Nvidia Game Don't Works Latest Victim. Batman Arkham Knight

I love Gameworks; never had an issue with a game using these features and I consider it a positive when a title has them.

AMD fanboys are just in a perpetual state of butthurt that they don't get to enjoy these extra eye candies. If they don't get to enjoy them, they don't want anyone to enjoy them. Gameworks graphic effects are always optional settings but the AMD brigade acts as if they are mandatory. If Gameworks effects aren't running well on your system, then TURN THEM OFF. This is not rocket science.
 
Xizer said:
I love Gameworks; never had an issue with a game using these features and I consider it a positive when a title has them.

AMD fanboys are just in a perpetual state of butthurt that they don't get to enjoy these extra eye candies. If they don't get to enjoy them, they don't want anyone to enjoy them. Gameworks graphic effects are always optional settings but the AMD brigade acts as if they are mandatory. If Gameworks effects aren't running well on your system, then TURN THEM OFF. This is not rocket science.
Click to expand...

Some people are trying to take it a step further and insist "Gameworks is there just to sabotage AMD performance." Why would Nvidia need to go through so much trouble to do what AMD is already doing to themselves?
 
To prevent cases like this they should include a game already released and well optimised with the graphics card instead of gambling on how it will run.. even companies are "pre-ordering" games it seems.

This is like ordering a takeaway pizza and have included some photos of the chef rubbing his nuts on the box..
 
Just a little update in regards to the game. WB "decided to suspend future game sales of the PC version"
http://steamcommunity.com/games/208650/announcements/

You know this game is really bad regardless of what proprietary software it uses when something like this happens.

Edit: you know if they re-release it without Gameworks features that will speak volumes about Gameworks software.
 
Why do you guys think that the fact they include GameWorks features caused the entire game to be an unplayable mess? I don't like GameWorks, but there are plenty of titles out that use some GameWorks features and aren't limited to 30 fps with basic functionality missing. Arkham Knight is an awful port regardless of whatever NVIDIA middleware they implemented. Adding some advanced smoke and particular features didn't remove the Ambient Occlusion feature from the PC version, or implement an FPS cap.
 
Rizen said:
Why do you guys think that the fact they include GameWorks features caused the entire game to be an unplayable mess? I don't like GameWorks, but there are plenty of titles out that use some GameWorks features and aren't limited to 30 fps with basic functionality missing. Arkham Knight is an awful port regardless of whatever NVIDIA middleware they implemented. Adding some advanced smoke and particular features didn't remove the Ambient Occlusion feature from the PC version, or implement an FPS cap.
Click to expand...

The game sucks yes but did you see the graphics options menu? It has AA on and off, and it is a gameworks game, that could mean HABO on or off. Other options are equally vague and if the game was coded with gameworks sdk then all the options are related to gameworks.

Not Nvidia's fault, more the fault of a piss pour development team, but as much as people say gameworks is not related to the way the game runs, it unfortunately is related.
 
filip said:
The game sucks yes but did you see the graphics options menu? It has AA on and off, and it is a gameworks game, that could mean HABO on or off. Other options are equally vague and if the game was coded with gameworks sdk then all the options are related to gameworks.

Not Nvidia's fault, more the fault of a piss pour development team, but as much as people say gameworks is not related to the way the game runs, it unfortunately is related.
Click to expand...
The game is built off of UE3. NVIDIA's effects are added on as middleware. They're not going to fundamentally change the underlying UE3 renderer, as far as I am aware. That's not how it works.

FWIW The Witcher 3 simply has "On/Off" for AA as well, and the only NVIDIA effect they use is HairWorks. A lot of game developers are (unfortunately) no longer offering anything but post-process AA, so the simple fact that it's an on/off switch by itself means nothing.
 
PRIME1 said:
Gameworks provides a set of tools to add things like physics and other enhancements to a game. It does not write or port games for a developer. You are ranting about something you clearly have zero knowledge of.
Click to expand...

Facts are wasted on people wanting to spread FUD

cageymaru said:
We agree to never agree and that is fine. :)
Click to expand...

See...dosn't care one bit about facts.
 
cageymaru said:
This is probably 99% of the problem.
http://www.dsogaming.com/news/repor...rectx-10-when-nvidia-gameworks-are-activated/
Click to expand...

Just stop.
The game runs like a turd when NOT using gameWorks libraries under DirectX 9.
(When GameWorks is NOT being used the game does NOT touch the librariers, thus debunking your FUD.)

