Batman: Arkham Origins

P

Pooky

New member
So here's the Destructoid Review: (3.5/10)

If Batman: Arkham Origins does one thing well, it's epitomize the kind of exploitative garbage that has steadily eroded so much faith in the so-called "AAA" gaming scene. When publishers whine and moan about piracy or used sales, this is the kind of game you can point to when you ask if it's any surprise that so few customers are unwilling to gamble $60 on a brand new game. This is the kind of game that, when publishers panic over flagging sales, you can hold up and say, "You did it to yourselves."

In that regard, Batman: Arkham Origins is not the game this industry needs. It's the game it deserves.
Click to expand...

http://www.destructoid.com/review-batman-arkham-origins-264357.phtml

Interesting...
 
I almost expected something like this, for someone to give the game a low score. Not this low a score but a low score none the less. I skipped pre-ordering after becoming a little concerned that it might not live up to the first two games.
 
Well i have played about an hour's worth and as a batman fan so far the game isn't that bad but it's not that awesome either when i have played through it about 30% i can give decent verdict
 
Ya, I hear ya. I won't expect the same level as the previous two games, so maybe I'll be able to enjoy it for what it is. Just with the reviews, I probably should have waited to get it during a Steam sale or something...
 
what most people are forgetting is this is where it all started not where things are going after arkham city, so your basically starting from scratch and you learn a lot from this game that gives you an idea of where the other 2 games came from, it's a starwars move and it's annoying but die hard batman fans should enjoy it

I am cept for the few bugs creeping in now that's annoying me
 
Haha, I was just coming here to post the Zero Punctuation review. As always, he nailed it.
 
Been listening to quite a few of his reviews and actually laughing out loud at some of the stuff. He's brilliant.
 
ok it's the first time i actually hear about this guy and he's freaking funny but some of the things he says has merit :p, but i'm a true batman fan (Fanboy even, waiting for my batman Bike helmet to arrive :p)

So i like the game not more than the first two but it's something fun to play when i'm at work with no connection and BF4 has to wait
 
What irks me is that no one bothers or raise and eyebrow when a CoD or BF game is released and they do not add innovation and proper change but wait till they bring out a Batman game that looks the same as the previous ones and everyone looses their minds.

It is a good game with proper decent story and solid game mechanics. It is supposed to get above average ratings across the board but that is not to be seen. I just find that game reviewers have become disjointed from reality. Reviewers have become complacent in their gaming ways and very bias wrt the games they review. You fond that there is no correlation between reviewers and no standard consensus. I'm not saying they should love every single game and be disingenuous in their reviews but at least give a proper view of the game instead of coming from your bias opinion.

Wrt this game, I do feel that they have built on a formula that worked and they played it safe but they expanded on the Arkham story and made a solid game worthy of a 7 at least.
 
A solid game that required 2 post-launch patches to fix game-breaking bugs and other glitches?

To me a 6.5 was actually too much. Much like the SimCity fiasco, I believe if you release an unfinished product using a (well-earned) brand name which is based on quality content, you deserve zero sympathy as you are clearly just riding on coat-tails and trying to get a quick buck...
 
Uhmmm... So I just got my PC version of Batman Arkham Origins. It requires you to activate on Steam.

Now games not being available via Steam store in certain regions have come up in recent threads with the irony being that you can purchase the local retail copy and then activate it on Steam, but not buy the exact same copy via the Steam store.

So here is a different spin on that... When trying to activate my key from my retail copy on Steam, I get the following error:
Not Available
Sorry, but the following items are not available for purchase in this country. Your purchase has been cancelled.
Click to expand...

So basically the game is available for purchase via the Steam store, but my retail copy won't activate.
 
Surprisingly, Yahtzee's review isn't nearly as scathing as I thought it'd be. I think most of the reviews I read are a little disjointed. They all go like this:

1. It's glitchy
2. The combat and predator is still the same engine, and they didn't mess around with it too much
3. Because it's more of the same, but not better than Arkham City, it sucks.

