Batman: Arkham Knight

[daniel77733]

Re: Batman: Arkham Knight

I thought the only one done by Montreal was the Batgirl DLC?

Nope. It's all WB Montreal.

[Fresh Tendrils]

Re: Batman: Arkham Knight

Everything I've read has said Rocksteady's developed everything since the August DLC including the Nightwing's GCPD Lockdown.

[Sandman42]

Re: Batman: Arkham Knight

Warner Bros. continue to be the worst with Season Passes between this and Mortal Kombat X. Even most of the DLC's from Mordor last year were pretty mediocre and short. Compare it to the Witcher as was previously said, or even Destiny, where for $40 you get a whole games worth of content.

I only made it about 7 or 8 hours in Arkham Knight anyway. I've always believe Asylum was the best one and the series was hurt going open world. City was still a good game, but I felt it was a step down from Asylum. Give me a smaller, more detailed map, over open world bloat anyday. After hearing so many cold reactions to how the side content played out, and getting tired of the Batmobile pretty quickly I put it down. The predator sections are still excellent, but I felt they were few and far between and replaced with strafe around and pretend you are playing Batman: War for Cybertron.

Also not sure if anyone else felt this way, but I found the combat to be less enjoyable than the past games. It could just be from fatigue after playing 2 of these games and Mordor. I do think they throw too many different types of special enemies at you. The previous 2 had mostly normal guys to build your combos off of and then a few special guys you had to do certain moves to beat. In this game it feels like there's entire mobs you are fighting have to be cape stunned, attacked from behind, taser dodging, etc.

[Smallville102001]

Re: Batman: Arkham Knight

Nope. It's all WB Montreal.

No ever thing out side of batgirl was rocksteady

Whatever you have to do to justify the awful season pass pricing and its terrible quality. The Witcher 3 just launched a true expansion for $10 that is at least 10 hours long.

The previous games didn't really need DLC because everything came packed in to increase the games' longevity and replayability. You weren't forced to buy additional challenges, maps, and characters because all that was already included and unlocked.


Actually, City had the most by far. There were 24 predator and combat maps in addition to 12 challenge campaigns, so 36 per character. Catwoman automatically came with the game so that's 72 challenges for you to go through right off the bat. If you wanted to download Nightwing or Robin that added even more.

My problem with the packed-in Arkham Knight challenges was outside of one or two none of them had any replayability. You beat them and moved on. Only one or two had any score-type measure that I would ever try to beat repeatedly like with Origins or City. Not to mention a cast of characters that were essentially background props until people complained enough for them to patch in the ability to use them in the challenges. Even then you won't be able to use them in free-roam for some lame, lazy reason.

For better or worse the Batmobile never really felt as organic or natural to the game like all the other elements did. Batman's combat system is wonderful with its fluidity and rhythm, but the Bat-Tank segments felt overly-simplistic and underdeveloped. Hell, they even copy and pasted some sections throughout the game. It just felt like a feature they could market and say, "hey, look, you can drive the Batmobile."

If you prefer this game over the rest of the series then that's wonderful, but I completely disagree and it is my least favorite. For me Origins is more engaging in both its story and gameplay, but then even Arkham City's disjointed story is better to me. The side missions turned into copy & paste missions. After you completed the first one it basically turned into "do this again 5 times for the final, dull villain confrontation." There was so much potential with what they had in the game, but it never came to a satisfying conclusion. It all felt thrown together like left-over ideas they had from the previous games that they never took the time to flesh out and develop.

I'm sorry, but this game felt like a total and complete cash-grab. The hype of the Batmobile, the full cast of characters, and the massively overpriced season pass. There's an under-the-surface animosity for this game and I think its warranted.

The season pass is not awful and doesn't need to be justified. Yeah city had 31 combat/predator maps and 14 campaigns if you count the DLC and 4 characters but knight is going to have around 50 combat/predator maps and has 7 or 8 characters. That is more then the other games had and then you also have the batmobile things so there for there is way more to do in this game then the other games. There is no reason to have free roaming with different characters all you would do is go around beat up people and walk and find some more people to beat up. That is boring and pointless. In less you are doing side mission or the main story or something free roaming is pointless. Like they are really going to make 8 characters with side missions for story mode lol.