It's a crappy port job by a 12 man console-studio...so bad the game now has been pulled from Steam...because of the CRAPPY porting.
https://community.wbgames.com/t5/Su...ate-on-PC-Version-of-Arkham-Knight/m-p/575332

You are so much fanboy that you use false claims, just because they suit your bias...but it does make you seem like an ignorant poster with an clear agenda..damned be the facts!
 
OK forgetting the specific Gameworks options, Nvidia says they work closely with developers. These Nvidia features are just on the PC so at no point did anyone bother to play the damn game at all to test it? Even Nvidia's "game ready" driver is so screwed up in SLI that performance goes down when using it. Nearly every game Nvidia is involved with is a steaming pile of unoptimized crap.
 
If you bought the game from Greenmangaming they are processing refunds for the game because it simply does not work. Pretty darn nice of them to do so.

http://blog.playfire.com/2015/06/batman-arkham-knight-pc-pulled-from-sale-refunds.html

If you have kept up with my other thread on this, this is a new update to the policy from Greenmangaming. They are now processing returns for the game. There is no "wait for first patch" clause as there was before. Great move by a darn good keyseller working in tandem with Warner Brothers to get customers their money back for an abysmal product launch. Yes, if you want to keep your game key then you can. It will not be removed from your Steam library if you decide to pass on a refund.
 
And there is an odd issue or two with at least one of the gameworks settings. It will actually make the game indicate it is DX10 instead of DX11. Also some people said at least one of those settings is also making their vram downclock a little.
 
Well Nvidia is going to directly help Warner Brothers to fix the game. Bravo Nvidia for doing the right thing! Hopefully this will expedite the beta testing and get a working and polished game into the hands of consumers. This is what Nvidia should have been doing from the get go instead of asking / suggesting for more fluff to be added to the game.

Eurogamer article.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-06-25-warner-suspends-batman-arkham-knight-pc-sales

UPDATE 25TH JUNE 12.00PM: Graphics card maker Nvidia is being rather nice and working with Warner to resolve Batman: Arkham Knight issues on PC.

"We are working with WB Games and the development teams to address the performance issues of the PC version of Batman: Arkham Knight," a spokesperson told us. "We have made our QA and engineering resources available and will provide updates when they are available."

These are not Nvidia graphics card-specific issues, the spokesperson added, but PC-specific issues.
 
cageymaru said:
Well Nvidia is going to directly help Warner Brothers to fix the game. Bravo Nvidia for doing the right thing! Hopefully this will expedite the beta testing and get a working and polished game into the hands of consumers. This is what Nvidia should have been doing from the get go instead of asking / suggesting for more fluff to be added to the game.

Eurogamer article.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-06-25-warner-suspends-batman-arkham-knight-pc-sales

UPDATE 25TH JUNE 12.00PM: Graphics card maker Nvidia is being rather nice and working with Warner to resolve Batman: Arkham Knight issues on PC.

"We are working with WB Games and the development teams to address the performance issues of the PC version of Batman: Arkham Knight," a spokesperson told us. "We have made our QA and engineering resources available and will provide updates when they are available."

These are not Nvidia graphics card-specific issues, the spokesperson added, but PC-specific issues. .
Click to expand...

Will you stop with your gameworks FUD now?
 
This is a bummer that the game runs like crap, looks like I will be waiting for them to patch it and the price to drop to $5
 
I think the real lesson here is DO NOT PREORDER and DO NOT BUY FIRST DAY. Only children and schmucks do that and you get what you pay for.

I hate gameworks as much as anyone but this has more to do with the big studio ripping off schmucks than anything else. Who the hell actually gets surprised when a port is complete garbage on release. Every game that comes out the dev team does the "we are dedicated to PC" song and dance and 9/10 the games end up having some sort of issue that needs patching. If yall schmucks would stop preordering and buying first day this crap would not be happening. So if you really want to yell at someone, then yell at all the schmucks that preorder and first day buy because the game studios only do this because they know they already got the money.
 
Factum said:
Will you stop with your gameworks FUD now?
Click to expand...
Nvidia's name is all over Arkham's marketing material (and vice versa) so they have a stake in it.
They're not doing this out of the goodness of their hearts.

That being said I'm glad somebody is helping to fix this train wreck.
 
ragecase said:
Another game bites the dust from gameworks.
Click to expand...

With WB deciding to suspend sales, I'm sure WB was plenty upset enough to bring bring EVERYONE involved to this clusterf#ck and forced them to fix it, even if payed off by nvidia.

Involve money, people get motivated. Wouldn't want to have been in THAT meeting...
 
