Game Informer

What Batman: Arkham Origins Learned from Asylum and City

The developers of Batman: Arklham Origins talk about their history and first time playing Batman: Arkham Asylum and Arkham City.

Related Articles


  1. well origins with story is earlier than asylum and city so the bad is that you don't have much things in city and asylum like grapple accelerator or much things.

  2. what i think about origins is better than asylum and city because in city you have strange mobs like they look like kiddish games in origins you have them better like bane dead shot copperhead they are better than asylum and city boss :S and joker is better on origins scars hairs it looks awesome 

  3. Man, saying that Origins sucks is stupid. Like, I don't think it is better than the previous titles, but it is practically the same game with a different story. I am actually enjoying the new game quite a lot (i bought it for 10 dollars so I am not defending a big purchase)

  4. I am confused as hell about the story line were does Arkham origins fit into the story I've played all of the batman up to origins and the story line is a little confusing

  5. The batman arkham games are supposed to be one of the best single player games but the story mode on arkham origins sux. I think the multiplayer was better, Rocksteady your the best.

  6. Dude on the left of the frame here, in the hat, makes A LOT of sense (challenge maps for Asylum/City make you appreciate the depth of the game mechanics… and the balance of navigation, brawling and predation is spot on perfect). I'm actually just starting to play Origins…

    …and while predation and navigation feel right, the brawling is off a bit from City. From what I've heard, you can no longer interrupt attack animations to counter (which often causes me to hesitate and try to strategize more). The only problem with this is that it can, and does, feel like there is less wiggle room with how long it takes before your combo count drops. Definitely not a fan of that. I mean, I'm down for adding more challenge to an aspect of a game (series), but not at the sake of sacrificing a fun, addictive formula that is at the heart of gameplay.

  7. this is total bullshit. WBM took arkham city and broke it, all of the changes they added ruin the game. the game looks worse, the combat is worse and the animations are so awkward now and they aren't nearly as smooth as they used to be, the AI is broken and it has no atmosphere. this game was a huge fucking disappointment.

  8. I really enjoyed arkham origins, not quite as good as City but still a very good game…
    Although the pc version of city was buggy as fuck ( I didn't buy the game till they fixed dx11 )
    I still love all of them, replaying batman AA now 🙂

  9. If these guys are working on another Arkham title then I find it extremely unlikely that they'll be able to top Arkham Knight. I think playing Origins, in the back of everyone's mind we knew there'd be another Rocksteady release but playing a WBM Arkham after Arkham Knight will be too weird,

  10. Rocksteady is like the older, more mature brother of WB Montreal (WBM), like Tadashi to Hiro. But the difference between Hiro and WBM is that Hiro was actually creative an innovative. WBM just basically copy pasted most of Arkham City and just signed its named across the box art to show that it really is “theirs”, with a red Crayola.

  11. I'll give WB Games one more chance to remake Batman Arkham Origins. From Scratch, new story, new everything. Keep the most wanted aspect and include the Nightmare Skin like promised.

  12. The one thing Origins did better than the others was the combat.  The boss fights were fast-paced and fun and this game, save for the Bane fight at the end just because it terrified me, but that's a good thing.  I really liked the Martial Artist enemy type, and it looks like Rocksteady did too since it appears they make a return. 
    The story and everything else is forgivable, but the one thing I didn't like at all was how BORING the world was.  Yeah, there were a couple of billboards here and there, but the city didn't have near as much detail as the last two games.  Rocksteady has said that even as big as Knight will be, they made sure to have a story around every corner of Gotham city, meaning every inch of the city has a purpose other than filler for a big world.  These guys did their best, and I liked it a lot, but this game just lacked the same soul the other games had.

  13. arkham asylum-9/10
    arkham city-10/10

    arkham origin-6,5/10 ( they didin't learn shit )
    Bugs,glitches, combat problems ,downgraded graphick compared to older arkham games, mediocre story ,atmosphere and side quests, no more patches" yes we know that the game has still problems, but fuck you we have your money now".
    Overall very lazy product they didin't even try

  14. One thing that bugged me was how armoured his suit was compared to asylum and city, they should of kept the overall style consistent with the other games. The feel and look of this game is completely different compared with the others. Origins feels too much like Nolan type batman where as asylum and city is more comic/animated series style

Back to top button