Batman: Arkham Knight

[OutOfBoose]

Nah, unless they decide to give away DLC for free.

I will be pissed if they do. I payed for the DLC with Season Pass.

 

[Nathan]

They also could have just used the Robin model they had in Arkham Origins that was only used for multiplayer. It was pretty good, too.

Especially since they had no issue re-using the [BLACKOUT]Deathstroke[/BLACKOUT] model.

 

[Benstamania]

Just popping in to say that hey.. I still like this game, lol. A lot. Some issues yeah, but I still like it.

 

[socool]

Okay. Finally 100%'d this one. Still stand by everything thing I said and everything Angry Joe said (seeing as how his review seems to have been brought in). I don't agree with the 6/10--I'd give it more of a 7.5/10--but his points were valid.

Still hated those damn riddles, though. Glad they knocked it down to 243 (City's 400 something ****in' killed me) but I think they should've thrown out all the "puzzle" trophies, like controlling his robo pals to get it for you and just knocked it down to 100 trophies and riddles all together. All the breakable objects and gimmick ones just got so damn tiring.

The Knightfall protocol ended up being not worth teasing. They should've just had the full thing at 100% instead of that "Finish two more side missions" crap. Was still a cool cutscene.

I think my biggest issue was the story/writing. It's clear that it was not written by, well...a writer. It's clear this was a game first. Almost every plot point is CSI'd. "Alfred run this sample." "Alfred put this in the batcomputer." "Alfred I found blahblahblah" Scarecrow does...nothing interesting. He tries to blow up Gotham at first, which is at least grand, but then he resorts to his typical flood Gotham with fear gas. Yawn. Why even bother teasing that? 'What is the cloudburst?" Seems pretty obvious knowing Scarecrow. And I'm not even gonna start with Arkham Knight. "New character." Lol.

Still, not a bad game. It's honestly a lot of fun at times and is honestly the best looking game I own. I'll definitely be playing the New Game + at some point, but God...disappointed. Lot of missteps and strange choices made here. Hoping they manage to avoid that with their next game.

 

[Benstamania]

I'd say I'm disappointed in it.. But not as much as I was with City. That game just left me down on all levels.

I'd still rank them al follows..

Origins
Knight
Asylum
City

I honestly bump Knight over Asylum because Hamill is just flat out amazing in it and if this was his last hurrah as the character.. Well then damn. What s way to go.

 

[OutOfBoose]

I also like the game a lot. People say harsh things towards the game they completed like twice with 100% in only two weeks after the release. It shows only how amazing the game is, even if it has some flaws.

Though I still find City and Asylum to be the best in Arkham series. And Origins - the worst. If it's fair to say so about any of them in this amazing series.

 

[Drz]

I will be pissed if they do. I payed for the DLC with Season Pass.

Ofcourse it would mean that season pass buyers would get a refund!

But C'mon if Rocksteady still dares to announce you have to pay for challange maps + multiple characters, things that we're FREE on all previous games then they're in for another PR nightmare. Common sense Sefton Hill!

 

[OutOfBoose]

Not gonna happen, I believe. Also, I don't think Sefton was behind this policy.

 

[Drz]

He's the boss of Rocksteady and even tweeted to respond to people requesting the challange maps, saying they're looking into it.

Rocksteady and WB thought too much of Arkham Knight and went with the wrong decisions marketing wise, they should have copied CD Red Projekt and promoted to be giving away free DLC in form of challange maps, costumes and quests.

 

[The Joker]

And I have a bit of trouble getting used to controls of both Origins and City on PS3 cause one have L1 to hold gadget and L2 for detective mode, while the other game reverse it.
If I leave Arkham Knight and returning to City and Origins, it won't be easy for me.

I'm playing City on New Game+ on PC, and did not expect to beat that, but I did, idea of needing 100% of Arkham Knight to have the full ending made me want to see if something similar could be said about City, but I couldn't complete all sidequests in the older game before completing the campaign, so no luck in that.

I still hate Two-Face fight portion in the last Catwoman mission in Arkham City.

Yeah I remember playing Origins for the first time, the detective mode and weapons buttons had been switched around. That took a lot of getting used to. Deja vu again here.

Why do you hate the Two Face bit in Catwoman's mission?

See, the fact that all of those villains were put into the main story in City made it too distended for me. There was not enough room for all of those villains to be given their due so the Dr. Strange plot line, for instance, ends up collapsing on itself by the end of the game to leave more space for Joker. Knight alleviated that issue by having just a couple villains be the locus for the main story. Leaving the rest for side missions didn't bother me because it gave about as much time for characters like Two-Face as the main story of City did. Plus I love transporting them to the GCPD and getting to see and speak to them afterwards.

