How do you feel about the Batman: Arkham series’ titles and naming convention?

[Spring-Loaded]

Batman: ...

• Arkham Asylum
• Arkham City
• Arkham Origins
• Arkham Origins Blackgate
• Arkham Knight
• Arkham VR
• Arkham Fist

Of those games, only one takes place in Arkham Asylum, and after Arkham City (named after the nightmare prison made after the Asylum was condemned), the connections to "Arkham" felt tenuous at best.

It always struck me as some marketing dept./corporate mandate or branding guideline that had to be followed: "make sure 'arkham' is in the title no matter what" even though having "Batman: _____" would be enough. Considering Origins has literally nothing to do with the Asylum and isn't even about the facility's actual origins or the person who created it, and the Arkham Knight's being a new character (or rather a new moniker), it just solidified that feeling. They could've at least had a "_____ of Arkham" or something to our a spin on it, something, anything

What do YOU think, and what do you think about the next game being "Batman: Arkham" whatever?

 

[Deleted member 18944]

Batman: Arkham We Live In A Society

 

[IDontBeatGames]

It literally has no effect on me and I am perfectly fine with the use of Batman: Arkham (Name).

You're overthinking it.
Also, Arkham City is the best Arkham game don't @ me.

 

[Rosebud]

Arkham Asylum is a great name. The rest, eh...

 

[Static]

Branding is important. There were Batman games before the Arkham series that were completely disconnected from them. Everything in the Arkham series feels contiguous and consistent. It's not just a good business idea, it's sensible, even if it doesn't have strong narrative roots after the first two games.

 

[Pein]

I think WB were overthinking the whole "Arkham" name, Batman is the important part in the games title.

 

[Spring-Loaded]

It literally has no effect on me and I am perfectly fine with the use of Batman: Arkham (Name).

You're overthinking it.
Also, Arkham City is the best Arkham game don't @ me.

Click to shrink...

Arkham City is the best, true, but the branding is inappropriate for a lot these entries.

Branding is important. There were Batman games before the Arkham series that were completely disconnected from them. Everything in the Arkham series feels contiguous and consistent. It's not just a good business idea, it's sensible, even if it doesn't have strong narrative roots after the first two games.

Click to shrink...

What about Marvel's Spider-Man?

 

[scare_crow]

It literally has no effect on me and I am perfectly fine with the use of Batman: Arkham (Name).

You're overthinking it.
Also, Arkham City is the best Arkham game don't @ me.

Click to shrink...

I will @ you because I agree.

This feels like a "I wish they'd name PS5 something 'cool!'"
It's a successful brand. They weren't going to stray from it.

 

[Buttzerker]

Bam Ham Slum
Bam Ham City
Bam Ham Orgi
Bam Ham-Knight


They're fine

 

[LewieP]

It's perfectly primed for Batman: Beyond Arkham.

 

[SneerfulOwl]

They better not name the next Batman game Arkham "insert text here".

 

[The Masked Mufti]

I feel like it's an issue with WBs marketing side or whoever is in charge of the title. The Middle Earth series has the same issue with the word Shadow. Like they refuse to let go of it in favour for something better.

I think they underestimate the general publics ability to recognise a franchise.

 

[Mona]

Arkham Asylum is the only one with a decent name, the rest are gross

 

[hikarutilmitt]

It's just how they went with the series name convention. The first two were Arkham <thing> and they just went from there. There's even joke dialog about "What's next? Arkham Country? Arkham Universe?" inside of Arkham City.

It's fine. We're all fine.

 

[StrappingYoungLance]

It's a bit dumb but at least you know exactly what Batman series you're dealing with and so it's successful in that way.

 

[Lowrys]

Arkham Asylum is the only one makes sense. But it's more of a brand thing.

 

[jph139]

I think, as far as "obviously just branding" titles, they're all pretty well justified in-game. For the main trilogy at least. Arkham City makes narrative sense, Arkham Knight is the name of a character. Could be a lot worse.

But I do hope they drop that convention for whatever they're doing next.

 

[Spring-Loaded]

It's perfectly primed for Batman: Beyond Arkham.

