Batman Arkham Origins - is it REALLY bad?

  • 51 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Edited by funkyzoom (1439 posts) -

This is with respect to the Gamespot review of this game, and also several other reviews which don't seem too impressed by this. To be frank, I had my reservations when they announced that Arkham Origins would not be developed by Rocksteady. But then, I'm also not the kind of person who believes professional reviews blindly, because I give more importance to the opinions of regular gamers (and not critics).

So this is what I want to know, from those who have bought this game (preferably on the PC). I'm considering buying the PC version. Is it worth buying the game at full price now, should I wait for a sale or price drop, or is it so terrible that its not worth buying at all? Also, since I'm a die-hard Batman fan, would I like this game in spite of its so-called "flaws"?

#2 Posted by FaustArp (1038 posts) -

I'm having a lot of fun with it. It's basically Arkham City 1.5, which is fine by me.

#3 Edited by Doom_HellKnight (12195 posts) -

No, it's not. If you enjoyed Arkham City, you should enjoy this. Really fun game.

I'm liking the younger, more brutal Batman.

#4 Edited by uninspiredcup (8267 posts) -

It's the best game I've played in a while. Not bad at all.

#5 Edited by GiantAssPanda (1605 posts) -

It's a fun game and if you're a fan of the franchise you will probably like it. The PC version looks great (with DX11 features and Physx), runs great and plays great.

Beware though, It's very buggy right now. I had to stop playing because a bug prevented me from progressing in a side quest. So before buying wait for a patch or two.

@Doom_HellKnight said:

I'm liking the younger, more brutal Batman.

I like him too. A very nice contrast to the calm and professional, more experienced Batman in the previous games.

#7 Posted by Masculus (2834 posts) -

Pretty glitchy. Been a while since I've played City, but it seens to be much more difficult. It has some additional effects but the graphics have not improved. The textures so far are worse than the second game.

If there isn't word on the company stomping the game's bugs, I'm getting a refund.

So, I don't recommend buying it right now.

#8 Edited by PinchySkree (62 posts) -

@FaustArp said:

I'm having a lot of fun with it. It's basically Arkham City 1.5, which is fine by me.

Being happy with rehashes ensure more will be made.

#9 Edited by RevanBITW (555 posts) -

@PinchySkree: Calling it a rehash is not fair. There wasn't a need to change the gameplay. Don't fix it if it ain't broke. You get a city that's twice the size of the previous game and you get a multiplayer thats pretty interesting which is essentially the Splinter Cell Mercs vs Spies mode except it's a 3-way fight.

#10 Posted by GiantAssPanda (1605 posts) -

@Masculus said:

It has some additional effects but the graphics have not improved. The textures so far are worse than the second game.

I just played Arkham City the other day and I thought the texture quality was about the same. Otherwise the game has a much cleaner look and the lighting and shadows have been improved significantly since the last game. Overall I think it's the best looking game in the series.

#11 Posted by Jetset314 (232 posts) -

Soo much fun and some of the boss fights are really fun, and I agree with the consensus: If you liked Arkham City, you'll like Origins.

#12 Posted by airshocker (29356 posts) -

It's not as bad as CP made it out to be.

#13 Edited by DefconRave (560 posts) -

Read the review in full not just look at the score. She said story/gameplay is up to par with AA/AC but it didn't bring anything new to the table thus score got marked down. If Origins was the 1st Arkham game it probably would have gotten 8/9.

#14 Posted by -wildflower- (2859 posts) -

People still care about reviews?

Like the first two games, I'll pick this one up for $10 (or less) during a Steam sale.

#15 Posted by PinchySkree (62 posts) -

@PinchySkree: Calling it a rehash is not fair. There wasn't a need to change the gameplay. Don't fix it if it ain't broke. You get a city that's twice the size of the previous game and you get a multiplayer thats pretty interesting which is essentially the Splinter Cell Mercs vs Spies mode except it's a 3-way fight.

A larger area to do more of the same. Watch the review.

#16 Posted by Flubbbs (3051 posts) -

no its not bad

#17 Edited by ShepardCommandr (2567 posts) -

It's not.

The reviewer has no idea what he is talking about.

#18 Posted by SPYDER0416 (16736 posts) -

It's more Arkham City, so if you expect innovation like the previous Arkham games you might be disappointed, but it's more awesome Batman gameplay that is worth checking out. At the very least, it's something to play until the next Rocksteady game, and gives us a good look at the Batman of the game universe. It is really cool that the animated, cinematic and comic universes are quite different.

#19 Posted by ChiefvsGordon (1085 posts) -

yeah i only played it for a little while and it reminds me a lot of arkham city. This isn't a bad thing because i love that game. the game looks amazing, this is the first batman game i have played on pc. i would say get it, if you liked AC. Don't let all reviews stir you away from a game. If you want the game then play it.

#20 Posted by gameofthering (10193 posts) -

I finished it today and it's basically just more Arkham City (Awesome!)

