Disclaimer: I didn't read 75% of the above replies, 'cause ain't nobody got time for that, so I apologize if I say what's already been sung.

I largely blame Origins for the jaded attitudes. I feel like if the wait between City and Knight had been four years without the arguably sub-par Origins in the middle to pad it out, there would be a lot more positivity and a lot less bullshit towards Arkham Knight. Instead, Origins came out, wasn't all that good, and even though it had nothing to do with Rocksteady and is questionably non-canon, sort of soured people on the series and made it all seem like a semi-annual samey-fest.

If you're talking about the GB crew, I feel like only Jeff is really not into it, and it's well established that Jeff pretty much hates everything that isn't Burnout Paradise has very specific tastes.

If you're talking about the internet in general, it's probably endemic of a larger trend of sequel fatigue.

It's probably down to the samey-ness of the newer games. AA was this incredible, out of nowhere game that changed the genre but each entry since has simply added and refined those concepts and innovations. It's very similar to how Far Cry is now. Far Cry 3 also came out of nowhere. It was just the 3rd entry into a series that was cool on paper but was pretty much a mess in practise so no one really had any expectations for it. If Far Cry 5 were announced at E3 2016 and was a game that played like the previous 2 titles, I'm sure people would be pretty jaded towards it too. In the case of Batman though, the fatigue comes from other games. No other game I can think of plays like the newer Far Cry games while dozens of other games just ripped the combat from Batman so even when a new Batman game comes out, it's already so familiar even if it's been years since the last one.

I think the fact that Arkham Asylum was so great in so many things that hadn't been pulled off in a believable way before is kind of a curse for this series. There simply wasn't too much to improve, aside from graphics and such. Hell, even bringing in much bigger open worlds doesn't seem like much of an improvement. Anything they've been trying to do to the later installments has been received with either a lukewarm response or, as in the case of the batmobile, even a negative one.

I'm very happy to be playing Arkham Knight, and have enjoyed the gameplay and story a whole lot, but I didn't play Origins and I don't know if I would have enjoyed this one as much if I had. It's just too good a formula to tamper with, but it does get tiresome that it always kinda does the same good things, and the new stuff that's supposed to introduce a new, cool pace never ends ip feeling as good.

Appreciate the insightful and respectable replies as always.

You know what other thing I found out recently that baffles me though?......Everyone seems to prefer Arkham Asylum now. When I finished City I thought it was undoubtedly better than the first one and one of the best games I had ever played. I was utterly blown away by it and I THOUGHT the majority opinion was that everyone agreed with me.....That is certainly not the case at least now.

Oh and I'm exaggerating here, I'm not "baffled" by it. It's just here I was thinking nearly everyone thought City was better but boy am I wrong, haha

Oh and as a side note, I just finished Knight and now THAT one is my favorite.

At Giant Bomb its just Jeff and honestly...he'd jaded about most everything.

Though seriously, the arkahm game is just fine and all of the batmobile things were just awful.

@frostyryan: People have long been adamant that the open world for City was to the games detriment. The pacing of the main campaign was really just a contrived mess, the justification for going from place to place was really off especially when it gets to Freeze. The whole campaign served as a super villain checklist rather than a coherent progression of activities based on the narrative which is what Asylum excelled at.

Most of the side content was poor too, political prisoners and all that generic open world checklist crap was just padding. Personal side note too I hate how they implemented the Riddler seriously 1 dude going around putting up chainlink fence puzzles everywhere for Batman is just dumb. It's fine when he puts his trophies in places that use the existing world assets creatively but seriously chainlink fences everywhere what the fuck?

I also personally don't like the combat all that much so with City focusing a lot more on the brawling aspect rather than the stealth component it felt like less of a game to me. The stealth areas in City were also less tightly designed too (most likely due to the open world design.)

What City did right though was the flying and additional characters made strides in making it a more tolerable game to me. The Freeze boss fight was great too.

I think it comes down to why you enjoyed the game in the first place.

If the primary attraction for you was the novelty of the combat system, then yeah it is probably getting stale after more of the same 3 more times + other franchises incorporating elements.

If the primary attraction for you was something else (the level design, exploring Gotham, the Batman mythology and veneer, the story etc) then you are probably not bored.

