Batman: Arkham Origins Review | WhatCulture

In 2009, Rocksteady released Batman: Arkham Asylum and showed the world how to effectively utilize a licensed property, putting other development studios of similar titles to shame. Two years later the studio released Arkham City which was an unequivocal improvement and total perfection of everything introduced, and ultimately one of the greatest games of this soon to be ending generation.

[ifritAlkhemyst]

Oh noes... is the game too hard for you sweety? Boo-hoo, those counters not as forgiving as the past games. This game sucks.

Blah. Someone should start a review score aggregate site called "Gamers--Who Suck at Games--Reviewing Games" so your criticisms can only be considered by others who suck at games.

[-Foxtrot]

You know maybe the game isn't as good as the previous ones...ever thought of that.

It's not like the review is out of 10 is it.

@famoussasjohn

Your just halfing the score if it were 10, we don't actually know she would give it a 5 if it were a 10. That's just guessing on our part. I would guess it would get a 6/7 out of 10

@ifritAlkhemyst

The combat is improved but it's not something which is a game changer or where you notice it.

As for the story....really? The Arkham City story was great, better then the story we got with Origins.

The only thing I have to say to people saying it's better then City is that it's done worse then it in reviews so obviously it's not that better.

I really feel like because it's Batman you WANT it to be good. Sorry but they dropped the ball with this, it could of been so much better and being a prequel didn't help.

I really hope Rocksteady will push this series forward with their next game...if it is Batman

[famoussasjohn]

If it were out of 10, it would be a 5/10 based off the current score it received in this review. I doubt the game deserves that.

[ifritAlkhemyst]

Considering I've already beaten it, I'd put it ahead of Arkham City. The combat is much better than in previous games and the story is better than... whatever was going on with City.

Now if we could just get a Batman game set in a more closed setting like AA I'll be happy, because this open world nonsense is somewhat dull and lifeless.

[InTheLab]

First, the combat in this game is the worst in the franchise. It's marginally broken and very sloppy.

Second, Batman AC's plot was basically the same as Batman Begins only instead of Scarecrow, it's Strange. Instead of some ridiculous evaporator machine, it's protocol 10. Origins, on the other hand is a legit Batman story. It almost feels like something out of Detective Comics.

Another thing people seem to be confused with is the actual City.

Origins is a better representation of Gotham City. Arkham City just jammed notable places around Gotham in a tiny area that made no sense. Places like Park Row but right up against Ace Chemicals and Amusement Mile when those places are nowhere near each other.

Orgins at least spreads it out but the problem there is how did the Mayor magically move all of these places around to fit them in Arkham??

Anyway, I can't argue with the 7s this game gets. It's very poor on a technical level and some of the interiors are crap compared to Asylum and City. The combat is complete trash but the story is pretty good although it's hard to believe Batman meets all these villains in a single night. S*** is still better than those garbage Spiderman games.

[carlingtat]

Perhaps you could set up a review of game reviews site called "Butthurt gamers at game reviews scores" so your comments will only be considered by others who are butthurt.

[ZombieKiller]

@Carling: So I guess I'm a butthurt fanboy considering I played Arkham City more hours than you have probably played games in general and think this game is better than City huh?!

Look at SniperControl's comment. Everyone that has played this game so far has been saying something similar. I've Platinumed both games and have done EVERYTHING there is to do in the games. After beating Origins, and realizing that the developers added one hell of a story and character development to an already monsterous game, expanded the city to 2X the size, then tweaked things the right way instead of adding too much or changing things up too much, I gotta say this game is better in MANY ways....but what do I know? I'm just a butthurt fanboy right?

@Ifrit: You're right, gaming journalism is a joke anymore. I wonder how much of this "shitty" game he actually played.
Just like the idiots that bash it for being the same game yet rate COD at a 9 every year.
@review: PLEASE...don't quit your day job.

[carlingtat]

@ZombiKiller

It depends. Does this review affect your experience of the game? Are you angry that someone else disagrees with you and thinks this game is bad? Its not about the amound of hours you've played it or whether you've platniumed all arkham games because nobody cares. Im saying ifritAlkhemyst is butthurt because hes angry that a game he enjoys has been given a low score by a reviewer. It won't take away anything from ifritAlkhemyst's experience of playing the game so why does it bother him? His comment reeks of butthurt and because this reviewer doesnt like the game he insults him by saying he sucks at video games.

Thanks for pointing me to SniperControl's comment which proves my point. He disagrees with the reviewer but doesn't insult the person but merely mentions that he is enjoying it and this review doesnt affect him at all in his experience. You can clearly see the difference in the comments by someone who is butthurt(ifritAlkhemyst) and someone who isn't(SniperControl).

[ifritAlkhemyst]

Butthurt by what? I already bought the game. I don't care what the scores are, I only care if I enjoyed it or not. I'm merely calling out this reviewer for criticizing a game for being too demanding of him.

