Batman: Arkham Knight - Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
Oh, my bad. I remembered that being Strange, for some reason.
 
I thought that AO had a superior story to both AA and AC, and I can't believe that it was the one that Paul Dini didn't write for.

However, I didn't enjoy AO as much as AC. The only standouts from AO were probably the Deathstroke boss fight (which was easier than I thought it would be) and the final Bane boss fight (which is like a horror survival version of the great Mr. Freeze fight).
 
I thought that AO had a superior story to both AA and AC, and I can't believe that it was the one that Paul Dini didn't write for.

However, I didn't enjoy AO as much as AC. The only standouts from AO were probably the Deathstroke boss fight (which was easier than I thought it would be) and the final Bane boss fight (which is like a horror survival version of the great Mr. Freeze fight).

I really didn't care for how they devolved Bane into a simple minded monster by the end of the game after what was a much better characterization in the rest of the game. But I guess they were doomed by canon in a sense.
 
Yeah I give them props for sticking to the continuity of the character there.
 
Strange was stabbed and blasted into a hundred pieces, tho...

I don't know how Hugo could come back after he died in Batman's arms and then got blown to bits.

Considering that the whole "Joker's son is force-grown and put on the AK armor" theory is STILL seriously being considered among people (alongside "Joker's Cadmus clone is AK"), Hugo surviving the explosion is suddenly less ridiculous.

Seriously, though, I'm betting it will be nothing more than the embodiment of what Batman fears he will become via fear toxin. :oldrazz:
 
Yeah I give them props for sticking to the continuity of the character there.

I don't. They could have used and developed the character more in following prequels. I mean, there's still some time before the first game's timeline, so there's no one or nothing forcing them to make Bane a dumb brute right away.

Seriously, though. They get a lot of dates wrong and make contradictions, but the ONE thing they got as accurate as possible was ruining Bane. :whatever:
 
I really didn't care for how they devolved Bane into a simple minded monster by the end of the game after what was a much better characterization in the rest of the game. But I guess they were doomed by canon in a sense.

I didnt like that story aspect either (I really liked what they did with Bane in AO until he was Titan-ized) but I did enjoy the gameplay aspect of it.

Kind of like AC. I enjoyed playing it the whole way through, but there were a lot of contrived and shoe-horned plot points that kinda bugged me.

Anyway, the number one thing that bugged me with playing AO was that I kept comparing it to AC and it never transcended its predecessor. I really think that AK will introduce A LOT of new things to the gameplay and probably even improve on the story structure used in AA and AC.
 
Last edited:
I saw this I thought I share. 7 Things OutsideXbox don't want in the game.

[YT]Wct1GUwoZdU[/YT]
 
I don't. They could have used and developed the character more in following prequels. I mean, there's still some time before the first game's timeline, so there's no one or nothing forcing them to make Bane a dumb brute right away.

Seriously, though. They get a lot of dates wrong and make contradictions, but the ONE thing they got as accurate as possible was ruining Bane. :whatever:


I've said this before, they did this in the case they weren't given the go a head for sequel to origins " they only made this cause WBIE wanted people screaming at them that they wanted the third installment to AA and city "Now." after rock steady pulled that stunt with them not working on the third installment , and saying they were working on a justice league ip. .

And it's still in question that origins will even have a sequel.

And it's better then having dangler's like what happened with beyond good an evil with it's third installment where they hint there's a sequel coming and we're left for years wondering what happened or look whats happening with the last guardian where they keep saying it's still being worked on but work on it is stalled and it's being turned into something else. kinda like what over strike which became fuse and metal gear rising. or more importantly "Prey 2" (the latter of which that really fit's the bill here where games are concerned )which were reworked into something else after personal difficulty of their own.

they were just being careful, which is better then what happened with these other games or what has happened in the comic's industry it's self very often where a writer would leave a dangler and it's not resolved for some years cause of the revolving door of writers policy the comic's industry has and other especially new and up and coming writers don't care for anything other persons work but their own.

