Why Arkham Combat Worked (Better Than its Copycats)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 มิ.ย. 2024
- The free flow combat system of the Batman Arkham games helped define third person action in the 2010s, but no matter how many games tried to imitate them, nothing quite hit that same mark.
You can support me further at patreon.com/user?u=79897293
Contents:
00:00 Intro
01:41 Depth in Simplicity
05:43 Showing Restraint
09:56 We Can't All Feel Like Batman
Music Used:
Main Theme - Arkham Asylum OST
One by One - Arkham City OST
Inner Demon - Arkham Knight OST
Main Theme - Arkham City OST - เกม
One thing I love about the combat are the sound effects. Batman's punches sound like tiny explosions. The beat down move is especially satisfying to use for that reason
Especially the special combo takedowns. Hearing *three* of those tiny explosions at once with the Bat Swarm is a treat🤤
"Batman doesn't kill"
Said as Batman is literally creating sonic booms through the sheer power of his punches.
Also the cracking sounds when taking out enemies in Knight is just, *chef kiss*.
I actually think that the _Middle Earth: Shadow of_ games adapted the freeflow combat well. They solved the problem of freeflow not working for 1v1 boss fights by giving their captains unique strengths and weaknesses that affected how you had to go about fighting them. I suppose it was taking the idea of Arkham's enemy types (shield enemies, armoured enemies, knife-wielding enemies, etc), but stacked the kinds of immunities/abilities that enemies could have. They also did little things like allowing the player to run for a little bit without losing their combo (instead of forcing you to link evades/redirects with attacks) and adding so many more attack options that somehow it worked. Fighting a captain without his minions around felt just as engaging as taking on a group of orcs.
I also loved what _Mad Max_ and _Sleeping Dogs_ did with it. Because these are normal people and not ninjas, they got rid of the ability to somersault across the arena. But because these guys have less compunctions about killing or maiming their enemies than Batman does, they focused on the moves feeling brutal and even more "crunchy" than Batman's comparatively more surgical bone-breaking attacks. The fights feel more raw and messy, which fits the characters. I always thought that the "freeflow without ninja stuff" would suit Commissioner Gordon well if the Arkham games ever gave us a mission where we could play as him.
So, I think _Arkham,_ _Middle-Earth,_ _Mad Max,_ and _Sleeping Dogs_ all did wonderful things with the combat system Rocksteady pioneered. Insomniac also clearly used it as an influence for their _Spider-Man_ games while not sticking too closely to it, and their combat is also great. The only game I remember playing that tried to do Arkham combat but made it shitty and boring is Beenox's _Amazing Spider-Man_ game.
Another wild card on an Arkham like system would be the Deadpool game.
That game had such a bizarre and weird yet interesting combat system.
The game had the "attack and counter" system with notable differences being the combo multiplier being super forgiving while the window for countering a bit trickier.
But the funny part comes when you mix in the other mechanics of the game and you can just completely ignore the counter mechanic. Dodging is incredibly op so you can just forget countering even exists and play like it's a character action game from the ps2 era, and best of all you can turn the game into a 3rd person shooter whenever you feel like it (and then switch back to hack n slash once you're out of ammo). It's such an odd mix of different styles of combat that oddly molds together quite nicely and fits the character extremely well too.
I heard somewhere that the developers for Arkham Asylum were inspired by the rhythm in martial arts movie combat and originally wanted to make Asylum a full rhythm-based action game. In a way, Arkham combat is like Bruce Lee's Jeet Kune Do: focused on efficiency and multipurpose, and brilliant/lazy in its simplicity and hard to replicate in circumstance. Also, now that you have made this video, I think you have to talk about your favorite Spider-Man game.
My favorite part of arkham combat is that it has tendency to untrain button mashing in people. Like i played spiderman actually looking for spider sense and thinking about the enemy types subconsciously, meanwhile put someone who just got done with spiderman on arkham asylum and they'll struggle until they learn
We need more melee games. The market is overrun with shooters. There is a fear and lack of innovation when it comes to hand to hand combat in games.
Ok
I would guess the reason that melee combat is less common than shooters is because shooters are relatively easier to make.
