NowGamer: "Rocksteady explains why Batman: Arkham Knight could only work on PS4, Xbox One and PC and is giving Wii U, Xbox 360 and PS3 a pass."
One way or another, these games provoked strong reactions.
I don't think Days Gone divided fans. For the most part, gamers loved it. It was the reviewers who were divided. Self-loathing racist pieces of shit that took exception to the main character being white. This was a fantastic game, one of the best open-world games I ever played, and I've played them all.
Second you on this.. I had absolute blast playing this game!! Memorable!
TLOU 2 I thought was utter s***.. I still haven’t finished it and stopped about halfway (apparently).
It wasn’t fans divided around The Order, it was a period where xbox fanboys were thinking Rise was a more engaging game so they were spreading a lot of hate..
Today they are hibernating with nothing to play
The Order was short, no denying, but a great game with huge potential
I enjoyed days gone and last of us 2. PeoPke trippin.
I always thought the order was kinda whack seeming so I never tried it. Id like to now though.
No thr order was a short, clunky mediocre yet visually stunning game. I thoughts so and pretty much every other reviewer did too.
The Order, where length was a criterion for rating a game, but only this particular game and no others.
While I enjoy what is there in Days Gone, I mourn what was lost. The first trailers for Days Gone showed a morality system that looked interesting. For example, in the beginning when you are chasing down Leon and after you caught him, you could choose to shoot him or leave him for the freaks. You can see hints of it in other places, like if you catch a bandit unaware sometimes they will disarm and it seems like Deacon had the option to shoot them or let them go (he automatically lets them go).
Whatever...those systems unless revolutionary don't add much...they rarely do in games that do have them.
For the most part, when it comes to Last of Us 2, incels, homophobes, and closet national socialist types didn't like it. I repeat not all, but most.
Days Gone is a great game and it was attacked by the leftist socialist people that are actually closet fascists. As a great poet once said: "Socialism is the mother of fascism."
The Order got hit from anti-Sony Xbox fans.
Out of these 3, Last of Us 2 stands above as being a work of art. It's still generating a ton conversation to this day.
-"Last of Us 2, incels, homophobes, and closet national socialist types didn't like it. I repeat not all, but most."
It's so weird & cringe to see other gamers paint this broad brush of *who* didn't like Part II. Why take the "most who disagree with me are Hitler" type of mentality over game tastes?
-"The Order got hit from anti-Sony Xbox fans."
No other community I've dabbled in - be it social media or gaming forums - has built up such a dedicated defense for The Order like N4G. This attitude fundamentally blows my mind, especially in the face of similar older titles (hello Uncharted 1) that already did a marginally better job at storytelling and gameplay. It almost feels like some N4G group chat made this reflexive defense as a meme and a bunch of posters are still playing along with it. No offense to genuine Order fans, but I simply can't shake that feeling.
Well to be fair, I remember being only one of a few people on this site that actually praised The Order when it for came out and got alot of flack for it. Over time it seems opinions have changed about it.
saying something is "cringe" doesn't prove me wrong. You just throw words out and hope they stick. Bring some evidence to prove me otherwise.
I got:
Letizi, R., & Norman, C. (2023). “You Took That From Me”: Conspiracism and Online Harassment in the Alt-Fandom of The Last of Us Part II. Games and Culture, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/155...
You're up. Maybe you can change my mind.
Because NG4 defended it doesn't mean NG4 is the gospel of gaming.
Yeah Yui, it was "the game to hate" at the time. What was bizarre was the, as usual, journalists that were lying about the game and their stories were approved.
It was all clickhate all the time for the Order. I defended it too.
@Yui
-"I remember being only one of a few people on this site that actually praised The Order when it for came out and got alot of flack for it."
That could've been the case right at release, but you should see more recent opinion articles on here. There's a pretty substantial cadre who defend it on here as being "unfairly tarnished" that I simply don't see elsewhere.
Most of the backlash against The Last Of Us 2 was people upset that Joel was killed off, simple as that.
