Jeccius View Profile View Posts. Personally Asylum, then City, then Origins. Asylum is a great great game in it's own right and by the time you finish that and thenmove on to City you'll appreciate the updated engine and story alot more. Plus there are a few nice touches and references to what happened in the Asylum which continue on in Cty Joker and Bane to name but two.
Ciy repeatedly references events in Asylum, but I do not think it will have a significant negative impact on your experience if you play Asylum first.
For someone at square one with a choice of which to play first, I'd say Asylum, no question, followed by City. Origin comes last - they will factor in the fact that it was released after the other two, it's not like they'll design it so your experience will be spoiled if you play the other two games first as they will expect.
Per page: 15 30 Date Posted: 17 Oct, pm. Posts: Discussions Rules and Guidelines. Note: This is ONLY to be used to report spam, advertising, and problematic harassment, fighting, or rude posts. Well I want play Arkham City but I haven't played the first, Is it required or u need play it to understand something or has a complicate continuity?? Also, after playing Arkham Asylum. You need to know what happens between the two games. The graphic novel "Batman: Arkham City" covers what happens between the two games.
If you don't wanna buy it, I read an article here on comicvine called something along the lines "What you need to know before playing Arkham City. No you don't need to. I would but it's not necissary. Echoing the other sentiments here, you probably can play it, but why would you go out of your way to play the weakest entry in the series first is a bit strange. Because the graphics are better on Xbox One as opposed to Xbox ?
Arkham Knight is just bloated and uninteresting, the complete opposite of Asylum. All the military porn in that game makes it feel like Tom Clancy's Batman, except it constantly tells you that you are blowing up unmanned drones because Batman doesn't kill people. Arkham Knight starts you out with all the tools and combos of the previous game you know how people complain that you always lose your abilities in Metroidvanias, Knight doesn't do that , but the downside of that is that it is a hell of a lot to take in at the start of the game when there is not much of a tutorial and everything is unlocked.
And also the new abilities are lame, they very clearly ran out of ideas so it's just "better armor so you can take more hits". You could but I found Knight to be the most bland and bloated of the three. I bounced off that game like a basketball. They had one big new idea and it was the Batmobile. People didn't really like it, but it's a huge part of the game, factors in to a lot of the puzzle areas, and definitely changes how much of the game plays.
It also really changes the traversal mechanics and makes it much easier to get around in or out of the Batmobile than the prior games. That makes it much more of an open world game than any previous ones in the series.
I also think it's weird to say that the game has "military porn" when the people with the military weapons are the bad guys! And they're defeated by one lone Batman. I will say that the game is clearly copaganda, and basically presents the police as selfless heroes defending Gotham against these invaders, overmatched as they may be.
I understand the Origins hate much more than the Knight hate. Origins was a buggy mess, especially at launch, so even though I think it's a decent game a lot of people had bad experiences with it. Knight is a super polished game, it's just kind of a different game than Asylum and even City, since it's much more about the open world and the activities in it. I think people just didn't like the Batmobile stuff and didn't like the balance between open world stuff and the more linear individual levels.
Also the plot is kind of bad but it's not like Arkham City had a great story either. It ran like absolute trash for me until the patches. Personally the batmobile made strong positive reaction at first, but then it just outstayed it's welcome.
It felt like they came up with a great mechanic, but then proceeded to cram it anywhere they could. I was already kinda laughing early on when you had to drive across roofs to go do a puzzle with your tank. Of course, your mileage may vary and I won't get into spoilers here, but I think a lot of characters were poorly written in the game, including the protagonist. The tank sections didn't help, either. Mostly, it was symptomatic of the main issue, that was that everything was more without necessarily being better.
It felt like they tried to use it everywhere and no idea was off the table. If there was a Batman mechanic, there was also a motorized version. There were car races, car puzzles, car combat, car stealth, car bosses and car platforming Getting around and the layout of the city itself felt a lot more interesting. You could, i personally have to play a game series through from the beginning, but if you're not going to do that just look up their plots on wiki, just to get an idea on who Batman has faced up to this point etc There no massive specific plot points you need to know about going in.
Based entirely within the walls of Arkham Asylum, after most prisoners have escaped their cells and taken over, the game was and still is an ideal antidote to all the brightly-coloured superhero adventures that came before. It switches the action from the confined location of the Asylum to the streets of Arkham City — a section of Gotham City fenced in and designated a superprison.
I think you should play it in order. Not really because of the story, because they are both selfcontain but because of the evolution of gameplay from asylum to AC combat, takedowns,gagets,gliding. And the stories are related. Personally Asylum, then City, then Origins. Can I play Batman Arkham City without playing asylum? Do you need to play Arkham Asylum before Knight?
0コメント