That's the old question, though.
Should the reviewer ignore the bugs and trust 'it will eventually work'?
From what I've read some people played a game that was almost unplayable because of glitches.
I'll personally play this game eventually, but not for a while until I hear the bugs are fixed. (And the prize drops)
No, a review should include any bad bugs that the reviewer encountered, and if the game gets a patch then the reviewer should update their review of the game to say that the bug they experienced got patched. Anything other than that would be unprofessional, because if you just ignore the bugs then you're giving consumers unfair expectations, especially if the developers end up ignoring the bugs and never fixing them, which does tend to happen at times. Reporting on the bugs and drawing attention to them gives the developers more incentive to fix their shit.
But the problem is, no one ever seems to follow through on the second part, the 'going back and updating their review once the bugs are fixed' part. Especially if they gave it a horrible review based on bugs alone. Not saying they should ignore the bugs; but they do seem to ignore the fixing of the bugs.
I feel the same way. I was really good at the combat in arkham city. Like really good, I have a high score of over four million points in the jokers funhouse map with batman. For some reason in arkham orgins I have difficulty getting a combo over twelve without the spider-sense counter icons. It is really pissing me off.
He didn't do the game any justice. He didn't review it objectively at all. The last bit may be directly about the gaming industry, but the entire review is actually about that. He used Arkham Origins as a scape goat to rage about other issues. a 3.5/10? That's completely unprofessional. The story is good, the boss battles are actually better than most boss battles in most video games. Definitely better that all of the boss battles from previous Arkham games.
Dude, you can't argue someone's not objective while claiming your personal experience makes up for everyone else having a worse one. Jim's review is worth substantial more to me than yours as it stands. And while I did actually like the game, the story to me was somewhat infuriating (Shiva and Deadshot are both side missions? Seriously? Because we needed more Penguin) and the boss battles aren't all amazing (like Bane's, which was regular ass enemy who occasionally goes invincible unless you superstun like, arrrrggggh, thats already not as cool as Ra's Al Ghul's fight).
So I started playing Arkham Origins yesterday to see if the criticisms levelled against it are justified. I haven't got far enough in yet to make an overall judgement but I have noticed (or possibly imagined) a few minor changes to the general combat system which have been frustrating me hugely. I looked it up and found this post on the Warner Bros. Games forum by 'EarthOne' which summarises the issue excellently:
"Before I start I want to say that I don't think this is a bad game at all. Just that unfortunately a lot of bad ideas came from WBM while developing this game. I'm all for making it more challenging, but this isn't, this is just ridiculous.
For God knows what reason, Warner Brothers Montreal though it would be a great idea to add unnecessary and plain stupid tweaks to the Freeflow combat system. I will only be talking about the combat here, as all of you probably already know about everything else that's been butchered in this game.
I've written some of this as a reply in a thread before, but this way an admin/dev might actually see this and pay some attention.
With the combat, I feel absolutely forced to counter all the time. When trying to maximise combo and points, countering is a waste of time unless it's too late and there is no other option.
However for some reason roughly every 7/10 times I evade, peform an arial attack or ultra-stun, I still get hit by an attacking thug while in mid-movement anyway... How is that logical? I'm basically being stopped ever getting great combos unless I make myself paranoid and hold my finger over the Triangle button the whole time, and half the time the counter doesn't even register and I get hit anyway.
Sometimes when countering a martial artist thug, it will just end my combo, even though I successfully countered him. Really.
Batman can no longer cancel his own hit animations anymore, so you're basically screwed if you're attacking someone or performing a move and then someone goes for you.
As well, sometimes when I'm in Freeflow Focus on a nice combo, I'll go to hit a thug who's a distance behind me, and Batman won't fly over and hit him, he just punches the air behind himself ending my streak.
On the flip side of that, the enemies are faster than Batman himself and for some reason can use their own form of Freeflow! If an enemy is going to attack me, the only things I can do are counter or evade assuming the counter actually registers and the off chance Batman actually evades without being hit. If an enemy is standing a distance away from you but is trying to hit you, they fly across the floor at you and hit you anyway. Realistic isn't it.
It is extremely unlikely that you will hit an enemy that is already going for you, even when you're in Freeflow Focus which is really stupid because you're basically being punished for having a good reaction time. Batman hits in almost slow motion half the time, while the enemies straight up smack you at quicker than normal speed.
