Talk:Batman: Arkham Knight/Archive 1

Archive 1

Development section

The second paragraph of the development section reads "Rocksteady decided early on in development to make Arkham Knight only for the then-upcoming next-generation of consoles, which was considered to allow them to focus on using the system resources to their fullest without reining in their ideas to accommodate the older generation systems."

I read this as implying, incorrectly, that the game will not be released on PC. It seems the sentence is supposed to indicate that it will not be released on previous gen consoles, but it could be clearer. N^oformation ^Talk 20:34, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

PC is not a console, so it is stated correctly. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:16, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

(The) Arkham Knight pics

The new Game Revolution preview has a couple screenshots of the Arkham Knight, and I'm assuming other sites probably were given assess to them as well. We might be able to use the fact that he's a new character to justify a screenshot on here, but I'll defer that to the more active editors.

Also, the current box art image is a really bad crop. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 19:40, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

I think it would be fine to include. Also, can you elaborate on how the box art image is a "bad crop"? What is the issue for you, as I don't see an issue with it. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:16, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Too much headroom/negative space at the top. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 20:24, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Hmm. I uploaded the image as is, so I will try to reduce that issue. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:39, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Release date pushed to 2015 (maybe)

Just so people are on standby: [1] I would not consider this a reliable source, but know that this statement is out there, and Rocksteady and/or Warner Bros. may be commenting on this shortly. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 05:58, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

main games vs whole series

This is the third main game but the fourth overall. Origins is a non-cannon prequel made by a completely different studio. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.46.209.18 (talk) 23:22, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Says who? It is the successor in real life to Origins, sequel in story to City and fourth game overall. End of story. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:29, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

uhm..says the creators? did you read the press release? also, where your citation that it's officially the fourth one? and i said overall you dumbass but the section specifically calls it main, which it is not. stop crying — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.46.209.18 (talk) 23:36, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

They can say it's the tenth game in the Final Fantasy series, there are four console Arkham games. Its the third Rocksteady have done, that doesn't have any bearing on this article. DWB (talk) / Comment on Dishonored's FA nom! 00:08, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Origins clearly isn't canon as Rocksteady call Arkham Knight the "Explosive finale to the Arkham trilogy."

...to their trilogy. - Favre1fan93 (talk – Comment on List of Marvel Cinematic Universe films' FLC) 14:47, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Release Date

I went to Gamestop to preorder that and he said it would be available in February. BecauseBATMAN (talk) 22:39, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Hopefully it will release soon, cause I don't know about you, BecauseBATMAN, but I'm tired of waiting for new gameplay! URDNEXT (talk) 01:09, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Spelling Mistake

IN Batmobile part, instead of laser defense, it is typed by mistake as 'Taser Defense". Please correct the spelling. 122.178.220.193 (talk) 01:25, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

 Not done It is not a mistake. Please see the source attributed to it. It is taser. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:50, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

GA/FA

Hey, I know the game only comes out next year, but is anybody interested in taking the article to GA/FA when the time comes? I'm onboard. URDNEXT (talk) 23:52, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Linux / SteamOS

Steam is now selling this for pre-order on SteamOS/Linux too, apparently for release simultaneous with the other platforms. I'm not quite proposing we add this to the article yet (the steamdb occasionally has errors), but we should look out for an announcement (perhaps from Feral) at GDC or Pax East. -- Finlay McWalterᚠTalk 19:29, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:41, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Sources.[2][3][4][5] --82.136.210.153 (talk) 03:04, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Out of the sources provided, VG24/7 is the only one that is reliable, and it does not adequately state that the game will be out on Linux / SteamOS. It just lumps all the titles together that are under the deal and doesn't specify which are for what platforms. There is no harm in waiting for a proper source to come around. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 04:31, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Favre1fan93, I partially disagree with your assessment of the sources. Phoronix, for example, is generally regarded as trustworthy and authoritative in relation to the subject at hand. How reliable a source is depends on context. Even GamingOnLinux is usable here, as a temporary link, because its statements are not speculation but it's spelling out facts. In fact, this material does not even require an inline citation per WP:MINREF, because it's not a direct quotation, has not been challenged and is unlikely to be challenged, and is not contentious material about a living person. Even the Steam page about the game itself, where it says "Batman: Arkham Knight will be available on SteamOS and Linux in Fall 2015.", can be used per WP:PRIMARY. --82.136.210.153 (talk) 06:56, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

