What does it mean to be the one to take on the burdens of an entire city? When a madman sends a message of fear and violence, what does it mean to stand against a force like that? Do you look fear in the face defiantly and laugh or rather take in what's going on around you and realize that you alone may not be the sole answer? To don a costume in a never ending war against crime means to put your entire being into something that you may not defeat. That is true of the final chapter in the Arkham series. Batman has incredible odds against him in this harrowing game that chronicles the revenge of both Scarecrow and the Arkham Knight. Would I say that this was the best the Arkham series had to offer? I have to say yes and no. Arkham Knight is a fantastic game that just simply could have been better in some areas.
Scarecrow has threatened Gotham City to an extreme level. He has a perfected fear toxin that is reportedly more potent than previous iterations. It is with his first demonstration that he gives citizens a chance to flee and the criminals a chance to take over. Two-Face, Penguin, Harley Quinn, Riddler, and Firefly have allied with Scarecrow in an attempt to put an end to Batman. A new face who has joined in on Scarecrow's crusade is known as the Arkham Knight. Little is known about the character, but his hatred for Batman is quite obvious. He brings with him a militia to take over the city and to ensure Scarecrow's plans succeed.
Booting up Arkham Knight shows the first impressive detail of the game: the graphics. Constant rainfall that is illuminated by great lighting and set by the amazing architecture of Gotham leaves a lot to be impressed by. Arkham Knight has many different locales to see and venture to. There are run down buildings, on-going construction projects, amazing statues, tall buildings, and many other notable environments that truly show how well done Gotham was made. The destructible objects and environments look fantastic, too. The characters look equally great. Both heroes and villains have visible cuts, bruises, sweat, torn clothes, and noticeable physical effects from combat.
In my entire playthrough of the game, I did not experience any graphical problems. Screen tearing? Absent. Bug and glitches? None whatsoever. Game freezes? Zilch. Blurry, loading textures? Nonexistent. Now just because I didn't experience anything off with the graphics doesn't mean no one else has and at the same time I have seen footage of Arkham Knight's PC port which was just terrible. As it stands, the console version of Arkham Knight is a graphical achievement.
While the sights are a wonder to behold, the sounds are good as well. Voice acting is (once again) solid on everyone's part. The soundtrack can be intense and dramatic. The greater landscape of the city has a vast array of sounds. Rioting, gunfire, police sirens, broadcasts from Scarecrow, the ongoing thunderstorm, Batman's gadgets, the Batmobile, among other things just solidify how much work was put in to make Arkham Knight the best of the series.
Now having mentioned the Batmobile, we come to that part of my review where we will be looking at the parts of the game that could have better. While I praise and give high marks to both the graphics and sound of Arkham Knight, it's ultimately the gameplay and the story that have me feeling that this was not the high note that a series like this should have ended on. There was a plethora of interesting ideas for this final installment. It's just that some of those ideas needed to be ironed out a bit before it was decided that this game was ready for release.
The series staple of freeflow combat has seen some additions. Batman feels faster and hits harder than ever before. He utilizes a new suit that increases his reflexes to the point where he can take down a group of gun wielding thugs without getting hit by a single bullet. This "Fear Takedown" requires that you get to a certain vantage point where a few enemies (preferably ones armed with guns or other troublesome weapons) become highlighted. You then strike at one which then causes the others to panic at the sudden attack. You select your next target, take him down, and repeat the process given how much you upgraded the ability. This is a great additional tactic that helps eliminate the more dangerous of any particular group of enemies. It's also humorous when they yell and trip over themselves at the quickness of Batman's attacks.
Just because Batman is more lethal doesn't mean that the regular punks and specialized professionals haven't picked up new tricks. One new tactic that unarmed assailants have is a sprinting tackle that cannot be directly countered. This run allows a simple thug to quickly and suddenly knock down Batman. Their restraining tactics don't end there. Some thugs will attempt to get a hold of Batman preventing him from moving around. Finally, a universal move that is seen in all enemies is assisting their own comrades. Whether that's in the form of healing, helping each other off the ground, or giving a unique power boost, these support tactics are something new to the series and a welcome challenge.
