[Sigfried1977]

I'm actually kind of in the middle. Combat works, but it isn't exactly exciting either. I just prefer having a bit more control over my actions. The biggest problem I had with the combat in Batman AA was the complete lack of challenge. You may have had the means to perform like a fancy martial artist, but why bother when hammering on buttons did the trick just fine.

I'm also not a big fan of the busy and kinda messy Batman of War art style. Especially stealth segments were almost impossible without detective mode because enemies and backgrounds would just blend together.

The whole game was sort of like Metroid Prime with training wheels.

[Scott_Arm]

Originally Posted by RenegadeRocks

I think the division in opinion is mainly due to the melee fighting system. I find it boring,repetitive and meaningless, other people find it smooth, rhythmic and best melee fighting system. The side you fall on regarding this can make or break the game for you.

I think this is pretty true. Personally, I loved it. The combat is constant, and one move flows into the next. Because you can't block, standing in one spot blocking attacks in all directions, you have to respond to each movement of the enemies. Counters are very much a button press with an extended animation attached, requiring little skill, but they are seamless, complex and brutal. The disarm counters in particular are fun to watch. What you end up with is a fight with no down time. There is always action and movement. Fighting in Batman AA was maybe more about presentation than skill level, but it worked for me. That said, the combat challenges are actually pretty damned tough. Large numbers of stun sticks and knives require some strategy, especially if you have to manage a crowd to prevent people from running and breaking open lock boxes that contain guns.

[Ghostz]

Originally Posted by RobertR1

Does 95% mean it's everyone's cup of tea? No. Nothing ever is but it does mean that if you're interested in the genre or looking to pick up a GOOD game, then this game has a very good chance of delivering.

...or I can simply wait for the next Assassins Creed that'll be more feature rich coming just 3 weeks later or simply download the new inFamous DLC? No. I think what you meant, is: if your interested in a comic book game that contains Batman, that takes place in this genre, it'll deliver for you on some level.

[Scott_Arm]

Originally Posted by Ghostz

...or I can simply wait for the next Assassins Creed that'll be more feature rich coming just 3 weeks later or simply download the new inFamous DLC? No. I think what you meant, is: if your interested in a comic book game, that takes place in this genre, it'll deliver for you on some level.

You can reduce any game into a checklist of features, and try to deduce which is better, but in the end that's totally pointless. It all comes down to whatever people think is fun and enjoyable to play. Sometimes the checklist looks good, but the end result is a POS. Reviewers seem to be very positive about Arkham City. Get over it. You can't compare review scores between games or between reviewers. If you don't like it, that's fine, but don't complain about it, or try to do some kind of mind reading to figure out why people like what they like.

[patsu]

Originally Posted by patsu

Based on how they reviewed some PS3 games, I don't think that's how those reviewers work. I remember a few reviewers took a point or half point off for "same as last one" according to their explanation. ^_^

Originally Posted by RobertR1

Likely because there's a global conspiracy against anything PS3 related.

Heh, I knew this would come up from certain posters.

A simple explanation is I only read PS3 game reviews (if at all !). ^_^
They may very well do the same for 360 and Wii reviews but I just wouldn't know. v_v

[Ghostz]

Originally Posted by Scott_Arm

You can reduce any game into a checklist of features, and try to deduce which is better, but in the end that's totally pointless. It all comes down to whatever people think is fun and enjoyable to play. Sometimes the checklist looks good, but the end result is a POS. Reviewers seem to be very positive about Arkham City. Get over it. You can't compare review scores between games or between reviewers. If you don't like it, that's fine, but don't complain about it, or try to do some kind of mind reading to figure out why people like what they like.

So, Assassins Creed is going to be a POS? Really?

[RobertR1]

Originally Posted by Ghostz

...or I can simply wait for the next Assassins Creed that'll be more feature rich coming just 3 weeks later or simply download the new inFamous DLC? No. I think what you meant, is: if your interested in a comic book game that contains Batman, that takes place in this genre, it'll deliver for you on some level.

Like I said, vote with your wallet (as you are doing) and call it a day. What does Assassin's Creed and Infamous DLC have to do with Batman reviews?

[AlStrong]

Originally Posted by Ghostz

...or I can simply wait for the next Assassins Creed that'll be more feature rich coming just 3 weeks later or simply download the new inFamous DLC? No. I think what you meant, is: if your interested in a comic book game that contains Batman, that takes place in this genre, it'll deliver for you on some level.

