ITT:

ITT:
>It wasn't that bad.

Attached: packshot-22eb8b01cfb852c8bfd6bf446ec70706.jpg (500x713, 86K)

first playthrough is absolutely amazing. No replayability for me though sadly.

It was playable. That's about it.

>pimp the fuck out of Bane for no reason other than The Dark Knight Rises.

Fuck that balcony fight. Seriously, fuck it.

But it's got the best story. Also, Brutal Bruce is best Bruce. Those shock gloves were the best addition to the game, the boss fights were all pretty good, 2nd best of all the games, and the setting was great. Sure it was a bugged mess, but nothing that ever broke the game.

I liked it...

Attached: bloodstone.jpg (460x215, 21K)

It was too much like the other games, still enjoyed it
Arkham Knight however, that game deserves to get way more shit than it does.

yeah maybe but it was still terribly designed in a lot of areas. for example, some of the challenge maps were almost impossible if you got the proximity detonation upgrade for the explosive gel, an upgrade that was removed from arkham city for good reason.

I forgot this existed. Sell me on it.

No.

Origins was great. I dont understand the hate it gets.

When are they going to actually reveal the reboot?

Please?

Honestly, at least here, I think it had to do with people's frustration about
>It was Joker all along.
Even though after I stopped caring and played it, it turned out to be handled very well.

Good game, but feels too much like Arkham City in terms of gameplay

Origins is some post- AssCreed 2 shit. If Brotherhood/AO we're your first or second in the series you'd get some enjoyment out of them but anyone who played the first two were pretty much burned out. Difference is AssCreed was ran into the ground and ironically enough revitalized with its own Origns title but Arkham died with Knight and the batmobile crashed and burned and the franchise is dead.

It's biggest con, I guess. But I mean what else could we expect from 1 year of forced development?

It was obvious it was the joker from the beginning too.

Which is why it still baffles me that Rocksteady legitimately tried to do the same fucking thing again in Arkham Knight. Like how retarded are you? Anyone who has even a basic understanding of the lore would know. Fucking try something new.

Decent, but definitely a rehash of arkham city. If you like Arkham city, its basically 'that again, but slightly different'.

I feel like the biggest indicator of a rehash for me was when they took the ice grenades from city, and made 'glue grenades' here in origins that do the exact same thing but are off-white instead of blue.

The online multiplayer was an interesting concept. Too bad nobody played it.

Bane was the highlight of the game
Shame they had to turn him into the retard from the other games at the end so the game could be canon

It's a better game than Knight, only brainlets would disagree

rocksteady didn't make origins

Not a single game in the series is good to begin with.

I didn't say they did. But Rocksteady made Knight (which in the context of the sentence is what I said) and took what WB Montreal did and did it again.

Maybe not explicitly bad but still the worst in the series by a country mile.

Yeah but why does this game get all the shit when the whole Arkham franchise is about riding the Joker's dick?

Bane was great. Much better than what Rocksteady did with it.

Best scene in the whole series?

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 45K)

because this is the third game with Joker as the antagonist, Knight got shit for it too

It was decent. You really felt like in a Bond movie with dozens of enemies more than usual.
For it's age, graphics are decent and weapon models are /k/ god tier porn, I did not expect such a satisfying melee too.
Worth 5-10$ imho

I prefer
>"I'm the reason the criminals breathe easier when the sun rises"