTER.

I've said it before and I'll keep saying it. Games companies are not our friends, they deserve no special treatment or "support". They either make a product or they don't. They are a business. To me they are no different to the companies that make ANY other product I own. While they exist I will chose to buy their product (or not), if they didn't exist they'd be replaced by other companies and I'd then decide whether to purchase their product or not.

elass0wyp0
elass0wyp0
9 years ago

Thank you Gabriel013, please post that exact paragraph after every Jawknee defending developers post. This kid just doesn't get it.

Jawknee
Jawknee
9 years ago

Kid? You have no idea. Best to learn to respect your elders.

elass0wyp0
elass0wyp0
9 years ago

It's just an expression pops. Is that better? 🙂 I didn't mean to insult with that, sorry.

matt99
matt99
9 years ago

slippery slope…

mk ultra
mk ultra
9 years ago

I have no problem with online passes because you are using the developers servers. However, I am highly annoyed that games without any online whatsoever are starting to adopt this as well to combat used games sales. I buy my games new as much as possible, especially if I particularly like the developer as in this case. But with the amount of games I play each year, it is just too costly to buy everything new. I feel in a few years if this takes off I will be forced to choose which games to fully experience new, and which games to pick up down the line with a slightly gimped experience. I think I will just start buying all my used games from GameFly instead of Amazon because they include all online passes with used game sales.


Last edited by mk ultra on 10/13/2011 10:24:22 PM

Jawknee
Jawknee
9 years ago

Fine with me. Developers deserve to get paid for their creations.

kris22
kris22
9 years ago

You made a sale to me. i decide to sale to someone else. You want a cut of that profit that i made from that buyer of your game when he or she decides to go online with it( or in this case OFFLINE). In this instance once you sold your game new, to me, our business together should be concluded. I do not expect for you to show up again when i decide to get rid of it to someone else. What i do or what someone else does with the copy of the game that has been legitimately purchased once is their business. I buy my games new 90% of the time but i can understand when someone is trying to save a little money but tactics like this cuts into the value of my USED trade-ins towards the purchase of NEW game. 🙂

Jawknee
Jawknee
9 years ago

You miss understand how software works. You aren't buying the software. You are merely paying for the license to use that software. What happens when you buy Adobe Photoshop or a computer OS? You get a key that allows you to unlock that software to ensure that software is used by YOU and YOU ONLY. If you sell that disc the software came on, the person you sold it too has to contact Adobe and PAY for another key.

What is so hard to understand about this?

Gabriel013
Gabriel013
9 years ago

There should be a push from gamers to get that changed Jawknee. Restricting free trade for the end user should be outlawed.

Now I expect that big corporations will never allow that to happen but the least gamers can do is fight the tide as hard as possible.

kris22
kris22
9 years ago

Game Developers will make money regardless. Now they will make a little more money based on how many people shell out for an online or offline pass for 10 dollars. If the game is good i dont want to sell it (God of War 3, anyone?). if the game has dlc coming out that does not seem to have been left out intentionally before the initial release i am down for buying it. This is how I show my support for a good game. Less used copies to sell more profits go into the developers and publishers coffers. Win-win mostly. I do not think used games buyers should be punished simply because they are looking for the best deal…

Jawknee
Jawknee
9 years ago

"Game Developers will make money regardless."

With this logic it should be okay to steal a game once in awhile right? Because my local grocery store will make money regardless I should be allowed to take a sandwich once in awhile no?

"I do not think used games buyers should be punished simply because they are looking for the best deal…"

You're not being punished. If you chose to buy a game used and miss out on some free perks that the developer decided to reward new buyers with that's YOUR decision. Please don't pretend to be a victim on top your delusion
that used sales don't hurt the developers.

By the way, there is a reply button.


Last edited by Jawknee on 10/13/2011 11:01:57 PM

Snaaaake
Snaaaake
9 years ago

Just in case some of you who don't know or might have forgotten, the video game industry is a business.

Jawknee
Jawknee
9 years ago

Yes but you see, some seem the think business' operate on magic profits that come from the money tree the money fairly plants every spring.

