It’s OK If We Never Get a Good Superman Game

Not to sound like Lex Luthor but the Man of Steel is a menace to society. Specifically Superman is a plague upon gaming, over which he looms like a sprawling shadow. The common refrain, one making waves again thanks to the release of James Gunn’s new film, is that there are no good games starring the character. There are two issues with this claim. For starters, it’s not entirely true. But more importantly, we don’t need a good Superman game.
Let’s start with the facts. Superman has appeared in videogames before. The most notable interactive adaptations include a first outing on the Atari 2600 in 1979, a reviled Nintendo 64 attempt, and an interesting but under-developed tie-in to 2006’s Superman Returns. Each attempts to bring the Man of Steel to games in a different way but the thing that unites them is their underwhelming delivery, at least in the mind of the audience.
A recurring issue plaguing Superman, in games but also in any medium, is what has become known as the “Superman problem.” As an (for all intents and purposes) invulnerable and all-powerful being, it’s hard to give Superman the required challenges to make any story starring the character feel compelling. A byproduct of this is the often spouted belief Superman is an inherently boring character. This goes doubly for games, in which giving the player a challenging (but surmountable) obstacle can be the entire gameplay loop. There have been attempts at getting around this problem; Superman Returns notably forgoes a health bar for the hero in place of a health bar for the city of Metropolis itself. This was a clever way to link your actions to the responsibility of the hero, yet this still didn’t quite deliver the fantasy people wanted. Which raises the question: what do people want out of a “good” Superman game?