Because of word limit, I'm going to include my one other complaint in the comments since it's a particularly nit-picky gripe and doesn't really affect the overall experience of the game.
I don't like Batman's costume. On the one hand, I understand that it's meant to evoke a sort of rough-shod, slapped-together feel since Batman is fairly new to the gig. But as the game takes place after Batman's been on the job for 2(?) years already, I don't feel that this is an adequate explanation. The armor actually looks quite well assembled as well, not really something Bruce just threw together for functionality's sake in a pinch. It seems to me that the design team simply wanted Batman to look more like Christopher Nolan's. In the Nolan-verse, where the idea is for the setting to be more realistic and grounded, this sort of setup works. The previous Arkham games, however, had a distinctly comic-book styling that seems to have been abandoned in Origins as well as in the upcoming Arkham Knight. I would have accepted the "it's only because he's new at Batman" explanation and moved on, but the trailers for Knight show that Batman's Nolanization is here to stay. It's the shift in art style that bothers me, not so much the particular aesthetics of Batman and his equipment. The Arkham games created a really great adaptation of Batman in the video game medium, and now it just seems like they're ripping off a successful film franchise rather than sticking to their original (awesome) work.
Leave a Comment:
Merely Good Amongst Greats
I was skeptical about Arkham Origins right off the bat. It hit two of my major "don't buy" flags (as well as one arbitrary flag that's specific to this series): 1) prequel, 2) different developer, 3) no Mark Hamill or Kevin Conroy.
Despite that, I ended up with the game thanks to a holiday bundle PS3, and I'd wanted to give it a try anyway. My first impression of the game was that my preconceptions were wrong, but the more I played the game the more I realized they were actually correct. In the end it's not a bad game, and I'd certainly consider it good, but it falls quite short of its much better predecessors.
The story started off very compelling, but the mid-game "twist" that the Joker was behind everything by pretending to be Black Mask really ruined it. While the Joker's introduction is an important part of the series' story, it didn't need to take center stage over an already interesting story concept of Batman vs. the assassins.
As for the assassins themselves, too few of them had actual screen time. Half were relegated to sidequests or ridiculously brief appearances, and in the case of Shiva I didn't find her until the post-game.
The gameplay was a mixed bag. The fluid, intuitive combat of Arkham City saw timing windows reduced (especially for counter-moves) and enemy interruptions vastly increased, making encounters stressful and filled with arguably unfair combo-breakers rather than satisfying and awesome. The stealth encounters were still good, and the new tools were familiar yet added enough new variety to feel fresh.
The Dark Knight challenge system was a decent addition, with the exception of the stealth challenges. Because most were dependent on story-specific predator rooms, and a few of the challenges could only be completed in a very limited number of specific places, either a guide or NG+ is required. I consider this bad because every other challenge tier could be completed in a single playthrough. Even if predator rooms only respawned upon completing the story, allowing completion after the main game, it would have been 100% better. (I completed them on a single playthrough, only because NG+ is something that doesn't interest me but I wanted to have done the challenges.)
Ultimately, Arkham Origins is good but not great. Asylum and City are great. I would give this about a 7.5/10.