I'm not fatigued by AC and Batman; as long as they're good games, I'm perfectly happy with it. Many would say Origins was lame out of the three, but for me personally, I enjoyed it more than City, as City was actually disappointing to me, and AC3 was also disappointing, but four came out and I really liked it. As for this series, if that's what we can call it already, I have no clue. I'm not sure I'll get it when it comes out, though I may. If it takes aspects from those games and does right by it, then I don't see why that's a bad thing, even if it may seem unoriginal. I hear they take a lot of those aspects and do them just as well or better in some cases.
Sure, but the fact that you've had a lot of immersion with some of those systems simply means that some of the bloom is off the rose, and whereas if you made it happily through four games of AC or Rocksteady's Batman games you might have a bit of a built in tolerance that would make you less susceptible to the charms of the follow ups to Shadow of Mordor's follow ups as time goes buy. This is why I estimated the third game would be my peak experience. Even if it does them better you've still seen them far more than when you first picked up Arkham Asylum.
Log in to comment