Warner buys Batman dev Rocksteady

By Robert Purchese Published 23 February, 2010

To Arkham Asylum 2 and beyond.

Batman licence-holder Warner Bros. has bought Batman: Arkham Asylum maker Rocksteady Studios for an undisclosed sum.

Warner had already secured publishing rights to Batman sequel Arkham Asylum 2 from Eidos/Square Enix. This was the inevitable next step in the relationship, apparently.

Warner's plan from here is to publish more Batman games plus other titles "based on widely recognised Warner Bros. brands". After the company's recent spending splurge, these include properties like Mortal Kombat and The Lord of the Rings.

Batman: Arkham Asylum 2 has no release date nor confirmed platforms. The first game, Batman: Arkham Asylum, was released on PC, PS3 and Xbox 360.Read our review and discover one of 2009's best games.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (33) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • CaptainQuint #1 2 years ago

    Rocksteady are to be groomed by WB to drain the living shit out of the Batman franchise. I hope your all looking forward to Batman 19, 'cox you're sure as hell gonna be playing it!

  • ChthonicEcho #2 2 years ago

    Considering how lovably visceral combat was in Arkham Asylum, I certainly wouldn't pass up a Mortal Kombat developed by Rocksteady.

  • mungolikebeans #3 2 years ago

    Hooray! Big corporate bread heads buy dynamic independent. How inevitably depressing.

    Capitalism sucks.

  • TeaFiend #4 2 years ago

    As long as WB do not ask for too many changes I will be quite happy.

  • Quint2020 #5 2 years ago

    Shame to see another independent British developer go.

  • Gearskin #6 2 years ago

    Bigger budget = more potential. Arkham Asylum x 1000

  • Dylbot #7 2 years ago

    If they can consistently make games of the same quality as Arkham Asylum then I'd be quite happy to see Rocksteady be fed all the IPs they can eat. Here's hoping that the WB let them get on with rather than turning the thumbscrews.

  • mungolikebeans #8 2 years ago

    'As long as WB do not ask for too many changes...'

    Oh, they will...


    Bigger budget = more scrutiny from money men who don't understand creative process.

    Potentially Arkham Asylum/1000

    Miserable cynical rant over.....

  • EgbertoTheGreat #9 2 years ago

    Why so negative? If WB wanted to flog Batman to death they wouldn't have objected to Pandemic's game and they would have simply farmed the title out rather than investing in a quality developer. It's sad to lose an independent but good to see serious investment coming in from a sector that's traditionally seen games as little more than an easy buck.

  • mungolikebeans #10 2 years ago

    @EgbertoTheGreat

    I hope you're right, i really do.

  • RedPanda #11 2 years ago

    Post deleted at 14:31:59 28-01-2012

  • TeaFiend #12 2 years ago

    Because it is a proven fact that having a publisher giving you money means that your game will be rubbish. Wait.

  • BBIAJ #13 2 years ago

    Does this sink any hope of there being a next-gen Urban Chaos: Riot Response sequel then? :o(

  • Lee_Morris #14 2 years ago

    I hope AA 2 isn't rushed out.

  • alimokrane #15 2 years ago

    Oh... another one goes..... Rest in peace Batman.

  • menage #16 2 years ago

    They'd better leave them alone, give them money sure, but butt out.

  • Postumo #17 2 years ago

    WB Boss to Rocksteady:

    Dear developers

    you must understand that we have an schedule and we have to get profit to make our shareholders happy.
    I hope you understand this. We need the game to be released A.S.A.P. so we can get money out of it before the end of our fiscal year.
    In order to get this you must finish the game within the next month. Innovation, deep plots or engine polishment are secundary, you can patch the game after the release and sell, if you haven't finished it yet, the ending as DLC as people surely will want to expand their experience . We are sure the game will sell better if it's similar to the one we sold last year so don't worry about the lack of new content due to yearly release. We know the business, let us show you the way.

    XXXX XXXXXXX
    CEO at WB Studios
    Best wishes.

  • Gearskin #18 2 years ago

    The internet is depressing. Why don't we all just kill ourselves?

  • kangarootoo #19 2 years ago

    I understand the fear that people have about WB "messing with the art", but if there is one thing worse for an indie than having external meddling, it is running out of funds and going under. In this climate, financial security is an important consideration, whatever else is hapenning. Hopefully it will all work out well for them.

  • strange_powers #20 2 years ago

    The pressures on Rocksteady now will be very similar to the pressures on Rocksteady before. Does anyone really think Eidos, with their presumably expensive Batman licence, were some sort of relaxed indie developers commune? Or that Rocksteady are headed by some sort of Mark E Smith-style maverick?