Enemies are also using different combinations of weapons and bolstering physical power to take on the Dark Knight. There are tall criminals that have heavy punches and cannot be directly attacked because of their lumbering physicality. Similar body typed specialists can wield huge shields, electrified gauntlets, and intimidating blades. Grunts that do possess firearms can have reflective clothing that prevents being sensed in Detective Mode. Some may even set up gun turrets or control drones. The number of offensive and defensive capabilities is amazing.
It's a good thing that you will sometimes have help. Batman is joined by Robin, Nightwing, and Catwoman at certain points in the game. When fighting along side these characters, you can switch control from Batman to the other character via a double team takedown. Take advantage of these when they are available. You can use it on those big enemies I mentioned earlier. You then take control of your partner. This won't cancel out a combo you had as Batman, but instead keep it going. By using both Batman and his partner's tricks and equipment you can stand to get a great combo that results in a lot of points worth of experience gained.
As usual, experience gained leads to upgrade points. Have a gadget that could use a little kick? Want to add some more physical resistance or bullet resistance to Batman? Spend an upgrade point and you'll be all set. Each category is a grid system. For every ability you unlock other abilities will become available. For every new gadget you obtain previously upgraded abilities can be upgraded further and possibly be given a new twist in its execution.
New gadgets include a Disruptor Gun, a Voice Synthesizer, and a Batmobile Remote. The Disruptor Gun gives Batman the ability to neutralize usage of firearms, booby trap weapons crates, and track vehicles. The Voice Synthesizer allows you to open voice activated doors after copying a certain character's voice and trick enemies into believing that their boss is giving them orders when you may be leading them into a potential trap. The Batmobile Remote is a quick way to summon the Batmobile to your location, but also gives you direct control of it while you are out of it.
The Batmobile is both a gift and a curse. There is a learning curve in regards to the Batmobile's movement, but the more you use it the better you'll get. The riot suppression and offensive weapons are fun as well. That being said, I feel that there was a bit of an over-reliance on the Batmobile. I know fans have been wanting it since Arkham City, but there are times (especially when you're trying to 100% the game like I did) where it feels that it's just too much. You can fight tanks until your knuckles bleed and solve the more complex Riddler puzzles that require the Batmobile, but it gets to be kind of overwhelming. Don't get me wrong, I loved having the Batmobile in the game, but there are many times where it felt like there was an over usage of it.
Something that Arkham Knight sorely needed was better boss battles. There really wasn't that great of a selection of villains this time around that could have acted as a boss battles, but there still could have been potential with other characters. In comparison to Arkham City's fights with Clayface, Mr. Freeze, Solomon Grundy, Ra's al Ghul, and even Joker, Arkham Knight just didn't deliver. I can say that I beat Arkham Knight without actually fighting the Arkham Knight. The titular antagonist goes throughout the whole game without a proper one on one boss battle. Sure you fight him while he's in a unique vehicle and in a stealth section, but that's as far you get. For all of the build up and his personal bolstering of his abilities, there isn't a single moment where that gets to be put to the test. Hands down Arkham City had the better boss battles of the series.
WARNING: MINOR SPOILER BELOW
Another disappointing encounter in Arkham Knight was the unexpected yet welcome appearance of Deathstroke. Remember how cool his boss fight was in Arkham Origins? Do you get to have a rematch? Maybe he has some new tricks up his sleeve? Nope. All you get is a repeat tank battle that you previously had with Arkham Knight. The only difference is that Deathstroke's tank has 360 degree vision and can attack you if you try to sneak up from behind. Destroying his tank results in Batman immediately knocking Slade out and that's it. What a disappointment. You should have seen my face when that happened. I guarantee you would have had a good laugh.
