Hello!

Do you folks think Rocksteady should make a Superman game? Superman han't had a lot of luck with games - generally speaking. I thought Blizzard's Death and Return of Superman was pretty good, but I don't think modern Blizz would be up for the task. I think they'd prefer to stick to their current IPs. I don't have a lot of confidence in other developers when it comes to this particular subject. If anyone is to do it, it would be Rocksteady. They know the extent of what the characters can do. And they understand the characters' motivations.

In this hypothetical game, all of Metropolis should be accessible. Not all at once, you would unlock sections of it as you progress through the story. The game would probably be massive, but not so large that it's impossible to create. Large, open cities were done before in games like Spiderman 2 and GTA V.

It goes without saying but...if Rocksteady takes on a project like this, Tim Daly should do the voice of Superman.

If they do make this game, is there anything in particular you would like to see? I personally want an unlockable Christopher Reeve Superman skin.

I read an article about this dilemma a few years ago and when they figured the problem was is that Superman is virtually indestructible, which makes him kind of a shitty game protagonist, unless of course, you change the nature of Superman. Problem is, as soon as you do that, it's no longer Superman, it's made for video game hybrid.

Could always end up using the vulnerability of those around him, though that could get old. How many scenarios can you have Lois Lane desperate for rescue within 8 minutes? Or have everything coated in Kryptonite. haha.

"Superman's Cancelled Open World Game - Unseen64"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBeSUzmG43g

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pA4gyil8n9M

That's a good argument. I think the best way to avoid that problem is to give him enemies that are as powerful as he is. There are actually tons of Superman villains who can take him on in combat. There's Zod, Metallo, Darkseid, Gorilla Grodd.

Villains don't necessarily have to be physically powerful. Lex Luthor has his machinations (and his specialized suit), and as far as I know Superman isn't immune to things like Joker gas or Scarecrow's fear toxin.

There are other ways Superman can be challenged. Like minimizing collateral damage. You should get a game over for pulling a Man of Steel.

Edit: it looks like my reply was lost. When I clicked "post" the window was stuck. I apologize if it comes up twice.

That's why I think Rocksteady should be in charge of development. They won't just cut and paste the Arkham series formula. They'd take the time to do make sure everything works.I apologize for not mentioning this earlier.

That's why Superman 64 had him solve a maze.

There's already a good Superman game. It's called Megaton Rainfall.

I don't know much about Superman. I'm imagining the typical video game of making up an excuse for killing everyone would be inappropriate. I'm not so sure about a point-n-click game, either.

Seems to me Superman is merely stronger, but not infinitely strong. Faster, but not infinitely faster. There is certainly nothing do with intelligence being more or less, it could very easily be merely average. Superman is not omnipotent and not omniscient. Nothing ever is, everything is fallible.

I think a key factor to being very strong is that of avoiding damaging anything. It's not like Superman can fix anything that's broken. There's no bringing back to life someone's pet or a first-responder on the scene of the accident.

There doesn't have to be anybody that is better than Superman, they just have to be annoying. You know, typical criminals.

Natural disasters would be a way to emotionally manipulate the player. Likely Superman wouldn't already be at the natural disaster. The time it takes to get there is time for people to be injured, fatally wounded, or die. Choices must be made of who to save now, and who might be saved later. What about those who are already wounded, maybe it turns out to be fatal? Number of lives saved might become less than initially reported.

Keep in mind, carrying a huge blob of people might be efficient, but it also might cause harm to the people being carried. Carrying a vehicle of people must be done carefully, not shaken. In general, people need to be moved without accelerating to multiple G-forces, and carefully placed down. Sometimes an object must be moved and of course it must be treated carefully if it's to be of use to the inhabitants later.

And of course, Superman doesn't have to respond to every disaster or call for help.

The world around Superman is fragile. It seems to me Superman also would have physical limits, but has come to know of those limits and doesn't push them (in front of witnesses, at least). For me, part of the Superman story is the mystery about what injuries have been experienced and how long it takes to heal, that seems to not get revealed. I think that's okay, though.