I agree that VG247 is not usable here. --82.136.210.153 (talk) 07:22, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Batmobile at MCM Comic Con

I don′t know, if anyone of you lives in London. But during this weekend, there is a replica of the Batmobile in the London Comic Con and maybe someone can make a picture for this article. --M(e)ister Eiskalt (talk) 11:32, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't know about an image, but I found an article about it that can be added to the marketing section. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:04, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

I mean that you can take a picture, if you are there. --M(e)ister Eiskalt (talk) 16:19, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

http://m.imgur.com/R0H1znW / http://www.mcmcomiccon.com/london/2015/05/01/life-size-batman-arkham-knight-batmobile-to-make-uk-debut-at-comic-con/ --~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by M(e)ister Eiskalt (talk • contribs) 16:22, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

But @Favre1fan93: Maybe you can add the article in here - that would be better than nothing. --M(e)ister Eiskalt (talk) 20:37, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

I had added it. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:07, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. --M(e)ister Eiskalt (talk) 13:15, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Outsourced?

According to http://community.wbgames.com/t5/Support-for-PC/PC-Performance-issues-we-hear-you/m-p/571341#M7537 , there is an "external pc development partner". Could this mean they outsourced the PC port? There has been no mention of an external developer before, to my knowledge. Ferrochemist (talk) 16:22, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

We should look through the credits for other development firms to confirm this. Zero Serenity ^{(talk - contributions)} 16:37, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

looks like it was iron galaxy studios , good job whoever found and edited it Ferrochemist (talk) 01:32, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

This is a common practice, almost every game uses multiple developers to cover different platforms these days, and Iron Galaxy was a developer for Batman: Arkham Origins as well. -- ferret (talk) 01:42, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Not nearly as common, but I was just saying that it wasn't mentioned before by WB or Rocksteady. Ferrochemist (talk) 12:11, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Why are ports not to be listed in the infobox per recent consensus?

Does this apply to all games? Can someone point me to where consensus was reached as I would argue that knowing the developer(s) for all platforms of a game is useful. So if the PC dev of this game cannot be listed in the infobox why isn't it mentioned in the actual article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smush123 (talk • contribs) 23:40, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

You'll need to head over to the talk page for the template at Template_talk:Infobox video game. The discussions appear to be contained in the two most recent archives, as well as a new section that has been opened in response to this article. -- ferret (talk) 00:29, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

White Washing of PC Problems

Not one mention of the fact that the PC version is a virtually unplayable piece of garbage? If Wikipedia was actually a good source of unbiased info I'd be more surprised. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.168.207.237 (talk) 13:30, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Then write it up and provide sources. Don't expect someone else to do it when you can do it yourself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.43.79.246 (talk) 15:09, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Also of note: reviews (positive or negative) written by Steam users who subsequently request a refund are removed. In other words, those negative review counts don't include anyone disappointed enough to request a refund. 75.158.232.215 (talk) 19:43, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Where does it say that? Zero Serenity ^{(talk - contributions)} 19:52, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

It doesn't. I purchased it, wrote a negative review and confirmed it got posted. After struggling for about 30 more minutes, I requested and received my refund. My review disappeared with my game. I don't particularly have an opinion of it one way or the other (I don't own the game, so should I be able to have a review?) - just putting that out there. 75.158.232.215 (talk) 19:57, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

If there's an article explaining that this happens, I think it would be worth mentioning (at least on the Steam article). Zero Serenity ^{(talk - contributions)} 20:26, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

The article really does gloss over the massive reaction to the PC version. As of a few hours ago, WB ceased selling the PC version (http://kotaku.com/warner-bros-says-theyre-suspending-arkham-knight-pc-sal-1713780990). Time is reporting on the problems with the PC version, and there's no shortage of articles on gaming sites like Kotaku. This section really needs an overhaul. http://time.com/3933187/batman-arkham-knight-pc/, http://kotaku.com/arkham-knight-pc-disaster-watch-day-two-1713637876 Ragan (talk) 04:26, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

