Batman: Arkham Knight

Discussion in 'Games, Gaming & Game-demos' started by Stone Gargoyle, Mar 1, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Kolt

    Kolt Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,622
    Likes Received:
    449
    GPU:
    RTX 2080 OC
    Well, if anything - and if it's true - it reinforces my reasons to hate WB games and to avoid anything published by them.. not to mention it reinforces the "don't pre-order" stance. I'm not going to continue spending money on games that aren't developed correctly for the platform I like to play on. It's like continuing to go to the same restaurant that you find cockroaches in the food. Why would you keep going there?

    I think gaming news sites should continue to publish stuff like this. It's news related to the game. Why wouldn't they post it? We all have the right to know why our AAA highly anticipated game is in such shambles. They also made it clear that nothing was confirmed. I see no problem.
     
    Last edited: Jul 1, 2015
  2. TR2N

    TR2N Master Guru

    Messages:
    629
    Likes Received:
    35
    GPU:
    AMD
    The whole series is /was a mess.
    I can say unreservedly playing arkham asylum is the only saving grace for this series and was ingenious to say the least with cross level platform design along with third person design.

    The evolution of the game has been exhausted to the point of failure and arkham knights is the pinnacle of this in story, design and performance on the pc.

    What will be released later this fall is unknown. We all hope it will be better but at what point is better when paradoxically from asylum onwards the series is a flop?

    I wish designers explore creativity in game design and not just release new editions of the same old crap just for the sake of their future employment.
     
  3. Damien_Azreal

    Damien_Azreal Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    10,098
    Likes Received:
    1,227
    GPU:
    Gigabyte 1070 Ti
    In my entire history of playing PC games.... Arkham Knight is the only release from Warner Bros that has been a disappointment in terms of performance and stability.

    Be if the FEAR series, Shadow of Mordor, Dying Light... or even the other three Arkham games. They've all performed great, giving me little to no issues... and been fixed quickly whenever an issue did pop up.
    If I stopped buying games from a publisher because they released a buggy one, I would've stopped buying from Bethesda years ago.

    And as for the article, I get that people are interested. They "want to know" what happened.
    But, really, all the article does is tell you what is right in front of everyone's face. WB put the PC version on the back burner and didn't bother fixing it.
    I'm just saying we didn't need an article with "anonymous sources" to tell us that. It's not some hidden conspiracy, some... filthy secret.
    It's completely obvious. Consoles came first, got primary focus as they are the main money makers. And since Rocksteady are a console focused studio, it's not surprising.

    EDIT: Honestly, that article would've "shocked me" if Warner Bros wasn't aware of the condition of the PC version and thought it was fine.
    Then... then I would be truly surprised. If they didn't know what was going on.
     
    Last edited: Jul 1, 2015
  4. wrathloki

    wrathloki Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,374
    Likes Received:
    7
    GPU:
    Gigabyte 980 Ti G1
    There are plenty of people that don't know nearly as much about the industry that would have no clue about the things. The article has its place.
     

  5. Feed_Bucket

    Feed_Bucket Master Guru

    Messages:
    399
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    EVGA GTX 1080 SC
    You think it is less damaging for them to not know the game was broken then to be completely aware and release anyways? I have to disagree even though both scenarios are pretty bad, ignorance vs. covetousness. Anyone who is giving props to WB/Rocksteady for taking responsibility, after the fact, is a moron.

    Clearly they had good pre-sales for the PC and were going to let it ride that dumb consumers would just tolerate a broken game (patch later). Luckily for us the new Steam refund policy went in to effect so we now have a voice but goldfish-minded gamers will just go back and buy the game again when they re-release it, which they shouldn't.

    What would be the consequences against Rocksteady if they denied WB of releasing a broken game? Obviously some contract legalities would be broken but how severe?

    On a second note, why would anyone pre-order a AAA game these days? Why give them any satisfaction especially when the game is guaranteed to be broken on day one.
     
  6. Damien_Azreal

    Damien_Azreal Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    10,098
    Likes Received:
    1,227
    GPU:
    Gigabyte 1070 Ti
    No. You mistook what I said.
    It would be worse if Warner Bros were unaware of the condition of the game, and released it without ever checking on it... it would be a sign that not only did they never check on it, but nor did they bother.
    If WB were so lazy that they never took the time to even check on the condition of a product... that would be a huge problem.

    Them being aware that the game had issues and releasing it is an issue, but had they been unaware and thought the game was fine... that would've been worse.

