Batman: Arkham Asylum

[Rudderless]

I also thought the fighting faintly reminiscent of Ninja Gaiden when I first played it. It's the fluidity, really. AC feels slightly clunky and faintly attritional by comparison. In Batman you're mainly on the offensive, while in Creed you're frequently biding your time waiting for your opponent to make the first move.

[Petrousgyre]

Yeah, there's a similar floaty sort of feel between strikes. If you wanted to stretch the point you could also compare the batarang in AA to throwing stars in NG.

[Vemsie]

Having played both games to absolute death (1000 points on Batman, over 1000 on Gaiden 2) I find them pretty different. Yes, they're both fluid (until NG drastically drops its framerate that is), but that's pretty much where comparison ends. Batman is more of rhythm action game in which you basically need to get into a tapping rhythm. Most of that happens on one button.

In comparison, NG from the offset demands a completely different playstyle. The fighting is less automated for starters. In Batman, you just have to keep the rhythm (combo) going to have him zipping around the level like a pinball. It's works brilliantly well. It's fast, fluid, visceral and context sensitive, which is a great touch.

Whereas Batman screams "I'm the badass Dark Knight, you guys don't stand a chance", Ninja Gaiden (2) basically says: "We're gonna send 50 incendiary shuriken throwing ninjas in to cut your throat and we'll throw in a few dogs to make matters worse. Try to survive."

Which in practice means you'll be jumping and dashing like a madman, using the environment (something you hardly do in Batman's combat levels) to your advantage by wall jumping and wall dashing. There's nothing automated about this. Every little dash and strike needs precise input, you'll be constantly switching between the jump button, the strike button and the dash button. Batman also can't block, he can only counter.

Winning in Batman is a given, the only question is whether or not you'll do it in one continuous combo. In Gaiden 2, combos are the last thing on your mind. You're only thinking about survival.

And Batman's move set is rather simple. You can jump, punch, counter, takedown, roll and use a few gadgets. In comparison, Ryu has hundreds of moves, the rather essential essence charging, different weapons and magic attacks, all of which require different inputs. It's nowhere near Bayonetta's depth, but it's a far cry from Batman (which is not a shallow system, just far less demanding and entirely different).

So yes, they're both fluid but in practice the action is as different as it is between Halo and Modern Warfare (even though there basic mechanics are far more similar than the ones in Batman and Gaiden). Though Bayonetta would be closer to Halo in this analogy, but you get the point.

In both you're trying to spot patterns in your enemies, of which there are similar numbers - and both rely on getting that and your timing spot on, whilst spotting the need to counter/block. In many respects they struck me as similar, AA's combat being much less technically demanding of course.

Well, in Batman it's not so much the pattern you need to spot (not talking about the stealth sections of course), but more the enemy type. If they carry a knife or a stun baton, you know you should stop pressing X. In Gaiden you hardly think about patterns or enemy types because the AI is incredibly brutal. The game happily chucks in about twenty incendiary throwing ninjas you have to fight and boy, are they aggressive. At that point, you only wonder about survival, basically trying to get hit as few times as possible, while getting in as much Izuna drops and essence attacks as possible, both of which require a totally different input than Batman's moves.

Also, the amount of enemies you have to fight in Gaiden far surpasses that of Batman.

[Rudi von Starnberg]

I also thought the fighting faintly reminiscent of Ninja Gaiden when I first played it. It's the fluidity, really. AC feels slightly clunky and faintly attritional by comparison. In Batman you're mainly on the offensive, while in Creed you're frequently biding your time waiting for your opponent to make the first move.

This is a good point. Batman makes even the counters feel a lot more offensive, as if you're countering on your own initiative rather than waiting for the enemy each time. Partly because enemies often throw punches frequently one after the other, unlike the standoffs you get in AC.

[Petrousgyre]

Having played both games to absolute death (1000 points on Batman, over 1000 on Gaiden 2) I find them pretty different. Yes, they're both fluid (until NG drastically drops its framerate that is), but that's pretty much where comparison ends.

Crikey, it was just an idle observation - clearly they're very different games in many respects, there was something at the heart of the combat that reminded me a bit of NG, albeit very simplified for want of a better word.

[Pob]

The point is that the combat in AA works well in a game which isn't exclusively about fighting. NG2 is a hardcore beat 'em up with an extremely tuned, complex combat system. It's the entire game.

Hand-to-hand combat is just one of the things Batman does. The fighting is very easy to pick up, yet extremely rewarding to master. I could imagine variations of AA's fighting system in open-world games like Assassins' Creed, but I couldn't imagine games like AC copying the NG combat.