As for me not fatigued at all, in fact I just Played City and Origins (+ Blackgate) a couple months ago and still very much want to play more. I just can't get AK to run right yet on PC :(

I don't get bored of most franchises though, Dynasty Warriors is one of the few that wore out its' welcome with me pretty quickly.

I don't know if it's actual cynicism regarding the series so much as it is a lukewarm response, in certain rather vocal circles, to the latest game. I'm not extremely-versed on comic lore, but I do peruse several boards where people who follow them rigorously have discussed this game at length. The primary, driving criticisms that keep coming up very much echo @n7's recent and rather comprehensive blog on the game. He articulated it much better than I could, but as a rough summary: the twists were known, the villain roster was far too bloated, and the side missions weren't diverse enough. People in these circles seem to still very much enjoy the game, it just doesn't feel like the capstone to the series that they had expected from Rocksteady.

That whole mess with the PC version certainly hasn't helped matters, either.

B:AS came out in 2009. There've now been 4 games since then (not counting DS versions). That means (mathematically) that we've gotten a new Batman game approximately every 1.5 years. Just a little much for me, but I'm not a huge fan of annual franchises (save for the Persona 4 "series" and I think that's more that they make different games out of it....for better or worse).

Happens to every series.

They have been good games, but this is also the 4th main series title in less than 6 years. Couple that with many games starting to use the core combat from the series, albeit with little tweaks, and the product just doesn't feel as fresh as it once did.

It's pretty simple really. The more vocal gamers are sick of sequels and want to see devs innovate. But that won't happen unless the masses stop buying them. I think the only franchises that are still pumping out sequels that excite me are MGS (because it's one like every 6 years) and Dark Souls (because I still haven't found any other games that have successfully emulated the style/community)

Regarding Batman specifically, I played Asylum when it was a PS+ game and thought it was okay. Haven't tried the others but if they are supposedly worse than Asylum, I don't really want to. I suspect that people are giving Asylum credit for being the first of its kind (which is fine), but if you play it after having played other games that built on the foundation set by Asylum (Shadow of Mordor, for example), it doesn't really hold up, imo.

With all of that said, I'll probably play Knight this year just for GOTY purposes once I can get it marked down on the preowned market, but I'm not really amped about it.

I'm only about 3 or 4 hours in but I'm feeling the same way about Arkham Knight as I did about Arkham City - it's a bit underwhelming.

I loved Arkham Asylum when it came out - I think for me, the fact that it was much more linear made for a better experience. I keep thinking of the intro to Arkham Asylum which was really fucking awesome. Arkham City and Arkham Knight aren't doing anything 'wrong' - they play well and being Batman and soaring around is fun - but I feel like I'm not actually exploring any of Gotham because I'm never actually down in any of it - I learnt a lot more about Arkham Asylum because you walked around so much more of its indoor environments. Each Arkham Asylum room felt like a bit of a puzzle - I haven't really had that yet with Arkham Knight, which is literally trying to force Batmobile puzzles on to me.

I don't dislike Arkham City or Arkham Knight, but I don't love them either

I've been listening to the old bombcasts. The ones from summer of 09 feature some shit talk about the game.

The hate comes from the best new idea they could come up with was cramming the batmobile into every nook and cranny of the game. I think one of the biggest reasons Asylum is lauded as the best Batman game is because of the location and it's lack of dumb reasoning behind it. The barren Gotham is not that exciting or different from the dumb ass premise of City.

After listening to the latest Beastcast it really sounds like they didn't make a definitive Batman game but instead the definitive Batman play set. Asylum was a Batman-ass Batman game and felt like the spirit of it rang more true than any of the others have so far. They may be more refined video games but they are less Batman games. This is all just my speculation, when it comes to Knight, based off of what I have seen and heard as I have only played the first two games. But I feel this way about City compared to Asylum and Knight looks to amplify this.

Huge Batman fan so pour it on. I'm not here for just the gameplay but to see all the great Batman moments in video game form.

it's probably a little fatigue of the series that is getting to everyone whose been playing these games.

I enjoy them, but it definitely falls in the "more of the same" category.

5 or so years from now, City, Origins, and Knight will all blur together in people's minds when asked for details about the series. Asylum will be the only one to stand out.

That's pretty much exactly it.

I thought Origins was pretty ok, but it certainly brought down my excitement for Knight. I like this one a whole lot, but it wasn't the grand return Rocksteady probably envisioned. Many years between sequels is a cool thing and allows excitement to build more naturally (see Doom). But every two years and it stops being special.

