Options

Rocksteady's [Suicide Squad] and WB Montreal's [Gotham Knights]

1121315171835

Posts

  • Options
    klemmingklemming Registered User regular
    Origins probably has the best story, and more consistently good boss fights. If you think of it as a massive expansion to City (like Undead Nightmare was for Red Dead Redemption) rather than one of the evolutions between Asylum, City and Knight, you'll know what to expect.

    Nobody remembers the singer. The song remains.
  • Options
    AegeriAegeri Tiny wee bacteriums Plateau of LengRegistered User regular
    Yeah, I would have preferred being able to play Origins than Knight.

    Knight was only okay. The batmobile shit ruined the game for me. There needed to be a solid 60% less Batmobile and more metroidvania feeling of the first two games. The open world cruft could also have been kicked out the window. It's a distant third in terms of the games I played and it's no coincidence since I finished it I've not touched it again since.

    The Roleplayer's Guild: My blog for roleplaying games, advice and adventuring.
  • Options
    MorninglordMorninglord I'm tired of being Batman, so today I'll be Owl.Registered User regular
    I don't think I can play two 3d action games at the same time without my hands laughing like j.j. jameson in Alex Raimi's Spiderman movies and saying "No" so I'll have to wait on this one cos Bayo is way more important for this lad.

    I'll get to this after you've all field tested it properly.

    (PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.
  • Options
    FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    klemming wrote: »
    Origins probably has the best story, and more consistently good boss fights. If you think of it as a massive expansion to City (like Undead Nightmare was for Red Dead Redemption) rather than one of the evolutions between Asylum, City and Knight, you'll know what to expect.

    Origins has the best boss fight, and also the best boss fight.

  • Options
    ED!ED! Registered User regular
    ED! wrote: »
    It is entirely possible that I know nothing about tech, but those CPU specs seem pretty damn high for 1080P/60. I dunno, maybe it is reasonable given the game is open world with unteethered co-op, but the Steam survey only says that about 10% of users across Intel and AMD have CPU's with speeds in the minimum and recommended CPU ranges.

    This is the reason it's 30 FPS on PS5s. There's some heavy CPU load stuff going on that doesn't have that much to do with graphics. Probably stuff they wanted to optimize but weren't given the time. Only two players available at launch with 4 player down the road is another flag of rushed release.

    This was what I first thought when seeing those specs. Like they can't limit frames on the PC so they'll control what they can and skew the specs higher. Like even the video cards required seem a bit high, but they are a few years old, not sure how "future proof" the cards were.

    I am VERY curious seeing what that Digital Foundry review on this is going to be. Game releases tomorrow morning for folks on XBOX so will be interesting to see more user reactions. Also curious if they're going to release this to streamers early.

    "Get the hell out of me" - [ex]girlfriend
  • Options
    DemonStaceyDemonStacey TTODewback's Daughter In love with the TaySwayRegistered User regular
    klemming wrote: »
    So how is this looking for someone who liked all the Arkham games (yes, even that one), and will almost certainly be playing solo?

    It looks narrative focused and good solo. Early reports are all solo players, I will be strictly solo as well.

    As for the Arkham games I think the best thing to do there is separate those entirely from your thoughts.

    This is a gear focused action-RPG with character builds. That alone has a huge impact on how combat will feel and not going to make a good comparison to a straight action game like those.

    If you like the idea of the RPG systems and stats and damage numbers then it should be up your alley. If not that will dampen things some.

  • Options
    KrathoonKrathoon Registered User regular
    The game does seem like it should not need major hardware to run. The rendering is not hugely fancy.
    I think they inflated the requirements.

  • Options
    DrezDrez Registered User regular
    Drez wrote: »
    Anyway, I just wanted to know if I need to (or should) finish Arkham Knight first. Does this continue that storyline? (And what is Origins?!?!?!)

    Origins was released between City and Knight, was made by (Afaik) the studio that's produced this one and was a kind of Year Two for Batman, centred around Black Mask putting a bounty on his head on Christmas Eve. It's a bit buggy but is excellent.
    klemming wrote: »
    Origins probably has the best story, and more consistently good boss fights. If you think of it as a massive expansion to City (like Undead Nightmare was for Red Dead Redemption) rather than one of the evolutions between Asylum, City and Knight, you'll know what to expect.

    Thank you both!

    Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
  • Options
    DrezDrez Registered User regular
    I kinda hope this works on Steam Deck.

    Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
  • Options
    ED!ED! Registered User regular
    For a second I thought this was Global release on all platforms of midnight on the 21st, but nooooooope. Windows can't have local time releases on STEAM, because then the world would be too fun of a place.
    Ffc08uLUYAAwg9N?format=jpg&name=large

    "Get the hell out of me" - [ex]girlfriend
  • Options
    KrathoonKrathoon Registered User regular
    edited October 2022
    Los Angeles kinda gets shafted on the release date.
    Green Man Gaming still hasn't given me my key.
    I did get a third external drive so I have plenty of room.
    I also had to re-image my c drive. So, some more space there.

    Krathoon on
  • Options
    DragkoniasDragkonias That Guy Who Does Stuff You Know, There. Registered User regular
    Oh damn I still don't have a PS5 and ain't getting one until SF6 comes out so I guess I'll have to wait a bit on this one.

  • Options
    KrathoonKrathoon Registered User regular
    edited October 2022
    I assume they will release the keys tomorrow. They are supposed to give some time to pre-load.

    Is there multiplayer?

    Edit: They are adding the real multiplayer in about a month. Yeah. This is a little undercooked. The city is supposed to be huge. There is an underground too.

    Krathoon on
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Well it has co op multiplayer out of the gate, they are adding the 4 player in a month but that sounds like an end game addition how truthful obviously is we'll see.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    KrathoonKrathoon Registered User regular
    edited October 2022
    This game really hits the spot. Should have had a demo with Batman dying.
    Also, the new Doctor Who is this weekend.

    Krathoon on
  • Options
    ProhassProhass Registered User regular
    Reviews are savaging it. Predictably because of the Avengers style loot grind

    You can just feel developers struggling making these games at the behest of publishers and financiers. Like these are talented studios that are being shackled to the idea that you have to make a gaas that gets people to grind for hundreds of hours for loot on empty meaningless content

    Gamespot quote is exactly what I was afraid of
    It's these rinse-and-repeat objectives that feel like they're made to fill time and push the loot that ultimately hamper the experience more than any other misstep. The game seems built to serve an almighty hours-played statistic that has lately felt frighteningly ubiquitous. Strong character work and a well-considered co-op experience can't save all that ails Gotham Knights, leaving this experience neither the one fans deserve, nor the one they need right now.

    Please let this kill this structure of game, or at least wound it

  • Options
    ED!ED! Registered User regular
    Reviews are about where most people thought they'd be. The complaints about the combat I'm writing off, but it's the lack of narrative content that is shocking; essentially if you've seen any of the trailers you've seen all the side boss content you're going to get.

    ACG review is really well done if you're looking for a good one.

    I will say the game looks excellent. Will still try it out, perhaps in a month or so but this is giving me real AVENGERS vibes: decent story, fun characters, a loot and skill treadmill that doesn't feel rewarding and generally lackluster cohesion of the parts such that you don't get an overall good experience.

    Honestly sounds like this needed more resources and that WB is really banking on Hogwarts.

    "Get the hell out of me" - [ex]girlfriend
  • Options
    ProhassProhass Registered User regular
    It’s just so frustrating because even if I just shrug and enjoy it, I can’t help but think about what a great game this concept could have been instead. Like with a guardians of the galaxy style team command system or something. Just anything but this gaas loot grind which inevitably bleeds into the combat and makes it feel unsatisfying to play

    Just a bummer and I hope the suicide squad game has the leeway to pivot away from this style

  • Options
    ED!ED! Registered User regular
    I actually don't mind loot-grinds in these kinds of games. It certainly needs to be paired with excellent combat (and the general consensus seems to be that it is. . .existent in this game), but the main death-kneel is if the loot doesn't really change up how you play the game. Other ARPG's are able to nail this and doesn't seem like GK has.

    . . .also not really seeing the GaaS of it all. That Gamespot review is interesting, but we know the game isn't a GaaS so it's odd that they use that as a criticism.

    "Get the hell out of me" - [ex]girlfriend
  • Options
    ProhassProhass Registered User regular
    edited October 2022
    It’s not a gaas but it’s structured as if it is one. It’s structured in a way that it has trivial repeatable and grindable content as the majority of its content, combined with a loot system that rewards you for playing longer and playing content more times, not for the kind of content you play or how you play . Like I don’t want to get into the weeds on this but for me I don’t really care that it’s not officially a gaas, it’s trying to play by the same rules as one so the shoe fits for me

    Prohass on
  • Options
    Local H JayLocal H Jay Registered User regular
    Easy W of a game concept mired by silly, grindy game design? Who would have thunk it

  • Options
    ED!ED! Registered User regular
    I mean. . .it sounds like an ARPG looter. Sure calling a game GaaS easily communicates what a person thinks of most of the gameplay, but it also has negative connotations that just aren't found here.

