No, you are spot on about that game. I have not played it either but I have watched enough and read enough to know it's garbage. GAAS plus sweet baby inc. is a formula for fail. Know your audience or suffer the consequences. It is that simple.
First of all, I want to say that I
support Rocksteady and
I did indeed buy that game (if initially in protest). I enjoyed the campaign; the animations are top-notch (with some decent banter as well), but feel the endgame and live-service elements as they've been implemented are tedious, even though the gameplay can be fun. There are certain elements of these games that are very difficult to pull-off/maintain, such as initial balancing/meta-shifts and changing mechanics/goals over time, which do in-fact require that very thing to get right (time).
With that requires some patience from the community, which this game has never been afforded,
and was never going to be afforded.
There's also the difficult aspect of how to monetize different aspects (ex: an expansion or a micro-transaction) of additional content, which in this case I think they got completely wrong.
It could be better (even with the same bones) if the structure were different, imo, as well as more varied (or better-utilized) content.
Perhaps target-farming increasingly difficult unique missions for better gear on a shifting meta across missions (leading up to a raid to acquire a character) rather than grinding difficulty ranks per mission.
It also would've helped a SUBSTANTIAL amount if MP had not been broken for months, as well as copious other bugs. It needed another beta/more-testing for sure, and probably more time in the oven.
I think they've worked many of them out now, but obviously these things are always a WIP.
There's also another issue, which you
very clearly fail to recognize, but I'm going to save that for the end of this post...
because I very much dislike being the guy that has to say it.
But somebody has to say it...in some amount of paragraphs from now.
I'm not trying to make excuses nor be an apologist, because the game (as it launched/sits) is far from perfect,
but some people use that (after the) fact as a shield for their negative sentiment that they developed long before they knew that and said sentiment was and/or is in-fact bolstered by something else.
I feel it's likely they didn't have the manpower (and/or experience in a live-service title) for initial acceptance to happen,
especially given their circumstances. At least not very quickly. In hindsight, given...
not yet...this game may have been better-served if their year of live-service content had been incorporated into the main campaign (without the repetitive mission-grinding structure). That said, that content may not have been possible without the extra time (or indeed funding from the initial game), not-to-mention these games generally improve over time as more content becomes available. People were never going to give TSSKTJL the time it needed to evolve and grow, even though that's always been needed for these types of games, and that's for a several reasons, but let's touch on a couple.
People forget games like Destiny, including it's sequel, likely had over
one thousand voices working on them at their height; not just ALL of Bungie, but Vicarious Visions (RIP, they made great stuff) and High Moon Studios, yet still had rocky entry points with little worth-while repeatable content at the beginning. Something something...Better Devils meme. Something something...Two tokens and a blue.
You probably don't get those references. It's okay.
You also don't get the last couple also likely gave a couple
really good dudes some
really bad days, but that's not your fault. (I'll share the responsibility on that one.)
Speaking of said team, to this day I still hope that certain Diablo support studio will walk-out en masse into the open arms of Sony contracts. But hey, I know it's not realistic, nor do I know if those same people still work there or if they would want to do that. All I know is that they do good work on whatever they make, and that included Destiny.
Rocksteady is something like 250 people, not dissimilar (or perhaps even less in it's case) to what I would guess work on The Division 2 (Massive is something like ~750 iirc, but until recently they were also working on Avatar and Outlaws). Live-service teams are generally (too, imo) small, and they carry a lot on their shoulders (including the thankless job of [especially good-natured] community managers; remember how bad it was for Anthem?). But that game (TD2/Div2) too initially had something like (off the top of my head, I forget the exact number) 1200 people or something work on the initial game release...and that's why it's literally been one of the few examples of a live-service game that has had legs: because there was a ton of initial content (which stayed in the game), and is in-fact very repeatable/reworkable, while inviting new people to experience it for the first time.
While I play The Division (2) and very much appreciate that Ubi has continued to support it for years, I also understand the limitations of what the (current) devs are able to accomplish within a certain amount of time. I think most of it's players do. They (the players) also continue to grind for exotics to level up their gear; come back to play (re-occuring) events or the new monthly story content; because not only is there a chase and (cycling) unique ways to play the game: they want to support a thing that keeps supporting them. The content is FREE, as are the new rewards. It survives not cynically just to keep it relevant as Ubisoft's (perhaps surprisingly to some) premiere franchise, but because I think many players give them that season pass and/or cosmetic money. Not because they always need/want the stuff...but because the dev team DESERVES IT for what they do (and how they communicate). Again, this is not unlike people buying whisper/outbreak ornaments in D2 (after *extra*/*secret* content that rewarded those items).
It's support, but also appreciation.
People were never going to give TSSKTJL the time it needed to evolve or figure out it's own monetization strat, even though that's always been needed for these types of games.
Those reasons come down to those very basic aspects mentioned above.