Click to shrink...

i wish. They'd still screw it up and have it be Batman: Arkham Beyond or something lame

I feel like it's an issue with WBs marketing side or whoever is in charge of the title. The Middle Earth series has the same issue with the word Shadow. Like they refuse to let go of it in favour for something better.

I think they underestimate the general publics ability to recognise a franchise.

Click to shrink...

Still don't know how they settled on "Shadow" instead of "Mordor" there. Mordor actually has mindshare, what with the "one does not simply" meme.

Shadow of War is the most forgettable subtitle

 

[MonsterJail]

I can't wait for Arkham 64

 

[The Masked Mufti]

i wish. They'd still screw it up and have it be Batman: Arkham Beyond or something lame


Still don't know how they settled on "Shadow" instead of "Mordor" there. Mordor actually has mindshare, what with the "one does not simply" meme.

Shadow of War is the most forgettable subtitle

Click to shrink...

Someone over there said "how we do retain familiarity while keeping the subtitle versatile for future installments." Seemingly Middle Earth isn't good enough :/

 

[Static]

What about Marvel's Spider-Man?

Click to shrink...

Despite similarities, it's not part of the series.

(Sorry, I actually don't take your meaning.)

 

[AgentLampshade]

Asylum: Perfect. It's an established setting.
City: A bit ridiculous but whatever. There's justification for it.
Origins: Meh. Cheap way to tie in a prequel with brand recognition.
Knight: Lame af. At this point it's soley for brand recognition. All others share this description.

 

[UglySofaGaming]

Arkham City's name made perfect sense - not even sure what a better title would be for the sequel although I'm sure someone will suggest something.

Arkham Knight was a stretch however, the name makes very little sense. With the scarecrow marketing they should have called it Batman: Arkham Horror and have the Arkham Knight be nameless until the big reveal

As for today, Arkham is good branding and if the next game is also in its cannon it should retain the naming convention because it separates it nicely.

I also think Batman: Beyond Arkham sounds like a great title

 

[Deleted member 18379]

They all have tie ins to Arkham so it works. Origins is the only one that feels like it's being used for brand recognition. Arkham Asylum is self explanatory, Arkham City is literally about a place called Arkham City. There is literally a character named Arkham Knight in the game and he is a focal point of the story. Whatever though. I feel like it's almost a thread about this series every other day on here now. Might as well try to dismantle the names of the games now as if it's a serious point of discussion or critique. Anything to kiss Asylum's ass and shit on Arkham Knight for this forum I swear.

 

[HiLife]

Arkham Society

 

[Doctoglethorpe]

Should have gotten rid of it for Arkham Knight and then just been honest that it's a Red Hood story. Seems like they created the pointless fake-out character just to be able to use the title.

 

[Brickhunt]

Branding is important. There were Batman games before the Arkham series that were completely disconnected from them. Everything in the Arkham series feels contiguous and consistent. It's not just a good business idea, it's sensible, even if it doesn't have strong narrative roots after the first two games.

Click to shrink...

I agree. It sounds ridiculous, but the Arkham subtitle makes it clear that it's a game taking place in the Universe established by the Arkham Asylum game.

If Spider-man PS4 had a subtitle, it's likely that it's sequels would have some variation of the subtitle too.

 

[Spring-Loaded]

Despite similarities, it's not part of the series.

(Sorry, I actually don't take your meaning.)

Click to shrink...

the lastest Spider-Man will almost certainly get a sequel, but there's no subtitle, even though there have been other games with that same title. It sold gangbusters because it's Spider-Man, the most popular superhero. It will assuredly get a sequel in the same continuity, but it won't have a word to carry over other than "Spider-Man."

Batman could've gotten away without retaining a subtitle word and the games could've had "Lockdown" or "City of Fear" as the subtitles and no one would've batted an eye since the asylum was left behind

They all have tie ins to Arkham so it works. Origins is the only one that feels like it's being used for brand recognition. Arkham Asylum is self explanatory, Arkham City is literally about a place called Arkham City. There is literally a character named Arkham Knight in the game and he is a focal point of the story. Whatever though. I feel like it's almost a thread about this series every other day on here now. Might as well try to dismantle the names of the games now as if it's a serious point of discussion or critique. Anything to kiss Asylum's ass and shit on Arkham Knight for this forum I swear.

