@Slim_Lyrics Also, if you look at what @AggrandizedUser posted in a comment just above mine:

"IGN Italia - 8.0: 'everything seems already done and seen.'

4Players - 8.0: 'the core mechanics hardly make any progress'

IGN - 7.8: 'Next to Arkham City, Arkham Origins is a bit of a disappointment in its lack of new ideas and use of win buttons'

AusGamers - 7.8: 'everything it does well the previous games also pulled off splendidly'

JeuxActu - 7.5: 'if you already played Batman Arkham City, then you'll find too many similarities to justify to buy a new game. '

VideoGamer - 8.0: "there's no denying that Warner Bros. Montreal has taken Rocksteady's tremendous template and crafted a similar experience."

NowGamer - 7.5: 'A good but underwhelming entry in the Arkham series that often feels more like an update than a true sequel.'

GameTrailers - 8.7: 'more of the same isn’t at all a bad thing for Bat-fans.' "

If you change the context to Call of Duty, it very accurately describes the series.

@Slim_Lyrics I never said Call of Duty sucks (I own multiple titles), nor did I say anything about weapons. I'm just saying call of duty should be reviewed exactly how Arkham origins was reviewed. Call of Duty is more of the same thing EVERY year, and therefore should be rated more along the lines of a 6 - 7 out of ten.

Please learn to read.

@AggrandizedUser Thank you, at least somebody gets it.

@fernandofan08 To innovate, all they would have to do is how it was done in Arkham City. Give the game expanded features (Riddler's collectables, bigger world, etc.) and add more gadgets, moves, and animations to build upon an already well crafted formula. Apparently, Arkham Origins does almost none of this, and therefore was given a 6/10. Carolyn even said that this game is still just as fun as the previous game.

While I don't disagree with this review, I find it funny how Call of Duty gets around an 8 - 9 every year.

Not that I disagree with Tom, but what exactly was he expecting? It's a cross-generational video game.

@ajay1708 I didn't even think about that. Very well said.

Wouldn't that mean every game would be banned? Every game distorts history in some way, whether through characters, stories, or mechanics.

Wouldn't that mean every game would be banned? Every game distorts history in some way, whether through characters, stories, or mechanics.

I doubt it.