Batman Arkham Knight - with x86/GCN consoles, how come we're still getting terrible ports?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 11852
  • Start date
PC version is getting slammed not only because of the sudden strong increase of sysreq for Radeon users, but also stuttering on all platforms and very poor graphical options [game is locked to 30fps by default].

I can't believe how any studio can be so monumentally stupid as to release a game on PC locked at 30fps in this day and age? When has that ever NOT been a disaster?
 
I can't believe how any studio can be so monumentally stupid as to release a game on PC locked at 30fps in this day and age? When has that ever NOT been a disaster?
You should post this to the bitchfest that the PC Arkham Knight thread! The clue is the threat title, 'Batman Arkham Knight - with x86/GCN consoles, how come we're still getting terrible ports?'

This is the 'Batman Arkham Knight - fuck me, it actuallly runs 30fps most of the time on consoles, WOOT!' thread. :yes:
 
Ironic if true seeing as they were getting praised by Eurogamer for not wanting to release an unfinished product just a few days ago.
Not wanting to release an unfinished product.. on consoles.

WB/Rocksteady has already conditioned me to wait for the GOTY edition. Similarly, CDPR regarding Enhanced Edition. :D Still got other games to play anyway.
Take this mature attitude and get out of here. This is a place to gnash teeth.

Out of curiosity, what were Rocksteady's other PC releases like?
 
I played it for an hour, lots of testing and stuff. I cannot make game run at reliable 30fps. Game often stutters and looses framerate when gliding, driving and in some game sections.

Quite disappointing after PS4 managed to get such great optimization. Game is there rock solid 30fps with perfect framepaceing.
 
Out of curiosity, what were Rocksteady's other PC releases like?

Mostly ok. DX11 was kind of a waste of time. Tessellation had a huge hit last time I played (long time ago). The HBAO was cute, but I'm not sure that it was particularly useful given the environments.

GPU PhysX actually looked pretty nifty if you had an nV card.

They otherwise ran very well under DX9 with MSAA (they must have switched to some sort of deferred for AK).
 
Arkham City, Asylum and Origins had decent performance on AMD cards, as long as PhysX was disabled (which I think it had to be, in case you didn't have a nVidia card).

ProNo-brainer tip:
If you're a marketing director of a game publisher, don't go to GAF using an account with traceable credencials to insult your customers:


ObF1VKl.png
 
Quite disappointing after PS4 managed to get such great optimization. Game is there rock solid 30fps with perfect framepaceing.
I feel like I'm stating the bleeding obvious here but it's easier to optimise for a console. :yep2: It is. :yep2: It just is. :yep2: Really. :yep2:
 
Especially considering what portion of sales will come from the PS4 vs PC. Money talks and for once they focused on making the primary platform pretty much stable, while taking some time to patch the PC version, which a fraction of gamers will ever see.
 
I intentionally disabled many effects via INI, switched to ~1300x700 windowed mode, and even though game looks like shit, framerate is still crap.
 
I played it for an hour, lots of testing and stuff. I cannot make game run at reliable 30fps. Game often stutters and looses framerate when gliding, driving and in some game sections.

Quite disappointing after PS4 managed to get such great optimization. Game is there rock solid 30fps with perfect framepaceing.

PC version is ported by another High Voltage game tier company called iron Galaxy.
 
hm... So apparently Iron Galaxy did the porting job ( same as Arkham Origins). Guess that explains the um... issues.

Not sure what sort of back/forth development they have going on, but it must not be particularly good. They even delayed the game for months...
 
Arkham City, Asylum and Origins had decent performance on AMD cards, as long as PhysX was disabled (which I think it had to be, in case you didn't have a nVidia card).

ProNo-brainer tip:
If you're a marketing director of a game publisher, don't go to GAF using an account with traceable credencials to insult your customers:


ObF1VKl.png
WOW. That's a shockingly epic fail.
 
hm... So apparently Iron Galaxy did the porting job ( same as Arkham Origins). Guess that explains the um... issues.

Not sure what sort of back/forth development they have going on, but it must not be particularly good. They even delayed the game for months...

I'm not sure Iron Galaxy was responsible for the delay. If the PC version was the only one with problems, then they could've launched the console versions earlier like Rockstar did with GTA V.
It's not like they lose money by making a late release for the PC crowd.
 
I'm not sure Iron Galaxy was responsible for the delay. If the PC version was the only one with problems, then they could've launched the console versions earlier like Rockstar did with GTA V.
Right just pointing out that there's maybe some weird stuff happening at Rocksteady.

e.g. if console versions were really bad 8 months ago, IG still needs time to do a proper port with the finished code (or somehow port in-progress work) and keep up to date with whatever Rocksteady hands over to them. Ugly situation.

But who knows.

edit:

Not trying to imply that the PC version was the sole reason for the delay, just that the delay would have to happen for reasons, and that whatever relationship they have for the porting process (the back/forth thing I mentioned) must not have been ideal, leading to PC issues (late start, crazy codebase - heavily modified UE3, DX11 vs console APIs etc.)

Plenty of things to consider.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top