    As Local H says, I think this is just another case of the developers having an excellent idea, that got its legs cut out through budgeting and corporate interference. That said, I still played the hell out of AVENGERS post-campaign, so here's hoping the Endgame mode (out next month. . .sheesh) improves upon the experience, but I'm not holding my breath.

    "Get the hell out of me" - [ex]girlfriend
  • Options
    LucascraftLucascraft Registered User regular
    Bad news on these reviews, but not surprising.

    6 months ago (ish) when they started releasing the first gameplay trailers and such, people analyzed it and started sounding alarm bells even back then. It's pretty easy to spot when a game has a bloaty loot system that doesn't actually add anything of value to the game. People were saying that mobs looked like HP sponges and the game looked like it was being needlessly weighted down by a superfluous loot system even before they got their hands on it.

    And then within the last couple weeks they did hands-on media demos and the feedback was pretty much universally all the same - the game feels overly grindy, combat is a slog, and the RPG elements don't really do anything to enhance the game.

    Now that actual reviews are coming out, having experienced the full game, they validate all those early alarm bells and early takes that the game is weighed down by its own systems.

  • Options
    LucascraftLucascraft Registered User regular
    This quote from the IGN Review about character swapping is particularly troubling:
    Really, my only major complaint with swapping characters is that each character has to unlock their abilities and be geared up individually, so the longer I played as one the less feasible it was to actually switch to someone else – I’d have to stop making progress to catch up one character and unlock all their special abilities before proceeding. What good is the ability to switch characters when doing so means going back to square one and having to grind XP and gear all over again?

  • Options
    DemonStaceyDemonStacey TTODewback's Daughter In love with the TaySwayRegistered User regular
    edited October 2022
    Yea right around where I was expecting so I'm all good there. Seems a lot like if you are into the whole ARPG and loot vibe usually have a good time. If not... well yea its not gonna vibe haha.

    But I loooove gear and character progression.

    Also it does irk me a bit when people talk about that kinda stuff "getting in the way of the gameplay". Because for plenty of people that *is* a big part of the gameplay. Like I've seen people say the gear and RPG stuff is tacked on and gets in the way in the new God of War. But that stuff is legit why I ended up getting that game. I wasn't even following it until like 2 weeks before launch because I didn't know about all that stuff haha.

    But I will take an action RPG with gear, stats and character builds over a straight action game any day. That stuff is what makes the combat fun to keep coming back to for me and many others. This kinda stuff is there because people like it.

    Sometimes people who are purely combat driven don't realize that is not how everyone experiences games. It goes the other way too. Sometimes people who are into all the systems don't get when people who are primarily there for the combat on its own.

    DemonStacey on
  • Options
    Local H JayLocal H Jay Registered User regular
    Yeah idk, I love destiny and the loot system there but too many games have tried to graft that onto something that doesn't need it. The Arkham games are a proven formula to me, no need to fiddle with that by adding rpg elements like the slog that is modern Assassin's Creed games. it's just not for me, and it's a shame because I fucken love Nightwing and Robin stuff. I would have bought this already if it was just co-op Arkham but it's not that, it's a bunch of fiddly gear stuff and comparing cowls to see which one adds a +1 to my penis or whatever I'm good on

  • Options
    shoeboxjeddyshoeboxjeddy Registered User regular
    DemonStacey, I think if you gave people the option to grind 10 special crimes to unlock traversal for each character (40 special crimes total to unlock playability for all characters) [this is the actual system in the game] vs you just have traversal and then can play as many special crimes as you CHOOSE to... the vast, VAST majority would pick the latter system. You're looking at a "there are dozens of us!" number for those who truly PREFER busy work over meaningful gameplay systems.

  • Options
    ED!ED! Registered User regular
    Lucascraft wrote: »
    This quote from the IGN Review about character swapping is particularly troubling:
    Really, my only major complaint with swapping characters is that each character has to unlock their abilities and be geared up individually, so the longer I played as one the less feasible it was to actually switch to someone else – I’d have to stop making progress to catch up one character and unlock all their special abilities before proceeding. What good is the ability to switch characters when doing so means going back to square one and having to grind XP and gear all over again?

    I thought they literally said this ISN'T how character progression works in the game. Like just yesterday in the trailer covering the different Knights and how they played.

