PDA

View Full Version : Wow, I think I prefer AC3's combat system to Batman's (Sushi is so gonna kill me :D )



Farlander1991
06-14-2013, 06:46 PM
Ok, so, it's been very long time since I played Arkham Asylum (basically, I haven't played it since 2009 when it was released), and I haven't played Arkham City until now, and the first thing I did was to get into the combat challenge arena mode (the DLC ones, since they are instantly opened).

And by Odin's beard was I bored. Now, let me make a few things clear:
1. Arkham City's combat system is more polished than Assassin's Creed 3's.
2. Enemy archetypes in Arkham City make all Batman's basic combat abilities useful.
3. Plus it rewards your skill with its combo/point system.
4. Also I was playing on the keyboard, and I can't say that the keyboard controls in Arkham City are the most comfortable, so maybe that has something to do with what I say next.

And yet, all that being said, here I was, playing Arkham City combat challenge mode, and just thinking, 'I'm... not actually having fun with this' (now, I'm not saying I've instantly mastered it, mind you, I've been making mistakes along the way, but my point stands).

AC3 combat system is by no means perfect in my opinion, and there are lots of ways to improve (especially as it concerns enemy archetypes and the way they're dealt with), but here are some reasons why I prefer it to Batman's:
1. In Batman you are constantly on offensive, trying to rack up points and quickly reacting to attacks coming your way (even shielded opponents don't break that because you stun them to attack them to break through shields). Being on the constant offensive at such a pace (and Batman is REALLY fast paced) gets tiresome to me. AC3 at least forces you to stop attacking when Jagers come in.
2. I find myself varying buttons much less in Batman. Most of the time I found myself using Strike and Counter buttons. Not saying that Stun and Dodge were never used, but in AC3 I find myself varying three buttons most of the time (which are, now that I think about it, essentially all buttons used in the basic combat system in AC3, though it has technically speaking 6 moves). And to me that makes a big difference, actually.
3. I can clearly see who I am going to attack next in AC3. This happened to me a lot of times in Arkham City, where I point to an enemy's general direction, press Strike, and insteand of attack that enemy I wanted Batman flies off to attack the dude five meters behind him. Maybe that has something to do with the PC port and the way the game handles directions with the keyboard buttons, but it irritates me greatly, especially considering that usually I can't manage to get back to the main crowd to continue my combo chain after this.

Mind you, I haven't been taking Batman's gadgedts and AC3's tools in comparison in this post, since I haven't gotten acquainted with Batman's gadgets yet, so I'm just comparing the basic combat system of both. And I prefer AC3. One thing that I REALLY like in Batman's system is that enemies are really aggressive and don't wait too long for attack. In fact, one change of how aggressive the enemies are would instantly increase AC3's 'engagitivity' (a word I just invented for things that are engaging :D ) by like 50%.

So, yeah. Maybe I will warm up to it in time, but so far, Arkham City - polished combat system, agreed, but I can't say I like it or that it's my style. Here's hoping that AC4 is going to really polish what has been set up in AC3, because that potentially has to be something I personally am going to really enjoy.

ProletariatPleb
06-14-2013, 07:05 PM
He's the ******* Batman, he eats assassin for breakfast.

Sushiglutton
06-14-2013, 07:11 PM
It's hard to argue which one you find more fun. I mean some people think bingo is more fun and exciting than chess and it's not much I can do about that ;). I can adress some of your points though :

1) Not true at all. Have you encountered enemies with knives yet? When fighting titans you have to switch between beatdown and counter which is an absolutely amazing feeling when you get it right. One of the best thing about Arkham-combat is how it switches up the pacing. Knife dodge is slow and have you on the edge of your seat. Beatdowns are are very rapid and make your heart pump. It's like music :)!

2) Arkham doesn't really force you to mix it up. It's largely up to you if you want to have a good time or be bored. I always try to mix it up as much as possible ofc and set up high scoring moves (such as ground takedown) by stun nearby enemies without knocking them out and similar strategies. There are a lot of techniques for getting high scores and that's when the game truly shines.

3) Not really a problem imo. But it has to do with experience I think. After a while you start to remember where the different thugs are and to manipulate the camera efficiently.


