Metascore
74

Mixed or average reviews - based on 46 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 28 out of 46
  2. Negative: 3 out of 46
  1. Oct 25, 2013
    78
    Next to Arkham City, Arkham Origins is a bit of a disappointment in its lack of new ideas and use of win buttons, making it the least interesting of the trilogy.
  2. Oct 25, 2013
    60
    Batman: Arkham Origins is a deeply predictable game. It gives you exactly what you'd expect in another Arkham game, without doing anything to push the series forward.
  3. Oct 25, 2013
    85
    Batman: Arkham Origins delivers more of what made Rocksteady's games great, but doesn't break new ground. Like a youthful Bruce Wayne, it isn’t as crafty, and it takes its dings during combat, but still puts on a hell of a show when it needs to. Once Joker steps into the spotlight, it becomes a hard game to put down.
  4. Nov 13, 2013
    75
    However, in the midst of solving crimes while exploring Gotham, it's impossible to ignore some annoying issues. Firstly, there are bugs.
  5. Nov 4, 2013
    75
    I had a lot of fun with Arkham Origins, I thought the multiplayer mode was interesting, and I definitely think it’s worth checking out, once some of the more serious bugs are addressed.
  6. Nov 27, 2013
    83
    Another strong Batman outing, but one left bruised by the Arkhams Asylum and City. [Christmas 2013, p.72]
  7. Nov 6, 2013
    77
    Batman: Arkham Origins does its best to continue what two of the generation’s best games started, but falls far short of either game.
  8. 90
    Yes, it’s frustrating at times, but it sure as hell got our blood pumping. Plus, the animations look unbelievably organic — especially contextual finishers that incorporate the surrounding environment —and the sound effects give every hit a satisfying sense of bone-crunching devastation.
  9. Oct 31, 2013
    80
    Arkham Origins is not a bad game, in fact, it is really well made. The problem is that it feels like a lateral move for the series.
  10. Oct 24, 2013
    80
    Batman: Arkham Origins is a wonderful version of somebody else's game. While a return to the Arkham series is welcome – and if you take only one thing away from this review, it should be that Origins is a worthy entry – there's no denying that Warner Bros. Montreal has taken Rocksteady's tremendous template and crafted a similar experience.
  11. Oct 28, 2013
    40
    Bugs, glitches, game freezes, and other technical issues mar what would have otherwise been a passable, if unsurprising and uninspired Batman game.
  12. Oct 28, 2013
    35
    It's contemptuously pissed all over what Rocksteady accomplished with the previous Arkham games and shat out a soulless wreckage of a game. The only good in Origins comes from work already accomplished in previous games, with a whole lot of bad added in.
  13. Mar 11, 2014
    83
    Arkham Origins is very fun to play and very easy to forget as soon as you're done. Kicking butt as Batman is still a joy and the Invisible Predator scenes are as excellent as ever, but the game's almost complete lack of surprises weighs the experience severely down. [Nov 2013]
  14. Nov 5, 2013
    65
    Origins is the least impressive game the series has to offer. Warner Bros. Games Montréal eagerly uses the fundamentals that original developer Rocksteady created and perfected with the two other Batman-games, but forgets to build upon it and really make it their own. The combat system is the best it has to offer and can make Batman: Arkham Origins quite entertaining. Aside from that, there’s nothing here that its predecessors don’t do better.
  15. Oct 28, 2013
    70
    A poor man’s version of Arkham City, although that still leaves a fairly rich gameplay experience – even if it is the franchise equivalent of treading water.
  16. Oct 25, 2013
    87
    The quality of the combat, the diversity of the dialogue from lead characters to two-bit crooks, and the sheer amount of things to do make this stretch of Gotham an enjoyable place to visit. Origins proves the Arkham formula is strong enough for another team to tamper with, but if the series wants to really break free of its restraints in the next generation, they’re going to have to teach this old bat even more new tricks.
  17. Oct 25, 2013
    80
    A good homage to Arkham Asylum and Arkham city. Forcefully derivative, but Warner Montreal can feel proud of releasing such a competent, focused and well-made sequel that captures the elements of the two previous games.
  18. Oct 25, 2013
    88
    Arkham Origins has a lot to live up to. I think it gets close but sadly not close enough. You still feel like Batman, but it’s missing... something. Perhaps Batman isn’t just a man with a bunch of extraordinary gadgets, maybe he needs that creepy weirdness as well.
  19. 80
    It doesn't bring many new tricks to the table, but Origins is still thoroughly entertaining.
  20. 80
    It's a case of more of the same, but with such good source material this isn't a bad thing. [Issue#105, p.87]
  21. Oct 28, 2013
    70
    Batman: Arkham Origins doesn’t seem to realize its true potential, and because of it, falls short.
  22. Oct 25, 2013
    70
    Even though it's worse than the predecessors in almost every possible way, Batman: Arkham Origins is still highly enjoyable. Which says a lot about how good the Arkham series has been so far.
  23. Oct 31, 2013
    78
    We were happy to see so many delightfully crafted boss fights, even though the actual clashes and brawls weren’t as challenging as we hoped. They are still very entertaining and were excellently incorporated into the main tale.
  24. Oct 28, 2013
    75
    In its desire to to be stewards worthy of the prestigious Arkham series, Warner Bros Montreal has played it too close. Arkham Origins is well executed and sure to keep fans satisfied, but it doesn't dare to bring enough new ideas to warrant higher praise.
  25. Oct 29, 2013
    75
    Arkham Origins only surprises with its story, but otherwise it´s a predictable and in many ways roughly polished prequel. If Batman isn´t boring you yet, or if you´ve always wanted to try an Arkham game, then Origins doesn´t do much wrong, but we´ve come to expect better by now.
  26. 70