The hell is it with you people here? Everyone acts way too emotionally attached to games and console brands. It's as if they were your children or something, you're that damned touchy about them.

[carlingtat]

@ifritAlkhemyst

Deny it all you want but your first comment shows otherwise. You are the one showing emotional attachment by insulting the reviewer just because they gave a bad score because they found it a bit difficult.

[ZombieKiller]

"Thanks for pointing me to SniperControl's comment which proves my point."

- No it doesn't. Nobody knows your point apart from failing at an attempt to insult people.
"ifritAlkhemyst is butthurt because hes angry that a game he enjoys has been given a low score by a reviewer."
So Ifrit went about it a little different than Sniper. Same thing for me.... We all feel the same way. It's a great game and doesn't deserve the low reviews that it is getting. When you see alot of reviews saying 8 and 9 out of 10, then you see a 5....or even a 3...something is up. SO yes, we are fans, yes we are pissed or butthurt, and yes it's for a legitimate reason. The game doesn't deserve the score. I'm pretty sure Ifrit went about it the way he did because just like the rest of us, we are sick and tired of seeing shitty reviews for good games. This site is flooded with that crap. Do these crappy reviews effect my expereience? No.
I can't clearly see the difference in the 2 comments because I don't view it like you do. Just because someone comments about a bad review and it might seem a little harsh, doesn't mean they're butthurt. Ifrit proves my point in his reply to your so-called insult. I'm sure I'll get a reply via PM since you're out of bubbles. I wonder why...hmmmm

Edit- Just to feed the flame a bit more:

Look at all the comments in the actual article. ESPECIALLY the long one written by Harrison Holt-McHale...everyone says this game is awesome. They say they have been having a blast. One guys even says it ruined his weekend. Then the author turns around and says it's now a 3.5 instead of 2.5. Didn't everyone bash the shit out of Microsoft for changing their policies? Or God of War Ascension for taking things out of the game that offended people? Same thing here: Stick to your word. Believe in what you're selling...How are we supposed to give this guy any credibility?! Not to mention, the guy rushed through the game to write the review....but I'm still butthurt I guess huh? Grow up.

[InTheLab]

It's not about the difficulty. It's about the moves not working properly or at all.

For example...

You're in the middle of a combo and Batman will lunge toward a guy the he's about to counter then stop for no reason at all and drop the combo.

Or you go to do a takedown and someone is hitting you in the middle of a takedown.

There is a difference between hard and cheap and the combat here makes the game cheap and sloppy.

[SniperControl]

Another bad review?? I love this game, sure it's got its problems but I still enjoy playing it.

[SonyStyled]

i personally hated these games. that and mass effect are the 'great' games that ive never enjoyed. and no im not being sarcastic

[fsfsxii]

Shovelware. It happens.

[SpiralTear]

Yup, it does. Just not here.

[PopRocks359]

It's hardly shovelware. It's just not quite on the same level as the first two Arkham games which were made by Rocksteady. This is from a new developer, so obviously it doesn't have the same flare and style.

[Spore_777]

Still going to play this -_-

[thricetold]

And you should, this is one if not the best one. Sick of these bloggers knocking AO because another studio made it. The mp is fun as well. I haven't played too many mp's where I was suddenly snatched up after enjoying a quiet moment after a kill. Matches can be intense and nothing about the mp feels tacked on. They said the same thing about uc2 mp, ac mp, gta mp and they were wrong then.

[s8anicslayer]

To be an actual reviewer you have to score it based on all areas that are used to eveluate the game based on your scoring system, just because it didn't get great scores doesn't mean you won't enjoy it, it just means it has game altering issues. No game is perfect the better the game the less issues, thus the higher score it will receive. My advice to people who get upset at scores dont take it as an insult to yourself but instead as a means to let us know what we are in for instead of having really high hopes and being dissapointed.

[xKugo]

Game is great for me. Awesome acting, great story, looks beautiful, amazing sound effects and runs ridiculously smooth.

Note: I am running this on Dual-GTX 780s on PC, so probably entirely different experience for console players.

[Jagsrock]

It's funny how Arkham City was amazing but Arkham origins which is essentially Arkham city with more stuff has been getting significantly lower scores.

[Pintheshadows]

I really don't understand the criticism considering this improves on the previous Arkham games in so many ways. Better boss fights, better story, the freshness of Batman, better detective mode, larger more dangerous open world, more gadgets, more interesting side quests.

[ConsoleHQ]

I find a lot of Origins' problems to lie in the details. The combat doesn't flow as nicely and the boss fights, while great ideas, just don't feel nearly as polished. Except Deathstroke. Now THAT is a boss fight.

As for the combat, there isn't as good of a rhythm to how enemies fight you.

I spent over a hundred hours in Arkham City alone so I'd notice even the slightest difference.