Board 8 > Spiderman or Arkham?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Fair to say these are easily the best superhero games (and 2 of the best licensed games period)
---

I like how you didn't include Origins
---

I really liked Arkham Asylum but couldnt get into the open world that was City. Never made it very far into the game.
---

Spider-Man is great but the Arkham games are incomparable imo. Better pacing, story, use of villains, side missions, and combat.
---

Asylum is incredible, City is great, Knight was mediocre

Spider-Man was awesome, and I think Knight is just bad enough to drag the trio down. Funny enough, if this was Origins instead of Knight I might take the Asylum games, for some reason I had good fun with Oirgins.
---

Haven't played Spider-Man yet, I should get around to that! On Batman:

Asylum has the tightest and best design, a middle-ground story and the weakest gameplay

City has by far the best story and bosses, solid gameplay but only a so-so open world

Knight has by far the best open world, gameplay and side missions, but a completely abysmal story and no real bosses to speak of

I liked Knight a lot despite its miserable story and the "fuck you, finish more of our arbitrary open world checklists if you actually want an ending" being one of the worst things I've ever seen in a video game. Mostly because of the latter point, I'm far more likely to replay City if I'm jonesing for some Batman.
---

I actually like City best, though Aylum is close. Asylum has some incredible moments (Scarecrow obviously, but also probably the best riddles) but I loved how City opened up the gameplay and exploration. Really made me feel like Batman more than Asylum did.

By comparison, Knight was pretty disappointing, largely because of how the Batmobile changed everything (driving laps really fast is not a riddle, damn it!)

Overall I think I slightly give the edge to Spider-Man though. They're about even as far as capturing the style of the character, and about even on combat (B:A is more methodical and careful but SM's is faster and makes better use of space). Arkham handled the villains better but Spider-Man handles the heroes better. It ultimately comes down to Spider-Man just being a little more fun to play. The webswinging is one of the most incredible exploration mechanics I've seen in a game.
---

Xiahou Shake posted...

I liked Knight a lot despite its miserable story and the "fuck you, finish more of our arbitrary open world checklists if you actually want an ending" being one of the worst things I've ever seen in a video game. Mostly because of the latter point, I'm far more likely to replay City if I'm jonesing for some Batman.

I'd say the worst thing about Knight was how it handled Deathstroke. One of the only really good moments in Origins was Deathstroke, so I was hyped they brought him back as a secret boss in Knight... only to have his boss fight be a generic tank battle where you don't even see him

fuck all the tank missions; what a boring mechanic
---

I guess I would say individually Spider-Man is better than Knight for the reasons mentioned so far.

Asylum > Origins > City > Spider-Man > Knight would be my ranking.
---

Snake5555555555 posted...

Asylum > Origins > City > Spider-Man > Knight

<_<
>_>
---

To me, Origins has the best narrative of the Arkhams. They made Bane a legit threat which is one villain Rocksteady never really got right. I also really dig the art direction of the game. I will admit though the combat isn't as tight as the Rocksteady games and the electro-shock gloves are way too overpowered.
---