SPOILER ENDS HERE
The story had it's gripping, intense, and kick ass moments; however, there were a few things that I just didn't like. I won't put any spoilers here, but just know that the core story leading up to the finale (in my opinion) could have been better. I will say, though, that Arkham Knight's identity becomes fairly obvious to us Batman fans given his attitude toward the Dark Knight. If you're a Batman fan and you're reading this, let me ask you: it was very apparent who Arkham Knight was, right?
There was also some parallels with Arkham Origins that resonated here. The one obvious tidbit of information that everyone knew about Arkham Knight was that Batman's villains were teaming up. Do they appear in the primary storyline? Not necessarily. Much like in the information provided for Arkham Origins' assassins going after Batman, a good portion of the rogues gallery (like the assassins) are left as side missions and are nonessential to complete the main campaign. That is unless you want to complete the entirety of the game to get the best ending in which case you do get to face everyone, but their encounters are lacking.
WARNING: ONE TEENY, TINY SPOILER AHEAD
The other parallel with Arkham Origins is a focus on Joker in this game. His sudden yet unique appearance is (much like Deathstroke) welcome, but is (much like the Batmobile) too much. They managed to squeeze in Joker as a hidden "big bad" due to his influence on Batman's mind that is accelerated by Scarecrow's fear toxin by the end game. You don't fight Scarecrow or Arkham Knight. You fight Joker again. While the sequence is cool, it's not a proper end fight. Come on, guys. Batman has other formidable and dangerous villains out there. You can give them the spotlight once in awhile. Also looking at Origins with its treatment of Black Mask.
SPOILER HAS ENDED
I won't say that Arkham Knight is a regrettable investment. I actually enjoyed the game quite a lot. It's just that there are some parts that I question the direction on. I believe that if Rocksteady focused more on potential boss fights and polishing up the story instead of PS4 exclusive content and story pack DLC that then Arkham Knight would have been an astounding finale.
Clearly, Rocksteady has plans for the future with the Batman family and possibly the greater DC universe. I would hope that they learn from the praises and criticisms from both reviewers and gamers about Arkham Knight. Was this the best Arkham game? No. Does Rocksteady's fandom and appreciation for Batman shine through as always? Yes. I am very curious to see what they have planned next. I encourage everyone to give Arkham Knight a chance, but limit your expectations on the story and some parts of the gameplay.
Discover the best Batman Arkham games ranked from Asylum to Knight, including Origins, VR and more, with a focus on combat, story, and world design.
Games such as Mad Max, Red Dead Redemption 2, and Batman: Arkham Knight desperately deserve a modern-day revisit.
RDR2 still looks astounding on PS4 Pro. i cannot imagine how it could look with a next gen upgrade.
Probably not very different.
No idea why this article is highlighting recent beautiful graphically-advanced games and saying they need current gen makeovers. They already look better than most new releases; just compare Arkham Knight and Suicide Squad!
It's obviously never gonna happen since Sony killed the game and studio, but Driveclub. Even in its current state, 10 years after release, it still puts many competitors to shame ...
It's a shame they cancelled the game. Definitely the best racing game I've ever played on Playstation. Just got GT7, but it feels so slow and less arcade-y, which is to be expected of a sim racer of course, that I just enjoy it less.
Driveclub also graphically looked insanely good for its time. I wonder what a Driveclub 2 would look like for the PS5.
Mad max ikr! Far cry primal, it amuses me how ubisoft just left ac unity hanging, sadly most of the good staff left from rocksteady while being forced to make that abomination smh
One way or another, these games provoked strong reactions.
I don't think Days Gone divided fans. For the most part, gamers loved it. It was the reviewers who were divided. Self-loathing racist pieces of shit that took exception to the main character being white. This was a fantastic game, one of the best open-world games I ever played, and I've played them all.
Second you on this.. I had absolute blast playing this game!! Memorable!
TLOU 2 I thought was utter s***.. I still haven’t finished it and stopped about halfway (apparently).
