I never completed Arkham Knight and only played the first two games which I really liked. But for some reason I can’t get into Arkham Knight. I find myself overwhelmed by the controls that seem to do something different all the time.
Granted, I am much dumber now than five or so years ago when I played the first two. But as far as I recall they were relatively straight forward. But as soon as I reached the first tank segment in the beginning of AK I remembered when I gave up originally.
But this time I decided to soldier through. Until I got to a segment where I had to complete five or six boring ass tutorials which all showed me different unrelated things of which I needed exactly one to progress and which all could have been integrated into the normal gameplay. Three I already forgot and with one I didn’t even know what I was supposed to be doing but somehow I completed it.
Is it worth it to go on playing? Do I have to know everything it’s trying to teach me? I remember that it was pretty much needed to learn everything in Doom Eternal (as opposed to 2016). But at least all the controls were pretty consistent there.
Anyways. Should I keep playing? Or is Arkham Origins better? Maybe I should just replay Asylum and City instead.
Edit: I kept playing and it did get better. Still annoyed by the same things as before but it’s still an Arkham game. Thanks all!
You must log in or register to comment.
I liked it as much as the others ASIDE from the tank missions. they leaned on the tank WAY too much. There are two or three tank battles where you will be pulling your hair out for sure. Definitely focus on upgrading the tank as much as you can because you will need all the help you can get.
I’ve only beaten it once for some reason I can never beat the Cloudburst tank again
It is clunky and I am also old, slow, and uncoordinated. I did manage to finish it, and I ended up liking it overall. I didn’t care for the Batmobile stuff, and I was never good at it. But once I got “good enough” at the Batmobile sections and could solve the puzzles, etc, I have to admit I found it satisfying in the same way you feel after getting your taxes or colonoscopy over with.
If you decide to walk away from it, you aren’t missing anything super fantastic. I love the series, but there’s no requirement to complete all of the games. Life is short, there are lots of other things to do. No need to beat your head against the wall on it.
You might like the Spider-Man games better. The combo moves, power ups, suit choices, etc, are more customizable there and I think it ‘flows’ better. Zipping around a realistic map of NYC is really damned cool, too. (Though I did find myself missing the moody atmosphere and je ne sais quoi of Gotham and Bats). There is are the occasional nasty / annoying boss fights in Spider-Man (one of them early on) but once you face roll past them, the rest of the game is hella fun.
Yeah, the Spider-Man games are a good comparison. A ton of different moves you can do but most of them are pretty easy and intuitive to pull of. I’m patiently waiting for Spider-Man 2 to arrive on PC.
I think I’ll invest a few more hours into Arkham Knight and if I can’t get into it I’ll try Origins. And if that one doesn’t do it for me either I’ll just play Asylum again.
Thanks all for your input!
Tacking on my unsolicited two cents - I gave Origins a very, very fair go (added an easy 30 hours to my playtime and even completed some challenge paths for my sense of accomplishment), and while it does try to emulate the success of its prequels, ultimately it falls short of its predecessor.
Arkham City is a perfect balance of all the elements introduced during the series; it doesn’t feel incomplete (although Asylum works great as an entry point) yet it’s not an overbloated mess like Knight. Its story also feels more emotionally involved and the plethora of characters is incorporated well.
Totally agree with this! Same thoughts about Spider-Man too.
It has its issues for sure, but the gameplay certainly isn’t one of them (barring the tank sections). I recently played all four games back to back and Knight has by far the most responsive and fluid combat in the series.
Imo the problems are the tank sections, and the story. Overall the story isn’t terrible or anything, but…
Tap for spoiler
The Jason Todd twist was so obvious and had zero build up in any of the prior games. They really should’ve just stuck with Scarecrow and hallucination Joker.
Yeah, the whole twist that >!he was being kept in an abandoned part of Arkham ever since the first game is kinda dumb.!<
But even just the fact that we’ve never once heard of him until this entry, and suddenly we’re getting loads of backstory, makes the “reveal” comically obvious.
First time I played it I hated it. That was just after finishing the previous one. I came back to it like 6mos later and it was fantastic. Just needed a break I guess. The controls do suck a bit at first and it takes some getting used to.
Origins is better, in my opinion. It’s the black sheep but it’s my favourite in the series.
Arkham Knight is my least favourite but I still like it. If you really hate the tank sections, though, you might not like it no matter how long you play. That’s a pretty big part of the game, and it’s not great.
The story is also dumb.
major story spoilers
It would have been way better if Barbara was the arkham knight, having faked her death and the suit could have had mechanical legs to help her walk and her voice digitally altered to sound like a man. Instead we got another Jason Todd as the Red Hood with a different name.
ETA: I’m curious whether the downvotes are because I think Origins is better or because you don’t like my idea for how the story could have been improved.
I survived it for a few hours but ultimately succumbed to your issue exactly but with the added annoyance of having to get in and out of the car repeatedly. Not my game either…
