Batman: Arkham City, A Great Yet Flawed Game

Ian Fisher writes: So far the reception towards Batman: Arkham City has been exceedingly positive with the game earning a 97 rating on Metacritic, which is almost unheard of for any game released this generation. I had a fun time with Batman: Arkham City but I couldn’t help but be disappointed by a few things, which surprisingly made me wonder if Batman: Arkham Asylum was ultimately the better game out of the two.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Alos882757d ago

Maybe it's just me, but that was difficult to read. You could have made it a little easier by making smaller paragraphs, rather than huge intimidating chunks of text.

mafiahajeri2757d ago

LOL!!Theres no way arkham asylum is a better game then Arkham city. The sequel improves on everything.

Pozzle2757d ago

I don't know...I think there were a lot of things Arkham Asylum did better than Arkham City, and a lot of things Arkham City did better than Arkham Asyum. I liked that Arkham City was more open world and that there was more focus on DC and Batman lore/history, but I also felt the main story was much too short and a lot less fluid than Arkham Asylum's. IMO the focus on multiple villains also let it down because there wasn't enough time spent on each of them.

That's just my opinion though. They're still both incredible games.

M1chl2757d ago

Pozzle: Thats how I feel about it

xenophage2757d ago

I agree. Arkham City felt like it was trying way too hard. Plus for me personally, the navigation system sucked. That's a pretty huge fuckup when it comes to open world games.

I preferred the tighter, linear narrative of Arkham Asylum.

mafiahajeri2757d ago

Look to the sky genius and youl see a huge!!! Bat signal to tell you where to go. Is that so hard?

Trying so hard? Yes they did try hard and made an amazing game dont get what you mean by trying too hard. Actually Im sure you yourself dont even know what you mean.

xenophage2756d ago

Lol I don't think you know what you mean. Plus this is my opinion after I bought the game. If you love it so much, good for you. I don't.

TheGameFoxJTV2756d ago

Gamers now days want small upgrades to new sequels. If a dev team does too much work, they are told they "tried too hard". hence why so many people buy CoD games each year. they never really change, so people love them. 1990s-2004 Gamer > Modern Day Gamer.

We liked change, this gen of gamers wants the same shit re-wrapped in $60 price tags.

Bercilak2756d ago

I agree with you (and the author). Despite the continued excellence of the graphics and the improvement in combat, I actually found myself bored about halfway through the game. There was so much in it that was unnecessary for the advancement of the main story that it started to feel like a series of interlocking fetch quests with a ton of fan service, e.g., in the span of 30 minutes, I encountered Penguin, Mr. Freeze, Solomon Grundy, Talia and Ra's al Ghul. And this was related to the main, again?

Arkham Asylum had a much more tightly constructed narrative that made me want to see what would happen next. Arkham City, not so much. For those who enjoyed Arkham City, good for you. : ) I'm headed back to the asylum (insert snarky comment here).

xenophage2756d ago

Heh. Same here. Downloading Arkham Asylum off Steam as I type this.

MasterCornholio2757d ago (Edited 2757d ago )

I was just disappointed that I couldn't ride the Harley in the game. At least I had a great time playing with duct tape with her.



kramun2756d ago

Every game has flaws, and Arkham City is no exception. But it's still one of the best games I've ever played. Maybe the focus should be on what the game does right instead of what it does wrong.

kma2k2756d ago

I loved the gamed the only flaw was the whole catwoman dlc thing! Tainted my view of a otherwise great game!

Show all comments (15)