News Article

Batman: Arkham Origins Will Be Cheaper on Wii U

Posted by Tim Latshaw

Savings in lieu of online multiplayer

Although Batman: Arkham Origins for the Wii U will not be receiving the online multiplayer mode provided to its Xbox 360 and PS3 brethren, the omission does seem to be reflected in a lower price point.

Kotaku reports that a $50 price for the Wii U version has been confirmed with a representative of publisher Warner Brothers Interactive. The other console versions will be going for $60.

The Wii U Arkham Origins will offer the same single-player campaign found in other versions as well as a season pass granting access to DLC add-ons.

Is $50 for Arkham Origins enticing even if its utility belt isn’t as fully stocked? Let us know below.


From the web

Game Screenshots

User Comments (95)



evildevil97 said:

This, I'm okay with. If they're going to omit features, at least they can charge less for them.



BTTFDeacon said:

Yeah I will get it on the Wii U now. Since they were omiting features I was a bit sceptical but omiting features for a cheaper price point is an insentive



Bulbousaur said:

I would rather have multiplayer than $10 extra to be honest, but I guess this is a decent compromise for some people. If I ever get the game it'll be for PS3 though...



JaredJ said:

this seals the deal for the wii u version for me. I was considering the ps3 version for the 60s tv show Bat suit. But for $10 cheaper I will take the Wii U version.



MussakkuLaden said:

Personally I don't care about the multiplayer, nor do I expect that it'll be any good anyway. Therefore having the game for 10 dollar less would actually be an advantage, that is for me personally.
But on the other hand, I would not buy that game for full price anyway and the price may drop faster on the other systems..., which I don't have, though.
So, anyway, irrespective of the lack of multiplayer, it's nice to see that one game is actually cheaper on WiiU - and not more expensive, as so many others were.



ShadowFox254 said:

$10 huh? Then Warner Brothers won't mind when I'll wait for the GOTY edition. That way, I won't be able to give them to much money. PC or Wii U.



Chris720 said:

Well you can't complain with that I suppose... Still, why no online on Wii U? The Wii U can obviously handle online gameplay.



SkywardCrowbar said:

Nice. Very nice. I mean, I was already going to get this and the Season Pass, but this is greatly appreciated and justified. The base game won't have as much stuff as on other consoles, therefore it shouldn't cost as much.



Chris720 said:

@Shiryu I understand that, but how else is the install base going to get bigger if you don't provide what is common place on other consoles? No one wants to buy an inferior version, especially with the online component not apart of the Wii U version.



Shiryu said:

@Chris720 True, it's a double edged sword and one that always (ALWAYS!) end's up gettig us, the consumer, screwed. But we will endure, because for every "offline Batman" version out there, there is also a "The Wonderful 101" and Nintendo IP exclusives in our box of joy.



Urbanhispanic said:

I actually would have liked to see the online multiplayer so I'm a lil' bummed out. On the other hand, since when does the publisher knock off some dollars to acknowledge that one version of the game isn't getting all of the features that the others versions will have? If the game shows itself to be a quality title, then we should support WB by purchasing it.



MrGawain said:

Explain to me why then you can buy it on for £37.99, but the PS3/Xbox 360 versions are £30?



Platypus101 said:

Hasn't it always been this way? It was always 10$ cheaper for the Wii version... It's just been recently that the games have been priced at equal to the rest (doesn't look to be working, online sale soon?!) oh well, we can always dream.



AtlanteanMan said:

This may seem like an insignificant article, but personally I'd like to see more companies try this for reasons other than the obvious point about paying less for a version with omitted features. The industry has long been in a destructive rut where online-enabled gaming is concerned, and their decisions are typically guided by perceived profit without a glimpse at the value for the consumer.

On the surface it might seem that lacking online multiplayer would render the Wii U version of Batman: Arkham Origins the "inferior" one, but that really depends on the player and what they buy the game to experience (this would apply to ANY title). The Batman: Arkham series has always been about epic single-player storylines, exploration, and experiences at its core; multiplayer can be a bonus but is hardly necessary, but remember the emphasis on ONLINE here. Over this past generation alone games have seen a drastic decline in lengthy single-player campaigns, and offline multiplayer is almost never even mentioned anymore despite the huge HDTVs we have now that we'd have loved to have during the heydays of GoldenEye 007, Halo: Combat Evolved, Mario Kart 64, and so on. For the record, I don't hate online play but after so much experiencing the team-killing, cursing, and general antisocial behavior of total strangers online, I'd much prefer to just be able to enjoy a gaming session on the couch with my friends and family or an outstanding, epic quest and story during an all-nighter with a JRPG or other single-player campaign. Games have gotten away from what made me fall in love with them in the first place.