It seems the page has been updated and I wasn't seeing the current version or it was just changed. This links will probably still be useful. I have changed the wording near the beginning of the section, because calling the massive reaction "not as well-received" is deceptive or at best misinformed in the current situation. I added a Kotaku link that showed the user reaction on Steam and lists some of the problems, but more sources for this statement would be useful, and I am not up to sifting through them right now.Ragan (talk) 04:29, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Note that this page is under Pending Changes protection, and updates will not be shown on the live article until they have been accepted by a reviewer. I have just accepted all of the pending revisions as of this time stamp. -- ferret (talk) 13:17, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Removal of PC reviews from the lead of Reception?

In the reception area, why was my edit reverted? I can't find the exact revision that removed my text. The information I wrote was legitmate and correct with a reliable source that went along with it. So I ask again, why was it removed?

Links: Revision, Difference --Anarchyte 02:21, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

That text appears to still be in the article at the end of the first paragraph of the Reception statement, and I do not think it was ever removed. You may not have seen it while viewing the article due to the Pending Changes protection that this page was under, until the revisions were later accepted by a reviewer. -- ferret (talk) 13:22, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Rename Technical Issues to PC Technical Issues?

Just to see what others think, the technical issues section and current uproar is exclusive to the PC release, and I think having the section simply called technical issues arguably impacts perception on the console versions, which so far as I know lack the problems and are well-received. I feel the name of the section should indicate that it is a PC-issue, which will also draw attention to PC gamers looking for information on the article, or those interested in researching this matter.Ragan (talk) 04:46, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

I would opt for "Technical Issues on Windows platform" if we're trying to be as clear as possible. -- ferret (talk) 13:19, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

 Done — AYTK talk. 18:36, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 July 2015

Under the "Additional content" section, a word has been left out. The extant text is, "Design producer Justin Vazquez said, "Hacking is really what separates her from the other characters... Our intention was that Batgirl should be less powerful than Batman, but that Batgirl plus hacking could give her opportunities do things that not even Batman can pull off." An edit should be made to insert the word to after opportunites so that the text reads, "Design producer Justin Vazquez said, "Hacking is really what separates her from the other characters... Our intention was that Batgirl should be less powerful than Batman, but that Batgirl plus hacking could give her opportunities to do things that not even Batman can pull off." Ultraapple (talk) 04:30, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

 Done Well it was put up exactly as it was mentioned in the source. However, guessing it was a mistake, I've corrected it by adding the word inside square brackets. Best -- Chamith (talk) 05:49, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Unbalanced reviews template

Looking at the Metacritic scores and seeing that the PS4 version has so much more reviews than the Xbox one and Windows versions currently, would it make more sense to make it more of a multi-platform template to identify which version was reviewed? GamerPro64 03:44, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Plot expansion

Could somenone please complete de game's plot? some people want to know what the game deals with — Preceding unsigned comment added by 181.28.189.227 (talk) 18:45, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

It's being actively expanded, give it some time. -- ferret (talk) 19:14, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

This is unrelated to the plot expanion, but a HUGE plot correction needs to be done: It is made clear in the ending of Batman Arkham City that batman, with the help if Mr. Freeze, manages to find and then injects on himself a cure for Joker's infected blood desease. Furhtermore, in Arkham Knight Its clear (thanks to the "hallucination" joker) that ONLY AFTER being exposed to scarecrow's toxing in ace chemicals Batman hallucinates with, is brefily mind controled and slowly both mind-changed, defeated and subsequently "killed" by Joker. Somene please make the needed corrections as soon as posible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drumerwritter (talk • contribs) 06:57, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Plot Correction

A HUGE plot correction needs to be done: It is made clear in the ending of Batman Arkham City that batman, with the help if Mr. Freeze, manages to find and then injects on himself a cure for Joker's infected blood desease. Furhtermore, in Arkham Knight Its clear (thanks to the "hallucination" joker) that ONLY AFTER being exposed to scarecrow's toxing in ace chemicals Batman hallucinates with, is brefily mind controled and slowly both mind-changed, defeated and subsequently "killed" by Joker. Somene please make the needed corrections as soon as posible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drumerwritter (talk • contribs) 06:57, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Additional content reception

