Report: Batman: Arkham Knight still isn’t the port the PC deserves

Just as Warner Bros. Interactive and Rocksteady promisedBatman: Arkham Knight made its triumphant return to the PC yesterday in its long-promised patched form. Some recent user reviews of the re-released game are in, and they're not pretty. 

The release notes for yesterday's patch don't get into too much detail, but they contain some interesting tidbits nonetheless. On Windows 7 systems, Warner says Batman: Arkham Knight may constantly page data back to the disk, and users are advised they may need to restart the game to fix that behavior. On Windows 10 systems, WB now recommends a whopping 12GB of system memory. CrossFire and SLI profiles are still in development, too.

Those warnings and work-arounds don't bode well for a smooth experience, and player reviews confirm it. As of this writing, 14 of the 20 most recent reviews for Arkham Knight are negative. Most say the game simply doesn't run well, even with the patched version. Steam says the game's reviews remain "mixed," but we see that a hefty majority of the nearly 18,500 reviews of the game are negative.

To make up for Arkham Knight's continuing woes, Warner Bros. Interactive has announced that gamers who already own the game—along with those who are willing to roll the dice and buy in by November 16—will get the whole Batman: Arkham game collection right away, plus a "Community Challenge Pack" due in January for free. WB also dropped the asking price for Batman: Arkham Knight to $50 as an additional enticement. 

Ben Funk

Sega nerd and guitar lover

Comments closed
    • killadark
    • 4 years ago

    I don’t see what is wrong with the update it works almost flawlessly on my system (there is stutter when traveling fast across map cause i had it installed it on my WD green 2TB HDD but it was minimal like some micro second)

    The game used to be a mess but now it runs smooth 45+ @ 1440p ultra save for shadows on normal since they look pretty much the same to me on ultra and i save 3 or so FPS

    all on not a high end CPU as well fx8350 and r9 290 @1140 core

    But the Ram usage is quite huge i have to say out of my 20.7gb of physical + Page file it used 12 GB most of the time or slightly lower.

    Vram sits at 3.7gb usage.

    For those having a crash with Fatal error update your Physx drivers worked for me

    • Krogoth
    • 4 years ago

    It is the Batman & Robin of the Batman games.

    Get over it.

    WB just needs to learn from their mistakes and the rest of us just need to move on.

      • LoneWolf15
      • 4 years ago

      …But without a whiny Chris O’Donnell.

    • Ninjitsu
    • 4 years ago

    $50? Lol.

    Go get the recent humble bundle, Insurgency, Men of War: Assault Squad and two copies of Abyss Odyssey for $1.

    • Meadows
    • 4 years ago

    [url<]http://www.cad-comic.com/cad/20151030[/url<]

    • NovusBogus
    • 4 years ago

    This beast is Kickstarter’s gift that keeps on giving, no doubt about it. Whenever someone asks why the world has gotten crazy enough that large numbers of relatively smart people are throwing millions of dollars at a semi-famous person’s vague promise that a game might be made at some point in the future, supporters merely point to Arkham Knight and say ‘because this is the alternative’.

      • DoomGuy64
      • 4 years ago

      People need to ditch kickstarter for a more accountable method of crowd funding. We’re rewarding too much fraud, and it’s no longer limited to f2p, dlc, and pre-orders.

        • sweatshopking
        • 4 years ago

        Totally with you there. Give me shares in a ventures profits and we can talk.

          • NoOne ButMe
          • 4 years ago

          Ah. No, Kickstarter is worlds better than joint venture and such.

          People promoting a game because they stand to make money from it’s launch is toxic. Look at Project Cars for an example of that…

            • DoomGuy64
            • 4 years ago

            It’s already toxic. Look at Descent: Underground. The hype is unreal, and none of the backers want to admit they’ve been conned. There’s better examples like Star Citizen, but generally speaking most of these projects are a disappointment.

            Profit sharing I can do without, as long as the backers have control and partial ownership of the IP in case the developers abandon or screw up the project. There needs to be consequences when the developers fail to meet what was promised, or turn a beloved franchise into some micro-transaction abomination.

            Kickstarter is 3drealms making DNF, with no consequences. Backers need to have a Gearbox option, where you can take over the project when developers fail the users. Bare minimum requirement for crowd funding to produce acceptable games.

            • NoOne ButMe
            • 4 years ago

            It would be more toxic.

            The IP idea is solid in theory, and I like it, just seems impossible to implement in a reasonable manner.

            • DoomGuy64
            • 4 years ago

            Lol, no it’s not. The company responsible for funding the startup would just have to manage it. Backers would vote on how to handle the abandonware. It’s no different from when you buy a car or house with a loan. The Bank owns your property until you pay it off. Same concept here. The Users own the IP until the developer produces a reasonable product. If not, then instead of going into limbo, users can fire the developer, and open source the game to finish it.

            Regardless of how well this works, doing nothing is unacceptable and people would continue to have zero recourse on failed startups. It’s not sustainable, and Kickerstarter’s poor reputation is already discouraging backers from funding any new projects. Outside of reform, Kickstarter will eventually die off from lack of funding, and/or lawsuits.

            edit:
            Another thing that Kickstarter needs to implement is immediate early access. Users have no idea how well a game is progressing other than the constant propaganda spewed out by the developers. Developers need to spend 100% of their time making the game, and 0% making youtube videos. Maybe 5% for leniency, but they need to focus primarily on finishing the game, and backers need to have access to see how far the game is progressing. This would help testing for bugs, and backers could offer input into tuning the mechanics.

          • Kurotetsu
          • 4 years ago

          But you can do that already, without Kickstarter.

          • RMSe17
          • 4 years ago

          Go for it!

          • BobbinThreadbare
          • 4 years ago

          There is Fig now, which offers limited profit sharing.

      • RMSe17
      • 4 years ago

      Sounds like you got burnt? StarCitizen will come out good though.

      • Platedslicer
      • 4 years ago

      You nuts? What’s Kickstarter got to do with this? Since when have publishers needed an excuse to release crappy ports?

      It’s downright bizarre how people get their knickers in a knot because of how [b<]other[/b<] people spend [b<]their[/b<] money.

        • BobbinThreadbare
        • 4 years ago

        He’s saying KS is the response to years of crappy ports.

          • Platedslicer
          • 4 years ago

          Huh. You’re right. Guess I misinterpreted the first sentence.

    • kamikaziechameleon
    • 4 years ago

    What a flipping disaster. Bad ports are one thing but Rocksteady Arkham games have always had great pc ports. This is rather amazing to see. I wonder if my 32 gb of system memory will provide smooth sailing… What is going on with Rock steady, ports this gen were supposed to go off w/o a hitch.

      • NoOne ButMe
      • 4 years ago

      All the ports except this that are big names seem to be just fine. In terms of being at least as good as the console games.

      Most are better than the console games. Some are just as glitchy as the console games. One is worse then the console games, and, the blame is all on having a team of 12 people porting it and probably also just throwing the GameWorks code ontop of that certainly didn’t help.

      GameWorks is normally a pretty big performance hit, if your performance is shit throwing demanding code on top of it certainly doesn’t help. GW doesn’t deserve any blame for the game running this poorly. Full of crashes and apparent memory leaks and other huge failers.
      As I’ve seen quite a few people who, like me, are proAMD/antiNvidia, seem to claim.

        • ClickClick5
        • 4 years ago

        Rockstar did good with GTA5. Very well done, and well worth the three delays it had.

    • TopHatKiller
    • 4 years ago

    “12GB” Are they kidding?!
    Withdraw it, for gods sake, fix it, and come back to us.
    This is… [the rest appropriately censored]

      • RMSe17
      • 4 years ago

      When you can get 32GB of RAM for under 180$…. *shrug*

        • ClickClick5
        • 4 years ago

        Not for DDR4…fak, that was pricey.

      • Ifalna
      • 4 years ago

      It runs just fine with 8. Don’t fall for the marketing hype.

      • Crackhead Johny
      • 4 years ago

      If that was the graphic card RAM req it would be crazy but for just a PC?

      My 5 (?) years old system (i5-2500k)
      Well anyway, this 5 year old system has been running 16GB for ~half a decade, is 12GB still considered a lot?

        • NoOne ButMe
        • 4 years ago

        8GB is the standard entry to gaming. 6GB seems to be the standard for consumer devices.

        My gaming laptop came with 8GB, but, it was under $900 and only one stick so when I get around to it going to 16GB will be easy.

      • travbrad
      • 4 years ago

      Yep it’s pretty crazy that a console port needs 12GB of memory when the Xbone and PS4 only allow games to access about 5GB of memory. This has to be one of the worst optimized ports ever, and it took them 4 extra months to get it this “good”?

    • NoOne ButMe
    • 4 years ago

    Well, given I’ve played none of the games and supposedly they’re mostly quite good I might drop $50 for all of them.

    Given those are on Steam for a total of $65 total currently, and, maybe this one will be playable eventually.

    Perhaps I’ll actually give Steam a little money given they HAVE improved.

    • EzioAs
    • 4 years ago

    And I thought Assassin’s Creed Unity was bad…

    …shame on me.

      • maroon1
      • 4 years ago

      AC unity never felt like bad port to me. Runs fine on my laptop (has GTX 970M) on 1080p on near max settings (only had AA off and Environment Quality on very high instead of ultra)

      I don’t know how much frame rate I was getting. But it was playable to me. The game does not feel more demanding than other games I’ve played like witcher 3 and dyling light

      Also, AC unity did not run very well on consoles. Digital Foundry comparison shows that a cheap PC with i3 4130 and GTX 750 Ti runs the game on par with consoles settings and frame rate

    • sweatshopking
    • 4 years ago

    Saw the game on kinguin.net for like 15$. Still not worth it.

    • TruthSerum
    • 4 years ago

    Suckers for punishment!

    • TwoEars
    • 4 years ago

    It is neither the PC Port we deserve, nor the one we need right now. So let’s just hunt it, until it goes away. The End.

    • TardOnPC
    • 4 years ago

    You either die a hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain.

    What if you already own the other games? Can you have two game licenses on Steam? I’d love to gift the other games to my little brother.

      • rahulahl
      • 4 years ago

      Nope. Which is why its a pretty useless option. Majority of Arkham Knight players are fans of the series and would presumably already own the older games. In which case they get nothing.

        • TardOnPC
        • 4 years ago

        Oh man, that is a pretty weak deal for most users. Thanks for the info. I think if I gift my existing games to my brother before I get Arkham Knight I should be ok.

      • Ninjitsu
      • 4 years ago

      Yeah you can – the extra copies will sit in your inventory, and can be gifted.

    • odizzido
    • 4 years ago

    They’re never going to fix it. Maybe computers in 20 years will be able to overcome the bad programming with brute force and it will run playably.

    • Sargent Duck
    • 4 years ago

    [quote<]...will get the whole Batman: Arkham game collection right away, plus a "Community Challenge Pack" due in January for free[/quote<]. Chances are if you're a fan of the franchise, you already own the previous games, so that's a pretty useless perk for just about everybody. And I'm guessing the "Community Challenge Pack" is made up of maps built by the community? So again, no effort by WB. So all told, WB is essentially giving buyers of this game a giant middle finger.

    • fhohj
    • 4 years ago

    I guess it just must have been so tailor made for the consoles with the UE3 engine so heavily modified with extensions specifically targeting those consoles that it was hard to port. Either nobody knew what a pain this would actually be to port, or they never had any intention of fixing it anyway and this was always about stamping down a source of bad press to poison the console games launch. They don’t give a shit. The console games have moved their units. They’ll only care if the numbers on the next one suffer. They probably are betting on a new engine to fix that. The series is too valuable now that they won’t just let it rot. Not after one bad outing. Maybe two though.

    At this rate they could have just left it off PC and just launched it when all the DLC was out.

    • auxy
    • 4 years ago

    Once a bad game, always a bad game… ;つД`)

    While this isn’t always true — in particular certain MMORPGs really didn’t hit their stride until later in life — it’s true in the hearts and minds of gamers. Marshall Mathers said it best:
    [quote=”eminem”<]You only get one shot.[/quote<]

      • Strawb
      • 4 years ago

      It’s a good game, it just runs abysmally, which is a damn shame.

      • DrDominodog51
      • 4 years ago

      [quote<]Don't miss your chance to blow; this opportunity comes once in a lifetime[/quote<]

      • anubis44
      • 4 years ago

      Hmm. It runs very well on the consoles.

      Maybe it needs DX12 and a GPU with a hardware based scheduler (RE: a Radeon GPU) to run well, but nVidia cards don’t have one, and DX12 isn’t yet on enough PCs, so they tried to make it run under DX11, and DX11 can’t handle it.

    • DPete27
    • 4 years ago

    Read: How to kill a game franchise.

    • K-L-Waster
    • 4 years ago

    Sooo they took this… thing… off the market for 30 some odd days to fix the port, and this is what they came up with?

    To paraphrase Monte Python, this is a game for laying down and avoiding.

      • auxy
      • 4 years ago

      [quote=”Monty Python”<][url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbOZccv9ym8#t=59s<][b<]This is not a wine for drinking. This is a wine for lying down and avoiding.[/b<][/url<][/quote<]

      • derFunkenstein
      • 4 years ago

      30+ days? No. Four months. June 22 to October 28.

        • Crackhead Johny
        • 4 years ago

        Much like a fine wine this takes more than 4 months. Give it a few years and it should be good.

      • Hinton
      • 4 years ago

      No.

    • Meadows
    • 4 years ago

    [quote<]"On Windows 10 systems, WB now recommends a whopping 12GB of system memory."[/quote<] What the actual tuck.

      • swaaye
      • 4 years ago

      I guess it only runs well if the whole thing can fit in your system file cache?

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This