And you are fully entitled to do that within your right. Lots of people like the game, and you don't. People's opinions differ, that's natural. So what? Who cares if you think it's overrated or if there's something you think is better? What does that matter? People have different tastes. There are different considerations. This is getting unnecessarily off topic.

Complain all you want, but what's the point on shitting on people's views? If lots of people think it's a competent game, then that's that. Overrated just because of your other opinion? Then it's just not your cup of tea. So move on.

[AlStrong]

Topic is Batman the game, not "Reviewers have opinions: News @ 11."

[Ghostz]

Originally Posted by AlStrong

And you are fully entitled to do that within your right. Lots of people like the game, and you don't. People's opinions differ, that's natural. So what? Who cares if you think it's overrated or if there's something you think is better? What does that matter? People have different tastes. There are different considerations. This is getting unnecessarily off topic.

Complain all you want, but what's the point on shitting on people's views? If lots of people think it's a competent game, then that's that. Overrated just because of your other opinion? Then it's just not your cup of tea. So move on.

I hate when people twist my words....

No, I didn't say Batman:AC was overrated....

[AlStrong]

Originally Posted by Ghostz

I hate when people twist my words....

No, I didn't say Batman:AC was overrated....

This game is feeling overrated

I'm sorry, then I misunderstood the point of this sentence.

[Ghostz]

Originally Posted by AlStrong

I'm sorry, then I misunderstood the point of this sentence.

I can't actually know if a game is overrated until I played it but it feeling overrated is the perception I'm receiving: it being reviewed favorably because it's Batman; that's the feeling I got when I got burnt paying full price on the previous entry.

[Richard]

Brands generate hype. That's normal. What is also normal is reviewers sometimes marking down a sequel for not living up to the potential laid out by the first game.

What's important is mentioning why you feel the game is being overrated. That will help people engage the discussion. Is it the graphics? Does combat feel monotonous? Is Harley Quinn going to strip down even more? Find out, same Bat-time, same Bat-channel!

[Ghostz]

Originally Posted by Richard

Brands generate hype. That's normal. What is also normal is reviewers sometimes marking down a sequel for not living up to the potential laid out by the first game.

What's important is mentioning why you feel the game is being overrated. That will help people engage the discussion. Is it the graphics? Does combat feel monotonous? Is Harley Quinn going to strip down even more? Find out, same Bat-time, same Bat-channel!

Well, I noticed observing behavior, people here go on full frontal assaults when they come across statements they don't agree with, even asofar creating Strawman and attacking me for statements I didn't even make. People don't want discussion, they want deeply held beliefs verified with varying degrees of agreement. In which I get tagged for being a troll if I don't agree. How do you say: it's not exactly a healthy environment for discussion when you hold a gun to my head.

[RenegadeRocks]

Originally Posted by Ghostz

Well, I noticed observing behavior, people here go on full frontal assaults when they come across statements they don't agree with, even asofar creating Strawman and attacking me for statements I didn't even make. People don't want discussion, they want deeply held beliefs verified with varying degrees of agreement. In which I get tagged for being a troll if I don't agree. How do you say: it's not exactly a healthy environment for discussion when you hold a gun to my head.

Well, I don't think thats the case.
I have also disagreed and said I don't like the game in the same thread a syou. I did not get crucified !

[patsu]

So after so many posts, no one answered why the second game is reviewed highly ? Looks like I'll have to do some reading myself.

[Gerry]

Originally Posted by Ghostz

Well, I noticed observing behavior, people here go on full frontal assaults when they come across statements they don't agree with, even asofar creating Strawman and attacking me for statements I didn't even make. People don't want discussion, they want deeply held beliefs verified with varying degrees of agreement. In which I get tagged for being a troll if I don't agree. How do you say: it's not exactly a healthy environment for discussion when you hold a gun to my head.

Yeah, it's not you, it's everyone else.

[joker454]

Originally Posted by patsu

So after so many posts, no one answered why the second game is reviewed highly ? Looks like I'll have to do some reading myself.