The additional content reception section shouldn't exist. There is a reason no game page in all of Wikipedia includes it: there is no general consensus. Compare to the main reception section. It all boils down to a couple of "this random guy thinks this, this other random guy feels that". It's ridiculous, it's unencyclopedic, it doesn't pertain to the game reception and it has no place here. - Fighting Fefnir (talk) 19:15, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

It very much has a place in the article. Reviews for the additional content exist and provide scope to additional parts of the game. This info would not fit farther up with in the "Release" section; it fits here. And given the amount of it, we can create the subsection. If there was not as much as there was, it would just be a paragraph at the bottom of the section. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:12, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 July 2015

There is an easter egg for Ace the Bat-Hound, please add "Ace the Bat-Hound" to the references listed in Synopsis/Characters, next to Superman, Black Canary, Blue Beetle, and the others. Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ry_78TkKCp4 24.211.226.190 (talk) 17:07, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

 Not done Unverified YouTube accounts (as this one is) can't be used to source material. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:10, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

• Well, I guess we'll just have to find a better source then. -24.211.226.190 (talk) 20:16, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Anonymous source

Editor Favre1fan93 seems dedicated to stating a rumor as fact and quoting therefor an anonymous source. The cited source for the quote not to maniacally screw over customers—but because they believed it was good enough, Klepek, Patrick (July 1, 2015). "Sources: Warner Bros. Knew That Arkham Knight PC Was A Mess For Months". Kotaku, clearly states that the sources were anonymous. Two sources, requesting anonymity to avoid jeopardizing their careers, spoke with Kotaku over the past week in hopes of explaining how the broken PC version of Arkham Knight made it out the door. They both said that Warner Bros. was aware of the many issues facing Arkham Knight on PC and that the publisher chose to ship the game regardless, not to maniacally screw over customers—but because they believed it was good enough. Other sources treated the knowledge as rumor, see e.g. "Rumor: Warner Bros. knew Batman: Arkham Knight was broken on PC before release" Gamezone; and the reliablity of the Kotaku source was even questioned in the comments on the Kotaku webpage. Based on this lack of unanimity of opinion, and failure to establish Warner Bros. knowledge of the defects with reliable sources, it would seem to violate WP:NPOV as well as WP:UNDUE to include this anonymous quote in the Wikipedia article. --Bejnar (talk) 16:56, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

The quote is a good insight into the report. In how it is used in article, the words "reported" and "their sources" are used to indicate that this is not fact, but the opinions of the sources. I don't believe that is in any violation. And should WB games respond to such claims (I don't believe they have), their response could and should be added. - Favre1fan93 (talk)

The source remains anonymous without indicia of reliability. Also, you haven't addressed the issue of WP:UNDUE. Does not the use of the quote give undue emphasis to Warner Bros. knowledge or lack thereof, in an article that is supposed to be about the game? --Bejnar (talk) 03:23, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Nine months RossButsy (talk) 01:37, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Nine months RossButsy (talk) 01:37, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Marketing Section

The Times Square ad image needs to be a little bit bigger, preferably the size I've set it to now and that's because the image is based on content. Readers need to see what the image says and it's not actually visible in the size that was previously set. The objective is to make the article more readable and "view-able" on mobile devices and tablets. The image should be large enough to comprehend without it actually being clicked on for a second time and that's exactly the case here. Majority of the people who're just "reading" Wikipedia, just scroll through the article and just the see the images and try to understand the gravity of the article and if the image is small or requires a second click to see, then it is highly likely that they would not see it. So, let the image stick to the size I've set it to. Thanks! D437 (talk) 14:21, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

It is purely promotional content, a picture of advertising. I have removed it, ending the controversy. Scr★pIron^IV 14:25, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

And that's exactly why the picture was placed in the Marketing section of the article. Doesn't it make sense to show a marketing ploy in the section? And isn't it the formal convention to discuss edits before actually reverting or in this case entirely removing the image? D437 (talk) 01:46, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Regardless of if the picture should be kept or not, it is too large. If readers want to see it in its detail, that is what the gallery viewer and/or the actual file location is for. I'm restoring the smaller size back. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:02, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