Click to shrink...

It's pretty clear Arkham Knight (as a character name) only exists because of the devotion to the "Arkham" brand. Even Arkham City could've been named something else since it was a straight-up prison rather than an asylum. I still remember people thinking "Arkham City" was a dumb name way back when.


and knight is a better game than asylum, same with city and origins

Should have gotten rid of it for Arkham Knight and then just been honest that it's a Red Hood story. Seems like they created the pointless fake-out character just to be able to use the title.

Click to shrink...

That could've made for a cooler story, especially if it involved an earlier reveal of Red Hood's identity, have the whole city attack be a ploy by RH to kill all the supervillains, and had Batman trying to stop him from doing so

I agree. It sounds ridiculous, but the Arkham subtitle makes it clear that it's a game taking place in the Universe established by the Arkham Asylum game.

If Spider-man PS4 had a subtitle, it's likely that it's sequels would have some variation of the subtitle too.

Click to shrink...

I can't imagine there being much confusion over whether the MSM sequel being in the same universe as the first though. I'm curious whether the title will have adverse effects on brand recognition.

 

[Deleted member 49319]

Still don't know what the hell this was.

 

[Rodney McKay]

Should have gotten rid of it for Arkham Knight and then just been honest that it's a Red Hood story. Seems like they created the pointless fake-out character just to be able to use the title.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, it was a stretch with Knight, and Origins already pretty much broke it since I don't even think Arkham was in it (or barely at all if it was).

I hope they next game they finally just drop the Arkham.

 

[SageShinigami]

It was fine to denote Rocksteady's games, but the first Batman game to take place outside that world needs to stop using it. All this "it's branding" stuff is nonsense. The brand is fucking Batman. The brand will always be Batman. He's the biggest superhero in the world, and the biggest one DC has far and away. You can literally have a subtitle that says "Buy this Shit, It's Fucking Batman" and people will roll in there dropping sixty bucks.

Still don't know what the hell this was.

Click to shrink...

Knight.

 

[Deleted member 59955]

I really do not understand why people have a problem with the name Batman: Arkham. I swear this is the only series where people have an issue with the title.

I like all of the titles. A new one being called Arkham is exciting to me. Fact is that it should be called Arkham if it's set in the Arkham universe or uses Arkham gameplay.

 

[ChaosXVI]

I can see why they kept the Arkham name after Asylum for City, and it made sense in-universe. But the rest? Yeah, tenuous at best. But branding is a thing and it makes sense that they want a wide-audience to know that these games take place in that same universe as others have said.

It's the same problem I have with the Metroid Prime series besides the main trilogy. Metroid Prime is literally the name of the main antagonist of those games...but there are other Metroid Prime games that do not feature it, therefore making no sense to call them that, except that they have similar gameplay to those games vs. other non-Prime Metroid games. Metroid Prime 4 shouldn't have that name, but for branding's sake, it makes too much sense to change it.

 

[Deleted member 59955]

Also you said you were going to explain why Arkham Chronicles is a bad subtitle but you didn't. It's because you know it isn't. If the game is a sequel to Arkham Origins and explores the history of Gotham and or Arkham, then Chronicles fits perfectly as the literal definition of Chronicles is the history of something. It also sounds good. The name screams "Hey look we are exploring the history of Arkham and Batman".

 

[erlim]

Batman: Arkham We Live In A Society

Click to shrink...

Certainly if there was a multiplayer version it would be Arkham Universe.

 

[carlsojo]

I like it, it's a brand.

Tbh though I wish they'd go back to formula and give us Arkham Asylum 2.

 

[Deleted member 59955]

I like it, it's a brand.

Tbh though I wish they'd go back to formula and give us Arkham Asylum 2.

Click to shrink...

Arkham City is Arkham Asylum 2. It's the sequel to Arkham Asylum and expands Arkham as a prison. In fact the game was called Arkham Asylum 2 before the name Arkham City was officially revealed.

