Originally posted by Smasandian
For each game in the series, I expect developer to change things up, make things better and add new elements.Origins did none of that. Just because it's a prequel, doesn't give the developers a day off.
Im not saying innovations shouldn't be made but I don't think Batman that is only two years into things, without a Batmobile, and takes place 5 years before asylum should be rolling with tech and fighting abilities that are better then the other games.
Plus the shock gloves, remote claw, and the "enhanced" detective mode are pretty good innovations imo. Not to mention now you can access your challenges and batsuits from in game in the Batcave. All along with having drop points for the Batwing all over Gotham. Much more innovation and you may as well have made a sequel instead of a prequel.
ooh and honestly im happy with the h2h combat. I honestly thought it was going to be worse because in interviews they said he was going to be "unrefined". I assumed his fighting style was going to be much more sloppy then what it was.
Originally posted by BlackZero30x
Im not saying innovations shouldn't be made but I don't think Batman that is only two years into things, without a Batmobile, and takes place 5 years before asylum should be rolling with tech and fighting abilities that are better then the other games.Plus the shock gloves, remote claw, and the "enhanced" detective mode are pretty good innovations imo. Not to mention now you can access your challenges and batsuits from in game in the Batcave. All along with having drop points for the Batwing all over Gotham. Much more innovation and you may as well have made a sequel instead of a prequel.
ooh and honestly im happy with the h2h combat. I honestly thought it was going to be worse because in interviews they said he was going to be "unrefined". I assumed his fighting style was going to be much more sloppy then what it was.
Except the fact that in Origins, all of his gizmo's are there already. Doesn't really seem like Batman is "learning" the trade. In that case, why is the story about assassins trying to kill Batman? Doesn't really make sense if he is not very well known with the thug community.
1. Shock gloves are just more powerful fists. Nothing really new.
2. The remote claw is just a fancy line launcher.
3. Drop points is a staple in open world games. Check out Far Cry 3 and its strongholds that act as drop points.
It's a solid game but it's generic. Aside from Fire Fly and a section of the end boss, all boss battles are roughly the same. You fight them and then guys show up, and then fight them again...it's boring.
Originally posted by RedX1852The atmosphere was way better. The graphics were much more detailed, Strange was awesome as well as Penguin. Seriously, I was disappointed in the lack of Penguin for this game. Nolan North's Penguin>>> to me. Origins was a really fun game, man. But I'm not just gonna claim it's the best when they copied the exact template from AC without really adding anything too substantial all the while making improvements here and there. AC mad significant additions to the gameplay from AA.
I don't get it, how can City get a better rating because of Gameplay and not Story, i mean i liked City but it didn't have me emotionally and the story was all over the place with all these annoying Penguin Appearances got on my Nerves, City was good, but the story wasn't as strong as Origins and the only emotional part, if you call it emotional is the end when Joker Dies, but not even that was emotional for me so i don't get why Good Gameplay and Scrambled Story makes for a Better game than one that has already Good Gameplay and an even Better Story
Originally posted by RedX1852
Another thing that upsets me is all the people complaining about not having Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill not voicing the Joker and Batman, i LOVE Kevin Conroy as Batman, he is the definitive Batman but he Cant live forever, and if he was to pass before the next Batman Game comes out, than we need a replacement and Roger Craig Smith has done an excellent young, gritty Batman and Captured how he would sound if he was younger and more angry Perfectly, and he has proven himself to be an excellent Replacement but he Gets NO CREDIT, Nope Non at all, instead it all goes to Troy Baker, who is excellent but dang give some credit to Roger, and all the people complaining about Mark Hamill clearly don't know that he Retired from the Joker after Arkham City, i get it Troy Baker is a Damn Good Joker, but its like People Don't GIVE A FVCK about Batman's Voice and Voice Actor, instead its all about Troy Baker and the Joker,
Originally posted by Darth Martin
Surprisingly, I actually thought the voice actors for Batman and Joker did really solid jobs in their roles. The guy who voiced Joker sounded very reminiscent of Mark Hamill. Eventually, I just bought in to the other guy as Batman as well.
Originally posted by Smasandian
Except the fact that in Origins, all of his gizmo's are there already. Doesn't really seem like Batman is "learning" the trade. In that case, why is the story about assassins trying to kill Batman? Doesn't really make sense if he is not very well known with the thug community.1. Shock gloves are just more powerful fists. Nothing really new.
