Whoa! I've had two very cool jump scares during the last two days. The first one is a major spoiler so I'm not talking about it quite yet. The second happened when I was flying around, minding my own business. I scaled the top of the building only to be grabbed by Man-Bat. Fucking cool!
Can't buy this game for PC anymore until the devs are satisfied with its quality. It's a shame, but such a drastic action is suitable and a respectable move for the mess that is this port.
Gagan said:It is ideal to expect professionalism now?
This whole it is "their job to make money" isn't a defense or a counter argument, that's complete nonsense.
Let me correct myself, it's not idealistic to expect professionalism out of media outlets so closely entangled with publishers who practically keep the site in business with their advertising money. It's plain stupid.
As long as the current business model between big pubs and popular specialized media outlets remains largely untouched, nothing will change. And I don't mean that in a way that suggests game journos and reviewers are inherently crooked, they might all be swell, honest dudes for all I care. I am just saying the way gaming media works is fucked up and corrupted down to a fundamental level.
SteelAttack said:Gagan said:It is ideal to expect professionalism now?
This whole it is "their job to make money" isn't a defense or a counter argument, that's complete nonsense.
Let me correct myself, it's not idealistic to expect professionalism out of media outlets so closely entangled with publishers who practically keep the site in business with their advertising money. It's plain stupid.
As long as the current business model between big pubs and popular specialized media outlets remains largely untouched, nothing will change. And I don't mean that in a way that suggests game journos and reviewers are inherently crooked, they might all be swell, honest dudes for all I care. I am just saying the way gaming media works is fucked up and corrupted down to a fundamental level.
Totally agreed. It is not professional to get money from the very source you are critiquing. It a plain conflict of interest. It is unacceptable in journalism, it should be unacceptable here.
SteelAttack said:Gagan said:It is ideal to expect professionalism now?
This whole it is "their job to make money" isn't a defense or a counter argument, that's complete nonsense.
Let me correct myself, it's not idealistic to expect professionalism out of media outlets so closely entangled with publishers who practically keep the site in business with their advertising money. It's plain stupid.
As long as the current business model between big pubs and popular specialized media outlets remains largely untouched, nothing will change. And I don't mean that in a way that suggests game journos and reviewers are inherently crooked, they might all be swell, honest dudes for all I care. I am just saying the way gaming media works is fucked up and corrupted down to a fundamental level.
Except that is a sweeping generalization that doesn't account for places like Giantbomb where they clearly have people who aren't tied to pubs for money for the shit they do, or Kotaku who is basically a spam fest blog, ditto for Polygon (though yes the Microsoft aspect kicks in), or what have you. The whole "they are bought by the pubs thing" doesn't change the job though. They go through the trouble of actually reviewing the thing, critiquing the thing, hell in general the last couple of years I've got more of a sense that scores have been gradually coming down as opposed to the usual round of over inflated shit.
It has nothing to do with the writers being corrupt or the business model, they just suck dick at their jobs. There is a difference between the two, it has nothing to do with structure man, they are just that incompetent.
This game is amazing. The story is on fire, tie ins to one of the most famous batman comics, the stakes are huge, relationships are are being tested, it's fantasic. I love the way the batmobile is being used in puzzles, basically acting like a different character to manipulate. The batmobile feels like a natural addition to the bat arsenal, it's fit in so well.
The difficulty has ramped up quick, toothed games ease you into combat with tougher enemies, in the first two hours I was already fighting ninjas, medics, gun dudes, electric guys, shield dudes and they bum rush you. Predator sections have enemies that are smarter, they stick together in groups, now there are turrets as well. This is all rights the start who knows what they have for the rest of the game.
This feels like rocksteady at the top of their game.
Gagan said:SteelAttack said:Gagan said:It is ideal to expect professionalism now?
This whole it is "their job to make money" isn't a defense or a counter argument, that's complete nonsense.
Let me correct myself, it's not idealistic to expect professionalism out of media outlets so closely entangled with publishers who practically keep the site in business with their advertising money. It's plain stupid.
As long as the current business model between big pubs and popular specialized media outlets remains largely untouched, nothing will change. And I don't mean that in a way that suggests game journos and reviewers are inherently crooked, they might all be swell, honest dudes for all I care. I am just saying the way gaming media works is fucked up and corrupted down to a fundamental level.
