mafiahajeri3706d ago (Edited 3706d ago )

Oh snapppppp !!! Yes!!!

love how they have the batmobile there, to make everyone happy. I mean everyone nagged about it.

Love that it's only current gen, way to support current consoles and not create half assed last gen ports. I hated when devs said they wouldn't make current gen games because there's still not enough of a market, off course there isn't if you don't support it!!

Explosive finale sounds great I wouldn't like it if they milked it, every great franchise should have an "explosive" finale! Until they make a justice league game xD

Respect rocksteady.

GarrusVakarian3706d ago (Edited 3706d ago )

Next gen and PC only, yessssss, no cross gen limitations.

We will be able to drive the Batmobile around the city, AWESOME!

Rocksteady, drivable Batmobile, next gen and PC only, Scarecrow presumably the main villain......i have a great feeling about this one.

I am also LOVING the fact that this Batmobile looks more like the oldschool Batmobile and not the newer tank-like one.

This is the Batman game we have been waiting for.....HYPE!

guitarded773706d ago

I really thought we'd hear about an Arkham Origins for PS4/XBOXOne before this. At least we're getting a Batman game for Rocksteady again.

PLASTICA-MAN3706d ago (Edited 3706d ago )

Finallly! I hope they ditch the old UE3 and use UE4 this time and try to reach the quality of Arkham City intro (which they promised they could achieve it next-gen) or the UE4 Infiltrator demo.

THE-COMMANDER3706d ago

Ohhh man, you have no idea how much im excited, this an absolute day one! Rocksteady + Next Gen + drivable Batmobile = The best Batman video Game!

lsujester3706d ago

I'm still wondering why it's called Arkham if you can drive the entirety of Gotham. I understand the branding, but I doubt anyone will think this isn't the next in the series.

To me, Batman: Gotham Knight makes more sense.
Or even, Batman: Gotham Nights has a cooler, suave feel to it.

gaffyh3706d ago

So glad it's next gen only.

joab7773706d ago

Isujester...its branding.

UltimateMaster3706d ago

Hopefully, it's not as bad and doesn't have the glitches that AO had last year.
It's made by Rocksteady, so that's a good thing.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 3706d ago
vishmarx3706d ago

another batman g....oh wait drivable batmobile....aaaaaaaaaaaahhhh

hulk_bash19873706d ago (Edited 3706d ago )

Rocksteady hasn't let us down yet. This is gonna be awesome.

MightyNoX3706d ago

Only Rocksteady can save us from the Mediorcity that was Arkahm Origins. Welcome back, Rocksteady.

hulk_bash19873706d ago

Agreed, the Arkham Franchise is back where it belongs.

Vandamme213706d ago

I'm definetly getting a ps4 now..I love asylum, city, and origins...now I can't wait for this one.

vivid833706d ago

to be fair rocksteady didn't make arkham origins

borgome3706d ago

You could also get it for the xboner.

Bruce_Wayne3706d ago (Edited 3706d ago )

Let's make it impossible for them to add co-op or competitive multiplayer.

Hype level is atrocious. I'll be done justice.

AstroCyborg3706d ago

yeah the online was soooo well recieved in origins

sweetSWAGGER3706d ago

Rocksteady could do multiplayer justice if they really wanted to. Ever since the second game introduced multiple characters to play as in the challenge mode, I've been pushing for a 2-player co-op option that let's us fight legions of bad guys together for the highest score.

I think the challenge mode is where that would have to remain, though, as it would only complicate the campaign. Honestly, it's not a "complete" Batman experience if my friends and I can't Batman-and-Robin it up in the challenge mode. Origins came close, but it took a competitive, team deathmatch approach which I didn't like at all. It just felt like a desperate attempt to force in shooter-based multiplayer.

Sharingan_no_Kakashi3706d ago

It better be good. The last one was extremely disappointing. Now that it's back in Rocksteady's hand though it should be better.

beebap3706d ago

I see few people hating on origins but dont know why it was really good and anyone that give it a miss should give it a chance.

gillri3706d ago

I think we all knew it would be next gen only, which is why Warner Bros got Arkham origins out to eek out some revenue from that huge userinstalled base

tiremfej3706d ago (Edited 3706d ago )

Rocksteady was working on this for a few years then...should be a very good game. I did not try Origins due to the bad press. City and Asylum were excellent games though.

adorie3706d ago

This is the best gaming news of the morning.