The first is because this is a studio that made the single-player Arkham games. Those players not only were largely not live-service players; (and imo) were never going to be live-service players. Because of that development
some of those players were openly
resentful, which encouraged others to follow that path where-as I feel many otherwise would not have done that. From the moment it was announced (far into development), 'influencers' piled negativity onto this game, and hence their followers did as they do, or at the very least perpetuated it by covering those perspectives. From there it spiraled into constant digging for negative press and click-bait to feed that manufactured outrage because some people literally just want to
make money...
watch...
create a trainwreck. This was not helped by the unfortunate passing of Kevin Conroy, whom people obviously cherish, especially when what happens in the
initial part of the game leaked...which only gave more ammuniton to those that were shit-talking a game most had not hardly seen, let-alone played. Because of this not only did Rocksteady lose support (over work long-finished and nobody knew[/knows?] the complete context, as well as a situation they couldn't control), people lost their appreciation, instead focusing on the worst parts of what happened.
In essence, communal negativity killed this thing before it was even born...and that pissed me off. A lot. Because that wasn't fair to the time Rocksteady spent on it...IS STILL SPENDING ON IT.
Which is likely difficult (to work on and make good content) when you know the public sentiment is bad.
(Did I just have a self-reflective moment wrt Bungie devoting resources to Marathon? I absolutely did. That is why I write. Because nobody is perfect, but we should all try to think of ways to try to be better.)
It wasn't...and isn't...fair to Kevin's (past or perhaps yet-unseen) work....or anybody's work...to approach this game with a
specific type of demeanor.
It's fine if you don't like specific elements of the game THEY DECIDED TO MAKE, it's fine to be critical; perhaps there's something to be learned from your perspective.
The old saying goes something like: Critique the art that is there, not what you want to be there.
That saying still holds true, but in live-service games you can actually give suggestions and if enough people agree they might actually do that thing, hence making something (overall) better for everyone.
Understand the difference?
When many see the meme about "when you set yourself to offline to play TSSKTJL", some people laugh. I get angry, and for the same reason: it's true.
Some people made association with the game toxic.
--------
@DAPUNISHER
Not people like that company you mentioned...which me a couple lives ago would have told you off for regurgitating blaming, me a life ago would have blocked, but in this life will write a long-ass post...no.
People like YOU. Somebody whom hasn't played the game and knows nothing but what someone else told you to dislike for reasons you don't even understand, and they likely don't either.
FUCK. THAT. SHIT.
Do not be the guy that responds to this by stating everyone has the right to be critical, because I know they do, but that's not criticism. That's ignorant and malicious hear-say. That...is...THE...problem.
Don't be part of the problem. Think for yourself, propose a solution, or kindly STFU.
--------
Point being, it appeared *almost* nobody wanted this game to succeed regardless of it's initial state or what may come after, and so it didn't. I do not think that was a natural occurance, but a by-product.
Myself, otoh, was excited by the game. Partially because I didn't have an attachment to it; I was anticipating getting to understand the Arkhamverse so many people loved and this was *my* way in because I really do enjoy live-service games. Part of it was the notion (that I really didn't want to talk about because sometimes a *guess* can sometimes either set unfair expectations and/or screw up somebody's plan) of what they could do with this game. I had always figured the title was just a controversial way to begin a typical comic arc and get people to pay attention (which partially back-fired because of said unforeseen tragic event, but also bc some loud people are extremely ignorant). I figured it was likely (over time) they planned to not only bring them back (especially coinciding with James Gunn wanting to reboot the WHOLE DC Universe and do transmedia) and perhaps even make them playable. None of that was out of the question. Perhaps they had Batman (or Batman-aided) missions planned, as well as Wonder Woman (super weird that her own game is being developed in what could've been this game's lifecycle...right? Not really). There is/was a lot of potential for this game, and even though I know the mechanics are different, I've begun to appreciate some of Rocksteady's strengths, including their long-form story-telling (which I guess that others used to appreciate somehow don't care about anymore).
There came a moment at the end of the campaign in which a certain thing happens. I literally cried for five minutes. You might think that's weird, but I don't think it is.
I only had passing knowledge of Kevin Conroy before this game's life-cycle (being a video game nerd; watching some Arrowverse and small amounts of the animated series growing up).
But after what Rocksteady did, I felt I could support and relate to his stance; it also showed that they had a tremendous amount of respect/appreciation for him (by how they did it). Those things all matter.
It was because of this that I decided I will forever support this game, however long it lasts. It's not perfect, it may never be great. I don't care. I will support those people because I appreciate what they did.
Because of playing this game, I even grew to appreciate Batman; the legacy and future. I even started paying attention to some content creators that do very good work following it.
Hell, there's even a singer that used to go by Batman I follow (now) that changed his name to...
...Oh wait. That's the post I
wanted to make, one about the how absurdly clever Stellar Blade is; how much I want to thank Hyungtae Kim et al for creating it; Shuhei Yoshida et al for fostering it.
How it reminds me of Parasite Eve; the first Square Japan game worked on by a Western Studio, or other correlated ideas that have had, or could have, positive impact on the world (if in retrospect).
Instead, no...I have to remind, if not teach somebody about the cardinal rule of ANY forum:
DON'T BE AN ASSHOLE. 
Thanks