Except that is a sweeping generalization that doesn't account for places like Giantbomb where they clearly have people who aren't tied to pubs for money for the shit they do, or Kotaku who is basically a spam fest blog, ditto for Polygon (though yes the Microsoft aspect kicks in), or what have you. The whole "they are bought by the pubs thing" doesn't change the job though. They go through the trouble of actually reviewing the thing, critiquing the thing, hell in general the last couple of years I've got more of a sense that scores have been gradually coming down as opposed to the usual round of over inflated shit.
It has nothing to do with the writers being corrupt or the business model, they just suck dick at their jobs. There is a difference between the two, it has nothing to do with structure man, they are just that incompetent.
his has been my impression as well. Outside of Game Informer, IGN and console-dedicated sites.
In light of the PC news, I petition for the thread to be renamed: Batman Arkham Shite.
I tried out an AR mission and it seemed the same as the challenge maps. Is there a big difference?
travo said:I tried out an AR mission and it seemed the same as the challenge maps. Is there a big difference?
I did one combat mission and it was just a max combo trail without stages or overall score. Challenge maps have four rounds and every thing you do adds to the score, like variation, no hit, perfect combo.
Gagan said:Except that is a sweeping generalization that doesn't account for places like Giantbomb where they clearly have people who aren't tied to pubs for money for the shit they do, or Kotaku who is basically a spam fest blog, ditto for Polygon (though yes the Microsoft aspect kicks in), or what have you. The whole "they are bought by the pubs thing" doesn't change the job though. They go through the trouble of actually reviewing the thing, critiquing the thing, hell in general the last couple of years I've got more of a sense that scores have been gradually coming down as opposed to the usual round of over inflated shit.
It has nothing to do with the writers being corrupt or the business model, they just suck dick at their jobs. There is a difference between the two, it has nothing to do with structure man, they are just that incompetent.
I'm not saying they are bought by pubs. And I agree that ad money shouldn't change the nature of the job, but in reality, it does. The minute a site takes advertising money it generates a conflict of interest when someone in that site writes something about the game. It goes agains the basic tenets of journalism. Even if it's not a conscious thing, it will happen.
Dvader said:travo said:I tried out an AR mission and it seemed the same as the challenge maps. Is there a big difference?
I did one combat mission and it was just a max combo trail without stages or overall score. Challenge maps have four rounds and every thing you do adds to the score, like variation, no hit, perfect combo.
I guess that tells you how much I spend on the challenges. I more of an exploration kind of guy.
Love the thread title.
SteelAttack said:I'm not saying they are bought by pubs. And I agree that ad money shouldn't change the nature of the job, but in reality, it does. The minute a site takes advertising money it generates a conflict of interest when someone in that site writes something about the game. It goes agains the basic tenets of journalism. Even if it's not a conscious thing, it will happen.
Here's the direction I’d take Gagan's point in regards to this: the vast majority of critics are so incompetent that any conflict of interest actually has no effect because their reviews are so inadequate in and of themselves: meaningless waffle with a slant is indistinguishable from meaningless waffle.
Holy shit! Amazing, simply amazing. The gameplay scenarios are incredible.
This game is fucking incredible.
I still have city ranked higher but it's early.
Dvader said:This game is fucking incredible.
I still have city ranked higher but it's early.
Same here but only because of the surprising lack of boss fights. In fact, the only one that I can recall so far is the helicopter at Ace Chemicals. I'd give Knight the edge or slightly ahead of City in most everything else. Gotham is so pretty to look at. I have to stop to check out the lighting and details.
I think the reason the city feels so empty is because of the sheer size of it. There's the same amount of content, just spread out. I still miss the lore/ history stuff like finding tape recordings or discovering a historic landmark.
Does any of this city look familiar? I can't find anything that I remember from AC.
The thread title is killing me.
Foolz said:Here's the direction I’d take Gagan's point in regards to this: the vast majority of critics are so incompetent that any conflict of interest actually has no effect because their reviews are so inadequate in and of themselves: meaningless waffle with a slant is indistinguishable from meaningless waffle.
I reluctantly agree.
In an unrelated subject, I have been waiting for your particular input in the storytelling thread. 
View on YouTube