To vastly oversimplify shooter combat can be boiled down to click on the bad guys and take damage if you are in their line of sight for x amount of time. (Again this is a massive oversimplification).
Conversely, melee combat requires more work with animations and hitboxes that seem so easy to mess up it’s kind of a miracle we get any melee focused games at all.
@@AK-tr6lo You are correct. I made my first game in high school an FPS zombie game. It's pathetically easy compared to the game I'm developing now.
@@CodenamePrince, can you make a Batman Arkham type game where we play as Playboi Carti in his pointy ears hat???
@@rodarollada LOL! I can if I wanted to
I just beat Killer Croc Iceberg lounge. No one can call it a button masher.
Yessir and I'm assuming it's Arkham Knight right?
Damn man! I've been trying to do so and even with 200hrs+ in game still can't get to him
@@turjaniczazsombor04 it literally took me 200 hours to do it. Now that does include 240 percent but still
Amen
@@NMbones98 nah, arkham city
I'm someone who always prefered satisfying combat over challenging combat, not that i don't like the latter but for me personally when combat is satisfying it feels much better then having absolute control but the combat being super challenging and tight, even if i enjoy both i'm someone who values satsifaction over difficulty, and that's one of the reasons i prefer the Arkham free flow over actual fighting games like street fighter or the amazing and challenging fighting in DMC.
Thank you for high-lighting the beauty of Arkham's free flow, it's my favourite combat in any game ever made.
Funny, i'd say i'm the same with preferring satisfying combat rather than challenging one, yet i'd choose other games to talk about here, i really love the satisfying combat in both the Arkham games and the DMC games, but dislike the challenging combat of Souls games
I think a game like dmc is actually a good middle ground between challenging and satisfactory combat, the games can be difficult and can beat you to the ground, but at the core it's not hard to get a grasp of how it works, and styling on demons and seeing dante do 20 flips in the air paired with the sound desing and the soundtrack make the game feel really good even on the first playthrough
@@imgkaizer I mostly agree with this, i still prefer the Arkham free flow or the Mad Max free flow, but DMC is still very amazing to play, i really love doing the combos and such, but i wouldn't say it's an actual middle ground it is quite technical and that's the amazing part about it.
@@Atlan73 yeah, that part about the middle ground wasn't really true, but there are games much more difficult and much less flashy, like dark souls
this is very much how i have felt about the free flow combat system (and the copy cats) as well, one thing which i also find important in such combat system is presentation. in my opinion this kind of combat system can only work if it actually makes you feel like you are killing your enemies through the animation work and sound design. something like Ghost of Tsushima or Sleeping Dogs for example did it very well (RDR2 too although it is mainly a shooter game with some melee combat in it).
6:05 the best boss is actually electrocushioner from Arkham origins. Everybody who played it will know why
real
I cried once the fight against electrocutioner was over, because I realized I'll never be able to experience anything like that again
Because his fights happens a mere half-hour before Deathstroke, an *actually* complex fight that will test your reflexes and countering skills. Without the contrast of Electrocutioner, Deathstroke's fight might not stand out quite as much!
I don't know if any of you actually play AR/challenge mode in Batman AK in particular- the problem in that game is that it spams too many unique enemy types. You'll find yourself having to use the batclaw 6 times in a row to clear all shockshielded enemies. You'll have to spam disarm and destroy for quite a while to clear the screen. You'll have to do x for y and a for b, and while you're doing all that, the other unique enemy types have already replenished themselves. You can genuinely play with trying to keep a 100% uptime on taking out medics, stun batons, shields, etc. and they can still be all over your screen. So yes, Batman freeflow combat has depth, and it's top tier compared to other beat em ups, but in Batman AK in particular, the depth of the combat dies because sure, you don't spam left click, but you spam your disarm and destroy key, you spam your batclaw key. Nothing freeflow about this. You basically get a free critical strike grace period at the start of the challenge, then rarely ever again; as doing so will just mean you have less uptime on taking out special enemies, which will mean you have to spam the same buttons even more to cull their numbers. I hope this explanation made sense.