Gadgets are a super important part of Arkham's combat ofc. It's much smoother, varied, deeper, better paced (no overly long double counter animations for example). Arkham City's combat is just on another planet than AC3's. The quality difference is so huge that I feel like it's more of a fact than an opinion ;)!


Here's what Alex Hutchinson has to say on the matter http://www.computerandvideogames.com/363428/assassins-creed-iii-interview-alex-hutchinson/?page=3#top_banner:


In all honesty, I think that Arkham Asylum is probably a better fight, but we have managed to really improve our fighting system and merge it with the open-world adventure elements much better.

Farlander1991
06-14-2013, 07:21 PM
I mean some people think bingo is more fun and exciting than chess and it's not much I can do about that

Sounds like an insult, but I'll give you a pass :p


1) Not true at all. Have you encountered enemies with knives yet?

I have, maybe because I've tested the combat system in the combat challenge maps so far yet, but I found it fairly easy to avoid their attacks by attacking other enemies and then attacking them. Though I know what you're talking about. But so far I had to dodge the knife attacks on a rare occasion only.


When fighting titans you have to switch between beatdown and counter which is an absolutely amazing feeling when you get it right

Are titans in story mode? Because I haven't got far in story mode yet.


One of the best thing about Arkham-combat is how it switches up the pacing.

So far I disagree, it keeps it mostly at a pretty constant fast pace.


2) Arkham doesn't really force you to mix it up.

And I have a problem with that, honestly. I want mixing up be a part of the core combat system, not just for the optional objective of getting more points.

AC2_alex
06-14-2013, 09:05 PM
2) Arkham doesn't really force you to mix it up

But oh yes it does. Its all about the enemy archetypes. They dictate the way you have to approach combat. In Batman, you have:
-Regular Thugs
-Armored Thugs
-The Shield Guys
-The Knife Guys
-The Electric Stick Guys
-Armed Thugs
-The Assassins
-(and occasionally) The Big Boss Guys, ie the hammer and sickle brothers

In AC, you have
-Regular Soldiers
-Speed Guys
-Grenadiers
-Jagers
-(don't know their names but) The guys that roll over your back and then strike you right after

And i honestly can't remember any others. Regardless, the difference between AC and the Arkham games is large. AC3 had the best combat of any AC game, but the Arkham games have it down perfect. They're basically known and critically acclaimed (amongst other aspects of the game) for their perfect combat.

Just because somebody has a better experience in one game doesn't make it better. Nickleback could be my favorite band (lol), but it doesn't make it the best band.

Sushiglutton
06-15-2013, 08:41 AM
Sounds like an insult, but I'll give you a pass :p

Sorry I didn't mean to :(. I have the highest respect for you. But I can not understand the opinion that AC3 has better combat than Arkham City. I mean there are plenty of opinions I don't agree with that I can still understand. Like for example I understand the arguments for why AC1 could be considered better than AC2 even though I don't feel that way personally. That someone who has mastered both AC3's and Arkham City's combat systems would find the former better is incomprehensible to me, sorry.



I have, maybe because I've tested the combat system in the combat challenge maps so far yet, but I found it fairly easy to avoid their attacks by attacking other enemies and then attacking them. Though I know what you're talking about. But so far I had to dodge the knife attacks on a rare occasion only.


Are titans in story mode? Because I haven't got far in story mode yet.


So far I disagree, it keeps it mostly at a pretty constant fast pace.


And I have a problem with that, honestly. I want mixing up be a part of the core combat system, not just for the optional objective of getting more points.


Again I would encourage you to play with the game. Try to do the different techniques and find strategic uses for them. The reason the core combat system doesn't force you to mix it up is that it's tuned so both casuals and more hardcore gamers (this is not Ninja Gaiden obv) can have a good time. Casuals can easily get by and string together long combos by jumping over eneimes, and using the standard takedowns once they get a x5 combo. More experienced players have a ton of things to dig into and learn if they so choose.

I do understand the argument that the game should force you to mix it up, but it's not that important to me personally (and I fail to see this being an argument in favour of AC3). The key thing for me is that the game gives you the opportunity to be played in a fun way. To me Arkham City does while AC3 does not.

