My issues of the IGN review

[Zouls]

Obviously nobody is gonna care, i have no real love for the arkham games, i have no stake in this other than buying it for fun to play with a friend but i wanted to post the problems i have with the review because it almost turned of off the game that we are really enjoying.

Im fine with people not liking it, im fine with it not being everyones cup of tea, but its getting slammed in ways that are borderline lies at time from severe exagerations.

First off the actual facts.
-Severe optimization problems on recommended rig in open area.
-The abilities that requires you to use your scanner is garbage, but that isnt mentioned.

other than that

He says that "with the stealth and taking down bad guys its hard to not compare to the arkham games even though he knows they are different" which is a failure on his part

"the plot is obvious because i read the comics" which i found amusing, like yeah?

"Combat is sadly one of the worst aspects of Gotham Knights" which sounds massively overreaching because he right after says "its not the WORST i have played but compare to how "smooth" batman brawls you are smacked in the face with an underwhelming and over simplified combat" which is WILD

Oh here is a choice quote "the OVERSIMPLIFICATION of combat is perhaps best examplified by the COMPLETE ABSENCE of ANYTHING resembling the arkham counter system" not even its different, not even its not there, he is straight up claiming that there isnt even anything resembling a counter system, which to me is screaming lies, when one of the bonus objectives are literally perfect counters, but yeah he wants an "i press button i avoid all damage"

"You just repeat the same attacks and wait for your special abilities to come up and enemy health bars to widdle down" meaning that he just spams instead of really thinking about who to take down because he prob played on easy mode.

Another choice one "At its worst its actively frustrating as you are hit by attacks that seems ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO DODGE...." Fighting a specific boss who does a ground damage area under them, to not stand in it, as the video shows the guy standing in it face tanking the damage, then complains that he cant see the giant red markers which gives plenty of warning because he is actively ignoring the boss mechanics and playing on easy.

"...And dont feel like you have full control over your character" video showing them taking a CC ability to the face that they could have avoided, and then being mad that they are cc'ed

"Doing dull side QUESTS to unlock stable things like fast travel" which takes about 10 minutes to unlock in the entire city, and isnt a quest.

"The game forces you to engage with RPG elements to grind and minmax equipment" you want to make a build yeah, dont need to minmax though.

"Compounding the problem are RPG elements with menus that makes you "grind" to keep up in gear and i never feel completely in control of my loadout" by not giving you everything for free because its not an arkham game, and again there is so little grinding if you just actually play the game and take the quick tasks you come past.

"Combat never gained enough complexity to become interesting" you just said you wanted to have everything unlocked and have the batman style where you punch, counter punch and do nothing else and then you turn around and say that the various enemies, ways to approach each area, the different enemies and how to handle them isnt complex? especially at later stages where you get some real nasty combos of enemies.

"then praises the characters having unique playstyle" but how is that NOT part of the thing above

"I wouldnt call any of them good" what do you MEAN, they each have some really amazing options for how you want to approach the game from builds, and utilizing the innate characteristics, im doing a stealth robin with elements thrown in for freeze cc potential of big enemies, where a friend is focusing on grappling as redhood and getting as many grab strike kills as possible, with builds to match.

"its balanced for 2 people" which is game reviewer way of saying "please carry me i suck"

[LoganTheOutlaw]

Hey i feel you dude but I gotta ask, have you finished the game yet and what are your thoughts on the ending?

[PocketYoda]

I care mate.

I agree with you 100% but you must understand these modern journalists aren't real gamers, they barely play these things and instantly tar them, they are employed to push agendas above all else and aren't very smart..

The game has issues sure but none of what that parasite raved about.. Gamers are always whining about games always being the same and as soon as developers change them up a bit oH is not like the last games, oh the tragedy..

Whats funny is if the devs had literally copy and pasted Arkham games these same parasites would have lambasted the game for being exactly the same as the last game..

Best just to ignore these parasitic game journalist websites that only care about modern politics and not the things they are employed to actually do..

Watch a few lets plays from nobodies and check steam reviews at release.. then decide what you think.

[John Vermintide 2]

Their reviews are about as valid as yours. ;)

[PocketYoda]

Originally posted by Bowsette Gone Bananas:

Their reviews are about as valid as yours. ;)

No they are not they are being paid to review the op is not..

[Ronin Gamer]

Or you know, a decent amount of people might actually be having problems running the game, or they have an opposing viewpoint/opinion to yours which is the whole reason why you are supposed to look at MORE than one review.
God forbid someone thinks differently from US TRUE ELITE GAMERS!!!! Dear god the degree of head up your butt is quite staggering.
No clearly I know how everyone SHOULD be having an opinion of this thing I have a specific opinion of and NO ONE can possibly have a differing opinion to my own!

