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.Lieju said:That's the old question, though.Adam Jensen said:Once the bugs are fixed it will be an excellent game.
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)
yeah this is my only beef with the game. I think the combat is great personallyEddie the head said:Well except the game keeps freezing on me. I just god poised by that one chick and now my game won't load.Adam Jensen said:But for me Arkham Origins runs so much better than both AA and AC.
Like with Obsidian games.Dirty Hipsters said:*snip*
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).Adam Jensen said: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.
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 ^_^Battenberg said: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?
That's one hell of a long post - might be worth spoilering.RJ 17 said:snip
Easier to get noticed with a big ol' mega-post.Battenberg said:That's one hell of a long post - might be worth spoilering.RJ 17 said:snip
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.
*Cough* [http://www.destructoid.com/100-objective-review-final-fantasy-xiii-179178.phtml]Adam Jensen said:He didn't review it objectively at all.
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.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.
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.hazabaza1 said:*Cough* [http://www.destructoid.com/100-objective-review-final-fantasy-xiii-179178.phtml]Adam Jensen said:He didn't review it objectively at all.
And even judging his review "objectively" he does seem mention quite a lot of problems about the combat, map, detective sections and such.
Even if you remove the bits of the review where he complains about the industry there's still a lot of issues he talks about.Adam Jensen said: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.hazabaza1 said:*Cough* [http://www.destructoid.com/100-objective-review-final-fantasy-xiii-179178.phtml]Adam Jensen said:He didn't review it objectively at all.
And even judging his review "objectively" he does seem mention quite a lot of problems about the combat, map, detective sections and such.
weirdsoup said: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.
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.The Wykydtron said: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.
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.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.
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.Adam Jensen said: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.
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.Kungfu_Teddybear said: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.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.
Also, a 3.5 out of 10 is a seriously unfair score.