 

[Brickhunt]

I can see why they kept the Arkham name after Asylum for City, and it made sense in-universe. But the rest? Yeah, tenuous at best. But branding is a thing and it makes sense that they want a wide-audience to know that these games take place in that same universe as others have said.

It's the same problem I have with the Metroid Prime series besides the main trilogy. Metroid Prime is literally the name of the main antagonist of those games...but there are other Metroid Prime games that do not feature it, therefore making no sense to call them that, except that they have similar gameplay to those games vs. other non-Prime Metroid games. Metroid Prime 4 shouldn't have that name, but for branding's sake, it makes too much sense to change it.

Click to shrink...

In case of Metroid Prime, the series also had 2D games being released when "Metroid Prime" 1 and 2 came out. Had the 2D games simply died after Fusion, it would be okay for Prime to be dropped. But there was still Zero Mission when MP2 arrived. At this point, Prime became a sub-series, regardless of the namesake taking part in the title or not.

Arkham City is Arkham Asylum 2. It's the sequel to Arkham Asylum and expands Arkham as a prison. In fact the game was called Arkham Asylum 2 before the name Arkham City was officially revealed.

Click to shrink...

I'm pretty sure he means a Batman game taking place in a smaller location just like Arkham Asylum, instead of big place like Gotham City.

 

[Mathieran]

I don't like the Arkham naming convention but it doesn't really bother me that much either. It's the brand, so I don't expect them to change it any time soon.

 

[hydruxo]

Never really thought about it but yeah now that you mention it, it doesn't quite make sense for City and Knight. Not a big deal though ultimately.

 

[Spring-Loaded]

Still don't know what the hell this was.

Click to shrink...

It was for Big-Ass Arkham World

I can see why they kept the Arkham name after Asylum for City, and it made sense in-universe. But the rest? Yeah, tenuous at best. But branding is a thing and it makes sense that they want a wide-audience to know that these games take place in that same universe as others have said.

It's the same problem I have with the Metroid Prime series besides the main trilogy. Metroid Prime is literally the name of the main antagonist of those games...but there are other Metroid Prime games that do not feature it, therefore making no sense to call them that, except that they have similar gameplay to those games vs. other non-Prime Metroid games. Metroid Prime 4 shouldn't have that name, but for branding's sake, it makes too much sense to change it.

Click to shrink...

That a good parallel to the Arkham series, with similar minor in-game justifications (Dark Samus technically used to be Metroid Prime, though Hunters truly has no connection iirc)

Though the Prime series is releasing concurrently with games outside of its sub-continuity. If WB had been thinking ahead, they would've named Arkham Origins something else and let that be a potential sub-series a la Metroid Prime.

And "Metroid Prime" sounds cool whereas "Arkham ______" really sounds dopey in most instances outside of Asylum.

I like it, it's a brand.

Tbh though I wish they'd go back to formula and give us Arkham Asylum 2.

Click to shrink...

"Back to Formula" has to be the subtitle to Marvel's Spider-Man 2.

 

[lazygecko]

This is a consistent strategy with WB's "licensed" (weird phrase to use when their parent company owns the IPs) properties. Consider how they also go out of their way to not call the Shadow of Mordor/War games Lord of the Rings. Any milquetoast marketing person would tell them they're crazy for not being super upfront and blatant with leveraging the brand recognition of the actual titles the games are based on, but I think it's a clever branding angle which has paid off. They were serious about getting into the games industry as a major publisher, but they were also aware about what kind of stigma licensed properties carry from years of oversaturation with shovelware titles. What I think they're essentially doing is signaling that they want these series to be able to stand on their own legs as brands in their own right within the gaming space.

It might not be as necessary to continue this strategy in the future, but back in 2008 and the early 2010s I think the stink of "bad quality licensed game" was still very fresh in the minds of consumers.

 

[Spring-Loaded]

This is a consistent strategy with WB's "licensed" (weird phrase to use when their parent company owns the IPs) properties. Consider how they also go out of their way to not call the Shadow of Mordor/War games Lord of the Rings. Any milquetoast marketing person would tell them they're crazy for not being super upfront and blatant with leveraging the brand recognition of the actual titles the games are based on, but I think it's a clever branding angle which has paid off. They were serious about getting into the games industry as a major publisher, but they were also aware about what kind of stigma licensed properties carry from years of oversaturation with shovelware titles. What I think they're essentially doing is signaling that they want these series to be able to stand on their own legs as brands in their own right within the gaming space.

