Is Arkham Origins worth the buy?

Nay

It's mediocre compared to City and Asylum.

I didn't see anything wrong with it really,I enjoyed it

It's the second best game in the series behind City so if you can find it for cheap I'd give it a try.

Yes it's worth it.

Loved it.

Isn't it like 8 bucks on psn because of some super hero sale? if so then its worth 8 bucks. it felt like a dlc but there was a game breaking bug

Id say it was good overall and is worth getting. It is the weakest out of the three by far, could have been better. But they portray Bane really well and the relationship between Batman and Joker is very well done.

If you can find for a discounted price (which I imagine you can pretty easily) and you were are a fan of the other games and are a fan of Batman it is worth playing.

Firefly boss fight is very fun too.

It has real Bane, so duh

Yeah. The story is freaking awesome everything else is neat I guess.. The only reason I dislike it is because it's kind of buggy at times.

It's a broken piece of garbage

I loved it. Story was great and it has actual Bane in it instead of that Gorilla they had in Asylum and City. I didn't experience any of the glitches other people are talking about although I played the game on PC and the console version might be worse.

It's not the best Arkham game but it's better than most other games so yes , buy it

No, it's absolutely terrible compared to the first two.

I thought it was a huge let down and waste of money. If you're looking forward to Deathstroke and Black Mask as I was, it's one of the worst games you could play.

It's definitely worth playing whether you buy or rent. Don't let people tell you it's bad game since gamers these days don't know what a bad game is.

It's an okay game, but has way too many problems. It's kind of glitchy (in my experience it was nothing game breaking, just annoying stuff you have to work around), it has nothing to do with the other Arkham games outside of title & combat (and even causes continuity errors with the other games), & the game basically lied to you about it's plot. It has an awesome set up that sounds really cool, but they end up completley ruining it (all I'll say is don't get your hopes up for Black Mask or Deathstroke like I did). Despite my complaining I thought it was alright, but that's probably because my expectations were insanely low.

Overall, I'd get it if it's cheap ($15 or below maybe), but know it's nothing special going into it.

Its a good game but adds nothing great to gameplay

It's the best Arkham game - buy it.

I chuckled at those who said it was broken because I had very few problems with my game. The only real "glitch" I had was Deadshot killing a hostage even though I got to him in time undetected. Other than that it was smooth. I have to disagree with TheCannon because it's only obvious that they'd build up to that certain character when he was the villain in Asylum and City. IMO he was done better in this game than he was the other two. Out of the three, Origins had the better story.

This! Big Time!

I was so pissed off with Black Masks portrayal!

No. The game is flawed.

It's still worth playing, but you have to stick with it for a while before it gets good. Don't go in expecting it to be anywhere near Arkham City's quality or you'll be hugely let down.

Nah there are serious problems with the game. It made me restart twice and I got stuck in walls constantly. The game has a great story but it's flawed.

@doctorxander: I honestly think the further I got in the more I hated it because *SPOILER* I don't want Joker when I'm promised Black Mask. We at least fought the assassins hunting us in the beginning of the game, nearing the end we just fight Bane twice and Joker. Also, at least Deathstroke, one of the characters they hyped up most, was in the beginning whereas he was completely absent for the entirety of the rest of the game (post credits doesn't count as part of the game).

It was fun but...same time it was just Arkham city the christmas special. Story was well written though.

I don't understand it when people say "well written story" when:

1) Joker is the big reveal which literally everyone expected. Not much of a reveal so I hope that's not what made the story good.

2) The premise was good, but it wasn't what it should've been. We didn't even get to actually fight half of the assassins in the main story mode. The assassins were the story and we didn't get to fight all of them!! W. T. LITERAL. F.

@The_Deathstroker:

1. Funny af name. Points for that.

2. If I watched any episode of any superhero show or read any comic even, I know pretty much how it's gonna end. I don't watch or read for that, but to see how the main character gets from point A to point B. The dance to the end game of the Joker reveal was good. Tying up all angles with a character thats main drive is chaos isn't an easy thing to sell.

3. I'm with you on that. That trailer had me thinking it was going to be more than it was, the one with bruce aging. Electrecutioner was basically just a plot device for the gauntlets.