I loved the first batman game, it was one of the best games I ever played. But my gaming tastes different dramatically from yours so there is no way I could ever explain to you why, and likewise probably no way to explain why on the second game. You'll have to rent it to find out. If the second game is basically just like the first game but with new villians and better graphics, then it's a must buy in my book.

Having said that though it's timing is bad. With Skyrim almost here and the crazy Steam holiday sales a mere 7 weeks away, I'll probably wait on buying any new games right now.

[JB9861]

Originally Posted by Ghostz

So, Assassins Creed is going to be a POS? Really?

Nope. However, Batman is also feature/content rich as well. It has reviewed favorably because people like the combat mechanics and they're also impressed by the production values. There's plenty to do and everything comes together to make you feel like the bat. Additionally, of course brownie points because so many superhero games tend to be terrible and more often than not don't do their respective licences justice. Other than that not much to say really about why its acclaimed. Except that you really shouldn't even worry about this game because the attention will be short-lived. Unless you don't like ND either. I suggest laying low then because I don't want to see an epic meltdown.

[Scott_Arm]

Originally Posted by joker454

I loved the first batman game, it was one of the best games I ever played. But my gaming tastes different dramatically from yours so there is no way I could ever explain to you why, and likewise probably no way to explain why on the second game. You'll have to rent it to find out. If the second game is basically just like the first game but with new villians and better graphics, then it's a must buy in my book.

Having said that though it's timing is bad. With Skyrim almost here and the crazy Steam holiday sales a mere 7 weeks away, I'll probably wait on buying any new games right now.

It'll be interesting to see if this one bests the sales of the previous one in such a crowded fall release schedule. The last one was an August release. I think this one is going to be a good selling game. Making no predictions, but I think it should at least match the last one in total sales. I couldn't find any solid sales data, other than it sold more than 2.5 million copies fairly quickly. Not sure if that was just consoles or if it included PC.

[Sigfried1977]

I think it'll do just fine. Skyrim is probably more of a threat to Dark Souls. Most rpg gamers are most likely going to get one or the other, plus a little weekend treat like Batman or Uncharted 3 (which will have a much harder time I believe) to go along with it.

[Ghostz]

Originally Posted by RenegadeRocks

Well, I don't think thats the case.
I have also disagreed and said I don't like the game in the same thread a syou. I did not get crucified !

.....that's because I articulate my self in a way that makes people want to sic the attack dogs on me. They call it trolling.

[Acert93]

Originally Posted by patsu

If it's the same old formula, why do the press score the game so high and so consistent ? I thought some of them look for new surprises and innovation even for sequels ? Perhaps there is something new upon closer inspection ?

So after so many posts, no one answered why the second game is reviewed highly ?

As a parachute lurking monster of bibliographic proportions come in to rain fire onto this amazing thread of derailed excellence I would recommend going back and reading the thoughtful replies from AzBat and then Scott and follow their link recommendations if their 1-2 paragraphs didn't offer enough insight. But essentially they answered the question.

So what do you mean by formula? Mechanics? Story theme? I mean, Mario has been jumping on bad dudes heads and saving the same princess for DECADES now, so the formula is "dated" and yet the new titles often get amazing reviews. Why? because they are amazing games! As Scott said:

Originally Posted by Scott_Arm

Isn't that pretty much the same for every sequel? Halo, COD, Gears, Uncharted, Killzone, Infamous, GTA, Mass Effect, Ratchet and Clank, Lego Star Wars ... Whatever game you want to pick. Sequels are almost always a refinement of the predecessor. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. And if the game is a hell of a lot of fun to play, and well crafted, why not give it a near perfect score? Are games like Geometry Wars and Stardust not worthy of good reviews because they aren't innovative at all?

Batman AA was an awesome surprise. It is a very popular and well-liked game, because it was fun to play. If the sequel is an improved evolutionary step, then I don't see any reason it shouldn't be well reviewed. Hopefully I will like it just as much as the original, if not more.

AzBat gave more specifics noted:

Originally Posted by AzBat

For one, the main hub is now the city & not just the Asylum on an island. Second, you get to play against all the rogues that you didn't get to in the first game. Third, there is now a nice portion where you can play as Catwoman in the single player. Plus, you get all the normal stuff you get with a sequel: new weapons, moves, story, challenge maps etc. So I can see how the same old formula could still garner high praise.

More weapons, more enemies, a bigger world, new playable characters, and just a ton of new content and refinement on a good game formula that people are wanting more of is a pretty good place to start.

Originally Posted by patsu

Based on how they reviewed some PS3 games, I don't think that's how those reviewers work. I remember a few reviewers took a point or half point off for "same as last one" according to their explanation. ^_^

Or it could be: the sequel in question had some broken aspects of the formula and, in retrospect, the formula had grown old in the previous title, so the new twists may have helped give some new legs, a couple hours in when the freshness wore off it was apparent it was more of the same. That has happened a LOT this generation. A sequel indisputably better than the predecessor but due to a) the quality march of the industry and b) a rehashed formula running long in tooth, failing to build forward and better, and not addressing core issues often results in scores going down, not up.

Indeed, if a game comes out 2 years later and is "same as the last one" they are lucky to get only a 0.5 point off! As much as people love to complain about CoD or Halo if you have played those games it is really obvious how many incremental steps those franchises take. Yes, more of the same, but more of everything in the "same" new way.

In the same way of Batman:AC was still basically in one building/complex, didn't have Catwoman, had marginal gameplay changes/refinements and a smaller list of new gadgets and such, it would probably rate as a 7.5 game. THAT would be more of the same--it could even be a much, much better core experience, but one gamers already had. Which isn't always bad, but when you are playing a 6-12 hour game you don't want to fall into the same routine of gameplay over and over again.

Btw, I have no interested in this game. I got a "free" game with a buy 3 get 1 free promo, and I picked up 2 copies of FM4 instead of Batman. I felt hand held like Renegade said and as batty as I am for Batman it just did not do it for me.

Originally Posted by Ghostz

This game is feeling overrated because so many people simply want a great comic book game.

Originally Posted by Ghostz

I hate when people twist my words....

No, I didn't say Batman:AC was overrated....

Yes, on the interweb we drive large aircraft through the chasm between a game "feeling overrated" and saying a game is "overrated." Excuse me while I get out my English-to-VBulletinboard translator.

Hey, I am not a Semantic Philologist in real life, but I play one on the internet. I would have that one looked at before the interweb spiders bite

[Mendel]

Looking at the gametrailers review I´m actually finding myself excited about this game. It would seem to me like it has that Metroid primeish open world, get a new gadget, reach a new place with that new gadget kind of a thing going on that I absolutely love for some reason. Hell, it even has the scan visor batmanified! But can catwoman roll into a ball and shit bombs?

edit: And just as I got the voucher for downloading this game from steam and was hoping for its imminent release, I get the news that the pc version will be delayed. Well... no way is this different from the whole half life 2 voucher experience

[patsu]

Originally Posted by Acert93

As a parachute lurking monster of bibliographic proportions come in to rain fire onto this amazing thread of derailed excellence I would recommend going back and reading the thoughtful replies from AzBat and then Scott and follow their link recommendations if their 1-2 paragraphs didn't offer enough insight. But essentially they answered the question.

I read some of the reviews in the GAF official thread. Antan provided the link.
Azbat's post told me what's new. Scott gave his reasoning of why the second game *could* be better than the first game. But he talked mostly about the first game though. ^_^

From the GiantBomb, G4TV and GamesTrailer reviews, it seems that the game is deeper and more fun to play. Enemies are smarter (e.g. they will remove the grappling points, and also switch weapons during melee), Batman has more gadgets, can fly an extended distance, and has more ways to navigate the rooms (since the enemies are smarter now); plus the game world -- 5 times larger -- is full of things to do. It seems that things are carefully laid out and highly polished.

So what do you mean by formula? Mechanics? Story theme? I mean, Mario has been jumping on bad dudes heads and saving the same princess for DECADES now, so the formula is "dated" and yet the new titles often get amazing reviews. Why? because they are amazing games! As Scott said:

Ask the reviewers ! I am just the messenger since I noticed that a few complained about "same old formula" in their own writeup for other games. I am asking questions too. ^_^

AzBat gave more specifics noted:

More weapons, more enemies, a bigger world, new playable characters, and just a ton of new content and refinement on a good game formula that people are wanting more of is a pretty good place to start.

The "more of everything" approach didn't work for quite a few games/sequels. As I understand, despite the increase in scope, all the pieces in Batman 2 are expertly put together. As a result, all the reviews are consistently high since they probably could not find any major flaws.