It might not be as necessary to continue this strategy in the future, but back in 2008 and the early 2010s I think the stink of "bad quality licensed game" was still very fresh in the minds of consumers.

Click to shrink...

which means the next batman game can leverage the goodwill generated by the Arkham games by abandoning its branding, simultaneously acknowledging the good it's done while also avoiding turning off people burnt out on that series

 

[Jangowuzhere]

Arkham Knight is a cool title.

The only one that strikes me as dumb is Arkham Origins.

 

[Static]

the lastest Spider-Man will almost certainly get a sequel, but there's no subtitle, even though there have been other games with that same title. It sold gangbusters because it's Spider-Man, the most popular superhero. It will assuredly get a sequel in the same continuity, but it won't have a word to carry over other than "Spider-Man."

Batman could've gotten away without retaining a subtitle word and the games could've had "Lockdown" or "City of Fear" as the subtitles and no one would've batted an eye since the asylum was left behind

Click to shrink...

I think we got to the situation as you described it with City. When they extended that subtitle to the second game, they anchored every subsequent game to it, whether you think that's for better or for worse. I think that the Arkahm series now has an established look and feel and continuity, and an audience who know it as the Arkham games. Not the Batman games. I certainly don't talk about them as simply being Batman games, and that's fine.

Marvel and Insomniac have evidently chosen not to do that thing, but my suspicion is that they'll still make every effort to tie the sequel or sequels to the original in other ways, to make sure that every casual browser who played or even just heard the buzz about Spider-Man know that this is a game in the same lineage. Because why wouldn't they want to take advantage of all that good will?

I don't know. I don't think there's anything wrong with Arkham's choice to do the thing, or Spider-Man's choice not to. But Arkham is married to it, and I think the benefits for the consumer and the studios and publisher outweigh the dissonance of the games being relatively disconnected from the person or place named Arkham.

 

[carlsojo]

Arkham City is Arkham Asylum 2. It's the sequel to Arkham Asylum and expands Arkham as a prison. In fact the game was called Arkham Asylum 2 before the name Arkham City was officially revealed.

Click to shrink...

Nah man I want a game taking place in or around Arkham Asylum. Ditch the open world and go back to the Metroidvania-like dungeon of Arkham.

 

[Spring-Loaded]

Nah man I want a game taking place in or around Arkham Asylum. Ditch the open world and go back to the Metroidvania-like dungeon of Arkham.

Click to shrink...

I'd be all for a remake or reboot of the general Arkham Asylum concept, but make it a real/good Metroid-like with a better story with a non-horrible final encounter. Crib from Serious House on Serious earth or the Trial episode of the Animated series.

 

[Deleted member 59955]

Nah man I want a game taking place in or around Arkham Asylum. Ditch the open world and go back to the Metroidvania-like dungeon of Arkham.

Click to shrink...

The original is still there. Go play that.

which means the next batman game can leverage the goodwill generated by the Arkham games by abandoning its branding, simultaneously acknowledging the good it's done while also avoiding turning off people burnt out on that series

Click to shrink...

Not if it's in the Arkhamverse. If it's in the Arkhamverse then it needs to/should be called Arkham for consistency sake.

 

[Man Called Aerodynamics]

It's kind of silly how it ended up becoming the "Arkham series" even though only the first one has anything to do with Arkham, but whatever.

 

[Deleted member 59955]

It's kind of silly how it ended up becoming the "Arkham series" even though only the first one has anything to do with Arkham, but whatever.

Click to shrink...

Arkham City had to do with Arkham a whole lot. Arkham Origins was the origins of the Arkham series and Arkham Knight ended with Arkham Asylum and also had The Arkham Knight in it.

Arkham City literally showcases the story of how Arkham Asylum was closed and reused for Arkham City. Yet it's not about Arkham? Cmon.