<iframe width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/dVYTlPgKsAI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Hard not be excited about Arkham City after how awesome Arkahm Asylum turned out to be. And you get to play [for roughly 20% of the main game] as the impossibly-sexy Catwoman, so I don't see how you can go wrong there.
Having already played 70 hours of Skyrim and having beaten the finale of Saints Row 3, I'm ready to get down with some Batman.
The world was a bit confusing and daunting at first, it doesn't really do a great job of introducing you to how the open world works, in my opinion, but I've got it figured out now and I'm really enjoying it. Arkham City does a really great job of expanding on what Arkham Asylum did in making it feel like you really are Batman. And swinging around a big chunk of city feels pretty cool. Inclusion of sidemissions and even more little things to find and do is a nice inclusion. I'm enjoying it.
You had trouble with the giant glowing arrows in the sky telling you exactly where to go?
Not sure I understand then.
What's there to not understand? The game puts you into a huge world, far larger than anything that was in the original game, and doesn't do a very good job of initially explaining the parameters and functions of that world.
What parameters? I don't know what you mean by that. You're given an objective the very instant you get your bat suit, and you never stop getting them. Compared to other "open world" games, I found this one to have VERY good direction from the very start, and the side missions open up very organically.
It's not even a big deal, certainly not one that I want to get into some huge debate about. The initial introduction to the open world was a bit confusion for about 10 minutes. I messed around and finally got it figured out. That's it.
Sure sure, no need to debate it, but I still don't actually understand what confused you.
AC's hub is fundamentally different from AA's, in large part because AA's had a large portion of its section locked off from you from at first and the hub doesn't even appear until several hours into the game. Moving from point A to be point B is very different from any other open world game out there. The dichotomy between a huge hub and events taking place largely inside buildings is different too.
It's a different sort of game with a different sort of take on a style of game that's become very familiar over the years. Chalk it up to playing AA after coming off of Skyrim [which plays exactly like Oblivion and Fallout 3] and Saints Row: The Third [which plays exactly like Saints Row 1/2 and GTA].
So you mean how the game world may be "open" but is still pretty guided?
That's a part of it, yes.
Anyway, AC's pushing pretty hard for the number 1 spot on my list, even giving Skyrim a run for it's money. Never thought I'd say that! I like how it introduces even more gadgets and gizmos, and integrates them very well into the world, the Riddler trophies and riddles that are even more difficult to figure out and acquire, the way the game gives you leeway in handling sidemissions and in how they still feel like they're part of the world, and the way they've broadened the variety of locations even while keeping it within a decayed urban environment. Great game is great.
Redundancy is redundant?
Yes, I agree on all of that. The whole experience reminds me of a good Metroid game. Just wait on the Riddler quest by the way, it gets MUCH better. On another note, bat swinging from bat perch to bat perch while on my bat way to a bat objective, then suddenly bat saving a bat victim I hear screaming for help, really makes me feel bat bat.
While Catwoman's side story does push the story along, all in all I think it was sort of lack luster for what it was. Still, she's funny.
Dont you mean debat it.
Sounds awesome, I wonder if Wii U will get an iteration
I'm not so certain it will. The Wii U is still a ways off and by that time Rocksteady will likely be neck deep in the third entry in the series (this one drops a lot of hints as to what that might be).
Between these two games, I've seen pretty much every last Batman character I wanted to see, with the exception maybe of the ventriloquist. Heck even the Mad Hatter is in there. He makes you some tea, his special tea, his specialty.
Dark Jaguar Wrote:Heck even the Mad Hatter is in there. He makes you some tea, his special tea, his specialty.
Oooo Oooo! He makes his tea of untimely death?!?!? ~Claps wildly.
What about the guy (villain) who can slow down time? He was pretty interesting. Gameplay wise it would make for some interesting puzzles and fights.
I'm still bummed the riddler isnt the focus on Batman 3. If you've ever seen The Game with The Douglas you could see how horrific a billionaire could be, mix it with a little Saw and Holmes and with the right script you could create a serious whodunit with the riddler reveal at the end. Cast Patrick Stewart in his best Shakespearean who weaves a story that the world is a stage as a diplomat who has eyes on presidency. The riddler would be a calculated planner to create a world wide economic crash where he comes out a quintillionare, an old fashioned world domination type villain. He'd be a great juxtapose to the Joker's insane terrorism - the internal cancer, the dictator we follow in to hell, creating conflict, wars, driving the country down with the illusion that we're accomplishing for the greater good. The ultimate conspiracy theory that only Bruce can unravel. But every step Bruce or Batman makes to stop the riddler it creates a hate towards him that he's trying to stop progress or get in the way of what this country needs, leading to Gotham despising batman as an anti-american, that batman himself is the terrorist and Patrick Stewart's character is our salvation.
Oh well, hopefully Bane will be an interesting arc.
The Riddler plays a bigger role this time. He's not the main villian, but he's still got a lot going on. The thing is, "whodunnit" isn't really this Riddler's style. He's completely unable to do anything without leaving a hint of who he is. People have to RECOGNIZE his brilliance. It's pathological. Still, he's pretty well thought out. His big warehouses full of victims in traps does have that Saw vibe to it, except Riddler did it first so there's that.
That time guy. I forgot about him. I actually liked his first appearance the best, before he got the time control powers. I liked the idea of someone who's main "power" was simply excellent timing.
Of course, the best villain would be: LORD DEATH MAN!
Check him out rockin' the black body suit with skeleton markings inexplicably matched with brown gloves and boots.
<img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.comicsalliance.com/media/2010/09/deathman09.jpg">
I hate it when things slip thought my fingers....
A more modern interpretation...
<img src="http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/6/66037/1516960-screen_capture_1_large.png">
He's even got a theme song.
<object height="81" width="100%"><param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapi.soundcloud.com%2Ftracks%2F24891633&"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapi.soundcloud.com%2Ftracks%2F24891633&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed></object><span><a href="http://soundcloud.com/tchalla/lord-death-man">Lord Death Man</a> by <a href="http://soundcloud.com/tchalla">Tchalla</a></span>
His special power? Nothing much, he can use yoga to slow down his vitals and fake his own death (later he can fake his death in much more elaborate ways basically on the spot, the ultimate escape artist). His power isn't the thing though. It's that costume and that name.