I can never keep up. I'm interested in AC but with so many games released so quickly I'm scared to start.
Batman: Arkham Origins Review Thread
- Thread starter Poetic.Injustice
- Start date
I can never keep up. I'm interested in AC but with so many games released so quickly I'm scared to start.
captainnapalm
Member
If you're going to attack a franchise that has created its own, unigue highly successful third-person action formula for being too similar after it has only released three games, how is it humanly possible that first-person shooters are not absolutely raked over the coals every time a new one comes out?
Tal Shiar Agent
Banned
I got killed a dozen times doing the trees in AC3 because there was no clear landing point for jumps like there were in the cities. Half the time I jump, expecting to land in a pile of hay, only to hit the ground and die.
Oh god, I totally forgot those came out this year.
vasametropolis
Member
I consider most of these reviews to be useless assessments. Of course the game is similar, and despite them not noticing, there are dozens of gameplay tweaks.
WordsintheWater
Member
So far I have heard Batman the most and Roger Craig Smith does a fantastic job, it actually sounds like a younger Kevin Conroy to me.
Pops Maellard
Member
Agreed. His performance is excellent, and it completely matches the behavior of the character. I'm glad it isn't Conroy in this case; just wouldn't feel right. Conroy is restrained, mature Batman.
As a whole, Origins is superb and these middling reviews are a bit shocking. I went in expecting a lazy rehash of City, abundant in mediocrity, but Origins has blown me away. Perhaps it's merely a combination of the visual presentation, incredible score, and my favorite time of year, but unless the ending is terrible I have to admit it's my favorite game in the series.
plagiarize
Banned
I think it's that a game that was fresh and innovative makes it harder for what comes after it in the same franchise.
RE5 got criticized for being too like RE4. The Dead Space series got criticized for not evolving enough, when it really had it's own thing going, combat wise.
Etc.
Call of Duty was never mechanically unique. Hell, it was yet another WW2 game from the team that mead Medal of Honor: Allied Assualt. Which wasn't original itself. Iteration after iteration since got us where we are.
Batman, people wanted another big step forwards like City, or something as groundbreaking as Asylum. Obviously that's too steep an order.
See You Next Wednesday
Banned
The wheel doesn't need to be reinvented, but it at least needs to be round.
Not liking what I'm reading about the game.
The addition of a win button is the worst part. Do not want.
The difference in COD 1 to 2 was HUGE. Enemy A.I. patterns, battlefield sizes, alternative routes etc.. COD2 was a generational leap from COD1 & MoH:AA, not just graphics, but things that mattered in gameplay.
Hm..average to above average reviews.
I'll probably pick this up on PC just to check out the DX11 technologies, and from what I can tell the free form combat is just as excellent as ever. I do find it very interesting that so many of the reviews are complaining about the game being too similar to past incarnations, while games like Call of Duty, where each sequel is practically a carbon-copy of the previous game, get absolute adulation from those same review sites.
Also, Troy Baker.
Great, now talk about what happened from Modern Warfare 1 -----> Today.
I'll probably pick this up on PC just to check out the DX11 technologies, and from what I can tell the free form combat is just as excellent as ever. I do find it very interesting that so many of the reviews are complaining about the game being too similar to past incarnations, while games like Call of Duty, where each sequel is practically a carbon-copy of the previous game, get absolute adulation from those same review sites.
Also, Troy Baker.
Great, now talk about what happened from Modern Warfare 1 -----> Today.
captainnapalm
Member
We'll see. I expect this game to do well even if does just deliver pretty much more of the same. I think most fans of the series will probably be happy with that. I know I'm looking forward to it.
Those games benefit from the Activision/EA/Ubisoft triumvirate, all of whom can aggressively push and hype games. WB isn't a slouch, but it isn't the juggernaut those three are.
And, the Arkham series isn't seen as a sacred cow by reviewers the way other series are.
We're also at the tail-end of a generation, and I think reviewers have finally - out of fatigue - begun docking games that "play it safe" more than they would have 2-3 years ago.
