• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Batman Arkham City - Armored edition (Wii U) Reviews thread

IGN said:
Batman: Arkham City isn't perfect, but listing the little things I didn't like gets in the way of all the stuff I adored.

IGN 95/100

What is a bigger deal is the GamePad integration. This ranges from the usual "DS port" stuff like a persistent map screen and a touch menu interface to upgrade Batman's abilities, both of which are very appreciated, to AR tweaks like tilt-controlled Batarang aiming. I found these additions, and the use of augmented reality to search crime scenes in Detective Mode, pretty useful and natural. Aiming in particular augments analog stick targeting with tilt fine-tuning in the same way Uncharted: Golden Abyss did, and it's welcome.

The coolest use of the GamePad, however, is in the environmental audio. When Batman receives radio transmissions from Oracle or overhears a conversation with his surveillance equipment, the audio comes in over the GamePad, simulating Batman's earpiece. As you get close enough to a conversation that Batman would be able to hear it unassisted, it shifts over to the TV audio. It's cool.

You can also play the entire game directly on the GamePad, which is an absolute boon for absentminded Riddler trophy searching while watching TV.

These extras – along with the presence of all previously released DLC – would all be fine reasons to opt for the Armored Edition over the normal, uh, Spandex Edition on other consoles, but there is one Bat-Caveat that must be noted. The framerate is nowhere near as smooth as it is elsewhere. Armored Edition doesn't really have slowdown – instead, there's a consistent choppiness to animation. I hope this is a problem Unreal Engine 3 developers get sorted out quickly. In any case, it's not a reason I would avoid Armored Edition (it still looks great), but be aware you're not getting the best-looking version.

Joystick.com 90/100

Unfortunately, these methods for using the GamePad are inconsistent at best, with the equipment selection being the most inessential. Almost none are preferable to playing the game with a traditional controller. Much like the new armor Batman sports in the Wii U release, these changes are primarily superficial. They don’t get in the way of enjoying this exemplary game, but they certainly don't make for a better play experience.

If somehow you’ve yet to play Batman: Arkham City, Armored Edition is a great way to finally appreciate the game along with a majority of its DLC. However, the Wii U port isn’t preferable to Game of the Year versions you’ll find on PS3 and 360. Armored Edition utilizes the GamePad better than some other AAA games being ported to the system, but that’s still not enough to make this the definitive release, or one you should go out of your way to play.

GamesRadar 90/100

Gadgets themselves also insist on using the touchscreen, with the biggest offender being the hacking device. Whereas before, you'd rotated the analog sticks (or press keyboard keys) to solve puzzles, you now have to open up a whole new hacking minigame where you trace your finger on the touchscreen to find the right hotspot while avoiding a red line that intermittently sweeps past. I used to like how quick and efficient hacking was in Arkham City, bypassing the flow-breakage of dreary door-opening minigames found in other titles, but Armored Edition has spoiled that.

Another issue is the gyroscope being used to aim Batarangs and the Batclaw. You can use the right stick to aim, but the gyroscope still registers and can throw the reticule off slightly. The remote Batarangs are also controlled via the GamePad screen, and again can be steered using motion or stick input, with similar conflicts. These issues are tiny, never really getting too much in the way, but they help hammer home just how much was changed simply for the sake of change, regardless of whether or not it improved the game.

Batman: Arkham City Armored Edition simply tries too hard to be more than the port it honestly should've been. If you can implement new features and controls in ways that make the experience superior, then I'm all for it, but here we have a game that's fallen into the familiar trap of attempting to alter everything without regard for whether or not it actually improves anything. Dragging my finger slowly across a small screen to open a door is not gameplay -- it simply isn't. Fiddling with dragging gadgets to hotkey them, when opening a menu and hitting a button to select them would be quicker, is not an improvement -- it's a detriment. It's making things less efficient than they used to be an effort to impress us.

