-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
55 days later, Arkham Knight PC is still hopelessly unplayable
- Thread starter GrizzNKev
- Start date
His Majesty
Banned
Wait wasn't the release for PC two weeks later?
Anyway I am still waiting for this mess to be fixed. Take your time Rocksteady and some kind of apology (as in a free game) to the people who bought your product would be nice.
PC is releasing day and date as the console versions now. Multiplayer is coming MUCH later though.
Hyrule Warrior
Member
Well I think some people on PC feel confident in Phantom Pain because of how well Ground Zeroes performed. I mean, it's almost the same game, and Ground Zeroes was beautiful on PC, so I think the belief in Phantom Pain turning out alright is not entirely unfounded.
Considering we know how well FOX Engine performs on PC, and a lot of the issues with Arkham Knight seemed to stem from the streaming technology they developed for the console versions (and a poor port, to boot.)
Not to mention the same team that handled the GZ port is handling TPP port. I don't think they'd push the PC release up by two weeks if they weren't confident.
Freedom = $1.05
Banned
You're assuming iron galaxy botched this. What makes you think it was solely them?
John Kowalski
Banned
Well, things going wrong is pretty much how it goes. It's not exactly acceptable to sell a product that, for the most part, does not provide what it promises to, but without someone or something to pinpoint as the cause for that discrepancy it's useless, and honestly fairly dumb, to complain at the gods that the game didn't get released when you wished it would. In truth you are probably exemplifying the very stressful nature of videogame development that helped the game be released before it was done, or, perhaps, originate some other line of wrongdoing that led to an unsuccessful development process. Now maybe it is public why exactly the port had so many troubles, i don't know, i haven't kept up with it. But, and this is my assumption, if the desire were to create the conditions necessary to avoid developers, publishers and consumers from being put in these sorts of situations in the future... i'm sure complaining that the game didn't release as it should when it should isn't going to solve anything, but only add to the already neck breaking speed at which the industry is moving.
This line of reasoning makes no sense to me. Don't release a product that doesn't function. One more delay versus this is an obvious choice.
TemplaerDude
Member
Dude, there are people who can't run the game for more than 10 minutes without it crashing or locking their system. Your experience is hardly indicative of everyone else's, do you think they pulled it off the steam store just because the frame rate went to shit every once in a while?
they can't make people forget this mess so soon, and I think a real "relaunch" is out of the window since there are many games are coming in fall. but they can do some sort of a massive sale on it (like $20) after releasing the patch with the season pass for free for anyone who already bought it on steam.
I'll take a Cass Cain batgirl skin as a compensation.
VanquishUK
Member
Game worked fine for me when I disabled all the NVIDIA graphics settings.
The situations aren't exactly identical: Ubi outright "cancelled" Unity's Season Pass by way of releasing the meat of it for free whereas Arkham Knight's has just been delayed. That said, if WB is to offer some sort of recompense, then Season Pass holders ought to be entitled to a little extra something given they parted with more money.
Personally, the situation has created an opportunity for a last-ditch effort at wringing out of WB a Steam key for the original Arkham Asylum (it's the one and only Batman game on Steam that I don't own). The game was supposed to be included alongside the Steamworks-laden GOTY Edition for those activating GFWL keys, but the issue that got in the way of having Valve whitelist them gave enough time for WB to change its mind.
John Kowalski
Banned
No shit sherlock. That's my point. They have delayed it.
No, they haven't.
So they delayed it (after they fucked up) and you are now complaining that they are not fixing this fast enough.
Spring-Loaded
Member
I had 60fps in most enclosed areas and after a while, didn't get much stuttering at all during my first play through. It's been much, much worse overall since then for some reason. Really inconsistent even when using a fix someone came up with to help with texture streaming.
I remember hearing this port would be handled in-house at Rocksteady. Mind-boggling that WB would allow the port for their biggest release be half-assed, but I guess they didn't count on Steam refunds. I hope this continues to bite them in the ass for a long time.
I remember hearing this port would be handled in-house at Rocksteady. Mind-boggling that WB would allow the port for their biggest release be half-assed, but I guess they didn't count on Steam refunds. I hope this continues to bite them in the ass for a long time.
John Kowalski
Banned
Suspending sales and continuing development doesn't count as delaying its release?
"delayed" it.
lol
ya, that's what they did.
Dont you have to release it in order to be able to suspend sales?
hey_it's_that_dog
benevolent sexism
You don't understand! It's on his hard drive right now and that is worse than if they had never released it at all for some reason!
That's correct. They still have money from the people who didn't get refunds. Not everyone got refunds. That's not a delay. They released and sold the product.