Moreover, playing a character without Disarm and Destroy makes this problem tenfold. This is why I stick to Batman, Azrael and Batgirl, though, I have to play Batgirl with a controller because for some reason half the roster's inputs are bugged / not mapped on PC, and Batgirl is one of them. Without a controller, Batgirl cannot do the critical strikes mentioned in the video; the mechanic that makes your combo build up twice as fast. She cannot disarm and destroy or do a special batarang ground takedown. Rocksteady, in the 9 years of Batman AK's existence, never fixed the PC input issues, and I hate playing with a controller because it's less precise. I can do it, but I'm better on M&K.
And if anyone thinks I can't go above 100k because I'm stuck or something, that's not the issue. imgur .com/a/80Mpsww
I played that just now to post it for this comment.
I actually cut a segment talking about my hangups with Arkham Knight, including combat issues and over reliance on the Batmobile, but I decided to save that for another video. But yes, especially after doing the community challenge trophies it became clear that AK specifically can get infuriatingly imprecise at ways I didn’t see in past games
@@sosaysjay Yes, it's kind of a shame for what is supposed to be the ultimate, most modern Arkham game.
I don't mind the batmobile and I understand why they used it so much; they finally implemented it for an Arkham game and were probably enthusiastic for it to be a significant mechanic in the game. However, I too, also wish it took less screen time; the game could instead have gone for a batfamily route and we could've played other characters more, even in duo settings. Who knows how a team-up between Azrael and Red Hood would look like, right? If Rocksteady expanded on the roster of characters within the Arkham games, they'd never have to go the Gotham Knights route either.
I don't think I'm the first person with these ideas, Rocksteady themselves probably pondered about similar things; I suppose they just didn't have the time to make every idea come to reality. It's a shame this happens to so many titles and franchises.
Looking forward to your next video, the discourse around the games is nice.
@@thefierce this is pedantic but Gotham knights wasn’t rocksteady (or Arkham)
Bruh, there is a guide for fixing Batgirl keyboard mappings on Steam. Why you didn’t try it?!
IDK if they updated that guide after Rocksteady removed Denuvo DRM. Because the fix was a workaround with files that could be modified without making game unplayable (it couldn’t start with adding Batgirl mappings to the main file, you had to create “DLC” files).
Batman Arkham City was my first Video game outside of Sonic Adventure 1 and Damn that was a way to enter the world of gaming cuz goddamn is the Batman Arkham games just perfect. Got all three of them on my PS5 for 5$ and never looked back.
You can thank Rocksteady by purchasing the Suicide Squad game………
Been playing the Arkham trilogy recently and the combat really stood out as something that just works for the kind of game it is. There are definitely combat systems I prefer that are far deeper, like DMC or Yakuza, but they wouldn’t work for Batman. Freeflow really emphasizes Batman’s calculated, strategic and rhythmic style of fighting and it never got old. It’s more expressive than people give it credit for, but by that same token I don’t find it nearly as compelling in other games that tried to copy it, like they missed the point. Rocksteady were just ahead of the curve.
oooh using the puddle footage for the spiderman example is EVIL
I think games like Oni, Sifu, Matrix Path of Neo in theses days should refresh the melee games genre.
Arkham combat excells when you chase legitimate perfection in the challenge maps. Flawless freeflow, and every single combat/gadget variation. Pair this with trying to achieve the best combo multipliers, and what was once a low-mid skill ceiling, now becomes borderline unreachable without legitimately perfect play.
Related to what you said about the Middle Earth games, I always have thought free flow combat as presented in those games was a bit of a mismatch for the Nemesis system. The Nemesis system is all about forming these personal grudges against individual foes, but once you get them alone they fold like a lawn chair especially once you get end game powers. I thought this issue was partially created by the combat system being best for fighting groups of enemies while leaving 1v1s as relatively underwhelming affairs.
Are there narrative justifications for Talion fighting hordes of enemies? Sure. My issue was just that I kind of wanted the stories I formed with my Nemeses to end with some kind of dramatic 1v1, but that particular implementation of free-flow combat was never able to make me feel like I was dueling a worthy rival to death.
I've only ever played shadow of war, but in my experience this largely stops being an issue when you increase the difficulty enough.
@@yersiniapestis5237 I’m the opposite, I’ve mostly played Shadow of Mordor which has no difficulty options. Btw, how many difficulty modes did War end up getting? I remember they added a bunch after launch to give different experiences but I didn’t have much opportunity to tinker around with them.