  • TeaFiend #21 2 years ago

    As much as "OMG WB IS HUEG" and only care of their shareholders, they seem to have done well enough with movies. Which are also a creative media and require large amounts of money. I am pretty sure they are aware of what a game is and how to work it.

  • Skurmedel #22 2 years ago

    I dunno about that TeaFiend, the two last Batman movies were very good but, ... Matrix... I could've sworn I saw a sequel to the first movie, but I think it must been a nightmare because it sucked giant balls.

    On the other hand, that Matrix game they squeezed out was better than the average movie license game (according to the reviews at least)
    Edited by 1 at 23/02/10 @ 12:08

  • TeaFiend #23 2 years ago

    The second and third Matrix films are ok. They are not the best nor did they have the OMGness of the first.

    Looking through the list of games they have published, mneh. They have done a lot of distribution deals rather than actual publishing. MAybe they will reaslise there is a cashcow here and fill it up a bit?

  • BillyBrush #24 2 years ago

    The negativity is baffling imo...you think Eidos weren't having a big ol say in their games already?

    Warner foster more creative talent than Rocksteady games already, and tbh not just on the film side. They have Monolith, who if you've not noticed, have produced 4 18 rated violent as they come games this gen...I'm sure the marketing man didn't dictate that they should create a game where you play as a drunk cop that hits psychos with a shovel.

    So...big corporate buys dynamic independent...boo hoo, next week foaming at the mouth over some screenshots of God of War or crackdown 2...irony bypassed

    How do you think Warner became a 'big corporate' anyway? by selling steel?, manufacturing electronic components?....or from a more creative medium?

    They're better than about 90% of the games publishers whose games you are probably looking forward to, and i think it's very good that they're involved in the games business...they can only offer other options, and if people like Rocksteady want to go with them....well, maybe just maybe they think that's because they offer them the best future.

  • WrongShui #25 2 years ago

    I don't understand the negativity about this, Bruce Timm has been doing the best work with Batman for warner bros over the last 15 years or so with the animated franchise, still going strong with the new DVD movies aswell.

    Since the writer for AA and the majority of the voice talent came from that this news seems good to me.

    But then again, grr, big business is bad

  • Duchessprozac #26 2 years ago

    I'm mixed on this. On the one hand, WB can give Rocksteady a security that they wouldn't get as an indie but it's the wording of their statement that worries me. It sounds too much like something Activision would spout.

    Here's hoping it's just corporate PR crap and they're not going to farm out Rocksteady on an ever decreasing circle of shitty DC based games.

  • Skurmedel #27 2 years ago

    How is them working with a creative medium relevant really? Working with a creative medium doesn't mean the end result will be good, or even creative. It may not even mean that the process employed by the company is creative.

    (Yes minus me Mr. I don't agree, why discuss it...)
    Edited by 2 at 23/02/10 @ 14:15

  • SpaceMonkey77 #28 2 years ago

    I can understand the concern for Rock Steady. with the amount of film licenses Warner have in the pipe (Green Lantern etc) I would hate for Rock Steady to be burnt out on that stuff.

    Square Enix had a major asset in Rock Steady, namely a western developer who can make good action games. This sounds insane considering action games are Square's biggest weakness, but money talks I guess. Their loss.

    Besides that Warner purchased the dismal MK license, which I'd hate for RS to be lumped with. The up side is they'll have access to exclusive stuff.

  • iHAZaCHEEZ3burger #29 2 years ago

    If they implement a good combat system to a LOTR game like they did with Batman I wouldn't complain. I just hope they don't start milking franchises.

  • jefranklin18 #30 2 years ago

    It is far, far better that Rocksteady continue to be able to pay the bills than maintain any "artistic freedom" at the cost of a potential loss of revenue. If Rocksteady can produce other WB IPs with the same level of attention detail as Arkham Asylum, then WB have got themselves a great revenue stream.

  • Vixremento #31 2 years ago

    I loved Arkham Asylum - and I bought the PC version so I'm just hoping they also release the second one on all of the platforms...it's just really too good for anyone to miss out on. As long as they bring more interesting fights in like those that we had in the first one then I'm sold - perhaps a few new gadgets/weapons earlier on in the game too!

    Also, let's hope they don't fall into this "always connected" drm crap...now if only we had a sure fire way to really cut down on the pirates hurting the more deserving games like this one (I'll never get to play AC2, C&C4, etc. because of them screwballs).

  • VibratingDonkey #32 2 years ago

    Well that kind of sucks. Now they'll be assigned to developing games based on various Warner IP's for all eternity. :\

  • vegard #33 2 years ago

    so...expect a shitload of dlc for these games