See, I get it, the image is a panorama shot, its big and all that, but the current size is too small and my proposed is supposedly too big for everyone here, what if we agree on a size that's not in the extremes? Say, something in between what your proposed image size is and my proposed size is? Say something at about 400px or 375px where its not too large to make it look awkward or too small for readers to not be able to see the image at all. Let's work this out and help people. Thanks! D437 (talk) 19:43, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

It really shouldn't go higher than 350. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:10, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Ok, I've set it at 350px. No more reverts or edits, its final. 350. D437 (talk) 20:19, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Nothing is ever final. That's not how Wikipedia works. And my comment wasn't that it should be 350. Just that it shouldn't go higher than that. 300 is still an adequate size for it. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:55, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

You know what, fine. Keep it your way. Its because of "editors" like you that Wikipedia will never be accepted as a proper/legit/cite-able source anywhere in the world. Thank you. I will remove the image entirely from Wikimedia Commons. Thank you. D437 (talk) 18:58, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Batman: Arkham Knight/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: AdrianGamer (talk · contribs) 14:16, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

I should be able to get this done by the end of this week. AdrianGamer (talk) 14:16, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Lead

• it is the successor to Warner Bros. Games Montréal's 2013 video game Batman: Arkham Origins - listing the developer of Origins in the lead is not necessary. It is too detailed for the lead
  •  Done
• Scarecrow unites Batman's greatest foes in a plot to finally destroy Batman - sounds like something from a press release for some reason. Some rephrase would be great
  • Adjusted. Let me know.
• with a primary focus on Batman's combat and stealth abilities, detective skills, and gadgets that can be used in both combat and exploration. - Rephrase it to with a primary focus on Batman's melee combat, stealth abilities, detective skills, and gadgets. Leave out the remaining part for the gameplay section
  •  Done
• a more open world structure - wikilink open world
  •  Done
• Remember to add information about sales and accolades (if there is any) to the lead.
  • Not many accolades at the moment. Added a sentence about sales that is appropriate at this time.

Gameplay

• grapnel gun, line launcher, batarangs, the countering system and Detective Vision - Source gives no indication that "batarangs" is a returning mechanic
  •  Done I've added a second source for batarangs.
• The second paragraph of the gameplay section is a bit short. Try to integrate more information about the grapnel gun and line launcher here.
• Is Disruptor-rifle a new gun? If it is, it should be moved to the part talking about new gadgets
  • The fact that it is a rifle, with one of its features is new. The Disruptor itself is a returning gadget. I've included wording to clarify.
• imitate other characters' voices to direct thugs into traps - what characters you can imitate then? You imitate the voice of another thug, or as a hostile police, or something else?
  • I've included examples of characters you can imitate. They aren't in the sources provided, but (obviously) from the game itself.
• fired twice while in the air to chain grappling moves together. - source 5 has no use here. The next source has covered it very well
  •  Done
• Arkham Knight introduces enemy medics who can shield enemies in electrified fields and revive unconscious ones,[6] sword-wielding enemies, and brutes who are resistant to damage and must be stunned before they can be attacked, while brutes wielding Gatling guns, tasers, and blades require additional steps to defeat. - This sentence is too long. Try to split into half
  •  Done
• Throughout the city, Batman can encounter enemy watchtowers - "can" is not necessary
  •  Done
• There is only two sentences in the six paragraph, which is not enough.
  • Added the content to the end of the third paragraph on combat.
• Where does the word "Free Flow Combat" come from?
  • The game's term for entering an uninterrupted combat streak.
    • I know, but you need to mention its definition in the article, for readers who no nothing about the series and the combat system.
      •  Done Defined.
• I feel like that a subsection called "combat" can be created. It may feel a bit more organized this way.
  •  Not done Combat info is dispersed throughout the whole section, to where it is most applicable and flows with other content. Creating a subsection will interrupt that.
• uninterrupted attack adds to the player's combat score - what is combat score used for?
  • To unlock the double team takedowns.
• One such character, the Riddler - wikilink Riddler
  •  Done
• some collectables can be revealed by interrogating the Riddler's henchmen. - Any examples?
  • Reworded, because as it was was incorrect.
• used in solving the game's puzzles - Puzzles were not mentioned much in this article. Is there any more coverage on this?
  • Really it was just the winch stuff (which is mentioned) and getting Riddler trophies. I've added about the Riddler trophies.

