Xbox 360 Thread

[ElectricEye]

Originally Posted by Me Likey Rookies

out of that list ive only played AC and infamous2. Infamous is a shooter with terrible melee combat and AC is clunky with 1 enemy attacking you at once. i do feel defensive about the game because im a huge comic book nerd but i also think the gameplay is some of the best out there.

If you don't mind my being so direct and putting opinions aside....having played only two of those and those being most of the major action releases of the past few years; how would you know? I'm not trying to sound like a dick or anything, but it just seems odd to defend a games mechanics as being "some of the best out there" without having actually played what else is out there. I'm not telling you that you shouldn't enjoy it. It's cool that you did, even. Looking at it completely objectively without the framing of being a Batman fan or caring about comic books and strictly as someone looking for a good game, I just don't think it stacks up to what else is out there in that aspect.

[nrk]

I'd take Batman's combat over those games you listed EE. I don't know how someone can say AC has superior combat, or anything superior to Batman. AC is a overrated turd of a series. All you have to do is just block and counter, with a few attacks mixed in. It's very similar to Batman but way more basic, IMO.

It seems like people are playing it wrong. Of course just spamming X and Y is going to get repetitive. I had a lot of fun building up combos while mixing in gadgets. I don't even know how someone never noticed his Health bar that's always on his screen with an XP bar under it. People really confuse me sometimes.

Originally Posted by ElectricEye

I disagree that Batman has better gameplay than Assassin's Creed, first off. The variety of weapons and ways to do things in that game give it a lot more life than "press X a few times and then Y". The gliding is pretty gratifying in Arkham City and really compliments the larger sense of scale in the game. In the end though, that's just something you do to get from place to place and not really a part of the core mechanics.

It's all just very simple. I don't get a great sense of control when playing it, it feels like you're watching things play out as opposed to actually engaging in them. Do you want to kick the guy instead of throwing a punch? Can't do that without triggering an animation you don't have control of. Do you want to grab him? Can't do that either. Blocking? Nope. It's just all very passive. The gadgets are a nice touch in certain situations, but I found myself not needing to use them at all or not finding it worth doing more than once as a "hey that was pretty neat" type of deal.
p

Gliding was a core mechanic for me when I was outside. I dive bombed people all day long outside. And yes, you can grab a guy. It's called a takedown and you need combos to do it. Why would you need to block? There's an OP dodge and counter. Besides, blocking would get Batman surrounded and ****** in most situations.

[Caddy]

I can't really comment on the new Batman game, but I found the combat in Arkham Asylum super boring. It is intuitive and works well for what it is, but it's real simple. I didn't play AA for the mechanics though so it's no big deal.

[ElectricEye]

Originally Posted by nrk

I'd take Batman's combat over those games you listed EE. I don't know how someone can say AC has superior combat, or anything superior to Batman. AC is a overrated turd of a series. All you have to do is just block and counter, with a few attacks mixed in. It's very similar to Batman but way more basic, IMO.

All of them? Really? I can understand Assassin's Creed a bit I guess, but there's no way on some of those titles combat wise. But yeah, Assassin's Creed mixes it up with a more active take on things with weapons and the ability to switch things up on the fly. Not sure how anyone can walk away having played both of them and say it's more basic than Batman. Batman is basically just a gimped version of that game mechanically, with a simplified version of the combat system to accommodate the hand to hand fighting. It's been over a year since I've played an Assassin's Creed game, so I really can't say for sure on this one, but I seem to just remember it holding your hand a lot less. Neither are examples of how to craft fun combat in games, but given the choice I would take the variety of Assassin's Creed.

Originally Posted by nrk

It seems like people are playing it wrong. Of course just spamming X and Y is going to get repetitive. I had a lot of fun building up combos while mixing in gadgets. I don't even know how someone never noticed his Health bar that's always on his screen with an XP bar under it. People really confuse me sometimes.

