Makes me want it to be open world...said nobody ever (that is sane)Nah, Uncharted in open world would be great too! Have more faith in ND.
If you hadn't noticed, this is Forum 2.0
Started by the-pi-guy, Jun 16, 2015, 10:06 PM
previous topic - next topic0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Makes me want it to be open world...said nobody ever (that is sane)Nah, Uncharted in open world would be great too! Have more faith in ND.
| VizionEck Cube Royale is releasing this year "I'm Mike Armbrust" -Me |  |  |
Nah, Uncharted in open world would be great too! Have more faith in ND.I don't know. Batman got progressively worse and it's directly because of the open world. That's not to say Batman games still aren't super awesome fantastic smash amazing.
I don't know. Batman got progressively worse and it's directly because of the open world. That's not to say Batman games still aren't super awesome fantastic smash amazing.Well that's cause RockSteady isn't ND.
| VizionEck Cube Royale is releasing this year "I'm Mike Armbrust" -Me | | |
Well that's cause RockSteady isn't ND.That wasn't Naughty Dog either!
Kinda off topic but I'm really feeling the desire to replay Golden Abyss. That game was such a great uncharted.
That wasn't Naughty Dog either!Wasn't open world either!
| VizionEck Cube Royale is releasing this year "I'm Mike Armbrust" -Me | | |
Wasn't open world either!Doesn't that prove my point?
I don't know. Batman got progressively worse and it's directly because of the open world. That's not to say Batman games still aren't super awesome fantastic smash amazing.How so?
How so?because it went from fun to lame.
How so?Arkham Asylum had an almost old school form of progression system. They start you off easy and then they keep on adding variations and such to keep the game fresh and challenging. What you get at the beginning of Arkham City/Knight at the beginning is how it is at the end. There's very little variation in predator gameplay in City and so far there's only been one infiltration mission (Levels essentially) in Knight. Even the combat gameplay is pretty stagnant. City only added armoured men and shield enemies, but they were added pretty early and that's the end of the variations. Asylum threw in Titans which completely changed the way you had to take on combat gameplay. Even traversal. You start off with no enemies around the Asylum grounds, then you get enemies, then you get snipers, then you get the crazies that run at you, then you get Ivy's plants. City only added snipers and did it early on. Knight didn't change anything from City aside from healers, which forces you to take them out early and regress back to the same old. It took me about 12 hours to finish Arkham Asylum. I only stopped to get stuff that I knew where it was and was on the way. It took me 8 hours to finish City, again getting what was in front of me. Asylum's core game is more meaty than City's and probably Knight (I'm taking my time, will do a run through when I'm done everything afterwards to compare). So while they spent a lot of time on the open world, and in Knight's case the Batmobile, the core of the game is sloppy and almost thrown together. Knight is especially bad. There's only one indoor infiltration mission so far, not including the "Drive Batmobile to wall and open wall via taking out enemies", and I'm half way through Knight. That's not to say City or Knight is bad, you can just tell they put all their efforts into the "extras" and threw the core game together. On a side note; so far I find Origin's core gameplay to be better than City and Knights (Halfway through Origins). Origin's was closer to Arkham Asylum's infiltration and difficulty progression, while keeping the open world aspect.
I agree completely, but that has nothing to do with the games being open world.I'm saying they were focused on other things, they couldn't focus on the core. City as a game is much larger than Asylum, yet the core was much shorter, almost half as short. Same with Knight. They focused so much on getting the Batmobile up and running (Including the open world puzzles, stuff, etc) that they almost destroyed the core of the game. Like I mentioned; so far I've only really come across one level (Infiltration style) in Knight. Also, Asylum wasn't sandbox. Arkham Asylum is level based with backtracking, ala Metroid. There's no Metroid in Knight (There was in City, but it was more sloppy). I'd be enjoying Knight far more if it had actual levels in it. Hell I even miss going into vents and stuff to get into a level. There was just so much more thought put into Asylum that's missing in City/Knight. It's mostly sandbox fluff in the latter titles. Like, I'm saying if they had the proper dev times, or even had teams designing the different portions of the game (One on the sandbox, one team on levels), Knight would have been far superior. My playthrough so far makes me feel the game is sloppily put together (Same with City, but not nearly to Knight's extent).
AA was mostly open world too, just not with the scope of the other games.
| VizionEck Cube Royale is releasing this year "I'm Mike Armbrust" -Me | | |