Pretty much everyone has been down on this series since the sequels. This is hardly a new phenomenon. Arkham Asylum was nearly perfect, and the rest have been okay.

For the people trying to figure out which games have similar combat to Batman, you should probably know that Giant Bomb has a page for it. Get to adding to the list!

As others have said, it could be that this is the fourth entry in the franchise and fatigue has set in.

Personally, I'm kind of jaded because of what Sonny6Killer mentioned. They just crammed that batmobile / bat-tank into every part of the game that they could manage, and I honestly got tired of it pretty fast. That having been said, I still had a good time. It's just... Arkham Asylum started this game series with an incredible foundation of combat / predator stealth challenges / and atmospheric breaks between the action. It was a fairly linear 12 to 15 hour long experience with about 5 hours of more open-ended Riddler trophy round-up at the end (if you were so inclined), but it never dragged and it's rather small world was surprisingly intricate and multi-layered.

Arkham City lost some of that focus by enlarging the hub world that tied all the different linear levels together, but it had a good story conceit for why there'd be an entire city district of criminals, kept that trinity of combat / predator / atmospheric storytelling intact, and added some amazing gliding mechanics. I thought it went freaking overboard on Riddler trophies, but fair enough. It's a sequel. Go bigger, go bolder, and all that jazz. :-P

I get the impression that Arkham Knight aimed to go bigger than its predecessor as well, and it didn't quite work for me. The voice acting, writing, graphics, and polish are all superb (well, not the last one on the pc... yet). I don't question Rocksteady's skill. However, I don't agree with how they tried to mix things up even further. The combat in this game was refined and elegant, albeit very familiar by this point. The fear takedown tweak and new gadgets added a lot of really fun new ways to tackle predator challenges, and the story was rather poignant and intriguing. Those were all well and good.

Yet, what I remember most are moments like racing after APCs and wishing to the gods that my stupid Bat-immobilizer would lock on before my target turned YET ANOTHER CORNER (if there was a skill that shortened the lock on time by one second, I would have bee-lined towards it! Ugh). I remember doing obnoxious trial-and-error batmobile time trial riddles that made me want to throw my controller through the window at times. I recall over a dozen explosives wedged in the road, each one requiring me to fight hordes of unmanned drones that all looked exactly the same. I'd see a count of "50 drones" remaining and just sigh in dejected annoyance. The main story would have me beating up a bunch of goons and then stealthily taking out a pack of mixed enemies, follow that up with a story bit as a reward, and then... stick me back in that batmobile / bat-tank for inordinate lengths of time. Even side quests ended with me driving my damned prisoners to jail in the freaking car while they regaled me with expository dialogue. On and on.

I loathed it by the end, especially those god-awful bat-tank stealth sequences against cobra tanks that made me rage-quit several times. Without going into too many spoilers, I drove to one location about 2/3rds of the way into the main quest expecting a big bout of punching and stalking. Instead, I had to fight off a 50 vehicle wave of drones. Then, I had to do another bat-tank stealth sequence. After that, they made me go to another island for ANOTHER wave of 50 drones, followed by another bat-tank stealth sequence. I finally got to do about 15 minutes of on-foot sections... before there was an impromptu and very contrived bat-mobile boss followed by a small stealth sequence and... an ULTIMATE bat-tank fight. :-/

It seemed like every time I was finally getting what I wanted (i.e.: not being a hover-tank), the game became afraid of me potentially getting bored and ushered me back to the car. I wasn't left too thrilled, and spending the past couple hours gathering the 200+ Riddler trophies I skipped during the main campaign hasn't done much to remedy that. If the Riddler voice actor, character, and writing weren't so wonderfully done, this would be insufferably tedious. Three more to go.

I doubt anyone will agree with me on this, but I hope the next Batman game narrows things down again. We've now had three games in a row with plot contrivances for a city peopled only by criminals (City's prison, Origin's... Christmas season (?), and Knight's fear gas). We've gone from fighting Blackgate convicts to League of Assassin henchmen to a freaking private army replete with drone tanks, and from a dark crusader to a tank commander. Unless Batman is going to leap into a giant robot suit and join Superman in fighting an alien invasion on a tropical island peopled only by extraterrestrials, I think we've reached the logical end of the "bigger is better" Arkham premise.

