I totally get the frustration about exclusivity, but I feel like it’s disingenuous to criticise this game for being exclusive. It’s pretty clear that at this point, almost 9 years later, warner bros had no intention of making more Arkham games, rocksteady had no intention of making more Arkham games, and WB was no way in hell going to fund another one. A lot of the upset I have seen just seems to be, “if I don’t get to have it, no one should!”, and it just doesn’t make sense. We should be happy that more Arkham content is getting made! On top of this meta is shilling out BIG dollars to fund something that is guaranteed to sell at a deficit. This doesn’t mean it won’t sell well, but Meta funding the studio, workers, advertising, etc themselves is a big ask. Obviously, when they are doing all of this, to MAXIMISE the potential of their current magnum opus, they are going to make it exclusive. I also hear many people saying “I don’t want to buy a Meta Quest 3”, which I just don’t fully get. Firstly, the quest is a console. It has a wide range of games, with many bigger ones on the horizon where flatscreen has been on a deficit. It is NOT just some ‘Facebook headset’; it is a gaming ecosystem that Arkham Shadow has the chance to bring to light. You also mentioned maybe investing in a PCVR headset, but two points on this: 1) PCVR headsets are like, triple the price of a quest, and ALSO require another 1000 dollar PC to play on! Talk about accessibility! Meta is by far the most affordable headset out there, and Meta is continuing to sell at a deficit to keep prices down. 2) The Quest 3 is also a PCVR headset! Many people don’t seem to understand what a VR headset is and what it does, but the Quest 3 is a powerful standalone headset with awesome PCVR capabilities as well! Finally, many people seem to think that such a game can just be ‘ported’ to console, or that this game was made instead of a console one. This is not the case! There was never going to be a console game! And on top of that, you can’t ask, Meta, who is already investing millions into the game, to then fund a flatscreen one as well when they are a VR company! That’s not how game development works, and it won’t ever work like that. I think many people are missing the fact that VR is awesome, and we have many good games on the horizon. Maybe this game can act as a wake up call for everyone.
@@Unclekhyle I’m glad you feel that way, and if anything, if the game receives enough love it may give WB a kick up the ass to greenlight a new flatscreen game!
Of all the "hater" reaction videos, this is one of the most reasonable ones. Like you said, Zuckerberg is the reason this is only on Meta Quest 3, but it's not like WB was making a new Arkham game and Zuck paid WB to keep it off from the consoles. It was Meta/Facebook/Zuck's company who wanted to make a Batman game to help them sell Quest 3 systems so they called WB and got the license to make a new game set in the Arkhamverse. Without Meta, this game wouldn't even exist, because it's their game, made by one of their first party studios. They're going to keep doing this, they did it with Medal of Honor, Resident Evil 4, Assassin's Creed, and now Batman. They at some point were going to remake GTA San Andreas for their Quest 3 and a new Splinter Cell, but those were canceled. Who knows what else will we see in the future? It wouldn't surprise me if they're after Halo, Call of Duty, etcetera next.
Try vr and you'll understand. Also, don't hate something you don't have a clue about. Quest is actually the primary pc vr headset besides being standalone. Time to catch up!
i do not have a problem with this game except it being only on quest. i have a valve index and vr headsets are expensive i am not going to just get a quest 3 or even the quest 3s just to play this game. they could even port the game to pc and i could play it with revive i don't give a shit it just sucks it is only on the "meta os" or whatever you call it
@@biqxed I feel your pain, but if you like vr, it's time to change horses. I also did it, I came from PSVR. The only headset right now who clearly has a future is Quest. This game is a prime example of that, no other vr company was willing to pay for a game like this. And this game is not the only one worth the jump for, you know that.
@gyorgyboszormenyi9078 true. But valve is coming out with there own quest like headset eventually. More leaks just came out about it so it is happening it's just a matter of when
@@biqxed Valve can certainly change the game again, but even then, I don't think Quest will be avoidable for vr fans for the foreseeable future, with its 8 first party studios, so everyone can safely jump on that too, no reason to wait and miss out.
Everyone that has played this game even Non-VR Arkham Batman fans absolutely loved it.
Quest 3 is a PCVR headset also.
