TheChickenKing
Savant
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2016
- Messages
- 296
I disagree. Batman's combat is objectively worse, with far more automation and enemy types that ask for nothing more than button memorization. It requires zero spatial awareness or active problem solving; you simply see an enemy of a certain type and remember that a shield means tap this button followed by this button. Enemies attack more actively in Spider-man, the gadgets and alternate moves do more than "take out enemies but in slightly different ways" allowing you to come up with creative solutions to problems and even some basic combos, and the story in Spider-man is significantly more coherent - Batman, especially Arkham City, was written by monkeys. It's so full of plot holes and contrivance as to border on parody.this is true. Spider-Man is a moderately decent action game with some major low points while Arkham City borders on great and has less low points. I mean, Catwoman is much hotter than Mary Jane and actually contributes something besides terrible contrived stealth sections so that's already a notch for the BatThis game wishes it was even a fraction as good as Arkham City. It's notFinished Arkham City: Spider-Man edition.
I will say that I very much so enjoyed the Batman games and that the stealth is way better. I'm pretty sure you could flip around what I just said about Spider-man's active combat in favor of Batman's stealth (more intelligent AI, gadgets interact with the environment and enemies in interesting ways, etc.) and Catwoman is definitely way better than Lois Lane But With Red Hair. But Spider-man's far superior boss battles, combat, and general quality makes it a clear winner in my opinion despite a few annoying stealth sections.