[Ronin Gamer]

Originally posted by PocketYoda:

Originally posted by Bowsette Gone Bananas:

Their reviews are about as valid as yours. ;)

No they are not they are being paid to review the op is not..

Oh. I forgot about that aspect. I guess the only retail workers that matter are the ones that don't punch in for a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ paycheck. Because you know, nobody that works retail does it for the paycheck. Clearly the loving wonderful job itself is gift enough....

[PocketYoda]

Arkham Knight got 9.2 on IGN... I wonder what they were paid to give that trash that score...

[John Vermintide 2]

Originally posted by PocketYoda:

Originally posted by Bowsette Gone Bananas:

Their reviews are about as valid as yours. ;)

No they are not they are being paid to review the op is not..

And neither is IGN, but people gotta have fuel for their conspiracy theories. If IGN posts a review you agree with, it's fine. If they post one you don't agree with then they're secretly being paid by a publisher.

[PocketYoda]

Originally posted by Ronin Gamer:

Originally posted by PocketYoda:

No they are not they are being paid to review the op is not..

Oh. I forgot about that aspect. I guess the only retail workers that matter are the ones that don't punch in for a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ paycheck. Because you know, nobody that works retail does it for the paycheck. Clearly the loving wonderful job itself is gift enough....

Retail workers deserve their pay, they work way harder than parasitic games journalists.. And yes if games journalists are paid ignore their reviews they will be bias..

[John Vermintide 2]

You guys realize it's okay to like a game that someone else doesn't like, right? It doesn't somehow make the other person's review invalid.

[PocketYoda]

Originally posted by Bowsette Gone Bananas:

You guys realize it's okay to like a game that someone else doesn't like, right? It doesn't somehow make the other person's review invalid.

Yes it is but bad mouthing it sets people off..

[John Vermintide 2]

Originally posted by PocketYoda:

Originally posted by Bowsette Gone Bananas:

You guys realize it's okay to like a game that someone else doesn't like, right? It doesn't somehow make the other person's review invalid.

Yes it is but bad mouthing it sets people off..

Giving a game a negative review isn't badmouthing it. It's a review. A negative review is just as valid as a positive one, and isn't less valid because you disagree with it.

For instance, I don't like Halo 3. A lot of other people do like it. The game doesn't work for me and I just find it hard to play. Me thinking the game isn't good doesn't make positive reviews of the game less valid.

[PocketYoda]

Originally posted by Bowsette Gone Bananas:

Originally posted by PocketYoda:

Yes it is but bad mouthing it sets people off..

Giving a game a negative review isn't badmouthing it. It's a review. A negative review is just as valid as a positive one, and isn't less valid because you disagree with it.

For instance, I don't like Halo 3. A lot of other people do like it. The game doesn't work for me and I just find it hard to play. Me thinking the game isn't good doesn't make positive reviews of the game less valid.

Its how IGN does it offends me..

[John Vermintide 2]

Originally posted by PocketYoda:

Originally posted by Bowsette Gone Bananas:

Giving a game a negative review isn't badmouthing it. It's a review. A negative review is just as valid as a positive one, and isn't less valid because you disagree with it.

For instance, I don't like Halo 3. A lot of other people do like it. The game doesn't work for me and I just find it hard to play. Me thinking the game isn't good doesn't make positive reviews of the game less valid.

Its how IGN does it offends me..

Then just roll over and enjoy the game. Heck, I'm enjoying it despite agreeing with almost every negative thing said about it and suffering through some terrible optimization.

[Doctor Hades]

I have never been a fan of IGN and generally read its reviews last but if they deem a game to be sub-par then it says a lot about the game without even reading any of the text.

Having played Gotham Knights myself then I would say that it is absolutely NOT a good game, the game design and everything about it is just too underdeveloped and/or poorly conceived but it is functional. It is playable and in short bursts it can be moderately fun. However, it has too many flaws and ultimately leaves me feeling a bit dissatisfied with the experience. The mission structure is perhaps the worst part of the game; it feels confusing and deliberately grindy and with the mundane combat and dull quest design just ends up feeling more and more like a chore than entertainment. Every time I play the game, I just do not feel like I am making any progress through the game.

Gotham Knights, so far, is just an outstandingly average game. It's like pale imitation of a better game. It's like a copy of a copy of a copy that has lost the essence of what made the original so good.