The reason has nothing to do with hardware technical limitations (obviously) and also nothing to do with practicality for the consumer; it's all about the money, baby, as are the vast majority of the industry's directions as of late that have ticked gamers off. By centering around online-enabled functions developers can control players' access to content after the point of sale, adding scads of additional dollars to that $60 purchase through DLC (some of which has already been on the disc in many games but you have to pay for to "unlock"), the ill-fated Online Pass and "Always Online" experiments by EA, Activision, and Microsoft, and whatever else they can think of to separate you from your money. And the control mechanism doesn't end there, of course; the intrusive system updates we've come to endure are there to prevent anyone from ever being able to enjoy devices like a Game Genie or Pro Action Replay again if we choose to. The aforementioned "Always Online" was meant to end gamers' ability to sell their used games, which would have essentially destroyed the brick-and-mortar retail games sector. Control is the name of the game, over not just their product but over YOU.

One game, even one as high-profile as Batman: Arkham Origins isn't enough to return things to a semblance of value for the money for gamers; it would take a lot more such titles offering the lesser-priced offline-only option. But if it were to happen, I've little doubt that sales figures for the "lesser" versions would more than justify a hard look by the industry at returning to offering better and more expansive single and local multiplayer options. For some of us, online is not just highly overrated; we've come to see it as a Trojan Horse we want less and less to do with.



Darknyht said:

Wish they would have announced this prior to me purchasing WInd Waker HD. I already have completed Wind Waker on Gamecube, and would much rather beat up criminals as Batman.



JaxonH said:

Well, you can essentially pre order it on Amazon for $39.99 with free shipping, since they are also offering $10 credit on the Wii U version. I'd actually have paid full MSRP for this on Wii U though, since the gamepad integration in Arkham City was so well thought out. Don't think I'd ever want to play this game without a second screen...



LordJumpMad said:

You might as well cut out Batman from the game, and just rename it Robin:Sidekick Origins for the Wii U.



JaxonH said:

Wow, that's the most insightful thing I've read all week! Well said. I wish people would stop automatically equating "no multiplayer" with "not worth buying". This game never was supposed to have multiplayer in the first place, and everyone was excited for it. Then they announced multiplayer, and that Wii U wouldn't have it, and all of a sudden people start saying they don't want the game. What sense does that make? It's still the exact same game you thought it was before they ever announced multiplayer. That hasn't changed. AND it's cheaper ($39.99- the price of a HANDHELD game), AND it has gamepad integration, AND full DLC with season pass. All these things considered, why would anyone NOT want this game on Wii U?



JaxonH said:

It's not about whether Wii U can handle it, it's about the projected pay to earn ratio. How much do they want to INVEST in a version that A) isn't going to sell well and B) will have little to no online presence?

One only needs to look at Batman Arkham City to get an idea for how this new game will sell. Arkham City didn't do bad compared to most other 3rd party multiplats on Wii U, but it certainly didn't do well.



Rafie said:

Trust me when I tell you all that the PS3/360 crowd would have loved to not have multiplayer in it. I sure didn't want it. The Wii U crowd ain't missing anything. I'm getting it for the PS3 because I have my other Batman games on it with trophies. Then again, I liked Batman so much that I bought the 360 version and beat it there too. Both Batman games on both systems.



unrandomsam said:

@JaxonH They could have it in with cross platform mutliplayer. (Be in their interest if the Wii U version was the best as if people actually liked this then they may buy two copies).

Me I like it but not enough to be bothered prior to a GOTY edition.



rjejr said:

@MussakkuLaden - "But on the other hand, I would not buy that game for full price anyway and the price may drop faster on the other systems"

PS3 games do tend to drop in price a lot faster, though that is skewed by Nintendo 1st party games taking nearly forever to drop. Darksiders 2 and AC3 did both drop on the Wii U though so maybe things will equal out. SM3DW will still be $60 for 5 years though.