[Guest]

Actually, I wish AC2 had the fluidity of Batman's combat. It's incredibly archaic in comparison.

In both you're trying to spot patterns in your enemies, of which there are similar numbers - and both rely on getting that and your timing spot on, whilst spotting the need to counter/block. In many respects they struck me as similar, AA's combat being much less technically demanding of course.

AC2's combat is far more complex and there's a whole host of reasons for that. Enemy/Civ AI, the gameworld itself, multiple factions fighting (For/against you), one hit blind kills (which then stops other enemies attacking), and a lot more enemies around you that in Batman.

Plus in AC2 you're always using weapons. Lots of different weapons with differing block effectiveness', power, and speed. This has to be accounted for - where as Batman is fists and feet only.

That you can also quickly sidestep in AC2 and deal a killing blow is brilliant - it's a lot harder to do than counter, and yet the counter attacks can be blocked by the better enemies. As such side stepping and delivering the killing blow takes far more skill.

Batman, while more Balletic, is relatively simple. It works very, very well - I enjoyed it immensely. The real kicker with the combat though is that final aweome blow. Slow motion to the top of the head with a big haymaker or spinning kick. You can't underestimate how much punch this relatively simple addition gives the combat. That is awesome, yet in AC2 it wouldn't work as well. You're often pulling off final blow kills amongst the general melee...and you could finish off one guard only to run into more moments later. So to "end" a combat situation with such a move would not suit AC2 - you'll often want to kill and move on. They do it regardless (assassinations) yet it doesn't give a real slow mo close up quite like Batman does, or it will break the flow and your chances to escape are narrowed (swapping camera angles, etc).

I like that the combat of Assassin's Creed 2 is deeper than both the first game and Batmans. It makes me work for kills where as Batman often does not - however that does suit the Batman game, he is a superhard hero. You expect him to fly around and whack goons on the face and have them spin to the floor knocked out.

If you took the simpler Batman system and put it in AC2 you'd lose a lot of immersion and some of the tense situations where your health is running low, you're backed up against a wall, and you have to really concentrate to pull of enough kills to wipe out your opponents or make them run.

The other twist/strange divergence between the two games is that you've got more "health" can take quite a few sword blows in AC2, yet you can't really take that much punishment in Batman!

[Pob]

Yeah, the changes in speed are integral to Batman's combat. Not only does delivering heavy blows look and feel so much better, it gives you time to plan your next move. Genius

If you took the simpler Batman system and put it in AC2 you'd lose a lot of immersion and some of the tense situations where your health is running low, you're backed up against a wall, and you have to really concentrate to pull of enough kills to wipe out your opponents or make them run.

Or just press left on the d-pad to instantly refill your health

[Guest]

Or just press left on the d-pad to instantly refill your health

True although if you die in Batman you're going to respawn about 50 feet away from your enemies.

If you die after a prolonged chase in AC2, from several running battles, and say you get hit by an arrow or similar...well you're going to be mighty pissed when you have to do that whole mission again just to escape again.

That's why they have such a system in place. AC2 is not the hardest game in the world by any stretch (he says after only having played a few hours!), yet I know Batman is not either. Yet both are fantastic.

Personally, as a game/experience, I think Batman edges it for me. It's just got such a fresh feel, where as AC2 is AC1 with more stuff on top of it (and a much, much, much better story).

[Rudderless]

Plus in AC2 you're always using weapons. Lots of different weapons with differing block effectiveness', power, and speed. This has to be accounted for

I'm not sure I can fully agree with that. The weapons are all pretty much of a muchness, I found. If your timing's good, you'll get a counter-kill with whatever weapon you're using, and with your average grunts you can get through some battles simply by attacking constantly, eventually wearing them down, should you not want to wait for them to strike first. After doing it a couple of times for a laugh, I never used the poison blade, and there isn't much point in using the bludgeoning weapons. I only ever switched to fists on the rare occasion where someone was carrying a lance, and the pistol and throwing knives were only useful from a distance. So in 90% of the game's battles I either used the sword or my hidden blades, the latter usually to begin the fight with a double-kill or vertical takedown, or if I decided to use a smoke bomb.

I suppose looking at it like that, you can see why people might find it more varied, but I'd say there's an equal amount of skill involved in Batman - in ACII you can stockpile enough medical supplies to sort you out even if you take a battering, whereas Bats is a lot more fragile, so you need to be more careful, even as you go on the offensive. In Batman, attack is the best form of defence, whereas the reverse is true of ACII.