Regardless, I still think that the “Shadow of” combat system isn’t as good against one opponent and that limitation feels wrong to me when you consider the Nemesis System.
@@AK-tr6lo Even on the recommended Nemesis (Hard) difficulty in Shadow of War Orcs will quickly overwhelm you if you're not careful. And just like Mr. Freeze, they'll learn how to counter you if you keep using the same move on them too many times during a fight. Like if you vault over their heads more than a few times they'll learn to counter it and you lose that ability against that particular captain, even if he runs off and you fight him later.
Aside from the Nemesis difficulty, you have easy and normal below that. Easy is for if you just want the story and normal if you are a beginner and didn't play the first game. You need to play on Nemesis however to unlock the full potential of the Nemesis system. There's two more difficulties above nemesis and they behave differently. Gravewalker makes enemies stronger and harder to take down. It's the Masochist difficulty. Brutal makes enemies as hard as Gravewalker, but also buffs your power. You still go down just as quickly as Gravewalker tho. It's the glass cannon difficulty, and currently recommended for replaying the game if Nemesis feels too easy or boring.
Shadow of War vastly improved on the first game in terms of gameplay, give it a try. It goes on sale at 85% off fairly often.
PS: Brutal difficulty is also more immersive as enemies go down faster which makes if feel less like your sword is made of wood.
@@AK-tr6lo I would disagree. The combat in war worked way better for me in a 1 v 1. Every hit felt personal, your enemy would start adapting as the fight went on, and a single orc captain was tougher than a whole group of his followers. Fighting a massive group honestly kind of sucked, cuz there would be arrows and spears flying at you from all directions. Granted, i cranked the difficulty up to max, but I feel like it fit in quite well with the Nemesis system, as i would have very personal grudges against the orcs that I would fight.
I think some of my problem with free flow combat 1 on 1s is more the feel of the fights (for a lack of a better term) then how they actually play out. In my opinion free flow seems to work best when you are supposed to be someone with a significant martial advantage against most of your opponents. As a result I personally found most encounters with a nemesis orc ran the spectrum from really easy to just kind of annoying. I never really felt like any of the nemeses were really an equal, just some tricky guys who I needed to pin down and eliminate.
Is this dynamic justified in the text of the game? Sure. But, personally I think I would have liked it better if it used a combat system like the ones in Sekiro or Sifu where your opponents do feel more like equals. Also from what it sounds like I probably should have fiddled around more with the difficulty settings in Shadow of War.
It honestly seems mostly like my issue is the game feel feels off for what I think would work better for what the nemesis system seems to want to do. But obviously all of this is just my opinion.
The Deathstroke fight was the highlight of combat in the whole series, but it's sad that it lasted all of a minute or two. Still better than rug pull in Arkham Knight, but it wasn't the epic 1v1 anyone expected.
Really?
It was way too easy for the type of character that you were fighting. It was one of the easiest fights of the whole series. The Killer Croc fight in the same game was harder.
This wouldn’t be a problem if that was your first fight with him and you got a second one that was much more challenging like how babe got.
@@Indigo_1001 It wasn't a difficult fight, but it was focused. It was two martial artists going at it, instead of Batman just ploughing through some goons. It was also the only fight in the whole game that was just that; a fight. An arena, two guys, beating each other up. No weird superhuman stuff, just two dudes.
I definitely agree a second one with a higher difficulty would've been neat.
@@Indigo_1001If you had a problem fighting Killer Croc in Origins, I can't trust your gaming takes lmao
@@Indigo_1001, it’s not Babe, it’s Bone. 🍖
@@Indigo_1001, it’s Bone, not Babe.
Brilliant to see you do a different sort of video to the usual. I love your videos.
Good to see Arkham content from this channel. We are loooking forward to see more!
Spider-Man isn’t an Arkham Game in my opinion because it’s fundamentally different. It’s not really free flow you can’t counter. And air combat is not a factor in the Arkham games.
"Air combat", you're talking as if it were fight jet dogfighting.
This "air combat" is far less unique than the domination mechanic in the Mordor games. It doesn't make it special.