    This reads as a harsh review, but the basic building blocks are still in place. And it's a good game compared to others. However it pales when stacked against the previous two masterpieces. The Batman in Origins is seemingly a metaphor for his creators: less experienced, and making the odd mistake.
  27. Oct 28, 2013
    65
    Batman: Arkham Origins could have been so much more. I’m not sure if a rushed development cycle, a new developer, or shoehorned multiplayer is to blame (maybe a combination of all three), but unfortunately, Origins falls short of the high bars the previous games have created.
  28. Oct 30, 2013
    70
    A different studio, the same product. Arkham Origins is basically the Arkham City title, re-painted not to a pink colour but into the mood of Batman's advent. The fun is there, however and unfortunately, its drawbacks should really be solved.
  29. Oct 28, 2013
    70
    It is a well done, if familiar game. In all its homogeneity with respect to its predecessors, though, Arkham Origins lacks surprise and spark. You'll constantly feel one step ahead of the game.
  30. Oct 25, 2013
    90
    Warner Montréal proved to be fully capable of following in Rocksteady's footsteps, delivering a very entertaining game. If you were expecting a revolution in gameplay or setting you'll probably be disappointed, but despite that Batman: Arkham Origins is great fun and deserves to be played by any fan of the series.
  31. 92
    A brilliant prequel story that retains the high standards of the series to date, Batman: Arkham Origins is a superlative third instalment that perfectly embodies the spirit of DC's darkest and most enduring hero. The Dark Knight rises once again, and he kicks ass.
  32. Oct 28, 2013
    70
    Batman: Arkham Origins is a flawed, but enjoyable game that fails to improve on a winning formula. This is still great core gameplay, solid graphics, great voice acting, and a plot that's a good ride while it lasts. Just don't expect anything new.
  33. Dec 28, 2013
    80
    That it's so thoroughly entertaining despite being mostly identical to its predecessors speaks volumes about the quality of Rocksteady's original design, and of Warner Montreal's understanding of same. [Jan 2014, p.68]
  34. Oct 25, 2013
    65
    Batman: Arkham Origins is a massive step back from Rocksteady’s Arkham efforts due to countless technical problems, poor gadget balancing, and a needless addition of versus multiplayer.
  35. Oct 25, 2013
    80
    Can Batman: Arkham Origins be considered a failure? Definitely not, but it certainly is a game without a spark of genius. The developers have used previously constructed assets and prepared a well-crafted ending to the trilogy. It's not as good as Asylum or City, but fans shouldn't be disappointed. Origins is still a very good Batman game - not original, but extremely effective.
  36. Oct 25, 2013
    70
    Where Arkham Asylum and Arkham City surprised me with their ambition, Origins is comfortable taking the best from what has come before without contributing much of its own — or even fully understanding what worked about those systems. It's built on a solid foundation but it doesn't take the world's greatest detective to see that something significant is missing.
  37. Nov 13, 2013
    20
    I really can’t figure out why this game exists other than the desire to cash in on the work done by Rocksteady. The combat isn’t as good, the story is weak and meaningless, all tension drained from it because we know that nothing bad happens to anyone as they’re all around in Arkham Asylum, and the gadgets are either exactly the same or have the barest of cosmetic differences to distinguish them from previous games’ gadgets.
  38. Oct 31, 2013
    70
    Arkham Origins isn't the next great Batman game but rather a competent rehash of Rocksteady's two entries. While it's filled with more flaws and familiarity than I'd like, it's still the third best Batman game the medium's ever seen.
  39. It may not be the best or most innovative game within the series, but it definitely feels like it fits with the two games made by Rocksteady Studios.
  40. Oct 25, 2013
    75
    A good but underwhelming entry in the Arkham series that often feels more like an update than a true sequel.
  41. Oct 25, 2013
    86
    Arkham Origins is a fantastic game, and one that is worthy of the Arkham legacy, but that being said, one can’t help but feel that WB Games Montreal played this one safe. They relied on the strength of Rocksteady’s rock-solid foundation, and simply applied new coats of paint and some extra decorations that weren’t there before.
  42. Oct 30, 2013
    80
    It's not necessarily Batman's finest hour and doesn't move the series forward in any significant way, but it's likely to attract fans the same way that crime attracts Batman.
  43. Nov 1, 2013
    60
    The real shame of Batman: Arkham Origins is that those attempts at innovation are so clearly visible. The studios have obviously made an attempt to freshen up the series, and some changes like the boss battles are actually very successful. But those changes are fairly minor in the grander scope of the game as a whole, leaving Arkham Origins unable to escape from under its predecessors' shadows.
  44. Oct 25, 2013
    80
    It’s really good. Just not, ironically enough, all that original...What ultimately keeps Arkham Origins from being as exceptional as its predecessor is the weight of the franchise itself. Origins has the disadvantage of being a prequel to a game that’s nearly impossible to top, by a new studio that understandably doesn’t want to drop the ball.
  45. Nov 19, 2013
    60
    Games appeal in different ways to different people but they should never be tedious, and Warner Montreal have been unable to recapture the spark and essence which made the previous titles such a delight to play. As a consequence, Arkham Origins suffers from monotony - one crime which even The World’s Greatest Detective would find impossible to solve.
  46. Arkham Origins is a very good game that stands on its own and delivers the same excellent adventure, exceptionally timed fights, clever puzzle-solving, hauntingly beautiful graphics and characters as memorable its predecessors...However, there are a few areas where it doesn’t quite match Rocksteady’s lofty achievements, writing being the most noticeable shortfall.
User Score
7.4

