New, very positive preview.

[Ensanguined Walls]

http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/696904/Batman-Arkham-Asylum-Preview.html?utm_source=g4tv&utm_medium=rssfeeds&utm_campaign=TheFeed

[EliteF50]

Thanks, Walls.

Reading it now.

[Ensanguined Walls]

Thanks, Walls.

Reading it now.

Enjoy.

[EliteF50]

Hmm, G4 said the pacing was good. Meh, the IGN team always has been picky as hell.

[Ensanguined Walls]

Hmm, G4 said the pacing was good. Meh, the IGN team always has been picky as hell.

IGN has always been a bit nitpitcky. Notice how G4 and Kotaku didn't have issues with the character model of Batman or the pacing transitions. They only said it needed a bit more polish, which is typical for a game demo that they were sent in early May (before most of the polishing took place).

[Goodmangamerguy]

awesome Walls/ thanks man!

[daklog]

indeed a very positive preview - and i was expecting nothing less, this game will keep people locked up in their rooms day and night ~ a safer alternative to actually putting on a bat suit and trying to stop criminals.

[batman4747]

indeed a very positive preview - and i was expecting nothing less, this game will keep people locked up in their rooms day and night ~ a safer alternative to actually putting on a bat suit and trying to stop criminals.

LOL i will leave my room when i get 1000G lol.

[Ensanguined Walls]

LOL i will leave my room when i get 1000G lol.

:lol:

[CaptainMcMulla]

thats what i dont understand why are IGN saying the pacing is off and G4 are syaing its good WTH?
Anyway another good preview for a fantastic looking game.

[Solidkill3r]

thats what i dont understand why are IGN saying the pacing is off and G4 are syaing its good WTH?
Anyway another good preview for a fantastic looking game.

Its IGN........End of story.

[Ensanguined Walls]

thats what i dont understand why are IGN saying the pacing is off and G4 are syaing its good WTH?
Anyway another good preview for a fantastic looking game.

IGN can be nitpicky sometimes.

[Ensanguined Walls]

Besides, if all they can say is "Batman doesn't walk right!", then you know they're nitpicking.

He walks fine, and the transitions look superb. At least they were only playing an unfinished demo.

[EliteF50]

I'm expecting a 5/5 from G4, and a 8.5 from IGN.

[CaptainMcMulla]

I like IGN's screenshots but IM NOT GOING TOLISTEN TO IGNs NITPICKING ANYMORE!

[CaptainMcMulla]

I'm expecting a 5/5 from G4, and a 8.5 from IGN.
IGN will say 8.5 because of the way batman walks :lol:

[Ensanguined Walls]

I'm expecting a 5/5 from G4, and a 8.5 from IGN.

G4 seems to love this game. Sessler was basically orgasming during the preview.

[sharpy_4]

It may be small, but IGN obviously felt it was significant enough to make mention of, and not one but two editors felt the same way. If the previews were reversed I feel the same comments would be being made towards G4. Let's not be blind fanboys and bury our heads in the sand when someone says slightly negative things about B:AA.

[Ensanguined Walls]

It may be small, but IGN obviously felt it was significant enough to make mention of, and not one but two editors felt the same way. If the previews were reversed I feel the same comments would be being made towards G4. Let's not be blind fanboys and bury our heads in the sand when someone says slightly negative things about B:AA.

IGN has a history of nitpicking. I'm certainly not a fanboy, but I've never been much of a fan of their coverage, and that doesn't only apply to Arkham Asylum. They tend to raise highly trivial complaints that not many other websites even mention.

Many of their readers feel the same way.

[Griffins22]

Besides, if all they can say is "Batman doesn't walk right!", then you know they're nitpicking.

He walks fine, and the transitions look superb. At least they were only playing an unfinished demo.

But if Batman's animations are the only problem they have why shouldn't they mention it? I don't get why you guys are all bashing IGN. If I was writing a preview for a game I would mention any little problem I had with the title for two reasons: o give the developers a chance to fix it and to alert the fans about the issue. Just because they mentioned a problem doesn't mean they think it's a huge issue. IGN had a lot of good things to say about the game, but everybody seemed to forget that the second IGN mentioned one little problem.

[Ensanguined Walls]

But if Batman's animations are the only problem they have why shouldn't they mention it? I don't get why you guys are all bashing IGN. If I was writing a preview for a game I would mention any little problem I had with the title for two reasons: o give the developers a chance to fix it and to alert the fans about the issue. Just because they mentioned a problem doesn't mean they think it's a huge issue. IGN had a lot of good things to say about the game, but everybody seemed to forget that the second IGN mentioned one little problem.

I disagree with IGN's coverage, and that extends far beyond Arkham Asylum. You disagree with me. There's no reason to make an issue out of it. I simply believe that IGN has raised trivial issues for many games that none of us seem to notice, and many of their fans have alerted them of that. Hillary isn't one of my favorite editors on the web, either. Regardless, we have differing viewpoints on IGN's inconsistent coverage (they said that the game's intro is a "gamble" due to the slow start in showing us each scenario, but the same editor never even mentioned that for BioShock).

Either way, let's keep the focus on this preview.

[sharpy_4]

IGN has a history of nitpicking. I'm certainly not a fanboy, but I've never been much of a fan of their coverage, and that doesn't only apply to Arkham Asylum. They tend to raise highly trivial complaints that not many other websites even mention.

Many of their readers feel the same way.
Fair enough, but while you might see it as nitpicking, others (including myself) see it as comprehensive coverage, making sure they're informing the reader of all things they consider relevant. I've read IGN for many many years and have done so because I find them reliable, but each to their own!

[Griffins22]

I disagree with IGN's coverage, and that extends far beyond Arkham Asylum. You disagree with me. There's no reason to make an issue out of it. I simply believe that IGN has raised trivial issues for many games that none of us seem to notice, and many of their fans have alerted them of that. Hillary isn't one of my favorite editors on the web, either. Regardless, we have differing viewpoints on IGN's inconsistent coverage (they said that the game's intro is a "gamble" due to the slow start in showing us each scenario, but the same editor never even mentioned that for BioShock).

Either way, let's keep the focus on this preview.

What I'm saying is, there's no reason IGN shouldn't mention trivial issues. That's just my opinion.

Anyway, the preview defintiely opened up some potential for the storyline.

[Ensanguined Walls]

Fair enough, but while you might see it as nitpicking, others (including myself) see it as comprehensive coverage, making sure they're informing the reader of all things they consider relevant. I've read IGN for many many years and have done so because I find them reliable, but each to their own!

Honestly, I think they're a bit inconsistent with what issues they tend to raise (while they mention the intro in this one as a "gamble", they never even said the same for BioShock, which introduced its story in the same way). Still, I can see why you would think differently. Let's keep the discussion on this specific preview, though, and its own specifics.

[Ensanguined Walls]

Up.