Not sure what you meant by the last part, but I did build up and use combos quite a bit and I defiantly explored gadgets as well. The special moves were kind of cool(hey, you occasionally get to press B to trigger another canned animation!), but most of the time I really had to want to use them and make a conscious effort to get them. Why hide something something like that that mixes things up.

Originally Posted by nrk

Gliding was a core mechanic for me when I was outside. I dive bombed people all day long outside. And yes, you can grab a guy. It's called a takedown and you need combos to do it. Why would you need to block? There's an OP dodge and counter. Besides, blocking would get Batman surrounded and ****** in most situations.

Gliding is fun, but at the end of the day it's a means of conveyance. Dive Bombing people is fun, but halfway through the game I had already maxed Batman out(without doing hardly any of the side stuff, even) so I had no real reason to use it to pick random fights. Makes for a good entrance into a crowd, but meh.

...and you're making my point for me about the overpowered counter thing. The game does things for you the vast majority of the time. Blocking isn't even something I would want implicitly, just an example to illustrate how little control you really have over the things happening on screen.

[nrk]

Originally Posted by ElectricEye

All of them? Really? I can understand Assassin's Creed a bit I guess, but there's no way on some of those titles combat wise. But yeah, Assassin's Creed mixes it up with a more active take on things with weapons and the ability to switch things up on the fly. Not sure how anyone can walk away having played both of them and say it's more basic than Batman. Batman is basically just a gimped version of that game mechanically, with a simplified version of the combat system to accommodate the hand to hand fighting. It's been over a year since I've played an Assassin's Creed game, so I really can't say for sure on this one, but I seem to just remember it holding your hand a lot less. Neither are examples of how to craft fun combat in games, but given the choice I would take the variety of Assassin's Creed.

I don't see how you can say AC mixes things up with weapons. Sure you can use different weapons, but you're still just pressing or holding the same button you'd use to attack. It's not like the weapons have different combos like God of War. I just don't see this "variety" that you see. Basic/Power attack, counter, block. There is much more variety in Batman's gadgets than AC's weapons. And holding your hand less? The counters instant kill people rather than just knocking them down in Batman. Counters are so much more op and hand holding in AC. In Batman, you have to jump on the enemy after they were knocked to the ground leaving you vulnerable.

Not sure what you meant by the last part, but I did build up and use combos quite a bit and I defiantly explored gadgets as well. The special moves were kind of cool(hey, you occasionally get to press B to trigger another canned animation!), but most of the time I really had to want to use them and make a conscious effort to get them. Why hide something something like that that mixes things up.

The part regarding health bars was a response to someone else in the thread, but I was lazy and didn't feel like quoting him. Well yeah you have to make a conscious effort to use the special moves, they'd be way overpowered otherwise and some are very situational. It also gives additional reasons to perform combos. The combo system alone is better than any combat in AC in my opinion. It provides more of a challenge by having to combo to use certain abilities and making you more powerful. I found mixing attacks/counters with gadgets while dodging tons of enemies to be a lot of fun myself. A lot more so than the AC loop of block, power attack strong enemies, counter and kill everything else.

Gliding is fun, but at the end of the day it's a means of conveyance. Dive Bombing people is fun, but halfway through the game I had already maxed Batman out(without doing hardly any of the side stuff, even) so I had no real reason to use it to pick random fights. Makes for a good entrance into a crowd, but meh.

Yeah leveling stuff up is quite easy but it's intended to be that way for New Game Plus, which also removes counter icons and such to make it a lot harder. There were often times you had to fight people outside to enter a place or just to finish a mission, so I'm not specifically talking about picking random fights. Hell, I even used inside in some areas when there was enough room and plenty of places up high to hide/dive from.

...and you're making my point for me about the overpowered counter thing. The game does things for you the vast majority of the time. Blocking isn't even something I would want implicitly, just an example to illustrate how little control you really have over the things happening on screen.

Well I'm not really making a point for the overpowered counter since they are both overpowered in AC and Batman, more so in AC. As I previously mentioned, counters instakill in AC, they just knock people down in Batman. If you're specifically speaking of Batman and not comparing it to AC, yeah it's still a little overpowered until you run into enemies you can't counter.