    That would be huge issue for any publisher.
    Sorry, but personally, I'd rather they be aware of the condition of their games. Even if they make the stupid decision to release it even with issues.


    And thank you, for calling me a moron.
    In a day when we've seen publishers and developers turn a blind eye. Act like nothing is wrong and refuse to take responsibility for the condition of a game's release... it's good to see Warner Bros step up and own the fact that they made a stupid decision.
    Nobody is saying what they did was right. But, they've made a far ballsier move then any other publisher would make.
    So yes, WB gets credit for doing what others would not. For standing up, taking the full force of the negativity head on and taking the responsibility for the mistake they made.


    And, really, this whole "if people stop pre-ordering games" thing needs to just be dropped.
    It's not going to change. People will always pre-order. If poor quality releases were going to have changed anything, it would've happened a long time ago.

    People pre-ordered Deus Ex: Invisible War. Got shafted, and turned right around and pre-ordered Thief: Deadly Shadows.
    People pre-ordered Watch_Dogs, were pissed. And right again... pre-ordered AC: Unity.
    This cycle will not change.
    And yes, there are people out there screaming and crying "I'll never buy anything from Warner Bros again!" when anyone with a brain knows the majority of these same people will buy, let alone pre-order Mad Max when it releases.
     
  7. (.)(.)

    (.)(.) Banned

    Messages:
    9,094
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX 970
    I agree all of this post, though AC DX11 was a mess for 6 months ( and far far far more so than AK) but if you really wanted to play it, DX9 was in perfect working order. Not an excuse for WB's, but a playable game was there.

    This AK performance issues and gamers response is just getting ridiculous though. AK is not by any means the worst port to hit the pc, far from it. It is absolutely ridiculous the way pc gamers are reacting to this port when for the last nearly 8 years, publishers like Ubi, EA and activision have released games that either never get fixed or are simply broken for months on end - Every Release they put out.

    AC Unity was in a far worse state than AK. Missing objects and scenery (sometimes the entire level), missing character body parts/faces and if i recall, on launch and for a good month or more, everyone was capping the fps to 30 as performance was atrocious (neither sli or cfx was working) while claiming 'smooth' performance and telling other people to stop being ubi haters.

    I find it so odd that despite 8 years of developers poor treatment of pc ports, only now with this game, a game that is nothing near the worst port to hit the pc, a game that despite the warning signs of previous Arkham pc ports and despite the far worse releases of Ubisoft and co, that this game is the one that pc gamers want to act like they'll high and mighty and righteous about being consumers who deserve better.

    The majority of you have done nothing but support this poor treatment of pc ports by funnily enough, arguing the opposite by saying that if you dont buy the broken ports and poorly optimized games, developers will stop bringing their games over to the pc platform the 'ol "thing will change, new console x86 = better ports" etc.

    And now that theres steam refunds, rather than doing what you should have been doing from the start, that being not pre-ordering/purchasing games till reviews are out, you're once again taking the easy route and still placing pre-orders as you think steam refunds has your back. How long do think that cheap tactic is going to work before publishers wiggle their way out of it or tighten return policies?
     
    Last edited: Jul 2, 2015
  8. Damien_Azreal

    Damien_Azreal Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    10,098
    Likes Received:
    1,227
    GPU:
    Gigabyte 1070 Ti
    Agreed.

    And, at release, I played Arkham City in DX9 due to my hardware at the time.
    While I heard about the DX11 issues, I did not face them myself. When I did finally make the jump to DX11 the issues had been fixed and I still had a solid experience.

    And I hugely agree with you. Arkham Knight is nowhere near the worst PC port ever released. Nowhere even close.
    But... it's being held up like some blasphemous sin upon the gaming world the likes of which has never been seen before! Even though... we've seen far worse time and time and time again.
     
  9. Feed_Bucket

    Feed_Bucket Master Guru

    Messages:
    399
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    EVGA GTX 1080 SC
    The only way I would give WB any commendation is if they had announced the game was broken before release since they apparently knew it was. They only stepped up because they got called on it. Had there been no Steam refund policy their actions wouldn't be nearly as significant. They would of just let users tolerate it until a series of patches released over a few months got the game to playable standards.

    I agree with you on the pre-order conundrum. There really isn't any unity among gamers. It's sad too since most are fine with getting the same game over and over (AssCreed, CoD). It'd be like going to a restaurant and ordering the prime rib every time but each time it tastes more and more like a turd.
     
  10. PhazeDelta1

    PhazeDelta1 Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    15,616
    Likes Received:
    13
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080 FTW

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page