Oh, and I haven't talked about Arkham Origins much because I don't know what to say about it anymore. I thought it was okay when I played it, though it seemed to be a bit janky compared to the previous entries. However, my complaints about Origins seem very minor compared to the over-indulgence in batmobile that Knight engages in. I think Origins was a more consistently enjoyable experience for me, which I didn't expect to be typing. *shrug* Such is life. At least I got Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill trading barbs again, which was a magnificent surprise... before they threw me back in the car for another "follow the lines as a sonar ping beeps" mission. :-/

I didn't like City very much and the fact that Knight is still open world means I'm not even going to give it a rental. I'm sure it's a good, maybe even great game, but I'm just not interested.

@frostyryan: Welcome to the world of liking something that other people openly criticize. As a fan of Assassins Creed games I would like to present you with a welcoming packet and my sincerest condolences.

@frostyryan: This jaded attitude seems to extend to a bunch of fantastic series. Sometimes more of the same is awesome. Reinventing the wheel just for the sake of it every time a new game in a series is released sounds far shittier to me than releasing something similar yet polished and fun.

I think because the PC port was bad a lot of people decided to hate on it. It's an amazing game.

It's too bad Iron Galaxy did such a bad job on the PC port. It wouldn't be getting as much shit.

@lazyimperial: I've been asking for the game to go back to those Asylum roots ever since I played City which I just didn't enjoy all that much. I thought City had an absolutely ridiculous story and the "open world" full of absolutely nothing added just that, nothing, to the core gameplay. I know this is blasphemy to some but even the flying and ziplining isn't that fun because it's not fluid at all. This isn't like Bionic Commando where getting around smoothly takes effort and skill giving you a real sense of kinetic motion. Each time you need to grapple for more speed you're completely pulled out of the experience into a stilted animation.

I wouldn't mind if they did do another Batman game because if anything Arkham Knight is just amazing in terms of attention to detail and world building. My personal little dream is that they would do a Batman Beyond game based on the excellent animated show. We can get access to all new future Batman tech, the Terry/Bruce relationship which was also really interesting, and a host of brand new villains. Soaring through future Gotham in the flying Batmobile or using Batmans jump boots for better gliding.. man.. so much potential there!

I think if you listen to a lot of what people are talking about with this game, it's the one-upsmanship with the Riddler stuff, it's the batmobile, and it's the legitimately tiring impact that an unnecessary 4th game had on the series. It's the stuff around the core of the franchise which is that feeling of being Batman these games do so well (especially as a fan of the animated series.) Also it's not like WB has treated this franchise with respect since the success of Asylum either.

The discussion about the direction Rocksteady took the series with City and onward is one to make sense of why Arkham Asylum is still the best in the series but that's about it.

@humanity: I don't think it was ever really pegged as a swinging game like Bionic Commando (which I agree had fantastic swinging). The grapnel is just a way to get you back up so you can glide down like Batman, which was the primary traversal mechanic. I thought that part (the gliding) felt great: fluid, but still with some heft.

Arkham Asylum is in the same position as Portal 1 for me. They're relatively small, very focused experiences. They feel refined, light on fluff, and are more memorable for it.

This series has veered away from the confined Metroid-style adventure and is essentially Assassins Creed now.

I haven't finished Arkham Knight but I find the presentation and story more interesting than the gameplay.

It's another sequel in the land of sequels. I loved Arkham Asylum. I played through it twice. I thought City was pretty great but didn't like the tacked on open-worldiness or the extreme number of Riddler trophies very much. I haven't bothered to get around to Origins yet. I might get around to this one sometime in 2020.

Video games are like cooking. There's a pair of fine lines separating not enough seasoning, just enough, and too much. The industry's approach to making sequels more of the same plus an open world, or more of the same plus driving, or more of the same plus more gadgets is leading to a bunch of unpalatable sameness. We need more innovation and less iteration. Especially out of the triple-A studios that have seemingly become afraid of it.

@theht: I'm not saying it was pegged as anything but people tend to talk about how awesome it is to glide around the city when I find it mostly kind of mechanical and lifeless. Dive bombing and coming back up adds a bit of nuance but you lose altitude each time and are forced to grapple eventually. I really wish they had some system in place like the 'dive bomb-pull up' maneuver that added more skill and experimentation to the gliding. Make it more free form.