I'm really really surprised such a high end game is so piss poor. Now I'm all concerned about preordering Battlefront. :)

BTW don't blame nVidia, blame the developer. There are PLENTY of gameworks games that work just fine, like Farcry 4. The % hits for the gameworks features were basically the same for both AMD and nVidia. I think only Godrays hit AMD slightly more (like 20% hit for nVidia vs 30% for AMD or something). Godrays fucked up gamma anyways. I'd guess because the godrays are tessellated.

No one is forcing the developer to use Gameworks. In 95% of the cases no one is forcing AMD users to use it either. I think project Cars is the only game that's ever forced it.
 
Dayaks said:
I'm really really surprised such a high end game is so piss poor. Now I'm all concerned about preordering Battlefront. :)

BTW don't blame nVidia, blame the developer. There are PLENTY of gameworks games that work just fine, like Farcry 4. The % hits for the gameworks features were basically the same for both AMD and nVidia. I think only Godrays hit AMD slightly more (like 20% hit for nVidia vs 30% for AMD or something). Godrays fucked up gamma anyways. I'd guess because the godrays are tessellated.

No one is forcing the developer to use Gameworks. In 95% of the cases no one is forcing AMD users to use it either. I think project Cars is the only game that's ever forced it.
Click to expand...

Erhhmm....
Project Cars does not use GameWorks FYI.

lol
 
Rizen said:
The game is built off of UE3. NVIDIA's effects are added on as middleware. They're not going to fundamentally change the underlying UE3 renderer, as far as I am aware. That's not how it works.

FWIW The Witcher 3 simply has "On/Off" for AA as well, and the only NVIDIA effect they use is HairWorks. A lot of game developers are (unfortunately) no longer offering anything but post-process AA, so the simple fact that it's an on/off switch by itself means nothing.
Click to expand...

And UE3 is an OLD game engine - it's so old it dates back to Gears of War (the original one) and DC Universe Online, along with UT2003 - all three games are multiplatform.

However, it's not that UE3 can't support AA - all three games I mentioned support AA, and on Fermi, no less. You don't need Gameworks for AA support - however, on older game engines, you may well NEED Gameworks support for features newer than Fermi-level GPU support. (B:AK was an included game for GTX980Ti - which could well be the driver for the inclusion of Gameworks.)

How well historically has Gameworks cooperated with older game engines?
 
PGHammer said:
And UE3 is an OLD game engine - it's so old it dates back to Gears of War (the original one) and DC Universe Online, along with UT2003 - all three games are multiplatform.

However, it's not that UE3 can't support AA - all three games I mentioned support AA, and on Fermi, no less. You don't need Gameworks for AA support - however, on older game engines, you may well NEED Gameworks support for features newer than Fermi-level GPU support. (B:AK was an included game for GTX980Ti - which could well be the driver for the inclusion of Gameworks.)

How well historically has Gameworks cooperated with older game engines?
Click to expand...

Yeah unreal engine 3 is old a decade now. but ut2003 was based on UE 2.5.(think you meant to type just 3) now AK is built on a tweaked version of UE 3.5. although they didn't do as good of job with it as irrational did with Infinite(obviously)
 
ragecase said:
Another game bites the dust from gameworks.
Click to expand...

Even if its not a gameworks issue their logo is stuck everywhere in that game so their name will still be shit by association. NV fan boys can spin it all they want but its the truth. Instead of porting the base game with limited resources and time now you have to waste time coding for extra fucking proprietary eye candy because NV threw some cash their way. GG
 
Yeah you dont sponsor a game and claim to work closely with the developer on the PC version and then not look bad when the game is a complete mess.
 
PGHammer said:
And UE3 is an OLD game engine - it's so old it dates back to Gears of War (the original one) and DC Universe Online, along with UT2003 - all three games are multiplatform.

However, it's not that UE3 can't support AA - all three games I mentioned support AA, and on Fermi, no less. You don't need Gameworks for AA support - however, on older game engines, you may well NEED Gameworks support for features newer than Fermi-level GPU support. (B:AK was an included game for GTX980Ti - which could well be the driver for the inclusion of Gameworks.)

How well historically has Gameworks cooperated with older game engines?
Click to expand...

I have been thinking about GW and the issues or rather debates on its use and competitive possibilities. I don't think it is just GW that is the problem. TW3 for example, showed negative performance for AMD and Kepler. Of course we know it was the tessellation factor in HW and the inability to change it in game other than none and 64X. But what if when Nvidia is helping early in the development of TWIMTBP titles they are steering the game devs to use higher level of features that work better on their own products or as in the case of TW3, exemplify the newer products. Would explain a lot with these rash of TWIMTBP games. Even with Ryse: Son of Rome AMD had a sizable advantage because of the use of compute (at least that was how the devs explained it). It doesn't just have to be GW features. All it takes is using the strengths of one product at the expense of the others.
 