It wasn’t fans divided around The Order, it was a period where xbox fanboys were thinking Rise was a more engaging game so they were spreading a lot of hate..
Today they are hibernating with nothing to play
The Order was short, no denying, but a great game with huge potential
I enjoyed days gone and last of us 2. PeoPke trippin.
I always thought the order was kinda whack seeming so I never tried it. Id like to now though.
No thr order was a short, clunky mediocre yet visually stunning game. I thoughts so and pretty much every other reviewer did too.
The Order, where length was a criterion for rating a game, but only this particular game and no others.
While I enjoy what is there in Days Gone, I mourn what was lost. The first trailers for Days Gone showed a morality system that looked interesting. For example, in the beginning when you are chasing down Leon and after you caught him, you could choose to shoot him or leave him for the freaks. You can see hints of it in other places, like if you catch a bandit unaware sometimes they will disarm and it seems like Deacon had the option to shoot them or let them go (he automatically lets them go).
Whatever...those systems unless revolutionary don't add much...they rarely do in games that do have them.
For the most part, when it comes to Last of Us 2, incels, homophobes, and closet national socialist types didn't like it. I repeat not all, but most.
Days Gone is a great game and it was attacked by the leftist socialist people that are actually closet fascists. As a great poet once said: "Socialism is the mother of fascism."
The Order got hit from anti-Sony Xbox fans.
Out of these 3, Last of Us 2 stands above as being a work of art. It's still generating a ton conversation to this day.
-"Last of Us 2, incels, homophobes, and closet national socialist types didn't like it. I repeat not all, but most."
It's so weird & cringe to see other gamers paint this broad brush of *who* didn't like Part II. Why take the "most who disagree with me are Hitler" type of mentality over game tastes?
-"The Order got hit from anti-Sony Xbox fans."
No other community I've dabbled in - be it social media or gaming forums - has built up such a dedicated defense for The Order like N4G. This attitude fundamentally blows my mind, especially in the face of similar older titles (hello Uncharted 1) that already did a marginally better job at storytelling and gameplay. It almost feels like some N4G group chat made this reflexive defense as a meme and a bunch of posters are still playing along with it. No offense to genuine Order fans, but I simply can't shake that feeling.
Well to be fair, I remember being only one of a few people on this site that actually praised The Order when it for came out and got alot of flack for it. Over time it seems opinions have changed about it.
saying something is "cringe" doesn't prove me wrong. You just throw words out and hope they stick. Bring some evidence to prove me otherwise.
I got:
Letizi, R., & Norman, C. (2023). “You Took That From Me”: Conspiracism and Online Harassment in the Alt-Fandom of The Last of Us Part II. Games and Culture, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/155...
You're up. Maybe you can change my mind.
Because NG4 defended it doesn't mean NG4 is the gospel of gaming.
Yeah Yui, it was "the game to hate" at the time. What was bizarre was the, as usual, journalists that were lying about the game and their stories were approved.
It was all clickhate all the time for the Order. I defended it too.
@Yui
-"I remember being only one of a few people on this site that actually praised The Order when it for came out and got alot of flack for it."
That could've been the case right at release, but you should see more recent opinion articles on here. There's a pretty substantial cadre who defend it on here as being "unfairly tarnished" that I simply don't see elsewhere.
Most of the backlash against The Last Of Us 2 was people upset that Joel was killed off, simple as that.
There is that too, but the other groups pilled on too, which increased the numbers. I really don't see why we have to ignore everything but Joel being killed.
I didn't like Part 2 and I'm not any of. The game sold like crazy, it's just hard for people to understand that most found the story to be arse.
Prove what I say is wrong. I will need evidence. I didn't not say all. Your exception rule doesn't work. Find evidence that counters mine. So, we can have a real discussion.