[ElectricEye]

Originally Posted by nrk

I don't see how you can say AC mixes things up with weapons. Sure you can use different weapons, but you're still just pressing or holding the same button you'd use to attack. It's not like the weapons have different combos like God of War. I just don't see this "variety" that you see. Basic/Power attack, counter, block. There is much more variety in Batman's gadgets than AC's weapons. And holding your hand less? The counters instant kill people rather than just knocking them down in Batman. Counters are so much more op and hand holding in AC. In Batman, you have to jump on the enemy after they were knocked to the ground leaving you vulnerable.

It feels different, at least. The difference between using a sword and a mace is tangible. The upgrade system makes it feel deeper and more rewarding.

Originally Posted by nrk

The part regarding health bars was a response to someone else in the thread, but I was lazy and didn't feel like quoting him. Well yeah you have to make a conscious effort to use the special moves, they'd be way overpowered otherwise and some are very situational. It also gives additional reasons to perform combos. The combo system alone is better than any combat in AC in my opinion. It provides more of a challenge by having to combo to use certain abilities and making you more powerful. I found mixing attacks/counters with gadgets while dodging tons of enemies to be tons of fun myself. A lot more so than the AC loop of block, power attack strong enemies, counter and kill everything.

Why make them so overpowered then? You're essentially relegating a component that adds variety for no real reason. Making them less powerful(along with everything else really) and dropping them more frequently would really break things up and let thing you feel more in control. The combo system essentially boils down to watching Batman wail on a guys face while he does nothing about it and then waiting for a guy to come over so you can press Y and wail on his face while he does nothing about it and repeat. It's not challenging or engaging. You guide the action along as opposed to controlling it. I found not using combos to be more effective even, consider I could just drop people with counters and ground attacks. The AI is pretty ******** too, aggressive in some spots and completely non-committal in others. I was able to down countless thugs by using the ground thing right in front of guys while they sort of just circled me.

Originally Posted by nrk

Well I'm not really making a point for the overpowered counter since they are both overpowered in AC and Batman. As I previously mentioned, counters instakill in AC, they just knock people down in Batman. If you're specifically speaking of Batman and not comparing it to AC, yeah it's still a little overpowered until you run into enemies you can't counter.

...and then you just press B to stun them or A to get behind them while you wail on their face and then do nothing about it ;)

[DraftSavant]

Originally Posted by Caddy

I can't really comment on the new Batman game, but I found the combat in Arkham Asylum super boring. It is intuitive and works well for what it is, but it's real simple. I didn't play AA for the mechanics though so it's no big deal.

Videogames aren't really videogames. They're turning into interactive movies.

[nrk]

Originally Posted by ElectricEye

It feels different, at least. The difference between using a sword and a mace is tangible. The upgrade system makes it feel deeper and more rewarding.

It doesn't feel different enough to provide much variety, imo.

Why make them so overpowered then? You're essentially relegating a component that adds variety for no real reason. Making them less powerful(along with everything else really) and dropping them more frequently would really break things up and let thing you feel more in control. The combo system essentially boils down to watching Batman wail on a guys face while he does nothing about it and then waiting for a guy to come over so you can press Y and wail on his face while he does nothing about it and repeat. It's not challenging or engaging. You guide the action along as opposed to controlling it. I found not using combos to be more effective even, consider I could just drop people with counters and ground attacks. The AI is pretty ******** too, aggressive in some spots and completely non-committal in others. I was able to down countless thugs by using the ground thing right in front of guys while they sort of just circled me.

They're not overpowered as it is, but being able to spam them would be. Constantly being able to knock out people on the ground and aoe stuns? If you thought it was easy now(which it is unless you're playing NG+ on Hard), I don't know what you'd think it'd be after that. Also, you can use them frequently. All you have to do is get the combo meter to 5(after upgrading) which is easy as is.