Titans show up in the story, but to learn how to fight them properly (in flow) is quite tricky tbh. I didn't learn that in the handful encounters in story mode, even though they are not hard in the sense that you will die a lot.

Sushiglutton
06-15-2013, 08:44 AM
But oh yes it does. Its all about the enemy archetypes. They dictate the way you have to approach combat.

True, but the strategy to jump over enemies, get some punches in to get to x5 and then do a takedown works on pretty much all archetypes.

shobhit7777777
06-15-2013, 09:47 AM
He's the ******* Batman, he eats assassin for breakfast.

**** Yeah



@Farlander

I think the fundamental difference between the combat systems (and one reason why they shouldn't be compared even though I'm guilty of it myself :p) is what they are trying to deliver as an experience

Arkham's combat system is designed to make the player feel like Batman and allow the player to craft his/her own playstyle which best reflects how they envision Batman as a fighter. That is why the emphasis is on a combat system which focuses on:

1. Simple moves and controls - allowing the player to get in quickly and emphasizing the fact that Batman has been doing it for YEARS and this is childs play to him.....its muscle memory at this point and Batman is just infinitely superior to the thugs he is fighting...so its not a question of making the control scheme or the basic combat challenging via more combos or elaborate movesets

2. Aggression and speed - allowing the player to maintain a momentum of constant attacks because thats what Batman would be able to do and has done in the comics. He constantly fights multiple opponents at the same time....the pace of such combat has to be frenetic and fluid. It again goes back to emphasizing how Batman would deal with 30 guys gunning for him.

3. Gadgetry and Depth in gameplay - after laying on the simple combat system....the game allows the player the luxury to invest more into it by exploring the various combos using gadgets and special movesets. This is there to allow the player feel like a badass Batman who true to his character loves gadget use during combat. This also adds a creative element to the gameplay in terms of really allowing you to experiment with different gadget combos and approaches to combat

So you see the entire premise of the combat system is to be the best Batman sim it can.....and naturally (inspite of the obvious similarities) Batman of this universe is very different from Connor in his.

Assassin's Creed Combat is centered around brutal, violent and cinematic kills against several opponents who attack one at a time. This system is grounded in AC1's combat system where the idea was to make a REALISTIC blade combat game using counters and and clever placement.
The basic system aims to give the player the feeling of being a cunning, lone assassin using timing and speed to quickly and brutally take down his human opponents within the 'realistic' universe of the game.
Cinematic kills, gory attacks and counter based system is why the pace feels slower and of course its not always about being on the attack.


You're completely entitled to your opinion....and honestly I feel your points have merit...I'm just saying that Arkham's combat is as deep and engaging as you make it out to be...if you get an Expediency compulsion in that game then the system might not be as rewarding.

Farlander1991
06-15-2013, 10:23 AM
But I can not understand the opinion that AC3 has better combat than Arkham City.

Did I ever say that? No.

In fact, I said that Arkham City is a very polished and thought-out system, while AC3 doesn't have a very polished system. I've stated that in the post, you can find it. You can't find me saying that AC3 combat system is better :p But I do prefer AC3. And I think that, if properly polished, AC3 system is something that would be much cooler than Batman's system (and I'm going to do an emphasis on 'if' now, so people would stop misinterpreting me).

And, as shohbit says, it's more about what both systems are trying to accomplish. And, really, with the exception of the technical difference in being able to see who you attack next, my post was about that. I don't like what Arkham City tries to accomplish. Even though it's polished. I like what AC3 tries to accomplish. Even though it's unpolished. See what I mean?

PS. Though, also, maybe some of my negative opinions about Arkham are because I'm somewhat sick these days, I started playing 4 supposedly good games and I was bored to hell with all of them. Maybe when I get better I won't feel as bored with Arkham, but I still will prefer AC3 (and its potential) more than Arkham.

roostersrule2
06-15-2013, 10:25 AM
He's the ******* Batman, he eats assassin for breakfast.Indeed.