2. The remote claw is just a fancy line launcher.
3. Drop points is a staple in open world games. Check out Far Cry 3 and its strongholds that act as drop points.It's a solid game but it's generic. Aside from Fire Fly and a section of the end boss, all boss battles are roughly the same. You fight them and then guys show up, and then fight them again...it's boring.
Why wouldn't he have gadgets on him? The batcave is open to roam...It really wouldn't make sense to have complete access without access to the gadgets. He has been around for 2 years at this point so no he shouldn't be the best of the best but he certainly isn't a noob. He may not be refined but he is still trained. I would assume that the story entails batman being hunted down by assassins because The Joker is fairly new to the crime scene but not stupid. Hes heard all the talk about the batman and wanted to make preparations to cover his bases. No one ever said batman isn't well known. But he was mostly "myth" in this game. Nobody seems to know if he exists or not.
Actually the shock gloves are very new considering they allow you to attack through shields and teasers and allowing you to actually counter the shield bash attacks....
The Remote claw is a line launcher that also gives the addition of tagging enemies together, into fire extinguishers, into propane tanks, or even hanging people from gargoyles from a distance. If thats not innovating something then idk what is......
And yeah they normally are BUT drop points were not in the first two so it is in fact an innovation to the series.....
If you don't like the formula then thats fine and its all a matter of opinion but thats different then claiming it adds nothing to the series.
Allow me....
Innovate: to introduce something new; make changes in anything established.
Originally posted by BlackZero30xActually the shock gloves are very new considering they allow you to attack through shields and teasers and allowing you to actually counter the shield bash attacks....
The Remote claw is a line launcher that also gives the addition of tagging enemies together, into fire extinguishers, into propane tanks, or even hanging people from gargoyles from a distance. If thats not innovating something then idk what is......
And yeah they normally are BUT drop points were not in the first two so it is in fact an innovation to the series.....
And im the on that needs to look up the word?....Face palm.
Eh, I honestly think the game did innovate some. Should it have innovated more? Maybe, but considering that this was a fresh studio, I can't hold them to the same standard as I would rocksteady. I don't think it's fair.
Origins has a lot going for it, but it also has some glaring flaws. I don't think it's as good as City, but I think the gameplay alone puts it above Asylum (not to mention the writing, in many ways is almost as good if not as good, to me).
Originally posted by BlackZero30xA few new gagdets isn't innovation. Innovation is legitimate new gameplay features. Something that actually sets the bar higher than the last game.
Allow me....Innovate: to introduce something new; make changes in anything established.
And im the on that needs to look up the word?....Face palm.
This game played the dead same as City, but didn't have the atmosphere. The only thing it greatly improved was the boss fights. That's about as innovative as AO got.
Originally posted by Arachnid1
A few new gagdets isn't innovation. Innovation is legitimate new gameplay features. Something that actually sets the bar higher than the last game.This game played the dead same as City, but didn't have the atmosphere. The only thing it greatly improved was the boss fights. That's about as innovative as AO got.
Maybe compared to other games that already have more advanced innovations the the Arkham series in general. When you compare AO to the others it did in fact innovate on gadgets which in turn allowed new gameplay. But if you are talking about his straight up h2h then as I said before there is no reason to innovate it. If anything he should have been a little worse at it then he was. I mean they could have added a the ability to drive the batmobile or actually fly the batwing but I can understand why they didn't. So it could have been more innovative then it was but I think what they did with it was enough.
Originally posted by Smasandian
Except the fact that in Origins, all of his gizmo's are there already. Doesn't really seem like Batman is "learning" the trade. In that case, why is the story about assassins trying to kill Batman? Doesn't really make sense if he is not very well known with the thug community.1. Shock gloves are just more powerful fists. Nothing really new.
2. The remote claw is just a fancy line launcher.
3. Drop points is a staple in open world games. Check out Far Cry 3 and its strongholds that act as drop points.It's a solid game but it's generic. Aside from Fire Fly and a section of the end boss, all boss battles are roughly the same. You fight them and then guys show up, and then fight them again...it's boring.
How is it Generic but AC isn't,they haven't changed anything since the First Game and no ones Complaining, but when Batman does it, it gets Panned by Critics and Narrow Minded Gamers who think that in no way that Call of Duty, or God of War, or Assassins Creed, Halo, Grand Theft Auto, Gears of War, Devil May Cry, Tekken, Street Fighter, Naruto UNS Series, Portal and many other series are repetitive, But Batman's is after its 3rd Game come on explain that Logic For Me
Originally posted by Smasandian
I agree that the Origins boss fights are slightly better than Asylum but I don't think it's as good as City.The boss fights are roughly the same. One of the assassins attacks you, then it devolves into the typical thug brawl and make sure you hit your counter button.