Armored Edition didn't take that route. It took things that already worked perfectly and shook them until they cracked. Not shattered completely, but undoubtedly broken, just a little bit. If you only own Nintendo systems and love Batman, this remains a very worthy purchase, one that will give your hours of crimefighting enjoyment. If you've already played Arkham City, however, you'll be better off leaving it, because you already experienced the definitive version.
Read more at http://www.destructoid.com/review-b...ored-edition-238794.phtml#Z85AP6kMsp7yCHUw.99

Destructoid 70/100

SUMMARY: Although the core of Batman: Arkham City remains intact, new glitches and tacked-on gimmicks take away from the overall experience enough to make this a clearly inferior version of one of the great games of this generation.

THE GOOD: Same great story with all DLC packs already on the disc.
THE BAD: New glitches and unnecessary gimmicks make this a worse version than its predecessors.
THE UGLY: How the game looks if you play exclusively on the Wii U controller.

EGM 70/100
 
Looks like WiiU won't be getting a 10 out of 10...

YtL1A.jpg
 
curious how it can get 95 and 90 when the comments about the gamepad use were very critical. I'd have expected more of a drop than that.

Plus IGN's review looks like a reprint of the PS3/360 review, with a tiny paragraph at the end specific to the WiiU, which is almost entirely negative - yet still 95%
 
curious how it can get 95 and 90 when the comments about the gamepad use were very critical. I'd have expected more of a drop than that.

Plus IGN's review looks like a reprint of the PS3/360 review, with a tiny paragraph at the end specific to the WiiU, which is almost entirely negative - yet still 95%

Gaming Journalism:

VcQla.jpg


They are just like 3rd parties, phone it in
 
Plus IGN's review looks like a reprint of the PS3/360 review, with a tiny paragraph at the end specific to the WiiU, which is almost entirely negative - yet still 95%

Yeah, I had the same impression reading their review.

Anyway, for someone who has not played Arkham city on XBox360/PS3, this port seems a good chance to make up for it.
 
i'm really torned about this... i own every single hw, so i could actually get the game for whatever i want, but i usually prefer to feed the new baby...

on the other hand all those talks about fps issues and graphics are not good.

can someone who played the game on the wii u make a good comparison among all versions performance and graphic wise?
 
It's a poor showing, that a brand new console is struggling to run a game that 6 year old consoles ran with aplomb.

Hmm, I'm really not sure about this console, it seems extremely compromised in a lot of ways. I think I'll pass, and stick with the HD twins until actual new tech arrives, rather than inferior tech, repackaged with a pretty box.
 
No mention of the awful framerate? Saw the Giant Bomb guys playing it on stream yesterday and it was just terrible. And they rightly called it so.
 
i'm really torned about this... i own every single hw, so i could actually get the game for whatever i want, but i usually prefer to feed the new baby...

on the other hand all those talks about fps issues and graphics are not good.

can someone who played the game on the wii u can make a good comparison among all versions performance and graphic wise?

Watch the Giantbomb stream archive. The framerate is fucking terrible. Get it for any other system.
 
The game looked TERRIBLE on the GiantBomb live stream yesterday. From what thousands saw these positive reviews looked past the terrible framerate and texture issues.
 
IGN didnt even bother to write a review, they just stuck a completely negative paragraph at the end and left it at the same score, which is completely stupid
 
i'm really torned about this... i own every single hw, so i could actually get the game for whatever i want, but i usually prefer to feed the new baby...

on the other hand all those talks about fps issues and graphics are not good.

can someone who played the game on the wii u make a good comparison among all versions performance and graphic wise?

You're best off getting the PC version if you have a good setup.
 
Anyone who has seen the GiantBomb stream yesterday knows that these reviews are insane.

Yep, Doritos Pope all over them. There were segments where the game was struggling at sub-20 fps and dipping into single-digit fps often.
 
Well, guess I'll be getting the xbox goty edition after all. :(

Ugly case is preferable to ugly game
I already had it on PC and got all the DLC in a sale, but this takes out any possible regret for not waiting on the Wii U version.