They closed the gap for a reason in case something like these events that have happened.

we're on Arkham knight here in this thread let stay to that.
 
Last edited:
I've said this before, they did this in the case they weren't given the go a head for sequel to origins " they only made this cause WBIE wanted people screaming at them that they wanted the third installment to AA and city "Now." after rock steady pulled that stunt with them not working on the third installment , and saying they were working on a justice league ip. .

And it's still in question that origins will even have a sequel.

And it's better then having dangler's like what happened with beyond good an evil with it's third installment where they hint there's a sequel coming and we're left for years wondering what happened or look whats happening with the last guardian where they keep saying it's still being worked on but work on it is stalled and it's being turned into something else. kinda like what over strike which became fuse and metal gear rising. or more importantly "Prey 2" (the latter of which that really fit's the bill here where games are concerned )which were reworked into something else after personal difficulty of their own.

they were just being careful, which is better then what happened with these other games or what has happened in the comic's industry it's self very often where a writer would leave a dangler and it's not resolved for some years cause of the revolving door of writers policy the comic's industry has and other especially new and up and coming writers don't care for anything other persons work but their own.

They closed the gap for a reason in case something like these events that have happened.

we're on Arkham knight here in this thread let stay to that.

Zenith you're the voice of reason, thank you.
 
when do you think we will start getting gameplay vids?
 
when do you think we will start getting gameplay vids?
Likely the month and week of E3 or just befor it on that week. Unless they say otherwise to the major Gaming news sites like Game informer, GT, EPN.TV ETC. or show it on their DC all access them selves. I'm not expecting it til then.
 
all signs are pointing to batman being killed in arkham knight. its rocksteadys last game and sefton hill said he wants to go out with a bang. i am calling it right now. bad move if true.:cmad:
 
Uhh....all those "signs" are just Rocksteady saying they want to make a fantastic finale...
 
all signs are pointing to batman being killed in arkham knight. its rocksteadys last game and sefton hill said he wants to go out with a bang. i am calling it right now. bad move if true.:cmad:
I'm not sure about that, especially when the game will 'go on' after the main story with free roam and respawning thugs.
 
There's some similarities from the TDK trilogy and so maybe they'll pull off a TDKR ending by having Bruce retire and pass on Batman to Nightwing or somebody but naa I don't think they will kill him off
 
There's some similarities from the TDK trilogy and so maybe they'll pull off a TDKR ending by having Bruce retire and pass on Batman to Nightwing or somebody but naa I don't think they will kill him off
I think it could be the opposite of that. The Spirit of Arkham had an intense dedication to cleaning up Gotham, however was willing to kill. I think the Arkham Knight will be a personification of this - thinking he's a force for good but with methods opposing Batman. With the Knight defeated and the true mantle passed onto Batman, Bruce continues to defend the city from evil - thus a never-ending game. That doesn't rule out some epic finale.
 
The cheesy dialogue in the trailer with Thomas Wayne talking about leaving a legacy is just one of those clichés about Bruce Wayne needing to have an happy ending and the importance of Batman.

It's going to be hilarious if the story ends with Batman's retirement, because a fair amount of people (in the internet that is) already screamed their lungs out that Batman never retires and Batman should be a crusader till his last breathe.

Thats why i like the theory of Arkham Knight being a clone of Bruce aka Damian Wayne, you get the potential fatherhood Bruce never had and his realization things can't continue this way.

Or the cheesy dialogue is just to build up with Thomas Wayne appearing again as Scarecrow fear gas illusion.
 
I didn't find it cheesy at all or at least not bad
 
There's some similarities from the TDK trilogy and so maybe they'll pull off a TDKR ending by having Bruce retire and pass on Batman to Nightwing or somebody but naa I don't think they will kill him off

Batman beyond. ;)
 
I don't find the dialog in the trailer to be Cheesy at all. I thought is well thought out. It was ironic.
 
Maybe batman suffers from a multiple personality disorder and Arkham knight is really Bruce wayne , and batman submits himselft to Arkham asylum at the end of the game when he finds out it was him through out the whole time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"