Batman: Arkham Knight

[godisawesome]

It's a shame that the potential to do some interesting stuff with Harley's character and the infected people was reduced to about an hour in favour of the awful Arkham Knight stuff.

I'm of the opposite opinion; the AK stuff was initially much more interesting to me, and I kind of despise the ideas behind the "Joker infected" story while liking the execution of the idea. But the real issue is how each segment of the story gets mixed in with others. The game probably should have cut out a few subplots and jacked up involvement of others:

-if you want Joker's storyline done well, you can probably cut out the entire Knight and Army plotline and just use Scarecrow's fear gas and Harley's desire for revenge. Gives you focus, and make sit clear this is an epilogue to AC.
-if you want to do AK and the army, don't do Joker, especially as a constant hallucination. Scarecrow's hallucinations should focus on Batman's wounds, give Jason's reveal some cover with multiple other failures (maybe have Orpheus's death, Sara Essen Gordon's death, maybe that one cop Strange brainwashed in the comics)

 

[Brother Jack]

I was apprehensive about the prospect of Joker coming back and playing a large role, but I reconciled with it because the series has really been about the relationship between him and Batman more than anything else. After Joker came in and took over the stories of both City and Origins to detriment of other plot threads, I had resigned to that fact. And I think the way he was implemented was pretty brilliant actually, being this Dickensian ghost that taunts Bruce with all his failures and shortcomings, manifested in the Joker serum and Batman being his last vessel. I personally loved that the end of the game was a literal voyage into Bruce's psyche, ultimately ridding himself of Joker once and for all. It was a pretty definitive ending to the bond that they had.

 

[The Joker]

Nah, nah, nah the worst thing about AK was all the Batmobile ********. Way too much of that.

That does edge out all the other flaws as worst.

Joker in Origins will always be one of my pet peeves. I was looking forward to one game without the Joker, and yet again there he was. Doesn't change though that the story was very well written, the characterization for all characters were spot on, and Joker isn't even remotely as much in the game as he is in Arkham Knight. Where he's literally next to you, constantly talking ****. And it was a game that showed us that you can have the Joker, and not treat every other character in the game like a second fiddle. Bane was fantastic in the game and didn't take **** from the Joker.

Yeah AO was a master class in showing you can have two heavy hitting villains in a game, and not throw one under the bus in favor of the other. Especially in the Gotham Royal Hotel level, which is my favorite section out of all four games.

Both Joker and Bane were treated as equal threats, who clearly hate each other, but reluctantly work together. They're shown as two unique threats, and two larger than life characters. Joker is wild, psychotic, unpredictable. Bane is calculating, methodical, and physically brutal.

AO redeemed Bane after his crappy treatment at the hands of Rocksteady.

I completely agree with Nathan on Joker and AO's story vs AK's!

So do I. I mean it's a no brainer. Joker's presence in AO had proper meaning, purpose, and most of all Joker had CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT. In this sequence alone we got more insight into Joker's mind than all three Rocksteady games;



In AK he was just a pointless, and sometimes annoying hallucination.

 

[GamerSlyRatchet]

Yeah, I was really annoyed at Joker hijacking Black Mask's spot as the Big Bad. Seeing how great of a job they did in characterizing the beginning of Batman and Joker's relationship, though, softened the blow for me.

That being said, I thought the final act in Blackgate was super weak and unneeded. They should've finished Joker's plot after his hallucination with Harley, and then had Bane as the final Big Bad, with the final showdown being in Wayne Manor/The Batcave.

 

[Nathan]

AO redeemed Bane after his crappy treatment at the hands of Rocksteady.

Until the final moment, when they turned him into a dumb giant, because they had to follow Rocksteady's established canon.

 

[TX85]

And that's a reason why I want WBM to do their own Batman game with their own universe ideas. Keep some of the Rocksteady gameplay like the combat but try to improve on it as much as possible and then reboot everything else.

 

[Broseph44]

That does edge out all the other flaws as worst.



Yeah AO was a master class in showing you can have two heavy hitting villains in a game, and not throw one under the bus in favor of the other. Especially in the Gotham Royal Hotel level, which is my favorite section out of all four games.

Both Joker and Bane were treated as equal threats, who clearly hate each other, but reluctantly work together. They're shown as two unique threats, and two larger than life characters. Joker is wild, psychotic, unpredictable. Bane is calculating, methodical, and physically brutal.