Man hear we go again with origins and the talk about its story. Its story is so overrated it makes me sick. People complain about knight being predictable but out side of who the arkham knight was the game was far from predictable and origins story is far more predictable any way. You talk about side mission but a lot of them in city where repetitive to like having to find and blow up the different 6 different Titian containers. I have not played the witcher 3 have no interest in that game but all of the arkham games have about a 12 hour story with out the side mission like they are really going to make a story DLC that is 10 hours almost same the main story lol.


People talk about the batmobile being over used and yes it was how ever it is not has people say it is. Out of the 13 side mission like 8 of them don't require the batmobile at all and like 2 some so only like 3 are heavy on the batmobile. The season pass may be over priced but if it is it is just slightly over priced. People act like it should be a $15 pass. There is no way that a pass that added like 7-8 batmobiles, sever races tracks, skins, lots of challenge maps and at least 3 hours and 45 minutes of story dlc is only worth $15 maybe not $40 but it is close to being worth that much. If not 40 like 30-35 is what it is worth.

[Smallville102001]

Re: Batman: Arkham Knight

Hands down one of the worst season passes offered - companies need to take notes from The Witcher & Borderlands (and some other games) on how a season pass should be handled.


I mean, The Witcher is throwing an additional 30+ hours of STORY content for $24.99!

Batman wants $40 for skins and race tracks.

Only that is not all you got you also got at least 3 hours and 45 minutes of story DLC and a lot of challenge maps and yes challenge maps should have been in the game day 1 but even city and origins charged for some challenge maps so even had the game had challenge maps from the start some of them still would have most likely been dlc maps.

[daniel77733]

Re: Batman: Arkham Knight

Regarding the DLC, the developer is listed as WB Montreal for Batgirl and the GCPD Nightwing DLC on GameFaqs but im trying to confirm if it's actually Rocksteady or WB Montreal. Reason I believe it to be WB Montreal is because my friend is a huge Batman Arkham fan and a fan of Rocksteady and he passed on the season pass because he read that all the DLC content was being developed by WB Montreal who developed Origins because after Arkham Knight concluded, Rocksteady simply wanted to move on. WB gave all the DLC to WB Montreal because they're expected to continue the franchise without Rocksteady. Let you guys know once I know for sure. I would be surprised if it's Rocksteady simply because thus far, all the DLC content has been bad and a rip off by gamers thus far and to me, that has WB Montreal written all over it.

EDIT: The Red Hood, Harley Quinn and Batgirl DLC was done by WB Montreal. Everything else is actually Rocksteady. I was wrong and im surprised because it seems like the majority of the DLC in the season pass is basically just being rushed through.

Either way, looking at all the content in the season pass, it seems to be more about quantity than quality but none of it affects me so whatever.

[daniel77733]

Re: Batman: Arkham Knight

Smallville.....

There's several reasons why people were disappointed with Arkham Knight including myself -

1) Bat mobile is the main focal point in the game. Batman is secondary. Some of the stuff that you had to do with the Bat mobile like using the grappling hook to lift a roof which in turn makes it a ramp that you had to drive off of was good and very well implemented. The problem is that it's simply overdone to the point of where it becomes sickening. The Bat tanks were also overdone and honestly, not that good. It's basically strafe, shoot and repeat. If everything including the Bat mobile was done a few times throughout the game, it would have been a lot better. Instead, it became boring, tedious and repetitive very quickly and the good parts like what I mentioned simply lose the innovative aspect to it. In other words, less, a lot less would have meant more.

2) No boss fights. The side villains end in an arrest and no fight whatsoever. The one major fight you have in the story is in the Bat mobile against a powered up tank. And the Riddler boss fight is in some weird *** machine that you can't do unless you complete all the Riddles which leads me to -

3) Too many riddles. Seriously, 50 would have been plenty. Not 200+ or whatever the hell it is. Especially when you have to complete them all to fight the Riddler.

4) Hidden ending. In order to get the "real" ending, you have to complete the game 100% which includes all the Riddles and im sorry, crap like this is why YouTube is perfect for gamers.

5) Misuse of characters, mainly Scarecrow. Seriously, he's overshadowed by a villain who shouldn't even be in the game for obvious reasons which leads me to -

6) That villain who's throughout the game with you. My friend explained it but I thought it was pathetic to include a character that should no longer exist. And the crap at the end where you "fight" him was a total and complete joke.

7) The side quests that were actually mini-stories should have been great and ended in awesome boss fights. Instead, they're all short and end in an arrest.

8) Empty city. I get it and understand it but again, it was a crappy way out. The Bat mobile was such a huge strain in the game that there's simply no way that the game would have been able to handle all the random civilian NPC's. Also, this was done in Arkham City and shouldn't have been done two games in a row.

9) Arkham Knight reveal made sense story line wise but it was obvious and then he turns around and does the opposite of what he was trying to do throughout the entire game.

10) Perhaps worse of all is the fact that Arkham Knight is Rocksteady's final game in their trilogy and instead of being an easy classic, it turned out to be a huge disappointment. It seemed like all Rocksteady did was add in the Bat mobile and literally, rode it throughout the game until it was finished.

If you think it's the best or your favorite in the series, that's your opinion but my opinion is that while the game was solid and did some good things, the negatives outweigh the positives and being the finale hurts it the most because it's like - "hmmm, this is it?, this is how the last game is?" UGH.

Just like I was telling my friend while playing, game had so much damn potential to be an easy 9.5/10 and game of the year candidate but instead, it leaves the majority of who played it disappointed and even more so since it's the finale in Rocksteady's trilogy.

For me, Batman and MGSV are the two biggest disappointments this year and im happy that both franchises are done simply because one went two games too long and the other went with a unique idea that was horribly implemented and way too overdone to make the good parts of it even matter. And while I would rate them the same as The Order: 1886 and Watch Dogs (all an 8/10), these two games were far bigger disappointments to me for main reason - they're the series finale and my expectations were a lot higher for both of those games because of that.

To each his/her own though.

[Fresh Tendrils]

Re: Batman: Arkham Knight

The season pass is not awful and doesn't need to be justified. Yeah city had 31 combat/predator maps and 14 campaigns if you count the DLC and 4 characters but knight is going to have around 50 combat/predator maps and has 7 or 8 characters. That is more then the other games had and then you also have the batmobile things so there for there is way more to do in this game then the other games. There is no reason to have free roaming with different characters all you would do is go around beat up people and walk and find some more people to beat up. That is boring and pointless. In less you are doing side mission or the main story or something free roaming is pointless. Like they are really going to make 8 characters with side missions for story mode lol.

Arkham City had free-roam with Catwoman after the main story was over and that was enjoyable. Heck, there were even character specific Riddler trophies for her to find. The best part about these games has been the combat so any excuse to stroll around and beat up baddies is going to be worth while to me. You're telling me you wouldn't enjoy the option of creeping around Gotham as Nightwing, Batgirl, Robin, or Catwoman and messing around with the groups of thugs peppered around the map?

If you want to count all the Batmobile exercises and crap-tastic Scarecrow "races" as Challenges then that's fine, but the Combat and Predator challenges are extremely lacking. This is especially true since the initial AR Challenges you face are dressed up tutorials. They laid a goose egg on these and its clear as day they thought they could withhold those things to pad the DLC which is my biggest complaint.

Its obvious they withheld content for the DLC. There's no reason why the combat and predator missions shouldn't have been included with the game. It felt like a cash-grab. Hell, there's no reason why any of the character specific DLC shouldn't have been included in the game given how short they are and how little (if anything) they add to the gameplay mechanics. If you felt like 2 hours of the same crap, quality side missions, some skins, and a couple racetracks that are only worth driving through once is worth $40 then that's great. EA, WB, and Ubisoft love you. I, on the other hand, think its silly.

Man hear we go again with origins and the talk about its story. Its story is so overrated it makes me sick. People complain about knight being predictable but out side of who the arkham knight was the game was far from predictable and origins story is far more predictable any way. You talk about side mission but a lot of them in city where repetitive to like having to find and blow up the different 6 different Titian containers. I have not played the witcher 3 have no interest in that game but all of the arkham games have about a 12 hour story with out the side mission like they are really going to make a story DLC that is 10 hours almost same the main story lol.

I thought the Arkham City side missions were awesome and all a lot more engaging and memorable than Knight's. Tracking down Zsasz, Deadshot, and Hush, working (uneasily) with Bane and Mr. Freeze, and running into Mad Hatter and Azrael. Each one felt unique and intriguing. Arkham Knight simply walled off sections of gameplay for their side missions. Combat was relegated to Penguin, Predator to Two-Face, and racing with Firefly. Its actually quite surprising to me that the most memorable side mission actually contained the least amount of gameplay (Man-Bat) simply because its story was actually intriguing and interesting. I guess the lesson learned here is that Rocksteady is exceptional at set-up and build-up, but do not count on them to be have a satisfying conclusion.

They did a great job with The Joker, but outside of him everything else was hit and miss.

People talk about the batmobile being over used and yes it was how ever it is not has people say it is. Out of the 13 side mission like 8 of them don't require the batmobile at all and like 2 some so only like 3 are heavy on the batmobile.

I actually enjoyed the Batmobile side missions. My problem with the main missions was lack of diversity. Combat and Predator sections felt walled off to their respective side missions and their inclusion in the main story was minimal. Instead you had a main story that revolved (for better or worse) around the Batmobile and its gameplay.

[Smallville102001]

Re: Batman: Arkham Knight

Smallville.....

There's several reasons why people were disappointed with Arkham Knight including myself -

1) Bat mobile is the main focal point in the game. Batman is secondary. Some of the stuff that you had to do with the Bat mobile like using the grappling hook to lift a roof which in turn makes it a ramp that you had to drive off of was good and very well implemented. The problem is that it's simply overdone to the point of where it becomes sickening. The Bat tanks were also overdone and honestly, not that good. It's basically strafe, shoot and repeat. If everything including the Bat mobile was done a few times throughout the game, it would have been a lot better. Instead, it became boring, tedious and repetitive very quickly and the good parts like what I mentioned simply lose the innovative aspect to it. In other words, less, a lot less would have meant more.

2) No boss fights. The side villains end in an arrest and no fight whatsoever. The one major fight you have in the story is in the Bat mobile against a powered up tank. And the Riddler boss fight is in some weird *** machine that you can't do unless you complete all the Riddles which leads me to -

3) Too many riddles. Seriously, 50 would have been plenty. Not 200+ or whatever the hell it is. Especially when you have to complete them all to fight the Riddler.

4) Hidden ending. In order to get the "real" ending, you have to complete the game 100% which includes all the Riddles and im sorry, crap like this is why YouTube is perfect for gamers.

5) Misuse of characters, mainly Scarecrow. Seriously, he's overshadowed by a villain who shouldn't even be in the game for obvious reasons which leads me to -

6) That villain who's throughout the game with you. My friend explained it but I thought it was pathetic to include a character that should no longer exist. And the crap at the end where you "fight" him was a total and complete joke.

7) The side quests that were actually mini-stories should have been great and ended in awesome boss fights. Instead, they're all short and end in an arrest.

8) Empty city. I get it and understand it but again, it was a crappy way out. The Bat mobile was such a huge strain in the game that there's simply no way that the game would have been able to handle all the random civilian NPC's. Also, this was done in Arkham City and shouldn't have been done two games in a row.

9) Arkham Knight reveal made sense story line wise but it was obvious and then he turns around and does the opposite of what he was trying to do throughout the entire game.

10) Perhaps worse of all is the fact that Arkham Knight is Rocksteady's final game in their trilogy and instead of being an easy classic, it turned out to be a huge disappointment. It seemed like all Rocksteady did was add in the Bat mobile and literally, rode it throughout the game until it was finished.

If you think it's the best or your favorite in the series, that's your opinion but my opinion is that while the game was solid and did some good things, the negatives outweigh the positives and being the finale hurts it the most because it's like - "hmmm, this is it?, this is how the last game is?" UGH.

