I see this is on gamepass but have not played through the first 2 games.
Am I missing out if I skip them and play this one?
I see this is on gamepass but have not played through the first 2 games.
Am I missing out if I skip them and play this one?
Narratively there is a bit of a setup that I can summarize in two sentences
Joker infected himself with a virus and Batman kicked his ass. Joker died from complications due to that virus but not before infecting Batman who cured it.
Beyond that: Definitely, but Knight was kind of the worst of the series in my eyes.
1) You can play Arkham Knight without playing the previous 3 (yes 3) games. Even though Rocksteady didn't make Arkham Origins there actually are references to that game in Arkham Knight, though only a couple minor ones. I believe the game fills you in on the backstory itself as you go. There are lots of references and call backs you'll miss out on, of course, and you won't understand some of the nuances of the relationships, but the game doesn't do a great job with that stuff anyway and most of it is standard Batman stuff more or less.
2) Return to Arkham goes on sale like all the frickin' time for $10 or so. I'd imagine it will be on sale for the digital Black Friday sales so if you're not totally broke you can pick it up. You don't need to play those games first but they're good games. Even Origins is good.
3) Knight gets a really bad rap for a bunch of reasons that I don't really agree with. I like all the Arkham games, even Origins, but I liked Knight the best. There's too much Bat Tank, it has some story issues, and some of the gameplay changes aren't the best, but it looks fantastic, has the best open world from a gameplay perspective, and just has a ton of cool stuff in it. I think Rocksteady tried to do a bunch of new and interesting stuff in it and not all of it succeeded but much of it did.
Knight is fine, and is a visual tour de force to boot. You’re fine to start there, even a passing familiarity with Batman mythos is all you need to understand the story. But I’ll echo some others here and say if you do like the game, I would highly recommend checking out the original Arkham Asylum. It’s an incredible 3D Metroidvania, bordering on being a masterpiece.
I'm gonna dissent and say no. Game mechanics-wise (not even talking about story here), Knight starts you off more or less where City left off, and it's a hell of a lot to catch up on. I mean, it's hard to argue with the value, so go for it if you want, but each game builds on each other mechanically in a way that I think you'd be missing out on.
Yeah, you'll be fine.
Personally I find Knight is the second best in the series. I replayed them all recently, while Asylum is in its own league ahead of the rest, I get the same out of each open-world game. The biggest difference to me is just how they refined each over the years, and Knight comes out on top.
The Batmobile is overused, but after replaying, just helped me feel even more OP.
@singing_pigs: Huh? You're not wrong that the games build on each other mechanically but it's not like Knight is a particularly hard game, and every single mechanic from Arkham Asylum and City has been ripped off by literally dozens of games since those titles came out. Batman combat is a cliche at this point. The stealth has been copied by a ton of games.
I can't imagine anyone who has played even a few open world games with stealth or melee combat not being able to easily pick up Knight.
Honestly the hardest parts in Knight happen when you're in the tank, and those don't build off of anything in the prior games.
@bigsocrates: Nothing to do with it being hard, cause you're right it's not, I just mean I think Asylum->City->Knight all build on each other mechanically in a fun way, and I think you'd be missing out on that by jumping into the third chapter. All the combos and gadgets and stuff you built up in City are just there, and then they throw more on top of it. It wouldn't be a miserable experience, but it's much better having at least played City first, IMO.
You can. Not my preference, but definitely not gonna ruin anything for yourself.
The story can be easily summized on wikis--you aren't missing much--but as someone who's always been in the Asylum for life camp, it's a cool game that's hard to go back to after playing it's more advanced children. I'd just play Knight if it's most convenient. Hope you have fun!
@pg77: while I agree with the sentiment that night might be the"worst" I think that's only a product of diminishing returns, and if you haven't played any of them I think night would definitely be the most fun. The story's actually quite good and the batmobile stuff is pretty cool if not overdone.
@singing_pigs: I think this is a reasonable argument that you can benefit from playing the games in order, and I certainly wouldn't disagree with that (it's what I personally did) but I don't understand how this means you "can't" play just Arkham Knight. You're almost always going to get more out of a game if you've played the previous games in the series, but it's only necessary if the plot is going to be incomprehensible or if the game mechanics would be confusing to anyone who hadn't played the prior games. Neither is the case here. If all you've got is Knight and you don't care about the best possible experience or you just don't want to go back and play older games then just playing Knight is fine.
You could skip Asylum and go to City. If you were to skip the first two and jump into Knight, you would be missing out on some key story beats, but you will probably figure out what happened through context.
That said, Asylum and City are better than Knight. Those two games are old so they may not hold up as well anymore graphically, but Knight was bogged down by a couple of different things like the Batmobile.
I just want to jump back in and say after 30 hours launching out of and into the Batmobile never once got old. It always felt cool and the thing always felt great to drive. The only thing I remember being a little put off by were the number of times you needed to switch into siege mode and how it suffered a bit from that weird thing some sequels have where suddenly it seems like a world you already felt like you knew pretty well is entirely designed around your one new toy.
@nodima: So I found someone else who liked the Batmobile stuff. I see you, too, are a man of taste and refinement!
I would add that the Batmobile really opened up the puzzle elements in a cool and interesting way. I kind of wish they were making a sequel just because I feel like they could do even more with that. The puzzles in the first two games felt like an afterthought much of the time, but some of the Batmobile puzzles were actually kind of interesting.