If you just spam counter, yeah it's not going to be hard or engaging. It's like holding block and just countering everything in AC and instantly killing them..... easy. It's engaging if you play it how it's meant to be played, not just the easiest way. Getting 20-30 hit combos (and not by spamming 1 button, obv that isn't engaging lawl) mixing attacks, counters, dodging / getting out of being surrounded, and throwing in gadgets is certainly engaging. I don't know what you expect to get out of just hitting 1 button, but you're playing it wrong, or at least, the least fun way to play.

Out of curiosity, what difficulty did you play it on? I constantly got knocked out of finishing people off during ground attacks if I was surrounded or even if there was guy nearby while I attempted it, so I don't know what you're talking about there.

I keep seeing you talk about Batman's counter but don't even acknowledge AC's much easier and less engaging counter(which trigger those canned animations you complained about in Batman).

...and then you just press B to stun them or A to get behind them while you wail on their face and then do nothing about it ;)

Therefore making counter useless, which is what we were talking about there... countering. But I guess you'd just rather counter and insta kill them.

[ElectricEye]

Originally Posted by nrk

It doesn't feel different enough to provide much variety, imo.

Mix in throwing knives, guns, and the stealth elements that are more tightly integrated into the core combat and it does.

Originally Posted by nrk

They're not overpowered as it is, but being able to spam them would be. Constantly being able to knock out people on the ground and aoe stuns? If you thought it was easy now(which it is unless you're playing NG+ on Hard), I don't know what you'd think it'd be after that. Also, you can use them frequently. All you have to do is get the combo meter to 5(after upgrading) which is easy as is.

So again; make them less powerful and be able to use them more frequently. Break it up a little bit. What's the point of a special move when in order to use them you have to be kicking ass anyway?

Originally Posted by nrk

If you just spam counter, yeah it's not going to be hard or engaging. It's like holding block and just countering everything in AC and instantly killing them..... easy. It's engaging if you play it how it's meant to be played, not just the easiest way. Getting 20-30 hit combos (and not by spamming 1 button, obv that isn't engaging lawl) mixing attacks, counters, dodging / getting out of being surrounded, and throwing in gadgets is certainly engaging. I don't know what you expect to get out of just hitting 1 button, but you're playing it wrong, or at least, the least fun way to play.

To get those combos, you pretty much just have to mash the hell out of X and make sure to lead Batman the same way. Whenever a game forces you to make it fun by mixing things up(Which yet again; I did all that. Many times. Still not fun.) it probably isn't headed the right way....and again, the special moves really don't make it all that awesome. Hitting B with X to trigger a canned animation doesn't make it any better.

Originally Posted by nrk

Out of curiosity, what difficulty did you play it on? I constantly got knocked out of finishing people off during ground attacks if I was surrounded or even if there was guy nearby while I attempted it, so I don't know what you're talking about there.

I play games on whatever the highest difficulty setting available is at the start. I don't remember what that was. It happened quite a bit. Not every time, but quite a bit. I really didn't let myself get surrounded all(hardly ever) that much considering how easy to was to single people up by jumping over them and stunning, so maybe that had something to do with it. I stuck to the edges in the crowd. The guys really don't like to move around all that much, they kind of just stand there and wait their turn.

Originally Posted by nrk

I keep seeing you talk about Batman's counter but don't even acknowledge AC's much easier and less engaging counter(which trigger those canned animations you complained about in Batman).

I don't care about Assassin's Creed near as much as you think I do, that's why. The combat in that game is bad as well, but at least there's more to do. Sure, canned animations, but there's TONS more of them.

Originally Posted by nrk

Therefore making counter useless, which is what we were talking about there... countering. But I guess you'd just rather counter and insta kill them.

I would rather play a game with good combat...which neither has :( But out of the two, I prefer Assassin's Creed for sure.

[Jvig43]

Have to agree with the nrk, AC does certainly not have better combat mechanics than Batman. I'd even say combat was the worst part of AC.