I mean if you go through the trouble of making this huge world at least make getting around it a little more dynamic than grappling and mashing X every hundred feet or so.

@frostyryan: I felt jaded about this series about 3 hours into City. Stand by that. First game was really important because of the combat system but it was not a game that needed an open world to mess about with.

Happens to every series, it's just more noticeable with this one 'cause it's a new series.

I don't think there's a jaded attitude towards this series. All I've heard is how the batmobile features too much in the new one.Each game is good in this series, but AA was better imo in terms of atmosphere, the scene, story etc. AO being a close second despite its less polish.

I think it might be partially due to the internet outgrowing its obsession with Batman.

Typical sequel fatigue, I think. But I hear a lot more praise than criticism.

From all accounts (Well, all of them playing on console) Arkham Knight is a great entry, I think a lot of people just didnt want more Batman yet. I'm looking forward to it, but I like playing on PC and with a two week vacation to Otakon/Baltimore/DC coming up I didn't really see a need to have it immediately when I could just wait for a sale. Or, knowing how it launched, a functional version.

The main reason I'm bummed about the series is that they couldn't make a single fucking game without relying on Joker. I get it, he's the most popular Batman villain, blah blah blah. I lost a lot of interest in the game the second I heard that there are large amounts of Joker in Arkham Knight.

Are we really getting upset about other people's "jaded mellow-ness" now? We don't even need to hate or insult a game any more to get a thread defending it?

For what it's worth, Jeff seems to think the Metroid Prime games have been driven into the ground and Metroid Prime 3 came out in 2007. That's almost eight years ago. It doesn't take much for these guys to be sick of something.

I think unfortunately, its good old fashioned franchise fatigue.

Asylum was a breath of fresh of air, and and an INCREDIBLE Batman game, which arguably we'd never had.

City was a good sequel, but the more open world aspect had disadvantages over the tight brooding environments of Asylum.

Oranges (or Origins if you prefer) is perfectly serviceable, a bit buggy, but I think it gets way more hate than it deserves.

Knight (what little I've played of the PC version) does seem a little bit, well... more of the same with vehicle combat, I'll reserve judgement if and when they fix the damn thing.

@cornbredx: Off the top of my head Amazing Spiderman 1 and 2, Deadpool, Shadow of Mordor. Assassins Creed games, Sleeping Dogs, have all at least tried to mimic Arkham combat. And there's a lot more that I can't think of right now. I think maybe those 2 Watchmen games tried to copy it and did a terrible job.

To the OP I think Jeff responded in an overtly jaded way in the QL

Never liked the series at all but I don't think 3-4 games is too many games. For people who enjoy the format I'd think 3-4 games is most likely an appropriate number before people tire of them.

Call of Duty on the other hand should have stopped 3 years ago. :P

They are definitely not on the level of Assassin's Creed or Call of Duty. If someone loves the series I'm not gonna bat an eye, because they are still good games and haven't worn out their welcome too much. However, for me, they lost something in the move from Asylum to City. That first game benefited so much from the smaller area, and the more metroidvania-esque structure. It also had the benefit of not just being, "another open world game," of which there are far too many of for my tastes. It's gotten to the point that a game being set in an open world is a strong turnoff, not a selling point (for me). After playing City and Origins (which was not that much worse than City and gets undeserved ire), I'm just done with that kind of Batman game and have zero interest in playing another. And I'm a huge Batman fan.

If they had went back to the style of Asylum, I would be on board. But they didn't, so I'm not. Even if they stuck with the open world, they're just not changing up enough for me personally. If they had leaned harder into the detective aspect of the series, that would've helped a lot. The crime scene recreations don't do jack shit to make you feel like the world's greatest detective, because you're not figuring out anything for yourself. Give me a screen full of evidence and let me connect them and commit to a conclusion. Something like that. Instead they put in the batmobile as the big new thing, making it even more like, "just another open world game," which all seem to have driving around as a huge part of the experience. No freaking thanks. Honestly, idk if deeper detective stuff would even solve it for me. I like the combat. I like the stealth. I loathe the constant traveling from point A to B and constant collectibles in my face that is the standard of open world games. It feels like walking through quicksand to get an ice cream cone. Sure, the ice cream is good, but it's not worth the hassle.