Literally all the enimies you're confronting take shots at you one after the other straight away simultaneously. This just defeats the purpose of the whole Freeflow system which is designed to let you use the space around you to string a nice, smooth, flowing combo together. Yeah, that's pretty much removed from this game.
When trying to complete challenges like the Shadow Vigilante 15, it is extremely frustrating when your combo is ended by a thug either having quicker speed than the Flash, or them hitting you through every defence you have. Not to mention Batman just being an idiot and not hitting anyone while in Freeflow... /facepalm.
None of this ever happened in Arkham City, it was so much more smooth and logical.
On a side-rant as this has quite a big effect on the combat, why did they feel it necessary to swap L1 and L2's functions around, as well as R1 and R2's functions while aiming? That was such a stupid move.
Why when making the third game in a series would you think it's a good idea to alter the control scheme that everyone is used to, and not even provide an option to revert back?
I know it's not a huge change, but honestly it makes a huge difference. The PS3's triggers aren't great as it is, which just adds to the frustration. It maks it hard to string combos together when trying to use quick-fire gadgets, and I often flick into detective mode rather than using a gadget out of habit which instantly kills my combo.
Hopefully someone with the power the change this game will pay some attention to this and take it into consideration."
Initially I thought maybe I had just gotten worse at the game, having not played in a while, and assumed I was falsely blaming the game however having found a few other people who've found the same issues I'm now curious: Has anyone else noticed these changes and if so have they been as irritating for you as they have for me?
Dunno, finished the main story today, combat seemed fine to me. I don't mind that I have to block more, though that said, I don't have to "constantly hover my finger over the triangle button", my right mouse button always has a finger over it ^_^
Seriously though, it's only natural that enemies try to hit you and not just queue up like idiots (there's an old saying that goes "Not even Hercules against two"). The combat still flows beautifully, you just have more of your hits being counters, but that if anything, adds to the flow, assuming you know what you're doing. There's also something to the tactics of prioritising your opponents (for me it's the shield fuckers first as I can't counter them, then the knife guys cause I suck at countering them ) and dividing them up a bit.
The person who wrote that post mentioned losing his combo due to a martial artist guy 'interrupting' it. He's actually doing it wrong, the martial artist does have some room between his strikes, but rather than waiting for him to strike again, you can go ahead and punch someone else once before countering his attack again. As for the counters not registering, really, the only time the counter "wouldn't register" for me was if I was JUST starting to punch someone when I really should've reacted to an attacking thug. If you press the counter button during your punch animation (rather than right after it), you're doing it wrong.
So no, have to disagree, the combat still works just fine. I'm far more bothered about the whole "Fast Travel takes 10 minutes to load" thing... was sitting here with my brother laughing our arses off at how Batman could've flown to the fucking Moon and back with his flying car in the time it took him to fly over a few blocks when I first tried it...
That's one hell of a long post - might be worth spoilering.
I'm glad to hear I'm not the only one who's noticed the changes. They should only be minor issues in a system which is otherwise excellent but I'm something of a perfectionist and these issues make it very hard to get flawless combos, often even in relatively simple encounters. Even more annoyingly it's making me play very conservatively which has changed the fights from looking like spectacularly choreographed masterpieces to a repetitive string of counters and evades.
Also could people please try to keep on topic, there's probably more posts here arguing about Jim's review than talking about the combat system.
That's one hell of a long post - might be worth spoilering.
I'm glad to hear I'm not the only one who's noticed the changes. They should only be minor issues in a system which is otherwise excellent but I'm something of a perfectionist and these issues make it very hard to get flawless combos, often even in relatively simple encounters. Even more annoyingly it's making me play very conservatively which has changed the fights from looking like spectacularly choreographed masterpieces to a repetitive string of counters and evades.
Also could people please try to keep on topic, there's probably more posts here arguing about Jim's review than talking about the combat system.
But I'm like you in that I'm a perfectionist as well. Back in Arkham City, any of the "Big Main Fights" (such as the very first one in the court room and the arena brawl in the museum) I would just immediately restart to the last checkpoint if I messed up my combo. But back in AC, it was because I got sloppy, plain and simple. In Origins, it's like the game is specifically DESIGNED to make you break your combo. Case in point: what I was talking about with the interrogation targets. I can't tell you how many times I've lost a combo because there's been an interrogation target in the fight. I liked it MUCH better when you had to specifically save them for last and then, as a finish move, Batman scares the shit outta them by knocking out their last buddy then immediately he's got them by the throat, holding them off the side of a building.