There are plenty of legitimate criticism in hours long analysis videos and reddit posts actually critiquing Part 2. The people you're talking about are such a minority, and they attack just about everything because they see the "wokeness" in the most subliminal ways. They're insignificant because the game still sold pretty well, and reviewed well regardless. Keep in mind the game released world wide, and western politics and views can't be applied to every corner of the world. I can agree that Days Gone was attacked, and unlike Part 2, due to these sites being so heavily political biased it did do some damage.
I am at least showing the group was large enough of a concern for a journal to publish an article.
Where's your evidence?
The last of us part 2 was bad story wise. Not some nonsense that you speak of...most of the negative people were random...lots of the critical reception from anything other than mainstream journalism thought that the game had huge problems.
Angry Joe and skill up being prime examples of that...unless of course like most socialists out there you wanna just lable people.
@anast
Oh geez...Twitter is full of trolls...common sense.
The YouTube critics I mentioned are innocent till proven guilty. And proven with facts not opinions. I gave you evidence of 2 prominent youtubers and yet you ask for more...either you can't read or you aren't looking for evidence.
As far as groups being "large" for journos to get their panties all tied up...well then again you must be extremely gullible. As if we haven't seen thousands of articles claiming players are offended, angry or backlashing based solely on 1 or 2 posts. They love grabbing very specific individuals and using them to represent a much larger base....whatever is convenient to them making the case that gamers bad and journos good.
-"saying something is "cringe" doesn't prove me wrong. You just throw words out and hope they stick. Bring some evidence to prove me otherwise."
It doesn't "prove" it, but I have a solid success rate with the term - which seems to be the case here too. With regards to your article, I should break this down into parts:
1.) For starters, bleating for countering "evidence" after brandishing a media analysis paper (or papers) shouldn't be treated as some kind of trump card. That's not to say these researchers did nothing, mind you. Only that expecting counter-ideologies within this field who'll make this specific kind of work for TLOU Pt. II is absurdly demanding on its face. Nevermind the probability of non-progressive types getting the administrative approval being next to nil, but that's another can of worms.
2.) While I have critiques about x or y (some anecdotes being more flimsy than others, GG speculation, etc.), let's say for this argument that it's a solid piece overall. Having read the whole thing, there is literally *NOTHING* that validates the broad brush with which you painted TLOU2 critics in your first comment (speaking as someone who thinks it's a good game). The discussion about alt-fans, anti-fans, etc. does paint an ugly picture about the TLOU subreddit, Twitter users, certain YouTubers, and more; however, there's no positive declaration about TLOU2's critics ending at these particular clusters either. Even if you say "most, not all" in your first comment, that still seems overly broad compared to the text I read. (EDIT: That's not to disregard the nastiness or modest size in its own right.)
It's also worth noting how much of that paper's material is inspecting a pre-/at-release sort of backlash. But the game's been out for several years now. More and more people who AREN'T incels, homophobes, closet Nazis have played it past 2020 and you don't really see this new broad consensus about its accomplishments; in fact, you see more of a continued split over whether or not it deserves such monumental praise. Here's just a few other sub-communities near its release that don't fit your description:
- https://www.youtube.com/wat...
- https://www.youtube.com/wat...
- https://www.youtube.com/wat...
-"Because NG4 defended it doesn't mean NG4 is the gospel of gaming."
Correct, but you're just solidifying my point. Even PS fans elsewhere (social media or gaming forums) don't go to bat for The Order with the enthusiasm and consistency they do here in my experience. That's what makes your assessment of "anti-Sony Xbox fans" so fascinating to me.
1) Speculation and emotion
2) Speculation and emotion
2a) Might be an argument if you gave me something other than your own opinion and emotions over the subject, but it's left as an anecdote without any real research. By the way, we can't negate the at release behavior, because it fits your narrative. It existed and those groups were involved.
The article is not a trump card and the fact that you seem to think so is more troubling on your end than mine. The article was to see if you could find other people that researched this phenomenon and we can have a conversation, but you still refuse to do this. Instead you wrote a sermon, which is a shame because maybe you had something with point "2a: It's also worth..." But this point still tries to side step actual events.