The real kicker with the combat though is that final aweome blow. Slow motion to the top of the head with a big haymaker or spinning kick. You can't underestimate how much punch this relatively simple addition gives the combat.

Oh, totally. To use Pokémon parlance, it's super-effective.

If you took the simpler Batman system and put it in AC2 you'd lose a lot of immersion and some of the tense situations where your health is running low, you're backed up against a wall, and you have to really concentrate to pull of enough kills to wipe out your opponents or make them run.

Like I say, I never really got that tension because, particularly by the time you reach Venice, you've got that much health and that many potions to spare that you can get absolutely mullered in battle yet easily survive. If you did use a similar system to Batman in AC, you'd have to make the protagonist weaker, and enemies not quite so likely to block most attacks.

[Guest]

Oh, totally. To use Pokémon parlance, it's super-effective.

Does anyone else go "BANG" in their head as Batman connects with the final goon? I think one time I stood up and mirrored the punch, pretty much saying "HAVE IT" at the screen. Most empowering!

[MDY]

I think if any Ubisoft game would benefit from 'stealing' Arkham's combat system it'd be the next Prince of Persia instead of AC..

A simple flowing system would be ideal for dealing with a load of opponents and you could mix in slowdown powers etc with it very nicely..

[Guest]

I think if any Ubisoft game would benefit from 'stealing' Arkham's combat system it'd be the next Prince of Persia instead of AC..

There's more than a case for this, as PoP is a tighter experience than AC.

There is also a case to say that AC2 did not refine their combat system enough/they didn't want to change it too much. They added features and content instead of going for refinement.

And, also, no doubt Batman AA took some inspiration from the first AC game and the dev team thought about the combat "We can use this, change it, and make it suit our game".

[templar wizard]

for those fo you who have a nvidia card, you should try AA with the 3d Vision equipment.

the game is optimised for a 3d experience and it is SUPERB.

makes the game of the year even more enjoyable.

[Guest]

for those fo you who have a nvidia card, you should try AA with the 3d Vision equipment.

the game is optimised for a 3d experience and it is SUPERB.

makes the game of the year even more enjoyable.

Really?! I've got the card, the glasses, and the game - yet I never bothered to try them. I thought it would be pump!

I'll give this a bash when I get a chance this weekend

[Pob]

There's more than a case for this, as PoP is a tighter experience than AC.

There is also a case to say that AC2 did not refine their combat system enough/they didn't want to change it too much. They added features and content instead of going for refinement.

And, also, no doubt Batman AA took some inspiration from the first AC game and the dev team thought about the combat "We can use this, change it, and make it suit our game".

It's the "one button for attack, one for counter" thing which works so well, along with the 'incoming attack' indicator. It means you can get started straight away.

Doing away with lock-on and just using directions is also a key part of it, but this relies on it being very well calibrated, and good camera positioning (both is which AA has).

[Guest]

Doing away with lock-on and just using directions is also a key part of it, but this relies on it being very well calibrated, and good camera positioning (both is which AA has).

How do I target archers in AC without lock on?

[templar wizard]

Really?! I've got the card, the glasses, and the game - yet I never bothered to try them. I thought it would be pump!

I'll give this a bash when I get a chance this weekend

fo Reals????

YES! its off the hook. you will be wowed on the splash screen with the leaves blowing by Batsy. replay the opening, because that walk to the cells, will make you fall in love with the game again.

[Guest]

"Off the hook" is one of my favourite phrases. You could not have sold this any better to me.

[templar wizard]

It will flip your wig COUSIN!

[Guest]

Too much now

[Pob]

How do I target archers in AC without lock on?

Is that a rhetorical question? Because I was talking about hand-to-hand stuff, not ranged combat

[Guest]

Is that a rhetorical question? Because I was talking about hand-to-hand stuff, not ranged combat

This is part of the reason why the AC system is more complex - you're in an open world with a lot more going on, and you've got multiple interactions that require that additional functionality.

[SeanR]

I had an arkham asylum dream last night

[mayor_mike_haggar]

Frasier?

[Dandy_Sephy]

Sequel Confirmed

:OMG:

[hub2]

*Cough* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfnxZvxJqeQ

[AK Bell]

Very popular game with open ending and massive licence gets sequel shocker.

[Retroid]

I haven't even played the original (apart from the demo) and I'm excited!!

[Wroth]

So what did people spot?

Penguin's bar, Riddler poster, Joker's ill, and has Dark-Knight-esque makeup. Harley still in the same nurse's outfit?

What else?