... Although I'd still get it looking better on PC, so even in a best case scenario I'd have neat tablet controls combined with, what, a solid 30 FPS? Even if this was a good port I wouldn't see them going for 60 or above 720p.
 
I don't care about reviews normally, but after the GB stream... WTF? Did they play it for five minutes or something? Because the framerate matters to the game, and it's terrible.
 
I don't care about reviews normally, but after the GB stream... WTF? Did they play it for five minutes or something? Because the framerate matters to the game, and it's terrible.

The bad framerate was noticeable within the first 5 minutes and only got worse. No idea how you could not notice it.
 
How could they on good conscience give such high scores when the game plummets in frame rate any time Batman gets himself surrounded by goons?
 
ShackNews Review said:
However, whether it's sloppy optimization or underpowered hardware, the Wii U is not able to maintain a steady framerate. During the more crowded fights, the game chugs along with a framerate that looks like its in the teens. Even worse, when gliding around the open world, it's not uncommon for the game to simply freeze and stutter momentarily. In comparison to last year's Xbox 360 and PS3 release, the Wii U clearly suffers.

At least some reviewers bring it up.
 
I already had it on PC and got all the DLC in a sale, but this takes out any possible regret for not waiting on the Wii U version.

... Although I'd still get it looking better on PC, so even in a best case scenario I'd have neat tablet controls combined with, what, a solid 30 FPS? Even if this was a good port I wouldn't see them going for 60 or above 720p.

how much does it cost on steam?
 
Those scores don't make sense when there are framerate issues as bad as there are. I suspect these reviewers didn't replay the game.
 
I already had it on PC and got all the DLC in a sale, but this takes out any possible regret for not waiting on the Wii U version.

... Although I'd still get it looking better on PC, so even in a best case scenario I'd have neat tablet controls combined with, what, a solid 30 FPS? Even if this was a good port I wouldn't see them going for 60 or above 720p.

If they'd gog it, I'd buy it on the pc in a heartbeat.
 
Even the lowest review (from Sterling) doesn't mention problems for the fps and still recommends the game, lol.
Mabye it was a problem with the giantbomb console?
meh, I was close checking this out despite disinterest until now in a christmas sale, or a rent or something, but this seems to be useless if true. Too bad, and now it's even more embarassing that Nintendo couldn't get better 3rd party support within a year and had to highlight this shit for 5 minutes on their E3 showing.
 
Those scores don't make sense when there are framerate issues as bad as there are. I suspect these reviewers didn't replay the game.
Well, at least one review mentioned it...

Still, a lot of reviewers simply aren't sensitive to these issues and will consistently fail to mention them.
 
Not that there's a standardised scale for how many points should be deducted from some idea of a base score (the 360/PS3/PC versions' score?), but I do not see how the gamepad and included DLC in any way outweigh the performance issues. The price difference might even be large enough to cover most of the DLC, although I haven't done the math here and I have no idea of how much content is new or exclusive.

Do you rate the game compared to the other versions or compared to some sort of Wii U standard though? If all multiplatform games that were ever to come out on the Wii U were also to have exactly proportional issues, obviously practically impossible, would games just score two points out of ten lower on the console by default?
 
Even the lowest review (from Sterling) doesn't mention problems for the fps and still recommends the game, lol.
Mabye it was a problem with the giantbomb console?
meh, I was close checking this out despite disinterest until now in a christmas sale, or a rent or something, but this seems to be useless if true. Too bad, and now it's even more embarassing that Nintendo couldn't get better 3rd party support within a year and had to highlight this shit for 5 minutes on their E3 showing.

I was watching the gametrailers 'i got a wii u' and saw some weird things during the intro movie of assassin's creed. I was wondering if there was some other select videos of Batman. maybe it was just the stream? Hell if I know but I wanted to get this. Soo confused.
 
is the batman beyond suit given to you in this edition of the game or how about in the game of the year edition on xbox 360?
 
Top Bottom