This is for anyone who isn't actively following the performance thread. A reminder that this happened and is still broken as a warning against buying games at launch in the future.
Uh, no?
Hey OP,
It might be a while, I played through it on PC but they sounded that they wanted to rewrite the code for a lot of stuff, I also disagree that it is completely unplayable. I got 96% completion before I could not be bothered on PC.
They may have had to rip a lot up and start from scratch imagine the amount of QA that has to involve and thinking up new algorithms etc. It might be a while just play the damn game and come back if / when they fix it.
It might be a while, I played through it on PC but they sounded that they wanted to rewrite the code for a lot of stuff, I also disagree that it is completely unplayable. I got 96% completion before I could not be bothered on PC.
They may have had to rip a lot up and start from scratch imagine the amount of QA that has to involve and thinking up new algorithms etc. It might be a while just play the damn game and come back if / when they fix it.
Buying launch games in the future isn't the issue. I have preordered mgs V without hesitation. I will however never preorder another wb pc game ever.
I have basically brainwashed myself to think that the PC version never happened and we're facing a Dark Souls II-like situation. WB/Rocksteady is (re)porting the game to PC and it will be available a few months after the console version. The first version never existed. I'm happier this way.
The Faceless Master
Member
more like fucked the consumer.
they didn't delay it since it was released which means it can't be delayed andthey didn't recall it so its not a recall.
they didn't delay it since it was released which means it can't be delayed andthey didn't recall it so its not a recall.
it is absolutely unplayable for many
enough reports of it on the internet, enough reports from people here
it turns into a slideshow for me with chugs that drop to 1-2fps no matter the settings even tho im more than capable of running it. it's not framerate drops
it also crashes randomly
yet we get "lol its not unplayable" as if PCs were all the same. that's what im saying. This is widely know as a terrible port enough to get straight up pulled from sale. You know you're the exception to the overwhelming rule here, yet people act as if the game is playable for them it means it's "not that bad"
¯\_(ツ_/¯
I enjoyed myself enough to play through it twice.
cool attitude :/
Solid Samus
Banned
Really seems that it would be worth considering that Arkham Knight hardly represents a trend among PC ports. It's an outlier.
Fudgepuppy
Banned
I started playing it today on my 970, worked fine for the most part. Drops when racing fast and sometimes when gliding, but for the most part it's stable at 60fps.
Not acceptable port though.
Not acceptable port though.
Beat the game on the PC w/ around 75% completion, other than textures going wonky on 2 occasions and falling through the world in the Batmobile once, I didn't really have any issues to speak of, admittedly my machine is pretty beefy, i7-4790k w/ 970GTX, 24GB of RAM. Shitty for people who had major issues tho.
Screenshotted both issues when they happened, luckily, quitting out and going back in fixed the problem.
Screenshotted both issues when they happened, luckily, quitting out and going back in fixed the problem.
OnionPowder
Member
¯\_(ツ
I enjoyed myself enough to play through it twice.
Every game should just run like this then. It's no big deal really, who cares about performance on a $1200 PC
ffejeromdiks
Banned
Still hoping they'll give us Mad Max to compensate
There's nothing unexpected, it's just that after MCC being subpar almost a year later, waiting for another game I want to play to get fixed really irritates me.
Oh please. The port is shit, the hyperbole people spout is also shit.
dr_rus
Member
While I'm waiting on the patch as well whatever little I've played of the game in it's release state was far from being "unplayable" even on my old 970 in 2560x1600. I'm just refusing to play it without more graphical options and with this utter crap in place of a proper antialiasing it has atm. Once the patch hit I'll see if it improved and if not then well I guess I'll have to inject SMAA to play it.
I highly doubt it. If we are lucky, we'll get the season pass or gets to choose an older WB game. Even the chance of getting an older game is pretty slim imo. They would've given us a game at the time of pulling the game from Steam, so that we could play another game in the meantime while they are fixing AK, but they didn't.
dude what is your proof for this?
like yeah ok, but you're being the counter-argument for the sake of being the counter-argument; it's stupid
we're talking costumers against WB, why would you take the side of "huh, it runs well for me so the complaints must be hyperbole!" other than just being on the opposite opinion?
it's one of the most transparent internet attitudes
I've never had any issue even close to the shit I get in this game. It is absolutely inexcusable. There's no hyperbole, the fucking thing got pulled.
Here's the game running for me
go to 0:15
oh my hyperbole
"Effect X worked for me, it's probably your PC despite this being one of the all time shittiest PC ports ever."
what'd be the issue with a PC that runs every other game released around the same time just fine?
like why are people even trying to be on that side of the argument
Similar threads
- Poll