Plot

• conquer the Riddler's (Wally Wingert) challenges - Isn't this a side-mission?
  • Yes, but how is it any different for the wording of Two-Face's or Penguin's description?
    • Because at the beginning of the sentence, it said "he must overcome". Players can choose not to complete these optional missions.
      • That is only for the Scarecrow one. he must overcome Scarecrow's (John Noble) plot to threaten Gotham City; he must dismantle the Penguin's (Nolan North) weapon dealing operation, etc.
• You need to deal with the two citation needed tags in the fourth paragraph of the character section.
  • Found one for Jack Ryder. Working on Killer Croc's.
  • So I haven't been able to find a source for Croc. Could we use the game itself, with the dialogue that references him, as a source?
• Source 42 is not reliable. It comes from a contributor from Forbes.
  • Disagree with this. All the Forbes sources are not unreliable.

Development

• downloadable content (including the story-based "Harley Quinn's Revenge" downloadable content) - The example is not necessary. Do not think that it is really closely related to this game's development.
  • Gave a reword to the content. It is, as that was the point Rocksteady kind of "severed ties" with Dini in terms of story plotting.
• This statement led to speculation that he would reprise his role as Batman in Arkham Origins, which was not the case - not really needed.
  • It is, because Origins was the only known Arkham game in development at the time. Add to indicate this.
• The quotes about the absence of multiplayer can be paraphrased.
  •  Done
• It can be summoned with a button press, and Batman can both enter and be ejected from it quickly, with ejection allowing the character to begin gliding instantly. - mentioned in the gameplay section already. Not necessary to mention it again here.
  •  Done
• considered moving around the city to be part of the game - Change "moving around the city" to "traversal". Sounds slightly better
  •  Done
• and allowing players to skip that would detract from the experience. - "that" is not necessary
  •  Not done Does not sound grammatically correct with out it. Because then you don't know what is being allowed to skip.
• The world's challenges were set out on the vertical and horizontal plane to discourage players from using only one form of movement, with the Batmobile providing a faster method for moving large distances - Does this means "vertical map-design"? "faster than" but what it is being compared to? Gliding?
  • Yes and yes. Added words to clarify.
• During early development, Rocksteady placed a prototype Batmobile to buildings were made taller to accommodate the vehicle's ejection ability can be moved to the second paragraph, which is talking about the city's redesign.
  •  Done
• The quote on "not building the biggest open world but the richest" can also be paraphrased.
  •  Done
• the team developed ideas for shops - What ideas?
• The music section's long quote can be paraphrased
  • I've reduced the quote.
• Tracklisting is redundant and violate WP:VGSCOPE#14. Do not really see the need of using {{Infobox Album}} here. It is not a film score.
  •  Done

Marketing/Release

• It needs to be rearranged. Every single information put in one single massive paragraph is not good. For instance, all the comic staffs can split into a new paragraph.
• I actually suggest you to merge the entire marketing section to the release section. It is up to you to decide whether to do so or not.
  • For the above two points, merged with the release section as a subsection and made a new one called "Comics" for all of that info.
• book writer Marv Wolfman, is scheduled to be released alongside the game. - tense. "It was released" alongside the game.
  •  Done
• On the delay - First delay, or the second delay?
  •  Done - first one.
• Hill and the Rocksteady team were caught off guard by the rating - You may need to mention who Hill is again. Readers may forget about him after reading these paragraphs
  • I added his first name, but do I need more?
• featuring her own weapons and abilities - Any example?
• The Quinn-centric DLC follows the character as she infiltrates - "Quinn-centric" is not necessary.
  • For the above two points, I reworded it all.
• The "Scarecrow Nightmare" DLC - The sources say that it is a PS4 exclusive, and it is not mentioned here.
  • Per the info in the second paragraph all retailer or console exclusive content was timed until "Fall 2015" which meant August or September 2015. So adding that is not necessarily factual, even though it is the only PS4 exclusive content that has not been released on Xbox One yet. Rocksteady has content planned until December for release, so if it doesn't come out by then, I will add that text.
• What is a "combat challenge maps". Has the gameplay section mentions this before?
  • The gameplay section doesn't mention this, but maybe it should. I'll investigate sourcing this here or in the gameplay section.
• where the player as Batman goes up against "legendary super-villains invading Gotham City, with new story arcs, missions and gameplay features" - can it be rephrased? It currently sounds like something extracted from a press release
  • ...It was. That's why I quoted it because there wasn't any other way I could think to word it to describe what it was, without using those exact words.
• due to "a lot of requests" - "a lot of requests" can be changed to something without the quotation mark.
• since it was not featured in the Tumbler pack, like the Keaton suit was in the 1989 pack - Do not think that it is necessary.
  • For the above two points, change the quote material, and the second point text explains why there were a lot of requests (versus just general fandom saying "I want the X suit!")