You sound Ungrateful, i bet you think you could do a better job yourself
Originally posted by Arachnid1
A few new gagdets isn't innovation. Innovation is legitimate new gameplay features. Something that actually sets the bar higher than the last game.This game played the dead same as City, but didn't have the atmosphere. The only thing it greatly improved was the boss fights. That's about as innovative as AO got.
While it doesn't make sense from a story perspective, they have to balance the gameplay part of it too.
In the context of the story, should he have less gadgets? Yes, definitely, but if they'd done that they'd have been lambasted for changing the game too much and restricting players.
Same goes for the combat system. Oh, he has MORE options now? That totally makes sense from a story perspective (not).
TBH, If this was Rocksteady, I would have been more critical of them. But this was WB Montreal. They were given these resources and a relatively complete game engine, and they were forced to learn every bit of it before coming out with a game of their own. This isn't the same as the guys that built and modified the unreal Arkham engine from the ground up doing the grunt work, knowing the shortcuts and workarounds, etc. The most these guys had been able to work with the assets beforehand was in porting Arkham City to WiiU, so they were not exactly in the best position imo.
TBH, while Origins does have it's faults (grappling far too limited, bugs and lag etc), I think it's unfair to expect it to be the leap from City that City was from Asylum. This was a relatively untested studio, and had they changed too much, they might have easily ended up alienating people.
They were very much in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation, and I don't envy them that.
I think they did add some neat features to the game that even improve on City (the crime scene mechanic, upgrades, the interiors, the batcave and fast travel), but all in all, I think that given the background behind the games' development, it's being judged more harshly than it is.
I will say this, though: If you're not a huge comic book fan and you've played/own City, I couldn't justify buying this game. It only really shines for those that are a certain kind of Batman fan, imo.
Originally posted by -Pr-
While it doesn't make sense from a story perspective, they have to balance the gameplay part of it too.In the context of the story, should he have less gadgets? Yes, definitely, but if they'd done that they'd have been lambasted for changing the game too much and restricting players.
Same goes for the combat system. Oh, he has MORE options now? That totally makes sense from a story perspective (not).
TBH, If this was Rocksteady, I would have been more critical of them. But this was WB Montreal. They were given these resources and a relatively complete game engine, and they were forced to learn every bit of it before coming out with a game of their own. This isn't the same as the guys that built and modified the unreal Arkham engine from the ground up doing the grunt work, knowing the shortcuts and workarounds, etc. The most these guys had been able to work with the assets beforehand was in porting Arkham City to WiiU, so they were not exactly in the best position imo.
TBH, while Origins does have it's faults (grappling far too limited, bugs and lag etc), I think it's unfair to expect it to be the leap from City that City was from Asylum. This was a relatively untested studio, and had they changed too much, they might have easily ended up alienating people.
They were very much in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation, and I don't envy them that.
I think they did add some neat features to the game that even improve on City (the crime scene mechanic, upgrades, the interiors, the batcave and fast travel), but all in all, I think that given the background behind the games' development, it's being judged more harshly than it is.
I will say this, though: If you're not a huge comic book fan and you've played/own City, I couldn't justify buying this game. It only really shines for those that are a certain kind of Batman fan, imo.
How does anything you just said Make Sense? if your in first years of crime fighting you should have more gadgets and bulkier armor, ya know what forget it, your just as hypercritical as any other gamer
Originally posted by RedX1852
How does anything you just said Make Sense? if your in first years of crime fighting you should have more gadgets and bulkier armor, ya know what forget it, your just as hypercritical as any other gamer
lol, no, he would have less gadgets, as he'd still be refining his crime fighting technique.
Batman becomes better as years go on. He develops better countermeasures for certain villains. He progresses, not regresses.
But sure, bash away. Be mad for no real reason.
Originally posted by -Pr-
lol, no, he would have less gadgets, as he'd still be refining his crime fighting technique.Batman becomes better as years go on. He develops better countermeasures for certain villains. He progresses, not regresses.
But sure, bash away. Be mad for no real reason.
no ones mad here, i just cant tolerate hypocrites