Snaaaake
Snaaaake
9 years ago

True, it was never wrong of them to do this in the first place, be glad that we're not paying any monthly fees to play online.
This is bugging me, if some people can afford to pay $5 for Xbox Live, why can't they add another $10 for online pass?
Or worse, PSN users aren't even paying any fee in the first place.

The outrage caused by introduction of online pass is simply nonsense.

Gabriel013
Gabriel013
9 years ago

I agree their is no special money tree for the game Publishers and Developers but you know what, that's the same damn case for any business or individual.

Games companies ARE businesses and do not deserve any special treatment which allows them not only to make a profit from the original sale to the reseller but also many of the subsequent sales after that point.

Jawknee
Jawknee
9 years ago

You sound bitter against business' in general. No point in debating some one like you who doesn't appreciate the lengths and the risk these business' go through to provide us with a product we enjoy. You're not entitled to any special treatment. Either you support the business' that provide the games you like or you don't. Simple as that.

Gabriel013
Gabriel013
9 years ago

Jawknee, All companies go to lengths and risks with their products. I just don't think the games industry should be able to have special treatment.
Yes they are products I enjoy but then so are most things I buy, or I wouldn't buy them.

I don't mind businesses being successful and making profit. I work for a software company!

It's the special treatment I object to. Once you sell your product, whatever your product constitutes, that should be the extent of your involvement. Unless you're offering technical support.

I also think that all the little extras being sold (the current example would be dlc) are perfectly fine, but should also be resellable.

There's nothing bitter about it, I swear.

I confess I view it cold and hard. I have no sentimentality for any business. It just surprises me when people do especially when it's hitting the end user in the pocket.

darxed
darxed
9 years ago

I think the main issue here is that more and more developers are treating videogames as software programs, and we as gamers won't accept that because, well that wasn't the case until this generation. Even though I reaaally don't like these online (offline?) passes, things could be much much worse.

Gabriel, you say you work for a software company, so you should know this too if a videogame is just software then the developers could charge you extra for manuals, tutorial, and worse off all, support. So imagine you're playing and suddenly your game freezes… and you can't do a thing about it because you didn't pay the additional 20 bucks to get support just for ONE YEAR. So you have this unplayable mess and no, you can't expect a patch to fix it cause only owners with paid support will get that.

Sooo things could be much much worse. I work for a software company too and I've seen all that happen. The problem is that developers have always seen videogames as software, but couldn't treat it as software until this generation.

FxTales
FxTales
9 years ago

People have a hard time parting with money, so naturally they will look at something like this as a cheap tactic to wring them out of more of it. I have no problem with what they are doing. I think their reasons are just. My opinion.


Last edited by FxTales on 10/13/2011 11:05:56 PM

Temjin001
Temjin001
9 years ago

While I wasn't planning on it, Forza 4 just ain't doing it for me, so it'll go back on Tuesday and I'll grab this Batman game with my rental game pass.

Jawknee
Jawknee
9 years ago

Is it not the GT5 killer people said it would be?

Temjin001
Temjin001
9 years ago

It's definitely not a GT5 killer, because one is like Taco Bell and the other is authentic Mexican. Not that it isn't a good a game. It's well presented and impresses me with how it pushes the 360, technically, to new limits, but it still fall short of GT5 as a simulator. I put Forza 4 through some tests and the track surface geometry is well below Gt5. The handling is still too forgiving, even with ALL assists turned off. There's absolutely no way I could take a Ferrari 355 through Nuremberg like I just did on a more unforgiving simulator. The Dreamcast's F355 Challenge gave me a good point of reference for that comparison, and that ancient simulator simply feels a lot more real.

It also really annoys me how Turn 10 tucks so much of the tuning/upgrading away from the user. Even when your car is under upgraded for a campaign event the UI happily obliges to do all the upgrades for you so you can just "go race." Not to be so down on Forza. It's good. Better than NGS Shift. But I just don't want to carve out time for something that does better to present the face of GT racing, but treads very carefully to accommodate the tolerance of most players who need to have fun, and need to have it right away. Get this. The game immediately after loading it up for the first time takes you right into a "quick race" automatically, so you can get the twitch fix needed before having to press "A" through some menus.

Jawknee
Jawknee
9 years ago

"Get this. The game immediately after loading it up for the first time takes you right into a "quick race" automatically, so you can get the twitch fix needed before having to press "A" through some menus."