But hey, if you're the type of person that loves open world games (or at least hasn't come to despise them like me), then I totally get why you like these games. They are still very well made and some of the best open world games around. They're just not the kind of Batman game I want to play. Not really the kind of game I want to play period, really.

Arkham Knight just doesn't have a soul. It starts off awesome and peters out. The game has a direction problem in that it wants to show you things but settles for telling you instead. From the story down to the game design, it's just... empty.

The side missions require you to first do a thing and then it makes you do that thing every single time. It's never different, it's always the same. I don't mean "it's so similar you think it's the same", I mean it's formulaic in a way that says "We need to be done with this".

I wouldn't say I'm coming from a place of jadedness, personally. I'm coming at it from a critical frame of mind. I just couldn't ignore some of the flaws in this game. Usually people will complain about something in a game I like and I'll think "Well it doesn't bother me so it's totes cool". But there's just so many things in this game that made me ask "Is this... it? I've done it once so I've seen all there is?" And that's bad, in my opinion.

I don't like Batman: Arkham Knight. But I do like Batman: Arkham Knight. It's so pretty to look at, especially Founders Island where I hung out a lot just looking at all the super cool neon buildings. It sounds good. It plays well, aside from that game breaking glitch I ran into where I had to revert back to an earlier save and thus lost like 90% of my Riddler trophies, but hey, it happens. I wasn't even that bothered by it, truly. Because I honestly like the game. So I wanted to do it again.

I mean I did get the Platinum trophy like a week ago. I didn't just pick this thing up to yell at and then throw away. I did everything. I got intimate with this game. I became The Batman.

My life motto is: If we can't criticize the things we love, we must not love them very much. And just like MGS4, a game that is so dear to my heart, I can't see past the flaws and missed opportunities. So I'll probably nerd rage on it for a while until another game comes out to nerd rage to, but at least it comes from a place of love. Words that love.

If we are going to build this list, I would like to present Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Yes, I am ashamed to know that one.

PS: Weren't Watchmen & Deadpool built around the same combat style?

OT: I think the problem is that the series has changed relatively little in this time. After Asylum, they changed the world to be an open world game, and that was pretty much the biggest mayor change of City (say what you will about which was your favorite, but no one can say City didn't innovate (although perhaps in the wrong direction)). Origins was released soon after that, and while many people remember it for not being a Rocksteady project and not having some of the most emblematic staff (like Paul Dini and Mark Hamill), the biggest problem it had was that it was pretty much the same game as City with some really underwhelming villains roster (really... Electrocutioner? Lady Shiva? female Copperhead?) and was a little buggy, which made it feel undercooked and rushed, which increased the exhaustion of the public.

The new Arkham game had a steep curve ahead unless it innovated again, and having a new way of transportation being shoved down our throat is likely not enough. Of course, the game being broken didn't help.

They nailed it first time, everything after arkham felt like a side step.

Something similar will happen to darksouls, doesn't matter how good a series is, it has to evolve or end.

I wouldn't say I'm jaded about the Batman games, I just don't think they needed to do another open-world environment after Arkham City. Full disclosure: I never played origins. Maybe one day I will. I think I agree with the sentiment among some that Arkham Asylum was pretty much perfection (although I'll admit it did have some sour notes in the late areas of the game). The closed environments made the game feel like a puzzle game in some ways - figuring out the enemies' patrol patterns, knowing which guys to strike first, etc. Although Arkham City did have its highlights: 1) infiltrating the Penguin's base was great because, again, closed environments forced you to use whatever gadgets you had on hand. 2) the Mr. Freeze boss fight on hard difficulty, because it forced you to use everything at your disposal to take him out.

I did like the initial shift to the open-world environment (flying around, getting in street fights with thugs, etc), but ultimately it didn't do anything vastly different. The open world stuff was such a chore... And it made taking out thugs a breeze. Get spotted? Fly away, wait a minute then charge back in. Aside from Mr. Freeze, the bosses in City fights felt uninspired. Plus, I think @patrickklepek's tweet summarizes it best:

It seems like they've doubled down on the worst open-world padding. I mean, I'll definitely get this game at some point (two years from now when the game of the year edition is on sale, because you know there's going to be a ton of DLC), I've enjoyed the Batman games but not as much as I enjoyed the first one.