“It's the freakin' bat!”
Thirty seconds prior you are sailing over Gotham, looking for a Riddler trophy or another one of the games many side quests, then you overhear a lowly thugs' plan to take the dark knight down. So you decide to prove him wrong and glide in while tossing a few batarangs, and after a flurry of punches, counters, and a timely quick gadget later you finish the lone combatant with a batmobile assisted takedown. You dust yourself off in the spectacular neon lights, jump into the batmobile and drive off without looking back.
Welcome to a Gotham that you have never seen before.
From the moment you begin the game, you can tell that Arkham Knight is going to be a dour yet beautiful affair. The clown prince of crime is dead and the power vacuum is filled by Scarecrow, who against all odds has turned Gotham into the haunted house he always wanted it to be. However he has an ally, A mysterious figure called the Arkham Knight who makes his disdain for Batman known from their first encounter. The mystery and intrigue that surrounds the identity of the Arkham knight always beckons you to plow through the story, but yet you find yourself torn between doing a story mission and a side mission.
If you are familiar with the series, you will feel right at home-the control scheme that worked so well in the past remains, however Rocksteady (and the Arkham Knight) has made sure that no seasoned veteran of the series cannot simply stroll (or rather glide) into battle. Predator scenarios in the past could be achieved by a 'glide in, zip out' approach as you slowly and silently pick off cronies. It's not so simple now. There are enemies that deploy sentry guns or control drones, Medics that revive downed comrades, and brutes with miniguns that will patrol an objective. Predator situations require a more measured approach and careful consideration, however there are more gadgets at your disposal and it will reward the more patient of players.
As for the open melee combat, the days of wailing on a dozen punching bags are long gone as well. on any given Sunday there could be half a dozen armed thugs; two with stun batons, two with shields, a medic or two and the always present brute. Just like the predator scenarios, the tension is heightened and you just can't jump in useless you have a plan or things can go south very quickly.
Then there is the batmobile.
It is easily the most contentious aspect of the game as many fans will either love it or hate it. From the start the control scheme is not user friendly, thankfully the controls can be changed after the tutorial. The real problem is that so much of the game revolves around the Dark Knight rider and it is the least consistent mechanic in the game. When you are pursuing one of Gothams most wanted through the streets, you can plow through many destructible objects and not bat an eyelid, but yet you can lose traction on a slight incline and lose your mind.
Then there is the Batmobiles battle mode which is quite basic; string together a combo without getting hit and you unlock a variety of special moves that will aid in battle, rinse and repeat. The Batmobile combat is the least rewarding aspect of the game, and when you do finally get to drive it in pursuit mode it is the slowest way to traverse Gotham (unless you prefer running) and many side quests require the batmobile and they could become tedious even for the many ardent completionists out there.
However by car or by air, Rocksteady may have created the greatest representation of Gotham city to date. As you are perched atop of one of Gothams many buildings, you can see the beads of rain drip from Batmans cape in the foreground as you gaze upon lights of Wayne tower in the distance. And as you soar over the city The bat's cape ripples in the breeze as the lightning cracks, then you can drop down into a plaza and see Zatannas magic shop, or you can drive the streets and spot John Constatines office while looking for yet another riddle. Although Gotham was not ever intended to be pretty place, it has life and vibrancy that is accentuated by the superb lighting effects, and the various familiar (and not so familiar) cameos leaves you thinking that Arkham knight was made by fans for the fans.
In the end, Arkham knight will make you sad, happy, then sad again. The engaging story will make you sad when it comes to an end, the gameplay will make you happy when you think back to the fun you've had, then you'll become sad again knowing that this awesome series has come to a close.
Games such as Mad Max, Red Dead Redemption 2, and Batman: Arkham Knight desperately deserve a modern-day revisit.
RDR2 still looks astounding on PS4 Pro. i cannot imagine how it could look with a next gen upgrade.
Probably not very different.
No idea why this article is highlighting recent beautiful graphically-advanced games and saying they need current gen makeovers. They already look better than most new releases; just compare Arkham Knight and Suicide Squad!
It's obviously never gonna happen since Sony killed the game and studio, but Driveclub. Even in its current state, 10 years after release, it still puts many competitors to shame ...
It's a shame they cancelled the game. Definitely the best racing game I've ever played on Playstation. Just got GT7, but it feels so slow and less arcade-y, which is to be expected of a sim racer of course, that I just enjoy it less.
Driveclub also graphically looked insanely good for its time. I wonder what a Driveclub 2 would look like for the PS5.
Mad max ikr! Far cry primal, it amuses me how ubisoft just left ac unity hanging, sadly most of the good staff left from rocksteady while being forced to make that abomination smh
One way or another, these games provoked strong reactions.
I don't think Days Gone divided fans. For the most part, gamers loved it. It was the reviewers who were divided. Self-loathing racist pieces of shit that took exception to the main character being white. This was a fantastic game, one of the best open-world games I ever played, and I've played them all.
Second you on this.. I had absolute blast playing this game!! Memorable!
TLOU 2 I thought was utter s***.. I still haven’t finished it and stopped about halfway (apparently).
It wasn’t fans divided around The Order, it was a period where xbox fanboys were thinking Rise was a more engaging game so they were spreading a lot of hate..
Today they are hibernating with nothing to play
The Order was short, no denying, but a great game with huge potential
I enjoyed days gone and last of us 2. PeoPke trippin.
I always thought the order was kinda whack seeming so I never tried it. Id like to now though.
No thr order was a short, clunky mediocre yet visually stunning game. I thoughts so and pretty much every other reviewer did too.
The Order, where length was a criterion for rating a game, but only this particular game and no others.
While I enjoy what is there in Days Gone, I mourn what was lost. The first trailers for Days Gone showed a morality system that looked interesting. For example, in the beginning when you are chasing down Leon and after you caught him, you could choose to shoot him or leave him for the freaks. You can see hints of it in other places, like if you catch a bandit unaware sometimes they will disarm and it seems like Deacon had the option to shoot them or let them go (he automatically lets them go).
Whatever...those systems unless revolutionary don't add much...they rarely do in games that do have them.
For the most part, when it comes to Last of Us 2, incels, homophobes, and closet national socialist types didn't like it. I repeat not all, but most.
Days Gone is a great game and it was attacked by the leftist socialist people that are actually closet fascists. As a great poet once said: "Socialism is the mother of fascism."
The Order got hit from anti-Sony Xbox fans.
Out of these 3, Last of Us 2 stands above as being a work of art. It's still generating a ton conversation to this day.
-"Last of Us 2, incels, homophobes, and closet national socialist types didn't like it. I repeat not all, but most."
It's so weird & cringe to see other gamers paint this broad brush of *who* didn't like Part II. Why take the "most who disagree with me are Hitler" type of mentality over game tastes?
-"The Order got hit from anti-Sony Xbox fans."
No other community I've dabbled in - be it social media or gaming forums - has built up such a dedicated defense for The Order like N4G. This attitude fundamentally blows my mind, especially in the face of similar older titles (hello Uncharted 1) that already did a marginally better job at storytelling and gameplay. It almost feels like some N4G group chat made this reflexive defense as a meme and a bunch of posters are still playing along with it. No offense to genuine Order fans, but I simply can't shake that feeling.
Well to be fair, I remember being only one of a few people on this site that actually praised The Order when it for came out and got alot of flack for it. Over time it seems opinions have changed about it.
saying something is "cringe" doesn't prove me wrong. You just throw words out and hope they stick. Bring some evidence to prove me otherwise.
I got:
Letizi, R., & Norman, C. (2023). “You Took That From Me”: Conspiracism and Online Harassment in the Alt-Fandom of The Last of Us Part II. Games and Culture, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/155...
You're up. Maybe you can change my mind.
Because NG4 defended it doesn't mean NG4 is the gospel of gaming.
Yeah Yui, it was "the game to hate" at the time. What was bizarre was the, as usual, journalists that were lying about the game and their stories were approved.
It was all clickhate all the time for the Order. I defended it too.
@Yui
-"I remember being only one of a few people on this site that actually praised The Order when it for came out and got alot of flack for it."
That could've been the case right at release, but you should see more recent opinion articles on here. There's a pretty substantial cadre who defend it on here as being "unfairly tarnished" that I simply don't see elsewhere.
Most of the backlash against The Last Of Us 2 was people upset that Joel was killed off, simple as that.
There is that too, but the other groups pilled on too, which increased the numbers. I really don't see why we have to ignore everything but Joel being killed.
I didn't like Part 2 and I'm not any of. The game sold like crazy, it's just hard for people to understand that most found the story to be arse.
Prove what I say is wrong. I will need evidence. I didn't not say all. Your exception rule doesn't work. Find evidence that counters mine. So, we can have a real discussion.
There are plenty of legitimate criticism in hours long analysis videos and reddit posts actually critiquing Part 2. The people you're talking about are such a minority, and they attack just about everything because they see the "wokeness" in the most subliminal ways. They're insignificant because the game still sold pretty well, and reviewed well regardless. Keep in mind the game released world wide, and western politics and views can't be applied to every corner of the world. I can agree that Days Gone was attacked, and unlike Part 2, due to these sites being so heavily political biased it did do some damage.
I am at least showing the group was large enough of a concern for a journal to publish an article.
Where's your evidence?
The last of us part 2 was bad story wise. Not some nonsense that you speak of...most of the negative people were random...lots of the critical reception from anything other than mainstream journalism thought that the game had huge problems.
Angry Joe and skill up being prime examples of that...unless of course like most socialists out there you wanna just lable people.
@anast
Oh geez...Twitter is full of trolls...common sense.
The YouTube critics I mentioned are innocent till proven guilty. And proven with facts not opinions. I gave you evidence of 2 prominent youtubers and yet you ask for more...either you can't read or you aren't looking for evidence.
As far as groups being "large" for journos to get their panties all tied up...well then again you must be extremely gullible. As if we haven't seen thousands of articles claiming players are offended, angry or backlashing based solely on 1 or 2 posts. They love grabbing very specific individuals and using them to represent a much larger base....whatever is convenient to them making the case that gamers bad and journos good.
-"saying something is "cringe" doesn't prove me wrong. You just throw words out and hope they stick. Bring some evidence to prove me otherwise."
It doesn't "prove" it, but I have a solid success rate with the term - which seems to be the case here too. With regards to your article, I should break this down into parts:
1.) For starters, bleating for countering "evidence" after brandishing a media analysis paper (or papers) shouldn't be treated as some kind of trump card. That's not to say these researchers did nothing, mind you. Only that expecting counter-ideologies within this field who'll make this specific kind of work for TLOU Pt. II is absurdly demanding on its face. Nevermind the probability of non-progressive types getting the administrative approval being next to nil, but that's another can of worms.
2.) While I have critiques about x or y (some anecdotes being more flimsy than others, GG speculation, etc.), let's say for this argument that it's a solid piece overall. Having read the whole thing, there is literally *NOTHING* that validates the broad brush with which you painted TLOU2 critics in your first comment (speaking as someone who thinks it's a good game). The discussion about alt-fans, anti-fans, etc. does paint an ugly picture about the TLOU subreddit, Twitter users, certain YouTubers, and more; however, there's no positive declaration about TLOU2's critics ending at these particular clusters either. Even if you say "most, not all" in your first comment, that still seems overly broad compared to the text I read. (EDIT: That's not to disregard the nastiness or modest size in its own right.)
It's also worth noting how much of that paper's material is inspecting a pre-/at-release sort of backlash. But the game's been out for several years now. More and more people who AREN'T incels, homophobes, closet Nazis have played it past 2020 and you don't really see this new broad consensus about its accomplishments; in fact, you see more of a continued split over whether or not it deserves such monumental praise. Here's just a few other sub-communities near its release that don't fit your description:
- https://www.youtube.com/wat...
- https://www.youtube.com/wat...
- https://www.youtube.com/wat...
-"Because NG4 defended it doesn't mean NG4 is the gospel of gaming."
Correct, but you're just solidifying my point. Even PS fans elsewhere (social media or gaming forums) don't go to bat for The Order with the enthusiasm and consistency they do here in my experience. That's what makes your assessment of "anti-Sony Xbox fans" so fascinating to me.
