They might be closest, but they're still pretty far off. One of the core pillars of Arkham combat is that it would punish you for button mashing by dropping your combo, meaning you not only gain fewer points at the end of combat but also lose access to your instant finishers, which are all too valuable for taking out the toughest opponents. Spider-Man is happy to let you mindlessly mash, and it's far worse off for it.
Might just be because I'm just starting out, but Spider-Man's combat is much more punishing for me. Could just be the higher emphasis on using specific combos on certain enemies, which I have some difficulty keeping straight.
yeah i don't care so much about ease, i care about how it feels. Arkham's combat was fun, but the insane distances you could instantly travel made it feel like the game was playing itself. mordor's solution is better imo. but it obviously comes down to personal preference.
I felt it was more about the "free flow" in the free flow combat system in Arkham. You want it to all chain together, and Arkham made sure you only hit the buttons you needed to exactly as many times as you needed to. Mordor let you keep your combo going even though it had been like 10 seconds since the last time you did anything, which wasn't exactly flowing at that point. That combo system was a great fit for Batman, and it would fit in nicely with Jason Bourne or John Wick as well, and I'm not sure Lord of the Rings was the best fit for it, but it doesn't seem like many are trying to do that combat style anymore.