It's simply different. In Asylum, it is rare for you to get the drop on enemies in combat (not Predator). In City, you can actually stand on a rooftop spying on enemies, and then glide down onto them, starting freeflow/predator combat at your leisure.
Also I find the combat incredibly fun. To one who find combat mediocre, I see how this point bears little weight.
I spent quite a bit of time grappelling onto buildings and coming down on enemies in AA. Rarity is not a concern of mine.
Obviously people who find the combat really fun are going to welcome any chance to engage. How does that make the city equal to the Asylum in terms of level design or atmosphere? It bears weight because even if I loved the combat, I would still think the city was lazily executed and a boring place to be.
Tell me more of how you glided from Arkham East to Arkham West.
You run everywhere in Asylum. The occasional grapple to save yourself 10 meters of walk doesn't count. In City, you almost only run in interiors.
And on surprise attacks, in Asylum you had opportunities to do that in the story.
In City you have the same amount of opportunities in the story, and an infinite opportunities in the open world. In this case, infinite actually is better (because it doesn't hurt the main story missions). You can just glide down and kick enemy ass if you want to. There is also Predator opportunities in several places on the map - in Asylum, you only got the few instances of snipers, and it's incredibly limited compared to City.
I grappled and glided all the time outside in Asylum. I don't get this obsession with not having to run. Batman runs in the comics sometimes too.
Now, about the surprise attacks in Asylum: I don't remember if enemies respawned. I did quite a few surprise attacks outside of the story, but I dont' remember there being infinite supply. Which is fine, as the game provided enough opportunities to do so. Beating infinite trash enemies is the way of Rockstar and Bethesda, and they aren't any better for it.
Meh, whatever. The best thing with these games are the Predator challenges and being good Batman/superhero games
Fixed
Yes, all sandbox games are bad games because you prefer small environments.
All
sandbox open worlds were not addressed. AC's open world is bad because it's a bland open world. Morrowind had a more interesting, and even larger environment. It's about execution, not size. There are very few open worlds as focused and thoughtfully designed as smaller games, because the intent is usually to impress people superficially or go with market trends, not to design a setting that best compliments mechanics or provide interesting space.
And open world =/= sandbox. A sandbox is judged by the sand and toys and the degree to which you can manipulate them and be creative, not the box.. The Metal Gear Solid 2 demo, which took place on a ship, was more of a sandbox than many of the open-world games that get labeled such. AC is no more sandbox than AA.
Grapnel boost was not in AA, it was added in AC. Huge fucking difference when you can glide across the city without touching the ground or a roof once.
Boost, so what? A minor addition to what was already there because they designed a space that would be even more boring to go through otherwise. Why you think not having to ever touch the ground is significant, I'll never guess or understand. It's petty, not huge.
.