There is that too, but the other groups pilled on too, which increased the numbers. I really don't see why we have to ignore everything but Joel being killed.
I didn't like Part 2 and I'm not any of. The game sold like crazy, it's just hard for people to understand that most found the story to be arse.
Prove what I say is wrong. I will need evidence. I didn't not say all. Your exception rule doesn't work. Find evidence that counters mine. So, we can have a real discussion.
There are plenty of legitimate criticism in hours long analysis videos and reddit posts actually critiquing Part 2. The people you're talking about are such a minority, and they attack just about everything because they see the "wokeness" in the most subliminal ways. They're insignificant because the game still sold pretty well, and reviewed well regardless. Keep in mind the game released world wide, and western politics and views can't be applied to every corner of the world. I can agree that Days Gone was attacked, and unlike Part 2, due to these sites being so heavily political biased it did do some damage.
I am at least showing the group was large enough of a concern for a journal to publish an article.
Where's your evidence?
The last of us part 2 was bad story wise. Not some nonsense that you speak of...most of the negative people were random...lots of the critical reception from anything other than mainstream journalism thought that the game had huge problems.
Angry Joe and skill up being prime examples of that...unless of course like most socialists out there you wanna just lable people.
@anast
Oh geez...Twitter is full of trolls...common sense.
The YouTube critics I mentioned are innocent till proven guilty. And proven with facts not opinions. I gave you evidence of 2 prominent youtubers and yet you ask for more...either you can't read or you aren't looking for evidence.
As far as groups being "large" for journos to get their panties all tied up...well then again you must be extremely gullible. As if we haven't seen thousands of articles claiming players are offended, angry or backlashing based solely on 1 or 2 posts. They love grabbing very specific individuals and using them to represent a much larger base....whatever is convenient to them making the case that gamers bad and journos good.
-"saying something is "cringe" doesn't prove me wrong. You just throw words out and hope they stick. Bring some evidence to prove me otherwise."
It doesn't "prove" it, but I have a solid success rate with the term - which seems to be the case here too. With regards to your article, I should break this down into parts:
1.) For starters, bleating for countering "evidence" after brandishing a media analysis paper (or papers) shouldn't be treated as some kind of trump card. That's not to say these researchers did nothing, mind you. Only that expecting counter-ideologies within this field who'll make this specific kind of work for TLOU Pt. II is absurdly demanding on its face. Nevermind the probability of non-progressive types getting the administrative approval being next to nil, but that's another can of worms.
2.) While I have critiques about x or y (some anecdotes being more flimsy than others, GG speculation, etc.), let's say for this argument that it's a solid piece overall. Having read the whole thing, there is literally *NOTHING* that validates the broad brush with which you painted TLOU2 critics in your first comment (speaking as someone who thinks it's a good game). The discussion about alt-fans, anti-fans, etc. does paint an ugly picture about the TLOU subreddit, Twitter users, certain YouTubers, and more; however, there's no positive declaration about TLOU2's critics ending at these particular clusters either. Even if you say "most, not all" in your first comment, that still seems overly broad compared to the text I read. (EDIT: That's not to disregard the nastiness or modest size in its own right.)
It's also worth noting how much of that paper's material is inspecting a pre-/at-release sort of backlash. But the game's been out for several years now. More and more people who AREN'T incels, homophobes, closet Nazis have played it past 2020 and you don't really see this new broad consensus about its accomplishments; in fact, you see more of a continued split over whether or not it deserves such monumental praise. Here's just a few other sub-communities near its release that don't fit your description:
- https://www.youtube.com/wat...
- https://www.youtube.com/wat...
- https://www.youtube.com/wat...
-"Because NG4 defended it doesn't mean NG4 is the gospel of gaming."
Correct, but you're just solidifying my point. Even PS fans elsewhere (social media or gaming forums) don't go to bat for The Order with the enthusiasm and consistency they do here in my experience. That's what makes your assessment of "anti-Sony Xbox fans" so fascinating to me.
1) Speculation and emotion
2) Speculation and emotion
2a) Might be an argument if you gave me something other than your own opinion and emotions over the subject, but it's left as an anecdote without any real research. By the way, we can't negate the at release behavior, because it fits your narrative. It existed and those groups were involved.
The article is not a trump card and the fact that you seem to think so is more troubling on your end than mine. The article was to see if you could find other people that researched this phenomenon and we can have a conversation, but you still refuse to do this. Instead you wrote a sermon, which is a shame because maybe you had something with point "2a: It's also worth..." But this point still tries to side step actual events.
The final point doesn't solidify anything unless you are trying to solidify your own opinion. Albeit, it is passive aggressive, which is strange.
-"Speculation and emotion"
I mean... okay? Where am I wrong on 2.) though? Asking for a conflicting media studies research paper on this specific topic is already a random ask, given the environment with which these are made.
-"Might be an argument if you gave me something other than your own opinion and emotions over the subject, but it's left as an anecdote without any real research."
Wait. Just so we're clear: a research paper that focuses most of its attention towards a subreddit and social media comments to Neil Druckmann means you get to sustain your overly broad claims while contrary social media sources that don't exhibit the same kind of "alt-fan/anti-fan" rhetoric can't be counted? Now I feel even more confident in my initial assessment b/c all you're after is just whatever can be found with some accreditation behind it - regardless of quality.
-"By the way, we can't negate the at release behavior, because it fits your narrative. It existed and those groups were involved."
That's the thing: I never said they wasn't a sizable contingent of that either. From the start, my response was just how wild it was to paint *MOST* detractors with such a broad brush. I still don't think I'm off-base in saying it's cringe to just say "most people who shit on x game are closet Nazis or bigots of some sort," especially when your research doesn't really validate that.
-"The article is not a trump card and the fact that you seem to think so is more troubling on your end than mine."
Bro, you literally responded with "Bring some evidence to prove me otherwise.... You're up. Maybe you can change my mind." I don't really see how I'm speaking out of turn there given this and your original comment.
-"The article was to see if you could find other people that researched this phenomenon and we can have a conversation, but you still refuse to do this."
If no other people *HAVE* researched this phenomenon, then I don't see how the next best option is highly-popular sources which counter your original claim. Given that all you're promoting is a media studies paper hyper-focusing on a specific cluster of media, why wouldn't other forms of media work as some kind of substitute? That's not side-stepping events in the slightest.
-"The final point doesn't solidify anything unless you are trying to solidify your own opinion. Albeit, it is passive aggressive, which is strange."
I don't know what that first sentence means, honestly.
Look, I'll just put it like this: try to have a frank conversation about The Order on some other non-N4G gaming forum. There isn't going to be this clean split between 'Sony fans' and 'Xbox fans' that love it or hate it. Ask Sony fans how they'd feel about paying full-price for it and you're not going to get the ardent defenses compared to some of its most popular comment sections here.
Still no evidence. I ask for you to bring contrary evidence, so maybe I might change my mind, all research can be falsifiable. This is what you are missing. We are thinking in two different universes.
You are writing sermons, which is a waste of everyone's time including yours. Bring some research and we will discuss it. As of now you have only brought superstitions.
-"I ask for you to bring contrary evidence, so maybe I might change my mind, all research can be falsifiable."
But I literally read YOUR evidence and it doesn't support the broader claims you made at the start. I'm not sure where else to go with that.
-"Bring some research and we will discuss it. As of now you have only brought superstitions."
Bro, leveraging this kind of language is so wild in the face of what you've provided. It's like unless those different communities I linked where fused together in a random media studies paper, you'd magically consider it valid. I don't understand how you're leveraging that, especially when it doesn't fortify your initial claim. You're basically retorting to me writing too much, regardless of the content itself. Just the oddest conversation with you thus far and I don't quite get it.
Amazing gameplay, but TLOU2 had one of the worst, most convoluted and uneccessary plots I ever seen in a sequel. Terrible story and the characters were forgettable. I didn't give an F about anyone in the story.
I don't think any of these divided fans, other than LoU2. The rest were either victims of biased reviews or just generally agreed that they weren't as good as they could've been or just overall disappointing.
Batman: Arkham Knight wasn't in the best shape when it swooped onto Switch at the end of last year. Fortunately, the game has today received a monster 16GB update, one that's guaranteed to fix all of its problems, right? Well...
I dunno, the game runs fine on PS4 and PS5… I think this might be a Switch thing.
Batman arkham knight shouldn't be on the switch as well as many other titles on the ps4 and xbox one because the switch will have the worst version that always perform poorly
The switch 2 will have the same dilemma as the later years of the switches life cycle because any AAA multiplatform games on switch 2 will most likely be the worst version to own because that game will be available elsewhere with way better performance and visuals.
The switch gained quite a bit of success because it was the only portable console available to play a lot of AAA multiplatform games but today there are many alternative handheld consoles that are better than the switch 2. Nintendo will be Nintendo so hoping for the latest cutting edge technologies to be in the switch 2 isn't being realistic while knowing Nintendo likes to make quite a bit of profit on sales of their hardware
Because the game was built to run on the PS4 and the PS5 won't have issues because it plays PS4 games. It is a Switch thing this game is asking a lot out of the little hybrid hand held system.
When it comes to Nintendos gaming systems people need to stop making excuses for games running poorly on it because the switch was made 4 years after the ps4 and xbox one. It doesn't matter that the switch is a handheld console that can also be docked to play on a television.
There are so many games I played on the switch where the performance is very poor dropping the frames per second into the teens constantly but reviewers and a lot of gamers excuse the issues as it's a weak Nintendo handheld.
I can already see that a lot of people will be making excuses for issues when it comes to the switch 2 when they need to be highlighted like games on other gaming platforms. These gaming companies have years to research and develop the necessary components to make gaming consoles and Nintendo shouldn't get a pass for making shoddy hardware.
Silverhawk: "the switch was made 4 years after the ps4 and xbox one. It doesn't matter that the switch is a handheld"
What? Yes it does. How do you have more agrees than disagrees? You expected a small inexpensive 2017 Tegra in a Nintendo handheld console with a heavy focus on battery life to be as powerful as a PS4 home console that's powered by a wall and plugged into a large TV? No offence man but that's psychotic. I doubt even the Switch 2 will be running anything close to God of War Ragnarok. The Steam Deck can come quite close in some aspects but jeeze. You're talking about a budget 2017 handheld lol seeing it run Arkham Knight at all is an insane feat. Probably shouldn't have even been attempted in the first place but it's at least kind of cool that it's possible
DLSS and potentially VRR could be a huge game changer for Switch 2 but power constraints in a handheld are a very real thing. Even in 2025 you're not gonna get what you're looking for in a handheld unless you go the expensive handheld PC route and suffer through brutal battery life. Certainly not from Nintendo lol that's not their thing.
Another rushed port job, it's disappointing to see better looking games run/perform better than a game from 2015
To be honest. Batman Arkham Knight looked a lot better in 2015 than almost every..if not exactly every game released for the Nintendo Switch since 2017.
It needed a big downgrade like The Witcher 3 or Mortal Kombat 11, 1 to run well on this weak hardware.
if The Witcher 3 can run on this thing at a respectable framerate, there is zero excuse for other games.
But that's because the dev took their time and optimized it properly. It wasn't a rush job like so many 3rd party games.
@neoridr ..look how Witcher 3 looks in comparison to other versions. (Pretty much like a last gen version of it..but yes it runs well at least)
While Batman AK on Switch looks more like the PS4 /XB Versions but runs worse of course.
As said..it needed a big visual downgrade and did not receive it.Porting it to the Switch was a damn dumb idea anyway.
Dummying down a game that is meant to run on XB1 and PS4 is going to be challenging to run on a system that is probably as powerful as a PS3. I give them a congrats for bringing it to the Switch and I hope this challenge pays off for them. As for me grabbing Arkham Knight on the Switch I am good I have the PS4 version.
Batman: Arkham Knight Still Runs Poorly On Switch Despite Massive Update........ But is still a better game than suicide squad *fixed the title*
Batman: Arkham Knight is considered by many as one of the best-looking games that Rocksteady released. And, since Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League is now out, YouTube’s ‘NikTek’ shared a comparison video between them.
OK. I guess I should now give up hope for this game. I read somewhere someone saying the graphics were great. Man that just.... @#$!!
There's a massive amount of cherry picking here to make Suicide Squad look bad here. The person is purposefully playing the game poorly. And it's definitely downgraded in the PS5 capture, because it doesn't look that bad.
Look, there's enough to 'hate on' in the game as it is, people don't need to play poorly to make it look even worse to make a point.
This is a dumb comparison. This is a combo shooter being compared to a combo battler but they showed nothing of what makes Suicide Squad its own game.
OMG you are defending Suicide squad... actually I'm not surprised.
Game is garbage, disrespecting OG Dc characters.
Should I explain, no. You already know my stance.
@Christopher
While i agree overall with your point about cherrypicking (play poorly, if that was actually the case), i think that comparing melee system was useful, because:
1. It shows how undercooked the melee system feels/looks (starting from 2:50, the player tried to start a combo and instead, it was just a mess, hits not registering, enemies flying all over the place - those 2 attacks at 3:10 should've been a hit);
2. Highlights the worse looking animations for melee system and overall lack of them (hence the inclusion of AR challenge section from Harley Quinn DLC for Arkham Knight).
Before you'll say that it's not important in a coop looter-shooter, consider this:
- they (Rocksteady) have added a melee system and Harley Quinn (known for her melee and acrobatics in previous games and in DC overall) to the game;
- they decided to make the melee system as basic as possible. Yet, they know how to make it better, they have the experience of doing so, but decided it's not worth the time and/or money.
If they would've spent more time with it and shown some care, this would not be seen as another reason to dislike the game. But now it just shows the lack of passion from them, which is disheartening, in my opinion, coming from Rocksteady.
***1. It shows how undercooked the melee system feels/looks ***
It's not a melee game, though... Heck, Deadshot's melee is gauntlet guns. The only reason you melee is to 1. pick up shield buffs after shooting in the leg or 2. to pop them up for higher chance at crit shots.
***2. Highlights the worse looking animations for melee system***
No, again, it doesn't. I have no clue how they got that singular animation off over and over, but it's not great but it's also not that and I never saw Harley do that animation in my short gameplay. They didn't show any other melee animations, just that one shitty one they repeated over and over.
Having said that, I'm not saying they're 'great' only that they're not as bad as they made it out to be with cherry-picked gameplay.
*** Before you'll say that it's not important in a coop looter-shooter, consider this: ***
It's important to rate a game based on what it is. One is a shooter, one is a battler (melee focus). Even more, Squicide is a rapid traversal/shooter game, but they showed absolutely none of that in good taste, only really shit traversal from Harley and nothing about jumping around the battlefield from roof to roof shooting.
***OMG you are defending Suicide squad... actually I'm not surprised. ***
I'm just not defending crap comparisons that aren't at all done in good faith. You can enjoy being ignorant in your opinion if you wish.
Just in terms of visuals, I checked out since other YouTube videos, presumably 4K, and the graphics looked really bland. Like the lighting seems so basic and textures look bland. Draw distance looks good, and in the daylight it looks ok at best imo
Actually, agreeing with you here Christopher. In addition there are totally different moods and art styles for each game. Can't wait to play SSKTJL on Gamepass PC soon!
Contradicting yourself, saying you're not impressed with Sony's recent State of Play, yet you're defending this which looks way worst than any of the games shown.
"All these things could only be done on next gen!", will this become the norm!?
Ouch....thats hurts.
Wii U is in a tough spot due to the hardware being limited
I don't think Wii U owners mind too much. Its not like they expect every game to be gimped.
You could get another team to code a last gen version, but that just adds unnecessary costs to a project meant to sport next gen visuals.
I will probably get a Wii U one day, but not as a multiplatform device.
Sad news for wii u owners. They must be planning to utilize nextgen engine fully,which is great news