Just start with 2. Its gameplay is miles ahead of 1, and Ezio is an interesting character. You can decide if you want to finish Ezio's story or move on to 3 from there. You'll spend a majority of your time doing the boat side missions, which will prepare you for 4. You can go back and do the others to fill in the blanks in the overall story.
TheFLYINGManga_Ka
Member
Lately I can't trust reviews on multiple sequels anymore. I have to play it for myself to make my own judgment.
Reviews are just for talking about on game forums nowadays. It's amusing and can be nasty.
I'm sure the game is really good. But I have to see for myself.
Reviews are just for talking about on game forums nowadays. It's amusing and can be nasty.
I'm sure the game is really good. But I have to see for myself.
The reviews feel very reminiscent of GoW Ascension and Gears Judgement. Arkham Origins sounds like a decent enough game, but I suppose the question is whether we really needed another entry in this series before this gen ended. Sure, it isn't hard to understand why these games exist. They are big moneymaker series on consoles with massive install bases at this point, so if you're a publisher, why wouldn't you try to squeeze out one more entry in the series before shifting focus to next gen. Though with the latest GoW and Gears seemingly ending up with underwhelming sales, I'm curious if the Batman brand is strong enough that this game will end up doing very well regardless.
ezekielpacman
Member
If you liked the other Batman games you'll like this, it's pretty simple. Not entirely sure how that results in scores like 6/10 (a score which in a vacuum I'd have no problem with, but on the skewed scales of videogame scoring equates more to a broken mess), but whatever. Eager to see if the same stringent standards are applied to CoD, AC and BF later this year.
I do imagine two key differences are the fact they're post-3 installments, ones that were essentially climatic finales to trilogies, and came out in the middle of Spring. Arkham City SORT OF has that climatic finale thing but each game has been more or less self contained and that's generally how Batman works period. And it'll be among the fall games, so that probably does help.
Still, there does seem to be that same low level of hype, and we are about to go to a new generation. I'm curious to see how it goes, I suspect it may do better than the GoWs but it won't be anywhere close to AA or AC.
Eh, I consider that more a score for something that's very average and unremarkable... which would only really apply to this if only the Batman games existed, or at least stuff like Zelda and Metroid-type games for alternate reference points. But this isn't really a kind of game we see too often, maybe the open world thing but this isn't really the same as most of those.
Karak
Member
That is because most can only identify very large differences in similar games in a series. It sounds odd but something like this versus GTA5 which are both good sequels many times it is hard for someone to identify the differences between games like this versus something like GTA5 that was more in your face with the differences.
Hero_of_the_Day
Member
I have never bitched about reviews before, but this is truth right here. Every game since Modern Warfare has been the same, at least to the degree that Origins is the same as City and Asylum. People are essentially paying $60 for rebalances and new maps, but reviewers still give all those games 9 and 10s. Seven Call of Duty games that are pure genius, but three Batman games and it's obviously nothing more than a crash grab that should have points deducted for not being new enough.
It was expected, though.
I haven't played God of War, but Gears Judgement doesn't even deserve to be spoken in the same breath as Origins. That game was inferior to the entire rest of the series.
Rockondevil
Member
Arkham Origins is basically more of what you are used to from the last 2 games. I was really quite enjoying myself until I got a corrupt save game.
Never before on any game have I had a corrupt save and it literally makes me want to not play it anymore as I feel like I wasted ~10 hours.
Assuming this isn't a common thing I do recommend everyone gives it a go.
Never before on any game have I had a corrupt save and it literally makes me want to not play it anymore as I feel like I wasted ~10 hours.
Assuming this isn't a common thing I do recommend everyone gives it a go.
Coffee Dog
Banned
Basically, from a guy who just beat it: it's arkham city with a better paced story and an incredible second half, with a larger world, more detective shit, and slight jank/more bugs compared to previous titles. doesn't start as good as AC, but when it picks up it doesnt stop.
There is a particular sequence a little over halfway through that is so absolute genius it might be my favorite moment in the whole series. New bats is about the same as conroy, occasionally awkward line reads and all, though his voice is noticably different. And troy baker is godlike.