[nrk]

Originally Posted by ElectricEye

Mix in throwing knives, guns, and the stealth elements that are more tightly integrated into the core combat and it does.

I wouldn't say stealth is more tightly integrated than Batman, but regardless Batman has lots of stealth in its combat. I forgot about the guns,

So again; make them less powerful and be able to use them more frequently. Break it up a little bit. What's the point of a special move when in order to use them you have to be kicking ass anyway?

As you say below, to get those combos all you have to do pretty much is mash X, and to get 5 hits in a row is hardly kicking ass. It's to add another dynamic. You already have all your gadgets to use in addition to these moves. When you get to 5, you can only choose 1 of the special moves so it adds a little more decision making.

To get those combos, you pretty much just have to mash the hell out of X and make sure to lead Batman the same way. Whenever a game forces you to make it fun by mixing things up(Which yet again; I did all that. Many times. Still not fun.) it probably isn't headed the right way....and again, the special moves really don't make it all that awesome. Hitting B with X to trigger a canned animation doesn't make it any better.

In just about any game there is an overpowered move or spell or whatever that you can spam to win. It's just easier to do in Batman. That doesn't mean you have to play that way. The best special move was the multi ground take down, so it's not like the uninterpretable take-down is the only one. It's actually the worst. The aoe stun is very nice as well.

I play games on whatever the highest difficulty setting available is at the start. I don't remember what that was. It happened quite a bit. Not every time, but quite a bit. I really didn't let myself get surrounded all(hardly ever) that much considering how easy to was to single people up by jumping over them and stunning, so maybe that had something to do with it. I stuck to the edges in the crowd. The guys really don't like to move around all that much, they kind of just stand there and wait their turn.

That's strange, the AI I experienced wasn't like that at all. Not even when I played it on Normal.

I don't care about Assassin's Creed near as much as you think I do, that's why. The combat in that game is bad as well, but at least there's more to do. Sure, canned animations, but there's TONS more of them.

It's not that I think you care about Assassin's Creed so much, rather than you said:

Look at pretty much all the top flight action games out there today and put Batman below that.

I was disputing that, and AC was one of the games you listed. AC was probably the game that has the highest fan/critic reviews.

I would rather play a game with good combat...which neither has :( But out of the two, I prefer Assassin's Creed for sure.

Yeah neither have the greatest of combat. Assassin's Creed just bores the **** out of me, and I love Batman. Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill were fantastic.

[ElectricEye]

Eh, I guess I just don't get it. I'm glad you guys are having fun with it, I did too even, but it's just not for me. It's obviously a well made game and it does an absolutely fantastic job of bringing a world many people hold dearly to life both through the videos and the audio, but judging it purely as a video game, I think it's a lot weaker than the critical praise would have you believe. The gameplay doesn't have many huge flaws either, but that element of the title just doesn't stand out from the crowd and tropes set up by titles like Assassin's Creed. I guess I give those games more of a pass because they established that sort of formula first....and both of the Batman games kind of recycle those mechanics as opposed to evolving them.

Beyond that, my quips are relatively minor. The writing seems to be true to the source material, but it seems more concerned with making quick, fan servicey cameos as opposed to any real kind of characterization for Batman or the villains he battles. The voice acting is is superb and is defiantly deserving of all the praise it gets. That's rare for games. Most of the time, voice acting is something that you can just sort of hope doesn't screw it up. With these games, it adds something to it. I found myself appreciating it in spite of not having much attachment to the source material it draws from, although I did like the cartoon as a kid.

If I had to give it some sort of a score, I would probably go with a solid 7 to a light 8. It's a triumph of production values and doing right by the fans of the material(from what I've read anyway)...but not necessarily transcendent, forward thinking game design. I just found it way to shallow to buy it as a Game of the Year candidate.

[Me Likey Rookies]

I wouldnt call AC a turd, i picked up Brotherhood again this weekend because I was craving it. Being able to wear Altair's robes is just awesome and the side missions (Leonardo's Machines, Lairs of Romulus, Sophie missions) are a blast. I thought Revelations was a HUGE step down.