Just like I was telling my friend while playing, game had so much damn potential to be an easy 9.5/10 and game of the year candidate but instead, it leaves the majority of who played it disappointed and even more so since it's the finale in Rocksteady's trilogy.

For me, Batman and MGSV are the two biggest disappointments this year and im happy that both franchises are done simply because one went two games too long and the other went with a unique idea that was horribly implemented and way too overdone to make the good parts of it even matter. And while I would rate them the same as The Order: 1886 and Watch Dogs (all an 8/10), these two games were far bigger disappointments to me for main reason - they're the series finale and my expectations were a lot higher for both of those games because of that.

To each his/her own though.

1. I agree that the batmobile was over used. I think if they had done like 25% less batmobile and like 25% more dual play that things would have been better. Dual play was a great new feature but was only in the for a very small amount.


2. I agree with that it is my biggest problem with the game and my biggest question left hopefully SOI can have some good boss fights. I cant remember a action adventure game with such few boss fights before.


3. The more riddles the better I think and this is not really true because the game had way less then city. City had like 440 of them or something. This game only had like 243 or something and where more creative with some of them to. If you say this game had to many riddles then that has to be a issue with the other arkham games to.


4. Arkham games are great because it takes a long time to get 100% on and have a lot of replay value and the full ending didn't even really add that much any way.


5. Scarecrow was great in this game just great.


6. The way they used joker was just brilliant and made much more since then it did in origins to have him in the game and the end was just perfection! The franchise at its core is about joker and batman's relationship and had some very creepy stuff going on there.


7. Not of them are short but yeah needed more boss fights. The pig side mission was great and not short.


8. I would like to see more people around but like you said it was like that in city so you cant really hate on them for that then.


9. Yes it was predictable but it was the only part of the story that was predictable and I found origins joker thing to be even more predictable and it made less since to.


10. I hope we get another arkham game. I don't think it would take much to fix the issue that the game had. If the game had a lot less batmobile like 25% less and like 25% more dual play and real boss fights like ever arkham game had before this I think knight would be consider much better. If they where to make another game and do those things + had a shadow predator gameplay feature and have dynamic weather and day night cycle and have more people around in stead of it being empty that would be enough to make a new game that is great and not to much like the ones before.

Arkham City had free-roam with Catwoman after the main story was over and that was enjoyable. Heck, there were even character specific Riddler trophies for her to find. The best part about these games has been the combat so any excuse to stroll around and beat up baddies is going to be worth while to me. You're telling me you wouldn't enjoy the option of creeping around Gotham as Nightwing, Batgirl, Robin, or Catwoman and messing around with the groups of thugs peppered around the map?

If you want to count all the Batmobile exercises and crap-tastic Scarecrow "races" as Challenges then that's fine, but the Combat and Predator challenges are extremely lacking. This is especially true since the initial AR Challenges you face are dressed up tutorials. They laid a goose egg on these and its clear as day they thought they could withhold those things to pad the DLC which is my biggest complaint.

Its obvious they withheld content for the DLC. There's no reason why the combat and predator missions shouldn't have been included with the game. It felt like a cash-grab. Hell, there's no reason why any of the character specific DLC shouldn't have been included in the game given how short they are and how little (if anything) they add to the gameplay mechanics. If you felt like 2 hours of the same crap, quality side missions, some skins, and a couple racetracks that are only worth driving through once is worth $40 then that's great. EA, WB, and Ubisoft love you. I, on the other hand, think its silly.

I thought the Arkham City side missions were awesome and all a lot more engaging and memorable than Knight's. Tracking down Zsasz, Deadshot, and Hush, working (uneasily) with Bane and Mr. Freeze, and running into Mad Hatter and Azrael. Each one felt unique and intriguing. Arkham Knight simply walled off sections of gameplay for their side missions. Combat was relegated to Penguin, Predator to Two-Face, and racing with Firefly. Its actually quite surprising to me that the most memorable side mission actually contained the least amount of gameplay (Man-Bat) simply because its story was actually intriguing and interesting. I guess the lesson learned here is that Rocksteady is exceptional at set-up and build-up, but do not count on them to be have a satisfying conclusion.