All of those aforementioned villains got their due. Joker, Penguin, Freeze, Ra's etc all got good roles in the game.

Hugo Strange not getting his due is down to bad writing, not having other villains part of the main story. A competent script could have juggled the villains and had Hugo and Protocol 10 the main focus instead of turning the whole thing into a cure chase.

Compared to AK, the majority are nothing but side quests. Cameos. Look at Two Face for example, in his own side mission we don't even see him until the end of it. In AC he got better treatment, and even that was weak but he still came off much better there. Compared to AK how many villains can you say got to really shine? Ivy and Scarecrow. Arkham Knight was an under developed obvious character almost from the get-go. We don't even know where he got his army, how and why he decided to team with Scarecrow of all people, why he felt killing all of Gotham justified his grudge against Bruce etc. At least with Hugo we knew who bank rolled him and his Arkham City venture, how he manipulated Quincy Sharp into giving it the go ahead, and why he was carrying out Protocol 10.

When I play AC it feels like I got a decent helping of villainy. When I play AK, I feel like the bulk of them were minor cameos. And this is a game that falsely promoted the idea that all the villains were working together to take Batman down.

It's a 2 year gap in release, but not development.

How do you know that? What were they doing for those 2 years? I don't believe that in nearly 2 years between games major changes cannot be incorporated into it. Especially considering the plethora of Origins references in the game, which means they could easily have put in proper boss fights.

I believe people of this generation have unrealistic expectations about everything. I don't need to document every occurrence of that happening to feel justified in it's truth. You seem to just take exception that I don't share your opinion and happen to think this game isn't nearly as bad as you say it is.

You believe people of this generation have unrealistic expectations about everything. So in other words it's just an unfounded belief. You have no actual basis for this opinion other than it's something you believe.

Feel free to believe what you like. It's your right. But I knew when push came to shove you could not produce any proof from the actual criticisms of this game which showed the masses were having unrealistic expectations for it. That's all I wanted to clarify.

When someone comes and says people had unrealistic expectations, they usually base it on things said people have been saying in their comments/criticisms. Otherwise you can say any movie, game, what ever no matter how weak or bad is only getting criticism because people of this generation have unrealistic expectations.

I also wouldn't use this place as some gauge for a "legion of disappointed fans" because virtually across the board the game has been praised and is deemed a success. If critics are telling you before you even play the game that the Batmobile inclusion is a weak part, it's expected that most people will already have their mind made up about it.

I'm not just using this place. Far from it. I've seen it all over the net. Written and video reviews. I would never just use one place to gauge a general reaction. That's bad statistics.

Are you now accusing people of disliking the Batmobile just because they heard it was weak before they even played it?

Most gamers nowadays have a sheep mentality that way, or a totally opposite contrarian view just to be different. If that many people are upset about the Batmobile, no boss battles and dislike the side quests (which most aren't really necessary to see the gist of the ending) to that extent that it ruins the whole experience for them, then that's their opinion and they're entitled to it. Doesn't mean I can't think it's utterly ridiculous though.

Sheep mentality. So lets gets this straight. You think the gamers who were disappointed with the game had unrealistic expectations, hated something before they even tried just because they heard it was bad, and have a sheep mentality?

This is your belief for people being disappointed with the game yes?

I think the tank battles are the only thing universally viewed as a flaw. Some reviews I saw or read didn't even mention the side quests and for a few that did, they praised them and gave kudos to the wheel and how much it streamlines and prioritizes your objectives. Some didn't like having no boss battles, others liked that they weren't just shoved in there just to be there.

The Batmobile in general is the common flaw that is almost universally criticized, not just the tedious tank battles you have to do in it.

The side quests would be the second most common flaw, along with the lack of decent boss battles.

I'm not trying to defend side missions, tank mode or boss battles. I'm saying the game overall is fantastic, and if some fans are saying it's not, then they probably had unrealistic expectations for it. Or maybe they didn't, whatever, that's fine.

So unless people think the game is anything less than fantastic they probably had unrealistic expectations. They couldn't possibly just find it good or average?

Do you concoct these theories for everything you love and other people don't? Honest question.

But I don't understand how you can sit here and say your view is the majority, apparently just because you feel like saying it, then turn around and try to demand factual statements from me in order to defend my viewpoint. There's no difference there, it's simply differing opinions. There's no consensus among the general population who have this game, the only metric there is, is professional reviews. And by and large, the game has been a critical and commercial success. That's really the only fact here.