Reception

• The scores Arkham Knight received are high. What does this imply then?
• The reception section need to be completely rewritten. It should show whether the different aspects of the game is well-received or not instead of talking about reviewer's general impression on the game. Something like "The combat of the game is well-received. Game Informer called it "amazing" while IGN thought that it has lots of depth."
• Paragraphs are too long. I feel like that the paragraph are arranged in a random way.
  • To the above queries; I've reduced the content of many of the reviews listed in the section. However, after contemplating your second bullet, I disagree with the section needing to be completely rewritten. The method you suggested is one way to present the content, the way the article is now, another. I agree that there was a lot of material in this format, and I've done my best to cut down the info and move it in line with Batman: Arkham City#Reception, which is a FA.
• The fifth paragraph of the reception section is made up of quotes. Paraphrase some of them.
• He added, "It's a disappointment, to say the least, - The quote can be paraphrased to "He added that he expected more from the downloadable content, and hoped that the future ""Arkham Stories" have more content." or something similar.
  •  Done
• Do we really need the long quotes from Reiner's opinions on Batgirl: A Matter of Family?
  • Reduced.
• praise the side story involving Edward Burke - Who is Edward Burke?
  • Explained.
• I think that instead of "Batgirl: A Matter of Family" or "Catwoman's Revenge", it should be Batgirl: A Matter of Family and Catwoman's Revenge. Italic and no quotation marks.
  • I've always felt that DLC content was quoted material, not italics. I'm going to drop a quick note at the project talk to inquire.
• I suggest changing the order of how the subsection are arranged in the reception section. The major reception part, followed by the additional content reception, followed by technical issues, followed by sales, and followed by accolades.
  •  Done
• The part about technical issues should be in the release section. It is not really that closely related to reception
  • Well the two are sort of related. The bad reception to it helped bring to light the technical issues. I don't know if having two separate sections regarding the issue is necessary. As such, do you suggest it stay in reception or move to release?
• Receive plenty of nominations from this year's Golden Joystick Awards. You can have a look here
  •  Done
• The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, the second best selling game of 2015 behind Mortal Kombat X - It is too complicated. rephrase it to "beating the record previously held by The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt and Mortal Kombat X"
  • Witcher 3 and Mortal Kombat did not have the same record. Witcher 3 had the fastest selling game of 2015 record (which this game beat) and Mortal Kombat was the second best selling game of 2015 overall, which this game came in second.
• I thought that things like "report" should not be mentioned in the article. Unless Warner Bros. come out and admit that "we knew the PC version has problem and we still decided to push it out", it should not be included.

References

• The article says that source 15 comes from PlayStation Blog, but why it is a review from Hardcore Gamer?
  •  Done Don't know why that was.
• Source 23 has cite errors
  •  Done
• Source 32 and 115 (Forum source) are not reliable
  • Cinema Blend is reliable. The forum source is as well because it is release material from Warner Bros., not general users.
    • No, CinemaBlend is unreliable
      • That discussion was from 5 years ago at RSN. The site is a reliable source. See its About page.
        • Since no one has opposed, I will let this go.
• All sources from Forbes should be replaced. They come from contributors, and are not reliable.
  • As stated above in the plot section, I disagree with this as it is incorrect. They are all reliable.
    • That is not always the case. Forbes has contributor content that may not be reliable. You should find alternatives for them.
• Source 34, you should use the work field for The Escapist and Market for Home Computing and Video Games
  •  Done
• Would be great if the Twitter/Facebook sources are replaced
  • Don't need to be per WP:TWITTER.
• Wikilink Joystiq and AOL for source 67
  •  Done
• Not sure whether Gearnuke is reliable or not.

