I'm debating between this and arkham origins

#1 Posted by jak3099 (101 posts) -

I've played both arkham asylum and city and loved them, but I've only played a little bit of the first assassin's creed. I want to save money and time and only get arkham origins or AC4. Would you go for AC4 just to play something different for a change? I just hope the game doesn't get repetitive.

#2 Posted by Black_Hand_313 (787 posts) -

I'm a fan of both series. I was a bit wary about Arkham Origins because it's a new developer and they're keeping the fundamentals the same (though why change it if it was amazing?). However, I decided on Arkham Origins over AC4 because I feel that the Arkham series is higher quality and I've been a bit disappointed with recent AC games. 

 

ACIV still has potential, with an open world and open mission structure. My concerns are more about the main story missions and if this will "feel" like Assassins Creed.

#3 Posted by BlazeKingz (502 posts) -

i would recommend ac4 since i heard that origins was disapointing. And since they ended the desmond stoeyline you would have no problem with understanding the games story.

#4 Posted by niko_srbija (110 posts) -

I got both and love them!!!!

#5 Edited by Slinqy (244 posts) -

If you've played Arkham City, or Arkham Asylum, you will be getting more of the same with Arkham Origins. It's just another Batman adventure. If that's what you really like though you'll feel right at home with Origins. AC4 on the other hand is surprisingly different from its predecessors. Since you haven't played most of the originals, you will have no problem dropping into the story at this point, and I'm sure you will enjoy the combat and free-roam much more than AC1. So, perhaps maybe do some more research and think on it before you make a decision; it depends on what you're a fan of.

#6 Edited by ABakedAlien (307 posts) -

I was faced with the same decision. I went with Black Flag. I was NOT disappointment in the slightest. As someone who hated AC 3 but loved the earlier entries, this was a pleasant surprise.

#7 Posted by Roanark (2467 posts) -

I play on PC so I can't speak much of Black Flag yet, but Origins was pretty good. Though probably not good enough to choose it over AC. All the bugs and glitches, repetitiveness, etc. I've beat it already (although it took me well over a week because the last part of the game became unplayable) and I'm bored. It's not much more than Arkham City was. Worth getting if you can but not worth sacrificing a better game for.

#8 Posted by jak3099 (101 posts) -

hahah i forgot i made this post! i was getting tired of dragon's dogma: dark arisen and wanted a new game. i figured arkham origins would be more of the same and decided to step out of my comfort zone and get AC4.

It took some getting used to the game, but i am addicted. i just got a crew for my ship and am plundering spanish vessels lol. the only thing that frustrates me (and this is because of my personality, not the game) is that i am OCD about getting all the hidden chests, animus fragments and shanties. I have to remind myself it's just a game and have fun with it :D

#9 Posted by Frag_Maniac (2059 posts) -

@jak3099:

@jak3099 said:

...the only thing that frustrates me (and this is because of my personality, not the game) is that i am OCD about getting all the hidden chests, animus fragments and shanties. I have to remind myself it's just a game and have fun with it :D

But that's a big part of a game like AC, there's lots of exploring, and AC IV has one of the best game worlds to do it in. Traveling the high seas can become a bit of a pain in the Jackdaw though, esp if you've only 50% weapon and armor upgrades like me. There's lots of places where it's difficult if not impossible to travel without getting surrounded by stronger vessels, because you have to travel through restricted zones that are heavily protected.

If I have one gripe it's that prepping for naval battles is a grind. I'd rather they made it possible to sail ships or have a crew member sail them as escort ships after boarding and defeating them, vs having to use them for scrap to repair the Jackdaw. I don't want to have to resort to an abstract fleet system via an RTS type menu in a game with such a rich and dynamic game world. It just seems to waste a lot of the potential immersion on strategy gimmickry vs using the real world graphics.

It seems requiring an online pass for fleet building and management, even in sp play, was an easy way for them to put a lock on one of the more effective ways to battle and farm resources for those wanting to borrow, rent or buy the game used. Because of this you pretty much have to buy it and gamble on one of the most crucial aspects of the game being intuitive and interesting enough to use.

Even as far as immersion goes I'd much rather have ship accumulation and management be more hands on than RTS. I want to be able to plunder and sail ships on the fly, either by open battle or via commanding assassins to help infiltrate those docked. I don't care if I'm only limited to 2 or 3 escort ships, I want to be able to command things in the world vs via a fleet management menu.

It's decisions like this that make it obvious creativity and gameplay immersion often take a back seat to profits and simple plot by chart gameplay when publishers whom also develop are at the helm.