My initial reaction to Arkham Origins, unfortunately, was not a positive one. The controls didn't feel right, everything was moving a little too quickly, and the introduction was not at all what I expected to see from an 'Arkham' game. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see what Warner Bros. did here: they requested more Batman from Rocksteady, who obviously told them "no", so Warner Bros. used the 'phone-a-friend' lifeline and used the in-house developers instead.
"We don't need Rocksteady, we can do it all on our own, yeah that'll show 'em!"
The good news is: Arkham Origins is actually not a bad game.
The bad news is: Well...it's a bad 'Arkham' game.
At the very least, Warner Bros. Montreal makes great use of the Batman mythology, using some of his more obscure villains and drawing inspiration from some of the award-winning storylines. There are plenty of moments in the story that should be positively orgasmic for true Batman fans, Arkham Origins has no shortage of fan service and doesn't hesitate to put you smack dab in the middle of Gotham's history. Be prepared for a few surprises along the way -- this game is also about the origins of one key villain in the Batman world, in addition to Batman himself. The only problem is the fact that Rocksteady essentially made "the last Batman game ever" when they made Arkham City, and the ending to that game left several key characters in the Batman universe dead or basically gone forever. Bringing them back in the prequel feels wrong, and dishonors them in a way.
The gameplay is in tact, thankfully. You can pretty much be Batman one-hundred percent and no-holds-barred. There are a few innovations to enjoy here, and the gameplay is still loads of fun. It seems like the gameplay is more difficult than it was before, and not in a good way. Also, some of the gameplay additions don't make sense. This is supposed to be a prequel, his gadgets should older and not newer!
There are some problems with the game's world as well. This is supposed to be when Bruce Wayne first became Batman, yet it appears as though the game takes place in pretty recent history. Characters in the game make references to things like "texting" and the internet, which doesn't make sense because this game is supposed to have taken place a long time ago. It feels odd or even wrong entirely to believe that by the time the events of Arkham City occur, Batman and the Joker have only been rivals for less than ten years. Arkham Origins insists on occuring in recent or modern times, which makes the timeline of the Arkham Universe feel squished and rushed. A swing and a miss on Warner Bros. part.
For all of the nitpicky things wrong with Arkham Origins, it's still a heck of a lot of fun to play. The story still rocks, the graphics are great, and the open-world gameplay is blissful. Even the side-missions make more sense than before; the "Most Wanted" system provides you with a convenient and simple way to keep track of all the side-missions. The challenge mode has been refined, and I recommend you buy the Deathstroke challenge pack because Deathstroke is a hoot and a half to play as, even if his gadgets are just alternate versions of Batman's. It would help if they provided a Deathstroke tutorial, but fans of the franchise should have no problem adapting.
If you love the Arkham series, or if you're just a fan of Batman in general, do yourself a favor and give this game a try. I think you'll be impressed. Warner Bros. put forth an honest effort to make a decent game, but it's just not a Rocksteady game at all. So far I haven't found anyone online in the multiplayer, so I can't comment on that: I guess nobody wants to play it, but it looks amazing which is really a shame. Origins is packed with single-player content anyway, even if Warner Bros. didn't do a fantastic job on making sure it wasn't buggy.
Give Arkham Origins a fair chance, it's worthy of the Arkham name. But Warner Bros. doesn't need to do this again, please just wait for Rocksteady this time.