Dayaks said:
I'm really really surprised such a high end game is so piss poor. Now I'm all concerned about preordering Battlefront. :)

BTW don't blame nVidia, blame the developer. There are PLENTY of gameworks games that work just fine, like Farcry 4. The % hits for the gameworks features were basically the same for both AMD and nVidia. I think only Godrays hit AMD slightly more (like 20% hit for nVidia vs 30% for AMD or something). Godrays fucked up gamma anyways. I'd guess because the godrays are tessellated.

No one is forcing the developer to use Gameworks. In 95% of the cases no one is forcing AMD users to use it either. I think project Cars is the only game that's ever forced it.
Click to expand...

Farcry 4 had issues when it was first released which doesnt make any sense since it uses the exact same engine as Farcry 3. Actually almost all the gameworks AAA games released in the last couple months have had issues I actually cant think of one that didn't have any issues.
 
rumartinez89 said:
Farcry 4 had issues when it was first released which doesnt make any sense since it uses the exact same engine as Farcry 3. Actually almost all the gameworks AAA games released in the last couple months have had issues I actually cant think of one that didn't have any issues.
Click to expand...

I have to agree there's a correlation between GW and shitty releases. Also have to agree with the other posts... If I was nVidia I'd take more care when I put my name on something. Seems gameworks is hurting them more than helping from an image perspective.

Still gotta love the effects after it's sorted.

One of my favorite games for beauty and running fast is BF4. Just happens there's no gameworks there. Mantle was in that which IMO hurt AMds image because all I saw were threads how it was fucked and to just use DX. Perhaps GPU manufacturers should focus on GPUs? Drivers perhaps?
 
I have stuck to just waiting until games are 50% off usually the games are patched and working by then, I leave the debugging to the early adopters(video cards included). Also did AC:U ever get tesselation added.
 
rumartinez89 said:
I have stuck to just waiting until games are 50% off usually the games are patched and working by then, I leave the debugging to the early adopters(video cards included). Also did AC:U ever get tesselation added.
Click to expand...
Many people already bought this game before launch for cheaper than that.
 
63jax said:
http://www.techspot.com/review/1022-batman-arkham-knight-benchmarks/
GameSpot just did a performance review of the game and i think NV bois won't be happy after they find out what GS said about Game Works.
Click to expand...

As long as we're calling names, the AMD bois might want to know the PC port has been pulled from sale for fixing by WB. Meaning that the game isn't going to be fixed any time soon, as if it were a patch could have been released 'Soon (TM)'.

The PC port sucks plain and simple, and shouldn't have been released in that poor state. By pulling the game from sale WB are loosing money and I'm sure they aren't happy about that. Stop using GW as a scapegoat.
 
AlexisRO said:
As long as we're calling names, the AMD bois might want to know the PC port has been pulled from sale for fixing by WB. Meaning that the game isn't going to be fixed any time soon, as if it were a patch could have been released 'Soon (TM)'.

The PC port sucks plain and simple, and shouldn't have been released in that poor state. By pulling the game from sale WB are loosing money and I'm sure they aren't happy about that. Stop using GW as a scapegoat.
Click to expand...

please don't get me wrong, i don't care about Fury X or GeForce pissing contest, i always switch GPUs, maybe my next card will be an NV again, all i'm saying is that GameWorks really sucks according to many people now, and this line from TS is very decisive: ''The heavy use of GameWorks is another big problem and it seems any game Nvidia touches at the moment ends up running like garbage.''
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the link. That's a pretty brave article from Techspot. It probably will get them in trouble with nvidia since that doesn't take much, but big kudos to them for at least starting to address the Gameworks problem.
 
rumartinez89 said:
Farcry 4 had issues when it was first released which doesnt make any sense since it uses the exact same engine as Farcry 3. Actually almost all the gameworks AAA games released in the last couple months have had issues I actually cant think of one that didn't have any issues.
Click to expand...

That's not true at all. The development team added a lot of graphical features to the engine. Just because it's the same engine does not mean it's not getting updated. Just like the UE3 used in Arkham Knight is certainly not the same version you see in Arkham Asylum or City. The main reason why it's not UE4 is most likely because the development team had a good workflow for UE3 and thus didn't need to learn so much new stuff.

I don't see a correlation between Gameworks and poorly working releases. It's just a middleware to provide additional (Nvidia optimized) effects.You might as well complain that games that use SpeedTree are running poorly. If GW was indeed the issue, then all problems should disappear when those settings are turned off. That's not what happens though as the games in question had plenty of issues that don't even touch GW in any way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top