@@felisasininus1784the domination mechanic isn’t unique at all you basically grab an enemy and force them to switch sides. It hasn’t been done in a lot of games but the execution is way simpler than making a combat system that works differently based on if your feet are on the ground or if you are in the air.
I've seen people praise Web of Shadows combat more than Insomniac Spidey's. Heck, I've seen people praise the web swinging in Fortnite, Web of Shadows, Spider-Man 2: The Game, Ultimate Spider-Man, Marvel Rivals, and Kill the Justice League's Harley's grapple gun physics over Insomniac Spidey's.
@@felisasininus1784Also mentioning "air combat" isn't a flex cause Batman as a character isn't obviously gonna be doing air combos. I dunno why people like to bring this up. The 2013 Deadpool game had similar combat to Arkham but also had air combos cause Deadpool is much more zanier compared to Batman
FAX
People aren't ready for this but prince of persia had the prototype freeflow combat
Ultimate Spider-Man and Path of Neo too also have elements of that combat system
Something you didn't touch on is the fact that the combat isn't actually just attack and counter. The game rewards you for incorporating the quick gadgets, which add much-needed variety to standard encounters -- the batclaw and REC especially are useful for incapacitating enemies, opening them up for attack or holding them at bay while you focus on someone else.
Arkham didn't invent the idea of having an attack and counter button, but they did event the Free Flow system. The jumping across the battlefield like a ping pong ball.
But the real reasons behind why Arkham stands head and shoulders above its copy cats was the audio design and the fluidity of every element of the combat. All of your gadets flow together as seamlessly as any of your punches and because of that, losing your combo meter in Arkham is soul crushing.
The depth of the combat comes from the mastering the art of not losing your combo, which is harder than you would think because the game's mechanics are not 100% consistent all the time. Circumventing those inconsistencies while remaining stylish is the sign of a real master.
The only Arkham copy-cat that actually manages to compare to it is the Middle Earth games because they built off it instead of trying to subvert the system like say Insomniac Spider-Man.
Really fantastic analysis.
And I agree. It's a very simple system but the variety of enemytypes which often require specific responses to take out, and having the option to implement these quick-use gadgets and special moves makes it remain incredibly enjoyable.
You can't get like crazy expressive or creative with it, but there's definitely fun to be had with keeping your buttonpresses at the intended rythm, chucking some Batarangs through a crowd and pinballing between as many dudes as you can before using the multi-ground-takedown.
My only comparision point that I've personally played were the TASM games I think, and both of these essentially adapted just the punch and counter, and that was it. It felt insanely braindead and barebones, because there was nothing further to get into.
The semi lock-and-key design of Arkham's enemies would probably be bothersome in something where you put more of your own spin on things like DMC, but I think for how these games work it's pretty much perfect, since the challenge is essentially keeping your flow up, while responding accordingly to who you're trying to beat down at that moment. Screw up once and you're instantly massively weakened because you gotta land 3 hits to enter free flow again.
It's just the right amount of "use your brain"-challenge, to keep these games fun even if you ignore the gadget stuff entirely.
Aaand ye, I really like how the gadgets often serve both a combat and puzzlesolving utility. Making the most of the toolkit.
Anyway I lost my train of thought and am rambling again. Good vid
Good video. I think an important point is that, while the arkham combat at the end of the day is simple, the fact no one has been able to imitate it 100% shows how well crafted it is for what it's trying to be. I've played a bit of Shadow of Mordor and Mad Max and the feel of it is just wrong (in Mad Max's case, completely wrong, in Mordor's case only a little wrong); if Arkham's combat is a smooth professional tango, the others feel like an awkward nerd trying to fit in in the prom dance, it just doesn't flow like arkham does, like they don't fully commit to the fact this is meant to be a rhythm game (in mad max's case seemingly bc they wanted to increase the weight of the combat by making it slow and heavy, which does fit the vibe of the source material but heavily clashes with the way the mechanics are meant to be used as)
Good video as per usual
I'd like to hear you talk about the Arkham games in more depth. Please consider it.
Me too, for a long while the main games for me to play were Assassins Creed and the Arkham saga.
@@Kal-Racso Whatever did happen to the guys who made the original two Assassin's Creed games and Arkham Asylum? The world needs more visionaries like them, and even then it's a shame that Paul Dini didn't write for Arkham Knight or Arkham Origins.