I kept assuring myself that this game was worth the pre-order because "As long as they didn't fuck up the combat system, I know I'll love this game" since the combat was my favorite thing about the first two games. Everything I saw in the videos leading up to the release suggested that yes, they were gonna make it more challenging with the new enemy types, which I was actually looking forward to. But, lo' and behold, they managed to just out-right fuck up the combat system.
I had really high hopes that I wasn't going to get burned on this pre-order, because I only pre-order if I'm certain that I'm going to like the game. And really, after having beaten the game and not touching it since, I've gotta say I'm kinda regretting it now.
P.S. Worse than the combat system is the UNBELIEVABLY restrictive level up/challenge system...that pisses me off more than any of the BS in the combat system. You don't get Critical Strikes until half way through the game and you don't get Disarm-Destroy until damn near the end of the game...what kind of horseshit is that?!
My issue is that it used to be that only enemies that were on screen would attack, but now enemies that are off screen can now attack. It makes sense in a real-world standing, but this is a game, and as such, reality needs to be stretched to accommodate for the player. One too many combos have been ended because some dickhead off screen decided to attack me from beyond my visual range, giving me about half a second to do something about it once he shows up on screen and my reaction time isn't that good. It gets worse if the guy in question cannot be dealt with normally. On an unrelated note FUCK the Deadshot fight. One thing that developers should be terrified of is the player asking, "then what?" At the tail end of the encounter, Deadshot grabs his hostage and kills him if you do... something, it's not clear exactly what triggers Deadshot to kill the hostage. The only thing the game says at this point of the fight is use "Detective Vision to locate the hostage." HEY RETARD I HAVE BEEN USING IT THIS ENTIRE FIGHT, I ALREADY KNOW WHERE THE HOSTAGE IS! HOW ABOUT YOU CLARIFY WHAT THE FUCK IS SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN AT THIS POINT! GODDAMN! I'm sorry, I put the game down for the night after failing it like ten times because the game wasn't clear on what I was supposed to do.
100 hit combos, get on my level. This might just be the side of me who fully completed the combat challenges in City talking but the combat is the best so far.
People went on about how the enemies in Asylum politely wait to come at you one at a time now suddenly a mob attacking as a mob should is shocking? The counters are the best part of the game for me, the more the better. I guess after all the time spent on City the harder the better in Origins. The freaking kung fu enemies are awesome.
The boss fights are some of the best this year, especially the Deathstroke one, I was never one to care about the level up system in any of the other games except the health and a few stealth ones
EDIT: Oh yeah, the bugs really are worth all the fuss. My game is currently stuck on the last Bane fight because it turns into a black screen the moment it starts while the game is still technically being played, I can move and attack and everything. Dying to it doesn't reset it either.
cojo965 said:
On an unrelated note FUCK the Deadshot fight. One thing that developers should be terrified of is the player asking, "then what?" At the tail end of the encounter, Deadshot grabs his hostage and kills him if you do... something, it's not clear exactly what triggers Deadshot to kill the hostage. The only thing the game says at this point of the fight is use "Detective Vision to locate the hostage." HEY RETARD I HAVE BEEN USING IT THIS ENTIRE FIGHT, I ALREADY KNOW WHERE THE HOSTAGE IS! HOW ABOUT YOU CLARIFY WHAT THE FUCK IS SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN AT THIS POINT! GODDAMN! I'm sorry, I put the game down for the night after failing it like ten times because the game wasn't clear on what I was supposed to do.
I guess you never played the one particular challenge map in City? That Deadshot fight is a near exact copy paste of a map in there and the hostage take is part of that scenario as well. He just spins in a predictable circle until you get the standard silent takedown. Yes, it's dumb that you can't punch him really quickly before he gets there but that was in City too, you can only blame them for not improving on that one small aspect. You could call them lazy for the copy paste though.
Poor choice of words. What I meant to say is, Jim allowed his feelings about the state of the industry to worm their way into the review of the game. If that was common practice then how could we as consumers trust his reviews? He's supposed to inform us about the game not about his feelings about the industry.
Poor choice of words. What I meant to say is, Jim allowed his feelings about the state of the industry to worm their way into the review of the game. If that was common practice then how could we as consumers trust his reviews? He's supposed to inform us about the game not about his feelings about the industry.
TBH, I've finished AO and while it's a decent game, I feel it's the weakest of the 3 game Arkham games.