Therefore, I think a game for Superman should have something about reputation. Busting through a bunch of walls of a building or breaking a bunch of doors just to catch a suspect (someone thought to be a criminal) wouldn't do well for reputation. Just think about how journalists would write about the damage. Who's going to pay for that? Especially if it was the wrong person (that should be possible, too).

And of course, Superman has to have someplace to sleep, something to eat, and someplace to keep extra clothes and laundry. A toilet nearby. However, I'm not saying eating, using toilets, and sleeping should be in the game. What I'm saying is that everyday life should be considered as to why it's unreasonable to expect Superman would do nothing but rescuing people and whatnot.

There is the Clark Kent half. But how does that actually work? Obviously there would be a lot of stealth involved in the game. Nobody, absolutely nobody can ever see Superman and Clark Kent transitioning. The player must ensure this. That obviously impedes an immediate response.

Which brings up the counter-game. Tracking down Superman, figuring out more about where Superman goes and comes from and whenever. Certainly there must be journalists doing this. That's going to complicate the stealth part, if only because a few of the journalists will be stealthy, too. I mean, they might look like they aren't paying attention, but maybe they are watching a reflection in the surface of a window. If a connection is ever made and written about in the newspapers, will it be believed? What changes will happen in Clark Kent's life? Will Superman purposely set up someone else to be thought of as an alter-ego? How often?

In other words, what are the morals and ethics of Superman? Or, what will they be from the player? Superman could be whoever is playing the game, or rather however the player is playing the game in that moment.

And what would it be like to have a Superman in the world? The dilemma of trying to find out more about Superman, but then what to do with the information? And how to write about the disasters where Superman didn't show up? What reputation does a newspaper gain from doing that? That would depend on how that's done. What about blackmail? Or being blackmailed? It might not be just journalists who try to find out.

Seems like there's a lot of matter to work with and reveal, more so than has been or could be done with the typical story outlets. Instead of a specific story there could be an experience, either that of being Superman or there being a Superman in the world. It might be interesting to play both sides, but whenever desired and not limited by some sort of storyline. Perhaps offer to branch off into a separate save game. Maybe even record all the events so the game can be played back, sort of like a video, like the rewind some games have. In that way the (copy of the) save game could also be used for playing as the other side (either Superman or counter-journalist), as a separate game. In other words, the game player would be creating the challenges of discovering who Superman is, or of Superman avoiding detection while trying to live a "normal" life.

Perhaps that is similar to what is achieved with a so-called level editor, but without the need for one because the means of shaping the game are that of continuing to play the game itself (from one side or the other) rather than designing a map from scratch.

Okay, too far. Gone way too far…

EDIT: I also realize I wasn't really thinking the game would ever end. The reputation wouldn't be a score. It would all be about the experience.

How about the whole population of Metropolis?

Let's say the game would revolve around general Zod as the villain, so that would give Superman opponents who can match his strength and harm him. At the same time, the city would be in danger and give Superman a reason to rescue people from different kinds of dangers, like invading aliens, collapsing buildings and so on.

"Superman does not kill" they can use that in the combat mechanics. When he does a full swing at some bankrobber (hell, even if he sneezes with deadly intend) there ain't anything left; instead of make the combat dramatic by threatening Supes life it is made dramatic by threatening his code of behavior; his him being Superman. His full all-out no quarter given action would be reserved for special candidates like Doomsday, Darkseid or Zod/similar unfriendly Kryptonians.

Overall the game should give a lot of non-combat activities; doing investigative reporter work with careful use of his powers when nobody looks; do races with Flash; drink coffee with Batman.

I think it's entirely possible.

Step 1: While Superman, give him his powers. All of them. That's the FUN of Superman. Not the challenge.

Step 2: Most of the gameplay should be Clark Kent. That's the CHALLENGE of Superman. His detective skills, writing skills and interpersonal relationships are what make Superman interesting.

Boom. You have a recipe for a super-fun, challenging, enjoyable game.

Some great suggestions here. no shit