Because the disappointment view is the majority. It's in the reviews. I didn't make it up out of nothing. Disappointment not hate. Most people aren't calling it a bad game. Just disappointing or the weakest in the series because of the aforementioned flaws. Even I think it's a very good game. Just the weakest of the series. You mistake people thinking something is the weakest of a series, or a disappointment as automatically mean that it's bad.

You're accusing legions of people of being sheep, disliking something just because they were told it was bad, and having unrealistic expectations. If you're going to make allegations like that then there has to be a factual basis for it. You don't just conjure that up out of thin air because you can't believe people didn't love something as much as you did or what ever.

Challenges, finding riddles, it's all the same to me, and it's all terrible. And that's my opinion on that. I had AC and AA (and played AO), so I know the difference. I just didn't bother to make the distinction because I've never bothered with any of it in the first place, in any game, unless I stumbled across a trophy on my way to doing something a lot more fun.

You don't like Riddler trophies, and AK didn't change that. Fair enough. Nothing more to be said on that.

So that's tedious, but the Riddler crap isn't? Well, that's just another example of two people seeing things differently. I'm not saying you're wrong for feeling that way, I just can't share in the sentiment...

Yes the Riddler stuff can be really tedious. I found it especially bad in this game and had to go to Youtube to solve several of them. But that's being going on since game one. The Riddler trophies I mean. The difference here is this is the ONLY game where you have to get all the Riddler stuff to get the full ending.

At least in the other games you could ignore the Riddler stuff and still finish the main story and get the full ending. So AK made it extra tedious this time.

 

[Benstamania]

The Riddler crap is annoying, the chasing an armored vehicle just to have them magically speed away from you the moment you lock onto them make me want to throw my controller, Firefly's crap drives me insane.. While I enjoy the game over all I DO believe Rocksteady screwed up the side missions something crazy and made them more tedious than fun.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Yeah I remember playing Origins for the first time, the detective mode and weapons buttons had been switched around. That took a lot of getting used to. Deja vu again here.

Why do you hate the Two Face bit in Catwoman's mission?

Nothing killed the character I control as often as that portion did, either on Normal or NG+, 15 times before finally nailing him down, due the relentlessly respawning thugs and sometimes difficulty to hide.
Most satisfying thing in that bit is probably performing a ledge takedown on Harv.
The closest thing to being as painful is the Top of the World extreme challenge.

 

[Mister J]

The Riddler crap is annoying, the chasing an armored vehicle just to have them magically speed away from you the moment you lock onto them make me want to throw my controller, Firefly's crap drives me insane.. While I enjoy the game over all I DO believe Rocksteady screwed up the side missions something crazy and made them more tedious than fun.

I'd close the difference between me and target from 900m to <200m in no time, then the damn thing starts traveling at the speed of sound, using every turn and misdirection possible without missing a beat. So annoying.

 

[zeptron]

The only truly stupid parts in Angry Joe's review are when he's praising the Detective Mode reconstruction stuff when Arkham Origins is the one that came up with it, and his usual whining of no multiplayer.

Everything else was spot-on.

Geez, must every game have multiplayer forced upon it? This is one of the reasons why I don't like the influence that games like COD has had on the industry. As we're now getting games with multiplayer that didn't need them in the first place and apparently people have been spoiled by them.

This wasn't directly towards you Gamer BTW. Just wanted to say something in regards to the lack of multiplayer complaint.

 

[Broseph44]

Will the general opinion on the game improve in time?

I love the game, I seem to be one of the few who do. Oh well.

 

[Benstamania]

I'd close the difference between me and target from 900m to <200m in no time, then the damn thing starts traveling at the speed of sound, using every turn and misdirection possible without missing a beat. So annoying.

So it's not just me then.

 

[DCMarvelFanGuy]

Yeah I remember playing Origins for the first time, the detective mode and weapons buttons had been switched around. That took a lot of getting used to. Deja vu again here.

Why do you hate the Two Face bit in Catwoman's mission?



All of those aforementioned villains got their due. Joker, Penguin, Freeze, Ra's etc all got good roles in the game.

Hugo Strange not getting his due is down to bad writing, not having other villains part of the main story. A competent script could have juggled the villains and had Hugo and Protocol 10 the main focus instead of turning the whole thing into a cure chase.