AO redeemed Bane after his crappy treatment at the hands of Rocksteady.



So do I. I mean it's a no brainer. Joker's presence in AO had proper meaning, purpose, and most of all Joker had CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT. In this sequence alone we got more insight into Joker's mind than all three Rocksteady games.

For sure, which is one of the many reasons for me AO is my favorite of all the games and I think the best of them.

 

[Tron Bonne]

Finished it yesterday (well, beat the Scarecrow, didn't get the ending ending or whatever, but I saw it on YouTube, so whatever).

I've already said all I'm going to say about the Joker stuff.

I will give Rocksteady proper credit for the Scarecrow. They managed to get over their extreme clown fetish for awhile and gave Scarecrow really good spotlight in this. It came off like a major threat and all. As cynical as it was, I keep waiting for that moment when Joker was going to take over the narrative, but thankfully it never happened.

Can't say the same for Arkham Knight, though. Man, did that suck. Not only was the twist painfully obvious (people were guessing it a long time ago), just everything about his story was so half-baked. It's like he spends the entire damn game trying to kill Batman, belittle Batman, selling out previous allies, and just being a general be-all dick, but then comes around after Batman beats him and is all 'You were Robin once, breh." That's apparently all it took for him to subdue his years long hatred for Batman and paint a Batman symbol on his chest and ****ing whatever. Awful.

I really don't know what they were thinking with that story line. I almost wonder if maybe Knight was meant to be someone else (an original character perhaps) who at some point go shifted into being Jason Todd because someone thought, "Well, we can't not have him be a comic book character, because...uh, because, I guess." I mean, probably not. They should have just had him be Red Hood, revealed himself as Todd early, and had Batman reasoning with him to get him back to the good side, and you could have missions and stuff based around figuring out how Jason lived and where he's been and etc.

 

[Tron Bonne]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOzjHluBwds

Arkham Asylum/City remaster finally announced as Return to Arkham.

EDIT: The PR

Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment and DC Entertainment today announced Batman: Return to Arkham. The new title bundles Batman: Arkham Asylum and Batman: Arkham City, two of the most critically acclaimed videogames on the last generation of gaming consoles. Both are being remastered for PlayStation®4 computer entertainment system and Xbox One using Unreal Engine 4, a first for the award winning Batman: Arkham series. Remastered by Virtuos, this set offers fans a chance to play the first two Batman: Arkham titles including all Game of the Year edition bonus and downloadable content from both games, now with improved graphics, as well as upgraded models, environments, lighting, effects and shaders. Batman: Return to Arkham will be available beginning July 29 for a suggested retail price of £39.99.​

​

 

[Rodrigo90]

Looks better than ever.

 

[Tron Bonne]

Cover, and apparently people are saying the NA price is $50, but I'm not sure where that's coming from.

 

[SpideyVille]

It looks good and I'll definitely get it at release, but I want to see some comparison photos.

But still, I think I'll continue to hold off until Arkham Knight so I can replay through these first.

 

[Rodrigo90]

When they said everything was having new models, I stupidly thought it was going to look like Arkham Knight... glad to see I was wrong, because the old designs have their special charms.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Never played the originals, are the remakes worth purchasing?

 

[SpideyVille]

Never played the originals, are the remakes worth purchasing?

Absolutely.

I haven't finished Knight, but I feel like the closed-open environment of Asylum is one of the reasons why it is the best game in the series.

 

[Slade W]

Great news.

 

[X Knight]

sucks Origins isn't included, as that's the game I wanted to replay the most.

maybe they will remaster that separately?

 

[TX85]

Trailer was so good, definitely looks great!!

 

[The Joker]

I just wish Origins was part of this.

 

[Nathan]

Not the slightest interest in this without Origins.

 

[Dopinder]

Origins is the weakest arkham game, but it should be included.

 

[Slade W]

It is hard to imagine Origins not being re-released someday.

 

[Broseph44]

I just wish Origins was part of this.

Same. I love AA and AC and am totally getting the remasters. But I really wanted a remaster of Origins more than anything.

 

[Matt Mortem]

I haven't played the first two Arkham games in ages. I'm definitely on board for these remasters.

 

[SpideyVille]

I know they won't, but I wouldn't mind if they removed the Challenge Maps. Those are the only things preventing me from getting the Platinums on the PS3 versions.