I totally get the frustration about exclusivity, but I feel like it’s disingenuous to criticise this game for being exclusive. It’s pretty clear that at this point, almost 9 years later, warner bros had no intention of making more Arkham games, rocksteady had no intention of making more Arkham games, and WB was no way in hell going to fund another one. A lot of the upset I have seen just seems to be, “if I don’t get to have it, no one should!”, and it just doesn’t make sense. We should be happy that more Arkham content is getting made! On top of this meta is shilling out BIG dollars to fund something that is guaranteed to sell at a deficit. This doesn’t mean it won’t sell well, but Meta funding the studio, workers, advertising, etc themselves is a big ask. Obviously, when they are doing all of this, to MAXIMISE the potential of their current magnum opus, they are going to make it exclusive.
I also hear many people saying “I don’t want to buy a Meta Quest 3”, which I just don’t fully get. Firstly, the quest is a console. It has a wide range of games, with many bigger ones on the horizon where flatscreen has been on a deficit. It is NOT just some ‘Facebook headset’; it is a gaming ecosystem that Arkham Shadow has the chance to bring to light. You also mentioned maybe investing in a PCVR headset, but two points on this:
1) PCVR headsets are like, triple the price of a quest, and ALSO require another 1000 dollar PC to play on! Talk about accessibility! Meta is by far the most affordable headset out there, and Meta is continuing to sell at a deficit to keep prices down.
2) The Quest 3 is also a PCVR headset! Many people don’t seem to understand what a VR headset is and what it does, but the Quest 3 is a powerful standalone headset with awesome PCVR capabilities as well!
Finally, many people seem to think that such a game can just be ‘ported’ to console, or that this game was made instead of a console one. This is not the case! There was never going to be a console game! And on top of that, you can’t ask, Meta, who is already investing millions into the game, to then fund a flatscreen one as well when they are a VR company! That’s not how game development works, and it won’t ever work like that.
I think many people are missing the fact that VR is awesome, and we have many good games on the horizon. Maybe this game can act as a wake up call for everyone.
I really don't have a problem with the game existing as long as it didn't take anything away from potential console game
@@Unclekhyle I’m glad you feel that way, and if anything, if the game receives enough love it may give WB a kick up the ass to greenlight a new flatscreen game!
Looks good but fair
Of all the "hater" reaction videos, this is one of the most reasonable ones. Like you said, Zuckerberg is the reason this is only on Meta Quest 3, but it's not like WB was making a new Arkham game and Zuck paid WB to keep it off from the consoles. It was Meta/Facebook/Zuck's company who wanted to make a Batman game to help them sell Quest 3 systems so they called WB and got the license to make a new game set in the Arkhamverse. Without Meta, this game wouldn't even exist, because it's their game, made by one of their first party studios.
They're going to keep doing this, they did it with Medal of Honor, Resident Evil 4, Assassin's Creed, and now Batman. They at some point were going to remake GTA San Andreas for their Quest 3 and a new Splinter Cell, but those were canceled. Who knows what else will we see in the future? It wouldn't surprise me if they're after Halo, Call of Duty, etcetera next.
Hell yes. I'd love a Halo in VR
Keep crying 😂
Try vr and you'll understand. Also, don't hate something you don't have a clue about.
Quest is actually the primary pc vr headset besides being standalone. Time to catch up!
i do not have a problem with this game except it being only on quest. i have a valve index and vr headsets are expensive i am not going to just get a quest 3 or even the quest 3s just to play this game. they could even port the game to pc and i could play it with revive i don't give a shit it just sucks it is only on the "meta os" or whatever you call it
@@biqxed I feel your pain, but if you like vr, it's time to change horses. I also did it, I came from PSVR.
The only headset right now who clearly has a future is Quest. This game is a prime example of that, no other vr company was willing to pay for a game like this. And this game is not the only one worth the jump for, you know that.
@gyorgyboszormenyi9078 true. But valve is coming out with there own quest like headset eventually. More leaks just came out about it so it is happening it's just a matter of when
@@biqxed Valve can certainly change the game again, but even then, I don't think Quest will be avoidable for vr fans for the foreseeable future, with its 8 first party studios, so everyone can safely jump on that too, no reason to wait and miss out.