Using the knightfall protocol music is a nice touch
I love ALL So Says Jay videos!!!! ❤
Shadow of Mordor came very close I think.
Very well explained
pretty cool video mate i like this type of combat system i enjoy shadow of war a lot never played batman but it's on my list and i miss old assassins creed games so much with that combat and those awesome animations
The primary draw of skill expression in stealth action games comes from creating stylish or ultra-efficient chains of moves that embody the character to the fullest. In early Assassin's Creed combat you still have a long way to go, but for Arkham you've pretty much solved the puzzle. You have a reliable and non-cheap way to deal with every enemy type and a few variations if you don't feel like using those. You are a strong Batman, but from here you can get ridiculous by experimenting and picking up bits and pieces from community members, especially for Arkham Knight. Counters become a choice you can not make once you realize there's a speed benefit to closer range attacks if you just don't touch your left stick, so fast in fact that you can cut off incoming attacks before they can land. This is essential while holding a weapon because it allows you to attack armed enemies, but not counter them, and other moves that can successfully interrupt them will cause you to drop your weapon. Enemy juggling becomes similarly optional once you realize you can keep attacking or stun floored enemies by just holding right trigger. From there combos are very viable with different strings of gadgets, attacks, and stuns, which are actually advantageous for chipping away at Militia Brutes' massive health pools. Each individual punch of a beatdown resets your ability to use a gadget without losing combo, so you can spam them at everyone else while keeping your main target isolated. You can also cancel beatdowns into special combo moves to clear the surrounding area and allow you to continue your combo or choose to end it prematurely. Quick throw projectiles have special contextual behaviors when pointed at environmental objects or enemies in certain states. Some of my favorite channels to study Arkham combat from are Knerd, Fleaker, and DyyynamicEntry. Much more than other franchises, I've gotten a lot of value out of reading comments and descriptions, so I try to share every now and then when I learn new things too. Rather than major fundamentals that change how I engage with the system as a whole, it's mostly minor techs that go a long way in helping me look awesome when used in combination. I just picked up a tip about special ground pound behavior while holding a weapon from a comment I've been wanting to try out
That's why I love action brawlers like yakuza and arkham. There are so many little techs you can learn and utilize. Like in yakuza with wall bounding combos, and juggle combos; and with arkham and it's beatdown cancels
I'm glad Arkham fans have a series they love so much, but I'll always prefer the grounded brutality of Sleeping Dogs. Being able to disarm an enemy of his butcher knife and throw it at another is unendingly satisfying and the ability to grab enemies and throw them onto hooks or into air conditioning fans will never get old. Couple this with a fantastic combo system:
- punch, leg sweep
- punch punch punch, roundhouse
- punch punch, knee kick and then optional kick them in the head so hard they do a freaking backflip!
And you've got a game that any Arkham fan looking for something new should check out.
One of these days I'll finally finish Arkham City.
(great video btw)
Edit:
Went back and finished Arkham City (it was great)
I love the arkham games a ton, played em for hours on end. I still find myself going back to sleeping dogs because of how visceral and raw it's combat is. The mix of martial arts and brutal finishing moves make everything so damn satisfying.
I go back to both for sleeping dogs I just go to the docks underground fighting rings.
i havent watched the video yet but just from the title i already agree😂 i understand where people are coming from who say this is just a button masher cause you CAN just mash buttons and get thru the game just fine for the most part, if that's all the effort u want to put in the game doesn't say no... but there's so much more to it as well, there is so much room for player expression.
it just bugs me when people act like the combat is a QTE telling u to mash the same button over and over its like nah that's what you wanted to do with the combat system if u want to do more complex things with it u most certainly can and it will reward u so much for it
I think the only copycat I played that was enjoyable was Mad Max, but maybe its just my love for that game clouding my vision. But the game that elevates Arkham combat is Sifu. I WISH a batman game came out with Sifu's combat. Definitely the next evolution of this style of beat them up
I agree. Playing Sifu I was astounded that someone created a combat system that somehow threads the needle of being good for group fights while still having great 1 on 1 bosses.