    "Get the hell out of me" - [ex]girlfriend
  • Options
    Local H JayLocal H Jay Registered User regular
    edited October 2022
    The IGN video review calls out that they ditched the counter system (whyyyy) and there's tons of undodge-able attacks which is like, the antithesis of what I want out of an Arkham game. What's left is you to spam attacks until a special meter fills for abilities. Boring.
    https://youtu.be/i2SkZDhLQw4
    These reviews are pretty damning

    Local H Jay on
  • Options
    LucascraftLucascraft Registered User regular
    ED! wrote: »
    Lucascraft wrote: »
    This quote from the IGN Review about character swapping is particularly troubling:
    Really, my only major complaint with swapping characters is that each character has to unlock their abilities and be geared up individually, so the longer I played as one the less feasible it was to actually switch to someone else – I’d have to stop making progress to catch up one character and unlock all their special abilities before proceeding. What good is the ability to switch characters when doing so means going back to square one and having to grind XP and gear all over again?

    I thought they literally said this ISN'T how character progression works in the game. Like just yesterday in the trailer covering the different Knights and how they played.

    SkillUp mentions the same thing in his video review. You have to grind repetitive street patrol missions on each and every character to unlock their kits and level them up.

  • Options
    SyphonBlueSyphonBlue The studying beaver That beaver sure loves studying!Registered User regular
    ifcec0dz2whk.png

    This UI is horrible. Did they stop developing it after hitting Alpha?

    LxX6eco.jpg
    PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
  • Options
    shoeboxjeddyshoeboxjeddy Registered User regular
    ED! wrote: »
    Lucascraft wrote: »
    This quote from the IGN Review about character swapping is particularly troubling:
    Really, my only major complaint with swapping characters is that each character has to unlock their abilities and be geared up individually, so the longer I played as one the less feasible it was to actually switch to someone else – I’d have to stop making progress to catch up one character and unlock all their special abilities before proceeding. What good is the ability to switch characters when doing so means going back to square one and having to grind XP and gear all over again?

    I thought they literally said this ISN'T how character progression works in the game. Like just yesterday in the trailer covering the different Knights and how they played.

    It seems like the "levels" carry over, but the Knighthood system grind steps must be completed for every individual character. Which isn't uncommon in games like these, Destiny often had it where each class had to run through the whole campaign to get the new class or whatever, so if you liked to play multiple classes, you had to do all the levels multiple times.

  • Options
    klemmingklemming Registered User regular
    Yeah, I've been thoroughly unsold on this. I'd be fine with grinding if the grinding was fun to do. The Arkham combat felt so good I'd go out of my way to get in fights (even if they were totally unfair because there were only twenty of them), if that's what they were using here I'd just say "Oh no. Please, please don't force me to beat up more criminals" in as flat a tone as possible.

    Nobody remembers the singer. The song remains.
  • Options
    DemonStaceyDemonStacey TTODewback's Daughter In love with the TaySwayRegistered User regular
    DemonStacey, I think if you gave people the option to grind 10 special crimes to unlock traversal for each character (40 special crimes total to unlock playability for all characters) [this is the actual system in the game] vs you just have traversal and then can play as many special crimes as you CHOOSE to... the vast, VAST majority would pick the latter system. You're looking at a "there are dozens of us!" number for those who truly PREFER busy work over meaningful gameplay systems.

    I mean there's a couple things here. 1 is games of all types that appeal to different people come out. Its ok for some to do the things you don't want.

    And then for the "dozens of us!" Thing... some of the most played games are legit all about that "busy work" on a scale far outside what even i would like. So it would seem those things are actually like... really popular?

  • Options
    LucascraftLucascraft Registered User regular
    This is just my own opinion...

    I do not have a problem, personally, with gear driven games or games that add a skill/talent tree on top. I think those things can be done very well and can add an appreciable level of extra depth. The existence of such things is largely neutral. It can help or hinder a game, based on implementation.

    Using Assassin's Creed Valhalla as an example, it has things I really do like, and things I don't care for. So it's a mix. The things I do like include getting to spec into a build the way I want. I can go more stealth, or more melee combat, or more towards bows and ranged combat. I like that. I also like that there are different sets, with different set bonuses, and you can pick the gear that suits your playstyle, so you have options. Those things are all really good, and in that regard, I appreciate the extra depth and complexity that the system adds.