LOL! Comedy Gold.

Lawless SXE
Lawless SXE
9 years ago

Heh… it's supposed to be a way to gauge your skill. *shrugs* Funny though.

aaronisbla
aaronisbla
9 years ago

I find nothing wrong with developers giving perks and bonuses to those who actually spend their money on the game and the devs have something to show for it.

if you wanna buy it used, ur just gonna have to get use to it. Used game sales are doing to the video game industry what internet has done to music, taking money out of the mouths of the people who made a product. not condemning those who buy used games or download music, just stating what should be the obvious

kris22
kris22
9 years ago

Very valid point. alright so you are describing a product license. I do not remember video games coming with some form of authorization and utilization, notwithstanding PC games, to use them with the only requirement is that a legitimate copy of the game is in my console for it to work. I paid for a product i did not pay for a license to use said product. i did not agree to anything except the TOS if i am going ONLINE with said game. Who expects that the copy of the game that is in your collection to be used by you and only you?

Jawknee
Jawknee
9 years ago

Insert a game into your PS3 then press triangle over the disc and hit "About this game" it states the license terms and copy write laws.

WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
9 years ago

Burned.

rogers71
rogers71
9 years ago

Jawknee,
I agree with you 100%. Unfortunately, I think you are wasting your breath (or in this case, fingers). People see things 1 way and they aren't gonna change their thinking because someone intelligent is debunking all their arguments.

On another note, I want to give props to Rocksteady for not falling into the "every game must have online" category. I absolutely love the fact that I will be getting a game where 100% of the developers expertise was spent on a true blue SP campaign. I cannot wait for this game. 🙂

kris22
kris22
9 years ago

dont want to use the reply button 🙂

DazeOfWar
DazeOfWar
9 years ago

Doesn't bother me one bit. The game will be totally worth it to buy new. People also seem to forget that they can bargain shop. K-Mart will be giving a $30 gaming coupon for any future game purchase and a $10 gaming coupon towards the new LotR game with the purchase of Batman. Just sign up for a Rewards card.

Also anybody that is so worried about trade in values, maybe you should check out sites like Goozex where you can trade your games. I've traded games on there that have online passes and will get $50 for the game still. You can't blame the devs for places like GS ripping you off when you trade in games there.

edit: Like I said before, this is just the start. All games will soon have this. Wonder how some of you will take it then? Will you give up gaming altogether?


Last edited by DazeOfWar on 10/13/2011 11:59:44 PM

kris22
kris22
9 years ago

subjectively if that is the way you choose to look at it. i am taking issue with their methods of trying to monetize everything at the customer's expense. All in all this issue should be taken to court. A console game like Uncharted and a program like Microsoft Word that has you submit to a legally binding agreement should not be put in the same category.

aaronisbla
aaronisbla
9 years ago

taking it to court would be a waste of your time and money. What case would you actually have? your best bet would be to vote with ur wallet

Underdog15
Underdog15
9 years ago

Software is software is software. Laws haven't caught up with technology. (About 20 years behind)

But if I were you, I wouldn't rush it. If laws catch up, it won't work out in your favor. As is, at least you can get away with using software you have no license for.

Even if you wanted to go to court, it would be a civil case that would currently end with you losing, having to pay their court fees as well as paying the cost of the game new for every game you admit to playing used.

Currently, it's the way it is.

kris22
kris22
9 years ago

probably or just stick with the developers that do not use online passes

DIsmael85
DIsmael85
9 years ago

Still buying it new like I did with Rage and everyone other game that has recently released. This doesn't bother me one bit.

Bring on the Catwoman. Rowr!!


Last edited by DIsmael85 on 10/14/2011 12:11:21 AM

kris22
kris22
9 years ago

Real touchy subject concerning online passes. I hit myself on the head for forgetting about the end user license. In the TRANSFER OF PRE-RECORDED COPIES section it does state the use of single-use codes for special features though what special features entail is not detailed for obvious reasons. I would not have thought certain aspects of the single-player campaign would fall under the description of special features but you live and you learn 🙂

Jawknee
Jawknee
9 years ago

There was a time when I believed that when I bought a game I owned the software but that was before I understood software licensing. We indeed live and learn.