Assassin_M
06-15-2013, 10:54 AM
I think what AC III`s system needs is a touch of brilliance. The aggressiveness of the guards needs to tie in. The guards are lazy and the use of archetypes is not really helping this field. The scouts, generals and jagers/hessians for example are faster than Connor when chasing him, but they`re as lazy as any other guard in combat. the presence of each archetype should have a larger effect on the battle than just an offensive or defensive prompt or extra skill, they need to be more aggressive prompting more than one possible reaction. granted, Grenadier axe swings, firing lines and shooting provide a different prompt to push different buttons to avoid said ability, but it still feels lacking...

the fast pace of Arkham should be implemented here and fast pace shouldn't ALWAYS have to be the player attacking, since the devs have this idea that FAST always equals strike first, sure...but it does nothing else; it just makes the fight shorter and has the character mow everyone down instantly. speed should be challenging to implement, I always thought that there needs to be an entry and exit into battle, like when the guards are running towards and push you, there`s basically nothing you can do, but watch as Connor stumbles on the ground.

Entry/Exit -----> Guards attacking:
Quickly timed button prompt to enter the battle gracefully and avoid stumbling, it can be avoiding or dodging a head on Musket, jumping out of the way of ramming Grendiers..etc with every other Archetype. This provides the player with something more to do...it makes it more fun. its simple and engaging to ALWAYS have something to do.

Entry/Exit ------> Player attacking:
Running Assassinations are a keep, they`re a good example of battle entry, but what`s tricky here is that if you`re attacking an aware squad. quick reaction to incapacitate a second guard after entering a battle should ensure the normal battle stance, failing this would result in you stumbling to the floor..

Another thing to note is that an archetype shouldn't have JUST ONE ability and ONE fixed reaction for it, keep archetypes unique, but make them malleable, I can`t remember B:AC too clearly right now, but even the little guys, who were basically the same archetypes, had different strategies..ones who were armed with blunt or melee weapons and others who were not. it made combat have more meat to it and adding this to AC would definitely benefit....Grendiers not just swinging the axe for example, but throwing it as well...you know, when the situation becomes desperate...

third thing is Guard intelligence and no, not how often they attack, but how they help each other..for example, if you manage to disarm a guard, his buddy tries to push you from behind or poke you maybe. if you disarm a guard and throw his weapon far, another guard would pick it up and fetch it to his buddy. i`m glad AC III removed instant killing when disarmed (that was in ACB and ACR) it should provide enough time for guards to assist each other..

the final thing is the kill streaks, THIS should be removed and replaced with a better system to connect the fighting and make it smooth. Batman has the jumping all around the place, it makes the combat look so seemless and smooth and it looks like a kill-streak without being boring..it manages to add another move for the player to implement and manually connect the moves together...

all in all, I agree that the combat is unpolished in AC III, but it has great potential...this remedy it has here..it can work, provided they move out of their comfort space...

Sushiglutton
06-15-2013, 12:41 PM
Did I ever say that? No.

In fact, I said that Arkham City is a very polished and thought-out system, while AC3 doesn't have a very polished system. I've stated that in the post, you can find it. You can't find me saying that AC3 combat system is better :p But I do prefer AC3. And I think that, if properly polished, AC3 system is something that would be much cooler than Batman's system (and I'm going to do an emphasis on 'if' now, so people would stop misinterpreting me).

And, as shohbit says, it's more about what both systems are trying to accomplish. And, really, with the exception of the technical difference in being able to see who you attack next, my post was about that. I don't like what Arkham City tries to accomplish. Even though it's polished. I like what AC3 tries to accomplish. Even though it's unpolished. See what I mean?

PS. Though, also, maybe some of my negative opinions about Arkham are because I'm somewhat sick these days, I started playing 4 supposedly good games and I was bored to hell with all of them. Maybe when I get better I won't feel as bored with Arkham, but I still will prefer AC3 (and its potential) more than Arkham.


Ok fair enough :p. Maybe some of my negative comments are because I'm pretty tired/bored in general lol, sorry that I was unpolite :(. I still don't see how AC3 is really that much more defensively balanced, but having the option to choose how to follow up a counter is good. That's the kind of thing I hope is expanded upon in both Arkham and AC, namely a branching combo system (somewhat similar to PoP 2008 in a way), so that when you are in different states you have several options of how to continue.