TheTwelve3706d ago

I love that it's only for next gen consoles.

asmith23063706d ago

Arkham City didn't have a thing on Arkham Asylum. Let's hope this delivers.

KevinCubes3706d ago

You people still support this franchise when the devs and publishers are more concerned with dlc than game breaking bugs/glitches.
*rolls eyes* -__- c'mon

SoulSercher6203706d ago

WB Games Montreal =/= Rocksteady

blackpanther253706d ago

Am I the only that thinks Bruce Wayne in this trailer looks a lot like Ben Afflack

imt5583706d ago

NO multiplayer!!!!

YEEESSSS!

Probably inspiration from Ready @ Dawn.:)

Maml073706d ago

best game ever comes from tv shows and movies

eXclurel3706d ago

@lsujester

-possible Spoiler-
The article said there was a new villain that called himself the "Arkham Knight". That's probably why.
-possible Spoiler-

+ Show (12) more repliesLast reply 3706d ago
AaronPS3706d ago (Edited 3706d ago )

Yesss!
The entirety of Gotham city? Oh yeah

SteamPowered3706d ago

Odd they didn't call it Gotham Knight. Must be because of a comic tie in.

OrangePowerz3706d ago

Good its only PC and next gen.

SilentNegotiator3706d ago

I say it's acceptable to call it "next-gen" for the first year, when the last gen systems are still fairly active.

Half-Mafia3706d ago

I'm going to keep calling it Next-Gen until we dont have Cross-Gen games.

SilentNegotiator3706d ago

@Half-Mafia

EA's sports titles will have you calling the 8th gen "next-gen" until the 9th gen :P

Show all comments (161)
120°

6 Games That Genuinely Deserve A Current-Gen Upgrade

Games such as Mad Max, Red Dead Redemption 2, and Batman: Arkham Knight desperately deserve a modern-day revisit.

thorstein9d ago

Mad Max is underrated. Such a fun game.

Cacabunga8d ago (Edited 8d ago )

RDR2 still looks astounding on PS4 Pro. i cannot imagine how it could look with a next gen upgrade.

JonTheGod8d ago (Edited 8d ago )

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!

Yi-Long8d ago

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 ...

Demetrius8d ago

I'm not into racing games but yeah I even looked at gameplay of that sometimes

Demetrius8d ago

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

160°

15 Single Player Games That Divided Fans

One way or another, these games provoked strong reactions.

Read Full Story >>
gamingbolt.com
banger8814d ago

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.

Cacabunga14d ago (Edited 14d ago )

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

shinoff218314d ago

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.

Jon6158614d ago

No thr order was a short, clunky mediocre yet visually stunning game. I thoughts so and pretty much every other reviewer did too.

thorstein14d ago

The Order, where length was a criterion for rating a game, but only this particular game and no others.

Demetrius14d ago

I agree on my 2nd playthrough, ps5 this time

RavenWolfx14d ago

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).

Crows9014d ago

Whatever...those systems unless revolutionary don't add much...they rarely do in games that do have them.

anast14d ago

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.

coolbeans14d ago (Edited 14d ago )

-"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.

Yui_Suzumiya14d ago

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.

anast14d ago (Edited 14d ago )

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.

thorstein14d ago

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.

coolbeans13d ago

@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.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 13d ago
Skuletor14d ago

Most of the backlash against The Last Of Us 2 was people upset that Joel was killed off, simple as that.

anast14d ago

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.

Inverno14d ago

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.

anast14d ago (Edited 14d ago )

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.

Inverno14d ago

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.

anast13d ago

I am at least showing the group was large enough of a concern for a journal to publish an article.

Where's your evidence?

Crows9013d ago

He's not looking for evidence. Don't bother with him.

Crows9014d ago

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.

anast13d ago (Edited 13d ago )

Where's your evidence?

Crows9013d ago

@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.

coolbeans13d ago (Edited 13d ago )

-"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.

anast13d ago

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.

coolbeans12d ago

-"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.

anast12d ago

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.

coolbeans12d ago

-"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.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 12d ago
D0nkeyBoi14d ago

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.

Inverno14d ago

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.

160°

Batman: Arkham Knight Still Runs Poorly On Switch Despite Massive Update

Batman: Arkham Knight wasn't in the best shape when it swooped onto Switch at the end of last year. Fortunately, the game has today received a monster 16GB update, one that's guaranteed to fix all of its problems, right? Well...