Compared to AK, the majority are nothing but side quests. Cameos. Look at Two Face for example, in his own side mission we don't even see him until the end of it. In AC he got better treatment, and even that was weak but he still came off much better there. Compared to AK how many villains can you say got to really shine? Ivy and Scarecrow. Arkham Knight was an under developed obvious character almost from the get-go. We don't even know where he got his army, how and why he decided to team with Scarecrow of all people, why he felt killing all of Gotham justified his grudge against Bruce etc. At least with Hugo we knew who bank rolled him and his Arkham City venture, how he manipulated Quincy Sharp into giving it the go ahead, and why he was carrying out Protocol 10.

When I play AC it feels like I got a decent helping of villainy. When I play AK, I feel like the bulk of them were minor cameos. And this is a game that falsely promoted the idea that all the villains were working together to take Batman down.



How do you know that? What were they doing for those 2 years? I don't believe that in nearly 2 years between games major changes cannot be incorporated into it. Especially considering the plethora of Origins references in the game, which means they could easily have put in proper boss fights.



You believe people of this generation have unrealistic expectations about everything. So in other words it's just an unfounded belief. You have no actual basis for this opinion other than it's something you believe.

Feel free to believe what you like. It's your right. But I knew when push came to shove you could not produce any proof from the actual criticisms of this game which showed the masses were having unrealistic expectations for it. That's all I wanted to clarify.

When someone comes and says people had unrealistic expectations, they usually base it on things said people have been saying in their comments/criticisms.



I'm not just using this place. Far from it. I've seen it all over the net. Written and video reviews. I would never just use one place to gauge a general reaction. That's bad statistics.

Are you now accusing people of disliking the Batmobile just because they heard it was weak before they even played it?



Sheep mentality. So lets gets this straight. You think the gamers who were disappointed with the game had unrealistic expectations, hated something before they even tried just because they heard it was bad, and have a sheep mentality?

This is your belief for people being disappointed with the game yes?



The Batmobile in general is the common flaw that is almost universally criticized, not just the tedious tank battles you have to do in it.

The side quests would be the second most common flaw, along with the lack of decent boss battles.



So unless people think the game is anything less than fantastic they probably had unrealistic expectations. They couldn't possibly just find it good or average?

Do you concoct these theories for everything you love and other people don't? Honest question.



Because the disappointment view is the majority. It's in the reviews. I didn't make it up out of nothing. Disappointment not hate. Most people aren't calling it a bad game. Just disappointing or the weakest in the series because of the aforementioned flaws. Even I think it's a very good game. Just the weakest of the series. You mistake people thinking something is the weakest of a series, or a disappointment as automatically mean that it's bad.

You're accusing legions of people of being sheep, disliking something just because they were told it was bad, and having unrealistic expectations. If you're going to make allegations like that then there has to be a factual basis for it. You don't just conjure that up out of thin air because you can't believe people didn't love something as much as you did or what ever.



You don't like Riddler trophies, and AK didn't change that. Fair enough. Nothing more to be said on that.



Yes the Riddler stuff can be really tedious. I found it especially bad in this game and had to go to Youtube to solve several of them. But that's being going on since game one. The Riddler trophies I mean. The difference here is this is the ONLY game where you have to get all the Riddler stuff to get the full ending.

At least in the other games you could ignore the Riddler stuff and still finish the main story and get the full ending. So AK made it extra tedious this time.

You don't like the main story for Arkham Knight anymore?

 

[Drz]

The main story suffees from keeping Arkham Knight's identity a secret for too long and trying to make the shock value outweight proper characterization and build up. Once AK's Identity is revealed, you have 1 boss fight and 1 cut scene and thats the end of that character. Why? Because they want you to pay for more DLC content!

 

[Kane52630]

I love the game, I seem to be one of the few who do. Oh well.

Same.

 

[Benstamania]

You can enjoy the game and admit that it has overwhelming faults.

Like pretty much every side mission.

 

[Kane52630]

The actual side missions are fine but there isn't much of it. Which I can only blame the industry for driving every game into the DLC business.

 

[BoredGuy]

yeah the game is fun whenever you get to beat on some bad guys (especially when Nightwing, Catwoman, or Robin is involved), its incredibly beautiful, and has great performances from Hamill and Conroy, that alone makes it worth playing through

but the side missions are weak and repetitive
the batmobile stuff is, obviously, hit or miss
and the plot is overly simple and predictable

so basically, the replayability is low, New Game + seems like a waste of time, I won't be bothering with that

ps. im surprised how many people rank Asylum low on their list, I love that game the most because it was concise, contained, and had the best boss fights in the series... I'd take a solid story over an open-world any day

 

[Kane52630]

I posted it in the TDKR thread but my rankings of the series:

AA
AK
AC
AO

 

[Travesty]

Aa
ac
ak
ao

 

[I Am The Knight]

AO
aA
Ak
Ac