It feels more like a really big DLC for Arkham City, rather than a game in it's own right. I know there was a new development team and they clearly didn't want to tamper too much with the formula that made the first 2 games a success. But that being said, they've played it TOO safe and rather than expand on what's gone before they've just added to what's already been done.
I have to agree...it's like Arkham City with some only minor changes. Rocksteady took what worked in Asylum and put that in Arkham City along with new stuff that was changed for the better for the gaming experience.. on the other hand, Warner took everything from Arkham City, copypasted it, changed a few things for the worse and added unneeded things like Multiplayer and sluggish combat..
100 hit combos, get on my level. This might just be the side of me who fully completed the combat challenges in City talking but the combat is the best so far.
People went on about how the enemies in Asylum politely wait to come at you one at a time now suddenly a mob attacking as a mob should is shocking? The counters are the best part of the game for me, the more the better. I guess after all the time spent on City the harder the better in Origins. The freaking kung fu enemies are awesome.
The boss fights are some of the best this year, especially the Deathstroke one, I was never one to care about the level up system in any of the other games except the health and a few stealth ones
EDIT: Oh yeah, the bugs really are worth all the fuss. My game is currently stuck on the last Bane fight because it turns into a black screen the moment it starts while the game is still technically being played, I can move and attack and everything. Dying to it doesn't reset it either.
cojo965 said:
On an unrelated note FUCK the Deadshot fight. One thing that developers should be terrified of is the player asking, "then what?" At the tail end of the encounter, Deadshot grabs his hostage and kills him if you do... something, it's not clear exactly what triggers Deadshot to kill the hostage. The only thing the game says at this point of the fight is use "Detective Vision to locate the hostage." HEY RETARD I HAVE BEEN USING IT THIS ENTIRE FIGHT, I ALREADY KNOW WHERE THE HOSTAGE IS! HOW ABOUT YOU CLARIFY WHAT THE FUCK IS SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN AT THIS POINT! GODDAMN! I'm sorry, I put the game down for the night after failing it like ten times because the game wasn't clear on what I was supposed to do.
I guess you never played the one particular challenge map in City? That Deadshot fight is a near exact copy paste of a map in there and the hostage take is part of that scenario as well. He just spins in a predictable circle until you get the standard silent takedown. Yes, it's dumb that you can't punch him really quickly before he gets there but that was in City too, you can only blame them for not improving on that one small aspect. You could call them lazy for the copy paste though.
No, I haven't. I played the Deadshot side mission in the story mode which was straight-forward enough that I could take failure 'cause I knew I fucked up. This though, it feels that I'm failing to things not in my control and it is infuriating.
RJ hit the nail on the head with his first post regarding combat. I haven't finished AO yet, but have gotten quite far in the storyline and played some online. I was a Batboss at the first two games, and routinely got high 50+ combos in Arkham City without too much effort. I beat the game on Hard New Game+ as well and got 3 medals on all the Challenge maps, (Though didn't bother much with the Campaign ones) so I believe I'm extremely competent at the first two games.
I have managed to get a 50+ combo going in AO a few times, but all the tweaks spoke of already regarding the combat bogs me down and where I used to nearly never get hit in AC, even against the dangerous groups, I am hit frequently by thugs either obscured by the camera, or by enemies during my attacks. On Normal the "mash counter" issue is much less of a problem, but on Hard it seems to be the only real way to survive for long.
I also LOATHE the new Upgrade system. I used to pickup Multibatarangs as my first upgrade and wouldn't bother with Armor until I had just about everything else unlocked. But now you need 2 upgrades before you can get dual Batarangs, and while the Swarm was an upgrade you could buy immediately with your first point in AC, in AO you require 5 upgrades to unlock it, 4 of which are Ballistic Armor upgrades. The Upgrade Tree style they've gone for really takes away the replayability for me, since it's impossible to challenge myself by not getting any Armor upgrades, since they're mandatory for getting some of the important upgrades.
As for the boss fights? Meh. One fight was a Bane redux from AA, another was a Ra's clone from AC. Deathstroke was a fun battle, though I had a few issues with how it flowed, and also its timing in the story.
