Support NeoGAF

[CrackPebbles]

I think me liking asylum over city shows what I valued in those games, not to say city was bad, but for once in a game I can admit that the atmosphere/things outside of combat really sold it for me at the time. I guess by the time I played city I was just tired of the formula.

 

[HardRojo]

I've played through AA 6 times and AC twice, for some reason I don't get tired when playing AA, I liked it better than AC.
Which game is better is going to go down as one of the biggest discrepancies of the generation.

 

[nckillthegrimace]

But aside from just disagreeing on whats fun in general (I spent hours just flying through the city in AC aimlessly, and I loved it.), I don't see how you like anything in AA then. Taking out Snipers and getting into random fights on the street and the all that: mechanically, it's not significantly different from what you do in the levels you describe. If context matters that much to you, I can see why you wouldn't be a fan of it, but the game's greatest strength is that the mechanics alone are so good that they can be enjoyed without a level structured around them.

If you don't enjoy the game's mechanics on their own, it's kind of wierd that you like AA at all. The tighter pacing might make the gameplay feel more purposeful (since you are progressing through the game) than arbitrary fights of no significance, but how in the world does that make you enjoy it? You are doing the same thing you apparently dislike in both cases.

Structure and context are hugely important. Without them mechanics are just a meaningless exercise in futility. Take, for example, Resident Evil 6. I enjoyed the shooting mechanics (at least post-patch), but the game's design is complete junk. What's the point of continuing if the "how" is fun/interesting but the "what," "when," "where," and "why" aren't? Certainly, I could conceive of a scenario where the mechanics are so good that all other deficiencies are irrelevant, but I don't think that's the case for these Batman games.

 

[Veelk]

Structure and context are hugely important. Without them mechanics are just a meaningless exercise in futility. Take, for example, Resident Evil 6. I enjoyed the shooting mechanics (at least post-patch), but the game's design is complete junk. What's the point of continuing if the "how" is fun/interesting but the "what," "when," "where," and "why" aren't? Certainly, I could conceive of a scenario where the mechanics are so good that all other deficiencies are irrelevant, but I don't think that's the case for these Batman games.

Don't get me wrong, I agree that those things matter as well. But if you don't enjoy the mechanics themselves, I don't see how you can enjoy them just because of context. Think of it as a job. If its a job you hate, doing it for money is better than doing it for no reason at all, but I don't see how you can enjoy it even if you're doing it for a purpose. Similarly, if it's a job you love, getting paid is just an added bonus. You would do the job for free because it's pleasant in and of itself. Most action games like DMC, NG and Bayonetta don't need much more justification than "You here, enemies there, have fun." Or, for a more retro example, Tetris. Simple, fun, absolutely no context, one of the most enduring games of all time.

So you saying that context completely changes how enjoyable the same mechanics are, to the extent that AC disappointed you to this much for including not THAT much downtime, is just weird to me. Honestly, if I was looking at things like that, then AA really fell apart towards the end with an overly long Poison Ivy section.

 

[nckillthegrimace]

Don't get me wrong, I agree that those things matter as well. But if you don't enjoy the mechanics themselves, I don't see how you can enjoy them just because of context. Think of it as a job. If its a job you hate, doing it for money is better than doing it for no reason at all, but I don't see how you can enjoy it even if you're doing it for a purpose. Similarly, if it's a job you love, getting paid is just an added bonus. You would do the job for free because it's pleasant in and of itself. Most action games like DMC, NG and Bayonetta don't need much more justification than "You here, enemies there, have fun." Or, for a more retro example, Tetris. Simple, fun, absolutely no context, one of the most enduring games of all time.

So you saying that context completely changes how enjoyable the same mechanics are, to the extent that AC disappointed you to this much for including not THAT much downtime, is just weird to me. Honestly, if I was looking at things like that, then AA really fell apart towards the end with an overly long Poison Ivy section.

No, I enjoyed the mechanics to some extent, just not so much that I could ignore everything else. As for context, I don't mean that just as your purpose for doing things in the story, but also (and mostly) how the mechanics work within the structure and design of the game. So yes, I enjoy Bayonetta and DMC despite the fact that I have no idea what's going on. Alternatively, that is a case where the mechanics are so good that I could forgive any arbitrariness (even though those games are tightly and intelligently designed to exploit the mechanics). Further, puzzle and rhythm games are purely mechanical, so there's no context to consider. I like those, too.

And, yes, the Poison Ivy stuff was bad. Actually, the more we talk about it, the less I think I would actually enjoy either one of these Batman games if I went back to them. This has been a depressing conversation.

 

[Sojgat]

AC is mechanically superior in every way, but AA is the better game overall. AC's story isn't as good, and the open world, while very detailed, actually detracts from tthe experience. It seems to be overwhelming at first , but there isn't actually enough meaningful side content to justify it's existence. Catwoman sections are terribad, they destroy the narrative momentum of the game, and would have been much better served as a seperate campaign, unlocked after beating the main story. I'd recommend new players not install them on their first playthrough, they feel like an afterthought designed to encourage pre-orders.

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

Up to the Poison Ivy fight in my Asylum replay.

The combat was clearly improved in City and even this late in the game I find myself trying to pull off moves that were introduced in City. I forgot how ludicrously early the Bane fight was, too. People talk about the regurgitated Titan fights, and while I didn't like them, I felt like most of the boss fights weren't that great either. The Poison Ivy fight I always felt was a chore, but I'm not sure why exactly. I just don't have a lot of fun with it. The Killer Croc fight was just way too simple and easy, throw batarang, throw batarang, throw batarang, throw batarang...............

The scarecrow stuff has great atmosphere but the large sections of dodging his gaze kinda sucked IMO. I was relieved when in the (third?) encounter they have you actually fighting skeletons just to change it up. Also goddamn, custcene compression is NASTY.

 

[VillageBC]

Arkham City is a bloated, unfocused, poorly-paced disappointment of a game. Certainly, it improved the mechanics of actually being Batman, but it's as if Rocksteady forgot everything that made the first game so good. What was a tightly controlled Metroid-clone suddenly became a Jak II-esque open-world nightmare.

That one boss fight was good, though.

This is what I'm noticing on my first play through of Arkham City. AA was excellent game with some mechanics issue. This one lacks focus and I keep running into bosses that don't seem to have a point other then here, have a boss.

 

[JaseMath]

Arkham City is a bloated, unfocused, poorly-paced disappointment of a game. Certainly, it improved the mechanics of actually being Batman, but it's as if Rocksteady forgot everything that made the first game so good. What was a tightly controlled Metroid-clone suddenly became a Jak II-esque open-world nightmare.

That one boss fight was good, though.

Complete agree. Shoehorning in fan-service ruined the narrative of the story. Upgrades weren't as satisfying either.

 

[IcyRhythms]

I love AC and it does feel like a more polished game. That said, there is nothing in AC like the Scarecrow moments of AA.