They did a great job with The Joker, but outside of him everything else was hit and miss.

I actually enjoyed the Batmobile side missions. My problem with the main missions was lack of diversity. Combat and Predator sections felt walled off to their respective side missions and their inclusion in the main story was minimal. Instead you had a main story that revolved (for better or worse) around the Batmobile and its gameplay.

Doing free roaming with characters is boring you can fight people with them in combat maps and that is like the same thing only you don't have to walk/run around to get to those locations first. Right now the combat/predator maps are lacking but they are adding more of them and are adding the 4 round ones back has while. The are also adding indoor ones back like the other games had. Some of the side mission in the game are good and SOI is going to be at least 1 hours with 4 different villains I don't see has being bad and batgirl was 45 minutes to a hour and a half with the collectables and I found batgirl to be a good story dlc. Yes challenge maps should have been in the game day 1 but we are going to end up with more then we had in the other games and like I said even the other arkham games had some map dlc. So even if the game had those at the start most likely we would have had to pay for some of the maps.


The batmobile rack tracks are cool because they add even more verity to the game and like the maps are fun and addictive to try to improve your score over and over again. The fire fly mission was cool because the batmobile is better to be used has a way to get around rather then the battled mode. The man bat mission was cool because he was so creepy. I don't agree that joker was the only good thing about the story Scarecrow was great and a lot of surprises the game had and I felt more emotion with this game then I did with the other arkham games.

[Eman5805]

Re: Batman: Arkham Knight

The real reason there's no actual boss fights is...who the HELL can actually fight Batman? Only a handful of opponents he's ever faced were strong enough to physically fight him. Namely Killer Croc, Clayface, Bane, and Poison Ivy (and not even physically). Riddler needs a robot. Two-Face, Scarecrow, Penguin, Harley, Pyg, Firefly, Blackfire,

There's two guys and one ends in such a way I think Rocksteady was deliberately trying to make a joke out of it. The other should be able to challenge him, but he goes out of his way not to unless he has the upperhand.

This is a Batman that beat Deathstroke in a straight up fight when he was like a year into being Batman. Deathstroke is supposed to be almost metahuman and couldn't take Bats. A boss fight could only be a bunch of heavy weapons involved.

[Nolan8300]

Re: Batman: Arkham Knight

The problem with the riddler trophies isn't how many there are, it's that you have to collect them all to unlock the best ending. If it wasn't attached to the ending I'd say put in 10,000 for all I care I won't go get them anyway.

But playing this game and then being deprived of the real ending because I can't be bothered to find a bunch of collectibles was an absolutely terrible decision.

I know, I can youtube it, but it's not the same.

[Speedy]

Re: Batman: Arkham Knight

I don't get the hate on Joker.

I thought it was an utterly brilliant move and helped with the storyline. It's sad the climax and ending that the devs messed up on but it wasn't an issue with the joker. There were so many ways the storyline could've developed with the added story that Joker is "inside Batman's head".


...think if Hideo Kojima could've done a Batman game?!? Gosh - he seriously would've made me into actually BEING the Joker and killing innocent people while not even realizing it.

[mestevo]

Re: Batman: Arkham Knight

Releasing on PC 10/28.

http://steamcommunity.com/games/208650/announcements/detail/128710064900030355

Nothing special, just that it will be released an the DLC will finally be available.

[mrclutch]

Re: Batman: Arkham Knight

I don't get the hate on Joker.

I thought it was an utterly brilliant move and helped with the storyline. It's sad the climax and ending that the devs messed up on but it wasn't an issue with the joker. There were so many ways the storyline could've developed with the added story that Joker is "inside Batman's head".


...think if Hideo Kojima could've done a Batman game?!? Gosh - he seriously would've made me into actually BEING the Joker and killing innocent people while not even realizing it.

I thought the Joker stuff was the best part of the story by far...

[Fresh Tendrils]

Re: Batman: Arkham Knight

I thought the Joker stuff was the best part of the story by far...

He was the best character in the entire series.