Mixed or average reviews- based on 603 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 33 out of 181
  1. Oct 25, 2013
    10
    Played 1.5 hours so far. There are a few minor glitches, but it doesn't detract from the game (if you use a controller and have Synergy it may behave weirdly, just disable synergy or put the other computer to sleep my mouse only went off the left screen). Still set in Arkham City, plus a bit more across the bridge, and the Batcave is there. Still has the same combat. Thus far, they seem to have done well. It's very fun to play and has very good dialogue and story.

    I do find it weird having Batman ask who certain villains are, or anyone being like "who's the Batman? You made him up!" or "you're just seeing things!", since we obviously know who Batman is as well as several of the villains that Batman doesn't know yet...

    Very glad I got it. You won't be disappointed. Put your fears to rest, they didn't produce a half-assed game.
    Full Review »
  2. Oct 25, 2013
    2
    what a huge letdown. cant compare to the last 2 games at all. graphics are pretty bad unless ur on pc, game runs horribly unless ur on pc. city is dead, combat is soooo easy which makes it quite boring.....there are not 1 but 2 i win buttons being the shock gauntlets and the grapnel device that lets u string people up anywhere not like the last 2 games that while still quite easy required a little skill.....not this game u want to win spam a button and u win. honestly this game isnt that good its too short. clearly people are blinded by the fact that they paid money for this and are giving it much higher reviews than it deserves. Full Review »
  3. Oct 25, 2013
    8
    I wanted to love this game, Being a stout fan of the two prior Batman games I was both excited and worried as this project was not spearheaded by RockSteady Games, However from what I heard, both Warner Brothers as well as RockSteady were sure that this new studio was right for the job, so I preordered it.

    Number one on my list is the grading system, This is a game, not a test there is no need to produce a grade after each battle, all that is needed, in my opinion is to defeat the people you're fighting. The XP points were enough, it wasn't broken so why fix it!

    Number two, the name bothers me, there is no Arkham Asylum in this game and of course no Arkham City. This has nothing to do with an Arkham game. They would've done better to call the game; Batman; Year Two or something to that effect. Warner Brothers wanted to simply ride on the coattails of RockSteady's Arkham series and thus the name Arkham Origin was born. Maybe I am being picky but the only thing that this game has to do with the name is the Joker, The Penguin, Bane and Killer Croc, all the other villains are mostly assassins out to make a buck by killing Batman, which the same can be said by Warner Brothers Game.

    Number three, and the one that bothered me the most. WB Games put an embargo date on this game meaning that any reviewer who got a review copy was not allowed to review it until after the release. I did not sign anything and did not get a review copy, I pay for my games and thus I am not dictated by the companies on what I can or can not do. In my opinion any gaming developer who put an embargo for after the release has something to hide. Now I know why, because this game does not hold a candle to Arkham Asylum or Arkham City. Its not a bad game but it is repetitive and more of the same.
    Full Review »