MixMasterMudkip said:

Ugh! I'm so cross about this game! While i want to get it i'd rather wait year until it rereleases with all the content on it. I'm just gonna hope for that.



FJOJR said:

Awesome, same great game without the hassle of getting trounced online.



Captain_Gonru said:

@CanisWolfred I think it depends on the title. Some have, others are less. Depends on the game, I guess. Though, in the case of Wii U, we've yet to see a GOTY edition of anything on Wii U, outside of the titles that came that way the first time around.



Captain_Balko said:

Does anybody know if EB Games in Canada will use this price now? I have it pre-ordered from them so I get the Deathstroke bonus, but I'm not sure if it's worth paying an extra 10$ for... Help?



TingLz said:

If this was an EA game, they'd probably charge extra for "added features"



tebunker said:

Just thought I would add, as I didn't see it skimming through the comments, but at least in the states, you get a $10 credit on top of the $50 price tag on Amazon. I may jump on it now...



ricklongo said:

Not a fan of the Arkham series (I know, I know, odd man out), but I really appreciate this move. This shouldn't be the kind of game that's known for its online multiplayer anyway.



CaviarMeths said:

Still just getting the PS3 version so that I have all 3 games on one console. The price difference is nifty though.



SetupDisk said:

If the multi turns out to be crap I will get the Wii U version. I liked playing AC with the gamepad much more than AA with my PS3 controller. Though I still think AA was a slightly better game. I would love to play through AA again with the gamepad.



JadedGamer said:

Nintendo first party exclusives dont have multiplayer either.(I got w101 and its ok)Thats never been a deal breaker for me. but it doesnt satisfy the hardcore fan..I got lost worlds,WW,and 3d world coming in the span of a month.So this game's an after thought..



HappyHappy said:

Well, that kinda makes up for the lack on online multiplayer, but still not interested in it though.



Shambo said:

I couldn't care less about online, but I would NOT have even considered buying 'half' the game for the full price. Now, I'm back in I guess. Although I'm not sure if I'll go for the Wii U or 3ds version, they both seem awesome in their own way.



phazon said:

I'll get this eventually for my wii u. by then, if the multiplayer is any good and if the wii u picks up sales, maybe they'll add multiplayer to the wii u version



Dauntless said:

I'll wait for the game of the year edition. I don't know why online is such a big deal. This isn't a game I would buy for online. This is a single player game to me. But charging the same price as the 360/ps3 would be unfair because of the missing feature. This is a better offer but, I'm still waiting for the game of the year edition for $30. It will happen eventually sooner rather then later. I don't need to play this right away.



brandonbwii said:

I find it odd that people complain about omissions from a game with a discount but don't even mention the potential fun of Wii U Gamepad features. It sure helped Splinter Cell IMO.



Jaz007 said:

Sweet, I'll keep my Gamestop pre-order now instead of switching to Amazon. I probably would end never playing the multiplayer, so the lower price and gamepad is a good trade off for me.



hcfwesker said:

@rjejr Dude! Super Mario 64 DS ( we're talking about one of the first games released for the original DS almost 9 years ago) is STILL $34.95 at Walmart here in the US. Nintendo doesn't budge at all, though they do rarely, on 1st party price drops. lol

As mentioned above by some real insightful posts ... I love the Batman games for their single player campaign only, I NEVER cared about online multiplayer when it was mentioned, and I already pre-ordered this off Amazon a few months back for WiiU. This and DK Tropical Freeze are my 2 most anticipated titles for the holiday season.



Noend said:

I bought this on ps3 (or 360 can't remember) last year to play in 3d which was awesome. I don't think they do 3d anymore, ping me if I'm wrong.

I already preordered it on Wii u awhile ago. Gamepad baby, I'm loving it with splintercell, Rayman and Pikmin 3.



StarBoy91 said:


Sorry, I just love that joke from Nostalgia Critic's Batman & Robin review; it's a really timeless line! XD



Nico_D said:

Okay, if it gets belivable and good reviews, I'll get it now. That's a good gesture from WB.



Marshi said:

Great news...for the usa. But for us in the uk and and eu its still full price. Thats just an even worse admissioe of ignorance and arogance from warner bros. Grrr



darkswabber said:

already pre-ordered for the wiiU the game in july.
don't care much about the online (actually care a lot about it XD).
i still think they will patch it when the wiiU sales are better.



withoutdk said:

a lot of people buy games because of the multiplayer features.... and of course wii u does not get it... why? because then people wont buy it for their damn ps3 or xboxes.



Znerd said:

Hey this is a good deal cause i really dont see how Multiplayer Would be fair if everyone on the game had a map on the GamePad
But then i dont see the point of having multiplayer in an Arkham game



UnseatingKDawg said:

I see this as somewhat of a silver lining, especially for those who don't play multiplayer often, if at all.



Gunnerholic said:

I was going to get it for the Wii U regardless, online multiplayer does not interest me in the slightest, never has. I think a large number of Nintendo users feel the same, I for one would rather play local multiplayer any day than against some snot nosed kid who has nothing better than to spend 24 hours a day 'practising'. Which is why I was really surprised Ubisoft went with online mp for Splinter Cell and omitted the local co-op mode.... :/



DarkNinja9 said:

eh to me this is a middle ground between those who like only the story mode VS those who like the full game and try the multiplayer if the game has one

in the end the taxes still ends up being like $60 >.< plus shipping if you buy online like i do



CanisWolfred said:

@DarkNinja9 Ouch, and I thought our 8% was bad, but I guess you have 20% tax? Bummer. And no free shipping, either? double bummer.

...Maybe you should start shopping somewhere else, dude, you're getting ripped off. -_-



AJWolfTill said:

Not sure if that's a reasonable comparison as it had been out for a year on other consoles.
I don't own a PS3 or 360 and yet I still picked up City on PC



SetupDisk said:

I like online multi but so far this series has been focused on single. If it turns out like Tomb Raider where the single player is amazing but the multi is crap it's a definite Wii U purchase. Which I think might be the case here.



Megatonwhale said:

Well that's decided then I'm not the biggest fan of Online MP modes anyway so I kind of feel like the Wii U port has become the ideal version for me.



JaxonH said:

Oh my dear Rafie, what I would do to open your eyes to the wonders of gamepad integration in Arkham City lol



JaxonH said:

Lack of multiplayer is a blessing in disguise! Without multiplayer announced for other versions, we'd all be paying $60 for this game when it releases. But, thanks to WB the Wii U version doesn't have the tacked on multiplayer (and it literally is"tacked on" seeing as another studio developed it for them to add in), which as a result, gave us a way out of full MSRP.

Thank you kindly WB for not including the needless MP, and instead giving us a less expensive price for a game with added gamepad integration. That's what's up right there. I wish ALL developers of single-player games would do this for us.



MitchVogel said:

I'm glad they're doing this. I wouldn't have touched multiplayer anyways, so it's nice to not have to pay for it. I look at multiplayer in this the same I do for Assassin's Creed. It's just a tacked on extra so they can say it has multiplayer. No thanks.



ZesuBen said:

This was a really good decision. There's now a reason to get the Wii U version other than to just get the Wii U version. Good business practices.



P-Gamer-C said:

if u want the real full experience get a real gamers console i will either get this on pc or ps4 but even the other 'current' gen consoles will do like a ps3 or xbone360



hcfwesker said:

Hopefully this sends a message to other 3rd party devs who half donkey their games for WiiU with missing content.



DESS-M-8 said:


A reduced price point for fewer features is brilliant.
In all honesty I don't care about the content thats missing either. I own Arkham Asylum and Arkham City and have played the multiplayer maybe once ever. If I'd have paid less for those titles and not had access to the online multiplayer I'd have been very happy. If the Wii U wasn't getting the DLC then I'd be annoyed, missing out on content like "Harley's Revenge" would have been a big blow. But the Wii U is getting all DLC relating to the main game AND as a season pass.

So, game on and Day One purchase for me, this game looks amazing.



QuickSilver88 said:

Put me in the category of people who just don't give a damned about online gaming whatsoever...maybe it is a generational thing....I am an old school, dawn of time gamer and I just hate about all things online. In so many ways online features are tacked on and are shallow....obviously MMORPG, Head to head sports games or squad FPS games are games meant for online and make sense. I liked the first Batman a lot on x360 but never got to the second one....I will wait to see how this pans out but actually am more looking forward to 3DS version.



wombatkidd said:

@Chris720 My understanding is that they outsourced programming for online to a developer who has no experience in coding for the Wii U so they just didn't bother doing it.

Leave A Comment

Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...