The final point doesn't solidify anything unless you are trying to solidify your own opinion. Albeit, it is passive aggressive, which is strange.
-"Speculation and emotion"
I mean... okay? Where am I wrong on 2.) though? Asking for a conflicting media studies research paper on this specific topic is already a random ask, given the environment with which these are made.
-"Might be an argument if you gave me something other than your own opinion and emotions over the subject, but it's left as an anecdote without any real research."
Wait. Just so we're clear: a research paper that focuses most of its attention towards a subreddit and social media comments to Neil Druckmann means you get to sustain your overly broad claims while contrary social media sources that don't exhibit the same kind of "alt-fan/anti-fan" rhetoric can't be counted? Now I feel even more confident in my initial assessment b/c all you're after is just whatever can be found with some accreditation behind it - regardless of quality.
-"By the way, we can't negate the at release behavior, because it fits your narrative. It existed and those groups were involved."
That's the thing: I never said they wasn't a sizable contingent of that either. From the start, my response was just how wild it was to paint *MOST* detractors with such a broad brush. I still don't think I'm off-base in saying it's cringe to just say "most people who shit on x game are closet Nazis or bigots of some sort," especially when your research doesn't really validate that.
-"The article is not a trump card and the fact that you seem to think so is more troubling on your end than mine."
Bro, you literally responded with "Bring some evidence to prove me otherwise.... You're up. Maybe you can change my mind." I don't really see how I'm speaking out of turn there given this and your original comment.
-"The article was to see if you could find other people that researched this phenomenon and we can have a conversation, but you still refuse to do this."
If no other people *HAVE* researched this phenomenon, then I don't see how the next best option is highly-popular sources which counter your original claim. Given that all you're promoting is a media studies paper hyper-focusing on a specific cluster of media, why wouldn't other forms of media work as some kind of substitute? That's not side-stepping events in the slightest.
-"The final point doesn't solidify anything unless you are trying to solidify your own opinion. Albeit, it is passive aggressive, which is strange."
I don't know what that first sentence means, honestly.
Look, I'll just put it like this: try to have a frank conversation about The Order on some other non-N4G gaming forum. There isn't going to be this clean split between 'Sony fans' and 'Xbox fans' that love it or hate it. Ask Sony fans how they'd feel about paying full-price for it and you're not going to get the ardent defenses compared to some of its most popular comment sections here.
Still no evidence. I ask for you to bring contrary evidence, so maybe I might change my mind, all research can be falsifiable. This is what you are missing. We are thinking in two different universes.
You are writing sermons, which is a waste of everyone's time including yours. Bring some research and we will discuss it. As of now you have only brought superstitions.
-"I ask for you to bring contrary evidence, so maybe I might change my mind, all research can be falsifiable."
But I literally read YOUR evidence and it doesn't support the broader claims you made at the start. I'm not sure where else to go with that.
-"Bring some research and we will discuss it. As of now you have only brought superstitions."
Bro, leveraging this kind of language is so wild in the face of what you've provided. It's like unless those different communities I linked where fused together in a random media studies paper, you'd magically consider it valid. I don't understand how you're leveraging that, especially when it doesn't fortify your initial claim. You're basically retorting to me writing too much, regardless of the content itself. Just the oddest conversation with you thus far and I don't quite get it.
Amazing gameplay, but TLOU2 had one of the worst, most convoluted and uneccessary plots I ever seen in a sequel. Terrible story and the characters were forgettable. I didn't give an F about anyone in the story.
I don't think any of these divided fans, other than LoU2. The rest were either victims of biased reviews or just generally agreed that they weren't as good as they could've been or just overall disappointing.
This is probably the most honest review I've read for the game, perfectly encapsulate everything it does well, and does not. It's definitely not a bad game but considering this was supposed to be their last, I was really expecting more, even the side-missions were a bit lackluster, and in some cases rather anti-climactic like with Hush which was wonderfully set-up in Arkham City.