There is a particular sequence a little over halfway through that is so absolute genius it might be my favorite moment in the whole series. New bats is about the same as conroy, occasionally awkward line reads and all, though his voice is noticably different. And troy baker is godlike.
doniewhalberg
Member
Coffee Dog
Banned
No, though I really enjoyed that bit. Loved the visuals there. You arent quite there yet.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
Throw it in spoiler tags. I want to know what you're talking about.
Karak
Member
We gave it a buy rating on Angrycentaurgaming.
The fact is yes it is a sequel and luckily its a sequel to a good game that continues on that tradition. Perfect? Nope.
But worth the price? Well I played through the entire thing with the worst flu I think I have ever had in my entire life and still enjoyed it.
Its more grounded than the other games if only the overall tone and thats the way a prequel should be. But the most important thing to me was the question if it was fun. And it was damn fun.
Pros:
GFX
Interesting villians
Lots to do
Overall gameplay additions and polishing
Length
Cons:
Lackluster story but good writing within it. A mismatch if you will but does have some good points. As a total story, beginning, middle end, its lacking for a good deal of time until you get into it.
A couple bugs
Bad camera angles cropped up more in this than the others.
A normal review "should" never let that impact a review.
The fact is yes it is a sequel and luckily its a sequel to a good game that continues on that tradition. Perfect? Nope.
But worth the price? Well I played through the entire thing with the worst flu I think I have ever had in my entire life and still enjoyed it.
Its more grounded than the other games if only the overall tone and thats the way a prequel should be. But the most important thing to me was the question if it was fun. And it was damn fun.
Pros:
GFX
Interesting villians
Lots to do
Overall gameplay additions and polishing
Length
Cons:
Lackluster story but good writing within it. A mismatch if you will but does have some good points. As a total story, beginning, middle end, its lacking for a good deal of time until you get into it.
A couple bugs
Bad camera angles cropped up more in this than the others.
Its possible but thats making Peter pay the penalty for Paul as the guys who made it(devs) have no control over embargo(pubs).
A normal review "should" never let that impact a review.
Coffee Dog
Banned
K.
the fantastically surreal and (suprisingly, playable!) joker sequence after he's sent to blackgate, where psychiatrist harley asks him how his night has been. Combines elements of many great joker stories into one monologue that explains joker's relationship with the batman and how fascinated he is by him. Troy carried the scene, and the cherry on top is that it's all in the context of another great story, mad love. It was an absolutely inspired inclusion, given that in most other batman stories the spotlight wouldnt be given to joker's innermost machinations.
That point to me is also where the story goes from good to great.
doniewhalberg
Member
Hahah okay, was it the
Copperhead
MrCompletely
Member
Got this for $30 off eBay and my expectations were pretty tempered based on the reactions here and reviews I read.
In any regard, the game made me lose track of time in a big way and I'm enjoying it more than AC at this point. I'm 5 hours in and just beat
The game feels much more combat heavy to me, which is a GREAT thing.
The for an Arkham game it looks and plays better than ever. My only beef so far is that Batman costume looks too bulky. Enjoying the story and the premise so far, and I'm definitely getting that more 'brutal' vibe they were going for. Loving Batman's attitude in this one, it's how I wanted Bman to be in the previous games.
In any regard, the game made me lose track of time in a big way and I'm enjoying it more than AC at this point. I'm 5 hours in and just beat
Deathstroke - AMAZING fight
The game feels much more combat heavy to me, which is a GREAT thing.
The for an Arkham game it looks and plays better than ever. My only beef so far is that Batman costume looks too bulky. Enjoying the story and the premise so far, and I'm definitely getting that more 'brutal' vibe they were going for. Loving Batman's attitude in this one, it's how I wanted Bman to be in the previous games.
Weltall Zero
Member
Don't be. Lately I'm lucky if I can finish 4 games a year but AC was definitely one that I simply had to. One of the best games of the generation.
The 6 from Gamespot is a fucking joke.
They said multiple times the game won't be any different from AC, so why hate on it being the same?