    But on the flip side, because it's an RPG and they scale enemies based on power level, things that should be insta-kills are not always the case. Stealth assassinations, in my opinion, should always be an insta-kill no matter what. Or even more-so with aerial stealth assassinations. But because enemies scale based on level, sometimes when you shove your hidden blade into the back of their head, they don't die because their level is too far above yours, which is just silly.

    Bringing this back to Gotham Knights, I have seen clips in various video reviews where a player is doing an aerial dive attack from really high up in the air, and they bat-kick a goon in the head. And the goon takes like 30% damage. That's just ridiculous. If you've got the speed and velocity and stealth element, dropping in from a glide to kick them in the side of the head, that should be an instant KO no matter what. But it's not. And that kind of stuff bugs me.

    It's all about implementation. Some stuff is good. Other stuff not so much.

    I like Assassin's Creed Valhalla and I don't mind a large portion of the gear, RPG elements, and progression system of that game, but there are things that also really bug me about it... and I know I will feel similarly about Gotham Knights.

  • Options
    DemonStaceyDemonStacey TTODewback's Daughter In love with the TaySwayRegistered User regular
    edited October 2022
    See the interesting thing there is Valhalla is a great example of progression i do not personally like. It lacks limitations and actual builds. You get skill points way too easily and get just get them all. Its just a bunch of tiny little upgrades that individually don't feel like much and you end up with all the skills for your playstyle way too early and then nothing matters any more.

    At the very least it looks like(I hope this is true) you actually have to make a build for this and you don't just get everything. So it should feel like I'm improving my build the whole way through the game. Also it looks like there's much fewer skills so each one matters a bit more. We'll see soon how that pans out!

    DemonStacey on
  • Options
    rahkeesh2000rahkeesh2000 Registered User regular
    Lucascraft wrote: »
    Bringing this back to Gotham Knights, I have seen clips in various video reviews where a player is doing an aerial dive attack from really high up in the air, and they bat-kick a goon in the head. And the goon takes like 30% damage. That's just ridiculous. If you've got the speed and velocity and stealth element, dropping in from a glide to kick them in the side of the head, that should be an instant KO no matter what. But it's not. And that kind of stuff bugs me.

    To be fair... that's how it worked in Arkham too. You needed some special upgrades for glide KOs.

  • Options
    ED!ED! Registered User regular
    The IGN video review calls out that they ditched the counter system (whyyyy) and there's tons of undodge-able attacks which is like, the antithesis of what I want out of an Arkham game. What's left is you to spam attacks until a special meter fills for abilities. Boring.
    https://youtu.be/i2SkZDhLQw4
    These reviews are pretty damning

    See, and I'm not saying your take isn't valid, but this is the criticism I was hoping to avoid: knocking the game for what it was never trying to be (and honestly I'm glad this doesn't have the Arkham system, because - while a lot of people enjoy that system - it does limit your design space, especially when your most powerful moves are tied to keeping chains going). Like, isn't the Counter system in Arkham exactly the "spam attacks until a special meter fill for abilities" except you aren't spamming attacks (well you are) but also counters? And no, I know you aren't spamming attacks or counters in the Arkham series, because you'd drop your combos, but I can't imagine you can just spam light-attack on enemies and hope to be effective in combat in Gotham Knights either.
    SyphonBlue wrote: »
    ifcec0dz2whk.png

    This UI is horrible. Did they stop developing it after hitting Alpha?

    100%. One of my snarky comments I've thought was the UI is like they just hit a budget wall in development and said "Fuck it, it works. . ." and had to move on. This is for sure going to be one of those games where a "What happened. . ." video or story is going to be produced despite us knowing exactly "What went wrong. . .": passionate devs had an idea for a great game, WB executives were excited and greenlit the thing, and then midway through development cut the funding knees out from under the development team without pulling back on scope.

    . . .or not, I've never worked in game development and all the above is "gut feeling."

    "Get the hell out of me" - [ex]girlfriend
  • Options
    Local H JayLocal H Jay Registered User regular
    I mean they provide gameplay footage of them spamming attacks, at this point it's just like, what's the point of this game if it's not courting the Arkham crowd

  • Options
    DemonStaceyDemonStacey TTODewback's Daughter In love with the TaySwayRegistered User regular
    I mean they provide gameplay footage of them spamming attacks, at this point it's just like, what's the point of this game if it's not courting the Arkham crowd

    The point is to make an action RPG for fans of action RPG in the setting of Gotham.

    Someone not interested in an action RPG was never the target market of the game. Which certainly includes plenty of Arkham fans and likely a large reason this *wasnt* an Arkham game.

Sign In or Register to comment.