TR Forums

How is it, you ask? I don't know yet. I'm still installing. (Good thing I pretty much never buy retail anymore, but I really wanted this on launch day and...)

The discs I have either have a glitch on disc 2 or it legitimately only has 8GB that doesn't need to be replaced out of the gate.

I was about to 25GB downloaded when Steam went offline and when it came back apparently I only had 2GB. It seemed to be going too slow to just be verifying files.

So I figured I'd try installing the discs from my hard drive instead, heh. Hmm, nope, still 8GB. But at least it's an improvement from 2GB.

NOW I'm finally almost done downloading so I can find out if there's anything else to complain about

NOW I'm finally almost done downloading so I can find out if there's anything else to complain about

Well the game is capped at 30 fps and reports are coming in that the game is very buggy. I'm glad the Linux port wasn't released yet, and I'm hoping the flaws will be fixed by then.

whm1974 wrote:

NOW I'm finally almost done downloading so I can find out if there's anything else to complain about

Well the game is capped at 30 fps and reports are coming in that the game is very buggy. I'm glad the Linux port wasn't released yet, and I'm hoping the flaws will be fixed by then.

I haven't cared about 30fps caps in a long time. Do I like them? No. But it's low on my list of things to gripe about.

I enjoyed the guy who said he was Batman, one frame at a time.

I get so sickened by the nvidia startup intros whenever I see them. I wish Gaming Evolved and TWIMTBP/Gameworks would just gtfo.

I haven't cared about 30fps caps in a long time. Do I like them? No. But it's low on my list of things to gripe about.

A modern PC should be able play games at 1080p 60fps. Bioshock: Infinty was painfully slow at 30 fps, much better at 60 fps after disabling the 30 fps cap.

I play games for the gameplay, the tech isn't exactly an afterthought but I just don't care if it isn't 100% perfect.

Arkham Knight, on the other hand...I've barely started. You can't really call it 'playing' at this point can you?

I honestly didn't think it could possibly be as bad as everyone was saying.

I'll have to install the beta drivers and try again, which I didn't really want to do since I'm on win10.

I honestly didn't think it could possibly be as bad as everyone was saying.

I'll have to install the beta drivers and try again, which I didn't really want to do since I'm on win10.

From what I'm reading, the new drivers may help a little but not a whole not. Doesn't look like the developers did any major QC.

Alright, plays fine with the beta drivers. A glitch here and there but it actually feels like a finished game instead of whatever that was.

This game does look pretty impressive, even without the GameWorks crap enabled. (AMD users can enable some of it, at least, but I haven't tried it yet.)

Alright, plays fine with the beta drivers. A glitch here and there but it actually feels like a finished game instead of whatever that was.

But still at 30 fps? Since even budget game PCs have better hardware then game consoles, the PC versions of games should take advantage of said hardware.

whm1974 wrote:

But still at 30 fps?

I don't know.

The 8GB install is apparently a feature. I've read of other people who got the game on disc and had the same experience. Only 8GB installs from the disc and then it wants to download the other 25GB from Steam. I'm guessing that someone screwed up on the DVD installer so it stops installing from the DVD before it finishes. That may be fixed in a few days/weeks in their next patch but that will do no good for the people that either already installed the game or don't check for a patch before installing.

This game could certainly have used a few weeks polish before release. I don't know if Rocksteady Games is at fault or WB Games but one of them certainly screwed up by releasing the game before it was ready. I'll let the guys who actually did the port (Iron Sky?) off the hook since they were working under a tight deadline (two months, I believe) and wouldn't have final say over when the game gets released.

nanoflower wrote:

This game could certainly have used a few weeks polish before release. I don't know if Rocksteady Games is at fault or WB Games but one of them certainly screwed up by releasing the game before it was ready. I'll let the guys who actually did the port (Iron Sky?) off the hook since they were working under a tight deadline (two months, I believe) and wouldn't have final say over when the game gets released.

It's funny though, pre and post me installing the 15.6 betas was like night and day. Before, I could barely even call it a game, much less playable. After, it played just as smoothly as previous Arkham games.

I think once people figure out they need these drivers some of the peeps will calm down. (I assume NV has the same problem, I have no idea.)

What is it with some PC games that cap the frame rate at 30 fps? Come on 60 fps has been the standard for PCs for over ten years now.

It's easy to get around the cap.

What I want to know is if it's any good. I haven't had a chance to really play with it yet. I've been too busy playing NBA Jam on the Shield TV.

It's easy to get around the cap.

Be as that may be, there shouldn't be a cap in the first place.

derFunkenstein wrote:

What I want to know is if it's any good. I haven't had a chance to really play with it yet.

I could do without some of the gameplay introduction scenes but the game is solid. It's about what you'd expect, given the previous Batman games and the added Batmobile.

I'm probably only 1-2 hours in so far. I haven't been getting much sleep so it's hard to say.

I could do without some of the gameplay introduction scenes but the game is solid. It's about what you'd expect, given the previous Batman games and the added Batmobile.

So the game will be worth getting once they fix the problems and remove the 30 fps cap?

I doubt they'll remove the 30 FPS cap.

It's not really worth the £14 I paid for it, kinda a big step back (10 years?) in game tech since the last game in the series. Shame, I loved the others.

Graphics are rubbish, sub-Doom 3, and performance isn't good:


(spot the cutscenes)



Edit, curve pic only went to 99th percentile (which btw is 45.4 ms).

Topinio wrote:

performance isn't good

That looks exactly like before the 15.6 drivers. Did they test with those or no?

This is with 15.6 and an improvement on 15.5

I only ran the built-in benchmark to confirm that 15.6 was an improvement, didn't bother with a FRAPS run. Numbers are:

Min. | Max.| Ave.
25.0 | 71.3 | 47.3
33.3 | 77.3 | 49.7

As for testing, they likely didn't regression test (or at least didn't care about the results) as pCARS has taken a ~10% hit to its already shoddy performance versus 15.5

Topinio wrote:

I doubt they'll remove the 30 FPS cap.

It's not really worth the £14 I paid for it, kinda a big step back (10 years?) in game tech since the last game in the series. Shame, I loved the others.

Graphics are rubbish, sub-Doom 3, and performance isn't good:

Edit, curve pic only went to 99th percentile (which btw is 45.4 ms).

It's not just this game, graphics in PC games have largely stagnated for the past few years yet they demand ever-increasing hardware resources for no apparent good reason from the consumer POV. Instead of asking how many framerate did X GPU got we should be really asking why are we paying for yet another new GPU if we aren't delivered a substantial quality increase in graphics in return?

Do we really not know?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9124/amd- ... us-shading

At this point DX11 is as much a problem as DX9 was a few years ago.

So i got the game yesterday and i have not had real bad performance as some were claiming i get 40+ normally and 20's in batmobile no stuttering so far running from a mechanical HDD

Maybe they fixed stutter as well in yesterdays patch.

My main problem is cpu bottle neck, like REALLY heavy cpu bottleneck gpu usage bounces around 10%-80% frantically in GPU-Z
Here hoping DX12 for Arkham knight Rumor is true.

killadark wrote:

My main problem is cpu bottle neck, like REALLY heavy cpu bottleneck gpu usage bounces around 10%-80% frantically in GPU-Z
Here hoping DX12 for Arkham knight Rumor is true.

Seems like even with DX11 Windows 10 improves things, since I'm barely ever going below 30 when driving.

I'm not often below 30 FPS now I've removed the FPS cap in the .ini -- 30 was 75th percentile out of the box, 96th with the FPS cap removed via the .ini, and 97th with the patch. 99th percentile has gone up from 22.0, to 23.0, now 24.4 over the same.

It's just that with a 10th percentile of 93.9 and a 50th of 49.4, giving me a 97th of 30.5 and a 99th of 24.4 is kinda

Topinio wrote:

I don't know if Scott needs to hire you or put out a contract on you.

Milo Burke wrote:

I don't know if Scott needs to hire you or put out a contract on you.

I'm a bit of an Excel saddo and am constantly putting together all sorts of bits like this for work and leisure stuff. That particular workbook currently has 3 lines on each of the plots, corresponding to 2 different runs with the release version and 1 with the patched binary.

25% done. I'd be farther but for all this new Windows 10 build **** recently heh.

Still very glad I got this before they delisted it.

Savyg wrote:

killadark wrote:

My main problem is cpu bottle neck, like REALLY heavy cpu bottleneck gpu usage bounces around 10%-80% frantically in GPU-Z
Here hoping DX12 for Arkham knight Rumor is true.

Seems like even with DX11 Windows 10 improves things, since I'm barely ever going below 30 when driving.

i am on win 10 and cat15.6 which gets reinstalled to win 10 drivers if i dnt stop update service anyways performance on foot is bearable but in the batmobile is sub 30.
AND the worth part that god AWFUL TEXTURE LOOKS LIKE MUD
have a look..
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/f ... =471934912