@@AK-tr6lo It's not an easy game by any means, but you can never be bored, even while getting beaten to a pulp. That's good combat right there
Actually, I think So Says Jay should do a video on Sifu if only to compare its combat system to Arkham's.
Arkham combat limits player with 1 tap punch and force to change targets unless u stun them & in rapid punch u still need to prepare to counter/dodge. This helps to keep combat has balanced back and forth between offense & defense that makes it simple but enganging.
The first true crime game set this combat
Regardless of if you think the combat in the arkham games sucks or not, you have to admit it revolutionized combat games in general.
I can infinite replay Arkham Knight story mode in loops. The gameplay has 3 main variations, each doesn't take too long to finish ensuring good circulation before burnout/bored with overall good gameflow. I never found design like that in any other games.
SSKTJL has that too but some missions took too long because they don't circulate it for some reason and gear management kinda break the gameflow.
Arkham combat was definitely really interesting for the time and worked for batman, but I think since Sifu came out, there’s really no excuse for arkham style combat anymore. Not saying everything should copy sifu, but sifu showed that you can have an incredible combat system that is visually satisfying and feels smooth while fighting 15 enemies, but also has complexity and retains that complexity for 1 on 1 encounters.
I'd argue Batman Arkham's free flow gameplay give me the same feeling as Devil May Cry. Yea DMC is a hack and slash compared to Batman, but I think it still has an addicting factor to it: style. You can easily spam the same attack and defeat the enemies, but that's not the point. Being stylish is the biggest priority, and you actually want the combat to not end so fast in these games. Both games has a score and style meter, and being as stylish as possible gets you high points. It may have lowest skill ceiling, but it has a high skill ceiling when you try to stack up points by using the variety of moves, and Batman Arkham actually has a lot of move variety than just punching.
Just spamming x/square on the enemies is boring. Actually using all the moves in your arsenal, while not getting hit, is just so satisfying. You can play it safe in both DMC and Batman Arkham which is boring, or risk it all to have a satisfying experience.
Are you going to talk about Assassin's Creed Shadows? Stealth looks so promising
Yes at some point I’ll talk about it, hopefully I’ll get the chance sooner rather than later
I really want a gaming console :p
To anyone calling the Arkham series combat a button masher… I’d like to see them button mash their way through a room full of thugs with stun batons, guns, knives, titan enemies, brutes and league of assassin ninjas. Then see if they can still say it’s a button masher with a straight face… and if they still aren’t convinced, just have them fight deathstroke.
so says jay what do u think of the stealth system of arkham games
I like it a lot, I think it’s unique and keeps the player active, avoiding the usual crouch and cover formula
Honestly DMC and Ninja Gaiden have the best combat system I have seen in any game but I do like the Arkham system but its very slow and actually punishes you if you try to be faster than the animations
Guys, hear me out, but cats are cool 😎
You mention the skill celling being low but I don’t think that matters, to me free flow combat is about being expressive like dmc. yea I can just button mash square and triangle or I can stylishly and methodically take down each thug in the way Batman would.
The extent to which I think it can matter is the limit of that expressiveness. Obviously it’s an unfair comparison, but I’ve platinumed every DMC game, completing all the content including the no-hit run of DMC5 and all the hardest difficulties. Even with all those playthroughs, I haven’t scratched the surface of kinds of moves or combos I can pull off. DMC4 pandora is still largely a mystery to me because of its complexity.
Meanwhile, because there are so few skills in Arkham, I’ve essentially experienced everything I’d want to at some point. Since the only type of encounter that truly allows for expressiveness is the large group battles, there is only so much space to explore these mechanics before you’ve done essentially everything there is to do. If DMC6 came out tomorrow I’d struggle against the new enemy types, whereas if a new Arkham game came out I’d probably 3 star every challenge first try.
Again, that’s not to say it’s a bad thing. Difficulty is by no means a prerequisite for a good combat system. But I also do understand why the Arkham games may be too simple for some people.
@@sosaysjay I agree with everything you just said, but to be clear I am not saying free flow combat is hard it’s not. Anyone can get three stars but not everyone can get three stars while also clearing the room as Batman would.