1) Speculation and emotion
2) Speculation and emotion
2a) Might be an argument if you gave me something other than your own opinion and emotions over the subject, but it's left as an anecdote without any real research. By the way, we can't negate the at release behavior, because it fits your narrative. It existed and those groups were involved.
The article is not a trump card and the fact that you seem to think so is more troubling on your end than mine. The article was to see if you could find other people that researched this phenomenon and we can have a conversation, but you still refuse to do this. Instead you wrote a sermon, which is a shame because maybe you had something with point "2a: It's also worth..." But this point still tries to side step actual events.
The final point doesn't solidify anything unless you are trying to solidify your own opinion. Albeit, it is passive aggressive, which is strange.
-"Speculation and emotion"
I mean... okay? Where am I wrong on 2.) though? Asking for a conflicting media studies research paper on this specific topic is already a random ask, given the environment with which these are made.
-"Might be an argument if you gave me something other than your own opinion and emotions over the subject, but it's left as an anecdote without any real research."
Wait. Just so we're clear: a research paper that focuses most of its attention towards a subreddit and social media comments to Neil Druckmann means you get to sustain your overly broad claims while contrary social media sources that don't exhibit the same kind of "alt-fan/anti-fan" rhetoric can't be counted? Now I feel even more confident in my initial assessment b/c all you're after is just whatever can be found with some accreditation behind it - regardless of quality.
-"By the way, we can't negate the at release behavior, because it fits your narrative. It existed and those groups were involved."
That's the thing: I never said they wasn't a sizable contingent of that either. From the start, my response was just how wild it was to paint *MOST* detractors with such a broad brush. I still don't think I'm off-base in saying it's cringe to just say "most people who shit on x game are closet Nazis or bigots of some sort," especially when your research doesn't really validate that.
-"The article is not a trump card and the fact that you seem to think so is more troubling on your end than mine."
Bro, you literally responded with "Bring some evidence to prove me otherwise.... You're up. Maybe you can change my mind." I don't really see how I'm speaking out of turn there given this and your original comment.
-"The article was to see if you could find other people that researched this phenomenon and we can have a conversation, but you still refuse to do this."
If no other people *HAVE* researched this phenomenon, then I don't see how the next best option is highly-popular sources which counter your original claim. Given that all you're promoting is a media studies paper hyper-focusing on a specific cluster of media, why wouldn't other forms of media work as some kind of substitute? That's not side-stepping events in the slightest.
-"The final point doesn't solidify anything unless you are trying to solidify your own opinion. Albeit, it is passive aggressive, which is strange."
I don't know what that first sentence means, honestly.
Look, I'll just put it like this: try to have a frank conversation about The Order on some other non-N4G gaming forum. There isn't going to be this clean split between 'Sony fans' and 'Xbox fans' that love it or hate it. Ask Sony fans how they'd feel about paying full-price for it and you're not going to get the ardent defenses compared to some of its most popular comment sections here.
Still no evidence. I ask for you to bring contrary evidence, so maybe I might change my mind, all research can be falsifiable. This is what you are missing. We are thinking in two different universes.
You are writing sermons, which is a waste of everyone's time including yours. Bring some research and we will discuss it. As of now you have only brought superstitions.
-"I ask for you to bring contrary evidence, so maybe I might change my mind, all research can be falsifiable."
But I literally read YOUR evidence and it doesn't support the broader claims you made at the start. I'm not sure where else to go with that.
-"Bring some research and we will discuss it. As of now you have only brought superstitions."
Bro, leveraging this kind of language is so wild in the face of what you've provided. It's like unless those different communities I linked where fused together in a random media studies paper, you'd magically consider it valid. I don't understand how you're leveraging that, especially when it doesn't fortify your initial claim. You're basically retorting to me writing too much, regardless of the content itself. Just the oddest conversation with you thus far and I don't quite get it.
Amazing gameplay, but TLOU2 had one of the worst, most convoluted and uneccessary plots I ever seen in a sequel. Terrible story and the characters were forgettable. I didn't give an F about anyone in the story.