I fail to see the logic here. Firstly, if you read the previews and opinion pieces on most gaming websites the past year, EVERYONE told WB Montreal to play it safe and not reinvent the wheel, and now people are bitching about not pushing the envelope. Secondly, I fail to see how a great engine, and something that most of these 'bad' reviews says still feels like an Arkham game can ever be atrocious. I think compared to the others, you could say it's not as good. Does that mean it's bad? No, that's just silly. I've played it, and there are some niggly questions I had, but nothing game-destroying. Of the points of criticism that make sense, they are the following:

1. The game is hella glitchy.

Glitches get patched, mistakes happen. Skyrim and Oblivion were hella glitchy and people laughed it off. I'd give WB Montreal the benefit of the doubt here.

2. The additions to the combat system get mixed reviews.

This relates to a) Combat being more brutal because more enemies and counter-countering requiring relatively excellent rhythm and timing on higher difficulty levels, and b) The Shock Gauntlets. Regarding (a) I say the following: Remember that the freeflow combat system was originally supposed to be a rhythm game system, so don't complain about timing there. Secondly, if they didn't take a risk and add new things, they'd have gotten even more flak. Yes, there are glitches, and personally I feel the camera gets in too close, but those can be fixed (yet again). Regarding (b), some people I've talked to say the shock gauntlets add an interesting strategic element to fights, unless you want to spam them (which I was always able to do with other gadgets as well in a Arkham City when in a pinch). Secondly, you don't start with them, so they're a reward of sorts (no spoilers). Thirdly, they probably would have gotten more flak without taking a chance on them (yes, I know, yet again).

3. The storyline gets mixed reviews.

That's a matter of opinion. Some hardcore comics fans who reviewed the game, including some of my friends who are absolute crazy batman fanboys, lauded the story. Others didn't. Make up your own mind on this one.

4. The voices get mixed reviews.

Yet again, this is a matter of opinion.

So, all in all, if you've bought it already, you probably won't regret it, especially once patches come out for it. If you're considering it, I'd read more than just the Destructoid review (there are tonnes of reviews out there on metacritic calling it just as good as the others, for instance), as opinions are clearly divergent, and a lot of people are, IMHO basing their impressions on what they wanted rather than what they got (which is a classic fallacy when it comes to sequels in a series). This notion of spectacle creep, and just wanting more every single time until it breaks a game, is something which they also recently discussed on Extra Credits (http://www.penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/spectacle-creep), and before you simply (instinctively) complain about things not being "more than" the previous one, watch it.
 
mottamort said:
A solid game that required 2 post-launch patches to fix game-breaking bugs and other glitches?

To me a 6.5 was actually too much. Much like the SimCity fiasco, I believe if you release an unfinished product using a (well-earned) brand name which is based on quality content, you deserve zero sympathy as you are clearly just riding on coat-tails and trying to get a quick buck...
Click to expand...

I have to agree somewhat, but that's just as likely the publisher's fault for pushing a crazy deadline, and not necessarily the developer, especially not if you factor in it's basically their first swing at it (OK, yeah, they ported Arkham City to the Wii U, but a porting is fundamentally different). You have to remember, publishers won't do that unless we don't beg for more and are willing to put our money where our mouths are. Also, this is not NEARLY the same as the SimCity thing, that required you to be online always, and the servers kept crashing. Compare apples with apples here...
 
Also, i was referring to a previous post I had made regarding Simcity, so I wasn't "comparing" per se as just using it to illustrate my main point of being more responsible for releasing a product that at least works out of the box. In those regards, the two are directly linked. Simcity obviously had a whole boatload of OTHER issues along with it, but I'm merely talking about the fact that on day one of release, a much-hyped game based on a well known brand simply didn't work...
 
Good game dont put faith in reviewers look at cod took 10 before anyone complaned about it being the same old same old a good batman game is still better than 90 percent of other games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top