To make my point a little more clear I wanna use stealth encounters as an example. I can walk in a room and silent takedown each enemy and there’s nothing wrong with that or I can set traps deliberately scaring goons like Batman would. I think about free flow combat the same way I do stealth, If you’d like I can gladly show you a few examples.
@@r0cket104 I 100% understand what you are saying, but if you do have examples to show I am also always happy to see them
@@sosaysjay I gathered a few clips of mine I got off my PlayStation, how can I send them?
@@r0cket104 You can either email them to me at the address on my about tab on my channel or you can send me a PSN request
Make a video on Assassin's Creed : Rogue.
shadow o war has more fun combat than batman
the combat is not just a two button win. Wheres has this come from. There are plenty of enemies thay literally negate that from being possible. Also, the skill ceiling is very much high. Try and get to killer croc in the iceberg lounge AR and come back
Batman Arkham games were the copycats. THey took Assassin's Cred combat as a base. What they did better is that they kept evolving the combat from that base, while Creed never did until the abadoned the whole thing to switch to RPG combat. Which is why Arkham, Sleeping Dogs and Mordor all have vastly better combat than the Creed games they were inspired by.
The first time I saw a parry or counter system like this was in Spider-Man 2 in 2004, long before AC. You could argue Prince of Persia Sands of Time had a comparable system that would be more of a parallel to Arkham than AC1.
The funny thing is, I agree with much of what you said, I actually think Spider-Man 2 has better combat than an Arkham game but then it also has an issue you mentioned where the former game is just way too long, Spidey 2 is just way too long while Arkham isn't as much and they have more gameplay "pillars". I wish the Spidey 2 had more traversal based missions in the main story or just other stuff since so much of Spidey 2 is combat, combat, combat.
But here is the problem with character action game fanboys who deride Arkham combat for being "simple". Would Arkham magically be better if it was a bargain bin DMC? Nightmare Before Christmas Oogie's Revenge is that and it's worse than DMC1 and 2. Yet you never see these people talk about this game, it's a licensed DMC clone like they always wanted yet no one even remembers it so that pretty much proves my point.
That and I'm surprised Arkham combat gets derided so much when Zelda combat is even worse than Arkham, in Zelda most basic enemy encounters can beaten in basic sword swings, but Arkham combat at least requires SOME degree of more thinking yet no one ever critcizes, then again, no one is allowed to criticise Zelda on the internet but that is a different story.
In that case, I suggest you watch Full Fat Videos' video on Arkham/Web of Shadows combat.
@@maddenboseroy4074
Explain yourself dude, I dislike it when people need vids to do the talking for them. I don't even know what specfically you are addressing.
you think insomniacs spiderman has better combat? oh my god ☠️
@@evilzdeadite
I think Spider-Man 2 does, genius. Also read the whole comment because I clearly said I prefered Arkham as the collective whole. But hey be the Rocksteady spokesperson, they clearly need all the help they can get right now.
@@civilwarfare101 Firstly, your first sentence is a BULLSHIT reason to not watch a video. Secondly, seeing as that is the case, I suppose I will explain myself: the basic points are - Web of Shadows has faster animation, you can feel the power in Spidey's combat (the differences between basic and symbiote Spidey are much more pronounced, with basic Spidey being faster and symbiote Spidey having more off-the-rails power moves), the web strike is much more gratifying than in Insomniac Spidey, and Spidey can fight on walls in free roam like one would expect Spider-Man to; and Rocksteady had a better understanding of the Batman mythos than Insomniac seems to with Spidey's, to the point where Batman seems more powerful and faster than Spidey. Thirdly, th-cam.com/video/N4ptct2S5RY/w-d-xo.html&pp=ygUed2ViIG9mIHNoYWRvd3MgdnMgc3BpZGVyIG1hbiAy should be all the more enlightening, and lucky for someone like you, there is no one to do the talking for me.
I love the arkham games combat system, but I hate how people are saying the insomniac spidermqn games combat is a rip off or a copy cat of arkhams, like what ? How smoothed brained do you have to be to say something like that ? 😂
Just watch Full Fat Videos' videos on the Guardians of the Galaxy game and Web of Shadows/Arkham combat.
One thing I love about the combat are the sound effects. Batman's punches sound like tiny explosions. The beat down move is especially satisfying to use for that reason