Surprisingly enough, I actually like the Online...when you finally get into a match, and don't suffer conmection problems. It's a lot like going to an Amusement Park on a hot Saturday afternoon, and you're waiting in line for the biggest badass roller coaster in the park. Takes forever to get to the front, but once you get there it's awesome...assuming it doesn't eject you out halfway through the ride. Nothing pisses me off more than waiting around for 20-30 minutes, finally getting a match AND getting to play as Batman or Robin, then getting disconnected for seemingly no reason. (Where I was playing had an extremely good and reliable connection.)
All that being said, AO isn't a bad game. The storyline, while at points is ridiculous, (Where'd that sweet Detective Mode Scene Reconstruction Tech you had in AO but not AA go, Bats? Alfred toss it out?) it is really engaging and keeps me wanting to move forward, and the voice actors replacing Hamill and Conroy do a great job, much to my surprise. AO just doesn't live up to the much more polished AC.
I've been playing it at a friends house on PC and i don't know what the fuss is all about. It seems to crash a lot when i'm playing it (but nobody else) and it also seems to chug a lot, especially that 100 v 1 battle in the challenges. I put both of those down to playing on a PC again, i'm sure the console versions can't be that poorly optimised.
The combat itself is very much the same as before but the counter timing is much sharper and i feel more like i'm guessing the attacks rather than watching out for them. They fixed the super stun, ground pound combo so that i have never had it fail on me whereas before it was 50/50 if it would land without a jump inbetween. The guys who throw things have an area around them where they cannot miss if they throw and you cannot counter which means the risky dodge is the only option when close. Getting upto red combo makes the game too easy whilst not being on a red combo makes the game seem extremely slow and batman feels piss poor weak. When you get hit in an attack you see to get hit over and over again, sometimes without being able to break the combo for 3 or 4 hits.
But really it feels much the same as before but with more guys to fight. Managed to get a 118 hit combo, often get to 80...not as good as i was before but i haven't had enough time on it yet. The moaners seem to be moaning about their own ability more than the game so take their opinion with a pinch of salt
I didn't have a single problem on the PC version. Maybe it's a console thing. And since it's running at 30fps on a console, things can seem a bit sluggish. But for me Arkham Origins runs so much better than both AA and AC. An the combat, while tougher because enemies don't just wait for their turn to attack, isn't in any way ruining my fun. In fact, I quite enjoy the challenge.
Playing on PS3 and aside from the frame rate dropping now and then, I have no problems with the combat, Batman moves a bit differently, but I think that's intentional. He isn't as experienced a crime fighter, he is a bit more of a brawler due to this lack of field experience.
Kungfu_Teddybear said:
Phoenixmgs said:
To me, the combat in the Batman games isn't about the challenge of actually winning the fight but trying to pull off long and awesome freeflow combos, that's what makes it fun and challenging for me. It seems from other posters that its much too hard to keep lengthy combos going, which is very disappointing.
Well, I have the achievement for getting a x50 freeflow combo, so I'd say to people struggling to keep a combo going that it's a problem with them and not the game.
Also, a 3.5 out of 10 is a seriously unfair score.
I played the other two a lot, and I find this one a little more challenging but in a good way. Each time I get hit, I know it's my fault, I usually can be heard saying "why did I do that..." by my flat mates.
As for Jims review score, I disagree with him, but hey that's this opinion. That's the thing about people, and he is people, we all have differing opinions and ways we experience the same things like games, books, movies and so on.
I have found this to be the best written of the three (so far, I haven't finished it yet) and the boss battles to be the best in the franchise as well. You properly fight them. it's not like Bane/Ivy/Joker in Asylum, where it's dodge his charge and have him hit a wall or trigger the event that gives you the only way to hurt them. The Origins bosses I've fought so far you can punch to damage them like a regular foe, you just got to be careful not to leave yourself open, like I said though, I haven't finished it yet so that could change.
Keeping in mind this was by a different studio, they have done okay, there is this slight feeling of a lack of polish in some areas, but over all, I feel they have lived up to what I expected of an Arkham game. They haven't revolutionized the game, or made any huge changes to the formula and nor did they market it in such a way that you would think it was going to be the case. Rumor has it Rocksteady is working on another, so we'll see what's in store for us with the next title.
Like a few others I also haven't had any problems with the combat or controls with this game, for me it works just as fine as that in Arkham City.
Thats not to say that there aren't alot of problems with this game though, namely bugs and issues with the challenges and leveling but the core gameplay is certainly not one of them. WB Montreal have made a truly great here it just sucks they didn't take the time to polish it and work out the kinks before it was released.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
) and dividing them up a bit.