#21 Posted by Jacanuk (4328 posts) -

This is with respect to the Gamespot review of this game, and also several other reviews which don't seem too impressed by this. To be frank, I had my reservations when they announced that Arkham Origins would not be developed by Rocksteady. But then, I'm also not the kind of person who believes professional reviews blindly, because I give more importance to the opinions of regular gamers (and not critics).

So this is what I want to know, from those who have bought this game (preferably on the PC). I'm considering buying the PC version. Is it worth buying the game at full price now, should I wait for a sale or price drop, or is it so terrible that its not worth buying at all? Also, since I'm a die-hard Batman fan, would I like this game in spite of its so-called "flaws"?

Well, don't take the score on gamespot as the game is bad, because its not. its Batman like the two previous Batman games, nothing new , just more of the same.

So if you liked City and Asylum then buy the game but you won't lose out on waiting for christmas sale.

#22 Posted by Geminon (1095 posts) -

@funkyzoom:

it isnt even remotely bad. basically if you liked arkham city, you will like arkham origins. they are basically the same game with a different story.

#23 Posted by demi0227_basic (896 posts) -

Graphics are better and worse than AC. Lighting is better, design is cleaner. It's more...cell shaded...ish. It's less gritty...I think overall the difference is a slight change in art.

Gameplay is much smoother and more stable, city has been expanded. Not worth $50 if you played AC, but it's better overall.

#24 Edited by FelipeInside (25453 posts) -

Whoever said Arkham Origins is a BAD game has no idea what they are talking about it.

I finished it today (9 hrs campaign straight) and it's a great game.

It's basically Arkham City 2. If they decide to go for a 4th part, they need to change it up a bit.

#25 Posted by alan_carter (1404 posts) -

It's actually a great game, it's not like the jump from arkham asylum to arkham city, it's basically the same than arkham city but larger and a lot more gadgets.

But for not being "innovative" GS gave it a 6. Bf4 being identical to Bf3 will probly get a 9.. just don't mind what people say

#26 Edited by uninspiredcup (8267 posts) -

I'v played about 20 hours and personally I think it is way better than the other two. Bane was one of my fav characters (the first comic I read was knightfall) and it's great to see Warn Bros fix him from the dum dum in the prev two games. Even the Joker who tends to be a very boring character in these games got some pretty good story telling jumping to the killing joke. Along with Shadow Warrior this is another gem.

#27 Posted by gameofthering (10193 posts) -

@uninspiredcup: Yeah I really liked Bane in Arkham Origins compared to how he was presented in the previous two games.

#28 Edited by Cwagmire21 (5891 posts) -

This game's reception is all over the place. I've heard its the best in the series, I've heard it's more of the same (not necessarily bad), and I've heard its a soulless ripoff of a sequel.

Definitely going to wait for the hype to die down to see if this is something I want to pick up before the end of the year or wait for the $5 steam sale in a year or two.

BTW, I'm a HUGE fan of the series, who had concerns early on about an Arkham game not being made by Rocksteady so there's that. :P

#29 Posted by Jacanuk (4328 posts) -

This game's reception is all over the place. I've heard its the best in the series, I've heard it's more of the same (not necessarily bad), and I've heard its a soulless ripoff of a sequel.

Definitely going to wait for the hype to die down to see if this is something I want to pick up before the end of the year or wait for the $5 steam sale in a year or two.

BTW, I'm a HUGE fan of the series, who had concerns early on about an Arkham game not being made by Rocksteady so there's that. :P

Well, to be honest who ever said its the best in the series needs to buy some new glasses because its basically as mentioned City 2.0 done bigger but the same, and not to mention that the story doesn't match up to the previous game and character art design is horrible

But again its a batman game and not a bad game at that, its a fair experience but if you loved the two others you won't be disappointed.

#30 Edited by uninspiredcup (8267 posts) -

@Jacanuk said:

@Cwagmire21 said:

This game's reception is all over the place. I've heard its the best in the series, I've heard it's more of the same (not necessarily bad), and I've heard its a soulless ripoff of a sequel.

Definitely going to wait for the hype to die down to see if this is something I want to pick up before the end of the year or wait for the $5 steam sale in a year or two.

BTW, I'm a HUGE fan of the series, who had concerns early on about an Arkham game not being made by Rocksteady so there's that. :P

Well, to be honest who ever said its the best in the series needs to buy some new glasses because its basically as mentioned City 2.0 done bigger but the same, and not to mention that the story doesn't match up to the previous game and character art design is horrible

It has a significantly better story with character design closer to comic book.

In fact they actually went to lengths to explain why Bane is so terribly stupid in Rocksteadys as opposed to y'now, just making him stupid.

#31 Edited by Macutchi (4040 posts) -

This game's reception is all over the place. I've heard its the best in the series, I've heard it's more of the same (not necessarily bad), and I've heard its a soulless ripoff of a sequel.

Definitely going to wait for the hype to die down to see if this is something I want to pick up before the end of the year or wait for the $5 steam sale in a year or two.

BTW, I'm a HUGE fan of the series, who had concerns early on about an Arkham game not being made by Rocksteady so there's that. :P

entirely my thoughts too

#32 Edited by Gamesterpheonix (3522 posts) -

Im glad people are saying its a decent game despite reviews. Will be a good buy in a year or so when its dirt cheap. lol. I knew the game wasnt going to be much different aside from story and how Batman himself played. Oh well. More time to address my backlog.