I'm in the middle of MGS2 HD, just got to FatMan, everyone needs to get this hd collection.

EE, what game on your list should I try? Dark Souls seems to be the most critically acclaimed but I dont like the fantasy/dragon setting. Vanquish seems to get some love around the internet.

[ElectricEye]

Hard to say. Dark Souls is... complicated. It's a bit of a different beast than most of the games out there. Sort of an acquired taste for some. I would really recommend that to just about anyone, though. There's a ton of content, replayability, challenge, and ultimately; fun to be had. I've only been through it once so far, but I'm sure I'll come back to it multiple times. The multiplayer is still some of the best out there too. Redbox has it as a rental option if you're interested but non-committal.

Vanquish is a cheesy, over the top kind of game. That turned me off a bit, but the action is tight, exciting and interesting. It's a shooter, but it has a different take on that entire thing and really moves extremely fast. The best(and literal) way to describe it would be Gears of War as seen by the guys who made Devil May Cry. It's short, so it was a bit of a rip off at $60(I waited for it to go down), but $20 for 8 hours of entertainment isn't bad.

[TitansCJftw]

i havent turned my xbox on in about a month :\

[Caddy]

Originally Posted by TitansCJftw

i havent turned my xbox on in about a month :\

WTF. It's a great time to be a video game fan.

[Me Likey Rookies]

mgs3 hd is the most beautiful thing ive ever seen, it looks like a legit 360 game with how good the jungle looks and the ability to rotate the camera is godly.

i also think mgs2 has the best ending of all time, thoughts?

[ElectricEye]

I would really like to play Metal Gear Solid, but I missed the first title and don't have any way of jumping in. The story seems waaaay too complicated to just pop in at the second one.

[Prowler]

I would kill to have a faithful hd remake of the original with improved cgi cutscenes and the whole 9 yards. Only with an option to run with more evolved and modernized control scheme.

[M.O.T.H.]

I dont know what happened, but Gears 3 is just unplayable for me online now. My connection is just not holding up anymore. I know the dedicated servers are pretty much a thing of the past now. And on host games, I just cant compete. Everyone seems to have a rocket launcher instead of a gnasher. I point blank dudes in the grill and nothing happens, again and again. And people continuely kill me, when they're not even looking at me, or I'm behind them. It's maddening. I'm looking into upgrading internet connections if possible...if I cant, then I'm probably done with Gears online. Its lost all its fun, if it's just going to be cheap as hell.

[Jvig43]

After msg2 I just lost interest. MGS3 for me was way overrated and MGS4 I just didn't feel compelled to finish.

[Caddy]

Originally Posted by M.O.T.H.

I dont know what happened, but Gears 3 is just unplayable for me online now. My connection is just not holding up anymore. I know the dedicated servers are pretty much a thing of the past now. And on host games, I just cant compete. Everyone seems to have a rocket launcher instead of a gnasher. I point blank dudes in the grill and nothing happens, again and again. And people continuely kill me, when they're not even looking at me, or I'm behind them. It's maddening. I'm looking into upgrading internet connections if possible...if I cant, then I'm probably done with Gears online. Its lost all its fun, if it's just going to be cheap as hell.

I haven't touched Gears since Skyrim :(

[M.O.T.H.]

Originally Posted by Caddy

I haven't touched Gears since Skyrim :(

The best time to get back in it, is right after Christmas. Thousands of "noobs" get the game. You'll get 20 kill games like it's nothing. haha. Assuming your connection holds up in user hosted games, mine does not at all. The dedicated servers are constantly down now...so it's a lot more Gears 2 like. Except for the fact that I didnt have these huge lag issues in Gears 2.

[Jvig43]

I traded my gears in to get MW3. I think it was a wise decision, I had fun playing gears but I didn't love it or anything.

[Raiderz4Life]

Thinking of trading in BF3 and picking up Skyrim. Will probably wait til I finish Batman though and trade it in too.