@_animus_:

1. Thank you!

2. Yes, but.... I don't mind if you loved the story for the story. If you loved the story for the Joker reveal, that's what I have a problem with. We all knew it would happen, and to add insult to injury they all but take out Black Mask, whom we were lead to believe and promised to be the main villain, to have him in. Joker has been the main villain of the last two, Black Mask would have at least made the game interesting (and it was when Joker was BM) and put at least a speckle of creativity and originality to the story.

3. Agreed.

@The_Deathstroker: True. I wish he played a bigger role. Shifting the focus more to a mob vibe would've been fun but at least we can hope for it with the next one.

@_animus_: Yeah.

And we can hope, but God knows Joker will be the main villain once again.

@The_Deathstroker: Man I hope not...I don't think they'd pull that twice but entertainment is always trying something new nowadays. I hope this Arkham Knight guy is either someone new altogether or Jason Todd.

@_animus_: I bet the Knight is something new and original, but he's not going to be the one pulling all the strings. They wouldn't put the weight of the entire game onto the original character that no one has seen before or knows anything about. The "Shocker" will be that clay face was the one that died or something stupid and the Joker is behind it all pulling the strings. And Scarecrow seems to have his own plan separate from the Knight's, so..... Maybe the Joker is just pulling the strings of the Knight, but maybe of Scarecrow as well.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm 80% that'll be the case.

God, I hope not.

@dagmar_merrill: You fear it because you know it's got a chance at truth.

@The_Deathstroker: Yeah if they do that I will be pissed. I really want Scarecrow to be the real head honcho on Arkham Knight. He stole the show in Asylum but he never got another shot.

@dagmar_merrill: So do I, but I'm not getting my hopes up like I did for Origins. I've never been more excited about a game (Origins) and even pre ordered it (never pre ordered anything before) because I was so excited. Look at what I got from that.

I will go into this game thinking it will suck really bad, so that if it's good or if it's only okay I'll still like it more than Origins.

The Creative Director explicitly said that Joker is dead and is not returning. And that AK and Scarecrow are the main antagonists. So, no.

It's worth it. People's main complaints seem to be that it's too similar to the previous 2 games, but since you liked those it's not a bad thing - just don't expect too much new stuff. It's like another Arkham City but with a new story and maybe some new gadgets, Oh and Bane is not a moron for once.

Oh and I see some people have mentioned bugs, for what it's worth I finished the game without experiencing a single one. Just quicksave once in a while (or does the game autosave?), either way it should have enough patches by now, just make sure to patch it to the latest.

@The_Deathstroker: I agree I was disappointed with Deathstroke being beaten that early and Joker being Black Mask but I really liked the Firefly fight and the bit where you play as Joker and the final boss fight had a good feeling of epicness

These.

glitchy as hell, bland and time wasting story, ridding on the success of previous games so we don't have to put work into it. you can get a lot of ice cream with the money.

I got the game for $20 new, it is totally worth that.

@WarBlade539: They said that for Origins too, so don't be so sure.

Hamill said he was done and Joker is dead for Origins too, and look at what happened there.

Nope. I saved money not buying arkham origins so I could get Arkham knight.

Is it worth buying just for the multiplayer?

I can't be bothered playing through the story mode because I've heard it's inferior to arkham city's which I already felt although really fun was a bit overrated and I already know what happens in the story.

I'm also a bit burnt out on Arkham games, I spent absolutely ages getting the achievement where you have to beat new game+ 100% and complete all the challenge maps as Batman.

Just because it bugged for you doesn't mean it bugged for everyone else as well

Not as good as previous two but still an amazing game well worth your money and time.

@The_Deathstroker: Obviously. Origins was a prequel. Everyone knew from the start that Joker's gonna be in it. Plus, it wasn't even Rocksteady.

One of the lead devs told Angry Joe in an E3 interview that Joker is dead. So, it's safe to assume that there's no Joker.

@WarBlade539: yea I don't know about that. This is the last batman game in the trilogy. He'll be there some how

@darryl: If they resurrect him. But I don't think Rocksteady would resort to such a cheap tactic.

@WarBlade539: yeah I agree with u. Because then it will just be to obvious. I heard superman was suppose to be in it? Is that true