#33 Posted by Gooeykat (3360 posts) -

They had a near impossible task topping the last two games. If you're a fan of the first two, than you should probably enjoy this one.

#34 Edited by uninspiredcup (8267 posts) -

Im glad people are saying its a decent game despite reviews. Will be a good buy in a year or so when its dirt cheap. lol. I knew the game wasnt going to be much different aside from story and how Batman himself played. Oh well. More time to address my backlog.

Some "reviews" like Jim Sterlings seem to have made up there mind on it before it was released. Yes, it's not rocksteady, so what? It's still a dam good game.

#35 Posted by cdragon_88 (1174 posts) -

It's not as good as AA or AC but its still a good game. 7/10 for me. It actually feels like a step back from AC IMO. The new team definitely is not as talented as Rocksteady and it shows. Bugs and glitches here and there. Level design is the biggest problem with this game. Is it just me or is the camera a big problem this time around. I just went back to AC before this game released and never had a camera issue. In AO, especially indoors, I find myself constantly being screwed by the camera being punched in the back.

#36 Edited by RevanBITW (555 posts) -

Something that is understated about this new Batman game is the quality of the storytelling, it establishes the beginnings of the relationship between Batman and the Joker in a breathtaking way.

#37 Posted by IAMTYLERDURDEN (1 posts) -

I'm really enjoying this as well. I don't understand how you can find fault with this game if you enjoyed Arkham City.

#38 Posted by Arthas045 (5156 posts) -

Story is really good, but the gameplay has not changed.... So if you liked the other games there is no reason you shouldn't like this one.

#39 Edited by Byshop (11321 posts) -

It's the weakest of the series, but at the same time it's a very strong series. The biggest problem is that it's very buggy compared to the first two which were very well polished.

-Byshop

#40 Posted by FaustArp (1038 posts) -

I just finished it this morning, and I enjoyed the game quite a bit.

I'll likely start a New Game+ at some point.

#41 Edited by aroxx_ab (9458 posts) -

Crap, this game got glitch/bug so not supporting 360 controller? my controller works perfect in Crysis 3 but not in batman:/

#43 Edited by RevanBITW (555 posts) -

@aroxx_ab said:

Crap, this game got glitch/bug so not supporting 360 controller? my controller works perfect in Crysis 3 but not in batman:/

My Xbox controller works just fine with this game.

#44 Posted by aroxx_ab (9458 posts) -

@aroxx_ab said:

Crap, this game got glitch/bug so not supporting 360 controller? my controller works perfect in Crysis 3 but not in batman:/

My Xbox controller works just fine with this game.

I looked at wbgames forum other people got the problem as well, hope they patch it soon. Playing this type of game with kb/M is just wrong:(

#45 Posted by rmfd341 (3808 posts) -

It's pretty decent, it's a rehash but if you liked the formula of the previous game you'll like this one, some reviewers are taking the opportunity to bash this game because it changed studios so they can say ''OH LOOK IT'S AN AAA GAME AND WE GAVE IT A LOW SCORE'' . WB Games Montreal just released a patch that fixed a troubling bug in a side quest, everything's okay now.

#46 Edited by Tqricardinho (341 posts) -

@FaustArp said:

I'm having a lot of fun with it. It's basically Arkham City 1.5, which is fine by me.

The problem is that, according to many game reviewers, they lacked creativity. It's a shame though that they can't see how games like Call of Duty lack creativity every year...

#47 Edited by Murky2 (11 posts) -

Not as good as the previous but it's not as bad as peeps say

#48 Edited by kozzy1234 (35230 posts) -

No it is not all that bad, it is pretty much Batman: AC 2.0 and I enjoyed Batman AC more than the first game. I REALLY like the characters they brought for this game and also the origins story is interesting to. If you loved Batman AC then I am pretty sure MOST people will like this.

Far from perfect but it is a ton of fun. I agree with the Total Biscuit WTF video that he put it, sure it is not innovative but it is still alot of fun. Also the place where Adam Sessler does reviews for had a good review of it also that I agreed with. Total Biscuit was talking about why review scores are bad and I fully agree.

Also sure it is not innovative but it uses what worked for the previous ones but even then, why does this game get penalized for not being innovative yet games like COD, etc.. are the definition of not being innovative, yet sites still give them 8,9 and 10 each year without any good additions being made. Batman AC is one of my fav games this gen but it had much worse day one bugs than this does, atleast for me.

#49 Edited by uninspiredcup (8267 posts) -

Just saw the TV ad for this. Pretty good considering they had about 50 seconds to sell the game.

#50 Posted by mhofever (3954 posts) -

Preferred Mark Hamil's Joker voiceover, just seemed better than Origins Joker. Only other gripe I have with the game is the city. Doesn't seem to have that flair or characteristics that Arkham City had though I know that it's before they turn that area into a prison. Other than that, the same great combat and predator stuff along with a decent story. The new detective rewind thing is cool too.