I don't think any of these divided fans, other than LoU2. The rest were either victims of biased reviews or just generally agreed that they weren't as good as they could've been or just overall disappointing.
Batman: Arkham Knight is considered by many as one of the best-looking games that Rocksteady released. And, since Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League is now out, YouTube’s ‘NikTek’ shared a comparison video between them.
OK. I guess I should now give up hope for this game. I read somewhere someone saying the graphics were great. Man that just.... @#$!!
There's a massive amount of cherry picking here to make Suicide Squad look bad here. The person is purposefully playing the game poorly. And it's definitely downgraded in the PS5 capture, because it doesn't look that bad.
Look, there's enough to 'hate on' in the game as it is, people don't need to play poorly to make it look even worse to make a point.
This is a dumb comparison. This is a combo shooter being compared to a combo battler but they showed nothing of what makes Suicide Squad its own game.
OMG you are defending Suicide squad... actually I'm not surprised.
Game is garbage, disrespecting OG Dc characters.
Should I explain, no. You already know my stance.
@Christopher
While i agree overall with your point about cherrypicking (play poorly, if that was actually the case), i think that comparing melee system was useful, because:
1. It shows how undercooked the melee system feels/looks (starting from 2:50, the player tried to start a combo and instead, it was just a mess, hits not registering, enemies flying all over the place - those 2 attacks at 3:10 should've been a hit);
2. Highlights the worse looking animations for melee system and overall lack of them (hence the inclusion of AR challenge section from Harley Quinn DLC for Arkham Knight).
Before you'll say that it's not important in a coop looter-shooter, consider this:
- they (Rocksteady) have added a melee system and Harley Quinn (known for her melee and acrobatics in previous games and in DC overall) to the game;
- they decided to make the melee system as basic as possible. Yet, they know how to make it better, they have the experience of doing so, but decided it's not worth the time and/or money.
If they would've spent more time with it and shown some care, this would not be seen as another reason to dislike the game. But now it just shows the lack of passion from them, which is disheartening, in my opinion, coming from Rocksteady.
***1. It shows how undercooked the melee system feels/looks ***
It's not a melee game, though... Heck, Deadshot's melee is gauntlet guns. The only reason you melee is to 1. pick up shield buffs after shooting in the leg or 2. to pop them up for higher chance at crit shots.
***2. Highlights the worse looking animations for melee system***
No, again, it doesn't. I have no clue how they got that singular animation off over and over, but it's not great but it's also not that and I never saw Harley do that animation in my short gameplay. They didn't show any other melee animations, just that one shitty one they repeated over and over.
Having said that, I'm not saying they're 'great' only that they're not as bad as they made it out to be with cherry-picked gameplay.
*** Before you'll say that it's not important in a coop looter-shooter, consider this: ***
It's important to rate a game based on what it is. One is a shooter, one is a battler (melee focus). Even more, Squicide is a rapid traversal/shooter game, but they showed absolutely none of that in good taste, only really shit traversal from Harley and nothing about jumping around the battlefield from roof to roof shooting.
***OMG you are defending Suicide squad... actually I'm not surprised. ***
I'm just not defending crap comparisons that aren't at all done in good faith. You can enjoy being ignorant in your opinion if you wish.
Just in terms of visuals, I checked out since other YouTube videos, presumably 4K, and the graphics looked really bland. Like the lighting seems so basic and textures look bland. Draw distance looks good, and in the daylight it looks ok at best imo
Actually, agreeing with you here Christopher. In addition there are totally different moods and art styles for each game. Can't wait to play SSKTJL on Gamepass PC soon!
Contradicting yourself, saying you're not impressed with Sony's recent State of Play, yet you're defending this which looks way worst than any of the games shown.
How do you feel it compared to the previous two rocksteady entries?
I personally was disappointed with Arkham Knight and would rank them:
1. Arkham Asylum - Best story, best pacing, fresh idea and new combat at the time. 9/10
2. Arkham City - Improved combat, Catwoman playable but worse story and pacing. 8/10
3. Arkham Knight - Nice graphics, massive DLC fest is a big negative. Did not complete but 6/10 based on what I played.