Images

• Wouldn't a gameplay screenshot of the "dual play" mechanic or the Batmobile gameplay better than the screenshot of the re-designed Gotham?
• Overall the article does not seem to have much visual appeal to readers. Would be great if more pictures are included.
• 82.3% copyright violation, though it is not much of a problem, since most words that get repeated are Arkham Knight and Batman.

Overall

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list corporation:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

It is a very well-written and comprehensive article, support by a lot of reliable sources. However, there is some issues that need to be dealt with, such as the problems with the reception section. There is also paragraphs and sentences that are way too long. Leaving it on hold for 7 days, and once all the issues are fixed, the article should be good to go. AdrianGamer (talk) 14:32, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

The copyright vio thing also includes an article that is a copy-paste of this one. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 15:09, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

I've started going through your comments and responding to them. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:59, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

@AdrianGamer: I've answered most of your comments except the ones directly related to the reception of the game (and a few sparse others I'm still working out). That is going to take me a bit to rework and cut down, and I just wanted to inform you that I know in the coming days I'm not going to have a lot of time to spend to this. Beyond some of the smaller issues I can possibly take care of, I know at the earliest I'll be able to give some full dedication to concentrating on that section will be Wednesday and Thursday of next week. Just wanted you to know so if you don't see my replies for a bit, you know I haven't abandoned this. Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 05:28, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Notifying @Favre1fan93: AdrianGamer (talk) 15:29, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes? I've answered I think pretty much every bullet point. I was waiting for your answers to some and/or additional comments. Sorry if that was unclear. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:03, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

I still think that you should replace all the Forbes sources but it is not really compulsory so I will let this go. I am satisfied with how you handle all the sections. However, before promoting, you need to deal with the [citation needed] tag in the character section. AdrianGamer (talk) 16:15, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. So I asked you above, but will copy here, I have not been able to find a source to confirm Croc's appearance. Could I use the game itself? Croc himself doesn't speak, but in the bit that he appears, Joker mentions him. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:27, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

I guess it is fine to do so. AdrianGamer (talk) 10:02, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

 Done - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:22, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Great! With that we are good to go! Batman: Arkham Knight is now a . Congratulations! AdrianGamer (talk) 09:11, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! And thanks for reviewing! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:34, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

minor corrections/doubts

is "scarecrow's nightmare" a DLC or a challenge map? that's not specified, or is wrong (as it says DLC in the article) please correct it in order to avoid confusions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drumerwritter (talk • contribs) 05:55, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

And another thing, acording to the source lex luthor and kate kane-batwoman- are referenced by means of easter eggs in the game but in th article says that they actually physicaly appear in the game wich is clearly wrong. this should-or better yet must, be changed

"Scarecrow's Nightmare" is DLC challenge maps. Wording for Lex and Kate Kane is fine. "Appearance" does not mean only physical. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:53, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

"Critical acclaim" or "positive reviews"?

There has been an ongoing battle for a while (but not a reversion war) with both registered and unregistered editor on whether this game, like Batman: Arkham Asylum, holds critical acclaim or was only met with positive reviews. So, which is it? Discuss. — CobraWiki ^{( jabber | stuff )} 18:13, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

"Positive reviews" is the best terminology, because A) it has less than 90 on both GameRankings and Metacritic. Still good but not "critical acclaim"; and B) the PC version got far more critical reviews, particularly because of its technical mishaps. So that right there means it was not "critically acclaimed". - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:54, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

It is most appropriate to say critical acclaim for the console versions, because A) there are many other games that have the same rating on Metacritic or even lower that are cited as critical acclaim. B) So many publications praised the console versions, many saying it was one of the best games of the year and some saying the console generation. C) Metacritic should not be the ultimate deciding factor of whether or not it's critical acclaim, it should be looking at all publications as a whole. The console versions should say critical acclaim and the PC versions should say negative reviews. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.89.78.244 (talk) 17:36, 8 March 2016 (UTC)