The story is great, the best off all 3 games. Music is phenomenal, also best of all 3 games. Graphics are amazing ...on PC. (don't know about consoles)
Voice acting is good, especially Troy Baker as the Joker KILLS IT! Seriously if Mark Hamill doesn't come back, I want this man to replace Joker.
It has a slow start but later it get's so good. Buy this game and don't give a shit about the reviews.
They said multiple times the game won't be any different from AC, so why hate on it being the same?
The story is great, the best off all 3 games. Music is phenomenal, also best of all 3 games. Graphics are amazing ...on PC. (don't know about consoles)
Voice acting is good, especially Troy Baker as the Joker KILLS IT! Seriously if Mark Hamill doesn't come back, I want this man to replace Joker.
It has a slow start but later it get's so good. Buy this game and don't give a shit about the reviews.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
Nvm wrong thread 
It's odd that it is getting these 'low' scores. I'm 7 hours in and about the only negative thing I can say is that the motivation from the story isn't as strong as it is from the previous games.
However, mission structure, the city, the gameplay, they're either better or just as good as the previous games. It's a solid 8/10 for so far, it's really enjoyable.
Oh and it looks absolutely fantastic with all the DX11 + Nvidia stuff on PC.
However, mission structure, the city, the gameplay, they're either better or just as good as the previous games. It's a solid 8/10 for so far, it's really enjoyable.
Oh and it looks absolutely fantastic with all the DX11 + Nvidia stuff on PC.
I am just past 10 hours according to Steam, my next in game mission is to go to the Gotham Bank, so I am not sure how far in the story I am. But my impressions are that this is a solid 8.5/10 game.
That Gamespot review score is insulting.
I loved AA and AC. So I knew more of the same was exactly what I wanted. AO really is a great game, you guys shouldn't wait.
That Gamespot review score is insulting.
I loved AA and AC. So I knew more of the same was exactly what I wanted. AO really is a great game, you guys shouldn't wait.
We were talking about it in the OT but I really feel like it's a ridiculous review, as most of the reviews for this game have been (it's funny how reviewers can get away with calling a game with minimal hype and a 2nd team on it stale but can't do it for the yearly COD or assassin's creed game. Just sayin). I don't want to go completely off on sterling's review since I'm still early in the game but a lot of the stuff he said I'm just not seeing right now. The game would have to take a serious dive in quality and break from the batman formula in a huge (and bad) way to make a 3/10 justifiable.
Windom Earle
Member
This, I am enjoying the game greatly so far. I was not a huge fan of city, I find it much more interesting. That might change later, but I recommend going into this game with an open mind. Playing it at 1080p/60fps helps of course.
Yep. That part is awesome.
I would agree with you, but Origins could very easily have been an expansion pack. It'd be like if Bethesda had added a new island storyline to Skyrim and released it as a Skyrim sequel.
Nothing is fresh or unique about Origins. If you played & enjoyed 40+ hours of the Arkham City but haven't been interested in picking it up since, Origins would literally feel exactly the same as City...only with slightly less convenient grapple hook and traversal controls.
I finished the game today, still got side missions to do. I'm really surprised at the reviews though. It's kinda weird to see reviewers give COD or other franchises that barely change with each release to get constantly good scores but this series dared to do 2 similar games out of 3 and the reviews take a nosedive.
The destructoid review is especially full of shit. At one point Jim said the boss fights aren't as good as City but I think it's quite the opposite, the boss fights in Origins are better than the boss fights in City especially the final battle against
If you liked Arkham City and you are ready for more of the same stuff, you might wanna get this game. If I had played it before Arkham City it would definitely be my favorite.
The destructoid review is especially full of shit. At one point Jim said the boss fights aren't as good as City but I think it's quite the opposite, the boss fights in Origins are better than the boss fights in City especially the final battle against
Bane, it was super terrifying.
Dunkelgrau
Member
In round about an hour I will finish the game. I am surprised that it was so short.
Is Origins worth to play the side quest, too? Game was good, but not very good. I am not sure if I should invest more time.
Is Origins worth to play the side quest, too? Game was good, but not very good. I am not sure if I should invest more time.