I would also say that the flying in general in Knight is very liberating and fun. Asylum had some gliding, and City expanded that, but Knight really puts an emphasis on soaring above the city and gives you a lot of tools to get vertical quickly. There aren't a lot of open world games that let you just fly around so freely and the ability to fly around, call the Batmobile and drop into it, and then launch back into flight made traversal a ton of fun.
Siege mode wasn't so bad but was overdone. And they really didn't need Siege mode boss battles. Or some of the later wave based battles. At time it felt like you were playing a Battlezone remake instead of Batman!
If anything you should skip that last two ones and just play Arkham Asylum. It's still the best one.
Then play Origins which is the second best game in the Arkham series and definitely better than any of the Rocksteady sequels.
Shame that Rocksteady was butthurt about a game with a superior narrative/setting (Gotham during christmas) than any of their own sequels. It should have been included in the remastered collection.
I think so. Arkham Asylum is fairly short in comparison, and City is.. bloated, I think. I liked Arkham Knight a whole lot, even though I mainlined it without diving too deep into the side quests.
There are some story bits but you know who Batman is, so it's not like starting the Mass Effect series for the first time or something as a world introduction.
You can, but the best experience IMO is going through the series sequentially. Asylum is a hell of a tight experience and City is a great continuation of those narrative and mechanical threads.
Now, considering the whole Gamepass thing? Yeah, if you don't wanna plunk down some cash, yeah you can absolutely play and enjoy Knight without the prior two games, but I whole heartedly recommend you pick them up when they're on sale.
It's bugging me that so many people have forgotten about the just-as-good Arkham Origins. There are four Arkham games.
Anyway, start from the beginning. Those first three games can't be expensive or hard to find these days.
Maybe part of the reason for this is that it is actually difficult to get now, at least on Xbox. Arkham Origins for 360 is backward compatible, but only the disc version -- they're not selling a digital version of this game on xbox. I finished Arkham Knight earlier this year (it's fine), and figured I should play this. I eventually tracked down a disc copy for a reasonable price, and managed to ship it to Ecuador without paying crazy import duties, but by the time it arrived other games have come out :)
Echoing the other sentiments here, you probably can play it, but why would you go out of your way to play the weakest entry in the series first is a bit strange. Because the graphics are better on Xbox One as opposed to Xbox 360? Arkham Knight is just bloated and uninteresting, the complete opposite of Asylum. All the military porn in that game makes it feel like Tom Clancy's Batman, except it constantly tells you that you are blowing up unmanned drones because Batman doesn't kill people.
Arkham Knight starts you out with all the tools and combos of the previous game (you know how people complain that you always lose your abilities in Metroidvanias, Knight doesn't do that), but the downside of that is that it is a hell of a lot to take in at the start of the game when there is not much of a tutorial and everything is unlocked. And also the new abilities are lame, they very clearly ran out of ideas so it's just "better armor so you can take more hits".
@apewins: They did not run out of ideas. They had one big new idea and it was the Batmobile. People didn't really like it, but it's a huge part of the game, factors in to a lot of the puzzle areas, and definitely changes how much of the game plays. It also really changes the traversal mechanics and makes it much easier to get around in or out of the Batmobile than the prior games. That makes it much more of an open world game than any previous ones in the series.
I also think it's weird to say that the game has "military porn" when the people with the military weapons are the bad guys! And they're defeated by one lone Batman.
I will say that the game is clearly copaganda, and basically presents the police as selfless heroes defending Gotham against these invaders, overmatched as they may be.
I understand the Origins hate much more than the Knight hate. Origins was a buggy mess, especially at launch, so even though I think it's a decent game a lot of people had bad experiences with it. Knight is a super polished game, it's just kind of a different game than Asylum and even City, since it's much more about the open world and the activities in it. I think people just didn't like the Batmobile stuff and didn't like the balance between open world stuff and the more linear individual levels. Also the plot is kind of bad but it's not like Arkham City had a great story either.
@bigsocrates: To be fair to Origins, Knight was also unplayable for a lot of people on PC at release and WB had to give full refunds. It ran like absolute trash for me until the patches. Personally the batmobile made strong positive reaction at first, but then it just outstayed it's welcome. It felt like they came up with a great mechanic, but then proceeded to cram it anywhere they could. I was already kinda laughing early on when you had to drive across roofs to go do a puzzle with your tank.
@humanity: To me, all the characterizations are weaker. Of course, your mileage may vary and I won't get into spoilers here, but I think a lot of characters were poorly written in the game, including the protagonist.
The tank sections didn't help, either. Mostly, it was symptomatic of the main issue, that was that everything was more without necessarily being better. It felt like they tried to use it everywhere and no idea was off the table. If there was a Batman mechanic, there was also a motorized version. There were car races, car puzzles, car combat, car stealth, car bosses and car platforming...
You could, i personally have to play a game series through from the beginning, but if you're not going to do that just look up their plots on wiki, just to get an idea on who Batman has faced up to this point etc... There no massive specific plot points you need to know about going in.
Knight plays very similarly to City and Origins (underrated), with the first game being its own smaller and tighter experience, i quite liked the vehicle stuff in Knight, but i'll agree with others saying there's not a lot to it, kinda the same thing all the way through.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment