Batman Arkham Knight - Is it stable now?

F

Flogger23m

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
14,357
I know we've had a number of threads on this game in the past, but it seems like ever after the re-release of the PC version there were still issues. It sounds even more patches came out since then and I am having a hard time finding definitive answers on how the game became since. How is the game in its current form? Is it mostly bug free now? Decent performance? Can I get by with 8GB of RAM? GTX 970 and a 4670K and an SSD I can install the game to. Running at 1080 should I be able to max the game out at ~60 frame rates?

And is it worth playing Arkham City before this? I only played the very first game.
 
Yep the PC version is stable now and your rig will run it fine at 1080p. It's also on discount occasionally for around 15 bucks, I picked it up last time it was on sale and it's definitely worth it at that price.
 
It works good now, but yes play City before hand. Knight is a direct sequel to city. You will need to know what happened in City to understand everything in Knight. You could also play Origins, but that isn't as important.
 
Outside of modders finding a way, SLI will never be supported. It hasn't been locked at 30fps since it returned to sale.
 
I'm also eager to play this game. I enjoyed the hell out of City and have been waiting for this game to go down in price. However, I've heard that this game needs an SSD in order to perform adequately - which is ridiculous on it's face.

In everyone's opinion, is this correct? Would I see stuttering and texture pop-in on a HDD?
 
You will definitely see texture pop-in on a HDD. Not sure about stuttering, but it's possible. Textures pop-in occasionally even on a SSD, as it common with UE3 titles. Though nowhere near as bad as it used to be.
 
beat the game recently (90?% everything minus the riddler junk). no sli support but was running 60 fps nearly consistently except a few batmobile moments.
 
Derangel said:
You will definitely see texture pop-in on a HDD. Not sure about stuttering, but it's possible. Textures pop-in occasionally even on a SSD, as it common with UE3 titles. Though nowhere near as bad as it used to be.
Click to expand...
I should have phrased that as "pop-in beyond what one would expect in a UE3 game".

EDIT: So I finally bit the bullet and bought the much maligned Arkham Knight from Bundlestars for $14. My impressions about 45 minutes in are:

Game wolfs down VRAM and memory.

Performance is good.

Batmobile performance drops are negligible with volumetric smoke off.

Volumetric smoke looks silly and distracting.

No noticeable texture pop when installed on a HDD.

I really have no complaints. Perhaps if I was gaming beyond 1080p my system wouldn't suffice. But my GTX 970, I7 3770 and 16 GBs of RAM aren't having any issues at full HD.
 
Last edited:
I had a total blast with that game. On my 980 I had almost no performance issues playing with most things cranked at 1080p. I think I had one crash in a room with like a dozen PhysX effects going at once, but that was it.
I think the major issues came with multi-card, ATI hardware, and people playing at resolutions over 1080p.
 
Yeah it was stable for me @ 1080, see sig for specs.

The batmobile was cool but the novelty wears off half way through the game. I prefer perching in the dark on buildings and silently stalking Gotham's goons over using batmobile for some missions.
 
I think the Batmobile made for a neat way to keep the game from being repetitious. That said, there were plenty of eye roll moments where you can't complete missions thanks to the bridges not being down.
The game is more linear than it seems as a result.

I think my biggest gripe in the whole game are the turrets. They're literally the most powerful things in the whole game and probably the only things that will ever kill you. You'd think Batman would have something that would break them, knock them over, or whatever...but nope. I get that we're talking about a fantasy world full of the impossible, but the suspension of disbelief is pretty high for those turrets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Q-BZ
like this
Silky smooth 100+fps on my rig at 1440p. I enjoyed the game. I had to rush through it since I have a backlog. I enjoyed the myriad of bad-guy characters you interact with, especially riddler.
 
The game runs great for me even though I am running Nvidia surround. I haven't had any of the issues other people have had. I play at 8100x1600 surround in 3x SLI with all settings all the way up and it runs great. I even get SLI scaling even though others say it doesn't work. Go for it, it's a great game.
 
Went ahead and started Arkham City. I must say, the game has an atrocious menu and control scheme. And it isn't even clear with what you're supposed to do. Last game was tolerable but this is easily one of the most overrated games of the past few years. Its 5-6 out of 10 material, IMO. Top off the low quality with essentially zero plot and lackluster combat and I am not sure if I can force myself to play through this.
 
Played about ~90 hours between two machines that at the time were running i7's, one with a 780TI and one with a 290X and it ram flawlessly (literally) on both machines. Take that as you will, this was probably 2-3 months ago as well. I absolutely loved the game, even the batmobile sections and don't understand all the hate.
 
Flogger23m said:
Went ahead and started Arkham City. I must say, the game has an atrocious menu and control scheme. And it isn't even clear with what you're supposed to do. Last game was tolerable but this is easily one of the most overrated games of the past few years. Its 5-6 out of 10 material, IMO. Top off the low quality with essentially zero plot and lackluster combat and I am not sure if I can force myself to play through this.
Click to expand...

Out of Origins, Asylum, City and Knight I find that City runs the worst. I played through all of them in 2H '15 in anticipation of Knight and it ran the worse of the bunch on all of my systems. Origins, ironically, seemed to run the best followed by Asylum, then Knight.

I think Asylum gets a pass though given it's more confined and linear structure, it's just simply not as taxing as the other three "open-gotham" games.
 
City runs fine (60 frame rates, up scaled to 1440P with some MSAA) but its just boring and rather terribly designed. The first game was okay. I suppose it was structured. City has a more open world nature, which is another way of a developer saying they're incompetent so lets add cut/paste scenarios everywhere to make the game seem long. The clumsy controls, lack of saves and horrid combos just make the game impossible to play. The only thing you can reliably do is hit or block, and you'll just be mashing the button down 15-20 times because the enemies have an obscene amount of health. This game is no Mad Max, which is perhaps the pinnacle of fighting games. Absolutely blows the Batman games out of the water. The bright side to this game, if you can call it that, is that the controls are responsive. Clumsy layout and horrid combos, but navigating your character is actually sensible. If only Assassin's Creed could get the control input timing down to the second it would be a much better series.

Arkham City? Something went horribly wrong in development early on. I suppose I won't bother with Knight, but I am glad I tried this first.
 
One thing this one did differently from most sandbox games is that it forced you to find all of the side stuff yourself. For instance, the firefighters and corpses won't show up on your map or radar until you've already been very close to them. In some cases - right on top of them. I think that might be throwing people off. In 90% of other games you just go to the right spot on your radar. It's a little old school in that regard, but it makes the game artificially long, too. If you want to do the side stuff, a lot of your time has to be spent just wandering aimlessly.

I agree with the comment that City ran the worst. At the time, even if you had elite hardware, the game chugged with the fetaures turned on. PhysX always impacted performance a lot, too. Origins fixed all of that and ran really well with a much larger city to boot.
 
Drexion said:
Open the map, the main/side quests quests should have icons on there, set a waypoint to the location and that's pretty much it.
Click to expand...

That part is okay, but the prompts make no sense. I left off at a part where it brings up the A button to save some frozen cops. But it does nothing. Tapping, holding, pressing once. I have no idea if it is a bug or not, or what they intend on the player to do. Slapping "A" across the screen gives zero indication on how you're suppose to react to the environment. And if we're supposed to use another button do display it. Inconsistencies like this just kill the game.
 
Yeah I finally got around to installing and playing this one after waiting for it so long I forgot about it. It's not worth 15 bucks. Maybe 5. Unless you want an arcade-style tank game as much as you want an Arkham-style game.

Arkham City is probably my favorite game of all time. Arkham Asylum is great too, and I even like Arkham Origins, despite some bad design decisions and a ton of bugs. But I don't even think I'm going to finish AK. On its own it would be a mediocre game, but in the Arkham context its shit. Can't believe Rocksteady let this pile of scheisse out the door.
 
Arkham Knight is a must play for any fan of the Rocksteady Arkham games...another masterpiece...the Arkham trilogy deserves to go down as one of the all time great gaming series'...even the non-Rocksteady Arkham game is a worthy addition to the series
 
I started playing this the other day, seems pretty smooth and stable on my 1080ti......no graphical anomalies or corruption so far. The most annoying thing I have encountered is the first riddler batmobile challenge.
 
Blade-Runner said:
The most annoying thing I have encountered is the first riddler batmobile challenge.
Click to expand...

the Riddler challenges are more annoying/difficult in Arkham Knight compared to the earlier games...in the earlier games I wanted to finish as many as possible but with AK I wanted to skip them
 
polonyc2 said:
the Riddler challenges are more annoying/difficult in Arkham Knight compared to the earlier games...in the earlier games I wanted to finish as many as possible but with AK I wanted to skip them
Click to expand...

I was afraid someone was going to say that :mad::cautious:
 
The Riddler challenges were my only dislike for Arkham Knight. There were way too many and many of them are time consuming.
After the final big fix patch, I never had any technical or performance issues.
By the end of the game, everything because a little tiresome, but I had a good time with it.
 
Domingo said:
The Riddler challenges were my only dislike for Arkham Knight. There were way too many and many of them are time consuming.
After the final big fix patch, I never had any technical or performance issues.
By the end of the game, everything because a little tiresome, but I had a good time with it.
Click to expand...

Agree about the riddler trophies... not only were there too many of them, but many of them were no where near as clever or fiendish as the ones in AA and AC. I actually had *fun* solving those because they required some thinking. The ones in AK mostly just feel like a chore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top