Read Full Story >>
nintendolife.com
CrimsonWing6958d ago

I dunno, the game runs fine on PS4 and PS5… I think this might be a Switch thing.

_SilverHawk_58d ago (Edited 58d ago )

Batman arkham knight shouldn't be on the switch as well as many other titles on the ps4 and xbox one because the switch will have the worst version that always perform poorly

The switch 2 will have the same dilemma as the later years of the switches life cycle because any AAA multiplatform games on switch 2 will most likely be the worst version to own because that game will be available elsewhere with way better performance and visuals.

The switch gained quite a bit of success because it was the only portable console available to play a lot of AAA multiplatform games but today there are many alternative handheld consoles that are better than the switch 2. Nintendo will be Nintendo so hoping for the latest cutting edge technologies to be in the switch 2 isn't being realistic while knowing Nintendo likes to make quite a bit of profit on sales of their hardware

Knightofelemia58d ago

Because the game was built to run on the PS4 and the PS5 won't have issues because it plays PS4 games. It is a Switch thing this game is asking a lot out of the little hybrid hand held system.

_SilverHawk_58d ago

When it comes to Nintendos gaming systems people need to stop making excuses for games running poorly on it because the switch was made 4 years after the ps4 and xbox one. It doesn't matter that the switch is a handheld console that can also be docked to play on a television.

There are so many games I played on the switch where the performance is very poor dropping the frames per second into the teens constantly but reviewers and a lot of gamers excuse the issues as it's a weak Nintendo handheld.

I can already see that a lot of people will be making excuses for issues when it comes to the switch 2 when they need to be highlighted like games on other gaming platforms. These gaming companies have years to research and develop the necessary components to make gaming consoles and Nintendo shouldn't get a pass for making shoddy hardware.

Amplitude58d ago (Edited 58d ago )

Silverhawk: "the switch was made 4 years after the ps4 and xbox one. It doesn't matter that the switch is a handheld"

What? Yes it does. How do you have more agrees than disagrees? You expected a small inexpensive 2017 Tegra in a Nintendo handheld console with a heavy focus on battery life to be as powerful as a PS4 home console that's powered by a wall and plugged into a large TV? No offence man but that's psychotic. I doubt even the Switch 2 will be running anything close to God of War Ragnarok. The Steam Deck can come quite close in some aspects but jeeze. You're talking about a budget 2017 handheld lol seeing it run Arkham Knight at all is an insane feat. Probably shouldn't have even been attempted in the first place but it's at least kind of cool that it's possible

DLSS and potentially VRR could be a huge game changer for Switch 2 but power constraints in a handheld are a very real thing. Even in 2025 you're not gonna get what you're looking for in a handheld unless you go the expensive handheld PC route and suffer through brutal battery life. Certainly not from Nintendo lol that's not their thing.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 58d ago
Sgt_Slaughter58d ago

Another rushed port job, it's disappointing to see better looking games run/perform better than a game from 2015

Terry_B58d ago

To be honest. Batman Arkham Knight looked a lot better in 2015 than almost every..if not exactly every game released for the Nintendo Switch since 2017.

It needed a big downgrade like The Witcher 3 or Mortal Kombat 11, 1 to run well on this weak hardware.

Neonridr58d ago

if The Witcher 3 can run on this thing at a respectable framerate, there is zero excuse for other games.

But that's because the dev took their time and optimized it properly. It wasn't a rush job like so many 3rd party games.

Terry_B58d ago

@neoridr ..look how Witcher 3 looks in comparison to other versions. (Pretty much like a last gen version of it..but yes it runs well at least)

While Batman AK on Switch looks more like the PS4 /XB Versions but runs worse of course.

As said..it needed a big visual downgrade and did not receive it.Porting it to the Switch was a damn dumb idea anyway.

Knightofelemia58d ago

Dummying down a game that is meant to run on XB1 and PS4 is going to be challenging to run on a system that is probably as powerful as a PS3. I give them a congrats for bringing it to the Switch and I hope this challenge pays off for them. As for me grabbing Arkham Knight on the Switch I am good I have the PS4 version.

Phoenix7658d ago

Batman: Arkham Knight Still Runs Poorly On Switch Despite Massive Update........ But is still a better game than suicide squad *fixed the title*

Show all comments (16)